The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07.15.91 Council Packet AGENDA COUNCIL MEETING REGULAR JULY 15, 1991 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVE AGENDA 3. APPROVE MINUTES a. July 1, 1991 - Regular 4. CITIZENS COMMENTS 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. Set Public Hearing - Zoning Amendment 6. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a. Discussion with Representatives b. Approve ALF Ambulance Budget 7. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS 8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Project No. 91-1 - Award Contract - Proposed Assessments b. Elm Park Assessment Roll c. Evergreen Knoll Park Shelter d. Personnel - Planner's Position e. Personnel - Park and Recreation Programmer f. 1990 Audit Presentation 9. NEW BUSINESS a. Akin Road Elementary School Grading Permit b. Equipment Purchase - Public Works c. Budget Report/Adjustments d. Addition to Personnel Policy 10. MISCELLANEOUS a. Regional Airport - City Position 11. CONSENT AGENDA a. Project 91-3 - Sewage Flow Meter Final Pay Estimate b. Project 91-4 - Building Demolition Final Pay Estimate c. Police Department Booth at Dakota County Fair d. Dumpster Disposal e. Middle School Project - Excess Fill Agreement f. Temporary 3.2 On Sale License - Parks and Recreation g. Resolution Approving an Application for Gambling Premise Permit h. Developer's Agreement for Middle School i. Appreve-Pr+vIeg-Peley - PULL j. Approve Change to ALF Joint Powers Agreement k. Project 90-1 - Final Pay Estimate 1. Approve Resolution - Fire Service Charges m. School/Conference Request - Fire n. School/Conference Request - Fire o. School/Conference Request - Fire p. Approve Payment of the Bills 12. ADJOURN -i AGENDA REQUEST FORM ITEM NO. 10 a., NAME: Larry Thompson DEPARTMENT: Administration DATE: July 5, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 15, 1991 CATEGORY: Miscellaneous SUBJECTS Regional Airport - City Position EXPLANATION: Consider position on Search Area report. REFERENCE MATERIAL/RESPONSIBILITY: Update - Larry Thompson REFERRED TO: (NAME) DEPARTMENT: Larry Thompson Administration Development Committee 72.719-44'r ` -- SI `i , ' MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL SUBJECT: REGIONAL AIRPORT REPORT DATE: JULY 3, 1991 As noted in a previous memo, the Regional Airport Search Area Report has been issued. The report will form the basis of the selection of the final search area. While the report does not specifically state the Dakota search area is the area to be selected, it can easily be inferred. The following is the schedule for committee review and comment: July 17th Public meetings to receive comments on the Report July 19th Critique and comment on Report by County and local government officials. July 29th Final date for written comments. July 31-August 1 Small group work sessions. August 16th Task Force Meeting - Draft Final Report "Part 2 - Recommended Search Area". September 5th-6th Public Meeting on Final Search Area Report September 20th Adopt Final Search Area Report A copy of the report is on file for your review. County and City staff have reviewed the report and have outlined the perceived shortcomings of the report in the attached summary. This matter will be discussed at the July 15th Council meeting. The Council should decide if it wishes to comment and if so, what the comments should be. I have attached a copy of the Lakeville resolution for your review. ILIZer7411 Larry Thompson City Administrator cc: Development Committee SUMMARY Discuss Search Area Task Force Report Issued 6-21-91 TITLE: Selecting a Search Area, Part 2, Data Analysis ISSUES NOT INCLUDED OR THAT NEED FURTHER ANALYSIS 1. Impact on Adjacent Development 1.1 Population Density of Proximate Cities 1.2 Vested Development Rights 1.3 Community Stress Index 1.3.1 Identified in Adequacy Study 1.4 FAA Involvement 1.4.1 Gateways/Approachways, Flight Paths/Tracks, etc. 1.4.1.1 Part 150 Study 2. Community Viability 2.1 Displacement of People 2.2 Economic Dislocation 2.3 Quality of Life Issues 2.4 Rural Character of Southern Dakota County 3. Value of Irrigated Cropland and the Reports C.E.R.'s 3.1 More Thorough Discussion on Agricultural Impacts 4. Consistency with Metropolitan Development/Policy Framework 5. Surface Access 5.1 Costs of Roadway Construction and Right-of-Way Acquisition 5.1.1 Metropolitan Hwy. System, Trunk Hwys., County Roads 5.2 Understated Impact on Bridge Crossings 5.2.1 More Explicit Traffic Volumes, Travel Patterns, Trip Length, etc. 5.2.2 Estimate of Upgrade Costs 5.2.2.1 Mendota Bridge, Cedar Ave. Bridge, I-35E Bridge, 1-494 Bridges 5.3 2010 Travel Times and Isoline Diagrams Centered on Search Areas 5.3.1 Adequate for "relative use" ? 5.4 Impact on County Roads 5.4.1 Traffic Volumes, Travel Patterns, Trip Lengths 5.4.1.1 During Construction 5.4.1.2 Replacement Airport Operational 5.5 Functinal Classification of Roadways 5.6 Transit and Travel Demand Management 5.6.1 Mitigate Construction Impact 5.6.2 As a Policy Issue 5.6.2.1 Both On-site and Off-site 5.6.3 Insure Air Quality 5.6.4 Mitigate Potential Traffic Congestion 5.6.5 Input from R.T.B. 5.7 Involvement of and Analysis by Mn/DOT 5.7.1 What is Mn/DOT's assessment of impact/costs/etc.? 6. Non-transportation related infrastructure 6.1 Identification and Costs 7. Water Quality Issues 8. Geologic Issues such as Karst Topography and Underground Streambeds 9. County Representation/Involvement on Search Area Task Force ,,,,,, , , . . ,s,,.. ArPort Search Area Hews A newsletter from the Metropolitan Council on choosing a search July 1991 area for a possible new major airport for the Twin Cities Area. Number Two mwmown mi.. What's the New Data Report SEARCH AREA SCHEDULE 'dual-track' Compares Features In p July 17 Task force holds public meeting process Three Search Areas for with regional organizations, busi- ness groups and citizens to hear It's a plan to ensure Possible New Airport comments on Part Two Draft Data adequate airport Analysis and Appendices. 1 p.m., facilities for the Metropolitan Council Chambers. Twin Cities Area. New data about the the Twin Cities, prirnar- One track focuses three search areas un- ily in Isanti County. The July 17 Task force meeting,a continuation on a new airport der consideration for a other two, the Dakota of the earlier session that day. 7:30 option and the possible new airport has and the Dakota-Scott p.m., Metropolitan Council Cham- other focuses on hers. improvements at been published by the search areas,are located the existing airport. Metropolitan Council. south of Minneapolis July 19 Task force holds public meeting to A choice will be The data is con- and St. Paul in central hear comments on Part Two Draft made when eco- tained in a new report and southern Dakota Data Analysis and Appendices from discussed at countyand local officials and citi- nomic,operational, public meet- County. zens from each search area.Anoka- environmental and ings during the week of What follows is a Isanti-Chisago: officials-8:30-9:30 cost-benefit studies June 24-28. It will be summary of some of the a.m.,citizens-9:30-9:45 a.m.Dakota: are completed by reviewed in a second accessibility and environ- officials-10-11 a.m., citizens-1l- 1996. round of meetings in the mental characteristics of 11:15 a.m. Dakota-Scott: officials- .The Metropolitan latter part of July (see each search area. 11:30-12:30 a.m.,citizens 12:30-12:45 Council is to iden- schedule). p.m. Citizens, others wishing to tify by the end of The lengthy report Anoka-Isanti{hisago speak-1 p.m.Metropolitan Council 1991 a large por- Chambers. tion of land(a paints a picture of acces- Search Area search area)within sibility, environmental Access-The average Aug.16 Task force announces recommen- which a major features, land use,safety travel time for residents dation for a single search area and airport could be considerations and other of the seven-county area sets public meetings.10 a.m.,Coun- located. factors in the three to get to an airport in ell Chambers. •The Metropolitan search areas. The infor- the search area in the Airports Commis- mation is important in year 2010 would be 60- Task force holds public meetings on sion(MAC)is to de- selecting one search 62 minutes in the after- 6 �S, recommendation,report.Sept.5: 7 termine by the end area—then a site—for a noon rush hour. This p.m.,in recommended search area. of 1991 a long possible new major air- compares to an average Sept.6:9 a.m.,Council Chambers. range plan to in- port for the Twin Cities of 35 minutes to get to crease capacity at p Minneapolis-St. Metropolitan Area and Minneapolis-St. Paul Sept.20 Task force adopts recommends- Paul International the state. International Airport tions, report, and submits them to Airport.The MAC One search area,the (MSP)that same year. Metropolitan Council. 10 a.m., also must identify Anoka-Isanti-Chisago Council Chambers. by the end of 1995 area, is located north of (over) a specific airport Oct.30 Metropolitan Council holds public site within the hearing on task force recommenda- search area. Want to send us comments? tions,report,in Council Chambers, •In 1996 both the If you can't attend one of the public meet- 9 a.m.,and in recommended search Council and the ings,you can send us written comments area, 7 p.m. MAC must prepare for task force consideration through July recommendations 29. Send them to the Council and use the Dec.19 Metropolitan Council selects one on major airport following address: search area,adopts report.Time and long-term develop- + Airport Search Process place to be announced. ment for considera- Metropolitan Council tion by the legisla- Mears Park Centre 230 E. Fifth St. ture. St. Paul,MN 55101 • Based on distance, average user,or an aver- •''''I'" this search area would age total distance rang- How Big Would the New Airport Be? be,on average,29 to 32 ing from 28 to 33 miles. • miles farther than MSP. The search area At the recent meetings, there was some confusion over the size of the The current airport is, could be reached by 40 proposed new airport.The task force is using a conceptual plan for a on average, a 16-mile to 61 percent of people possible new airport that was developed by the Metropolitan Airports trip today. Some 15 to from their homes within Commission.The new facility would have six runways. 22 percent of the re- 45 minutes. It could be When all necessary facilities are added in, including safety zones at the gion's population lives reached by 39 to 74 ends of the runways,the MAC design results in a requirement for 15,300 within a 45-minute rush- percent from their place acres of land for the airport property. hour drive of the search of employment within Runways and their safety zones extend considerable distances in all four area. About 9 to 14 the same 45 minutes. directions. Runways need buffer land along their sides due to safety and percent of the region's Environment-About noise considerations. workers could reach the three percent of the The MAC has also estimated the LdN 65 for the new airport design. area from their place of search area is in wet- The 15,300 acres estimated to be required for the airport includes all of the work within 45 minutes. lands, and four percent LdN 65. LdN is a technical way to measure noise decibels.At LdN 65,there Environment-Some is forested. Some 89 is annoying aircraft noise. 25 percent of the search percent of the land is in People should also be aware that the state airport development act will area is in wetlands.The agricultural use,and the allow land use coral ols in an area three to five miles beyond the airport search area sits on top average crop equivalency boundaries.The purpose of the legislation is to protect the airport from of an aquifer that is a rating for the search area incompatible adjacent development and to protect people from noise or significant source of is 66. reduce risks from low flying aircraft.This land could be in private ownership. drinking water for the One percent is of the The legislation takes effect after site selection. metropolitan area. area is residential.Some About 24 percent of 4,442 people live there. the area is either for- There are 1,432 housing Nommmilm ested or forested wet- units,or one housing unit Newspaper Story Misleading lands.Agricultural lands per 52 acres. make up about 62 per- A headline in the Star-Tribune on June 22 was in error when it stated cent. The crop equiva- Dakota-Scott Search that the Council's New-Airport Search Area Advisory Task Force had picked lency rating, which as- Area the Dakota Search Area as the location for a possible new airport. sesses the economic Access-Average The task force,which will be making recommendations to the Council, return from the soil is, travel time would be has not picked a search area and will not recommend one until Aug. 16. on average,48.The rat- from 50 to 57 minutes. The report, Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport: Part Two Draft ing includes a 0 to 100 Airport users would re- Data Analysis. does not recommend one of the search areas. Instead,the scale,with 100 being the quire,on average, a 36- task force is currently holding many meetings with search area residents best. to 38-mile trip to get and other interested parties.The process will put the task force into a Approximately one there.It could be reached position to make a recommendation on August 16. third of the area is coy- by 33 to 35 percent of ered with peat soils.Peat the population from their would need to be re- homes within 45 min- Immounim moved for airport con- utes,and from 35 to 36 I Want to Get A Got a question? struction because it is percent of job locations Copy of the If you live in a search area,you may not stable enough to within the same amount Report? contact your local officials or"community support development. of time. P Residential use oc- Environment About contacts"-liaisons between search-area Copies of Select- residents and the task force. Call us for cupies about three per- 11 percent of the search cent of the land. Some area is in wetlands, and ing a Search Area the names of your community contacts. for a New Major For answers to technical questions 5,153 people live in the six percent is forested. Airport: Part Two search. area. There are Some 84 percent is inDraft Data Analy about the search areas,call Council 1,757 housing units, or agricultural use and the sis and its Appen- planners John Kari(291-6548), Chauncey about one housing unit average crop equivalency dices are available Case(291-6342),or Mark Filipi(291-6339). per 35 acres. rating for the search area at public libraries If you have questions about meetings or is 81. in or near the the schedule,or want to get on our air- Dakota Search Area About three per- search areas,They ports mailing list,call Donna Mattson of Access-The average cent of the area is resi- are also available the Council staff at 291-6493. travel time would be 43 dential. Some 3,951 at no charge to 65 minutes in the people live there.There through the Coun- afternoon rush hour.The are 1,217 housing units, dl's data center by area would be, on aver- or one housing unit per calling 291-8140. age,from 12 to 17 miles 60 acres. farther than MSP for the Lakevi((e July 8, 1991 Larry Thompson, Administrator City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Mr. Thompson: The Lakeville City Council adopted the final version of our resolution concerning the new major airport search area designation at its July 1, 1991, Council meeting. A copy of the resolution is enclosed. We appreciate the input we received regarding our interim resolution and look forward to keeping in touch with you as the New Airport Search Area Task Force of the Metropolitan Council continues its work. Sin rely, 4 Mayor Duane un DZ: lg Enclosure cc: City Council City of Lakeville 20195 Holyoke Avenue • P.O. Box 957 • Lakeville, MN 55044 • (612) 469-4431 • FAX 469-3815 CITY OF LAKEVILLE DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION Date July 1, 1991 Resolution No. 91-88 Motion By Mulvihill Seconded By Sindt RESOLUTION CONCERNING THE NEW MAJOR AIRPORT SEARCH AREA DESIGNATION WHEREAS, the Lakeville City Council finds and concludes: 1. Legislation adopted in 1987 required the Metropolitan Council to adopt a "dual-track" strategy for airport planning. Track "A" calls for the continued enhancement of the existing airport while Track "B" calls for the designation of a potential new major airport site. The search for a new airport site has not been carried out fairly: A. The criteria for the new major search area designation was adopted by the Metropolitan Council without a public hearing or adequate public input. Selecting the criteria dictates the result of the study. B. The Metropolitan Council 's new major airport search area advisory task force consists of forty-one members, of which only seven members are from Dakota County and only four members live within the Dakota or Dakota/Scott search area. C. At least one member of the advisory task force has expressed the opinion "get it out of my backyard". This is not a rational criteria for decision making. D. The advisory task force is operating without adequate support staff and with limited technical expertise. E. The environmental review process is defective. The Metropolitan Council has two conflicting roles: responsible governmental unit charged with reviewing the alternate environmental study and project proposer. The Metropolitan Council is the "project proposer" because it is charged under Minn. Stat. 1990 § 473 . 155, Subd. 3, with designating the search areas for a major new - airport. The Metropolitan Council cannot be expected to impartially evaluate its own decision making. F. In a report dated June 1991, entitled "Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport", the Metropolitan Council estimated that 15, 300 acres would be impacted by the Ldn. r07/01 /91 65 Contour. Only six months earlier a report dated January 1991, entitled "New Air Carrier Airport Conceptual Design Study and Plan" estimated 28,000 acres. Until this discrepancy is resolved, it is not possible to evaluate the suitability of a search site. 2. Moving the airport outside the Metropolitan Center violates the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework Guide ("Guide Plan") . The Guide Plan establishes the following goals, each of which support leaving the airport at its present location: A. Locate all urban development and urban-scale investment within a metropolitan urban service area. Facilities and services needed to support urban development can be provided at less public cost if the land area available for urban development at any one time is defined and limited in amount. The airport is a very large scale urban development requiring sewer, water, and a substantial road network. This very urban facility does not belong in the rural area. B. Provide existing development and forecasted growth within the urban service area with necessary regional services. The Council will place its highest investment priority on serving existing development within the urban service area by maintaining and upgrading existing facilities. The existing airport should be supported not destroyed. C. Accommodate unanticipated growth within the urban service area in the most economic and efficient manner. It is more economical and efficient to improve the existing airport and solve the existing environmental problems than construct a new airport and transplant the problems. Moving the airport will solve nothing. New homes and businesses will be constructed and they also will suffer from airport related problems unless the problems themselves are adequately addressed. D. Preserve agricultural and rural land use in a rural service area, the area within the region lying outside the urban service area. A new airport would require between 15, 300 and 28, 000 acres or more. Most of this would of necessity be farm land. Moving the airport will result in its destruction. -2- E. Concentrate major commercial and industrial development. Moving the airport will result in the dispersion rather than the concentration of major commercial and industrial development. Hotels, offices, restaurants, entertainment centers would develop around the new airport. The existing area around the airport would suffer a severe economic decline. F. Maintain, reuse, and reinvest in older, fully developed areas. A new airport would do just the opposite. G. Maintain a strong, diversified economy. Many businesses in the areas surrounding the existing airport depend on the airport for survival. Many will fall if the airport is moved. H. Make efficient use of public resources. Moving a large scale development out of the Metro- politan Center will create a need for a new and very expensive public infrastructure. The cost of improving the highways to serve a major airport in the Dakota- Scott search area, I-35W, Cedar Avenue, Highway 3, Highway 52, Highway 55, could reach a cost equivalent to the cost of the airport. This can be avoided by keeping the airport at its present location. 3 . Moving the airport out of the Metropolitan Center would be a terrible waste of environmental, human, and financial resources. A. William D. Franz, Chief of the Environmental Review Branch Region 5 of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, in a letter dated September 7, 1990, to James E. Barton, Senior Planner at the Metropolitan Council concluded: "Major environmental damage can be avoided if the existing airport is retained, as the majority of impacts due to both the airport and secondary development have already occurred. " B. The average drive time to the airport would be extended. This will burn more gasoline creating more pollution. Rather than being productive people will spend more time driving. C. If light rail 'is used to move people to the airport, costs will be dramatically increased because of the greater distance. D. The new airport would not remain an urban island in a rural area. Businesses, offices, restaurants, hotels, -3- amusement centers would develop in support of it. The result would be a new Metropolitan Center. This urban sprawl would destroy farms and the rural character of the area which brought people to it. E. Selection of a search area, siting, construction, and location of a new major metropolitan airport will result in a definite and substantial diminution of the market value of surrounding property. The drop in the value of residential real estate around a new airport would be quick and dramatic. The Airport Commission would be responsible for compensating the landowners. Alevizos v. Metropolitan Airport Commission, 317 N.W.2d 352 (1982) . 4. The Dakota-Scott search area is environmentally unsuitable for a major airport. A. The airport would seriously degrade the present high water and air quality and would destroy valuable wildlife habitat, wetlands, and prime agricultural areas. B. The soils in the area are unstable and very undesirable for urban development. C. The exposed bedrock in the area would increase construction costs and make the underlying aquifer highly susceptible to contaminants. 5. The environmental and capacity problems at the present airport can be substantially reduced. A. Homes and institutions should be acoustically treated. B. Adjacent properties affected by aircraft noise should be acquired or property owners compensated. C. The reliever airport system should be enhanced to handle corporate and general aviation traffic. D. Existing runways should be extended and new runways should be constructed. E. Air traffic control systems should be improved including the following upgrades, some of which are already in the process of being implemented: (1) new surveillance radar should be installed; (2) a microwave land system should be constructed; (3) the weather system should be upgraded; (4) advanced traffic management systems should be implemented. -4- s F. Demand management techniques should be implemented to shift demand to less crowded times. 6. The vast majority of the land uses surrounding the existing airport were constructed or purchased long after the airport was in place. These individuals chose to develop or purchase property in proximity to the airport. Moving the airport to a rural setting would force a use with nuisance characteristics on existing homeowners, farmers, and others that did not choose to live in close proximity to the airport. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lakeville: 1. Minn. Stat. (1990) § 473. 155 should be amended by deleting the "dual-track" strategy and by prohibiting a major new airport. 2. Plans should be proposed and implemented for improvement and enhancement of capacity at the existing airport. 3. Plans should be proposed and implemented to reduce noise pollution and other negative environmental impacts at the existing airport. ADOPTED this 1st day of July , 1991, by the City Council of the City of Lakeville. CITY OF KEVILLE BY: / /11? Duane R. Zaun, yor TTEST: fe-d2VOLCharlene Friedges, City lerk -5- a 4 AGENDA REQUEST FORM ITEM NO. Li NAME: Larry Thompson /V)P- DEPARTMENT: Administration 0 DATE: June 27, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 15, 1991 CATEGORY: Consent Agenda SUBJECT Approve Changes to ALF Joint Powers Agreement EXPLANATION: Housekeeping changes per recommendation of ALF Board REFERENCE MATERIAL/RESPONSIBILITY: Amendments - Larry Thompson REFERRED TO: (NAME) DEPARTMENT: Larry Thompson Administration Dan Siebenaler Police Ken Kuchera Fire /a1Z° Z).76"141— SIGNA MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL SUBJECT: ALF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT DATE: JULY 9, 1991 Attached please find a copy of proposed changes to the ALF Joint Powers Agreement as recommended by the ALF Board. The noted changes (underlined) are mainly housekeeping in nature and relatively self explanatory. It is recommended the changes be approved. L./7"a .6.45%en47 - .- y Thomps City Administrator cc: Karen Finstuen Dan Siebenaler Ken Kuchera file JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE AMBULANCE SERVICE AGREEMENT made this 26th 23rd day of March,- 1987, May. 1991. by and among the Cities of Apple Valley, Lakeville and Farmington, (hereinafter collectively referred to as "A.L.F. Ambulance" or "A.L.F.") . I. AUTHORITY. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Minnesota §471.476 and 471.59. 2. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Agreement is to provide advanced life support ambulance service for the Cities. 3. OPERATING BOARD. The Operating Board shall consist of three primary voting members and three alternate voting members: One member of the Council of each City shall serve as a primary member to the Board. Only members of the City Councils shall be eligible to serve on the Board as a primary member. Each member City may appoint one alternate to represent their City when the primary member is unable to attend a Board meeting. Alternate members may be either a Council Member or staff member from the member City. The initial terms of the primary members shall be as follows: Apple Valley 1 year; Farmington 2 Y.. - - . for a term of three years. Alternate members shall be appointed annually by each City. Member cities shall maintain their own responsibility for the appointments of primary and alternate members to the Operating Board. The City appointing a primary or alternate board member may remove the member at any time with or without cause, except that any primary member who shall miss three consecutive Board meetings may no longer serve as a member of the Board, which shall cause the appointing City to appoint a new primary member. The Board shall annually 1 r � ccicct a chair, vicc chair and cccrctary. The Board shall have the following officers: Chair. Vice-Chair and Secretary. On June 1 of each year. the Board shall rotate officers in the order of the Chair to Secretary. Secretary to Vice- Chair. Vice-Chair to Chair. This officer rotation shall occur annually unless otherwise voted upon by a majority of the primary Board members. Commencing June 1. 1991. officer seats shall be filled by primary Board members, by City, as: Lakeville - Chair. Farmington - Vice-Chair, and Apple Valley - Secretary. A Primary Board member may decline to accept a particular officer's seat, at which time the Board shall hold elections for all of the officers seats. A majority of board members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. At least one primary board member must be in attendance at any Board meeting. In no case, will three alternate board members meet for the purpose of transacting Board business. Vacancies for unexpired terms of office shall be filled by the appointing authority. The Operating Board shall carryout the purposes of this Agreement and operate the ambulance service ("the program") . The Board shall act by majority vote. 4. AMBULANCE SERVICE. The ambulance service shall consist of a life support transportation service meeting or exceeding the minimum requirements of an advanced life support service as set forth by Minnesota §144,804, et seq. The service shall include the operation of at least one ambulance unit operating on a 24-hour, 365 day per year basis. The Primary Service Territory of the service, as defined by Minnesota §144.801, shall consist of the municipal boundaries of the Cities and parts of the following Townships: Empire, Sections 1 through 36 (excluding the City of Coates) all in Township 114 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota: Eureka, Sections 1 through 36 all in Township 113 North, Range 20 West, Dakota County, Minnesota; Castle Rock, Sections 2 through 11, 14 2 through 23, and 26 through 35 all in Township 113 North, Range 19 West, Dakota County, Minnesota. The ambulance service shall further consist of support services necessary for proper operation. Support services shall include, but not be limited to, emergency dispatch, billing, record keeping, housing and finance. 5. FINANCE. A. The Cities shall make financial contributions to operate the program. Except for the initial ceatribution which shall bc payable within 30 days after the mcmbcr Cities approve the initial budgct, Contributions shall be payable to the Operating Board in quarterly installments on or before the first day of January, April, July, and October. Contributions of that part of the operating budget not met by grants, fees and/or donations shall be based on a ratio of each City's population to the total populations of the three Cities. For the purpose of the agreement, population means the populations established by the most recent Federal Census, by a special census conducted under contract with the United States Bureau of Census, or by a population estimate made by the Metropolitan Council, whichever is the most recent. The Operating Board's initial budget shall bc proposed ac coon as possible after the Board is organized. The initial budget shall promptly be sent to the member Cities for approval of disapproval..' The Board shall not expend any funds until after the initial budget has been approved by all mcmbcr Cities. Thereafter On or before May July 1st of each year, the annual operating budget for the following calendar year as recommended by the Board shall be submitted to each member City Council for approval or disapproval. No action within six} (60) seventy-five (75) days shall constitute approval. The budget shall set forth projected expenditures, service fees, City contributions and other revenues necessary to operate the ambulance. Additional contributions, either real or in- 3 kind, may be accepted. If all Cities do not approve the budget by July lot September 15th of any year, the program shall terminate at the end of that calendar year. B. The Board may not spend money in excess of the budget approved subsidy amount plus the revenues derived from the program for the then current calendar year. The Board, may if necessary, request additional contributions from member Cities. C. The Operating Board may not borrow money without the advance written approval of all member Cities. When approved by all the member Cities, a certificate of indebtedness may be issued by the Operating Board on behalf of the collective members to this agreement or, in the alternative, a member City may issue such certificate with all approving members being liable for the debt so incurred pursuant to Paragraph 10 of this Agreement. D. The City of Lakeville shall act as fiscal agent for the Operating Board and shall maintain a separate fund for the purpose of operating the program. E. The Board shall purchase equipment and supplies for the program through procedures which are most beneficial to the program. Contracts let and purchases made under this Agreement shall conform to statutory requirements applicable to the Cities. F. At the end of each calendar year, the Board shall cause an audit to be performed of funds expended and revenues received during the previous year. A copy of the Audit shall be made available to the Cities by May July 1st of each year. The audit shall be in a form such that it can be readily compared to the annual operating budget. 4 6. CONTRIBUTIONS OF FACILITIES BY CITIES. A. Each City shall, after receiving the recommendations of the Board, determine which of its lands, buildings, equipment and services, hereinafter called "Public Resources", will be made available to the Board. B. The cost of maintenance, upkeep and utilities for the Public Resources made available by a City shall be borne by the City that provides the Public Resources. The Board shall not pay rent for the use of the Public Resources. C. Each City shall maintain public liability insurance coverage on the Public Resources made available for the program. D. Public Resources will be returned to the respective City upon withdrawal from the Agreement. 7. PERSONNEL. The Board shall establish standards and qualifications for its personnel. The Board shall have the authority to hire and fire personnel and establish the terms of employment. The Board personnel shall be deemed employees of the Board, not of the member Cities. The Board shall delegate the day-to-day supervision of personnel to a paramedic director. 8. NONDISCRIMINATION. A. A.L.F. Ambulance service shall be available for use without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin and without regard to sex, age. disability, or public assistance status, except as may be necessary as a bona fide requirement of a specific service. B. No applicant for employment or employee hired pursuant to this Agreement shall be discriminated against with respect to that person's hire, tenure, compensation, terms, upgrading, conditions, facilities, or privileges of employment by reason of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, age. of 5 r sex disability, or public assistance status, except as may be based upon bona fide occupational qualifications. 9. INSURANCE. The Board shall take out and keep in full force the following minimum insurance coverage if it is available at a reasonable cost: Amount Coverage $1,000,000 Comprehensive General Liability $1,000,000 Medical Malpractice Statutory Worker's Compensation 10. DEBT AND TORT LIABILITY. A. DEBT. The Cities shall be responsible for all debts, expenses, and liabilities, excluding debts, expenses, and liabilities incurred as a result of tort liability, incurred in the operation of the program prior to their withdrawal from this Agreement in accordance with the following formula: Individual City's Total Contribution (excluding Public Resources) = Percentage of Liability Total Contribution of all Member Cities (excluding Public Resources) Contribution calculations shall be made as of the dates the debt or liability is incurred. B. TORT LIABILITY. To the extent there is no insurance coverage the Cities shall be liable for all debts, expenses, and liabilities incurred as a result of tort liability in accordance with the formula set forth in paragraph 10(a) of this Agreement. 11. DURATION. A. Any City may withdraw from this Agreement on December 31st of any year. Written notice of termination must be given to the other Cities at least six (6) months prior thereto. 6 1 B. In the event of written notification to withdraw, the remaining Cities shall meet to consider modifying the Agreement to continue without the withdrawing City or to terminate. In the event of termination, all surplus funds shall be distributed to the Cities in proportion to the amount contributed over the lifetime of the Agreement. Property obtained under this Agreement shall be distributed to the Cities in the same manner. If the remaining Cities continue the Agreement, the withdrawing City shall not be given any distribution, except its own Public Resources, until the other Cities agree to terminate. C. Each individual City agrees tc maintain in force at least $1,600,000 $600.000 in comprehensive general liability insurance. If any City is notified that its insurance is canceled, it will immediately notify the other Cities in writing. If any City is unable to obtain or keep in force at least the minimum coverage required by this paragraph any City may withdraw from this Agreement after giving the other member Cities at least thirty (30) days written notice of withdrawal. 12. This Agreement supersedes and repeals all prior agreements among the Cities related to ambulance service. 7 . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized officers. CITY OF APPLE VALLEY Dated: Mayor City Clerk CITY OF LAKEVILLE Dated: Mayor Administrator CITY OF FARMINGTON Dated: Mayor Administrator 8 AGENDA REQUEST FORM J` ( L ITEM NO. NAME: Wayne Henneke DEPARTMENT: Finance DATE: July 9, 1991 MEETING DATE: July 15, 1991 CATEGORY: Consent Agenda SUBJECT: Resolution - Fire Service Charges EXPLANATION: See memo REFERENCE MATERIAL/RESPONSIBILITY: Memo - Wayne Henneke REFERRED TO: (NAME) DEPARTMENT: Larry Thompson Administration Karen Finstuen Administration Wayne Henneke Finance Ken Kuchera Fire SIGN46;44441442-- % Memo to: Mayor & Council Date July 09, 1991 Re Fire Service Charges The fire department has pointed out that currently, the City and Townships which we contract fire service for do not bill fire service charges out to the people that use the service. The rationale behind this is that fire charges are calculated on a formula that allocates the total cost of providing the service to the City and Townships based on usage and taxable tax capacity. This scenario works perfectly if no services are provided to people that live outside of the fire contract area. A significant number of the calls during the year are for emergency response services. A good share of the owners of the vehicle are from outside of the coverage area and end up paying nothing for the fire service. The City or Township where the service was provided pays the bill based on the formula. Since the City is being charged for the service received from these people, it is recommended that the City charge them for the service. Cities and townships have always been able to charge the railroad for grass fires caused by trains. The Fire Department has conducted a survey of rates charged by various fire departments and the average charge is $150/hour per call plus labor at the firefighters hourly rate. The DNR has recently appointed interested fire chiefs as fire wardens. Agricultural permits can be issued by the fire warden which may eliminate the need for MPCA Air Quality approval. Each request takes 1 - 2 hours to process. The Fire Chief receives an average of 10 requests per month. The Fire Chief also issues M.P.C.A. fire permits which take the same amount of time to process. Currently, no fee is charged for this service. It is recommended to adopt the attached resolution which establishes a fire services charge of $150/hour per call plus labor at the firefighters hourly rate for emergency response services provided to recipient not residing in the Farmington Fire Department coverage area. The resolution also establishes a fee of $10.00 for the processing of Agricultural and M.P.C.A. Fire Permits. GV Wayne' E. Henneke Finance Director c.c. Larry Thompson, City Administrator Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief Karen Finstuen, Administrative Assistant Rosemary Swedin, Accountant I Arvilla Neff, Accounting Clerk file