The URL can be used to link to this page

10/12/2004 - City Council SpecialSPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 12, 2004 5:30 P.M. EAGAN ROOM AGENDA I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD III. REPORT ON FLOW RIDER STUDIES v, it IV. COMMUNITY CENTER BUDGET p, V. GENERAL FUND BUDGET FOLLOW UP ppVI. CASCADE BAY BUDGET 1. n 3 VII. PUBLIC UTILITIES BUDGETS f • WATER • SANITARY SEWER • STREET LIGHTING • STORM DRAINAGE • WATER QUALITY plc) VIII. PART II CIP (VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT) IX. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Information Memo October 12, 2004, Eagan City Council III. REPORT ON FLOWRIDER STUDY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To provide direction to staff how best to proceed with the FlowRider concept for Cascade Bay. FACTS: • The City Council had directed staff to explore the physical, operational and financial feasibility of installing a Flowrider at Cascade Bay to enhance the marketability and expand opportunities to populations that weren't currently being met. • A consultant has recently completed the first engineering feasibility report. • Deep soil core samples were drilled at two locations within the existing fence to better develop a profile of the subsoils. Additional soils information from the original Cascade Bay construction analysis were also included in the evaluation. • The soils were found to be non-native fill with the potential for becoming unstable, without substantial modification, under the load created by the Flowrider, • Based upon the soil analysis, a third location, in the southeast corner of the parking lot, where the soils were thought to have better bearing capacity, was suggested and subsequently analyzed by the consultant. • The consultant has estimated that the cost of installing a Flowrider in the more desirable third location to be just over $1,660,000. A substantial portion of the additional cost being necessitated by site preparation. • After reviewing the consultant's report, City engineering staff suggested that the backwash water should be discharged into the sanitary sewer system versus the storm water system, which the consultant suggested. The cost of connecting to the sanitary sewer system, which may be substantial due to its location, is not included in the estimate. • The cost implications are substantially above the original estimate of $1 million because of the soil conditions in the area where a FlowRider might be feasible. ISSUES • If the Council chooses to proceed with the Flowrider at this time, staff can begin the process of preparing plans and specifications but it may not be feasible for the installation to be completed before the 2005 season begins. • If the Council chooses not to proceed with the Flowrider, staff can continue to investigate opportunities that might be viable given the site constraints we now have documented. ATTACHMENTS: • Preliminary cost estimate on pagescQ and3 • Full report is included as a separate enclosure 1 Ari f 0 Cascade Bay Flowrider Addition Eagan, Minnesota V Feasibility Study Cost Estimate fei September 17, 2004 File No. 49-04-130 Item 617 B. Site Development 1 Decks, deck drains and walks, etc 0 2 Landscaping 3 Perimeter Fencing (vinyl coated) 4 Rope Barriers 5 Excavation/Cut and FIN Sail Correction 19 6 Retaining Wall 0 7 Retaining Wail Bench 8 Drain Tile 9 Shade Structures Ee 10 Silt Fence © 11 Exterior Lighting 12 Trash Enclosure Q13 Demolition 14 Parking Lot Restoration 6 15 Theming Elements C. Building/Structures 9 1 Mechanical Building 9 2 Flowrider Stricture el D, Utilities iD 1 Storm Sewer Modifications 2 Water Modifications APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE A. Aquatic Facilities 1 Flowrider Equipment Package Bonestroo Rosene BEM Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects Units Quantity Unit Price Cost Totals lump sum 1 5700,000 5700,000 sq ft 8,000 $4 50 $36.000 Iump sum 1 520.000 520,000 fin it 275 540 $11,000 lin. ft. 250 520 55,000 lump sum 1 540,000 540,000 sq. ft. 400 525 $10,000 lin ft 50 540 52.000 lump sum 1 $5.000 $5,000 lump sum 1 53,000 $3,000 lin ft 400 $250 51,000 lump sum 1 $25,000 525,000 lump sum 1 $20,000 $20.000 Iump sum 1 $20.000 $20.000 lump sum 1 518,000 518,000 lump sum 1 515,000 515,000 Iump sum 1 595,000 595.000 lump sum 1 5180,000 $180.000 lump sum 1 $25,000 $25.000 lump sum 1 55,000 55.000 $700,000 $231,000 $275,000 $30,000 Subtotal 15% Contingency Estimated Construction Cost 9 15% Administration, Testing, Permitting, Design, Inspection Subtotal 0 0 0 0 '3 Items Outside Construction Project 1 Electric and Gas Utility Services 2 Surf/Body Boards 3 Owner Purchased Site Amenities - Trash, Guard Equipment. Tables 8 Chairs, Signage, etc lump sum lump sum lump sum 1 $20.000 520.000 1 52.000 52,000 1 53.000 $5.000 $1,236,000 $185,400 $1,421,400 $213,210 $1,634,610 $27,000 A-1 APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE Cascade Bay Flowrider Addition Eagan, Minnesota Feasibility Study Cost Estimate September 17, 2004 File No. 49-04-130 Bonestroo Rosene 1201111 Anderiik & Associates Engineers & Architects Item Totals A. Aquatic Facilities Flowrider equipment package B. Site Development Deck, deck drains, perimeter fencing, rope barriers, topsoil, excavation and fill, retaining walls, drain tile, shade umbrellas, site lighting, parking lot restoration, demolition, etc. C. Building/Structures Mechanical Building and Flowrider Structure D. Utilities Electric and Gas Services Subtotal 15% Contingency Estimated Construction Cost 15% Administration, Testing, Permitting, Design, Inspection Subtotal Items Outside Construction Contract $700,000 $231,000 $275,000 $30,000 $1,236,000 $185,400 $1,421,400 $213,210 $1,634,610 $27,000 A-2 3 Agenda Information Memo October 12, 2004, Eagan City Council IV. 2005 COMMUNITY CENTER BUDGET ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To provide direction to staff regarding the proposed 2005 Community Center Budget. Background In April of 2003 the City Council after much study and many policy decisions approved the 2003/2004 Community Center Operating Plan. In acknowledging the uncertainty of estimates and assumptions used in developing the material and to maintain a significant element of flexibility, the document was presented as a plan and not referred to as a budget. It was prepared as a framework for operations with a clear expectation that modifications would be required as operations were undertaken at the Community Center. It was obviously a challenge to prepare the operating plan without the benefit of prior operating experience and with no similar models in either the private or public sector to draw from. Those issues combined with normal start-up costs and uncertainty resulted in a large number of assumptions and a requirement for flexibility in implementation. The document incorporated the overall operating philosophy and direction of the City Council Operations Committee, representing the full Council, and was based on the hours of meetings that were held. On December 16, 2003 the City Council approved the 2004 Community Center Budget. In preparation of the 2004 Budget a revised 2003 budget was also prepared based on the valuable, although limited, operating experience gained from the time of opening. The following general parameters were listed prior to the adoption of the original 2003/2004 Operating Plan and were listed again as background for the public policy issues that were raised during the 2004 budgeting process. 1. The facility is looked at as a whole. Although, certain areas/programs/operations are relatively independent from an operational standpoint, there is a great deal of interaction among the various components of the building. Items like days and hours of operation, memberships, programming, and rental opportunities and rates have impacts across the entire facility. The challenge of budgeting details while looking at the big picture has constantly been present in preparing and reviewing this material. 2. The facility is being viewed as a community center as opposed to a private sector health club. Community centers provide some programs and community/citizen opportunities that in and of themselves are not self- sustaining from a cost perspective. This is a significantly different model than you see in the private sector where only activities that produce revenue or contribute directly to revenues are offered and a clear bottom line financial analysis drives all decisions. 3. The success of the project will ultimately be determined over the Tong -term. There is a delicate balance between a short-term successful opening that impresses participants and makes them want to return and to renew memberships and long-term community acceptance of and support for the facility. 4. The importance of successfully marketing the facility and developing an acceptable market niche to maximize revenues while blending in the community center philosophy cannot be overstated. 5. Although the facility is being operated as an enterprise fund from an accounting standpoint, there is a dependence on other City operating funds incorporated into this plan. 6. The phased opening was designed to maximize immediate revenues and community exposure thereby building a solid foundation from which to move forward. 7. The plan is put together prior to a final determination on how child care will be operated. Staff is still exploring ways to maximize revenues by possibly providing fee-based programming for children in the child care space while parents are engaged in other fee-based programs. Another model would provide for more unscheduled drop-in day care services that are probably more costly on a net (expenses versus revenues) basis. Some combination of these two models is also a possibility. 8. No renewal or replacement or depreciation is funded in this plan. The Operations Committee has directed staff to reduce spending in the construction Furniture, Fixtures, & Equipment (FF&E) account to retain a beginning balance for renewal and replacement in lieu of funding that type of account from operations or funding depreciation. With the passage of additional time and with gaining more operating experience answers have been provided to some of these questions and observations. Others remain unanswered and new challenges continue to arrive. Flexibility in approach and in response has proven to be the hallmark of this venture. It is in that context that the proposed 2005 Community Center Budget is presented. Proposed 2005 Operating Budget The following table is a highly summarized comparison of revenues and expenditures: OTHER REVENUE -PARKS EQUIPMENT RENTAL PARK PROGRAM REVENUE CONCESSION SALES MERCHANDISE SALES GROUP SALES DAILY ADMISSION MEMBERSHIP VENDING ROOM RENTALS FACILITY RENTAL CONTRACT REVENUE ECVB Rent Subtotal Other Funding Sources ANTENNA LEASES Total Rev & Other Fd Sources REVENUES 2003 2004 Actual Budget See $ Note Below 93,900 40,000 65,570 71,400 371,400 155,040 46,000 6,600 $ 445,596 849,910 166,876 290,590 2005 Proposed Budget $ 22,200 2,000 13,900 31,900 2,600 100,500 96,500 574,200 5,000 172,300 1,500 55,700 8,600 1,086,900 292,300 $ 612,472 $ 1,140,500 $ 1,379,200 EXPENDITURES Personal Services Supplies, Repairs and Maintenance Other Services and Charges Merchandise For Resale Reserve For Renewal and Replacement Total Expenditures 2003 2004 Actual Budget $ 380,022 $ 779,500 46,939 55,000 170,579 288,000 14,932 18,000 $ 612,472 $ 1,140,500 2005 Proposed Budget $ 826,200 73,000 339,200 20,000 120,800 $ 1,379,200 Note: To more closely align revenue line items with required accounting practices the revenue codes were changed after 2003. Consequently, only a total revenue number is shown for the 2003 partial year of operations. 2005 Revenues Enclosed on page /D is a copy of the detailed revenue estimates for 2005 as compared to 2004. Also enclosed on pages / J and is a copy of the detailed revenue estimates for 2005 showingthe actual calculations for the various revenue components. Enclosed on page 5 is a detailed breakdown of projected 2005 me bership revenues showing membership totals by month. Finally, enclosed on page ! T is a copy of a fact sheet providing Community Center Statistics summarizing activity at the facility and providing a basis for revenue estimates. The revenue estimates, in general, are fairly aggressive, are still based on rather limited operational experience, and rely on continued extensive and successful marketing of the facility in combination with high customer acceptance and satisfaction. 2005 Expenditures The 2005 Community Center Budget is proposed at $1,379,200, an overall increase of $238,700, or 20.9% from the 2004 budget of $1,140,500. Excluding the new account of $120,800 for renewal and replacement, the increase is $117,900 or 10.3%. Given the continuing start up phase and the unique nature of the facility, the percentage increases are probably not a reasonable barometer upon which to set the budget, but they are provided as a reference point. There is no capital outlay included in this proposed budget as remaining items are being purchased through the construction FF&E account. Enclosed on pages ib through / is a copy of the proposed line item 2005 budget. On the expenditure side the more significant changes from the 2004 budget to the 2005 budget include the following: • Since the facility is new and most employees are early in their employment with the City, there are a disproportionate number of step increases relative to experience in other departments. • An additional full time custodial position is added and part time custodial is reduced. This position will assist in keeping up with the increased usage of the building and to maintain the facility at the level expected by the customers. ($29,700) • Operating supplies in general are increased to reflect actual experience. The 2004 allocation was too optimistic and under budgeted. The account includes both on-going operations and program supplies. ($17,500) • Personal auto/parking, primarily mileage was also under budgeted and accounts for an increase in 2005. ($1,700) • General advertising is increased as a component of the marketing plan. ($5,200) • General printing and binding is also increased as a component of the marketing efforts. ($2,000) • The overall City property and casualty insurance allocation results in a relatively Targe increase to the Community Center budget. ($11,700) • Utilities are increased to reflect actual expenses and increased membership. ($3,500) 7 • Other contractual services and maintenance contracts are increased substantially as the installation contracts are completed and closed, warranties expire, and the City has full responsibility for the building and equipment. ($21,800) • A new renewal and replacement account is added to provide funding for future replacement of major infrastructure and equipment. ($120,800) The proposed complement of personnel is increased by the additional maintenance position and is demonstrated in the following table: Proposed Personnel 2003* 2004 2005 Community Center Manager 1 1 1 Maintenance Engineer 1 1 1 Fitness Coordinator 1 1 1 Rental Room Coordinator 1 1 1 Facility Operations Coordinator 1 1 1 Lead Custodial/Maintenance 0 1 1 Custodial 1 2 3 6 8 9 Position titles have changed slightly since 2003 and not all positions were fully budgeted in 2003. Changes in the personnel complement continue to reflect operating experience and to respond to service needs of customers and the various constituency groups. OTHER INFORMATION Marketing The fourth item listed above under the general parameters around which all budgets and operating plans have been developed and approved states, "The importance of successfully marketing the facility and developing an acceptable market niche to maximize revenues while blending in the community center philosophy cannot be overstated? All City staff and especially those working at the Community Center are committed to this message and have been working diligently from day 1 to implement a comprehensive and well thought out marketing approach supported byecific objectives and expected outcomes. Enclosed on pages e20 and it is a copy of a summary of marketing activities that have been undertaken thus far in 2004. The success of this approach and the overall long-term progress that is being made is demonstrated in the membership numbers included in the revenue section of this memo. 8? Health Partners In July of 2004 the Eagan Community Center joined with HealthPartners (HP) to begin offering the Frequent Fitness Program (FFP) to our fitness customers. This promotion will reimburse eligible, participating HP members $20.00 toward each month's membership cost when they work out eight or more time per month; up to two members per household. Since its inception in July, 99 members have enrolled in this program. Seeing most employers offer open enrollment is December, we look forward to gaining new memberships, beginning in January, as employees change their current providers to be eligible for this HP offer. One excellent example of this is our neighboring business Lockheed Martin. Lockheed has been self-insured, making it ineligible for this program. Since the ECC signed on with HP, many Lockheed employees have persuaded their employer to change their current program to be fully insured through HP, allowing eligibility in the program. Thus beginning in January any HP insured Lockheed employee can obtain a $20.00 reimbursement by working out 8 times a month. This means their monthly membership dues will be $11.00. With this greatly reduced monthly fee we expect to gain additional members and retention should be easier because their out-of-pocket expenses will be lower. Renewal and Replacement The eighth item listed above under the general parameters states, "No renewal or replacement or depreciation is funded in this plan. The Operations Committee has directed staff to reduce spending in the construction FF&E account to retain a beginning balance for renewal and replacement in lieu of funding that type of account from operations or funding depreciation." That parameter is modified within the proposed 2005 Community Center Budget as $120,800 is included as an appropriation to begin funding the renewal and replacement account. The $120,800 results from a calculation using cost and expected life for various components of infrastructure and equipment. It is a public policy determination for the City Council as to whether or not the account should be fully funded at this time. A decision to not fund the account or to fund it at a lesser amount could reduce the amount of antennae lease revenue or allow for increases to other appropriations. Conclusion The Community Center is clearly off to a successful beginning and is establishing a niche in the Community. While many challenges have been addressed, many remain and will be aggressively met into the future. This budget document, while showing less detail than previous operating plans, incorporates previous City Council direction and is overall a stay the course budget with minor modifications. It also allows for continued flexibility as the City goes forward. 2005 Budget Community Center Enterprise Fund DETAIL OF REVENUES Revenues 4304 OTHER REVENUE -PARKS (non-taxable) 4305 EQUIPMENT RENTAL (taxable) 4310 PARK PROGRAM REVENUE (non-taxable) 4312 CONCESSION SALES (taxable) 4314 MERCHANDISE SALES (taxable) 4315 MERCHANDISE SALES (non-taxable) 4316 GROUP SALES (taxable) 4317 GROUP SALES (non-taxable) 4318 DAILY ADMISSION (taxable) 4319 DAILY ADMISSION (non-taxable) 4321 MEMBERSHIP (taxable) 4323 VENDING (non-taxable) 4324 ROOM RENTALS (taxable) 4326 FACILITY RENTAL (taxable) 4328 CONTRACT REVENUE 4621 ECVB Rent Subtotal Other Funding Sources 4980 ANTENNA LEASES 2004 Budget 93,900 40,000 65,570 71,400 371,400 155,040 46,000 6,600 849,910 290,590 2005 Proposed Budget $ 22,200 2,000 13,900 31,900 1,200 1,400 95,700 4,800 74,800 21,700 574,200 5,000 172,300 1,500 55,700 8,600 1,086,900 292,300 Total Revenues and Other Funding Sources $ 1,140,500 $ 1,379,200 to 2005 - COMMUNITY CENTER - 223 REVENUE PROJECTIONS 4300 RECREATION CHARGES 4304 OTHER REVENUE -PARKS (non-taxable) - Personal Training & Heart Healthy Living PT $1,600 month x 12 months HHL $250 month x 12 months Amount 19,200 3,000 4305 EQUIPMENT RENTAL (taxable) -Audio Visual 2,000 4310 PARK PROGRAM REVENUE (non-taxable) -Fitness Classes & Punch Cards / Open Gym Classes 28 per month x 8 participant x $4.00 x 12 months Open Gym (moved to 4318 Daily Admission) Punch Cards 6 month x $43.00 x 12 months 4311 PARK PROGRAM REVENUE (taxable) - Program that is not a class 10,752 3,096 4312 CONCESSION SALES (taxable) Concessions - general 28,712 Kids Night Out 18 events x 20 youth x $3.00 1,080 ECC Food and Beverage 20 meetings x 30 guests x $2.00 1,200 ECC Coffee Service 30 meetings x 30 guests x $1.00 900 4313 CONCESSION SALES (taxable) 4314 MERCHANDISE SALES (taxable) Towels/padlocks/batteries and cameras 1,200 4315 MERCHANDISE SALES (non-taxable) Socks 475 pairs x $2.00 950 Socks 12 packs x $9.00 pkg. 135 T-shirts 40 x $8.50 340 4316 GROUP SALES (taxable) - Blast Groups and Birthday Parties Birthday Parties 558 x $117.50 65,565 Additional birthday party guests 2 x $11.75 x 558 13,113 Groups 100 x 40 youth x $4.26 17,040 4317 GROUP SALES (non-taxable) - Groups that are tax exempt 30 groups x 40 youth x $4.00 4,800 4318 DAILY ADMISSION (taxable) -Blast & Daily Passes/Open Gym/Passport to Play Blast Daily 362 x 33.5 admissions per day x $5.00 60,635 Passport to Play 675 Open Gym 220 month x $3.00 x 12 months 7,200 Fitness Daily 362 days x 1.75 admissions per day x $10.00 6,335 4319 DAILY ADMISSION (non-taxable) -Blast Punch Cards 362 days x 1.5 cards per day x $40.00 21,720 4321 MEMBERSHIP (taxable) Memberships for 2005 (480 new members) 556,170 Initiation fees 250 x $69.00 17,250 Initiation fees 80 x $10.00 800 Initiation fees 150 x $0 (summer special has no enrollment fees) 4322 VENDING (taxable) 4323 VENDING (non-taxable) 5,000 4324 ROOM RENTALS (taxable) -Oaks/Meeting Rooms/Board Room/Teen Ctr./Gymnasium Oaks Banquet Facility 99,000 Meeting Rooms 10,000 Board Room 13,000 Lone Oak Room 5,250 Teen Center 3,000 Kids Kare 500 Gymnasium 41,500 4326 FACILITY RENTAL (taxable) - Gazebo/Band Shell 30 hours x $50.00 4327 FACILITY RENTAL (non-taxable) 1,500 4328 CONTRACT REVENUE - Caterers and Contracted Vendors Food Caterers 22,500 Liquor Provider 29,500 To -Go -Services 650 Chairs/Drapery 3,000 4621 ECVB Rent 8,600 Monthly Fees O O O O O O O O O O co O O O> O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • <19. O O O O U) U) Lf) CO N N CO ti CO CO O t- N f— N d O N C O N co O ti O co O O co N �t 4- 4- d' NI- Ln d' d' Nr 1 > 69-69- Ef} 69 d969 EH EA K3 Ef} EA Ct? L0, Q) EF? O N t O CO CO CO 00 O O O CO CO 00 CO CO N N N N M M M N N N N N 0) C4 O Co LO O L() U) LO LO U) U) O O O N N O r- "Ct CO CO M Nr LO (D M CO ti ti v - Ln O O O LO LO LC) O O O O O LO 0 0 0 U) N N N U) U) LO N N N N N CO r � O O U) O U) LO LO U) L(j LO O O O CO I� O N N N- 0) r- CO CO cr d* LC) Cr) U) O CO CO N- 1` f— Nr o 0) p Q L .Q N CII i U—* * * = Q N O CI3C L L >' >+ 0) Q- > U c �LL2Q2-7--)QC)0Zo Total for 2005 Initiation Fees O O O O O O'' LO O U);. N CO O 3 ~ OO G) En- EA G) eC 0) O CO 0) LC o • N O CO E 0) FuII initiation fee Reduced initiation fee Total for 2005 * no initiation fee for May -July Grand Total Membership Community Center Statistics: 'fitness Memberships - Total = 1108 1) 916 = Current ECC Fitness Members 2) 93 = 90 -day 3) 99 = Frequent Fitness Members (*Health Partners) *Began program in July. Following are monthly stats: 51/July 68/August 95/September 99/Current Miscellaneous — Fitness related purchases Personal Training Sessions Member Fitness Punch Cards Non -Member Fitness Punch Cards Fitness Equipment Orientations 2003 201 12 47 89 2004 639 25 174 75 Blast Daily Admissions 2003 (May — Dec.) = 5,586 2004 (Jan. — 10/5/04) = 7,400 Blast Punch Cards — 10 visit punch cards sold to residents 2003 = 428 2004 (Jan. — 10/5/05) = 225 Birthday Parties 2003 (May — Dec.) = 352 2004 (Jan. — 10/5/04) = 366 1 Group Blast Rentals '.003 (May — Dec.) = 118 2004 (Jan. — 10/5/04) = 122 Average group brings about 40 children (Thus 2004 calculations indicate nearly 5,000 children) Weddings 2003 (May — Dec) = 35 2004 (Jan. — scheduled to year end) = 58 2005 (currently booked) = 39 Gym Rentals — The "3 -regular" renters and their allocated time in hours EAA EVAA P & R Leagues Fall & Winter 2003/2004 762 223 426 Fall and Winter 2004/2005 780 300 600 Rental Events — Total booked in the ECC 2003 = 2000 2004 = 4000 Open Gym Programs Thus far in 2004: 1,630 individuals have attended open gym programs. This includes open volleyball, open basketball, family open gym, youth open gym, adult open gym, and our recently added preschool open gym. Miscellaneous — Merchandise for sale Batteries (for headsets) Towels Padlocks Cameras Socks Blast T-shirts 2003 1 19 33 9 503 19 2004 29 35 56 8 203 20 O O O 1 CITY OF EAGAN N N O) LL 0 ' 0. O N E U E W r.) O O O O N N 2005 BUDGET Department Budget LY) 0 O N DEPT REQ 223 -COMMUNITY CENTER ENTERPRISE 0 O 0 O 0 O co co in ti Lf) N G (D 0O N N LL) (0 O O O O O d_ M sal O N O) 0) O) (O M co 0 0 N M O 0 N CD N COCO0 LN CO NLO 0)) CO er CO(D coM Is- N M CO 0 ri co co '- N V SALARIES AND WAGES -REGULAR OVERTIME -REGULAR SALARIES AND WAGES -TEMPORARY OVERTIME -TEMPORARY PERA-COORDINATED FICA HEALTH INSURANCE LIFE DISABILITY - LONG TERM WORKERS COMPENSATION N 0 co co • - et L ▪ 1 in L0CD • CD LL PERSONAL SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 0 N M 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O• NO LO N N OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE PRINTED MATERIAUFORMS OFFICE SMALL EQUIPMENT 0 N N N N (O (O (0 CITY OF EAGAN 0 o � Lu O I- N W 0 —J Q 0 I— N () 0) Q W 0 m y E O c N Q) 0 N N-0 O ' 0 o. O N E z W CO 0 0 0 0 N N Code Description 223 -COMMUNITY CENTER ENTERPRISE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In In 0 0 0 o 0 0 to. IS, 0 0 O N L() r Il9 • N r N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ion' 0 0 0 0 0 L() 0 O N r In d' I() r (V r N 0 1- O CO 0) O I( ) co 00 0) r (0 O M r M N r r OPERATING SUPPLIES -GENERAL MEDICAURESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES BUILDING/CLEANING SUPPLIES CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT RECREATION EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES REPAIR/MAINTENANCE SUPP-GENL SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS BUILDING REPAIR SUPPLIES SMALL TOOLS SHOP MATERIALS CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS SNOW/ICE REMOVAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE N N N Col N N M M M in P CONCONCONCONCOC(NO (0 CONCONCON(NO (N0 CON O O 0 M O triO O In SUPPLIES,REPAIRS AND MTN N O 0) 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN N N O LL v7 O O. Z, 2 ca E U U W(/) 0 0 0 0 N N 2005 BUDGET Department Budget LU 0 N 0- 0 0 F- � 0 0 N CD -J Q 0 F- N () c 0 a 0 a) O O U 223 -COMMUNITY CENTER ENTERPRISE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O CO 0 N 0 0 I N 0 r 0 0 0 N (n (O cs r 0) N00 O C � r r- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 00 M 10[) 0 0 OV 0 O O (0 M �- O co O 00cri r r N CO00 00) co O 0) O co Tr 0 co 0) ▪ (0 r O r I- (0 ✓ 11) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES O W z 0 !1- 0 CO 0 < 0 TELEPHONE SERVICE & LINE CHG MATRIX SERVICE & REPAIR PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE GENERAL ADVERTISING EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING r- (0 C(00 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING INSURANCE ELECTRICITY NATURAL GAS SERVICE MISCELLANEOUS O �t CD I's CO M 0 P 00 0 0 0 0 0 r r Sr"Cr ' ▪ in 111 0 CO I- CO 0 P M M M M M Cr) M M M M M ' v CO (D CD (D CO CD CD CO CO CD (0 (D (D /7 CITY OF EAGAN M N O CV � y 0 0 o ca E J z 11J (/) 00 O O N N 2005 BUDGET Department Budget U w O C' 0 F— N 0- 0 0 H w o N 0 m J • Q O N U 00 co a) 0 .. U N O O 223 -COMMUNITY CENTER ENTERPRISE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 Lt) 0) 0 ' 0 N tfj M O M O 1 00 0 0O 0 O to O M O to to 05 N 00 U) eL2 "I 0)) 00CV ) 0— CCD CO (7) N N N O CD O CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS LOCAL MEETING EXPENSES DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS N '- M M r LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES VISA BANK CHARGES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES WASTE REMOVAL/SANITATION SERV TRANSPORTATION SERVICES MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS CO ti 0) COo CO M 0 0 COO 3 30 00 COO is? O O N 0) M M 0 0 O CO N C) ti) O OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES OTHER IMPROVEMENTS MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT FURNITURE & FIXTURES 0 0 0 (M03 0 0 0 0 CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Department Budget a W 0 N d W 0 F— ,� O 0 N m -J Q 0 I- N N 0 M N .. 0 LCL 2 O ' O. a.. 0 O N E U E wcn �Lt) 00 0 0 N N Code Description 223 -COMMUNITY CENTER ENTERPRISE OTHER EQUIPMENT 0 ti co CAPITAL OUTLAY 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O N N CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 T N- MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE In CO co N a) T MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE �9 TOTAL EXP BEFORE RENEW & REPLACEMT RESERVE FOR RENEWAL & REPLACEMENT TOTAL COMM CENTER ENTERPRISE OPER O O N Eagan Community Center Marketing — 2004 Below is a summary of how various areas of the Community Center have been marketed thus far in 2004. Fitness Memberships and Classes: • Ads in local newspapers for January membership special "The Year of You" • Commercial made and shown on Cable TV • Press releases on complimentary group fitness classes • Staff attendance at 3 different corporate health fairs • Letters to all current members on the Health Partners Frequent Fitness Program and the inclusion of group fitness classes into the membership • Letter to corporate offices on summer membership program and complimentary fitness classes • Staff attendance at 3 high schools to promote a conditioning camp and summer membership • Marketed ECC/Health Partners Frequent Fitness Program in District #196 Community Education Brochure 90—Day Membership Special: • Letter to coaches and athletes • Posters to area colleges • Commercial made and shown on Cable TV • E-mails to HR departments at the four businesses near our campus and to other corporations and colleges/schools The Blast Indoor Playground: • Letters to day care providers in six communities • Flyer to all MN Parks and Recreation agencies for summer group rentals and to all groups who booked in 2003 • Flyers distributed at AAU tournament • Monthly postcards sent to every child who has had a previous birthday party at the Blast • Article written for the MN Explorer • Visits to Elementary School Principles • Staff attendance at 3 different elementary school fall open houses Banquet Room and Meeting Rooms: • Ads placed in the Wedding Directory and Wedding Guide • Letters to local hotels • Letters to school leaders and coaches who will be planning 2005 sports banquets • Letter to government meeting planners • Staff visit to a local funeral home Specialized Events: • Hosted a senior fitness day • Hosted a women's health day • Hosted membership appreciation night at Cascade Bay • Booth at the Taste of Minnesota • Distributed bags and Blast flyers at the Eagan 4th of July parade • Goodies bags distributed at the MOM's (Mothers of Multiples) garage sale and the Lynx Day, both held at the Community Center • Mailings to church groups on the overnight rental options • Flyers included to all leagues containing information on our open gym programs and memberships Regular On -Going Marketing: • Press releases are done on a regular basis for all programs • Articles written for Experience Eagan • Promotion in the Discover Brochure • Promotion on City Web Page • Marquee at City Hall used to promote all programs, memberships, fitness classes and rental opportunities • Brochures placed on a marketing table near the banquet room when any large group is renting the Oaks • Brochure available at other city facilities Agenda Information Memo October 12, 2004, Eagan City Council V. GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET FOLLOW UP ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To provide direction to staff regarding the proposed 2005 General Fund Budget. At the September 13 Special City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to prepare responses to approximately 6 additional questions pertaining to the 2005 Preliminary General Fund Budget. At that meeting a memo providing answers to approximately 20 earlier questions was discussed and these follow-up questions or requests for additional information were generated. 1. What will be the job description for the 3rd Code Enforcement Tech position? How will the position be managed? The job description for the position will be the same as for the existing Code Enforcement Technicians; a copy of that job description is enclosed on pages (9.,c— through-!--. The position will be managed in a manner similar to the two existing positions receiving work direction from the City Planner based on priorities determined by the City Council and implemented through the Community Development Director. Enclosed on pages A� through 31 is a copy of a memo from Community Development Director Hohenstein and City Planner Ridley providing additional information about code enforcement in general and about this particular position. 2. In reference to the previous information regarding shifts, show the % increase/decrease that resulted in each department as a result of shifts made. The "Components of Department Increases" table (page 41 of the September 13 Special City Council packet) illustrates three reallocations of expenditures from 2004 to 2005: • The second of three annual installments of $131,800 for purchase of the Printrak (Police records) software—budgeted as an operating expenditure in IT in 2004— was more appropriately treated as a capital expenditure in 2005, with funding proposed to be from the fund balance. $131,800 represents 10.8% of the 2004 IT budget. • The Matrix telephone maintenance contract, which was in the Finance Dept budget in 2004 for $8,600, was moved to IT, the department that oversees the Matrix contract. In 2005, because the City requires 24/7 coverage for its phone system, the Matrix maintenance contract increased to $25,000. $8,600 represents 1% of the 2004 Finance budget. $25,000 represents 2.6% of the 2005 IT budget. • The Central Services Maintenance Dept clerical tech position ($43,700 total cost in 2004, $51,300 in 2005) is proposed to be moved to the Public Utilities Fund in connection with the opening of the Utilities Division office space in the North Water Treatment Plant expansion. $43,700 represents 9.3% of the 2004 Central Services Maintenance budget. Several relatively small reallocations of City-wide expenditures comprise the balance of the "shifts" from the 2004 budget to the 2005 budget. Included in the reallocations are (1) the City's property and liability insurance premiums; (2) telephone expense; and (3) auditing costs. The new allocations are intended to more accurately associate costs with the appropriate department or fund. From a City-wide perspective, overall costs in these areas are essentially unchanged except for inflationary increases. 3. How many dispatchers will it take to have two dispatchers available 24/7/365? Look at the addition of 1.5 or 2 new dispatchers—what would the impact be? Is there justification for the additional dispatchers? Would it be feasible to recruit a part-time dispatcher who is willing to start with a full-time training schedule? Answers to these questions are provided in the follow three attachments: • Enclosed on page , is a memo from Communications Supervisor Ruby summarizing the current and authorized dispatch personnel complement as well as quantifying the additional hours available through the potential addition of 1, 1.5, and 2 dispatch positions. • Enclosed on pages "1 ),3 through ,5 is a copy of a memo from Chief of Police Therkelsen providing a response to these questions incorporating a broader perspective into dispatch services. • Enclosed on page JLp is a copy of a 2004 Dispatch Staffing Survey as completed by Assistant to the City Administrator Miller comparing Eagan to other similar communities. 4. Tree Conservation—Response from contractors regarding cost for contracting INn_ dscaping service . Enclosed on pages _t 7 through 34 is a copy of a memo from Assistant to the City Administrator Miller summarizing he research that has been completed and the resulting public policy issues that have been raised in response to this question. 5. Graphically demonstrate the City's projections for how long new construction revenue will offset the tax capacity rate. Enclosed on page /if) is a graph showing the percentage of the annual increase in market value that is attributable to new construction versus inflation on existing properties. For example, for taxes payable in 2000, 38.2% of the increase in market value for the City resulted from new construction. Conversely, 61.8% resulted form inflation on existing property. The graph shows five years of actual results (taxes payable years of 2000 through 2004) and one year of currently available information (taxes payable 2005). That information is then projected forward (taxes payable years 2006 through 2009) using the resulting trend line. The projection based on this historical information results in little or no new construction market value in the taxes payable year 2009 and into 2010. While the exact floor has not been determined, it is unlikely that the actual increase would go below some percentage as there will probably always be some new development or redevelopment. The projection does not reflect the total level of market value in the community nor does it reflect the appropriate tax burden. It merely shows the relationship between increases in market value resulting from new construction and inflation. Since the calculation of tax capacity changed by State law for taxes payable in 2002, the analysis was completed using market value only, thereby providing a longer base period. The projections resulting from using tax capacity increases over the same time period would probably be similar to those arrived at by using market value. Also, only total market value was used. Results using commercial/industrial and/or residential market values individually might also produce some additional interesting results. However, those results would again be expected to be only marginally different from the conclusions using total market value. 6. Provide additional information about Web casting. How will it be used? What options/tools will it provide? Enclosed on page 41 is a copy of a memo from Director of Communications Garrison providing a response to this question. I believe this answers the questions and provides additional information in response to the items noted at the September 13 Special City Council meeting regarding the preliminary 2005 General Fund Budget and preliminary 2005 tax levy. Staff will be available to respond to any additional questions at the meeting on Tuesday and to seek additional direction as the budget preparation continues throughout the balance of the year, culminating at the rescheduled regular City Council meetings in December on the 6t and 13th. CITY OF EAGAN POSITION WRITE UP POSITION TITLE: Code Enforcement Technician DEPARTMENT: Community Development REPORTS TO: Senior Planner POSITION SUMMARY: Enforce City Codes and provide notification and means of corrective measures for compliance. Conduct inspections for the Planning Division. Work with the public and development community to ensure code compliance. Approve and process sign permit applications. ESSENTIAL POSITION FUNCTIONS: Enforce City Codes relating to zoning, signage, parking, turf grass and noxious weeds, building safety and appearance, and general maintenance of property; document complaints, perform inspections, evaluate property conditions and conduct the notification process; give guidance on corrective actions and work cooperatively with property owners to ensure violations have been corrected. Prepare and manage violation records on computer database systems and in paper form. Prepare reports regarding code enforcement cases. Issue citations for non-compliance cases and prepare documents for prosecution. Perform the duties of the City Weed Inspector. Coordinate long grass and weed eradication measures through contractual services and/or force account labor. Answer questions and provide information regarding zoning, land use, and ordinances to the general public and development community. Monitor sales and use permits to determine compliance with conditions. Review landscape plans and inspect landscape installations of new developments to determine compliance with approved landscape plan; coordinate release of landscape guarantee escrow funds. Review signage plans and process sign permits; inspect sign installations to determine compliance with approved signage plan; manage sign permit records on computer database system and in paper form. Remove signs from public property in violation of City Code, Dakota County regulations, or state law. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Ability to perform all essential position functions under the working conditions as described. Two years post -high school education/degree in law enforcement, building inspections, construction management, or similar and/or two years work experience in code enforcement or compliance. Experience using computer databases for recordkeeping and data retrieval and basic word processing skills. Ability to understand and interpret city codes. Ability to read blueprints and building/development plans. Effective verbal communication and negotiating skills. Good writing and analytical skills. Well -organized recordkeeping and management skills. General knowledge of turf, turf maintenance and landscaping. Ability to establish and maintain positive working relations with the public and co-workers. Ability to work independently and to use good judgment in the conduct of job tasks. Must be neatly groomed. Valid Drivers License. Must be 18 years of age by employment start date. DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS: Demonstrated experience in effective public contact. Previous code enforcement experience with a governmental agency or experience in municipal planning or inspections. Ability to make autonomous decisions. Experience working with people in potentially controversial situations. Experience using Access and GIS computer applications. Bachelors degree or progress being made towards a degree in urban planning or related field. Familiarity with municipal ordinances, enforcement procedures, zoning and subdivision principles. Working knowledge of inspection techniques. WORKING CONDITIONS: 50% Office 50% Field This position will require extensive field -work and interaction with property owners, developers, and/or contractors. Position may entail stressful conditions when dealing with concerned residents and/or developers and when needing to meet deadlines. Field conditions may entail walking over uneven ground, including snow and ice surfaces, in a variety of weather conditions including temperatures up to 100 degrees F and down to -20 degrees F. The position will require some physical tasks to be performed such as pulling out sign stakes and lifting heavy objects. 94, HOURS OF WORK: Normal office hours are 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., five 8 -hour days per week. However, assignments may require Code Enforcement Technician to work before and after this time, including some evening meetings. Overtime will be paid for all hours worked over 40 in a work week. h: \codeenf\empques Rev. 07/07/04 c7 city of eagan MEMO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JON HOHENSTEIN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MIKE RIDLEY, CITY PLANNER DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2004 SUBJECT: 2005 POSITION REQUEST — CODE ENFORCEMENT TECHNICIAN In follow up to the City Council request for additional information regarding the draft budget proposal for an additional Code Enforcement Technician position in the Community Development Department, we offer the following background and analysis. BACKGROUND As was anticipated at the time of the original budget submittals, zoning code enforcement activity has continued to create additional demands, both in volume and complexity of the cases that are being investigated and enforced. Conversations with representatives of other communities and the experience of our employees who have worked in other jurisdictions points to the fact that as a community matures, property maintenance, property storage, home and yard improvements and other changes in the character and condition of property result in increasing requirements to educate about and enforce compliance with basic City standards for such activities and conditions. This has been reflected in the growth in complaints and requests for information that our Zoning and Planning staff respond to on an ongoing basis. In addition, while most of the zoning enforcement activities are complaint based, the Council has permitted staff to be more proactive in specific areas such as offsite business signage, in an effort to respond to constituent concerns about the appearance of our rights of way and public properties, and rental housing standard enforcement, in response to specific neighborhood concerns. As the City continues to mature and add population and the properties within it continue to age and demand reinvestment to remain vital, it is evident that the demand for code enforcement activities will continue to expand. The attached table depicts the continued escalation in demand for zoning enforcement. The table represents only hard numbers of actual code enforcement cases; it does not reflect inquiries, unsubstantiated claims, and the daily interaction with citizens, business owners, realtors, developers, inter -departmental interaction, etc. SERVICE IMPACTS At the most recent Council workshop at which the budget was discussed, additional information was requested by the Council to better understand the basis for the proposed position. In particular, staff was asked to respond to the following question: What will happen if we do not hire the third Code Enforcement Technician position and, assuming the third person is not hired, how will resources and staffing be allocated within the Planning Division to address code enforcement needs? The answers to the questions are a combination of quantitative and qualitative impacts. They encompass current demands that we believe exceed the capacity of our current staffing levels as well as anticipated demands as calls for service are trending upward. Some of the impacts are measurable, while others are subjective and relate to the quality of the service we want to provide on the City's behalf. Even if the quantity of code enforcement cases remains at the current level, unless the additional position is added there will be an increased delay throughout the code enforcement process. This would include a delay in response time to complaints, subsequent follow-through on open cases, and a delay in achieving compliance. Timely contact and expeditious turn -around — service the public has come to expect —will likely require transition to a "first-come, first serve" basis, or a more stringent "priority" basis, based upon most urgent matters receiving primary response and attention. With less time to work one-on-one with a violator to attain compliance, there will likely be an increase in citations issued to achieve the necessary compliance with less staff -time involved. The goal of Code Enforcement is compliance; the last resort is issuing a citation because that involves the City Attorney and the court system. Both of which add significant costs (staff time and attorney's fees) to the City. With a decrease in staff time available, other responsibilities of code enforcement would be similarly affected. Several possible expectations would be reduced proactive or complaint -based sign removal from rights-of-way, delayed time in processing sign permit applications, delayed case file documentation (data entry, filing and monthly reporting), decreased time available to assist staff or the public with code research, zoning requests and similar inquiries, insufficient noxious weed assessment and removal on private and public properties, delayed landscape inspections and return of escrow funds, decreased time available to contribute to in-house meetings or committees that function as an integral part of serving staff and the public, decreased time available to respond to "hot -button" topics or areas of the City under scrutiny by staff or the council (i.e. 3lxx Pilot Knob Road, Wescott Square area, Widgeon Way area), and decreased time available to fill-in for staff on leave or out sick. Short -staffing or "work -overload" has an affect on the staff involved. The code enforcement position's responsibilities are dominated by addressing customer complaints, resolution of difficult cases, addressing neighbor disputes and sometimes uncooperative respondents. Current and anticipated workloads expand the timelines for resolving cases, which adds the strain of uncompleted or unaccomplished work to the job tasks and can increase the pressure -filled situations the employee is already working with. An overload situation may result in an increased number of mistakes and time dedicated to correct those mistakes, increased pressure from an unsatisfied public, increased demand for overtime hours to complete necessary work, increased complaints to supervisory staff, administration and the council, increased staff illness and decreased job satisfaction. CONCLUSION While our staff in the code enforcement function is dedicated and committed to customer service, it is important to give them the resources and tools necessary to do their jobs well. We believe that we are at the point at which the most important resource we can provide them is one additional staff position to spread the workload, provide proper attention to the resolution of complex issues, maintain our ability to perform proactive education and enforcement and continue to support community standards regarding the maintenance, proper use and appearance of properties within Eagan. We do not believe the code enforcement call increase we have experienced over the last several years represents an anomaly. We expect the calls will continue to increase over the next several years before leveling off. Given what we know about the experience of other communities that are one or two maturity steps ahead of Eagan, we cannot envision a scenario where the level of calls will decrease. Code Enforcement Activity Report by Year/Type 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Jan - Sep Building/Address Numbers Posted - - - - 2 - Compost 3 0 1 2 1 3 Fence Maintenance & Construction Requirements 2 1 11 8 10 4 Firewood Storage - - - - 4 3 Garage Sale Requirements - - - - 2 1 Grass/Noxious Weeds/Turfgrass Establishment 92 78 75 98 162 105 Home Occupation 5 8 6 11 14 14 Ice Houses, Docks, Floating Rafts - - - - 1 - Junk Vehicles/Household Goods/Furniture/Appliances 15 19 23 16 63 67 Obstructions on Public Property - - - - 24 10 Parking (Areas; Recreation Vehicles; Vehicles; Trucks; Use) 54 60 29 45 44 28 Performance Standards-Nuisance/Noise 6 7 4 1 2 1 Pool Maintenance & Requirements 2 2 2 3 6 5 Property Maintenance (2000 -present) - 20 9 10 101 20 Refuse 91 95 80 88 149 158 Repeat Nuisance Call - - - - 11 1 Signs/Election Signs 38 25 31 168 79 115 Zoning/Land Use 42 53 51 70 65 42 Multiple Case Category (1998-2002 only) 39 40 66 70 - - Total Cases Received 389 408 388 590 740 577 Annualized Projection 769+ MEMORANDUM EAGAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5700 651-675-5707 FAX DATE: October 6, 2004 TO: Dianne Miller, Assistant to the City Administrator Cc: Chief Kent Therkelsen Captain Jim McDonald FROM: Troy E. Ruby -Communications Manager SUBJECT: Additional 2005 Budget Questions As requested, I am providing additional information related to dispatch center staffing. Authorized staffing v. actual staffing: # of Authorized Dispatchers (Including Supervisor) 10.75 # of Current FTE Dispatchers (since May 2003) (Including Supervisor) 7.50 Full-time- 5 Part -time -2 @.75 # of Dispatchers as of October 10, 2004 (Including Supervisor) 8.50 Deployment of additional staffing: In response to the second part of your message, the addition of 1 FTE gives 2080 additional staff hours. With 1.5 FTE's we gain 3120 additional staff hours and with 2 FTE's we gain 4160 hrs. As stated in the response to the initial questions already submitted, with 11.75 FTE's we can accomplish round-the- clock double -up staffing and some triple up coverage. Any staffing increases above 11.75 FTE's will provide for consistent triple up coverage during our peak time (statistically around 9:00 PM) and extended triple up during additional hours of high demand. Based upon the most recent analysis of call -for -service demands, we would concentrate additional staffing hours on the period from 2:00 PM until midnight. Any staffing above 11.75 would also provide for more relief and flexibility during staffing losses due to vacancies such as resignations, training or other forms of time off. As stated above, every effort would be given to schedule additional staff during times of heavy call load. It is the goal of this Communication Center to provide the highest level of service possible. Please let me know if I can provide any further information on this matter. DATE: October 4, 2004 MEMORANDUM EAGAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5700 651-675-5707 FAX TO: Gene VanOverbeke, Director of Administrative Services FROM: Kent Therkelsen, Chief of Police SUBJECT: 2005 Operating Budget Questions As requested, I am responding to the three questions related to dispatch staffing posed by the Mayor and City Council at the Special Budget Meeting on September 13, 2004. I would like to begin with a brief summary of the staffing situation currently being experienced in the Communication Center. The Communication Center has been operating since May of 2003; using 7.50 FTE's which is short of our authorized staffing of 10.75. The staff shortage has been the result of absences due to resignations and leaves of absences. The Communication Center does have an additional FTE that was hired in May of 2004 who is expected to complete training on October 10, 2004. We are also utilizing the services of a Police Officer on medically restricted duty. The dispatch operation has continued to provide a high level of service to the community during this challenging time due, in large part, to the flexibility and patience of our current staff. The opportunity to have a medically restricted officer work in the center has helped tremendously. The Communication Center Manager has contributed many hours to dispatching duties, taking him away from supervisory duties to some extent. Although the contributions of the medically restricted officer and communications manager have served to alleviate our staffing shortage, we cannot expect either position to provide long term staffing help. Council Questions The first two questions posed at the September 13th Council workshop are closely related and best answered together. 1) "How would an additional 1.5 FTE's vs. 2.0 FTE's impact the operation?" and 2) "Can we recruit someone for a part-time position?" Put another way, the question becomes "What is the service difference with an authorized staffing of 12.25 FTEs and 12.75 FTEs in the communications center?" Assuming that 12.25 FTE staffing will provide for at least two dispatchers on duty 24 hours per day, the difference between adding 1.5 and 2.0 FTEs will be in our ability to staff a third dispatcher during peak service demand hours. The Eagan Police Communication Center processes Police, Fire and EMS calls for service. Although we are unable to precisely predict fire calls or other emergencies, we do make staffing decisions based on an 33 Gene VanOverbeke Budget Follow-up October 4, 2004 Page two analysis of service demand with a third dispatcher on duty as often as possible during the busiest times. 12.75 FTEs will provide more capacity than 12.25 FTEs to handle a critical incident efficiently and provide better coverage of our operation as a whole. I have attached graphs which illustrates the demand for services in the dispatch center by time of day and day of week. Although the mix of full and part-time dispatchers served the community well in years past, police administration has been reducing the part-time complement in recent years. Our experience had shown a declining amount of schedule flexibility and budget savings as our part-time dispatchers were consistently working in excess of 30 hours per week. Complicating the issue is the bargaining agreement with the dispatchers union. With dispatcher seniority based on the number of hours worked, seniority calculations become complicated and a new hire could easily be bumped to a full-time schedule by a senior dispatcher wishing to move to part-time status. The potential for shifting between part time and full time each year, makes it somewhat challenging to attract dispatch candidates. An alternative for 2005 would be to add 1 FTE at the beginning of the year, and the 2°d in the second half, which would have a budget impact of 1.5 FTEs for 2005. This approach would have budget implications for 2006. The third question: "Can we achieve around-the-clock double -up coverage with 3 Dispatchers working during peak hours?" As stated above, with 11.75 FTEs (increase of 1.0 FTEs) in the dispatch center we can accomplish round-the-clock double -up staffing coverage and some triple -up coverage, assuming no unexpected reduction in staff availability. Any staffing increases above that level would provide a greater margin for staffing losses due to resignation, vacation, leave of absence, training, etc, and at full strength, allow more hours of triple coverage. I hope this information will be helpful in responding to City Council information requests. Communications Manager Troy Ruby and I will be present at the workshop on October 12th to answer any questions that may arise. C/ Captain Jim McDonald Communications Manager Troy Ruby 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 £ Z 2000 1500 1000 500 0 • Number of Calls Calls For Service by Month (1/1/04 - 8/31/04) Month E Z 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 • Nurrber of Calls Calls For Service by Day of Week (1/1/04 - 8/31/04) ■ ■ Monday Tuesday ■ Thursday January February March April May June July August 3895 3486 3803 3804 4257 4502 4529 4457 Month E Z 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 • Nurrber of Calls Calls For Service by Day of Week (1/1/04 - 8/31/04) Day of Week 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 .o E 1000 Z 800 600 400 200 0 Calls For Service by Hour of Day (1/1/04 - 8/31/04) 400 100 2:00 300 4:00 5:00 6:00 790 890 900 1090 5000 200 t00 2:00 300 4:00 500 6:00 790 8:00 990 5190 1000 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Hour of Day as Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday 4633 4834 4804 4859 5091 4564 3948 Day of Week 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 .o E 1000 Z 800 600 400 200 0 Calls For Service by Hour of Day (1/1/04 - 8/31/04) 400 100 2:00 300 4:00 5:00 6:00 790 890 900 1090 5000 200 t00 2:00 300 4:00 500 6:00 790 8:00 990 5190 1000 AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM AM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM Hour of Day as CID atch Do the dispatchers handle fire dispatch? >, cn I, >, cn ✓, c Il X01 G' i >l cn >, 'O 45 L. ^O +O+ C) to.. O W 4r i:. 4"l V 4t C/) Z .5 L=1 - - - O - .-i r-. ,-4 E* +`�+ f� n. © w) 4t .° A a\ v) O — v vo .-., N O .—I O .--. a\ Fire Dept. Role in EMS response (automatic, discretionary, or not at all) Discretionary (contract for ambulance) Discretionary (contract for ambulance) Discretionary (contract for ambulance) Automatic (Full- time Fire/EMS) Automatic (Full- time Fire/EMS) Discretionary -- Respond on rescue calls as needed (contract for ambulance) Discretionary cs 0 0) U cnQ d WU C '~ CI, CU ESA Paid on call cc 0 'd a. 0 'd a E �, .—. w E �. .--. w _. 'O a Paid on call 7 FT, 80 Paid on call cu el O M C L L O d W t2 ..i 1,405 (+1,784 for ambulance dispatch) V7 C=:, ---• o, O OM N O 00 i i D1 ,.J t•-• Annual Police Calls for Service (2003) 48,945 45,234 N 46,672 (includes both police and fire calls in which a unit was sent out—Burnsville estimates an additional 2,000 calls in which no response was needed) M o In 37,216 (includes both police and fire calls) tri M Population Served by Dispatch Center 60,540 (includes dispatching for Farmington) 57,000 o v v-, 00 ct o; — o rn o vt 82,134 (includes dispatching for Rosemount) 47,761 51,440 0 o .x 01 Eden Prairie c 0 OC W West St. Paul C4 ''l!n a at W Apple Valley Minnetonka on cd cd o, tic o a) a VatO U O g:;„'d cd CID CID 0) a) .� .D v 0) 0 u b 0) U_ cat N 'd 0 0) • 0 0 ao O U b U .O O U 4-. 0 0) o~ 43) a) U City of Eapil MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: ASSISTANT TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR MILLER DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2004 SUBJECT: CONTRACTING LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE SERVICES At the August 24, 2004 Special City Council meeting, the Council raised questions regarding the proposed full time staff position in the Tree Conservation Budget. The proposed 2005 Tree Conservation budget included one additional full-time grounds maintenance position, which would adjust the number of FTE in Tree Conservation from 1.6 to 2.6 FTE. Also included in the proposal was a $12,000 reduction in seasonal hours resulting from the hiring of the additional grounds maintenance position. As the Council discussed the new position, there was consensus to research whether the City could contract out landscape maintenance services in lieu of hiring a full-time staff person. Per the direction of the Council, research was conducted by staff to determine approximate costs to contract landscape maintenance services as well as determine the pros and cons of in-house landscape maintenance services versus contracted services. Five companies that provide landscape maintenance services were contacted, and of those five companies, two provided estimated costs and three companies would not be interested in such a contract. The five companies were asked to provide cost figures to maintain the landscaping that is currently being maintained by City staff at four central locations, with the addition of the streetscaping sites that will no longer be under an installation maintenance contract in 2005, as well as the landscaping at the expanded North Water Treatment Facility. The four central sites included in the study for contractual maintenance in 2005 include: 1.) City Hall Campus—Municipal Building, Civic Arena, Cascade Bay (all plant material "outside" of the Cascade Bay fence), Dakota County Library, and Fire Administration; 2.)Eagan Community Center and Central Park; 3.)Streetscape Sites—Cedar Grove and Central Parkway; and, 4.) North Water Treatment Facility. The following price estimates were provided by the two companies that provide landscape maintenance services. The price estimates are based upon the provision of services to the City consistent with the current level of landscape maintenance, during the growing season (approximately 7 months). Cost Estimates to Contract Landscape Maintenance Services Rainbow Treecare: $200,000 Outdoor Environments: $68,800 37 Contracting Landscaping Maintenance Services October 8, 2004 Page 2 The cost estimates provided by the three companies do not include the maintenance of other sites serviced by the Tree Conservation division, including 60+ parks/public facilities and hundreds of landscape beds; nor do the proposals include the winter responsibilities assumed by Forestry staff that include park tree trimming, trail trimming, shrub and perennial trimming, plant inventory activities, and snow plowing. The following is a summary of the cost implications associated with the various options; (1)Estimate of Additional Cost to Provide In-house Landscape Maintenance Services One additional FTE (12 month position) $48,000 Reduction in seasonal salaries 12,000 Total proposed budget increase $36,000 (2) Estimate of Additional Cost to Contract Landscape Maintenance Services Average of two cost proposals to contract services: $134,400 Net cost increase to contract for services versus providing in-house services: $98,400 Per the request of the City Council, Parks staff was contacted as to the pros and cons of in-house versus contractual services. The following are some issues that were raised by City staff: PROS to Contracting Landscape Mtnc. Services CONS to Contracting Landscape Mtnc. Services • Professional experience and technical abilities • Only available a couple days out of the week during the growing season • No additional equipment • Requires supervision of City staff investment from the City • City is still required to pay for plant • Allows City staff to focus on other material and supplies areas of need • Concentrated hours (no off-season • Ability to plan set hours (both a pro assistance) and a con) • Cost • Flexibility to cease services on • Communication challenges between City's timetable City and company (understanding expectations,_availability of a reliable contact, etc.) • Add on costs (e.g. special events such as 4th of July or storm damage) • Relying on references; unsure of track record/abilities Contracting Landscaping Maintenance Services October 8, 2004 Page 3 A question that arose amongst staff while discussing the options available to the City with regards to landscape maintenance was whether the City could substitute the full-time position with additional seasonal support. According to Paul Olson, Superintendent of Parks, it would not be efficient or cost effective for the City to hire additional seasonal staff in lieu of the addition of a full time position because there is not enough equipment or a sufficient number of vehicles to support their duties. Furthermore, having a larger number of seasonal staff, many lacking the expertise needed to adequately maintain landscaping, trees, shrubbery, etc., becomes problematic as the numbers can exceed supervisory and management capacity. Similar to other maintenance activities, there is an optimum balance between the utilization of skilled regular employees and seasonal employees from the perspective of equipment availability, supervision, expectations, and management. Given the level of investment in and commitment to attractive, landscaped areas in the City, the following public policy issues should be addressed: 1. Does the City want to continue to maintain landscapes at high profile sites, and those found in parks throughout the City, at their current level? 2. Is there more long-term value in pursuing contractual landscape maintenance services rather than using regular employees? 3. The City has been planning for the completion of the ring road. Absent a clear plan for the ongoing maintenance needs of the new areas with regards to streetscaping, boulevards, plantings, etc., should continued investment be made in the installation of trees, landscaping, etc.? Cherryl Mesko and Gregg Hove will be present at the October 12 Special City Council meeting to respond to any further questions that the Council may have regarding the proposed grounds maintenance position and/or contracting for landscaping services. Assistant to the City Administrator 3cr a) w c c •- c w o �v ca a) w • Z a) .2 w � 0 a) V 0. 11 0- 0o O O O O O O O O O O d' M N ;ueoie 0 O 00 O& to& oc' `90 oc' so oc 6goc co oc' .�O oc' 00 o& a) > L 0 40 City of Eagan MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR GARRISON DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2004 SUBJECT: Provide additional information about Web -casting. How will it be used? What options/tools will it provide? Currently in the City of Eagan, approximately 60% of households subscribe to cable television; thus, 40% of the City does not have any access to view City Council meetings, City messages, or Advisory Commission meetings. With the increasing penetration of satellite TV dishes, the strategic challenge is how to communicate with the four out of ten residents who do not get cable, especially since the 2002 Community -Wide Survey established that residents who had the least access to information about Eagan felt the least favorably about the City and its services. However, that same survey showed 80% of Eagan's population in 2002 had access to the Internet and nearly 60% had accessed the City's Web site. In order to provide broader access to City meetings and productions, it is proposed that the City spend $30,000 in one-time costs to create ongoing live Web -casting and video streaming capabilities. The purpose of Web -casting is two fold. First, as previously noted, current non -cable subscribers cannot access City meetings or messages. Even for those that do subscribe to cable, the threatened federal elimination of franchise fess may eliminate funding sources for cable -casting. Web -casting capability would position the City to deliver any video content to the public via the Web. Second, by digitizing the format, citizens, staff, and elected officials would—the very next day— be able to go right to the section of a meeting that most interests them (e.g. a specific development proposal) without having to listen to or view the entire meeting. Providing greater consumer choice and easy access to information are emerging trends on the Internet and for e - government. In essence, people want what they want when they want it. In addition to meeting the strategic objectives identified by the City Council's Communication Committee and survey research to better communicate with those who currently have less access to City information, the technology would allow numerous forms of online Web communications. This could include an annual "video" message from the Mayor, promotions about City services, and marketing of Cascade Bay, the Civic Arena, and the Community Center. In essence, any product produced for the City's community television channels could be aired via the Web site, if so desired. fii Agenda Information Memo October 12, 2004, Eagan City Council VI. 2005 CASCADE BAY BUDGET Staff has not been able to complete this proposed budget at this time and is asking that consideration of the 2005 Cascade Bay Budget be rescheduled for a subsequent City Council Workshop. Agenda Information Memo October 12, 2004, Eagan City Council VII. 2005 PUBLIC UTILITY ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To provide direction to staff regarding the proposed 2005 Public Utility Enterprise Fund Budgets. Introduction The 2005 Public Utility Enterprise Funds have been prepared in a manner consistent with previous years and have incorporated a review process similar to the General Fund with sensitivity shown to the financial constraints being imposed on the City. User rates will be reviewed in the usual process and incorporated into the City's annual fee schedule for review and approval. No significant changes to rates are contemplated for any of these utility operations. Enterprise Funds are established to account for the financing of self-supporting activities of governmental units which render services to the general public on a user charge basis. Records are maintained on the accrual basis of accounting. The reports of the Enterprise Funds are similar to comparable private enterprise reports and are self-contained. Creditors, legislators, or the general public can evaluate the performance of the municipal enterprise on the same basis as they can the performance of investor-owned enterprises. Revenues Enclosed on page is a copy of the Comparative Summary of Revenues for all public utility enterprise funds. Enclosed on page 5O is a copy of the Detail of Revenues for all of the utility enterprise funds. Finally, enclosed on page Si is a copy of the worksheet showing the cash balances of the Storm Drainage and Water Quality utilities, also showing the breakdown of the available cash into three categories: Operations, Renewal & Replacement, and Expansion & Modification. Expenditures Water (61) The City's water utility provides for the production and distribution of safe and clean water through a series of 20 developed major wells, two treatment plants, and six reservoirs and towers. The water utility also maintains the water distribution system consisting of over 319 miles of mains and laterals. At year end 2003, the City had 19,570 connections to the water system. Excluding depreciation and debt service for both years from the total, the 2005 Water Utility Budget is proposed at $2,515,100, an overall increase of $272,800, or 12.2% from the 2004 budget of $2,242,300. The more significant changes from the 2004 budget to the 2005 budget include the following: • With the anticipated opening of the office space at the expanded North Water Treatment Plant a clerical position has been transferred from the General Fund (Central Services Maintenance Department) to the Utility Fund. The position has been vacant in the General Fund. ($51,400) • There is an increase in office supplies and building cleaning supplies to stock the new space. ($7,500) • There is a significant reduction in the allocation for chemicals and chemical products to reflect historical spending levels. (-$17,800) • There is an increase to reflect 1/2 of the LOGIS assessment for the new utility billing system. ($40,000) • There is a reduction to reflect the change in moving 1/2 of the allocation for contractual meter reading costs to the Sanitary Sewer Fund. (-$17,200) • There is an increase to the One -Call service fee resulting from a billing change. ($2,800) • Electricity is increased to reflect two additional wells being brought on-line. ($40,500) • The appropriation for the utility system repair account is increased to reflect the maintenance on three wells rather than the previous two. ($42,100) • The public utility administrative fee was increased by 5% from the 2004 level which had been set by the City Council when the amount was chosen as a building block to balance the 2004 General Fund Budget. ($25,000) • There is an increase in capital outlay to reflect replacement and new computers and equipment resulting from the replacement schedule, the new office space, and new maintenance facility. Also there are two pickup trucks scheduled for replacement in 2005. There was no capital outlay appropriation for 2004. ($97,300) Enclosed on pages through 51 is a copy of the proposed line item 2005 budget. �f The proposed complement of personnel is increased by the additional clerical position as demonstrated in the following table: Water Proposed Personnel 2002 2003 2004 2005 Administrative Assistant (Systems Analyst) 2/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 Utilities Operations Supervisor 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 Engineering Technician 2 0 0 0 Senior GIS Technician 0 1 1 1 GIS Technician 0 1 1 1 Clerical V 0 0 0 1 Water Production Technician/Supervisor 1 1 1 1 Utilities Inspector 0 1 1 1 System Maintenance Workers 4 3 3 3 Water Treatment/Production Workers 3 3 3 3 11 11 11 12 Consistent with past years, also included in the proposed budget is an allocation of $31,600 for seasonal employees to provide maintenance and technical GIS assistance. Many of the expenditures proposed in the 2005 water utility budget are related to the volume of water produced, treated and distributed (i.e., electricity, chemicals, break repairs, etc.) which is often difficult to predict with any degree of accuracy. The sale of water is proportionate to summer weather conditions, while break repairs often are the result of winter weather conditions. The bond payment of $879,000 including both principal and interest to retire the outstanding debt for the South Water Treatment Plant is included in the budget. Another significant cost is depreciation which is budgeted at $1,266,500 for 2005. Sanitary Sewer (62) The City's sanitary sewer utility provides for the transmission of sewage to the Seneca Waste Water Treatment Plant. All sewage treatment for the City is provided at that plant by the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). The City's system consists of over 270 miles of mains and laterals and 12 sanitary lift stations. At year end 2003, the City had 18,397 sanitary sewer connections to the system. The City's budget provides for costs to maintain the collection system (28%) and for the payments to MCES to provide for treatment (72%). Excluding depreciation for both years from the total, the 2005 Sanitary Sewer Budget is proposed at $4,531,700, an overall increase of $291,900, or 6.9% from the 2004 budget of $4,239,800. '�S The more significant changes from the 2004 budget to the 2005 budget include the following: • There is an increase to reflect 1/2 of the LOGIS assessment for the new utility billing system. ($40,000) • There is an increase to reflect a change to allocation 1/2 the contractual meter reading costs to the Sanitary Sewer Fund. ($17,200) • There is an increase to the One -Call service fee resulting from a billing change. ($2,800) • There is a decrease in utility system repair to reflect the fact that no lift stations are programmed for scheduled repairs in 2005. (-$94,000) • The public utility administrative fee was increased by 5% from the 2004 level which had been set by the City Council when the amount was chosen as a building block to balance the 2004 General Fund Budget. ($11,900) • There is an increase to the MCES service charges. ($43,800) • There is an increase in capital outlay for the purchase of small items, one replacement pickup truck, and a replacement combination jetter/sewer vac truck which actually replace two pieces of existing equipment. There was no capital outlay appropriation for 2004. ($247,800) In general, the primary cost for the sanitary sewer utility is the MCES charge, which is estimated for 2005 at $3,253,500. While this is a slight increase over the 2004 budget, the City's aggressive maintenance of sewer lines including the slip lining program is reducing the inflow and infiltration of ground water into the system and helping to control the treatment costs billed to the City by the MCES. There is also a depreciation expense in the amount of $560,000. Enclosed on pages \S& through is a copy of the proposed line item 2005 budget. There are no changes proposed to the current compliment of personnel as demonstrated in the following table: Sanitary Sewer Proposed Personnel 2002 2003 2004 2005 Administrative Assistant (Systems Analyst) 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 Utilities Operations Supervisor 2/3 2/3 2/3 2/3 System Maintenance Workers 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 Consistent with past years, also included in the proposed budget is an allocation of $19,900 for seasonal employees to provide maintenance and technical GIS assistance. 41-0 Street Lighting (63) The City's street lighting utility provides for the operation of neighborhood street lighting, major intersection lighting, and signals. User fees are used primarily to pay energy costs to provide the lighting on a pass through basis. At year end 2003, 14,761 customers were being billed for 3,340 neighborhood lights provided by that system. In addition, 18,773 customers were being billed for community lights (major intersection lighting, and signals). Due to an increase in the number of lights and in energy costs, this budget is increasing by $18,900 or 5.0% from $377,900 in 2004 to $396,800 in 2005, excluding depreciation in both years. Enclosed on page (P5 is a copy of the proposed line item 2005 budget. Storm Drainage (64) The City's storm sewer system consisting of over 200 miles of pipe, 400+ inter- connected ponds, and 20 lift stations is designed to collect and transmit run-off to the Minnesota River. At year end 2003, 18,784 customers were being billed for storm drainage/water quality. Excluding depreciation the 2005 proposed Storm Drainage Budget is $172,000 reflecting a decrease of $65,250 or 27.5% over the 2003 budget of $325,150. Two (2) years ago, the storm drainage and water quality budgets were separated for budget and accounting purposes. The storm drainage reflects only those costs associated with the conveyance and maintenance of the storm drainage of the storm drainage system. The more significant changes from the 2004 budget to the 2005 budget include the following: • A reduction in seasonal employees. (-$11,900) • There is a decrease in utility system repair to reflect the fact that no lift stations are programmed for scheduled repairs in 2005. (-$10,000) • Electricity is increased to reflect the Lebanon Hills Regional Park lift station. ($13,000) • Capital outlay is reduced and allows for the purchase of one gas detector. There are no significant upgrades to facilities in the proposed 2005 budget. (- $61,000) Enclosed on pages through leie is a copy of the proposed line item 2005 budget. There are no changes proposed to the current compliment of personnel as demonstrated in the following table: Personnel System Maintenance Worker Storm Drainage Proposed 2002 2003 2004 2005 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 4-7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Water Quality (65) The mission the Water Quality Department is to protect and improve the natural, esthetic, and recreational qualities of Eagan's lakes, ponds, and wetlands for the enjoyment and use by present and future residents of the City and region. Eagan has over 375 natural lakes, ponds, and wetlands larger than one acre, and over 80 percent of them are incorporated into the City's storm water system. The 2005 proposed Water Quality Budget is $524,600 reflecting a decrease of $187,500 or 26.3% Tess than the 2004 budget of $712,100. The more significant changes from the 2004 budget to the 2005 budget include the following: • A new Water Resources Assistant is proposed in the 2005 budget. ($48,500) • A reduction in the seasonal allocation. ($-9,200) • The allocation for mobile equipment repair parts is reduced. (-$8,000) • The allocation for alum dosing is reduced and does not allow for the treatment at Fish Lake in 2005. (-$21,000) • An allocation is added for consultant planning fees to begin an update to the Water Quality Management Plan and/or a Fish Lake task force. ($15,000) • The general pond modifications account is reduced, since less of this work is scheduled. (-$200,000) • Other capital equipment is reduced. (-$29,000) Enclosed on pages C97 through 7/ is a copy of the proposed line item 2005 budget. The proposed personnel complement is increased by one for the proposed Water Resource Assistant as demonstrated in the following table: Water Quality Proposed Personnel 2002 2003 2004 2005 Water Quality Coordinator 1 1 1 1 Water Resources Technician 1 1 1 1 Water Resources Assistant 0 0 0 1 System Maintenance Worker 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Clerical Technician 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 3 3 3 4 The proposed budget continues an emphasis on testing and chemical application to improve and maintain the highest level of water quality in various ponds and lakes. 2005 Revenue Estimates 220 10/6/2004 Comparative Sum of Revenues 2005 Budget PUBLIC UTILITIES ENTERPRISE FUND Comparative Summary of Revenues Actual Actual Budget Budget 2002 2003 2004 2005 TOTAL REVENUE Service Fees: Water $3,489,909 $3,933,357 $3,722,800 $3,804,900 Sanitary Sewer 4,311,259 4,104,519 4,603,300 4,452,200 Street Lighting 378,755 389,724 424,100 434,500 Storm Drainage 894,670 934,016 949,200 990,900 Connection Permits 29,100 24,150 28,000 27,200 Service Penalties 31,944 30,913 31,700 31,200 Other Operating Revenue 326,961 256,186 18,800 23,900 Antenna Leases 294,491 338,683 337,000 88,000 Sale of Meters 55,938 48,657 60,000 55,000 State PERA Aid 5,855 5,855 5,800 5,900 Interest on Investments 1,724,660 1,473,632 1,267,300 1,089,100 Interest - Other 76,727 68,447 69,500 47,700 Connection Charges: Water Supply & Storage 294,320 389,405 300,000 319,500 Water Treatment Plant 337,972 332,316 330,000 334,400 Water Quality Dedication 136,041 46,117 35,000 35,000 Water Quality Federal/State Grant 0 0 0 0 Total Revenues 12,388,602 12,375,976 12,182,500 11,739,400 DEDICATED REVENUE Service Fees: 1121 Water Renewal & Repl. 289,619 296,211 310,000 300,000 1122 San Sewer Renewal & Repl. 180,706 211,793 215,000 215,000 1126 Storm Sewer Renewal & Repl. 88,421 92,350 95,000 95,000 1125 Storm Sewer Exp & Mod 176,841 184,700 190,000 185,000 1119/24 W.T.P. Debt Service 931,928 1,059,552 920,000 995,700 Connection Charges: 1123 Water Supply & Storage 294,320 389,405 300,000 319,500 1124 Water Treatment Plant 337,972 332,316 330,000 334,400 Antenna Leases 294,491 338,683 337,000 88,000 Interest Earnings: 1119/24 W.T.P. Debt Service 317,449 240,893 212,100 237,100 1121,22,26 Renewal & Replacement 461,570 391,180 331,800 345,600 1125 Water Quality Exp. & Mod 43,999 36,897 31,200 37,700 1123 Water Supply & Storage 270,669 226,884 194,900 185,300 Water Quality Dedication Fees: 1127 Water Quality 136,041 46,117 35,000 35,000 Total Dedicated Revenue 3,824,026 3,846,981 3,502,000 3,373,300 REVENUE AVAILABLE FOR OPERATIONS $8,564,576 $8,528,995 $8,680,500 $8,366,100 2005 Revenue Estimates 220 10/6/2004 Detail by Dept 2005 Budget PUBLIC UTILITIES ENTERPRISE FUND Detail of Revenues Actual Actual Budget Budget Acct 2002 2003 2004 2005 DEPARTMENTAL: Water 4505 Water Service Fees $3,489,909 $3,933,357 $3,722,800 3,804,900 4506 Water Service Penalties 11,204 11,429 12,500 11,500 4507 Water Connection Permits 15,050 12,500 14,000 14,000 4509 Sale of Meters 55,938 48,657 60,000 55,000 4511 Sale of Property 0 3,100 0 0 4512 Water Turn Off/On Fee 4,350 4,845 4,600 4,700 4521 Constr Meter Permits 1,500 960 1,200 1,200 4522 Acct Deposit Not Refunded 18 (6) 0 0 3,577,969 4,014,841 3,815,100 3,891,300 Sanitary Sewer 4530 Sanitary Sewer Service Fees 4,311,259 4,104,519 4,603,300 4,452,200 4531 Sanitary Sewer Penalties 13,528 13,598 14,000 14,000 4532 San Sewer Connection Permits 14,050 11,650 14,000 13,200 4,338,837 4,129,767 4,631,300 4,479,400 Street Liahts 4550 Neighborhood Light Svc Fees 212,606 221,785 236,500 244,100 4551 Neighbrhd/Comm Lt Penalties 547 834 600 700 4560 Community Light Service Fees 166,149 167,939 187,600 190,400 379,302 390,558 424,700 435,200 Storm Drainaae/Water Quality 4540 Storm Drainage Service Fees 894,670 934,016 949,200 990,900 4541 Storm Drainage Penalties 2,050 2,343 2,100 2,200 896,720 936,359 951,300 993,100 NON -DEPARTMENTAL: 4031 Assmt Penalties and Interest 4,615 2,708 2,500 2,800 4135 Federal Grant --Water Qual 24,592 0 0 0 4140 State Grant --Water Quality 0 15,370 0 0 4160 State PERA Aid 5,855 5,855 5,800 5,900 4210 Returned Checks 140 0 0 0 4226 Developer Escrow Reimbursmt 8,720 8,125 8,000 8,000 4242 Maint Equipment and Personnel 9,254 9,455 3,000 8,000 4610 Interest on Investments 1,724,660 1,473,632 1,267,300 1,089,100 4612 Interest on Assessments 71,722 64,197 66,000 45,000 4614 Interest on MCES 5,005 4,250 3,500 2,700 4615 Change in Fair Value of Inv 265,747 (463,529) 0 0 4620 Antenna Site Rent 294,491 338,683 337,000 88,000 4657 Sale of City Property 0 0 0 0 4658 Vehicle Sales 0 1,925 0 0 4664 Cost Sharing Payment 0 0 0 0 4672 Water Quality Dedication Fees 136,041 46,117 35,000 35,000 4680 Connection Charge --Water 294,320 389,405 300,000 319,500 4685 Conn Chg--Water Treatmt Plant 337,972 332,316 330,000 334,400 4691 Other Revenue 4,852 11,398 0 0 4822 Other Reimbursements 7,788 0 2,000 2,000 4980 Transfers In 0 664,543 0 0 3,195,774 2,904,451 2,360,100 1,940,400 GRAND TOTAL $12.388.602 $12.375.976 $12.182.500 $11.739.400 SO 2004 storm water cash STORM DRAINAGE (Dept 64) / WATER QUALITY (Dept 65) CASH BALANCES Combined Combined 64/65 64/65 Actual Actual Budget Budget 2002 2003 2004 2005 Operations (1115 cash) Balance forward 525.253 522.356 502.648 555.198 Income Escrow Reimbursement 8,720 8,125 8,000 8,000 70% Storm drain fees 627,704 655,451 665,000 695,200 Grants/Development Fees 24.592 15.370 0 0 661,016 678,946 673,000 703,200 Expenses Gen! operations 626,095 620,724 556,450 596,600 Depreciation (non -infrastructure) 37.818 77.931 64.000 50.000 Total exp 663.913 698.655 620.450 646.600 Net increase (decrease) (2,897) (19,709) 52.550 56.600 Ending balance 522.35E 502.648 555.198 611.79Q Renewal & Replacement (1126 cash) Balance forward 131.952 258.571 363.353 438.353 Income 10% Storm drain fees 89,672 93,636 95,000 99,300 Interest 8.789 0 0 0 Total income 98.461 93.636 95.000 99.300 Expenses/other Renewal/replacement 3,612 0 20,000 0 Adjustment/other (31.770) (11.146) 0 0 Total expenses/other (28.158) (11.146) 20.000 0 Net increase (decrease) 126.619 104.782 75.000 99.300 Ending balance 258.571 363.353 438.353 537.653 Expansion & Modification (1125/27 cash) Balance forward 1.473.850 1.715.429 1.904.683 1.917.683 Income 20% Storm drain fees 179,344 187,272 190,000 198,600 Cash dedications (4672) 136,041 46,117 35,000 35,000 Interest 71.958 61.079 0 0 Total income 387.343 294.468 225.000 233.600 Expenses Expansion/modification 113,994 87,861 212,000 100,000 Adjustments/other 31.770 17.353 0 0 Total expenses/other 145.764 105.214 212.000 100.000 Net increase (decrease) 241.579 189.254 13.000 133.600 Ending balance 1.715.429 1.904.683 1.917.683 2.051.283 Income figures for each year reflect retroactive adjustments made in 11/95 to reflect 70/20/10 allocation percentages for storm drain fee income. c; i 10/6/2004 "a- 0 0 N CO O CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Water Department Budget 0 7 O Q N a) 1— • w O 0 0 N CO crJ 0 Q 0 O � N U - J N Q 0 0 H N U O O OU coco (D DEPARTMENT 61 - WATER 0 M 0 0 ( 0 �0 OO M 0) 0) (t) O O (f) 0 N . N CO (f) 0) (D 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 (D N (f) CO CO w' N h 0) '— (n OO N • N N M d Is- v - (f OO N OO (f) (f) N I. N Nr a) CO ▪ CO.~CO N n r0. 8 41 (0 N r(D (0 t� • 0) to .— .- N M O NM eh •-- 0 h M h • O• NO N 'ct M 0 00) Cf) ti (f) 6 0 u ((7 N - ti �- N M cf- 6110 SALARIES AND WAGES -REGULAR 6112 OVERTIME -REGULAR 6130 SALARIES AND WAGES -TEMPORARY 6142 PERA-COORDINATED 6151 HEALTH INSURANCE W IL J CNA (O 6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION PERSONAL SERVICES 0 0 0 0 0 O (O N O O O O� O co. N N co 4 co f� r- O OO 0) 6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 6215 REFERENCE MATERIALS O N 6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES -GENERAL 6222 MEDICAURESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES 0 EL 0 0 N u) 0 0 N 0 CC10(j 0 N CO J M Q O O N - J N Q O N N O � E O N Cn DEPARTMENT 61 - WATER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r- h M ▪ co O (0 o 14) u) u) N cfi N N s- N (6 N '- � 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) M • c0 O ' (o (n O s- N M s- s- N'-- r , h s- r- ll) 0) (00 0 0) ((00 ti '1) O ti ti CO Cn O� 0 V) M 0) 1- (0 0) N ' Cl. 0) 0) M s- M s- 0) r- 1- ▪ M s- D .-- M N 1- 0 M N N O c07 0) O M 00) 0) 14)) M 0 0 M c() cf) (0 co. co M N. M 0) N N M Ti 00 '- M , O 6223 BUILDING/CLEANING SUPPLIES 6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 6231 MOBILE EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 6233 BUILDING REPAIR SUPPLIES Cn F- LU CC > < H a a W F- Cd (/) Z Z < 0 F- (32 Q m Z LL U in IV M M N N (D (0 6240 SMALL TOOLS 6343 HEATING OIUPROPANE/OTHER FUELS 6244 CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 6250 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL & SUPPLIES 6255 STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL 6260 UTILITY SYSTEM PARTS/SUPPLIES 6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE 0 7 O CT N CD II II Q II I • • I J 1 Q O O I... N U <1 G) 0) ZQ • W m W E O n o a) U N 17 c c9 0 � a E 0 a0) O c y 17 0 U O co co 0 � E 0 C/) DEPARTMENT 61 - WATER M CO CO 0) SUPPLIES,REPAIRS AND MTN 0OOO NMM0 - N 00 Cr) N 14 .-- M . .- '- 11) N... O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OM 0 0 MO) NM 0r NN 00r)_ 0 Tv -1 l!) N- 00 ▪ 0 0 0 Is- CSV) CO M C0f) Cf) r Is. 0 h U1 C[) Is- N-- h N N N d' 00 (4 r r Co r (‚4O r C10 r O 0 CO d' 0 0) M M M O 00r r 0 0) 0 U) Cf) CO Cn M 03 N 0) 0) N •-• M .- Cr. O 'i N r N C3 O r r tl 6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES -GENERAL 6311 LEGAL 6312 ENGINEERING 6314 AUDITING 6315 FINANCIAL NON -AUDIT 6323 TESTING SERVICES 6346 POSTAGE 6347 TELEPHONE SERVICE & LINE CHG 6351 PAGER SERVICE FEES 6352 TELEPHONE CIRCUITS 6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 6356 ONE CALL SERVICE FEE 6357 ADVERTISING/PUBLICATION 0 O i Z /- 0 LU Q ° W 0 LL.= 0m i- o o N N < o - O N V I Q 1 DEPARTMENT 61 - WATER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Cr) to 0 0 O 0 0 CO N 0) If) to N O (OO N MO M M N O A M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO CO 0 Cl) 0 CO (O O O O O O O 14) . N O t[) to 0 00 '4) .- r O N '- M M N Cr) CO 0 t0 CO 1- O) N CO (O N CO N. Cato CO N to 0 ' • 0 M N- a- a- to v O (co N oi o ▪ N Cr) O) O to O) O O (O Cr) a O ▪ O co i� M O 1- (D h M h O N N 07 0) 0 N. 0 CO M O) tt? to Q) p) • MN O M O (O N- 0- N 6358 EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISING 6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING 6385 INSURANCE 6409 ELECTRICITY-WELLS/BOOSTER STN 6410 NATURAL GAS SERVICE 6425 MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPAIR LABOR 6427 BLDG OPERATIONS/REPAIR-LABOR 6429 STREET REPAIR -LABOR SS 6430 COMMUNICATION SYSTEM RPR -LABOR 6432 UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR -LABOR 6457 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT -RENTAL 6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 6477 LOCAL MEETING EXPENSE 6479 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 0) XW 0 Z H 2 - w W LL a a u) LLI Z U U < J 0 o (h 0o o) 3 1 O 0 N CO 0 CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Water Department Budget -J N 0 0 N c O w. a E • U u) C) L 1-.) 0 0 U O coo 0. Z m O 0 E oo DEPARTMENT 61 - WATER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O 0) N O CO N N- (0 (0 (O N 0 L() v- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (O CO N 0 0 N 0oi )) O LA Ln T 0) o VN'vt 00) CO 0 0) N (00 O • Ln M T o o O) 10 CO M c) Lt) M OT 6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 6506 TRANSFER FOR CENTRAL SVCS 6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6539 WASTE REMOVAUSANITATION SERV 6563 LANDSCAPING 6569 MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS 6575 MCES DISPOSAL CHARGES 0 0 M 0 O M a- 0 0 O O N 77r (0 (D CO A M O OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES O O O O CO 0 L1) N CO CO 0) (0 T 6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT 6680 MOBILE EQUIPMENT O 0 M 0) 0 0) L1") CAPITAL OUTLAY o LO (0 C t co 0 d I- I- D D O 0 IL U. VJ VJ z z 1- 1- 1- I- 0 0 0 N T CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Water Department Budget Oa) O 7 N 0 O 0 N CO - J Q O O N U - J O Q 0 N F- c O yU CI U C) - o O :S0 a >, • f0 o E N (/) DEPARTMENT 61 - WATER 0 O 0 M O O 0 O O O 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0) O) N N e- 0 0 0 0 0 N N r T 6855 MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE TOTAL WATER DEPARTMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0OO 0 tf') O M 0) (0 (ON CO co 00 0 0 0 00 OhO N (O M 000 0)) ti (O N CO N O O O CO O N N 0) 0 r 1 r r-.- 6 �O Ni 4 ti N OCO 1- ON N 0 CO 0 CO ' (O CO 0 a) l0 Cr) CV 00) N d W W IL z -J 1- 0 H aWw Uro Z W 0 2 H Z a?O Z Z Z • W C9 Q Q Q 0- CL O 0 Z Z Z } mmCO d 0 — N 01 02 333 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS 6488 DEPRECIATION EXPENSE 71) CO Q)) 0 7 N Cr I II I I II It I I Q O 0 O N U II II II 11 CO CO O OCO O CO ` N a0 co. (0 4 4 O O '— — N Nt ..- N O VO 0 N 0 0 CA CO t0 (O (0 co r N M OCO • 11, CO CO ( O N 0) V O ' M N M r- O N (0 O 0) CA N 4 O U) U) N II (O CO N. ,-(D N. 0) (O 0 11 CO ^ N r. 0) — M M ,J II co co (0 co N co 1s 0) 0 D 11 M ! — N Tr N 1 -II N Q11 II DEPARTMENT 62 -SEWER SALARIES AND WAGES -REGULAR OVERTIME -REGULAR SALARIES AND WAGES -TEMPORARY PERA-COORDINATED FICA HEALTH INSURANCE LIFE DISABILITY - LONG TERM N ▪ (0 ▪ of ur) fA to t0 CO (O • CO • (0 CO • CO • CO 6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION PERSONAL SERVICES N O M U)0) 0) CO N O ((0 U) 0 N O (O U) CO N M CO n CO a- M N OFFICE SUPPLIES OPERATING SUPPLIES -GENERAL 0 0 N N 40 CO FILM & FILM PROCESSING MEDICAURESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES N ▪ N CO CO 6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT REPAIR/MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES -GENERAL O (+f CO O 0 /) to d 0 7 O Q N a) ce H O Q N O Q 0 N 0 OQ 0 N 0 DEPARTMENT 62 - SEWER O 0 O 0 0 0 O co o to o N O N O ra-- o O O O O O O O N 10 qr.' O O 00 ,- .- to ,-- ‘- o7) -00 (0 CSO 0) �! 00)) O h O O t: 00 N 0) N N v O v vr O O In f� 47 MOBILE EQUIP REPAIR PARTS FIELD/OTHER EQUIPMENT REPAIR FUEL, LUBRICANTS, ADDITIVES SMALL TOOLS CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL UTILITY SYSTEM PARTS/SUPPLIES COMPUTER SOFTWARE co) N N .4' N N N N N tD 3O tD tD tD ID tD tD ID 0 0 00 SUPPLIES,REPAIRS AND MTN O O O O coOO O 1: V 0) h: d' O O 0 0 Oo o 0 0 00) O Lc) .4 Cr-) coc ' N 0 ,- N M r- N N N o o .- — v CO~0 OR. CO 'oV M N f� M PROFESSIONAL SERVICES -GENERAL TELEPHONE SERVICE & LINE CHG PAGER SERVICE FEES M M M M M cow row co co 2005 BUDGET Department Budget LC) N 0 Q N ii II I I 11 II O Q 0 N I_ II II II II I I II 0 a U 0 0 0 H a a)-oo CaO U CO C 0 Z d CO O E L) E O z N In DEPARTMENT 62 - SEWER o o 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .- 0) 1D 101000 v o O c7 CC) . r� v_ N 10 CO O) e - e- `c e- e- a>)) c" e- N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e- O) r` 0) co_ co_ NT 0 co. Of e- e- CO h N N e -O) e- e- N. e- N 3 e- N N .-- 0 f+) I1),_ 0 0 N N e- 0 0 0) 0 a0 CD c`) NO CO 0 N O co O CD 0 ID O) 01 In N e- I` NI' O) 1f) c") CO CO — e- I[) e- N.O .- N.- If) e- co f` 10 O) c) 0) nt 0 CO c) N Cv) 0) e- CO 1.0 e- O O C•-) C) 0) 0) CO 0 .0 N ID U) CO CD N c0 0 0 N ("1 e- N. c0 N 40 CO CO CO ce) C) CI e- e- 10 0) c0 a) r) N) N N- 0) CO ICY TELEPHONE CIRCUITS CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE ONE CALL SERVICE FEES ADVERTISING/PUBLICATION GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING INSURANCE ELECTRICITY -LIFT STATIONS MOBILE EQUIPMENT REPAIR LABOR STREET REPAIR -LABOR COMMUNICATION SYSTEM RPR -LABOR UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR -LABOR MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS LOCAL MEETING EXPENSES DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE TRANSFER FOR CENTRAL SVCS N CD t0 h O to (0 ICY 0) 0 N r` CO N 0) 0 ID CO 10 1.0 IA Co f` a0 0CV N M M Cf) I,. CO 0 0 el 10 in (0 CMO CCD Cel MO CMD (0 t0 (00 Cnt SO 4D CCD t�0 C(0 CCOO CO LO 2005 BUDGET Department Budget o d o O O CS N CU Q' H O N � CO J O Q O N J oQ O N H C O DEPARTMENT 62 - SEWER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 CO., 10 Cs - M T ri CD O 00 N ti a) c*) CC ▪ 'Cl..O CO O to c) cr) in r` a) v a) T T d' N O r- co 14) ate) M OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS N co MCES DISPOSAL CHARGES tD • CO • CO OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES 0 0 0 0 CO O C9 c. d' N OTHER EQUIPMENT MOBILE EQUIPMENT 0 0 CO tD c I O O CO t` et N CAPITAL OUTLAY TOTAL SEWER DEPARTMENT o O a) O co O O CO O 0 0 CO 0 to O DEPRECIATION Dept Request II 11 11 11 11 11 I W II II o No D 11 CD II 11 ii 11 u M a - 11 O -, 11 N U II < II 11 II II N Q - II O = 11 N 0 II < 11 11 11 • I- 11 W . II Q 0 co 11 W 0 C 11 1. W D m 11 11 o a 11 11 Ci N C) 11 0 11 11 11 11 11 111 11 111 11 p 11 11 w, 11 a II 'C 11 011 N 11 y 11 O II O O p 11 p. 0 0 111 M M co co Q N f6 0 E 0 E o N fn DEPARTMENT 63 - STREET LIGHTING Oo O co O O O O co co co_ N N • M N co O O0 0 O O O O O O co O N N M r N N CD I,- CN• COCO 0 0) (D c) CD N 0 0 C.I. N M N CD ,- (O CO (vv): (D N O a) N N 6315 FINANCIAL - NON -AUDIT 6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 6406 ELECTRICITY -STREET LIGHTS 6407 ELECTRICITY -SIGNAL LIGHTS 6411 UTILITY SYSTEM STREETLIGHT Gool O O ((0 I- tt CD a) N r- 6432 UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR -LABOR 6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES TOTAL STREET LIGHTING DEPARTMENT o O O N Hi To O O M O 6488 DEPRECIATION 0 O ti 3 a) CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Department Budget to O O N O 0 N BUDGET Dept Request DEPARTMENT 64 - STORM DRAINAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 O) O M 00 00 (0 N r r r Cr; N 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O O N u) to to ✓ N (.6 r r r N 0) r 0) 0) • r h (0 ti N CO 00) 0 0 o i N (00 N O (0 (0 r 1� M (O 0)r 00 (Y) CO 1.0 M I"- 0 N 4- 0) r t()) N 0 I,- CO O CO r O N M CO O to (0 O O c.i. 0 N '- '- r 6110 SALARIES AND WAGES -REGULAR 6112 OVERTIME -REGULAR 6130 SALARIES AND WAGES -TEMPORARY 6142 PERA-COORDINATED 6144 FICA 6151 HEALTH INSURANCE o3 6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION PERSONAL SERVICES O O 0 11) N O O o N CO (0 M1.0 00 6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES -GENERAL 6221 FILM & FILM PROCESSING 6222 MEDICAL/RESCUE/SAFETY SUPPLIES v O o N O M O) CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Department Budget to O O N O 0 N BUDGET Dept Request J M Q O O F- N Q -J N Q o 0 Q C O a cr)V a) ami 0 '5 Ov o O O a U v co c0 a Z, w 0 E � E o N CO 0 0 0 0 0O 0 O O I � O 0 0 t(0 )) 0 M r N _ ▪ _ O t[) 1- O Q) N O - CD O CD N DEPARTMENT 64 - STORM DRAINAGE 6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 6234 FIELD/OTHER EQUIPMENT REPAIR 6240 SMALL TOOLS 6241 SHOP MATERIALS 6250 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL & SUPPLIES (NI '- N N co N 6255 STREET REPAIR SUPPLIES 6260 UTILITY SYSTEM PARTS/SUPPLIES 6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE O O N N N 0 LC) N SUPPLIES,REPAIRS AND MTN coNCO N O CO N N 6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES -GENERAL 6346 POSTAGE 6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE 6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING go - O 0) O) t0 0 O O N CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Department Budget 1C) O O N Dept Request c 0 0. c 0 0) aa) 0 r§ U a) 0 O 0 p U 0. v :CI CD a Z a) m o 01.° E N(1) DEPARTMENT 64 - STORM DRAINAGE O O 0 O 0 O CO O O O N c+) to r 0) o O o o O O (0 O O O to C) to tf) , 00 CO O N .- 0) O CO 0 0 t[) O (O 0 M .- e') CO 0 CO azt LO CO 10 h: a- co co co N N O .- C) I- (0 T.. .- N 0) N LO • CO O r- c) O N CO~ CO (D CO to Cl) Cr) r- Tr •ct — r) N - N O N N- CO 6385 INSURANCE 6405 ELECTRICITY 6408 ELECTRICITY -LIFT STATIONS 6410 NATURAL GAS SERVICE 6432 UTILITY SYSTEM REPAIR - LABOR 6457 MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT 6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6569 MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES O O O O O O N (0 6630 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS O O N (D CAPITAL OUTLAY tk 4 rc7) tt ° 0 0 CO t1 C3 C Ca " 0 0 0 / '. o `t.) ° Q ® D o N r- �� « 6 0 W c % o 0 + S %C 111 ID Zg ti ii o v.Z k 0 g kr S y a�k� us t rt r Z t- 0 « k\ �� % a , W 0 cp % ®ey. ° & ZS %• CC c0 ° % co t \ 0 o ,r& 00, @ $ 0 o 2 0 '9 %f 3 0� 0 0 N 0) CITY OF EAGAN 4) O 0 t 10 O a at N (0 E '0 E 0 N (n 2005 BUDGET Department Budget O O N O O N BUDGET Dept Request -J Q O F- N 0 -J < N 0 U 0 Code Description DEPARTMENT 65 - WATER QUALITY O N co'O O O O> - (O 0) p r r • N 00 0 0 0 0 0 00 O N (NO — co co — 0) 0) N CO N to e- s- 00) (00 M (00 N tt ti CD a- 10 Ps. h M (O O) co (0 N (D O .- •- N in CV 111 Cf) CV In ,Cas Nr Nr MCO CO CO M ti M 4 CO i-- a▪ - f` O 0) ,-- CV ' x- T - 6110 SALARIES AND WAGES -REGULAR 6112 OVERTIME -REGULAR 6130 SALARIES AND WAGES -TEMPORARY 6142 PERA-COORDINATED 627 6151 HEALTH INSURANCE 6154 DISABILITY - LONG TERM 6155 WORKERS COMPENSATION 0 0 (0 N O O CO Cr; O N ti CO CO Cr) M r PERSONAL SERVICES O O 0 • N 0 N O 0 0 N (On N CO 0) Cf) 10 Cr CO O 1C) e- ▪ - N N 6210 OFFICE SUPPLIES 6215 REFERENCE MATERIALS 6220 OPERATING SUPPLIES -GENERAL v o O N O co Q) CITY OF EAGAN 2005 BUDGET Department Budget Dept Request 1— W Tr 0 0 0 N 0 CO J o I- N U Q J (N < o I- N U Q c O w a U y Q) 0 N O O▪ • O ° a p U to m CD a a. a) 0 ? @ o m N co DEPARTMENT 65 - WATER QUALITY N 0NuCDOOO CO (- a_ (O c') -tt N ((00 0 0 N - 0 0 N (f) N 'C N L().-- 0 0 00 C7) T !N (O E. 0) O • r Cl N..-- 0)) N �t M N 6221 FILM & FILM PROCESSING CO 0 CO N 0 0 M 0 N CO CO - M '~V N O N 6224 CLOTHING/PERSONAL EQUIPMENT 6230 REPAIR/MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES 6231 MOBILE EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 6232 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 6234 FIELD/OTHER EQUIPMENT REPAIR rog W > 1- 0 0 Q ui1— z Z U COR. 0 0 F. - J J 0 i U cn to o co v 40 CO 6244 CHEMICALS & CHEMICAL PRODUCTS 6250 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL & SUPPLIES 6257 SIGNS & STRIPING MATERIAL 6270 COMPUTER SOFTWARE O O o O a0 (A N l".• CD 0 0 0 In a- CO 0 0) a CO In" (O f - CO 0) O) co' SUPPLIES,REPAIRS AND MTN 6310 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES -GENERAL CITY OF EAGAN -o N O a 2 0. toco zL. a E 0 0 V) 2005 BUDGET Department Budget it) O O N O 0 N BUDGET Dept Request DEPARTMENT 65 - WATER QUALITY O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O r N M N 1f') N O) N 11) 14) N N O LC) 14) C`') N r ✓ r O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 r i- '1' N 0 r M N 0 r lC) C') O 't7 Ni N a- a- r r4 v 40 0 - CO00 N- ▪ N ..- ..-- .- r - N 0 N 0 0 M (0 CIC) CV Cl) 4 (Ni v - N r O 0) f- co M N 0) In N M N C`') I U • C) CC' 0 C) CO O CC) CV p) R CC) N (9 N r d 6312 ENGINEERING 6313 PLANNING 6323 TESTING SERVICES 6346 POSTAGE 6353 PERSONAL AUTO/PARKING 6355 CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE ea 6359 LEGAL NOTICE PUBLICATION 6370 GENERAL PRINTING AND BINDING 6385 INSURANCE 6405 ELECTRICITY 6426 SMALL EQUIPMENT REPAIR -LABOR 6457 MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT 6475 MISCELLANEOUS 6476 CONFERENCES AND SCHOOLS 6477 LOCAL MEETING EXPENSES CITY OF EAGAN a) to O Q 2 to co C° � • @, E 't) E o N U) 2005 BUDGET Department Budget O 0 N BUDGET Dept Request 0 a) 0 Code Description DEPARTMENT 65 - WATER QUALITY 00 0 00 0 O N L() t7) CO t1) r O 0 00 00 00 ▪ N CO 0) M 11) O) O t() cY) c, 6478 TUITION AND BOOK REIMBURSEMENT r •. L0 A 0 r N LO to l's N 0) N M M r ▪ co 0 0 CO N 0 0 N M to O O) r M 6479 DUES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS 6480 LICENSES, PERMITS AND TAXES 6495 WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ASSESSMNT 6505 PUBLIC UTILITY ADMIN FEE 6535 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6860 COST SHARING PAYMENTS 70 O O CO 0) N 0 O CO (Y) 0) ti (O r rn M 0) O a - OTHER SERVICES AND CHARGES O O 0 O O 11) 0 1- 0 O O 0 0 O co O O O N O) O M N 6630 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 6640 MACHINERY / EQUIPMENT 6660 OFFICE FURNISHINGS & EQUIPMENT 6670 OTHER EQUIPMENT 6680 MOBILE EQUIPMENT O O O 1) 0 r CAPITAL OUTLAY 4— 0 a) 0) 0_ IL wo 3 can 30 ice° .ata 3 co O� O 0 I' 0 Q o 0 -� a r 'o IA II o ' a. -o rt na il omc� �I 00 (1) D I 0 cN c m 3 i a. D g 73 m 11 '° 0 N 0Z1 %1 a Z a D it 11 tt g r n 0 •1 n N 11 It �' 70 A It rt Il C 11 0 0 s ra z II all , -� 11 3 03 -11 I► II ? 0 m it D lit 03 0 c0 Z it II II D Ci II o N 1I D N o► co tt r O 11 Nol 11 rn tt n v co Cn -4 ►j C (A n r at ' It cD O 1l II G N IIm� rnu -a a 0 i1 o 11 CD II a N 0 It � O C.71 II co 0 Ut\.i. t) II QNOA O r.0) I{ NO 0)0O o Q 11 ''"O O° 0 o 0 0 O Agenda Information Memo October 12, 2004, Eagan City Council VIII. 2005-2009 CIP PART II (VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To provide direction on the Part II (Vehicles and Equipment) section of the 2005 — 2009 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). FACTS: • The first year of this CIP (2005) is considered as a budget with the four out years (2006 — 2009) being presented only as a general plan. • All vehicles and equipment costing more than $10,000 are budgeted in this section of the CIP with items costing less than $10,000 budgeted in departmental operating budgets. • In 1993 the City Council established a policy whereby each year an amount is allocated to the Equipment Revolving Fund (ERF) for non -enterprise fund CIP Part II purchases. The allocation is based on an initial amount of $500,000 used in 1993 that is increased annually by population growth and inflation factors. The 2005 allocation was increased by 3.5% from the 2004 allocation to $901,373. An amount of $183,551 is being carried forward from 2004 generating a total available balance of $1,084,924 for 2005 purchases. • The ERF is funded through an annual ad valorem property tax levy. • The schedule for this consideration is timed to allow for coordination with various purchasing/bidding options to provide for the best possible prices, the necessary lead times for ordering the equipment, and the desire to place the equipment in service during 2005. • A management meeting was held at which time staff from each department had an opportunity to discuss their proposals and challenge other department proposals in attempts to prioritize overall City capital equipment needs, the attached list of purchases totaling $705,750 from the ERF was reached by consensus. This allocation allows for a carry forward to 2006 of $379,174. The carry forward balance illustrates the desire to maximize the City's resources by stretching equipment and vehicle use. �e� • Vehicles proposed for purchase were evaluated through the use of the revised Vehicle Acquisition, Use & Replacement Policy approved by the City Council in February of this year. • The funding sources for the total 2005 Part II CIP allocation of $1,171,750 include $705,750 from the ERF, $367,100 from the City's Utility Fund, and $98,900 from retained franchise fees. • Upon City Council consideration, this item will be placed on a subsequent consent agenda for approval. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on page 71/- is a copy of the summary of the equipment proposed for purchase through the 2005 CIP Part II along with the funding source for each item. • Attached on page 1,-2 is is a copy of the summary of the overall proposed 2005 — 2009 Part II CIP. '7 3 0 0 0 m c u 0 0) 0 LL 0 Equip Rev Fd U N O r z W _ j 0 m W b 0.0oa QN U V) -JW 0 U_ W U a 0 O N 0 0 0 0 N N 0 o co CO 0) 0 0 N N N (0) O ! 0 i of R - N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v. 0 v 0 0 (0 0 a- n 0) 0 0 0 0 CO 07 (0 0) 0 (0 0 C 0) 0 c0 N 0 N N 0) (DN. -N.- N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0) CO 0 0 0 N 0 (O (ry W O 05 V N 0 R co N N N Na) N 0 0 0 0 0 (f) 0 0 0 N V) N • O N co R (A 0 N Electronic Voting Equipment 0) U 1I 0 a) m w (0 (0 (0 (0 0) n n n 0 0 c0 Communications 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o a o 0 0) (0 0) O (0 0 N N 7 Full -Size Crown Victorias ($24,200 each) 1 Animal Control Van 1 Detective Squad Replacement Range Storage Building (With Apple Valley 1 Replacement Warning Siren 0 0 00 co , N N (9 f9 Fire Station Security System LL Sur/Insp Veh (rep #105, '92 Dodge 3/4 ton 4 X 4 P.U.) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 (7 O 0 0 (O N 0) *-0000 (» 69 00 000 0 0 o 0 3 o cr 0 r 0 00 '- N (n O O 00 39 0 0 CO 0 v r 0 N 0 00 0 0 c d N J 0 O E c (0 c >N N N N . V J L Y >. d > a U 0(0 0 0) > Y O) J N O 2 'C ul 0 0) V 0 L T- >.2 W O U .-. O dN rnoCC oc0 nm `m goo) N U# 0 O W 7 ccU N 01 0) W N N L N r �. H 7> K U 0) U O O (-° J 0m) O O 4 07 01 10 # c V (L > p O_ d N 0) 0) V 00 0 000 N 2'�' A a co co co el O- W F Y .. N J J N Y cc O_ U C C C C C U U N �a9 > m m m m tp2.111f) 0 0 S o 'E C ~ . D. O. r .. . 2 d' d' 5) 0) 0 N N TY/ Central Svc Maint a 0) N Sweeper (Replace Unit #139, '96 Pelican Sweeper) 0) b9 0 69 N O H h r co E E u • y 0 0. 0 a 2005-2009 C O 00000000000 O O O O O O O O O O OO O 0 ct Ln O CO O) LC) Lf) N- Ln Nr co M ' O M LC) I- u) f- O O O O N M CO 00)---cc-0 L() N T 0C- cr 0),-M N ER 0 0 OM M O O T T N Nt• cf Nr--- LO Cr Cr T T M T T o0 O (O 6 In Lo- 69- E9 EF) - 000 9 000 0000 000 0 000 0000 000 O U1+--0 crOOT N O 0 0 OI CO M N O O u) O M o0 Ln ti N N N cr( T O MT --M N N N T T T E9 00 0 Ln T c7' ER 000 000 LO T O M M M 1 -NN 69 0 0 0 0 000 0000 000 '000 cr' 00 O) r --NN O O u7 N O) Ln N O) ti T 000 000 66' CO T N N 00000000 000 L00000000 000 0,-00000P--'N%-.CD O M N (O o O - r O O) T OI N N N M N LO M (O r -'- 69- LO 0 N T MN 69 000000000 O 000000000 O O o0 LC) O 00 LC) M O Cfl ' O co- O O d• N ao N LC) t T M N N CO T 'i• M 0 N N N C 0 O 0 Ec m (o Q. O c �' 0 = a) >0) N C= V) c c •c-6 O a) d 0(o O p as C LL U N � c •- U W N a N i c c i0 a) coo a) = Cc/ = - > fy ❑ 0 o >,EE•(-'ou.noc-�� iii N a-. tUUUdLLd(4Ud(! w L' E SE E Q z Nu) E9 O 0 co MM (O (00) 0 cr 0) Eft 0 N • CO O) CD 00 0'- 0 O C! OM T (0 -Cf ✓ cr O 7— Eft- 4:r E9 Total Requested All Funds Less: non -ERF items Amount Available M O M O (O N 69 ti N 6c} O) ti M Eft - C Q a) LL O 0)0- c' O = Wc *Cc a) O Q- 5 U O W Q ERF: Allocations minus Requests-Cummulative 2005-2009: '` 2006-2009 ERF allocation figures are estimates based on 3.5% annual increases (growth + inflation)