Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.17.03 Council Packet City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation, the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 17, 2003 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVE AGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open/or Audience Comments) 7. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (11/3/03 Regular) b) Approve Various License and Permit Rene"Xals - Administration c) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration d) Accept Resignation Heritage Preservation Commission - Administration e) Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation f) Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation g) Approve Bills 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - Ash Street Project Hearing - Engineering b) Adopt Resolution - Certification of Delinquent Municipal Services - Finance c) Approve Therapeutic Massage License - Administration 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Engagement Letter 2003 Audit - Finance b) October 2003 Financial Report - Finance c) Adopt Resolution - AuthorizecBond Sale, Refunding Bonds - Finance d) Accept Bus Donation - S1. Francis Healthcare Services - Parks and Recreation e) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment 1000, 1012, 1020 8th Street and Consider Zoning Map Amendment 1020 8th Street - Community Development Action Taken Pages 1-6 Pages 7-8 Page 9 Pages 10-11 Pages 12-13 Pages 14..17 Page 18 Page 19 Pages 20-21 Page 22 Pages 23-29 Pages 30-31 Pages 32-37 Pages 38-40 Pages 41-47 f) Adopt Ordinance - Keeping of Animals Within the City - Community Development g) Approve Meadowview Park Master Plan - Parks and Recreation 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Tanker Truck Specifications - Fire Department b) City Administrator Search Final Selection 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN City of Fannington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Mission Statement Through teamwork and cooperation. the City of Farmington provides quality services that preserve our proud past and foster a promising future. AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 17, 2003 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Action Taken 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. APPROVEAGENDA 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS/COMMENDATIONS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS / RESPONSES TO COMMENTS (Open for Audience Comments) 1. CONSENT AGENDA a) Approve Council Minutes (11/3/03 Regular) b) Approve Various License and Permit Renewals - Administration c) Approve Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - Administration d) Accept Resignation Heritage Preservation Commission - Administration e) Capital Outlay - Parks and Recreation t) Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes - Parks and Recreation g) Approve Bills Approved Approved Approved Accepted Information Received Information Received Approved 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Adopt Resolution - Ash Street Project Hearing - Engineering b) Adopt Resolution - Certification of Delinquent Municipal Services - Finance c) Approve Therapeutic Massage License - Administration R83-03 R84-03 Approved 9. AWARDOFCONTRACT 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Engagement Letter 2003 Audit - Finance b) October 2003 Financial Report - Finance c) Adopt Resolution - Authorize Bond Sale, Refunding Bonds - Finance d) Accept Bus Donation - St. Francis Healthcare Services - Parks and Recreation e) Adopt Resolution and Ordinance - Consider Comprehensive Plan Amendment 1000, 1012, 1020 8th Street and Consider Zoning Map Amendment 1020 8th Street - Community Development Authorized Information Received R83-05; R86-03 R87-03 Denied f) Adopt Ordinance - Keeping of Animals Within the City - Community Development g) Approve Meadowview Park Master Plan - Parks and Recreation 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Tanker Truck Specifications - Fire Department b) City Administrator Search Final Selection 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE 14. ADJOURN Ord 003-503 Tabled Dec. J, 2003 Information Received Two Selected 7~ COUNCIL MINUTES REGULAR November 3, 2003 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Ristow at 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Ristow led the audience and Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. 3. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Audience: Ristow, Cordes, Fitch, Fogarty, Soderberg None Joel Jamnik, City Attorney; Robin Roland, Finance Director; Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Lee Mann, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director; Brenda Wendlandt, Human Resources Director; Jim Atkinson, Assistant City Planner; Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Harry BroIl 4. APPRO~AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Cordes to approve the Agenda. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. s. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. CITIZEN COMMENTS 7. CONSENT AGENDA MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to approve the Consent Agenda as follows: a) Approved Council Minutes (10/20/03 Regular) b) Approved Capital Outlay - Finance c) Adopted RESOLUTION R80-03 Gambling Event Permit - Administration d) Adopted RESOLUTION R81-03 Approved Submittal of Application for Landfill Abatement Funds from Dakota County - Parks and Recreation e) Approved Bills APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Council Minutes (Regular) November 3, 2003 Page 2 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS a) Approve 2004 License Renewals - Administration A public hearing was held to renew On-Sale Liquor Licenses, On-Sale Sunday Liquor Licenses, On-Sale Wine and Club Licenses, and Saunas and Therapeutic Massage Licenses. Applications were received as follows: On-Sale Liquor - Farmington Lanes Long Branch Saloon and Eatery Gossips La Margarita Restaurant On-Sale Sunday - American Legion Club Eagles Club Farmington Lanes Long Branch Saloon and Eatery VFW Club Gossips La Margarita Restaurant Club Licenses - Eagles Club VFW Club American Legion Club On-Sale Intoxicating Malt Liquor and On-Sale Wine - B&B Pizza The Ugly Mug Sauna and Therapeutic Massage - Rite Touch Therapeutic Massage Sherry Jackson Sharon Munich Insurance information had not yet been received from Gossips, the American Legion, and B&B Pizza. Staff requested approval of the above licenses and approve the licenses for these three businesses contingent upon receiving the insurance information. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to close the public hearing. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. MOTION by Fogarty, second by Cordes approving the 2004 On-Sale Liquor, On-Sale Sunday Liquor, On-Sale Intoxicating Malt Liquor, On-Sale Wine, Club, and Therapeutic Massage licenses with the above contingency. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 9. AWARD OF CONTRACT Council Minutes (Regular) November 3, 2003 Page 3 10. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS a) Set Council Workshop -Administration Staff requested Council set a workshop to discuss a Council policy on filling vacant Council seats, pavement management, and the new City Hall. A workshop was set for December 3, 2003 at 6:00 p.m. b) Administrative Policy for Minor MUSA Extensions - Community Development Staff recommended two minor changes to the MUSA policy as follows: - Include a 40-acre limitation on excluded properties. Anything over 40 acres would have to go through the entire MUSA process. - Allow some projects under 5 acres to be excluded from the full process. Minor projects consistent with MUSA expansion criteria and determined to promote responsible growth would proceed directly to the Council for consideration. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fitch to approve the amended MUSA review policy regarding properties excluded from the full MUSA Review Committee process. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. c) Appoint City Council Representatives to MUSA Review Committee- Community Development Staff requested Council appoint two Council representatives to the MUSA Review Committee. There will be 3-4 meetings between the end of November and late March or April. Mayor Ristow and Councilmember Fitch volunteered. Mayor Ristow suggested they have an alternate and Councilmember Soderberg volunteered as an alternate. MOTION by Soderberg, second by Fogarty to appoint Mayor Ristow and Councilmember Fitch to serve as City Council representatives on the MUSA Review Committee. Voting for: Cordes, Fogarty, Soderberg. Abstain: Ristow, Fitch. MOTION CARRIED. d) Gas Franchise Agreement - City Attorney The current gas franchise agreement with Aquila expires November 6, 2003. The previous franchise was for a period of25 years. The city proposed a IS-year franchise. The agreement includes a franchise fee option, which reserves Council's right to consider a franchise fee at a future date following a 90 day wait and public hearing process. The agreement also states that as Council deliberates a franchise fee Council should consider the competitive advantage or disadvantage it puts the gas franchise at compared to other energy providers. This does not mean the city is imposing a franchise fee, it just gives them the option. Mayor Ristow asked when electric and cable agreements are due. Attorney Jamnik stated Xcel will be due in 3 or 4 years and will be re-negotiated at that point. That would be an appropriate time to consider any franchise fees. Finance Director Roland stated the electric franchise is a non-exclusive franchise and covers both Xcel and Dakota Electric. The city already collects a fee for the cable franchise. Mayor Ristow stated residents can get along without cable, not gas or Council Minutes (Regular) November 3, 2003 Page 4 electric. That is the users option. He wanted to remind future Councils it is a tax, a users fee that the city is getting and the people pick it up. MOTION by Cordes, second by Fitch adopting ORDINANCE 003-501 granting a non-exclusive natural gas franchise to Aquila for 15 years. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) City Administrator Search - PDI Consultant Mr. Harry BroIl, Personnel Decisions International, discussed the City Administrator hiring process. Council was requested to decide which candidates they would like to interview. There were 34 applicants. Mr. BroIl spoke with Council, department heads, employees, and members of the community. He used the information he obtained to compile a position profile. He distributed the position profile and interview questions to Council. Council can also use their own questions. Interviews will be held with Council on November 12, 2003 beginning at 5:30 p.m., and November 13, 2003 beginning at 6:00 p.m. Mr. BroIl had narrowed the candidate pool to 13 and Council reviewed those applications prior to the Council meeting. The candidates were numbered in order to retain data privacy, and Council was asked to narrow the list to 6 applicants for interviews. He asked each Councilmember to choose their top 4 candidates. Councilmember Fitch stated there has been some discussion already with Councilmembers on a particular candidate that did not meet minimum qualifications. Yet by virtue of discussions with Councilmembers that name was put on the list. He asked if that is still a viable candidate for their purpose tonight. Mr. BroIl stated there are legal and philosophical implications. Philosophically, academic requirements were put out as pre-requisites because having achieved them they mean something in terms of a person's capability. However, as a professional in the field of personnel selection when talking about people in key leadership roles and often talking about academic degrees that were earned in some cases multiple decades ago, that whether or not quite honestly 20-30 years ago someone who got the 4-year degree or did not probably will not translate into much difference in terms of capability today. That was the agreement we went forth with and advertised, but it is something Council could change. There is no legal requirement that a City Administrator have any particular degree or academic background. Because this person had some unique qualifications and because of some private conversations with Council, they thought this was a viable candidate, Mr. BroIl included this person in the pool of candidates. Subsequently he has learned there could be some legal ramifications of including someone or changing the roles at this point. City Attorney Jamnik replied Mr. BroIl is correct that there is no legal requirement to have specified qualifications. Once you have adopted the qualifications if you deviate from them there may be legal liability either from a prospective candidate who did not submit an application because of the Council Minutes (Regular) November 3, 2003 Page 5 advertisement that you would only consider certain candidates meeting a threshold, or any citizen that says you have violated a policy or any of the other candidates. He could not give a level of risk of liability exposure. There has been litigation recently in local governments over employment decisions. If Council wants to open it up and consider candidates other than what was advertised for, he recommended re-opening the position and re-advertise and add to the pool of candidates. This would delay the timeline, but would insulate Council from legal challenge. Otherwise, Attorney Jamnik recommended they adhere to the policy to the extent they can. Councilmember Fogarty stated Council cannot be granted much latitude? Attorney Jamnik replied no. Mayor Ristow stated the bottom line is we asked for a Bachelor's degree and preferred a Master's degree. Attorney J amnik stated that is right, but Council can change that by putting the process on hold, and open it up so other candidates who also don't have degrees that meet the minimum requirement could submit applications. Councilmember Fogarty wanted to make sure none of the 13 candidates have withdrawn their name. Mr. Brull replied that is correct. He stated he informed the candidates of the open meeting law and candidate disclosure requirements, so once they are chosen, their names will become public. He will contact all 13 candidates regardless oftheir standing. The voting was as follows: Candidate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Cordes Fogarty Fitch Soderberg Ristow Soderberg Ristow Fitch Soderberg Ristow Fitch Ristow Soderberg Fitch Cordes Cordes Fogarty Fogarty Fogarty Codes Candidate 10 received 5 endorsements Candidate 3 received 4 Candidate 8 received 3 These three received majority vote of Council. Council had agreed to interview 6 candidates. Candidate 11 received 2 endorsements, Council agreed to include this candidate. Councilmember Cordes stated one of the candidates does not meet the minimum qualifications and asked if Council should eliminate him. She considered he was Council Minutes (Regular) November 3, 2003 Page 6 eliminated now. Attorney Jamnik stated it is up to Council whether you want to run the risk or not. Councilmember Soderberg stated for purposes of privacy they should not identify that candidate at all. Attorney J amnik cautioned Council to refer to candidates by number, because the data practices act provides that personally identifying information other than the name can result in a violation. They have to be extremely cautious to not mention any city or school or wherever the person might be employed that might be an indicator of where the person is from or other characteristics that would allow someone to discern the identity of the individual. Councilmember Cordes stated number 6 would have been her 5th candidate and that would give him 2 votes. Councilmember Fogarty said the same of candidate 12. Councilmember Fitch stated he also chose candidate 6. Council agreed to add candidates 6 and 12. MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg designating candidates 3, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12 as candidates for the City Administrator position. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. 12. NEW BUSINESS 13. COUNCIL ROUNDTABLE Councilmember Fogarty: She congratulated the Farmington football team on winning the game Friday. She reminded everyone of the school board elections on November 4. On November 18 the Park and Recreation Task Force will have an open house presenting the draft proposals. She and Mayor Ristow attended the Chamber's Breakfast with Council. They discussed the new City Hall and received a strong impression that people want the City Hall built, they want it downtown, and want Council to move forward. 14. ADJOURN MOTION by Cordes, second by Soderberg to adjourn at 7:48 p.m. APIF, MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, fJr. L.di.- ?7/?~L &Cynthia Muller Executive Assistant 7b City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, Interim City Administra~~ FROM: Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director SUBJECT: Various Licenses and Permit Renewals DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION City Ordinance 3-2-5 states that the Council has the authority to approve both On-Sale and Off- Sale Beer Licenses; Ordinance 3-25-7 regulates the granting of licenses for Billiard Halls; Ordinance 3-7-3 regulates the granting of Cigarette Licenses; Gaming Device Licenses are renewed by the City Council after application has been made in accordance with Ordinance 3- 16-2. DISCUSSION The following establishments have submitted their applications for renewal: Beer On-Sale - Beer Off-Sale - B & B Pizza, 216 Elm Street The Ugly Mug, 18450 Pilot Knob Road Farmington Super USA, 22280 Chippendale Twin Cities A vanti Stores, LLC, 705 8th Street Kwik Trip, 217 Elm Street Super America, 18520 Pilot Knob Road Econofoods, 115 Elm Street Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street Farmington Billiards, 933 8th Street B&B Pizza, 216 Elm Street Gaming Device License - Billiard License- Cigarette License - Farmington Billiards, 933 8th Street Longbranch Saloon & Eatery, 309 3rd Street Farmington Lanes, 27 5th Street American L~ion, 10 North 8th Street VFW, 421 3 Street Farmington Eagles Club, 200 3rd Street Fannington Municipal Liquor Store, 18320 Pilot Knob Road Fannington Municipal Liquor Store, 305 3rd Street Fannington Conoco, 957 8th Street Econofoods, 115 Elm Street Fannington Super USA, 22280 Chippendale Blvd Kwik Trip, 217 Elm Street Twin Cities A vanti Stores, LLC, 705 8th Street Brite Spot BP Convenience Store, LLC, 18266 Pilot Knob Road SuperAmerica, 18520 Pilot Knob Road The appropriate forms, fees and insurance information have been submitted with the applications. Police Chief Dan Siebenaler has reviewed the forms and approved the applications for issuance. BUDGET IMPACT The fees collected are as proposed in the revenue portion of the budget. ACTION REOUESTED Approve Licenses for the above mentioned applicants. Respectfully submitted, ~ j/,MuckL Lisa Shadick Administrative Services Director 7c City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, Interim City Administra# Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director FROM: SUBJECT: Temporary On-Sale Liquor License - St. Michael's Church DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION St. Michael's Church is requesting a Temporary on-sale Liquor License for a Knights of Columbus Bingo event, to be held November 22,2003. DISCUSSION This event will be held on St. Michael's property located at 22120 Denmark Ave. Per State Statute, a Temporary Liquor license must first be approved by the City and then forwarded to the State for approval. BUDGET IMPACT A City fee has not been established for a Temporary On-Sale Liquor License. In discussion with the Liquor Control Commission, staff was informed that the State of Minnesota waives all fees for Temporary Liquor Licenses for non-profit organizations. ACTION REOUESTED Approve the attached application for a Temporary Liquor License for St. Michael's Church, 22120 Denmark Ave., for November 22,2003. The City Council has not adopted a fee for this permit, and the State of Minnesota waives all fees in this type of situation, Council may waive any fees associated with this request. Accordingly, no license fee is proposed at this time. Respectfully submitted, ~~.Il, .~ad~ Lisa Shadick . Administrative Services Director Minnesota Department of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division 444 Cedar St-Suite 133 St. Paul, MN 55101-5133 (651)296-6439 TDD (651)282-6555 APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE CI"{X., , \l'WI' BUSINESS ( (:61 ) - 3 3 <0 0 TYPE OF ORGANIZATION o CLUB DCHARITABLE DRELIGIOUS DOTHER NONPROFIT ADDRESS TAX EXEMPT NUMBER 2 13 STATE W\N HOME PHONE ( ) DATE ORGANIZED tLh-\..L ()..6 ADDRESS 1/ v ADDRESS II I I Location where license will be used. If an outdoor area, describe J)/.J 0 DeVl ~ K - ,'S'or ,oJ / fJ~ /I Will the ~licant contract for intoxicating liquor services? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service. . Will the applicant carry liquor liability insura~e? If so, the carrier's name d.nd amount of coverage. (NOTE: Insurance is not mandatory.) (' d r: \ i t. ~..\&.h.l~l I ~15 0 . 1 Sel) ,000 APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUBMITI1NG TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT CITY/COUNTY DATE APPROVED CITY FEE AMOUNT LICENSE DATES DATE FEE PAID SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement Director Note: Do not separate these two parts, send both parts to the address above and the original signed by this division will be returned as the license. Submit to the city or County at least 30 days before the event. PS-09079 (6/98) 7d City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.c:i.farmington.mn.us FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers, htterim City AdminiS~ Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director TO: SUBJECT: Accept Resignation - Heritage Preservation Commission DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION Mr. George Flynn has submitted his resignation from the Heritage Preservation Commission as of November 4, 2003. DISCUSSION A copy of Mr. Flynn's resignation is attached. This vacancy will be added to the boards and commission positions Council will be interviewing for on Saturday, January 3, 2004. The term for this vacated position is through January 31, 2005. ACTION REOUESTED Accept the resignation of George Flynn and include this position in the search and appointment process held in early January 2004. Respectfully submitted, j&~(jl-4Aa~ Lisa Shadick. Administrative Services Director Cc: HPC Members Robert Vogel November 4,2003 To: John Fortney HPC Chair Members of HPC Lisa Shadick, HPC City Liaison Cynthia Muller, Executive Assistant Farmington City Council, and whoever [whomever] else may be concerned: Please accept this letter as a formal resignation from the Farmington Historic Preservation Commission, effective immediately. We have purchased a winter home in Lakeland, Florida and will be spending a considerable time there thru the winter months. My absence from future HPC meetings would create a hardship on the Commission as far as quorum calls are concerned. Thank you. ~~/ /~ G;r~e ~;;n 320 Walnut St. 'Farmington, Mn 55024 7e City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us FROM: Mayor, Councilmembers and Interim City AdmilIistratD{' Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director TO: SUBJECT: Capital Outlay DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION The Dakota Valley Arts Council and the City created a partnership that involved the creation of the Depot Way Arts Park. The Depot Way Arts Park was created in order to provide a place for sculpture art to be displayed in an outdoor setting. This year the DV AC and the City partnered on the purchase and installation of a new pergola that mimics the previous pergola that was installed a few years ago in Depot Way Arts Park. DISCUSSION A new pergola was built that will be installed in Depot Way Arts Park. The pergola has tiles much like the previous pergola that was installed on the south entrance to the park. In addition to the tiles, the new pergola has a seating area with two benches built into it. Once it is installed, there will be some plants that will need to be planted around it to complete the project. The pergola will be stored over the winter and will be installed next spring. I have attached a concept drawing of what the pergola looks like. BUDGET IMPACT The City and DV AC have in the past split the cost of sculptures or other work that has been installed in the park. The cost of the pergola was $5,000.00. The City's share will be $2,500.00. The 2003 Park Improvement Fund budget has money identified to cover this cost. ACTION REOUESTED No action is requested. This is for informational purposes only. ~es ectfullY. Submitted, . IJ;H}. ., ,I ~. , c--. I . Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director FRDr'l : PAPKE .. J l' I. I ~\J I FAX NO. : 6514638546 Jan. 28 2003 09=~4PM P6 r~.I~- :lff\.~t ~ A~.p~ Dc..~.i'" b'1 ~ ~ , - ID'- , J '''41& t~T:14o<"'~ (u.:' ....t~.J:." ccd..- ;,,~.... , ;..." ...)1..... -,.-- ~ .fr.... r'" b..Jt. , I 0 '~_. -4 . ,,~....' . ,.- "": 'I'\"" ,,&IS .~,...T . 3 ,..."..cr. "j r ....... . . ft C4 '\I.", r. ....,~ ~ 1~1t.c." ....~,.s. . '.i~ . .... ".,t:...t .,~~ fA-n&!) .~;,J.., (,~1'i,.,t~.I... '\ C&-.&.~ ,"'...-~ o-.:t'':'Lt. ;' s"t,h.' ,: .: ~.. ~~~.t .~~ rrL:... ......l-.~~ I:''';~'''''''''.l.. _ .... . "WI 4.sea . pld...... \&c.c- .... ~~.~ c.~ . ..t S,;J...~ . - .. ~..t. ~~~~ z.J(1. ~"'ul.fr&lto4- "T"."'.1 T, \&.. 'b ~ 712 DRAFT Farmington Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes from the Regular Meeting on October 8, 2003 Members Present: Randy Oswald, Paula Higgins, Debby Ruth, Mike Buringa and Dawn Johnson (arrived at 6:15 p.m.) Members Absent: None Other's Present: Patti Norman, Recreation Program Supervisor; Missie Kohlbeck, Senion Coordinator; Kellee Omlid, Recreation Specialist; Paul Burkel, Dakota County Fairgrounds Coordinator; Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director; Troy Raddatz; Michelle Schmidt; Michelle Meschke; Shawn Meschke and Scott Kamarainen. I. Call To Order Chair Oswald called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. Quorum was present. II. Approval of Agenda. Motion by Buringa, seconded by Ruth to approve the meeting agenda as amended to move the Meadowview Park Master Plan vote back until 6: 15 p.m. in order to accommodate Johnson's late arrival, add discussion on November 19th Commission retreat and update on the status of the change in the Ordinance pertaining to the Commission's length of term from two years to three years. Buringa, Ruth, Oswald and Higgins voted in favor. Johnson absent during vote. III. Approval of Minutes. Motion by Buringa, seconded by Ruth to approve the minutes from the September 10, 2003 meeting. APIF. VI. Old Business A. Update on Commission Retreat on November 19tb. Parks and Recreation Director Distad provided an update to Commission members about the status of the retreat planned for November 19th. He informed them that it will be held at the City's Maintenance Facility and that Jon Gurban will be present to provide some training for Commission members about what their role is as an advisory commission. He also stated that there will be some 2004 goal setting for the Commission and also time to begin identifying more specific areas for future park and open space. B. Status of Ordinance Change Concerning Length of Terms for Commission Members Director Distad updated Commission members that the City Council approved their request to lengthen the term to three years from two years and that it passed unanimously. C. Meadowview Park Master Plan Commission removed the Meadowview Park Master Plan from the table for further discussion and vote. Chair Oswald provided a brief overview on the status of the plan and wanted to make sure that it is in the record that the Commission members did their homework by each of them going out and walking the area of where the boardwalk is proposed to be built. Ruth moved to approve the Meadowview Park Master plan but with a revision that included adding an observation deck on the south side of the peninsula that would be attached to the boardwalk. Motion was seconded by Buringa. The following discussion ensued about the master plan: Buringa reiterated what he saw were the issues including the following . City staff members told residents that there would not be any structures built in the wetland and that there was a different interpretation of what residents thought structures meant from what staff thought structures meant. . Limiting access to the wetland and he thought that he thinks there is a beautiful view of the wetland and that the view of the wetland is different from the south side of the peninsula than the north side. . Continuation of trail connections is important and that he supports Debbie's motion. Higgins provided the following comments about the boardwalk: . When this item comes to the City Council she feels that they also should visit the site . She feels that by moving the boardwalk out into the wetland is a good compromise rather than having the trail run directly behind the properties. . She doesn't think that garbage will be an issue. Ruth had the following thoughts on the motion: Thinks that there was a great energy in the room at the last meeting and saw that as a good sign that people want to be involved. She thinks litter can be addressed by residents signing up for the adopt-a-park program and picking up trash as one of the activities to do when participating in the program. She encouraged residents to stay involved in the public process and seek appointment for other City boards and connmSSlons. Johnson provided the following comments about the park plan: She likes the plan. She said that there was an earlier plan that showed a trail being constructed along the backs of the properties on the west side of the wetland but doesn't know why it wasn't put in per the previous plan. Oswald addressed the motion by providing the following comments: . Said that he was in a similar position when he first moved to the City and that he was on the opposition side of moving forward on building recreational facilities. Said he understands where residents are coming from. . Stated that this issue has come up before when the Commission looked at putting a trail in around Lake Julia and was denied by the City Council. Now he has people who live there why the trail was never put m. . He thinks this will be a great addition to the park system. . He is concerned when wildlife is impacted but doesn't feel that in this case that the boardwalk will affect the wildlife like residents think it will. Roll was called. Ruth - yes Buringa - yes Johnson - yes Higgins - yes Oswald - yes Motion carried. v. Presentations. A. Summer Recreation Program Summary by Recreation staff members Patti Norman, KeUee Omlid and Missie Kohlbeck. Staff provided an overview and summary of the summer programs that the Department offered this past summer. Special highlights were as follows: . The swim bus was successful but the route and stops will need to be slightly revised next summer. . Scholarship program that was created was used and the system worked well. . Tennis program continues to grow. . Outdoor pool received a face lift resulting in funbrellas and lounge chairs being added along with the fence between the wading pool and the large pool being reduced in height. . Number of passes sold to the pool increased.s. New sports camps were added and have been talking with Buringa about adding more camps next year. 2 . First year of kickball went well. Program was cosponsored with Lakeville. Had 140 kids sign up. . Adult kickball league went well for the first year of offering it. Was a SORR program. Had six teams playing in the league. . DARTS bus trips for senior adults were well received especially the Fun Friday program. Other senior adult day trips have seen declining enrollment. B. Fairgrounds Presentation by Paul Burkel. Burkel provided the following information to Commission members as part of his presentation: . Fairgrounds has mowed trails through the wetland to the south the fairgrounds that is open to the public to use. Thinks there might be an opportunity in the future to tie this trail in with the City's trail system. . Presented the master plan for the fairgrounds. He identified that some buildings have been demolished due to age and condition. . He feels that with a lot of green space that there is also a lot of potential for recreational activities to occur on the fairgrounds. Thought that the lack of irrigation would be an issue if users wanted to have the green space sustained over a season. . Fair Board has discussed building a multi-purpose building in the space where the old 4H building was located. . He clarified that the fairgrounds property is not owned by Dakota County but rather by an Ag Society that is separate from the County. The County has provided a little funding in the past for the county fair. . None of the buildings on the fairgrounds are heated and the buildings are turned into cold storage over the winter. Chair Oswald presented an idea that he had about his interest in trying to get the City and the County Fair Board working together on constructing a multi-purpose building such as a two sheet ice arena that could be used by hockey during the winter and the fair during the warmer months. He thinks this would be a great opportunity that should be further investigated. C. Review Trail Master Plan. Distad provided an updated trail plan map as well as an early draft of the Trail Master Plan document. Commission members provided feedback to Distad on their thoughts about the map and the trail document. Distad stated that it will be brought forward to the November Planning Commission meeting and that if there were anymore comments that the Commission members would like to provide that they should contact him. D. Update on Recreational Facilities Task Force. Higgins and Oswald update Commission members on the last task force meeting that occurred. They informed Commission members that there is a community open house planned for November 18th from 5 :00-8:00 p.m. at the Farmington Middle School East Cafetorium and encouraged Commission members to attend. E. Silver Springs Giles Addition Distad updated the Commission on the location and size of the park. He said that he thought it was less than a half acre in size and should be considered as a tot lot. He said that he needs direction on what the Commission would like to do. He also stated that the park will need to be named. By consensus, Commission members directed Distad to move forward with developing a park master plan for the park. VI. New Business. A. Tamarack Park Master Plan Review. Distad reviewed the draft park master plan and asked for comments from Commission members. Commission members thought that it looked good. Higgins moved to approve the park master plan for Tamarack Park and Johnson seconded the motion. APIF. Motion carried. B. Discussion on Joint Meeting with Empire Township's PRAC. Distad commented that he had attended a Empire and Farmington Planning Advisory Commission meeting and that Empire Township representatives informed him that they have a PRAC and that they would like to 3 encourage the two PRACs to meet each other. Commission members thought this was a good idea and thought that the meeting should occur early next year after appointments are made to the Commission. VII. Additions to the Agenda. There were no additions to the agenda. VIII. Staff Report. There was no staff report given. IX. November Meeting Agenda. Following topics were suggested for November agenda: . Presentation Request by Farmington Youth Hockey . Meeting new Natural Resource Specialist Jennifer Collova . Depot Way Arts Park Update . Skate Park Review . Naming Park in the Giles Addition . Update on the Recreational Facilities Task Force X. Adjournment. Buringa moved and Higgins seconded to adjourn the meeting. APIF Meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. 4 8 a... City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, Interim City AdministratorO'll3 FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Ash Street Area Improvements Project - Public Hearing DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION At the September 2, 2003 City Council meeting, the Council accepted the feasibility report and scheduled the public hearing for November 17,2003 for the Ash Street Area Improvement Project. DISCUSSION The project consists of several core elements which are: 1) the street reconstruction from STH 3 westerly to the railroad tracks, 2) trunk storm sewer that will convey the drainage from Ash Street across STH 3 south of Ash Street/STH 50 to the proposed ponding area, 3) trunk sanitary sewer extended from 11th Street and STH 50 westerly to the Dakota County Fairgrounds, and 4) upgrade to the existing trunk water main in Ash Street. The proposed street and storm sewer improvements would address the upgrade of Ash Street and the current lack of a storm drainage system. The proposed sanitary sewer and water main improvements would allow for the provision of sewer and water service to properties located on the south side of Ash Street, as well as upgrade existing systems. The proposed ponding improvements will accept storm water drainage from properties adjacent to Ash Street and storm water from Ash Street that will discharge to the east to the proposed pond in Castle Rock Township. The storm water that discharges from the Ash Street system and other future ponding areas will be conveyed through a culvert under State Trunk Highway 50 (STH 50) to the Prairie Waterway system in Farmington. A neighborhood meeting was held on Thursday, November 6 at City Hall. As of the writing of this memo, staff has received five comment forms from the neighborhood meeting and one that was received prior (attached). The most discussed issue at the neighborhood meeting was the proposed area-wide assessment. Several residents said that they did not feel the project benefits them since they live a distance away from Ash Street. In response, staff indicated that the City had an appraisal performed in 2001 (attached) which supports the benefit of the proposed estimated area-wide assessment per residential equivalent unit. Ash Street Public Hearing November 17,2003 Page 2 BUDGET IMPACT The total project cost is estimated to be $6,605,000. Per the City's assessment policy and the cost sharing agreement with Dakota County, 70% of the street reconstruct costs will be borne by the County. Of the remaining costs, the City would fund 65% and 35% would be assessed on an area- wide basis. The County has agreed to pay for 25% of the storm sewer costs for the Ash Street system. 35% of the lateral storm sewer system in Ash Street would be assessed on the area-wide basis with the City funding the remaining costs of the lateral system, the trunk storm sewer system in Ash Street and those ponding improvements proposed east of Trunk Highway 3. Water main lateral and sanitary sewer lateral costs would be assessed to those properties that hook up to those services, capped by the amount identified in the appraisal, factored for 2005. The City would fund the remainder of the non-assessed lateral costs, trunk water main costs and trunk sanitary sewer costs. The estimated total project costs would be allocated per the following table: Item Estimated Total County City Assessed Proiect Cost Street $2,236,900 $1,700,800 $348,450 $187,650 Storm Sewer $2,291,200 $210,700 $1,923,700 $156,800 Water Main $746,400 $0 $661,700 $84,700 Sanitary Sewer $1,330,500 $0 $1,219,600 $110,900 Totals $6,605,000 $1,911,500 $4,153,450 $540,050 A benefit appraisal was performed for the Ash Street Project area. In regards to the area-wide benefit to properties from the improvements, the appraisal indicated that the maximum benefit received by the properties would be $800 per residential equivalent unit (REV). The land area of the commercial properties in the project area would be converted to REV's and the commercial properties would be assessed for their respective REV's. The proposed, estimated, area-wide assessment per REV for this project is $550. The appraisal identified the benefit (factored for 2005) for water and sewer service to be $3,450 for water and $4,200 for sewer for the properties along Ash Street and $4,250 for water and $5,500 for sewer for the properties in Highland Circle. The project costs borne by the City will be funded as outlined in previous communications from the City's Finance Director (see attached spreadsheet). Ash Street Public Hearing November 17,2003 Page 3 ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution ordering the Ash Street Improvement Project and authorizing the preparation of plans and specifications for the project. Respectfully Submitted, ~Yl1~ Lee M. Mann, P .E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: file RESOLUTION NO. R -03 ORDERING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, PROJECT 93-1, ASH STREET AREA IMPROVEMENTS Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 1 ih day of November, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council adopted the 2nd day of September 2003, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed Ash Street Area Improvements; and, WHEREAS, ten days' mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 17th day of November 2003, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given the opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasibility report. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted the 2nd day of September, 2003. The contracts for the improvements will be let within two years of the adoption of this resolution ordering the improvements. 3. Erik G. Peters is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of November, 2003. Mayor Attested to the day of November, 2003. Interim City Administrator SEAL ASH STREET PROJECT OPEN HOUSE November 6, 2003 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. Sign-In Sheet Name: Address: (D Telephone: ~~ \=C 1-t<L6..'(L II lUlu /T7. I3Pirb jf t~, ~~S ,.. 1" r V\ 0.. M (A f' kJ o c9~.o~ I ( ( I / ( 27,4!"' CtJt~DItt.-b (.P~ '{ S' ~o <;- ..3 -</ ere o:vol1 du <?' 0 I ,f'" s1 r ~-eT (;) ASH STREET PROJECT OPEN HOUSE November 6, 2003 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. Sign- In Sheet 3&Y. 6/ .i. /~ (~ ~ /~(. ~A-wr ~~n~-=eaJe1 ~is+ ~II" 3nl3.f- ~t~ ~C~~~ / CVJ-e f ' .hlLi II pcLJfQJ J ~& Et . Name: Address: t 13;7 ~~VlO~ ) I - /CJ5tJ ~/k Telephone: t),3-3t.7/ . 4/td ~(,Y9..5' 'It 0 "ifP tiC) _ 'If'i? ') I QlPo-gU3 tfb 3 - 3/(/ -:J- L/{p3 --f.(OJr-( (]) ASH STREET PROJECT OPEN HOUSE November 6, 2003 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. Sign-In Sheet Address: Telephone: ., Ash Street Project Comment Form Date: November 6,2003 Name: -<J; fA- C t~~ j Address: /UJ() 5 HN t l, JJ/e 1-)) Comments: n 'f)", ~;de.r 0 ~a... .b",Yr"~'" d ~ Q,.R- J:;"a-' A't: !~~ A~ ;]+1 \J~ RGL d<;w5~#'" tu-rn no i ~f/ :to 1. e- 9-j vJcLV I<~ u)~ck../- U:I>1.S" Je~ el'><.,Mt,j Nr'"1\ III :7 u . e.-.. b- v-rl ~ txJ6+- e- ~ cL e. L' ~f)JIS~if1/U... IP-A-I'r s;Je ~ ~f-,-pe~ 0) ","iLl!%", )1..1<161>/ hd ,Je ,.;"Jd ~ e- t{ ~.+~ a~e.aJ. Ash Street Project Comment Form Date: November 6,2003 Name: ~~ F~Q Address: 8/ It '3 "c! .sf. (TJ.e. llIe.-uJ "5 "c! Sf) ~q 1't>Uv9 In ,,; ( ~~ Comments: 1= Wewt- ~ f2,,;tJtJj IP & ftpk ON nsl'; sf. ~ , f\.. .., -f 4 sJ e. sseJ t-0~ 3 rc St. I-qff y~~ ~ tJE,pe"vd /SCJtJ,OfJ CQS If. (J,.;d .1;;' ~) ~~ tky hv-t. qc.cef J to "3 ~d S;, W ~ w-e.. ~ Ctc~sS to ftsJl. ~ 41St). W-t wtrJt ~)~ ~ 4f! J5 ~ <eI-e...J. ))0 ~ -a..h~ ~ i M ~ Ob ~ ~) r - ~ S- (:/tX4 o.J1 ~ ~ to /~~ ~ K &uU {;i:aJ ~ M -1J<AA:v2 ~ ~ J s~ UK ~ ~ ~..tb-- U~ I ZO: Ildill-LL W'c..J rL., J iJ JL:h :t:i; -A ~ ~, . I I fYno~ / Jrt(}1J~J fY'n 61J-tt · /..~ ~ ~) /)YlotR" ~( Ash Street Project Comment Form Date: November 6, 2003 Name: 'r('f\ '5 N I S~ Address: ~ S-L , \., 7 \ .../n, ) \-- .. Comments: , . ~ o~ mc;:.....t \ bo X:e'S Y.:>-e. <Y\. u v"ed -\--0 OL...--C"" 'S l d -c. oV-- -\.JA--e ?h ..: e---\- "50 lAX d "'"" ,+ h::N" +0 c.-o S 'S --l-o <:j.d- --\-h~ (Y\ c..l I ! ;;1. wh~ .........,.: \\ ~ q(\d o~~ ~ S\d~CLJk:.. d- \~ C0~ (..VI.' ~ \ \o~ -O~ -\-r te-S ? llJf\ ("-e'__LCLt'-ed - Why docs ---Ktt-e --\-rcu.' V\ Y\ov~ -to b\o LV +he \'\0 r ft 'S Q rY\lA.C'.J\ LA3he I'\-+he..\-e.. Cl.A"'e croSS ( n~ CtAYV\ 'S ) -Ra.s.\t\.l 1'\.5 I,S'^+s $ Wts ? SO'M~ of- +k +r~:t'\ -<At'jil\-t'U"S \ CA-,/ ov\ ~-e Y\~(Y\ --th(L{. ~ whole '1-DwY\. pv-a.c--\-\ ccV l y (20 \ r'"\ ~~ ~L'd dl e o+- ~..e.. l\.l5 Yct-- Ash Street Project Comment Form Date: November 6, 2003 Address: w,~~. to V (0~ <;A- Name: Comments: Jv~+ do ,+ ( Ash Street Project Comment Form Date: November 6, 2003 Address: '-...-.<~..., /'1 /../'~ '/ J/tP .~ '7:1~ "~/ Name: C) Comments: City of Farmington . 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, Interim City Administrator FROM: Lee M. Mann, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Ash Street Project Public Hearing DATE: November 17, 2003 Mr. David J. Finnegan, owner of the property located at 720 3rd Street, has forwarded a verbal objection to the Ash Street Project assessment and has requested that staff forward this objection to the Council for the record at the November 17, 2003 public hearing. PRECISION APPRAISALS & Home Inspections, Inc. a Div. of Access Information Systems, Inc September 5,2001 Mr. Lee Mann City Engineer City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, Minnesota Re: Ash Street Improvements Dear Mr. Mann: At your request, I have studied the proposed Ash Street improvements and the effect upon the adjoining property as well as other properties in the area. Specifically those properties from Maple Street on the north, the railroad right of way to the west, Highway 3 and east, along Ash Street to the east, To the city limits to the south. My analysis has included discussions with Mr. Mann regarding the specifics of the improvements and the plan to complete the work. The project includes work, which is within the jurisdiction of Dakota County, Castle Rock Township in addition to that ofthe City of Farmington. We have researched property values including sales and assessed values as it relates to properties affected. Our information has been received from Dakota County, Minneapolis Regional Multiple Listing Service and our own appraiser files. You have asked us to arrive at a conclusion that will assist you in determining the benefit to affected properties for possible assessment purposes. The study is complete as it relates to the area indicated and the work contemplated. 1210 /JEST 96TH STREET. 8LOOrtlNG TON. fiN 551./31 PH: (952] 888-8135 FX: (952] 888-5562 'Y The analysis has been primarily directed towards the lot values. This approach has been used since we were able to obtain recent costs from several new subdivisions constructed in the community in the last couple of years. The cost and benefit information is current and local. Lot values have ranged from $40,000 to $50,000 per lot with the major difference in the size of the lot. We have found Dakota County assessed values oflots and improvements are substantially less than what we would consider estimated market values in the area indicated. STREETS and STORM SEWER I understand that the costs for these improvements will be paid partially by Dakota County for both City and Township properties. A portion of the city share of the cost will be assessed on an area wide basis. For the City's portion to be assessed, I would suggest be limited to an amount not to exceed $800.00 per parcel. This amount is reasonable for the improvement and should be sustainable if necessary. SANITARY SEWER: This improvement is to be assessed to adjoining property. My study indicates a 9% increase in value for sanitary sewer. For lots with a value of $40,000, a reasonable assessment would be $3,600. Larger lots with a value of $50,000 the increase in value would be $4,500. WATER MAIN: This improvement is to be assessed to adjoining property. Water main is considered to have a 7% increase in value. Lots with a $40,000 value the assessment could be $2,800. Lots with a $50,000 value the assessment could be $3,500. The lot values indicated are based upon a study of lot sales within the City of Farmington and surrounding comparable areas. This report is intended for use only by the client and not by any other user. The conclusion or estimate or recommendation may not be understood with out additional information I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and PRECISION RPPRRISRLS & HOf7E INSPECTIONS, INC 3 limiting conditions, and is my personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opinion and conclusions. I have no present or prospective interest In the property that is the subject of the report, and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parities involved with this assignment. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. My compensation for Completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause Of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were Developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of the report. No one provided significant professional assistance to the person signing this report. If you have questions please give me a call. Thanks for the opportunity to assist in this project. Sincerely, Harvey F. Snyder Vice President PRECISION RPPRRISRLS & HOrlE INSPECTIONS, INC. Highway Department Donald J. Theisen. P.E. County Engineer Dakota County Western Service Center 14955 Galaxie Avenue 3rd Floor Apple Valley, MN 55124-8579 952.891.7100 Fax 952.891.7127 www.co.dakota.mn.us ft \,.1 Printed on recycled paper with 30% poslioconsumer waste. AN EQUAL OPfIORTUNTY B1'LOYER ~~ r-~"jr?r:-:-:,-~--- Ii ! ) 1\1-S \Q; ! ~ 0 \\,tJ 1"i3'T:::--J ,r i I ,/"----,,:=:: ---:::I ~ .,. t. -I /:1 ,.... '\ I i' I } , ------.:.::......: '''1 i \ '\ Ii !->/ [ :-:-';::~:'1~ J !" t I', I I..' r i: '\' APR J 0 2001 i Ii ;,' ! ~; i L . ~----'---_.. '...' ---- ! ----.--------_1 April 6, 2001 Mr. Lee Mann, City Engineer City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Cost Participation for Ash Street Reconstruction Dear Lee: Thanks for meeting with us on April 3, 2001, to discuss County cost participation in a possible Ash Street (County Road 74) reconstruction project. The cost participation policies applicable to this project are the pre-1996 policies. We applied these policies to this corridor recognizing the boundary issues with Castle Rock Township. Provided the project scope remains reconstruction to a two-lane urban facility with storm sewer, these participation levels for the reconstruction of Ash Street will be recommended to our County Board of Commissioners. Dakota County will participate in: · 25% of all storm sewer costs · 70% of all highway construction costs. (Utility relocation will be considered a road construction cost.) · Right of Way participation will be based on the actual location 100% County participation for property in the Township 55% County participation for property in the City · Engineering participation will be based on final total construction costs This project is not programmed in our current Capital Improvement Program (CIP). We encourage the City and Township to reach an agreement that will allow this project to be programmed. Our CIP process always has more projects requested than funds available. Local support for funding a project is needed for us to program a project. Please feel free to contact me if you have any other questions. incereIY" rk.- c: Commissioner Joseph A. Harris Brandt Richardson Susan Hoyt Dave Zech Tom Anton Mike Ring tn t- Z W t-::E otn Wtn ..,W otn o::tn zo.e( Ot-C t-zZ C)We( Z::EW -W:J ::E>tn O::otn e( - u.O::C u.o.Z o::Eo >t-m I-Wu. -Wo 00:: t-Z tnO J:i= tn- e(~ 0. ::E o o 10 10 0 I 0 0> 0> "I;f' ('t) 0 00 " 10 "I;f'~ T"" 10 0 <0 " ~~ 00 <0 0> "I;f' C\I <0 "I;f' " "I;f' " ('t) 0 t-~ ('t) C\I <0 00 10 T"" C\I 10 0 0 "I;f' 0> Ctn C\I 0 0 0 C\I <0 " 0> 10 " Wtn " "I;f' 0 0 ('t) 3:w 00 00 T"" 10 ('t) Otn T"" T"" T"" 10 ...Itn ...Ie( e( C 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 W 10 ('t) T"" 0> 0:: C\I 0> " 00 W 0 0 00 0> U. C\I "I;f' <0 C\I U. T"" W C 10 0 T"" <0 T"" 0 " 00 ~ 0 00 00 <0 Z ('t) 0 C\I <0 :J 00 <0 "I;f' 00 0:: ('t) 10 N.. T"" t- T"" C\I 0 10 10 ~ ('t) " 0 00 <0 10 0 0 T"" Z 0 T"" T"" :J " C\I 0> 0 T"" T"" 0 0 - <0010 0 0 0 0 0 T"" 0> t- O 10 0 0 10 0> 10 ('t) 0 0 0 ...IOtn 0> ('t) 10 C\I 0> T"" " ~~~ 0 e(Wt- <0 <0 0 T"" "I;f' 00 <0 00 T"" C\I 0 t-..,tn ('t) "I;f' ('t) 0> 0 0> 0 ('t) ('t) " 10 000 C\I " ('t) C\I ~ 0 10 <0 t-O::O C\I T"" C\I <0 ~ C\I C\I 0. ~-- C/J I:: C/J I:: I:: ;j ~ 0 cu8Q) c::: ~ - w ;j ;jC/J- I:: C/J ._ I:: ~ c::: ..c C/Jc- ;j .t: .- "C 0 W W - - Q) E z I:: 0 <( en I- 0 .~ cu >- ~ () 1;) m Q) t- ~ "C 0 - 0 c::: U '5. ;j l- I:: C/J W W c::: ~ ~ ;j cu .~ W LL . . U .., W c::: "C 0 c::: I- Z 0 m "C "C ~ C/J I:: 0:: I- ~ I- - C/J cu 0 0 0. en en I- ~ co ~b City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.c:i.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council members, Interim City Administrat I . FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Certification of Delinquent Municipal Services to 2004 Tax Rolls DATE: November 17,2003 INTRODUCTION The City's municipal servIces (utilities) experience delinquent accounts similar to private enterprises. DISCUSSION Minnesota State Statutes 444.075 grants municipalities the authority to certify delinquent utility accounts to property owners' real estate taxes as a special assessment for collection. This statute provides the City with the ability to collect unpaid accounts without incurring significant administrative costs. All property owners with delinquent utility bills (over 90 days overdue) were mailed notices and may pay their delinquent amount by November 26, 2003 to avoid certification. The notice advised delinquent utility customers that the City Council would consider this item on November 17,2003 at a public hearing. BUDGET IMPACT At the time of notice, 514 accounts in the total amount of $198,420.77 were outstanding. Payments have been received and applied to account balances in the interim. Only those accounts with delinquent balances remaining after December 1, 2003 would be certified to the tax rolls as a one-year special assessment. ACTION REQUIRED Adopt the attached resolution certifying the delinquent accounts as special assessments to the 2004 taxes of the appropriate properties. Respectfully submitted, ~,4/ Robin Roland Finance Director RESOLUTION R - 03 CERTIFYING DELINQUENT MUNICIPAL SERVICE ACCOUNTS TO THE DAKOTA COUNTY TREASURER/AUDITOR Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. a regular meeting of the City Council and the city of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City on the 17th day of November 2003 at 7:00 P.M. The following members were present: The following members were absent: Member introduced and Member seconded the following resolution: WHEREAS, the City has provided sewer, water, storm water and solid waste removal services to users of the municipal utilities; and WHEREAS, the City has invoiced these users for the services and payment on some of these invoices is delinquent; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 444.075 allows the City to certify charges associated with the municipal services as special assessments with the County Auditor, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Farmington, that: 1. Delinquent charges associated with the municipal services shall be certified to the County Auditor for collection as special assessments. 2. The special assessments shall be due and payable over a term of one (1) year at an annual rate of eight (8.0) percent. This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open session on the 17th day of November 2003. Mayor Clerk! Administrator lrc City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers, Interim City Administrat~ Lisa Shadick, Administrative Services Director FROM: SUBJECT: Approve Therapeutic Massage License DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to City Ordinance 3-15-8, a public hearing must be held to issue a Therapeutic Massage License. DISCUSSION Jacqueline Conklin has submitted an application for a Therapeutic Massage License. The business will be located at 308 Oak Street. The required attachments, fees and insurance information have been submitted with the application, Police Chief Siebenaler has reviewed the forms and approved the applications. The application did not need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission, as the business will be located in a B-2 zoning district. BUDGET IMPACT The fees collected are as proposed in the revenue portion of the budget. ACTION REOUIRED Approve a Therapeutic Massage License for Jacqueline Conklin, 308 Oak Street. Respectfully submitted, X~ld,)h<(al:C>L, Lisa Shadick ~_. Administrative Services Director Q'-c.'P~~C //4~3 CITY OF FARMINGTON THERAPEUTIC MASSAGE PRACTITIONER LICENSE APPLICATION (Type or Print) Applicant Name .. 10 c: ~ 4 e 1(' () P First T ra Middle C On/(If'n Last /-IC4/f.d en Maiden Homi 711:) I'D 1,"0 J e fy /1.. If' /' n j1 f 0 t1 s~~ c~ Address /1/u j- J-O oJ '/ State Zip Telephone Number (9..r>> '-j J / -.J I .).~- Date of Birth L/ /.).,). / b 0 How long have you worked as a massage practitioner? / 0 - 0 I -/0 -01 - 6-0:( List your present employer, address, and telephone number: Have you worked as a massage therapist in another municipality? Yes No If yes: Where When Have you ever been convicted of ~feIOny. crime, or violation of any city ordinance other than traffic related? Yes No If yes, please complete the following: Date of arrest Charge Date of conviction Municipality of arrest Sentence received 48549 r04I16197 Have you ever had a license denied, revoked, or suspended? /) 0 If yes, please complete the following: Where? Type of license Reason for revocation: When? Have you ever been committed for one of the following: Psychological problems Inebriation Drug Use Alcohol Use Other At what location(s) in the City will you perform massages? J 0 ;p Oo/( .S;, , ,ro.ILrn; ns-fon Will you be leasing property for thempeutic massage business: Yes No If yes, please provide a copy of the lease and the owners name, address, and phone nwnber: ~~b COnf1L4( -I-i 0.51 List the name and address of two persons who are residents of Dakota County who can attest to yo~ character: VLa,..J. ,/ Th 04t e j(fz, s -Ii... tit ;;qrJ 1(!)31;2 I t1v.,.,fe r{. () '-dCT- CO LIIO Dvdd DJud .JJcLt] 0. J4. U i II (J 0..11 ~ v i fie Telephone Nwnber q S 2 .:- '109- Job S- Telephone Number 9 r.) - LI fa 9 -;J 'i J ~ Please provide your principal address for the last 10 years? /7 I J s- ro It"a (Ie /lue /~/Zfr-.;' (1 r i-o n 200 :J t.b 5''1 /~fl ft", n p Wrl j 0).. .) ~ /I lie /U LU / KC\s.J' 0 11 / ;1 /lJ , I Have you ever received formal training in massage? Yes L No If yes, please complete the following: .~ Name of School & Address: t1 i (1 () e. c> ~ 0 /,' s. Dates Attended: 9 - 0 0 ..: q - 6 / SC).,(J(J/ () f Ifq.f-SCf~f-l- I] CJ J" W() 48549 0016/97 2 Hours of Training: Diploma Received: By Whom is the School Accredited: Please read the following statements carefully. By signing below, you agree to and are bound by each item: . I have received from the City of Farmington a copy of the Therapeutic MasSage Ordinance and will familiarize myself with its provisions. . I understand that a criminal conviction will not bar me from obtaining a license unless the conviction is directly related to the occupation for which the license is sought and there is no showing of sufficient rehabilitation. and present fitness to perform the duties of the occupation. I understand that failure to reveal a criminal conviction is falsification of the application and constitutes grounds for denial of the license. . The information I have provided on this application is truthful. I authorize the City of Farmington to investigate the information and contact persons/organizations named on this application. SignatureOfAPP]jcanl~ ~ ~ Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, on this day of ,19_. Notary Public Attach along with this application: 1. Evidence of the applicant's educational qualifications, including originals or certified copies of degrees, diplomas, and certificate from a certified school, and where this training was received. 2. A recent photograph of yourself. 3. Birth certificate or naturalization papers. 4. Copy of lease for building to house business (only if renting). 48549 104116/97 3 / C6.., City of Farmington 325. Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members, Interim City Administrat . FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Engagement of Audit Firm for December 31, 2003 DATE: November 17,2003 INTRODUCTION Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd has presented the City with its engagement letter for auditing services for the year ended December 31, 2003. DISCUSSION Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. has satisfactorily completed 6 years of audit engagement with the December 31, 2002 Annual Financial Statements. The proposal for the 2003 audit includes additional services and fees for the implementation of GASB 34 in addition to the usual audit. BUDGET IMPACT KDV proposes a fee of $18,200 for professional auditing services of the December 31, 2003 financial records. This is a 5.2% increase over the 2002 fees and is due to additional procedures which must be completed to comply with the new auditing fraud standards. Additional fees for the implementation of GASB 34 will be somewhere between $7,500 and $10,000 dependent on the amount of work performed. The proposed 2004 budget includes sufficient funding for auditing services. ACTION REQUIRED Authorize engagement of Kern, DeW enter, Viere, Ltd. for the December 31, 2003 audit. ~R:; ./ Robin Roland Finance Director KDV KERN. DEWENTER.VlERE October 27,2003 Ms. Robin Roland Finance Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Dear Robin: Weare pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide to the City of Farmington, Minnesota, for the year ended December 31,2003. We will audit the financial statements of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, as of and for the year ended December 31,2003. We understand that the financial statements will be presented in accordance with the financial reporting model described in GASB Statement No. 34. Also, the document we submit to you will include the combining and individual fund financial statements and schedules and the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards that will be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements. This document will include the reports required under Government Auditing Standards, and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non- Profit Organizations. The management's discussion and analysis that is a required component of the basic financial statements will be subjected to certain limited procedures, but will not be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit, and for which our auditors' report will disclaim an opinion. The statistical information that is a part of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report will not be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements, and for which our auditors' report will disclaim an opinion. Audit Objectives The objective of our audit is the expression of an opinion as to whether your financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and to report on the fairness ofthe additional information referred to in the first paragraph when considered in relation to the financial statements taken as a whole. The objective also includes reporting on - . Internal control related to the financial statements and compliance with laws. regulations and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a material effect on the financial statements in accordance with Government Auditing Standards. Certified Public Accountants Financial Services e>rxanization Developmenr Strategic Consulting Technology Services Minneapolis 7100 Northland Circle N. Sui.. 119 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428.1500 Phone: 763.537.3011 Fax: 763.537.9682 St. Cloud 220 Park Avenue S. P.O. Box 1304 St. Cloud, Minnesota 56302 Phone: 320.251.7010 Fax: 320.251.1784 Waite Park 415 3rd Street N. Suite 100 Waite Park. Minnesota 56387.2510 Phone: 320.252.7060 Fax: 320.252.9627 www.kdv.com Expert tulviu. When I"'" need it.... 877.912.7696 Technology Help Desk: 866.400.6426 October 27, 2003 Page 2 of6 . Internal control related to major programs and an opinion (or disclaimer of opinion) on compliance with laws, regulations and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements that could have a direct and material effect on each major program in accordance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular A- 133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations. The reports on internal control and compliance will each include a statement that the report is intended for the information and use of the audit committee, management, specific legislative or regulatory bodies, federal awarding agencies, and if applicable, pass-through entities and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with U.S. generally accepted auditing standards; the standards for financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996; and the provisions of OMB Circular A-i33, and will include tests of the accounting records, a determination of major program(s) in accordance with Circular A-l33, and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to express such an opinion and to render the required reports. If our opinion on the financial statements or the Single Audit compliance opinion is other than unqualified, we will fully discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form or have not formed an opinion, we may decline to express an opinion or to issue a report as a result of this engagement. Management Responsibilities Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control and for compliance with the provisions of contracts, agreements, and grants. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of the controls. The objectives of internal control are to provide management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, that transactions are executed in accordance with management's authorizations and recorded properly to permit the preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and that federal award programs are managed in compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements. Management is responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us. We understand that you will provide us with such information required for our audit and that you are responsible for the accuracy and completeness of that information. We will advise you about appropriate accounting principles and their application and will assist in the preparation of your financial statements, including the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, but the responsibility for the financial statements remains with you. That responsibility includes the establishment and maintenance of adequate records and effective internal control over financial reporting and compliance, the selection and application of accounting principles, and the safeguarding of assets. Management is responsible for adjusting the fmancial statements to correct material misstatements and for confirming to us in the representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually October 27, 2003 Page 3 of6 and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud affecting the government involving (a) management, (b) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (c) others where the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements. You are also responsible for informing us of your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the government received in communications from employees, former employees, regulators or others. In addition, you are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the entity complies with applicable laws and regulations. Additionally, as required by OMB Circular A-I33, it is management's responsibility to follow up and take corrective action on reported audit findings and to prepare a summary schedule of prior audit findings and a corrective action plan. The summary schedule of prior audit findings should be available for our review on the first day of fieldwork. Audit Procedures - General An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. We will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether from errors, fraudulent financial reporting, misappropriation of assets or violations of laws or governmental regulations that are attributable to the entity or to acts by management or employees acting on behalf of the entity. As required by the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular A-I33, our audit will include test of transactions related to major federal award programs for compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements. Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material misstatements or noncompliance may exist and not be detected by us. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial misstatements, or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material effect on the financial statements or major programs. However, we will inform you of any material errors and any fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets that comes to our attention. We will also inform you of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that comes to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential. We will include such matters in the reports required for a Single Audit. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to matters that might arise during any later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors. Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, creditors and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will also require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and related matters. October 27, 2003 Page 40f6 Audit Procedures - Internal Controls In planning and performing our audit, we will consider the internal control sufficient to plan the audit in order to determine the nature, timing and extent of our auditing procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinions on the City's financial statements and on its compliance with requirements applicable to major programs. We will obtain an understanding of the design ofthe relevant controls and whether they have been placed in operation, and we will assess control risk. Tests of controls may be performed to test the effectiveness of certain controls that we consider relevant to preventing and detecting errors and fraud that are material to the financial statements and to preventing and detecting misstatements resulting from illegal acts and other noncompliance matters that have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. Tests of controls relative to the financial statements are required only if control risk is assessed below the maximum level. Our tests, if performed, will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on internal control and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed in our report on internal control issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards. As required by OMB Circular A-I33, we will perform tests of controls to evaluate the effectiveness ofthe design and operation of controls that we consider relevant to preventing or detecting material noncompliance with compliance requirements, applicable to each major federal award program. However, our tests will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on those controls and accordingly, no opinion will be expressed in our report on internal control issued pursuant to OMB Circular A-I33. An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify reportable conditions. However, we will inform the governing body or audit committee of any matters involving internal control and its operation that we consider to be reportable conditions under standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal control that, in our judgment, could adversely affect the entity's ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial data consistent with the assertions of management in the financial statements. We will also inform you of any nonreportable conditions or other matters involving internal control, if any, as required by OMB Circular A-I33. Audit Procedures - Compliance Our audit will be conducted in accordance with the standards referred to in the section titled Audit Objectives. As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we will perform tests of the City's compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and agreements, including grant agreements. However, the objective ofthose procedures will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion in our report on compliance issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards. OMB Circular A-I33 requires that we also plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the auditee has complied with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant agreements applicable to major October 27,2003 Page 5 of6 programs. Our procedures will consist of the applicable procedures described in the OMB Circular A-i33 Compliance Supplement for the types of compliance requirements that could have a direct and material effect of each of the City's major programs. The purpose ofthose procedures will be to express an opinion on the City's compliance with requirements applicable to major programs in our report on compliance issued pursuant to OMB Circular A-i33. Audit Administration, Fees and Other We understand that your employees will prepare all cash, accounts receivable or other confirmations we request and will locate any invoices selected by us for testing. At the conclusion of the engagement, we will complete the appropriate sections of and sign the Data Collection Form that summarizes our audit findings. We will provide copies of our reports to the City's finance personnel; however, it is management's responsibility to submit the reporting package (including financial statements, schedule of expenditures of federal awards, summary schedule of prior audit findings, auditors' reports and a corrective action plan) along with the Data Collection Form to the designated federal clearinghouse and, if appropriate, to pass-through entities. The Data Collection Form and the reporting package must be submitted within the earlier of 30 days after receipt of the auditors' reports or nine months after the end ofthe audit period, unless a longer period is agreed to in advance by the cognizant or oversight agency for audits. At the conclusion of the engagement, we will provide information to management as to where the reporting packages should be submitted and the number to submit. The workpapers for this engagement are the property ofKem, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd. and constitute confidential information. However, we may be requested to make certain workpapers available to oversight, regulatory or state agencies pursuant to authority given to it by law or regulation. If requested, access to such workpapers will be provided under the supervision of Kern, DeWenter, Vi ere, Ltd's personnel. Furthermore, upon request, we may provide photocopies of selected workpapers to oversight, regulatory or state agencies. The oversight, regulatory or state agencies may intend, or decide, to distribute the photocopies or information contained therein to others, including other governmental agencies. The workpapers for this engagement will be retained for a minimum of three years after the date the auditors' report is issued or for any additional period requested by the oversight, regulatory or state agencies. Ifwe are aware that a federal awarding agency, pass-through entity or auditee is contesting an audit finding, we will contact the party(ies) contesting the audit finding for guidance prior to destroying the workpapers. Our fee for these services will be $ 18,200, plus an implementation fee of $ 7,500 to $10,000 for the implementation of GASB Statement No. 34. Additional services will be at our standard hourly rates. These rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved and the experience level of the personnel assigned. Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. The above fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary, we will discuss it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. October 27, 2003 Page 6 0[6 Government Auditing Standards require that we provide you with a copy of our most recent quality control review report. Our 2002 peer review report accompanies this letter. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City of Farmington, Minnesota, and believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us. Sincerely, a~=n:er:;Lt~~ ~~ Thienes,~~it Partner Certified Public Accountant RESPONSE: This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City'ofFarmington, Minnesota. By: Title: Date: lOb CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF REVENUES AS OF OCTOBER 31,2003 83.33 % Year Complete :1~111:1:11~~~I~WIIIII~II'~i~I.II'I'111 :.1:11111:: : 1 : . ::::<<<<<<<<<2003<::<< : <<< :: < )!~~@~~:C :~'::IIIII~IIIIIIII Ilm~Wlll . . . . . ~~<"!i!I)G!i;m~? .~~~R$f(~ :< : W1J)~ : ~ ? :~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~2.G63~ ~ ~~ < ............. . $ $ $ % $ % GENERAL FUND Property Taxes 3,188,070 174,932 1,713,656 53.75 1,188,741 45.72 Licenses/Permits 1,033,700 89,241 1,191,896 115.30 1,184,318 101.76 Fines 82,500 5,491 55,032 66.71 55,654 67.46 Intergovernment Revenue 414,975 16,058 480,415 115.77 406,101 49.70 Charges for Service 329,779 10,610 158,380 48.03 274,424 85.44 Miscellaneous 330,500 22,494 243,799 73.77 254,942 77.14 Transfers 225 000 21 021 188 650 83.84 287 083 83.33 Total General Fund 5.604.524 339 847 4 031 828 71.94 3651 263 64.51 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating Fund 27,000 836 10,023 37.12 12,240 50.50 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 3,898 11,791 146.47 6,494 80.67 Park Improvement Fund 152,500 5,496 51,841 33.99 370,772 94.83 Recreation Operating Fund 186,700 3,550 91,174 48.83 196,027 93.76 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 243,300 1,605 112,816 46.37 136,936 62.96 Liquor Operations 2,410,500 235,946 2,241,485 92.99 1,971,712 82.15 Sewer 1,298,000 228,641 1,118,336 86.16 1,413,682 91.47 Solid Waste 1,358,500 83,459 955,455 70.33 953,841 75.81 Storm Water 270,000 16,392 221,739 82.13 546,575 89.27 Water 1 790 000 200 255 1 290 330 72.09 1 508 563 85.71 Total Revenues 13349074 1 119925 10136 818 75.94 10768.105 76.45 CITY OF FARMINGTON SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES AS OF OCTOBER 31, 2003 83.33 % Year Comolete i::::~:':::li~MWI:I:I::::':'~:I:':':II'I.lli.II.lii:illi~~~.i""lli~~=: :::::::::*10:::::'::: l'~r~~~. . :.:.:.: :2002:':':':' :PJ.$~~~ ..... .... . m::::::Y+d::::::m ):::2002):: GENERAL FUND $ $ $ % $ % Legislative 61,120 4,031 59,433 97.24 59,231 83.68 Administration 418,660 32,250 418,961 100.07 310,661 87.73 Human Resources 191,820 20,392 124,259 64.78 101,811 78.48 MIS 92,330 3,332 63,600 68.88 50,413 88.80 Elections 10,870 - - 0.00 7,793 34.40 Communications 76,350 6,290 38,537 50.47 51,520 77.74 Finance 372,730 36,205 316,189 84.83 320,490 84.48 Planning/Zoning 155,360 16,747 121,202 78.01 120,856 86.46 Building Inspection 316,330 38,742 302,154 95.52 277,544 102.30 Community Development 87,350 12,307 143,700 164.51 66,841 77.30 Police Administration 456,300 47,188 426,931 93.56 312,629 80.14 Patrol Services 1,120,280 124,716 989,606 88.34 805,964 83.88 Investigation Services 171,980 19,372 143,415 83.39 97,954 64.99 School Liason Officer 80,830 8,540 64,676 80.01 64,786 96.61 Emergency Management 1,400 17 690 49.29 146 10.43 Fire 371,000 110,320 343,026 92.46 222,327 66.59 Rescue 47,690 1,237 29,207 61.24 22,468 59.84 Engineering 259,430 31,660 249,079 96.01 231,028 94.38 G.I.S. 12,820 26 3,129 24.41 682 6.54 Streets 419,200 40,273 409,961 97.80 303,203 82.43 Snow Removal 105,640 1,216 50,413 47.72 42,185 49.63 Signal Maint 95,600 7,953 70,034 73.26 67,745 79.14 Fleet Maint - - - 0.00 107,934 91.45 Park Maint 244,162 25,738 311,851 127.72 256,207 124.38 Forestry 110,000 21,527 42,302 38.46 41,124 39.96 Building Maint 105,300 6,791 97,486 92.58 103,471 98.06 Recreation Programs 256,850 36,322 319,918 124.55 210,544 73.71 Outdoor Ice 27,640 60 3,850 13.93 7,765 30.01 Transfers Out 100 000 - - 0.00 119754 92.12 Total General Fund 5 769 042 653 252 5 143609 89.16 4 385 076 82.95 SPECIAL REVENUE HRA Operating 88,840 9,565 69,672 78.42 41,855 80.26 Police Forfeitures Fund 8,050 276 4,851 60.26 8,350 103.73 Park Improvement Fund 134,500 12,415 138,865 103.25 92,335 79.05 Senior Center 108,020 14,662 116,126 107.50 89,475 82.41 Swimming Pool 124,560 1,607 124,064 99.60 116,814 97.09 ENTERPRISE FUNDS Ice Arena 273,900 27,022 217,493 79.41 188,673 79.37 Liquor Operations 2,362,750 203,441 2,090,783 88.49 1,945,635 88.36 Sewer 1,263,767 76,736 920,906 72.87 829,439 70.24 Solid Waste 1,363,631 123,134 1,096,337 80.40 1,061,142 87.30 Storm Water 242,939 35,066 174,206 71.71 156,405 65.89 Water Utility 1 104 503 72 132 879 262 79.61 542 502 35.95 Total Exoenditures 12,844,502 1,229 308 10,976,174 85.45 9,457,701 77.05 IDe.. City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, City Council members, Interim City Administrato FROM: Robin Roland, Finance Director SUBJECT: Consider Resolution - Authorizing Bond Sale, Refunding Bonds DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION Opportunities exist to refinance some of the City's outstanding debt, resulting in savings on interest payments without extending the term of the debt. DISCUSSION & BUDGET IMPACT The City has four bond issues which can be refunded (refinanced) at current market interest rates resulting in lower interest costs for the remaining term on the bonds. The bond issues are: G.O Improvement Bonds of 1994, G.O. Tax Increment Bonds of 1995, G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds of 1995, and Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds of 1993. The pre-sale analysis indicates a possible savings of over $175,000 over the remaining term of the outstanding debt. This is significant as the majority of the bond issues are tax increment debt which is to be repaid with tax increments. Those tax increments have been reduced over the years by tax rate compression and the reduced payments of a refunding bond issue will better align with the tax increments received. Copies of the preliminary Bond Sale Reports are attached to this memo. The bond issues have a six year and eleven year repayment period respectively. ACTION REQUIRED 1) Adopt the attached resolution calling for the sale of $2,205,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2003B on December 15,2003. 2) Adopt the attached resolution calling for the sale of $605,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2003C on December 15,2003. Respectfully submitted, #qJ Robin Roland Finance Director City of Farmington, Minnesota Pre-Sale Report November 17,2003 Proposed Issue: $2,205,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2003B Purpose: Refinance the following bonds: o GO Improvement Bonds of 1994 o GO Tax Increment Bonds of 1995 o GO Tax Increment Refunding Bonds of 1995 Description: The bonds will refinance the above listed issues. Estimated present value saving is $134,800 (6.113%). Term/Call Feature: 6 year bonds, callable in 2007 for maturities 2008 and after. (3 years) Funding Sources: Special assessment collections, tax increments, and property tax levy. Discussion Issues: If the interest rates, on the day of the sale, do not generate a reasonable level of savings, the City Council can reject the bids, and incur no issuance costs. Schedule: Pre-Sale Review: November 17,2003 Distribute Official Statement: Week of December 1, 2003 Week of December 8, 2003 December 15,2003 Rating Agency Interview Bond Sale: Estimated Closing Date: Week ofJanuary 12, 2003 Attachments: Proposed Debt Service Schedule and Savings Estimate Bond Buyer Index Resolution authorizing Ehlers to proceed with bond sale Ehlers Contacts: Financial Advisors: Bond Analysts: Sid Inman (651)697-8507 Shelly Eldridge (651)697-8504 Diana Lockard (651) 697-8534 Debbie Holmes (651) 697-8536 Connie Kuck (651) 697-8527 Bond Sale Coordinator: The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the Council Members at their home address for review prior to the sale date. \ City of Farmington, Minnesota Pre-Sale Report November 17,2003 Proposed Issue: $605,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2003C Purpose: Refinance the Taxable GO Tax Increment Bonds of 1993 Description: Estimated present value saving is $42,850 (7.083). Term/Call Feature: 11 year bonds, callable in 2011 for maturities 2012 and after. (7 years) Funding Sources: Tax increments Discussion Issues: If the interest rates, on the day of the sale, do not generate a reasonable level of savings, the City Council can reject the bids, and incur no issuance costs. Schedule: Pre-Sale Review: Rating Agency Interview Bond Sale: November 17, 2003 Week of December 1,2003 Week of December 8,2003 December 15,2003 Distribute Official Statement: Estimated Closing Date: Week of January 12,2003 Attachments: Proposed Debt Service Schedule and Savings Estimate Resolution authorizing EWers to proceed with bond sale Ehlers Contacts: Financial Advisors: Bond Analysts: Sid Inman (651 )697-8507 Shelly Eldridge (651)697-8504 Diana Lockard (651) 697-8534 Debbie Holmes (651) 697-8536 Connie Kuck (651) 697-8527 Bond Sale Coordinator: The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the Council Members at their home address for review prior to the sale date. Resolution No. Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution Providing for the Sale of $2,205,000 G.O. Refunding Bonds, Series 2003B A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $2,205,000 Refunding Bonds, Series 2003B (the "Bonds"), to refinance certain GO Improvement Bonds of 1994, GO Tax Increment Bonds of 1995, and GO Tax Increment Refunding Bonds of 1995 of the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit proposals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Farmington, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization: Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting: Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at City Hall on December 15,2003, for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following Council Members voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Dated this _ day of City Interim City Administrator Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Resolution No. Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution Providing for the Sale of $605,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2003C A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $605,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2003C (the "Bonds"), to refinance the City's $815,000 Taxable G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993 of the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("EWers"), as its independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit proposals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Farmington, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization: Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting: Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at City Hall on December 15,2003, for the purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following Council Members voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Dated this _ day of City Interim City Administrator Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. loJ City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and Interim City Administrat FROM: Missie Kohlbeck, Senior Center Coordinator Patti Norman, Recreation Supervisor Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution Accepting Bus Donation DATE: November 17,2003 INTRODUCTION St. Francis Health Services of Morris (St. Francis) has contacted the City about their interest in donating a 16-passenger bus that was previously owned by Trinity Health Campus (Trinity). DISCUSSION The bus' make and model is a 1997 Ford E 450. It is believed that the estimated value of the bus is about $65,000.00 if purchased new. It has been driven a little over 17,000 miles. The bus in the past was used by the Trinity to drive residents to and from medical appointments and other outings and so that is why it has such low mileage. The City's Fleet Maintenance Supervisor has inspected the bus and feels that it is in excellent shape. Since it is al6 passenger bus, it would require City staff to have a Class B license with Passenger Endorsement in order to drive it. The City has several staff members who currently have this license and are able to drive the bus. There are additional Park and Recreation Department staff who are interested in acquiring this license. After some discussion, it is felt that the bus would best be used for senior, youth and family activities including field trips and as the swim bus. Staffhave also discussed with DARTS, the possibility of using the bus as a backup to their regular bus. Currently the City has access to the DARTS bus every week on Fridays. Accepting the bus donation from St. Francis would allow City staff to have access to a bus more often for activity use and no longer being dependent on the DARTS bus for activities. Staff have discussed the storage and parking needs for the bus. At Trinity the bus was parked outside year-round. Staff feels that it would be acceptable to continue this practice until adequate indoor storage could be found. Staff are preparing an operational and maintenance plan in anticipation that the City Council will accept the bus as a donation. If the bus is accepted as a donation, staff will communicate the City's appreciation on behalf of the City Council to St. Francis for their generous donation. BUDGET IMPACT As mentioned previously, the Fleet Maintenance Supervisor has inspected the bus and has found it to be in excellent shape. He felt that the most immediate need was for the battery to be replaced. Beyond that he didn't see that there would need to be any more work on the bus other than just routine maintenance such as oil changes. There will be costs associated with fuel. The City currently offers field trips and rents buses from Marschall Lines. It is anticipated that the money that was previously budgeted for bus rentals would be used to cover fuel costs. Staff would also expect that when the bus is used for activities, the fee charged to the participants would cover the cost of fuel and a driver. The long-term budget impact would be the replacement of the bus. It is anticipated that beginning with the 2005 Capital Outlay budget that there would be money requested over a seven-year period that would result in the bus being replaced in 2012. ACTION REQUESTED Adopt the attached resolution accepting the donation of a 16-passenger bus from St Francis Health Services of Morris. Respectfully Submitte~~ ~).. \. ,/';) ':L.fJ) '1rw~~~'i1n\~~~1k:~ k~ ~ Missie Kohlbeck Patti Norm Randy Distad Senior Center Coordinator Recreation Sup isor Parks and Recreation Director RESOLUTION No. ACCEPTING DONATION OF A 16 PASSENGER BUS FROM ST. FRANCIS HEALTH SERVICES OF MORRIS Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Council Chambers of said City on the 17th day of November, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Members Present: Members Absent: seconded the following: Member introduced and Member WHEREAS, St. Francis Health Services of Morris is willing to donate a 16-passenger bus to the City; and, WHEREAS, the estimated value of the donated bus if purchased new is $70,000.00; and, WHEREAS, it is required by State Statute and in the best interest of the City to accept such donation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Farmington hereby accepts with gratitude the generous donation of a 16-passenger bus from St. Francis Health Services of Morris at an estimated value, if purchased new, of $70,000.00. This resolution adopted by recorded vote ofthe Farmington City Council in open session on the 1 th day of November 2003. Mayor Attested to the _ day of November 2003. City Administrator SEAL 10e- City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: !FIefV' Mayor, Council Members, ~. Interim City Administrator FROM: Jim Atkinson Assistant City Planner SUBJECT: 1. Consider a Resolution Amending the Comprehensive Plan for the properties located at 1020 8th Street, 1012 8th Street, and 1000 8th Street from Low/Medium Residential to Business. 2. Consider Adoption of an Ordinance to Rezone the Property Located at 1020 8th Street from R-2, LowlMedium Density Residential, to B-1, Highway Business. DATE: November 17,2003 INTRODUCTION Three adjacent property owners have requested comprehensive plan amendments for their properties located at 1020 8th Street, 1012 8th Street, and 1000 8th Street. One (1) of the three owners has also requested a rezoning of the property located at 1020 8th Street. The properties are currently designated as Low/Medium density in the Comprehensive Plan and currently zoned R-2, Low/Medium Residential. The owners are requesting to change the Comprehensive Plan designation on all three properties to Business and change the zoning designation for 1020 8th Street to B-1, Highway Business. BACKGROUND The applicants appeared before the Planning Commission on September 9, 2003 requesting a Comprehensive Plan amendment and Rezoning for each of the properties listed above. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the requests due primarily to the uncertainty of future uses on the properties. Prior to appearing before the City Council for a final decision on the requests, the applicants modified the proposal to address the comments received from the Commission and residents. The applicants requested an additional public hearing for the Planning Commission to review the modified proposal. The applicants are requesting to amend the Comprehensive Plan for the three properties as previously requested, but are only requesting to rezone the property directly adjacent to K&K Auto Ranch (1020 8th Street). The applicants have also provided a site plan and screening plan for the property showing the desired use and the methods that would be used to screen the proposed business use from the existing residences to the west. DISCUSSION Comprehensive Plan The 2020 Comprehensive Plan, updated in 2002, currently designates the subject properties as Low/Medium Density Residential. In order to recommend an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the City Council must determine that a business designation is a more appropriate long-term use than residential. Amending the Comprehensive Plan designation for the properties located at 1000 and 1012 8th Street but not changing the zoning designation would virtually mean that even though the best long-term use is commercial, the best short-term use remains residential. Zoning As previously mentioned, only the property adjacent to K&K Auto Ranch is proposed to be rezoned to B- I. As shown on the attached site plan, K&K Auto Ranch would expand to the north to provide additional parking for automobiles associated with the existing business. The properties located at 1000 and 1012 8th Street would not be rezoned and would remain R-2 on the Zoning Map. Storm Water Drainage A major concern expressed by residents during the Public Hearing on September 9, 2003 related to existing problems with storm water drainage in the area. Comments received indicated a belief that the additional impervious surface would magnify the problem that currently exists. However, any improvement to the site, including expanding the existing parking area of K&K Auto Ranch, would require submission of a grading plan to be reviewed and approved by the City's Engineering Division. The expansion would not be allowed to proceed if the grading plan did not adequately address the handling of storm water on the site. Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held an additional public hearing on the requests at its meeting on November 12, 2003. The Commission believed that the additional information provided did not adequately address how the storm water drainage would be handled on the site and therefore were not comfortable recommending approval of the requests. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial of both the Comprehensive Plan amendment request and the rezoning request. ACTION REQUESTED Deny the requested Comprehensive Plan amendments and Zoning amendments for the properties located at 1020 8th Street, 1012 8th Street, and 1000 8th Street. Respectfully S~~.._.. q~~ Jim Atkinson Assistant City Planner Request for Comprehensive Plan Amendments Current Comprehensive Plan Map Hickory Street ...... III ~ ...... V) ~ ...... r-.... ...... III ~ ...... V) ~ ...... 00 Ash Street t'rl :::... ~ ~ ~ ,l3'l :i: Castle Rock Township Farmington N A Request for Rezoning Current Zoning Map Hickory Street .... ~ ~ l... .... lr) ..s:: .... "- .... ~ ~ .... lr) ..s:: .... OQ Ash Street CV) ::.... ~ ~ ..s:: .~ i Castle Rock Township Farmington N A Proposed Site Concept Plan \IBIi;~\lI- Expanded Parking Area +J Q) Q) !..... +J C/) ..c +J 00 K&K Auto Ranch As h Street ~ (1) e r- fruOJe"ly lffJ e J, (~) (j) err f \J It vJ e" e lJ~ r~~eC'?~ \ +t Df', h lr / yT / /' '7 t.,\e~ ~ D i(.lvi)~ \ - o\:? v' /~..\ ~ rJ~ ,,~ 'j of I t' 0\ '",I ,\ 7',)/1 Q(oJ ~ty ';~~ \\j\l- ~o ~ " f\ \.~,:>\ , I I \" ,,' ",v; tJ'~ CJ (i) f:) (J @ \,\\ . \ \ \ I' , \ '1.\ "\ ~I \ \/ ~ ~ Yl~~ ~ 1.'17 ~e" f~ bI" I i I ! ;1\ I i 1/ / I I' i ! i / / Y I /Y ie~ ~ V r,q. f}JS /7 /1 J i / I / i i I i I I I i I I , ! i ! , l~fI\ t ~ \ ~l' 0 fi~ t e. I f / I I ! I ! i I I f / I i I f i EtJf(e.- L.of w, 1/ s /epe- f wit cL i-hI-€.. d r 'till S I , I i I / / lOde .-g'I/ $1. - ~f_,,!;; --- I ) - F"f" 0 r0 -) l\ ~f c? '- '12 o~J '- ((g-l-h. ~-~~) " ~ ~ ::::::- --+-- --' ~ "3 '\ ~ '\l ~ ';) - ~ -l:) ,~ ~ ~ ~ u <;t ~ -.Q .' ~ ~ -h ---0 -- ~ ..... ..j "3 ~~ -<:- ~ 1<'\, ,[ l--1 L - -- -t-: Vj ~ CQ I ~~ t- '. ---......."......... ".."'-0.-', ~ --- ---- < ~ ~ '\ ~ 1,- ......... 7\ ~ ~ "..." I ":. C"> ,/ ....... lOP City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us TO: Mayor, Council Members",,,t:/ Interim City Administrato~ FROM: Kevin Carroll, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Consideration of Zoning Code Text Amendments Regarding the Keeping of Farm Animals within the City DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION / BACKGROUND Earlier this year, City staff sent a violation letter to a resident who had acquired two pygmy goats. The violation in question was not the mere possession of the goats; rather, the violation related to the fact that the outdoor enclosure for the goats was approximately 130 feet away from the home of the nearest neighbor. The City Code currently requires there to be 500 feet of separation between an outdoor [farm] animal enclosure and the home of the nearest neighbor. The owner of the goats appealed the violation letter to the Planning Commission. The appellant and the Planning Commission jointly agreed to table the appeal to enable staff to conduct additional research and explore alternative methods of resolving the issue. City staff then reviewed relevant provisions in the City Codes of a number of different cities. DISCUSSION Some cities do not have any provisions that regulate or specify the minimum distance that must be maintained between homes and animal enclosures. Cities that regulate outdoor animal enclosures (for animals other than house pets) seem to do so in one (or more) of three ways: 1. They specify a minimum lot size for the keeping offarm animals (which is generally defined to include goats). For example, Cottage Grove requires 1.5 acres of land per "animal unit," and Lakeville requires at least 2.5 acres for anyone who wants to keep horses. 2. They specify a minimum distance between animal enclosures and property lines [60 feet in Cottage Grove] and/or the homes of nearby neighbors [300 feet in Cottage Grove and 100 feet in Lakeville]. 3. They prohibit the keeping of farm animals on "non-farm" properties unless an interim use permit is issued [as in Lakeville]. Minimum Lot Size The Farmington City Code does not specify a minimum lot size for the keeping of farm animals. As a result, property owners in any residential neighborhood can currently keep farm animals on their property as long as they are able to meet the existing 500- foot spacing requirement between animal pens and nearby homes. At its meeting on September 9th, and in the interest of reducing the presence of farm animals in residential neighborhoods to the greatest extent possible, the Planning Commission recommended that the City adopt a minimum lot size of 1.5 acres. Such a requirement would make the vast majority of residential lots ineligible for the keeping of farm animals. If the Council adopts such a recommendation, any residential property owner who has a lot that is smaller than the new minimum lot size AND who is currently keeping farm animals on that lot would have a legal non-conforming use after the adoption of the new requirements. In other words, the current use would be "grandfathered" because the farm animals were already being kept when the new ordinance went into effect. However, the non- conforming use could not be expanded, which staff would interpret to mean that no new farm animals could ever be brought onto the property. If an existing animal died or was removed from the property for any reason, it could not be replaced with another farm animal. If an existing animal produced offspring, the offspring would have to be immediately removed from the property. In time, there would no longer be any farm animals on the property, so the initial non-conformance would eventually be eliminated. Distance ReQuirement Farmington's 500-foot spacing requirement between animal pens and nearby homes is significantly in excess of the minimum spacing that is required in Lakeville, Cottage Grove and other communities. This may be due, in part, to Farmington's lack of a minimum lot size requirement. In addition to recommending a new minimum lot size of 1.5 acres, the Planning Commission also recommended that the City adopt a new distance requirement of 100 feet, which would be consistent with the City of Lakeville's minimum distance. Fowl A related issue arose recently regarding the keeping of chickens on a residential property. The Code currently does not include fowl in the list of animals that must comply with the provisions found in Section 6-4-2. If fowl were added to this section, the same minimum lot size and spacing requirements would apply, thereby eliminating the possibility that chickens could be kept in a typical residential neighborhood. Citv Council Review The City Council reviewed these issues on September 15, 2003 and generally agreed with the Planning Commission's recommended changes. One change suggested by the Council was that the recommended minimum lot size requirement of 1.5 acres be changed to 2.5 acres. The Council also directed staff to investigate whether the distance of 100 feet should be measured from the animal enclosure to adjacent residences as the Code currently reads, or to the nearest property line. The main concern with measuring to adjacent residences, as expressed by a Council member, was that if the property housing the enclosure was adjacent to a vacant property, construction of a structure on the vacant property would be prohibited within the 100-foot setback and therefore would minimize the buildable area on the adjacent property. However, the Code currently includes the following provision regarding exceptions to the required setback: 6-4-2(B) The enclosure must not be located closer than five hundred feet (500') to a residence not owned or occupied by the keeper of the animals unless: 1. Said animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, or 2. Said animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but prior to the existence of a residence within five hundredfeet (500? (Ord. 082-130, 4-19-82) Any enclosure would also have to maintain the required setbacks of the Zoning District where the property is located. In the A-I district, for example, the minimum side yard setback for an accessory structure is 20 feet. Planning Commission Review The Planning Commission held a public hearing and discussed the proposed ordinance at its meeting on November 12, 2003 and unanimously recommended approval. RECOMMENDED ACTION Approve the attached ordinance amending section 6-4-2 of the City Code regarding the keeping of farm animals within the City. / I fully Sub i~~ K v arroll Community Development Director 642: ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY. MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6. CHAPTER 4 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE CONCERNING THE KEEPING OF ANIMALS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 6-4-2 of the Fannin2:ton City Code is amended in its entiretv to read as follows 6-4-2: KEEPING ANIMALS WITHIN CITY: !\ny horse, mule, donkey, pony, cow, goat, sheep or :3nim:31 r:3ised for fur bearing purposes m:3Y be kept within the City under the following conditions: (/\) /\nimals must be kept within :3 cecure enclosure. A. DEFINITIONS: The followin2: terms shall have the followin2: meanin2:s: Fann Animals: Cattle. h02:s. bees. sheen. 2:oats. chickens. turkeys. horses. and ,?ther animals commonly accented as fam) animals in the State of Minnesota. House Pets: Animals such as d02:s. cats. birds (not including ni2:eons. chickens. 2:eese. turkeys or other domestic fowl). '2:erbils. han)sters. rabbits (includinQ: those n0l111ally sheltered outside of the orincioal structure). and tronical fish. that can be contained within a orincioal structure throu2:hout the entire veaL orovided that the containment can be accomolished without soecial modification to the structure that would require a buildinQ: nermit. excludin2: wild or domesticated wild animals. B. HOVSE PETS. The keenin2: of house nets is a oermitted accessorv use in all zoninQ: districts, C. FARM ANIMALS, The keenin2: of farm animals is a nermitted accessory use in all ZOnUH! districts orovided: 1. The minimum lot size is two and one-half (2 1/2) acres. ~ 08983 (B) The enclosure must not be loc:Jted c10Ger th:Jn five2. Fal111 animals mav not be confined in a Den. feedlot or buildin2: within one hundred feet (500') to a residence 1 00') of anv residential dwellin2: not owned or occupiedleased by the keeper of the animals,! unless: 1. S3ida. The animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, or 2. S3idb. The animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but prior to the existence of a residence within f.iveone hundred feet (~ (Ord. 082 130, 1 1 9 82) 100'). D. PROHIBITION. With the exceDtion of the keeDin2: of animals allowed bv subsections Band C of this Section. no other animals are allowed exceDt bv interim use Dennit as re2:ulated under the orovisions of Section 10-3-7. E. COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. Animals mav only be keDt for commercial Durooses if authorized in the zonin2: district where the animals are located. F. NUlSAtlCE ANIMALS. Animals may not be keDt ifthev cause a nuisance or endan2:er the health or safety of the community. G. ANIMAL ENCLOSURES. Animal enclosures shall be subiect to the accessorv structure reauirements of subsection 10-6-6. SECTION 2. ExceDt for Section 6-4-2(C)(l) under Section 1. this ordinance shall be effective immediately UDon its DaSSa2:e. Section 6-4-2(C)(1) under Section 1 of this QIdinance shall be effective on the fifth day after DaSSa2:e of this ordinance. ADOPTED this Farmin2:ton. day of 20 . bv the Citv Council of the Citv of CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow. Mayor Attest: Dan Siebenaler. Interim City Administrator SEAL ADDroyed as to form the day of .20 City Attornev Published in the Farmin2:ton IndeDendent the 20 day of 108983 ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF FARMINGTON DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 4 OF THE FARMINGTON CITY CODE CONCERNING THE KEEPING OF ANIMALS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 6-4-2 of the Farmington City Code is amended in its entirety to read as follows 6-4-2: KEEPING ANIMALS WITHIN CITY: A. DEFINITIONS: The following terms shall have the following meanings: Farm Animals: Cattle, hogs, bees, sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, horses, and other animals commonly accepted as farm animals in the State of Minnesota. House Pets: Animals such as dogs, cats, birds (not including pigeons, chickens, geese, turkeys or other domestic fowl), gerbils, hamsters, rabbits (including those normally sheltered outside of the principal structure), and tropical fish, that can be contained within a principal structure throughout the entire year, provided that the containment can be accomplished without special modification to the structure that would require a building permit, excluding wild or domesticated wild tmimals. B. HOUSE PETS. The keeping of house pets is a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts. C. FARM ANIMALS. The keeping of farm animals is a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts provided: 1. The minimum lot size is two and one-half (2 1/2) acres. 2. Farm animals may not be confined in a pen, feedlot or building within one hundred feet (100') of any residential dwelling not owned or leased by the keeper of the animals, unless: a. The animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, or b. The animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but prior to the existence of a residence within one hundred feet (100'). 108983 D. PROHIBITION. With the exception of the keeping of animals allowed by subsections B and C of this Section, no other animals are allowed except by interim use permit as regulated under the provisions of Section 10-3-7. E. COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. Animals may only be kept for commercial purposes if authorized in the zoning district where the animals are located. F. NUISANCE ANIMALS. Animals may not be kept if they cause a nuisance or endanger the health or safety of the community. G. ANIMAL ENCLOSURES. Animal enclosures shall be subject to the accessory structure requirements of subsection 10-6-6. SECTION 2. Except for Section 6-4-2(C)(l) under Section 1, this ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage. Section 6-4-2(C)( l) under Section I of this ordinance shall be effective on the fifth day after passage ofthis ordinance. ADOPTED this _ day of Farmington. 20_, by the City Council of the City of CITY OF FARMINGTON By: Gerald Ristow, Mayor Attest: Dan Siebenaler, Interim City Administrator SEAL Approv~d as to form the day of ,20_. City Attorney Published in the Farmington Independent the 20 - day of 108983 E",s-h~ 6-4-2: KEEPING WITHIN CITY: Any horse, mule, donkey, pony, cow, goat, sheep or animal raised for fur-bearing purposes may be kept within the City under the following conditions: (A) Animals must be kept within a secure enclosure. (8) The enclosure must not be located closer than five hundred feet (500') to a residence not owned or occupied by the keeper of the animals unless: 1. Said animals were kept prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, or 2. Said animals were kept after the adoption of this Ordinance but prior to the existence of a residence within five hundred feet (500'). (Ord. 082-130, 4-19-82) City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us IC?:J TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and Interim City AdmIDistrato~ Randy Distad, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: RE: Meadowview Park Master Plan Approval DATE: November 17, 2003 INTRODUCTION The City initiated a new process of developing master plans for its parks that utilized a public input process. Meadowview Park is the first park to have a master plan developed using this new public input process. DISCUSSION The 2003 timeline that occurred with the creation of a final master plan was as follows: . Early May - The City Council approved the hiring of Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. (HKGI) to develop a master plan for Meadowview Park . Late May - Staffmet with Paul Paige (the Consultant), a Landscape Architect who works for HKGI, to develop a timeline for completing the master plan. Dates for two public open houses were identified. . July 17th - The first open house was held. Residents who either had property that abutted the park or lived immediately across the street from the park were mailed a flyer (Exhibit A). Six people and their children attended the open house and provided initial input on what they desired to have built in the park. The Consultant took the comments received at this meeting to create an initial draft of the park master plan. . August 14th - Second open house held and same residents were notified by mail of the meeting. Initial draft of park master plan presented to those in attendance (Exhibit B). 21 people attended and provided feedback to the Consultant on the draft park master plan. Some residents were opposed to the location of a trail that was shown to run between the back of their properties and the wetland. Some ~eople also voiced their approval for this trail alignment connecting to the trail along 200t Street West. The Consultant then took this information and revised the master plan. . September 10 - Second draft of the park master plan presented at the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) meeting (Exhibit C). The second draft ofthe park master plan showed a trail connection being moved about 250-300 feet further east from its original location so that it now utilized a boardwalk across the wetland to serve as a connection from Meadowview Park to the paved trail along 200th Street West. There were seventeen residents who attended the PRAC meeting. Residents were allowed to address the PRAC members either with their concerns or their support. I have tried to summarize both the supporting as well as the opposing comments for the boardwalk that were received from the residents at the PRAC meeting. The comments in support of the boardwalk were as follows: ~ felt that the boardwalk will provide the best and most direct connection to Meadowview Park for the property owners who live south of 200th Street West ~ concerns with the high speed of traffic along Pilot Knob Road and how it will impact children's safety ifthe only connection is made to the future trail along Pilot Knob ~ felt that the wetland should be for everyone to enjoy and not just the property owners whose property abuts the wetland because everyone should be able to enjoy the wildlife and nature, which could be accomplished by building a boardwalk ~ liked the access to the wetland for its educational value to the community ~ feel that wildlife will adapt to the boardwalk and will be able to migrate and move over, under or around the boardwalk ~ felt that the boardwalk would be a good addition to the park and that it would be a unique experience in Farmington ~ felt that those who are opposed to the boardwalk are NIMBY (not in my backyard) residents ~ thinks that the City has too many trails that don't connect together and likes that the boardwalk connects the existing park trail to the 200th Street West trail ~ felt that a boardwalk is just a different way to build a trail The residents who spoke in opposition of a boardwalk being constructed provided the following comments: · said that staffhad told them that there would never be anything "built" behind their homes · felt that it would drive wildlife away from the wetland and would increase pollution · felt that the money spent on the boardwalk could be spent on other park amenities · have a safety concern with kids falling in the water from the boardwalk · they had paid a premium for the lots next to the wetland because it provided security, wildlife and nature and that building the boardwalk would decrease their property values · felt that there would be security and safety issues with allowing people from outside the neighborhood to come into the neighborhood · felt that the trail shown on the master plan on the north side of the wetland that connects to a future trail along Pilot Knob was the best location for a trail · felt that it should be illegal to build a boardwalk in a wetland and that it should be protected The residents who opposed the boardwalk construction across the wetland also provided a letter and petition with 60 signatures opposing the construction ofthe boardwalk across the wetland. I have enclosed a copy ofthe letter and petition with the signatures (Exhibit D). After receiving these comments, the PRAC then asked if there was support from residents for adding an observation deck to view the wetland. There didn't appear to be any opposition raised from residents about an observation deck being constructed. PRAC members then discussed the comments that were given by the residents and felt that there were two main issues that needed to be addressed before a vote could be taken. Staff was asked to do the following: 1. Find out what was said in the past by City staff to residents about what couldn't be built behind their homes. 2. Determine what the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) position is on building a boardwalk across a wetland and if there are any restrictions for a building a boardwalk across a wetland. The PRAC then voted unanimously to table the approval of the park master plan to the October 8 2003 meeting. . October 8 - PRAC members received information regarding issues that they had asked staff to follow up on. On the first issue about what was said by City staffto residents, it was discovered that City staff members who spoke with the residents about nothing being built behind their homes, felt that it was interpreted wrong. City staff members said that what they had meant was that no buildings or homes would be built behind the property owners and that they hadn't ever said that no trails or boardwalks would ever be built behind their homes. The second issue about DNR restrictions on building a boardwalk across the wetland was answered through an email from the DNR that came in a reply to several questions that were posed to the DNR by a homeowner who lives by Meadowview Park. I have attached a copy of the email for your reference (Exhibit E). The email basically stated that while the DNR does not encourage building boardwalks in a wetland, there is nothing illegal about building one in a wetland. In fact the DNR stated that they have no jurisdiction over this wetland and that it was up to the City to make a decision on whether or not it wants to build a boardwalk across the wetland. PRAC members then further discussed the park master plan and determined that it would like to add an observation deck to be shown on the south part of the peninsula that would be connected to the boardwalk. By unanimous vote, the PRAC recommended approval of a park master plan to the City Council that included adding an observation deck. . November I ih - The Consultant revises the park master plan to include an observation deck and it is brought before the City Council for approval (Exhibit F). BUDGET IMPACT As you can see by the attached spreadsheet (Exhibit G), the Consultant has estimated the costs associate with developing Meadowview Park. The funding source for the development of the park will be through the Park Improvement Fund. One issue identified by residents who oppose the boardwalk, was the cost to construct the boardwalk. Staff initiated some research on ways to keep the boardwalk's construction costs down. One promising lead has to do with working with the Minnesota Conservation Corp (Corp) and having them construct the boardwalk, which they can do at 1/3 ofthe cost of hiring a contractor to construct it. In exchange for their constructing the boardwalk, all the Corp asks is that the City provides a staff member to educate their workers about natural areas, open space and wetlands. In essence, the City would provide the materials for the boardwalk and a staff person to educate Corp workers and the Corp would provide the labor to construct the boardwalk. The Corp has worked extensively with the DNR constructing bridges and boardwalks in State Parks and State Wildlife Areas for the public to use and so have the experience to do this work for the City of Farmington. ACTION REQUESTED By motion approve the Meadowview Park master plan as shown in Exhibit F. Res ectfully Submitted, / f)J4J Randy Dis ad, Parks and Recreation Director ~)Lhi~'jt A We need your help in planning the future of your neighborhood park in the Charleswood Development e -^ @ ~.......................................................................................................................................................................................-- . . . . . . . . . . Neighborhood Input Open House Thursday, July 17, 2003 Stop in anytime between 4:30-6:30 pm . . ............................................................................................................................................................................................ We will incorporate your ideas at this open house into a master plan for review at the 2nd Neighborhood Open House in August. This is your park, we need your input!!! Location: Farmington Maintenance Facility 19650 Municipal Drive (large City building across Pilot Knob Road from the Charleswood Development) Questions? ? Call: Randy Distad Farmington Parks and Recreation Director (651) 463-1851 Bring your kids, neighbors and ideas! We will supply the tools for input. 'I'''''''t S'~~~1 ,....,."'k 'p~;.,;~ 9l.f* '1 i~f ~~~ ~ ~u~- IJ, e ~ W t? ~'x \~ ~)"i.t- B FUTURE RESIDENTIAL FUTURE RESIDENTIAL MASTER PLAN CONCEPT MEADOWVIEW PARK 2nd Public Open House Aug 14, 2003 Farmington, Minnesota NOTE: THIS MAP IS CONCEPTUAL ONLY AND REPRESENTS ONLY APPROXIMATE lOCATIONS OF PROPERTIES AND FACILITIES. KEY exisUng paved tra~ - - - - - proposed paved trail _ _ _ _ _ proposed boardwalk ....... proposed non-paved trail approx. park property ~ - c=J ~ . open space prairie plantings mowed turf wetland new tree existing trees . bench I!I Interpretive sign 8 park sign 8 bird house - exactlocaUon dependent on specleslhabttat (possible volunteer project) I o NORTQ 250ft I 500ft MASTER PLAN CONCEPT MEADOWVIEW PARK Master Plan Review September 4, 2003 Farmington, Minnesota NOTE: THIS MAP IS CONCEPTUAL ONLY AND REPRESENTS ONLY APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF PROPERTIES AND FACILITIES. KEY existing paved trail ----- proposed paved trail proposed boardwalk approx. park property r--- --J open space L........J mowed turf I:' >" . "l prairie plantings r<0YS<Xl L~j wetland , \- e new tree GJlJ~ I n'rr ~ existing trees El bench pEl picnic table G- griil [!] interpretive sign 1M] park sign @ bird house - exact location dependent on species/habitat (possible volunteer project) I o NORT~ , 250ft I 500ft c;~~/b~f b September 3, 2003 Mr. Randy Distad Farmington Parks and Recreation Director City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 Re: Proposed Trail/Boardwalk System in the Charleswood Addition - Meadowview Park Dear Mr. Distad: This letter is being written on behalf of all of the Charleswood Development ("Charleswood") residents who have signed the petition which can be found at the end of this letter. As you are aware, plans are currently underway to create Meadowview Park (lithe Park") in Charleswood. Residents from the Development have been invited to several Open Houses to discuss what items they would like to have in the Park. After the first Open House, a Draft Park Plan (lithe Plan") was developed and sent to all Charleswood residents. Since then, a revised version has been created and distributed to a few residents (See attached Exhibit A). This Plan contained various items such as a pavilion, benches, playground equipment, and a basketball court (as well as other items) - all of which are greatly needed in Charleswood. The Plan also calls for the addition of more trails - including trails in and around the wetland area, and a boardwalk in the wetland behind homes of residents. While additional trails are needed, trails through the wetlands areas should not be considered, as there are suitable alternatives which are beneficial to all concerned. The solution ("0ur Solution") that we propose is to place the trail along Pilot Knob Road instead of putting it through the wetlands. This would allow for the northern trails leading from 195th Street to be successfully connected to the trails that already exist on 200th Street, with minimal disturbance to the wetlands, existing wildlife, and Charleswood residents. (See attached Exhibit B). The following concerns have been compiled from group discussions between the residents whom have signed the attached petition regarding the trails in and around the wetland areas. A. Surprise Our main concern regarding the implementation of a trail system in and around the wetlands area is that our entire neighborhood was uninformed and misled as to the potential for the construction of trails in our backyards and adjacent protected areas. Residents were told by Farmington City Employees that no building or construction could or would ever take place in the wetland area - and likewise, residents could not build, construct or plant anything in the wetland easements of their properties. This information weighed heavily into the decision of these residents to pay premiums for quiet secluded lots. Had some residents known about a potential trail ANYWHERE behind their houses or in the Wetlands area, they may have chosen not to purchase these lots. Mr. Randy Distad September 3, 2003 Page 2 For some new homeowners, this is the second surprise since moving into the neighborhood. A handful of residents were not aware of the fact that a large portion of our rear yards would be encumbered by a wetland buffer easement. Others residing on 200th Street have been disappointed that a "small pedestrian path" has been increased in size to six (6) feet wide after having previously being told otherwise. In another case, a family who recently purchased a home on Evensong Avenue, specifically to get away from a trail in their back yard in another Farmington development, is now being told that they may get one in this back yard too. Had they known about the potential trail, the family probably would have not purchased the home - as they thought they were buying a private and quiet lot. The existing trail system adjacent to Charleswood 2nd Addition which connects to 195th Street was represented to the home builders and home buyers prior to the buyers' selection of building lots and the subsequent construction of their homes. These new homebuyers were given the chance to base the purchase of their new lot on all of the public appurtenances that would affect their property value. Likewise, if Our Solution is implemented, the trail along Pilot Knob Road will be noted in public records that will be accessible to those future homebuyers who are concerned about adjacent improvements that affect the value of their property. B. Safety and Access The proposed trail and boardwalk are set at an elevation that allows pedestrians to see directly and have access into the lower level of the adjacent lots. The existing trail system connecting to 195th Street and the proposed trail connecting to Pilot Knob Road are at an elevation far below the lower level of the adjacent houses and do not represent as much of a threat to privacy and/or security. With the proposed boardwalk going through the wetlands, residents are also concerned about children drowning - as the water depth in the wetlands in the spring and early summer is high. In addition, a trail through a secluded wetlands area would definitely be inviting for people with ill-will toward others - such as those committing assault, battery, rape, and false imprisonment. Our Solution would place the trail more out in the open and would be much less likely to have these types of occurrences - as the trail would be along a busy road. Residents in Charleswood along the wetlands areas have already seen vandalism and break- ins - without a trail being directly behind or near their houses. An unlit trail directly and/or indirectly behind the houses of residents would allow greater access into and out of Charleswood for additional crime sprees and vandalism. Mr. Randy Distad September 3, 2003 Page 3 C. Noise and other Pollution The proposed trail in and around the wetlands would obviously bring a 100% increase in pedestrian traffic, creating noise for the residents who purchased their lots not only for the seclusion - but also for the peace and quiet. An addition of a trail, especially a boardwalk (rattling across wood planking), would be a nuisance to these residents - as any type of traffic, whether it be walking, skateboarding, biking, motorized bikes, etc. would create noise. Noise pollution such as this would chase away existing wildlife while annoying nearby residents. In addition to the noise a trail/boardwalk would bring, allowing people access to the wetlands via trails will mean that a much higher increase of garbage and pollution will end up in the wetlands areas - destroying the natural habitat and injuring existing wildlife. Residents - who again, paid a premium for the peace and quiet of their lots, would be left picking up the garbage of trail- goers. These residents are already cleaning up bagfuls of garbage in the wetlands areas behind their houses - and there isn't even trail access. D. Destruction of Habitat Residents purchased lots directly on the wetland to not only enjoy the privacy and quiet - but also to enjoy Mother Nature and wildlife. There are very few nights where residents do not see any wildlife - which range from Ducks, Geese, Egrets, Pheasants, Fox, and Deer. Creating paths, boardwalks, and any other structures in the wetland will not only destroy this natural area - but it will devoid the wetland from virtually any and all wildlife. The currently proposed pathway places the trail through a group of trees where pheasants are known to nest. In addition, residents enjoy the "direct access" that the current wildlife has to our backyards. The proposed boardwalk would create an unwanted, artificial barrier - preventing wildlife from using the entire wetland and surrounding areas. Destruction of natural wetlands and nesting areas and preventing wildlife from utilizing the natural areas would be a tragic loss for the city of Farmington. As also stated above, any pedestrian traffic in the wetlands area will mean an increase in the garbage found in the wetlands - which will destroy the habitat and harm existing wildlife. What we fail to understand is why the City of Farmington would want to disrupt and destroy what little existing habitat there is for wildlife. With all of the residential and commercial construction currently taking place in Farmington - and the expansion that is planned in the future - which will further destroy existing habitat, why not preserve and NOT disrupt the wetlands areas in developments such as Charleswood? Mr. Randy Distad September 3, 2003 Page 4 E. Wetland Island Residents are also concerned, and rightly so, about the foul play that will (and already has been occurring without trail access) occur in the wetland island ("the Island") area that is proposed to have its shrubs and small trees removed for the installation of trails. This Island area will be void of any security lighting. This Island is not close to any residential street and its interior is screened visually and acoustically by a perimeter of trees. This Island is a breeding ground for those with various criminal intentions and permitting direct access to it would be a serious safety hazard. Any lighting placed on the Island would cause further invasion to the natural area and wildlife. It will also detract from the natural setting that residents expected when purchasing their lots. Residents along the wetland area have already experienced "flashlighters" at night - people in the wetland island area flashing flashlights into the windows of houses along the wetlands. Our Solution As noted above, we are not opposed to additional pedestrian trails in Charleswood in general - and agree that a connection from 19Sth Street to 200th Street does make sense for purposes of pedestrian travel in the master plan. Our Solution is to connect the northerly trails adjacent to Charleswood 2nd Addition to 200th Street via Pilot Knob Road. By doing this, the City of Farmington will successfully make the trail connection without affecting (and surprising) existing homeowners (there currently are no homeowners in this area). Our Solution consists of adding trails adjacent to future lots, along existing public roadways and connecting to the existing trails already installed along 200th Street. Research into Dakota County's Park and Recreation Plans, as well as the City of Farmington's Comprehensive Plan, reveals that Our Solution better meets the five (S) goals set by Dakota County in the Parks and Open Space Policy Plan than the current City Park & Rec Plan. 1. Assess Public Expectations for Parks and Open Space Opportunities Our Solution respects the needs of current residents and affected homeowners while still allowing functional access to Farmington trails. The Plan goes too far by putting in too many trails - and does not respect current residents, affected homeowners, or Mother Nature. 2. Acquire and Develop a Premier System of Parks and Trails Our Solution (creating a trail along Pilot Knob Road) allows for easier completion of the planned trail corridor on the west and east sides of Pilot Knob Road (see page 120 of comprehensive Park and Recreations plan). Mr. Randy Distad September 3, 2003 Page 5 3. Provide a Safe and Well-Maintained Park System Our Solution is safer as it does not place the trail fully in secluded areas, keeps the trail out of the wetlands areas (which are filled with water) and preserves Mother Nature by keeping garbage out of the wetlands areas - which are difficult to maintain. 4. Preserve and Restore Natural Resources within the Parks Our Solution is not at all invasive to existing protected wetlands and wildlife. The Plan would destroy this natural habitat, chase off and/or kill existing wildlife, bring noise and pollution to the surrounding community - which would result in a tragic loss for the City of Farmington. 5. Provide Outdoor Education and Recreation for Park Visitors Our Solution would result in monies saved (by deleting the proposed trails, boardwalk and related construction in and through the wetland area) - monies which could be reallocated to the park area - for additional equipment, pavilions, or for further recreation and education in Meadowview Park (See Attached Exhibit C). As you can see, Our Solution is a win-win for everyone involved, as it provides needed trail access for all Farmington residents, preserves the existing designated wetland areas, and allows property owners adjacent to the wetland to enjoy the privacy and quiet that they paid for. Please provide a copy of this letter and petition to all members of the Parks Commission in advance of the September 10, 2003, meeting to be held at 6:00 p.m. at Farmington City Hall. We thank you for your cooperation and consideration. Sincerely, Charleswood Development Residents Petition The following Farmington residents have read the attached letter addressed to Randy Distad and agree with the following declaration: "I SUPPORT THE PETITION AGAINST THE INSTALLATION OF A TRAIL AND/OR BOARDWALK FROM THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED PLAYGROUND AND OPEN FIELD TO A POINT ON 200TH STREET TO THE SOUTH THROUGH A PROTECTED WETLAND AREA FOR ALL OR SOME OF THE REASONS NOTED ABOVE." 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) 18) SIGNATURE uONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE ADDRESS /qqei-} l7vel'l9J:y ~UU Iii S 1 fv'~}\l ~N(; Mf;NtJb Iqq~,\ ,c l/~\'~ .A-V-It./l LI..L 1111/1 G-!A7 k, ~ d- VJ.fM~1 1JrVe. \,99 ??<f' -tueA/So^":? /)VI!-, ~fhh1JNjNJ ...J14t.f7- lEv<<=...., '$6&... 4","<- v 177ft) t- -J fl^ {;~e.J6 tA./~- ~7'7 .~J1. 51- uJ. S1S'3 OlOO1i St. W t)'~3 L?f:;D~+ LV ~..,o dobih. ~54-vJ 5'1(P1j ~rtJ1!l SI hJ 51lPl 2($)>(h S~-ee:t vJ 577e ~~ Jt ~ . y ) 7 g- JO<.J+t.;(- 0 ~)f- I q 7)" 7 Gv,,,,,-'lo'J ~ ) 20) 21) 22) 23) 25) 26) 27) 28) 29) JQ9.;l-7 6rrft"M3 Auc.. l 0. Or '3 s- 2v~ <SorL<j A..\.}e , L;~3-5^~~ 4~ J ,-E "" (' .' . J q q SG~7 f' (\{ t I ?) ''is f+v'f ft.. '^f I'\<\':>c.. "''''c.'''''$~'',,, ~v'f. 11CJCJ<'" L-=~.a)7{ .~( I - / 9Jl5 Ey/tJt'T ']/ZaU_ M?5 ~/:SJa- 4n-e.- / qq 7.5 fy r ~ 1(/ tv LL1. J<...I' ./ 597 & ,'J.rJ4 Sf _ w. 5t182.. loer.\. l-+- vJ. SZ1 Dv - dCV'TV' <; f v0 S, \" 'd-~~~\-.... ~\.' \j..), 5"<1 JY ~oo ~ ~ -\- LA...> 3" 7 S I )oot-h 5'r IV /?t:ll ~ ~ , (r7<gt{" txfan T reA 'C- s !faD eoo +n 6+. 0.:), Petition following Farmington residents have read the attached letter addressed to Randy Distad and agree with the following declaration: "I SUPPORT THE PETITION AGAINST THE INSTAllATION OF A TRAIL AND/OR BOARDWALK FROM THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED PLAYGROUND AND OPEN FIELD TO A POINT ON 200TH STREET TO THE SOUTH THROUGH A PROTECTED WETLAND AREA FOR AllOR SOME OF THE REASONS NOTED ABOVE." lf9) 50) 5\~ 5:J-.HJ 5~ 54~) 5S1Jl 5(P~ 5J+vf) 86 18) 19) 0) 21) CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE LJ 1) 4-2) 13) af4) tfS) Y.6) Lt7) R a. duY.- O~.5"fvdt-0 fl:-/c f~;~S2--/ t~(5l~~ ADDRESS 5q fr r4!J()~S1-. kJ, ~t(' r;?/)/j1J,~ W. 59Vo 2ooTh.sf W SCfl( 0 ~1JIfl' -sf. LV. S-g(~ ~~ Sf W eel '2 -h.-t. .1 1 '..=> ] 7206 SJ- vU ~7C7 6 U(J k :>-b~ t;'&ZO 2oo-ft ~ \ ;,,6J ~(f~,V ft/-e /09f) 8" Ex: co r~ 7n::-" L ./ SO 0 L{ 'ZOO'}",- s-'f-. 0 5<564 Ctr)1{, ~ lAJ . r; b ~ 7 20rJ111 sf w/ " 5" (f) or b Z-bb~ 5r. LJ-), ~Cjy- 7~7:J&- 79-. w~ .~cn /Lv6R ST- W /997'" ~~r ~<( ~k, 9) ;)-f) 01* SI LV , E)Lh,b",+ E- Hi Randy- Attached is the initial response I received from a Pat Lynch, the DNR Area Hydrologist. I plan on contacting the local DNR Area Wildlife Office that she references as well. Please pass this on to the Commission members - as it states that there will likely be some impacts on hydrology and wildlife - and that the DNR tries to avoid boardwalks in wetlands if at all possible. Thanks Much, Michelle Meschke 19984 Evensong Avenue Farmington, MN 55024 (h) 651-460-4152 (w) 651-688-4747 -----Original Message----- From: Pat Lynch fmailto:pat.lvnch@dnr.state.mn.usl Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 1 :39 PM To: Meschke,Michelle M Cc: Diana Regenscheid; Wayne Barstad Subject: Re: City of Farmington Wetlands - Charleswood Development I've been asked to respond. I spoke with a neighbor of yours yesterday who had similar questions/concerns. For specific questions about wildlife impacts, I suggest you contact the DNR Area Wildlife office at 952-492-5266. Q: The Consultant who designed current draft of the park plan states that there will be absolutely NO disturbance to the existing wetlands and wildlife, and that the DNR encourages boardwalks to be put through wetland areas. A: yes, there will likely be some impacts. Vegetation beneath the boardwalk will be altered due to the loss of sunlight. There would also be posts, I assume, driven in to the bed of the wetland. DNR preference is for trails to avoid wetlands (go around) if possible. If not, a boardwalk is less intrusive than a traditional earthen fill trail section through the wetland. A boardwalk would not alter the hydrology as an earthen fill trail section would. Also, reptiles and amphibians could easily migrate from one side to another of a boardwalk much easier than a fill section. It is common for trails to be located near, sometimes in, wetlands, including observation decks and interpretive signage. Q: What is your position on Boardwalks in wetlands areas in general - and what is your position on Boardwalks in particularly small wetlands areas that sustain a large amount of wildlife? (deer, fox, ducks, egrets, geese, pheasants, etc.) A: again, preference is avoidance. they have been permitted in some instances, for public purposes, and where impacts cannot be avoided. They can help to provide educational experiences. they can fragment wetlands and alter the movement of wildlife. Q: Do Boardwalks and other paved trails THROUGH a wetland disturb existing wildlife? We have been told that the particular boardwalk that is proposed to go through the wetland will prohibit large mammals from crossing it - as there will be tall railings.......... which will render about 1/2 of the wetland inaccessible to large mammals. What information/documentation do you have to support your position? A: i defer to the area wildlife manager (copied on this e-mail) Q: Do Boardwalks and other paved trails THROUGH a wetland disturb the wetlands? (particularly wetlands small in size?) How does the initial building process affect the wetlands......drilling anchors, etc. A: yes, boardwalks and paved trails disturb wetlands. the degree of impact depends on many factors like wetland type and size, hydrology, crossing type (fill versus boardwalk), wetland location in the landscape, timing of construction, presence or absence of rare, threatened, or endangered species, etc. initial process relocates some wildlife, some permanently and some temporarily. The most obvious impact is the affect of equipment and the footprint of the crossing replacing wetland vegetation. i have experience in observing many of these types of projects over the past 10+ years. Q: Does a City have to permission from you, the DNR, to "monkey around" with the wetlands? What is the process? A: city does not need DNR review or approval for a boardwalk or other trail in the subject wetland at Charleswood. DNR has no jurisdiction over the wetland. The city would only need to contact DNR for a permit if the trail/boardwalk crosses the tributary stream. Any wetland fill or drain impact would be at the discretion of the city. Q: Is there any oversight of the City by the DNR.... or can the City pretty much do whatever it wants, even though there is no good reason for doing so - and its citizens don't want it? A: DNR oversight of the city is limited to 6 wetlands and several stream miles in Farmington. The city cannot do whatever it wants. There are other wetland laws/rules that it must adhere to. The city itself is responsible for administering those laws/rules. If the citizens don't want it, it is recommended they make it clear to the city. Ultimately, it is the city council who makes the decisions. Again, I suggest you contact DNR Wildlife Manager Diana Regenschied for specific questions about possible impacts to wildlife. ~ ---.195THSTREET WEST (COUNTY ROAD 64 ) TRAIL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Z" , / ^-- ~ 1 - J -,- --r-- --.,-_ -:::p.~-----,::- -L ^' " K I I tutu r~ tral . '.., . connect~on ': t/l / I ....,.7 -..( rJ-"" '-iZ MASTER PLAN CONCEPT MEADOWVIEW PARK Master Plan Review November 3, 2003 Farmington, Minnesota NOTE: THIS MAP IS CONCEPTUAL ONLY AND REPRESENTS ONLY APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF PROPERTIES AND FACILITIES. KEY existing paved trail ----- proposed paved trail ----- proposed boardwalk _11_11_ approx. park property r- ~ open space L ---. mowed turf L-...I ~h i 6-d-- F CJ prairie plantings ~1 wetland ~,-,._ /J . new tree existing trees 13 bench P 8 picnic table Go grill rn interpretive sign ~ park sign 9 bird house - exact location dependent on species/habitat (possible volunteer project) I o NORT~ , 250ft I 500ft \ r --- \ \ FUTURE \ DEVELOPMENT \ I- I L- \ f- i- f" I l- n 0 i c z r- ~ ='II 0 Jo CJ i w I .: MEADOWVIEW PARK City of Farmington, Minnesota Prepared By: Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. 11.03.03 PRELIMINARY Concept Cost Estimate f?;tJ1'~'lt &- Description A Trails 1.00 8ft Bituminous trail * 2.00 8ft Boardwalk 3.00 6ft concrete walk 4.00 Overlook Unit Unit Cost Quantity Totals LF $ 22.00 822.00 $ 18,084.00 LF $ 120.00 645.00 $ 77,400.00 SF $ 5.00 690.00 $ 3,450.00 LS $ 7,200.00 1.00 $ 7,200.00 Subtotal Trails $ 106,134.00 EA $ 15,000.00 1.00 $ 15,000.00 LS $ 35,000.00 1.00 $ 35,000.00 LF $ 20.00 360.00 $ 7,200.00 LS $ 6,000.00 1.00 $ 6,000.00 LS $ 3,000.00 1.00 $ 3,000.00 EA $ 800.00 3.00 $ 2,400.00 EA $ 500.00 9.00 $ 4,500.00 EA $ 300.00 1.00 $ 300.00 B Amenities 1.00 Pavilion 2.00 Play equipment, safety mulch, installation 3.00 Playequipment conc. containor edger 4.00 1/2 BB court 5.00 Backstop 6.00 Picnic Tables 7.00 Benches 8.00 Grills Park signage Interpretive signs Bird Houses (volunteer project) C LANDSCAPING 1.00 Trees, various sizes/ave cost 2.00 Prairie 3.00 Turf Subtotal Amenities $ 73,400.00 EA $ 125.00 60.00 $ 7,500.00 LS $ 10,000.00 1.00 $ 10,000.00 LS $ 3,000.00 1.00 $ 3,000.00 Subtotal Landscaping $ 20,500.00 1$ 200,034.00 I * Does not include the 1340 LF of bituminous trail link to Pilot Knob Rd assumed it will be developed as part of future residential development. CostEst11/3/2003 Page 1 City of Farmington 325 Oak Street, Farmington, MN 55024 (651) 463-7111 Fax (651) 463-2591 www.ci.farmington.mn.us /I~ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers and Interim City AdmilriSlIaro~ FROM: Ken Kuchera, Fire Chief SUBJECT: Capital Outlay - Fire Department DATE: November 17,2003 INTRODUCTION The Fire Department is planning to purchase a tanker fire truck. DISCUSSION The bids received for this truck were rejected at the October 6, 2003 Council Meeting. The attached revised document includes the information for contractors and bid specifications for a new tanker fire truck. This document was completed by the Fire Department New Vehicle Committee. The process started prior to the first of the year with many hours of time delegated to its completion. BUDGET IMPACT Approved in the 2003 C.I.P. ACTION REOUESTED For information only. Respectfully submitted, ~.K~_ Ken Kuchera Fire Chief ~k ~., ..;.-.1 t i Farmington Fire Department Farmington, Minnesota Information for Contractors Sealed proposals are desired from reputable manufacturers of automotive fire apparatus in accordance with these specifications and with the advertisement, a copy of which is attached, for the piece of apparatus as follows: i r One Fire Truck tanker, m1ll1mum 3000 gallon booster tank and all other appurtenances III accordance with the following: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Each bid must be accompanied by bidders accurate written and detailed specifications covering the apparatus and equipment which it is proposing to furnish and to which the apparatus furnished under the Contract must conform. It is the intent of these specifications to cover the furnishing and delivering to the city, complete apparatus equipped as specified. Minor details of construction and materials where not otherwise specified are left to the discretion of the Contractor who shall be solely responsible for the design and construction of all features. Such details and other construction not specifically covered herein or not at variance with these specifications should conform with specifications as outlined in Booklet No. 1901 dated February 1996, Booklet No. 1142 dated August 2001 and any changes or additions made to these specifications since that date, by the National Fire Protection Association and approved by the International Association of Fire Chiefs. The apparatus shall further conform to all tlle standards of the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) 121. ~ I~ 1 All specifications herein contained are considered as minimum. Some items have been specified by brand name or model number. These have been carefully selected because of their reliability, compatibility with present equipment, and local availability of parts. The apparatus being furnished under these specifications shall conform to all of the requirements of all Chapters of Booklet 1901 and 1142. Any test equipment required or expense incurred for the Certification Tests shall be borne by the Contractor supplying this equipment. Exceptions taken in areas other than listed above must be listed on a separate page and marked "Exceptions to Specifications". Every exception taken shall be listed as to page number and paragraph. Failure to provide the required exception list Witll tlle bid proposal will be cause for rejection of that proposal. I. ;<r '1 ,j RELIABILITY OF CONTRACTOR: Contractor shall furnish satisfactory evidence that he or she has the ability to design, engineer, and construct the apparatus specified and shall state the location of the factory where tlle apparatus is to be manufactured and tested. A minimum of 10 (ten) references of Fire Departments who have purchased similar apparatus within the last 3 (three) years is to be provided with the Bidders proposal. List shall include customer's name, address, date place in service, and a current contact with phone number. ~ I Proposals will only be considered which are submitted by full time fire apparatus manufacturers who are current members of the Fire Apparatus Manufacturers Association (F AMA). F AMA is a non-profit organization designed to keep fire truck manufacturers abreast with the latest technologies and governing standards, and to act as a liaison to the IAPC and NFP A. Bidder shall include evidence of their affiliation to F AMA in the bid proposal. 1 4 WARRANTY: As a condition of the acceptance of the apparatus, the Contractor shall furnish the following Warranty: We warrant each new piece of Fire and Rescue Apparatus to be free from defects in material and workmanship under normal use and service. Our obligation under this warranty is to provide unlimited "Bumper - to - Bumper" coverage. All parts and labor required to place the apparatus back into standard working order is the responsibility of the Bidder. The Bidder shall have or designate an authorized repair facility within a ISO-mile radius of the Fire Department. Tllis warranty shall cover a period of time of one (1) year beginning at the time that the department takes delivery of the unit. The water tank (Booster Tank) is to carry the Tank Manufacturer's unconditional 20 year Warranty against any leaks or destruction due to cracks or corrosion caused by normal use of the same. This warranty extension required the yearly examination of the tank interior, with irregularities being reported to the factory immediately. The factory will repair or replace, as the Company may elect, the tank and/or its components. This warranty will not apply: 1. To normal maintenance services or adjustments. 2. To any vehicle wllich shall have been repaired or altered outside of our factory in any way so as in our judgement, to affect its stability, nor which has been subject to misuse, negligence, or accident, nor to any vehicle made by us which shall have been operated at a speed exceeding the factory rated speed, or loaded beyond the factory rated load capacity. 3. To commercial chassis and associated equipment furnished witll chassis, signaling devices, generators, batteries, or other trade accessories in as much as they are usually warranted separately by their respective manufacturers. This warranty is in lieu of all otller warranties, expressed or implied all other representations to the original city and all other obligations or liabilities, including liabilities for incidental or consequential damage on the part of the Company. We neither assume any other warranty or liability on the Company's behalf unless made or assumed in writing by tlle Company. SERVICE INSPECTION: After delivery the contractor shall arrange for a factory service representative to perform two (2) complete service inspections at a period of time six (6) months and at eleven (11) months from the date of delivery. RESPONSffiILITY OF CITY: It shall be the responsibility of the city to specify the details of the apparatus, its required performance, the maximum number of firefighters to ride on the apparatus, and any hose, ground ladders, or equipment it will be required to carry which exceed the minimum requirements of this standard CARRYING CAPACITY: The GA WR, and GCWR or GVWR of the chassis shall be adequate to carry the fully equipped apparatus including full water and other tanks, the specified hose load, unequipped personnel weight (The lmequipped personnel weight shall be calculated at 200 lb. per person times the maximum number of persons to ride the apparatus as specified.), ground ladders, and a miscellaneous equipment allowance of 2000 lbs. FAILURE TO MEET 'JESTS: In the event that the apparatus fails to meet the acceptance test requirements of the initial trial, a second trial may be made at the option of the Contractor, within thirty days of the date 2 of the first trials. Such trials shall be final and conclusive and failure to comply with these requirements shall be cause for rejection. Failure to make such changes as the city may consider necessary to conform to any clause of the specifications within thirty days after notice is given to the Contractor to make such changes shall also be cause for rejection of the apparatus. ALTITUDE REQUIREMENTS: The apparatus shall be designed to meet the specified rating at 2000 feet altitude above sea level. ACCEPTANCE JESTS AND REQUIREMENTS: Acceptance tests on behalf of the city shall be prescribed and conducted prior to delivery or within 10 days after delivery, by the manufacturer's representative in the presence of such person or persons as the city may designate in the requirements for delivery. The apparatus, loaded with a full complement of hose and personnel, a full water tank, and equipment as specified in "Carrying Capacity" on this page, shall meet the tests on paved roads, dry and in good condition. Tests shall be on the basis of two runs; in opposite directions over the same route, the engine not operating in excess of the manufacturer's maximum RPM. The apparatus, when fully equipped and loaded per "Carrying Capacity", shall be capable of the following performance on dry/leveVpaved roads in good condition: Under full load from a standing start the vehicle shall attain a true speed of 35 :MPH within 25 seconds. From a steady speed of 15 :MPH the vehicle shall accelerate to 35 :MPH within 30 seconds (without moving gear selector). The vehicle shall attain a minimum top speed of 50:MPH. The apparatus shall be able to maintain a speed of at least 20 :MPH on any grade up to and including 6%. Specified acceleration tests shall consist of two runs in opposite directions over the same route. The service brakes shall bring the fully laden apparatus to a complete stop from an initial speed of 20 :MPH in a distance not exceeding 35 ft., on a substantially hard level surface road free from loose material, oil, or grease. Manufacturers pump test and Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., Certification tests shall be conducted by the apparatus manufacturer in accordance with requirements ofNFPA #1901. A Certificate of Testing shall be furnished to the City, both for the Manufacturer's Preliminary Tests and the ULI Certification Tests. Responsibility for the apparatus and equipment shall remain with the contractor until acceptance by the city. The Manufacturer must supply at the time of deliver, at least two copies of: 1. Engine manufacturer's certified brake horsepower curve showing the maximum no-load governed speed. 2. Manufacturer's record of pumper construction details, per NFP A 1901. 3. Manufacturer's Run-In Certification with preliminary test results. 4. Pump Manufacturer's Certification of Hydrostatic Tests. 5. Pump Manufacturer's Certification of Pump Test Results. 6. The Certification of InspectionlTest of Fire Department Pumper by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. 7. Weight documents from a certified scale showing actual loading on the left front axle, right front axle, left rear axle, right rear axle, and overall vehicle (with the water tank full but without personnel, equipment, and hose) shall be supplied with the completed vehicle to determine compliance with NFPA section 3-1. 8. At least two copies of the complete operation and maintenance manual covering the completed apparatus as delivered including, emergency lighting and sirens, portable fire pump, portable or built-in generator, or other furnished accessories. 3 9. Wiring diagrams of electrical systems, instc1.lled by apparatus manufacturer. Diagrams must be "vehicle specific", describing all electrical functions. 10. All production drawings of individual fabricated apparatus body and tank parts. Prints shall include all dimensionc1.l information and material lists to allow reproduction of any body part by a qualified fabrication shop. 11. A "Delivery Manual", consisting of a 3-ring notebook type binder with reference tabs for each section, shall be furnished to include the following items: individual component manufacturer instructions and parts manuals, warranty forms for body, warranty forms for all major components, warranty instructions and format to be sued for compliance with warranty obligations, routine service forms/publications, and technical publications or training guide for major components. 12. A certified noise level test shall be performed on the specified vehicle with noise level test results provided to the city. Test is to be conducted on the actual apparatus being provided by the bidder not results of a like apparatus. Testing procedures are to be c1S per NFP A recommendations. NOTE: Exceptions to the above requirements will not be acceptable. The contractor shall affix a pennanent plate in the driver's compartment specifying the quantity and type of the following fluid use in the vehicle: 1. Engine Oil 2. Engine Coolant 3. Transmission Fluid 4. Drive Axle Lubrication Fluid 5. Air Conditioner Refrigerant 6. Power Steering Lubricant 7. Equipment Rack Fluid All nameplates and instructions plates shall be metal or plastic with the information permanently engraved, stamped. or etched thereon. Metal nameplates to be installed with plated screws. All nameplates to be mounted in a conspicuous place. DESIGN: The design of the equipment shall be in accordance with the best engineering practices. The equipment design and accessory installation shall permit accessibility for use, maintenance, and service. All components and assemblies shall be free of hazardous protrusions, sharp edges, cracks or other elements which might cause injury to personnel or equipment. NOTE: Where "nibbled" or non-continuous cutting methods are used to machine the body material, all edges shall be reworked/machine smoothed for injury prevention and appearance reasons. All oil, hydraulic, and air tubing lines and electrical wiring shall be located in protective positions, properly attached to the frame or body stmcture and shall have protective loom or grommets at each point where they pass through structural members. Parts and components shall be located or positioned for rapid and simple inspection and recognition of excessive wear or potential failure. Whenever functional layout of operating components detennines that physical or visual interference between items cannot be avoided, the item predicted to require the most maintenance shall be located for the best accessibility. Cover plates which must be removed for component adjustment or part removal will be equipped with disconnect fastenings or hinged panels. 4 Drains, filler plugs, grease fittings, hydraulic lines, bleeders and check points for all components will located so that they are readily accessible and do not require special tools for proper servicing. Design practices shall minimize the number of tools required for maintenance. All components shall be designed and protected so that heavy rain or other adverse weather conditions will not interfere with normal servicing or operation. ..! All aluminum used in construction of apparatus, manufacture shall state grade and thickness. All specified 4-way aluminum tradeplate shall be "polished" treadbrite or equal. All specified fasteners shall be zinc plated button socket head cap screws or Phillips head stainless steel cap screws. All nut fasteners to be, SAE Grade 5 or greater, self-locking, designed to prevent loosening. No substitute will be acceptable to stainless steel where specified. Since all custom manufacturers have the ability to shear, brake, weld, and drill holes, as these specifications require - all basic requirements must be complied with. Aluminum can not be substituted for any specified stainless fabrications. Welding shall not be employed ill the assembly of the apparatus in a manner that shall prevent the ready removal of any component part for service or repair. All steel welding shall follow American Welding Society D 1.1-96 recommendations for structural steel welding. All aluminum welding shall be done to American Welding Society and ANSI D 1.2-96 requirements for structural welding of aluminum. Flux core arc welding shall use alloy rods, type 7000, American Welding Society standards A5.20-E70Tl. The manufacturer is required to have an American Welding Society certified welding inspector in plant during working hours to monitor weld quality. All electrical wiring will be of a multicolor-coded type, or other wise marked along the entire length of wire. No exception will be made for single colored wire marked on simply marked on either end. Prior to the construction of tiris velricle, various chassis attachments such as: battery boxes, air reservoirs. air dryers, fuel separators, mufflers, tailpipes, filters, fuel tanks, and otiler bolt-on frame attachments shall be removed and relocated to pennit full utilization of the chassis for equipment compartments. All above specified components, where possible, shall be mounted on inside of chassis frame rails thus providing maximum compartmentation. Prior to assembly and inst:l.llation of apparatus body components, the chassis frame, springs, a;des, steering anns, and entire body subframe assembly shall be vinyl washed primed, zinc chromate primed, and acrylic urethane painted to match exterior body color. To insure the City a source of service and parts over a 20 year anticipated life of the apparatus; the Bidder shall provide factory authorized service and testing facilities. This same facility must stock a complete line of all fire fighting equipment and parts for this apparatus. Records as to the purchase source for all auxiliary components of the specified apparatus shall be available to City upon request. TIns purchase information shall include manufacturer name, model number, authorized distributor, current part number, and special installation instructions. The Truck Committee members, up to 4 (four), shall be advised as to the date of the following phases of construction: Pre-Construction (prior to bending of met:l.l), Pre-Paint (final design/equipment layout), and Pre-Delivery. Truck Committee members reserve the right to travel to the factory, at the City of Farmington's expense, during these stages of construction. Bidder shall arrange for the above specified "Pre-Construction Conference", at which time all final designs and equipment mounting locations will be approved. Any changes to original proposal specifications, as approved at the Pre-Construction Conference, shall be noted on a "revised specification", provided by the manufacturer and distributed to Truck Committee members within five working days after Pre- Construction Conference. 5 APPARATUS SIZE: Highest point of apparatus shall not exceed 126 inches; total overall width of apparatus shall not exceed 10 1 inches. PROPOSALS: All bids must be signed by an authorized employee or representative of the manufacturer of the apparatus being proposed. Bids signed by a sales representative shall be declared informal and will be rejected. Each bid must give the full business address of the manufacture. Bids by a Corporation must be authorized and signed by the President. Same signature is required on specified Bid Bond. A Bidders Bond in the amount of 10% shall be furnished with each Bid Proposal, written by a Corporate Surety, payable to the City of Farmington. This Bond is to insure that the Bidder will enter into a contract for the equipment as per the following detailed specifications with NO EXCEPTIONS. Bidder shall specify number of working days for competed delivery of the apparatus, from date of bid acceptance. In order to eliminate interest and handling charges for the chassis portion, the customer will "pre-pay" the chassis portion upon its receipt at Bidder's factory. This amount is to be identified in the Bid Proposal. All Bidders shall be required to det:1il, in exact terms, the payment for said apparatus in their own "Fire Apparatus Proposal". Bids may be withdrawn by certified mail or telegraphic request from Bidders prior to the time fixed for opening. Negligence on the part of the Bidder in preparing the Bid Proposal confers no right for the withdrawal for the Bid after it has been opened. No Bidder may withdraw their Bid after the time set for the opening thereof. All Bidders shall furnish complete "Proposal Specifications", printed on their own stationery; copies of reproductions of these "advertised specifications" can only be used as an attachment to the proposal specifications, for comparison/compliance purposes. All Bid Proposal Specifications must be in the same sequence as these Advertised Specifications for ease of comparison. Any bid not in this sequence will be disregarded and rejected. Each Bid shall be submitted with a complete detailed print of the apparatus as is specified. The print shall be to scale, minimum of 1 inch = 1 0 inches, of the exact apparatus being proposed, and not a stock print of a similar unit The print shall have complete views of the left side with chassis cab, right body side with chassis cab, rear of body, and top view of the chassis cab area. The print shall include all of the following items: compartmentation with dimensions and door hardware, hosebed arrangement with dividers and grating material, emergency and standard lighting fixtures and location, all exterior 4-way treadplate pattern areas, pump panel lay out with gauges and pump controls, discharge outlets-location and cap style, cross-lay hosebeds with roller assemblies, suction inlets - location and cap style, hand rails and location, tow hook and cubby, hand operated 12v quartz 1,000,000 candle power flood light and location in cab, body access steps and location, interior compartment shelving and location, roll-out trays, water tank with sump/fill tower/interior baffles, and otller necessary detailed features so as to provide a "picture" for the proposed apparatus. All submitted drawings shall become a part of the proposal, failure to submit the required prints, with the sealed bid proposal, will cause immediate rejection of the proposal and bid. Quality of drawing will be considered in determination of most qualified Bidder. All dimensions are subject to a +/- 1/4 inch tolerance. It is the intent of the City of Fannington to receive proposals on equipment/apparatus meeting tlle attached detailed specifications and all submittals or bid proposals shall so state on the Bid Proposal Page, followed by a detailed "Letter of Exceptions" listing the areas of non-compliance and equipment being submitted. The City of Farmington reserves tlle right to reject any or all Bid Proposals.aDd parshase t;he ElEltii13Hleat it ,refeRi. 6 Each Bidder shall be prepared, if so requested by the City, to present evidence of his design experience! capabilities and manufacturing ability to cany out the tenus of the contract The materials specified are considered absolute minimum. Exceptions will not be accepted or permitted since all raw materials of the specified type are available to all manufacturers. Since all custom manufactures have the ability to shear, brake, and weld, as these specifications require - all basic requirements must be complied with. No exceptions will be taken for stainless steel material and specified thickness, since it is available to all fire/rescue manufactures. Award of Contract: The contract will be awarded, as soon as possible to the most "Responsible Bidder", provided their Bid is reasonable and it is in the best interest of the City of Farmington. The city reserves the right to waive any formality in bids received once such waiver is in the interest of the City. Also to accept any item in the Bid, found to be of superior quality or otherwise preferred by the City. The competency and responsibility of Bidders along with content of proposal specifications and accuracy/quality of proposal drawing will be considered in making the award The City reserves the right . to reject any or all Bids when such rejection is in the interest of the City and to reject the Bid of a Bidder who, in the judgement of the City, is not in a position to perform the contract The City does not, in any way, obligate itself to accept ~be 16';,513t 61' any Bid. Prior to award, the Bidder will meet with purchasing officials (at City's location) to~ personally discuss all facets of these specifications to insure a complete and satisfactory understanding of the City's specifications and the Bidder's proposal. The only person authorized to approve change orders that result in a change that will increase the cost of the apparatus is the City Administrator, upon consultation with the Fire Chief. Delivery: The maximum period for construction of the vehicle shall not exceed 180 working days and shall include the time required for delivery of the chassis to the apparatus manufacturer. The contractor will not be held liable for delay of delivery caused by accidents, strikes, floods or other events not subject to their control. The completed unit shall be delivered to the city with full instructions provided to Fire Department personnel on operation, care, and maintenance of apparatus at the city's fire station. Payment for the apparatus shall be made within five (5) working days of delivery. The apparatus will not be left at city location without full acceptance or prior agreement between the City and the Bidder. Final delivery price shall not include any Local, State, or Federal taxes. The Bidder shall not be liable for any State or Federally mandated tax or program after the sale of this apparatus. Apparatus, to insure proper break in of all components while still under warranty, shall be delivered under its own power, rail or truck freight shall not be accepted. Delivery Engineer: Delivery shall be performed by a factory trained Delivery Engineer only employed by the Bidder. Delivery Engineer shall remain in the community a reasonable time for training of Fire Department personnel and making normal adjustments. Delivery shall include, but not limited to: A. Transportation of the fire apparatus. B. Conducting day and/or evening classes for instruction of Fire Department persOlmel and Drivers for operation. 7 The Delivery Engineer shall be factory trained, fully capable of conducting informative classes on the complete operation of the vehicle. This means familiarity with engine, running gear, and transmission, driving skill, as well as lkwdling of pmnp equipment and all controls. The Delivery Engineer shall set delivery and instruction schedule with the person appointed by City, recognizing the need for either daytime or evening classes. Advance notice of at least one (1) week will be given, advising the specific day on which the new apparatus will arrive. The Bidder shall make all housing arrangements for the Delivery Engineer and provide him/her with transportation to and from lodging and nearest available airport or rental agency (if it applies). The costs of all housing and other living expenses are to be paid by the Delivery Engineer. 8 Farmington Fire Department Farmington, Minnesota Tanker Truck Specifications Minimum 3,OOO-Gallon Vacuum Tanker PRIMARY VEHICLE FEATURES: APPARATUS Minimum 3,000-gallon vacuum tank, 20-year warranty Aluminum apparatus body Complete vacuum system One (1) powered drop tank rack, capable of carrying two (2) minimum 3,500 gal. portable tanks Or Two (2) manually operated drop tank racks, capable of carrying one (1) minimum 3,500 gal. portable tank each CHASSIS Medium Duty Chassis GVWR 54,600 Minimum 315 H.P. Diesel engine with exhaust engine brake Single 45 gal. Fuel tank Leece Neville 270 amp alternator Up-graded interior for sound dampening Allison automatic transmission, 3,000 EVS six speed Meritor 14,600 lb. set back Front axle Meritor 40,000 lb. Rear axle with manual differential locks One (1) chrome vertical exhaust stack Air Conditioning AM/FM weather band radio AM/FM Antenna mounted RH side of cowl High back, clothe fabric, Air suspension, Air lumbar, inside armrest Drivers seat High Back, cloth fabric, Air suspension, Air lumbar, inside armrest Passenger seat Tilt and Tele-scoping steering column Self-canceling turn signals Heated mirrors with 6" convex mirror below Power windows both passenger and driver Two (2) complete sets of chassis manuals TIRES Front 315/80R x 22.5" Rear 12R x 22.5" TANK Minimum 3,000 gallon capacity and shall be rated to 29" vacuum and 10 psi. Tank shall be properly coated to assure rust free operation Interior baffles shall be installed to comply with NFPA standard. There shall be one 20"manhole, top front of tank Tank shall have air actuated valve bottom of tank from manhole collar to 6" vent/drain pipe Vent/drain shall be 6" schedule 40 and shall be plumbed through tank Any overflow from the vent shall discharge under the truck behind rear wheels Switches for the vent shall be located in the chassis cab and at each tank fill location Tank frame shall be constructed to assure maximum strength and support DUMP & TANK FILL VALVES There shall be one (1) 6" dump with air-actuated knife valve at the tank rear On the rear dump valve shall be a tip-down chute constructed of tread bright aluminum On each side of the apparatus at the front shall be 6" intake/dump valves 6" valves shall have air-actuated knife valves and aluminum quick coupler w/cap One 6" x 22" automatic aluminum extension chute Air actuated valves shall have controls in cab and at each valve location 3.4" bleeder valve located at each fill location right Tank will be plumbed for future pump in front passenger compartment. BODY & COMP ARTMENTS Low side body constructed of 12-gauge aluminum with integral compartments. Two (2) Aluminum compartments, one on each side, ahead of rear axles, as large as space permits One (1) transverse compartment large enough to accommodate a powered ice auger. Cabinets constructed of 12-gauge aluminum, sweep-out design Aluminum swing up doors powder coated to match body with door activated interior lights and molded rubber floor tiles Each compartment shall be vented The vacuum pump and components shall be mounted in a separate compartment on the driver side behind chassis cab This compartment shall have a flush panel door with stainless steel piano hinge with vertical swing and door checks to hold open at 140 degrees and stainless steel" D" slam latch assembly. LIGHTING & ELECTRICAL: (LED lights where applicable) All wiring is color-coded and run through automotive loom. Wiring to the lights mounted on the tank shall be run through stainless steel conduit. ICC lights includes red and amber clearance lights and large rectangular stop, turn, tail Weldon 2010 and Truck-Lite clearance with chrome bezels. Two scene lights with internal optics shall be flush mounted on the upper rear head, directed down 15 degrees to come on with backup lights. Two-side flood lights on angled brackets one each side of tank. Two 7" clear back up lights. Two Whelen warning strobes, mounted top rear of tank by flood lights left light shall be Red, Right light shall be Blue Code 3 light bar, mounted on cab roof with 3M Opti-Com Code 3 siren, cab mounted Federal electronic Q-$iren mounted in front bumper Code 3 speaker, grille mounted in chassis front bumper Code 3 electrical control modules, mounted in cab with rocker switches Two grille strobes red. Two intersection strobes, mounted on each side front chassis fenders. Electronic back up alarm. Master battery disconnect switch by driver seat in chassis cab 4-light tank level gauge mounted in cab and large lights mounted on back of tank Open compartment light inside cab wherever practical 12v quartz hand operated 1,000,000 candle power flood light mounted in cab Map light on passenger side VACUUM SYSTEM Vacuum pump shall be mounted driver side behind the cab in compartment Pump shall be driven by PTO Pump shall be air cooled and shall be rated at 430 acfm @ 15"vacuum Pump shall have internal pressure/vacuum changeover valve, air actuated from cab Pump shall have automatic oilier with remote oil tank 3" primary shut-off lo-profile mounted top front of tank with stainless steel collar Primary shall have a stainless steel quick-release ring clamp PAINTING (Apparatus to match chassis) All surfaces shall be properly cleaned, sanded, prepared and primed Three coats of high quality Ford 9E White automotive paint shall be applied, with three coats clear Touch up paint provided Full automotive undercoating shall be applied under apparatus Marine spatter paint inside of cabinets on top of an abrasion resistant 'road guard' 16" reflective Blue striping on chassis and apparatus body MOUNTING Tank and body mounted to chassis with 1" rubber skids and u-bolt mounting hardware All pumping and electrical systems tested Full rubber mud flaps behind rear wheels Two tow hooks attached to chassis frame rails, front and rear through polished aluminum step deck OTHER ITEMS Drop tank rack shall hold two (2) minimum 3,500 gal. tanks Tanks shall be mounted on passenger side Drop tank rack shall be power operated with controls mounted conveniently near rack Or One (1) Drop tank rack on each side holding one (1) 3,500 gal. drop tank each with manual operation Two (2) minimum 3,500 gallon 22oz. Vinyl drop tanks (Fol-Da-Tank or equal) shall be provided Hose tubes built in under tank rack with rear access door to hold two (2) 6" x 12' hard suction sleeves Storage for four (4) 6" x 12' hard suction sleeves drivers' side with rear access door Center console with all emergency lighting, siren vacuum and valve switches Two (2) 12-volt power points located on center console Two flashlights with charger mounted in cab, on passenger side, Streamlight model # SL20X Two NFPA wheel chocks mounted under chassis on driver side Six (6) 6" x 12' light weight suction hose Low level floating strainer with detachable pan Dual air horns mounted one on each side on vertical portion of hood One (1) 6" cam lock X 5" Storz adapter One (1) 6" cam lock X 2 W' Male NST adapter One (1) 6" cam lock X 2 W' Female NST adapter Map storage on passenger side in cab Wherever 2 dissimilar metals are joined, they must be electrically isolated 2-way CDM 1250 mobile Motorola radio with optional oversized speaker It Is strongly recommended that all Motorola radio equipment be obtained from FFD specified dealer Two (2) complete sets of apparatus manuals Truck graphics will be determined at the pre-construction meeting ADDENDUM Miscellaneous Equipment The following miscellaneous equipment shall be provided as optional equipment with the apparatus and the cost listed beside each item. 18 H.P. Waterous pump (PB 18 Vanguard 30-25A) in passenger side compartment pump shall be plumbed into tank and on a slide out tray. Low level floating pump 350gpm placed on a slide out tray. 6" cam lock opening at top rear of tank (for overhead filling in bay). Exceptions to Stated Specifications Manufacture shall state reason, price difference, etc., on exception to specifications, and list them numerically on a separate sheet. Dealer demonstrator units and new chassis holdovers will be considered. - - ------ ~,/,hA City of Farmington 325 Oak Street Farmington, MN 55024 www.ci.farmington.mn.us FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO No. of Pages: 13 Date: 11/7/03 9:05 AM To: Joel Jamnik From: Cindy Muller Company: Company: City of Farmington Fax#: Fax #: (651) 463-2591 Telephone #: Telephone #: (651) 463-1803 Comments: Ken Kuchera brought over the attached revised specs for the tanker truck. He asked me to send them to you for your review. This is on the Nov 17 Council agenda. - . PERSON\JEL DECISIONS City Administrator Farmington, Minnesota Position Profile Prepared by: Personnel Decisions International 3 November 2003 City Administrator Farmington, Minnesota Position Profile Introduction This document is designed to serve three purposes: . Serve as a basis for assessment and selection of the candidates for the City Administrator position. . Provide information for candidates regarding the requirements, issues, and challenges that accompany the position. . Provide the City of Farmington with feedback regarding issues impacting the City's current and future status. Sources of Information Information for this document was obtained through a variety of sources: . Discussions with Mayor and Council Members . Group interviews with department heads . Meetings with employees . Correspondence with employees . Discussions with community members . Document review The support and cooperation of all staff and elected officials in contributing to this document is gratefully acknowledged. Background Farmington, Minnesota is a growing city on the southeastern edge of the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The balanced nature of Farmington's residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and natural open space areas offers tremendous appeal and accounts for the population growth from 5,000 residents in 1990 to a current population of nearly 18,000. 2 The City of Farmington operates under a statutory form of government consisting of a mayor and four-member city council elected at-large for four-year terms. The city administrator is responsible for administrative and financial duties. The city employs 65 full-time staff, as well as part-time and seasonal employees. The proposed 2004 total budget is $22.04 million and the General Fund budget is $6.2 million. Challenges and Issues Facing the Position Farmington's dramatic growth provides an exciting and challenging opportunity for city staff and elected officials. The newly appointed city administrator will have the opportunity to significantly shape the community for many years to come. . Team Building - Build a team which includes senior staff, line employees, and mayor/ council. Encourage cross-departmental communication. Align all employees toward common goals. . Structure - Determine space needs for city operations. Continue the discussion of a new municipal building for Farmington. . Service Delivery - Improve service delivery systems. Evaluate current processes and determine where change is needed and likely to yield results. . Growth Issues - Help the city deal with issues of growth including optimal balance between residential and commercial/industrial properties. Find the appropriate balance between growth and maintenance of community flavor. . Redevelopment Issues - Along with growth in many parts of the city, Farmington also has portions that are aging and require attention. Both redevelopment and replacement of infrastructure will be key priorities. . Transportation - Working cooperatively with other agencies, facilitate traffic patterns in Farmington, particularly on east-west routes. . Budget Issues - Along with every other municipality in Minnesota, deal with fiscal constraints, balancing service delivery with taxing authority. Investigate ways to provide quality service while releasing costs. . Intergovernmental Relations - Develop and maintain strong working relationships with townships, Metropolitan Council, county, state, and federal agencIes. 3 Desired Qualities Background It is desirable that the successful candidate have a background and track record in municipal government management. It is expected that this individual would have functioned as a city manager, city administrator, assistant, or related position. In addition, the following background and experiences were seen as helpful: · An advanced degree such as a master's in public administration · Experience in economics, political science, urban studies, business administration or related field · Experience in strategic planning, community and economic development The following represents a compilation of the desired knowledge, skills, abilities, and personal characteristics required for the position. While it is recognized that no one individual is likely to possess all these qualities, it is nonetheless helpful to begin with a "template" in order to evaluate candidates. Leadership Qualities · Can articulate a long-range vision for the city · Shares leadership and seeks consensus among all parties · Supports and empowers staff in their decision making while holding them accountable · Effectively motivates staff and develops a spirit of camaraderie · Forms a team with council and staff · Assists council in working through issues · Welcomes and encourages citizen participation · Helps others improve their problem-solving capabilities · Encourages creativity and appropriate risk-taking · Is fair, objective, and able to gain others' respect and trust · Shows strong trust in staffs abilities - solicits their input, delegates responsibility, and allows sufficient latitude · Develops partnerships with staff, council, and others · Coaches and trains staff where necessary · Recognizes leadership capability in others · Is willing to make tough leadership decisions 4 . Aligns people's effort toward common goals . Gains others' commitment toward goals . Is fair but firm . Shares credit with staff as appropriate . Creates a climate of trust and openness Human Relations . Establishes and maintains strong, cooperative, and trusting working relationships with staff, council, governmental agencies, and other groups . Demonstrates strong interest in, understanding of, and consideration of others' needs, feelings, and opinions . Values others and does not come across as condescending or arrogant . Expresses disagreement tactfully . Shows sensitivity and tolerance of others . Is an excellent negotiator . Relates well to people of different backgrounds . Is skilled and objective in resolving conflict . Is open and approachable by others . Displays compassion when appropriate . Works well with all people regardless of position, ethnicity, or gender . Possesses strong political sensitivity and interpersonal insight; quickly picks up on group dynamics, people's emotions, etc. . Takes a clear stand on harassment, discrimination, and other issues which detract from a healthy and equitable workplace . Is outgoing; enjoys meeting people . Becomes involved in the community . Is skilled in conflict resolution . Is responsive to the needs and concerns of others . Makes others feel important 5 Communication Skills . Listens well; demonstrates receptivity and attentiveness . Is an articulate communicator, both orally and in writing . Seeks input from others . Has media presence; is effective as a public speaker . Can present ideas in a clear, concise, and persuasive manner . Fosters open communication · Provides straight answers . Keeps council informed Judgment and Decision Making . Takes a big-picture perspective; does not lose sight of important issues · Demonstrates creative problem solving . Is willing to make tough decisions · Possesses sound business judgment . Has an open decision-making style . Is deliberate and decisive in regards to taking action . Demonstrates environmental awareness . Is a quick study and demonstrates grasp of intuitive issues . Is fiscally astute; possesses good quantitative skills and has a strong understanding of fiscal management . Balances policy with special needs . Develops creative solutions to problems . Provides council with appropriate alternatives and recommendations . Approaches issues from multiple perspectives . Thinks quickly on his/her feet . Demonstrates acumen as a long-term financial strategist . Possesses the foresight to anticipate problems . Effectively balances conflicting needs 6 Administrative Skills · Possesses strong long-range planning skills - has good visionary skills and is able to develop long-term strategies . Establishes clear, effective priorities . Is able to coordinate/manage resources so that operations are efficient and focused . Demonstrates good contingency planning . Demonstrates an appropriate level of control and follow-up - neither over- controlling nor under-controlling . Possesses solid overall management skills . Runs an efficient operation . Ensures that things are completed in a timely fashion . Follows through on projects, inquiries, and commitments Personal Characteristics . Possesses high ethical standards and considers the ethical implications of actions . Is honest and disclosing . Is in touch with the community; shares community values . Is involved in the community outside of direct job duties . Is a reflective and non-impulsive individual . Remains calm in difficult situations and does not overreact . Is willing to admit mistakes, lack of knowledge, etc. . Has appropriate level of self-confidence - does not come across as pretentious or arrogant . Possesses a positive outlook and a good sense of humor . Is willing to take responsibility . Is credible and straightforward . Is a person of strong character and integrity . Remains visible and accessible to employees . Functions effectively even in stressful situations . Has courage to stand up for one's self and staff . Adapts well to change 7 Technical Skills . Has knowledge of planning issues . Understands TIF projects . Demonstrates understanding of development and redevelopment . Has knowledge of annexation issues . Possesses knowledge of economic development strategies . Has knowledge of infrastructure improvements . Possesses strong financial management skills . Has knowledge in parks, recreation, and natural resources . Understands legal implications of decisions 8 I.; PERSOl\l\lEL DECISIONS Personnel Decisions International MEMO DATE: 3 November 2003 To: Farmington Mayor and Council FROM: Harry Brull SUBJECT: Possible Interview Questions As I promised, I am providing some possible interview questions for your interview with the city administrator candidates. Clearly, you will not be able to ask all of these questions. However, I did want to give you an extensive "menu" to choose from. Of course, you may have specific questions of your own you wish to ask. Please fee free to discuss these with me prior to the interview day or at our session just before the first interview. Please note that I have indicated for each question the competency measured by the question. Articulating Vision (Leadership) When you started in your last position, what was your long-range vision? . How did you go about implementing it? . What changes did you have to make? . What successes and failures have you achieved? Consensus Building (Leadership) What has been the most challenging issue where you have had to achieve consensus among different stakeholders? · What was the issue? . What made it challenging? . What did you specifically do? . How did things turn out? Team Building (Leadership) What have you done to forge a team with staff, management, and elected officials? . What has been the most critical thing you've done to make this happen? . Who was the most difficult person or group with which to work? Creating a Climate (Leadership) What major influence have you had which has helped create a climate of trust and openness in your current organization? . What exactly did you do to make this happen? . What impact did it have? Providing Direction/ Coaching (Leadership) Tell us about a direct report you had that was most in need of direction and/or coaching from you. . What was the person doing or not doing? . How did you approach the situation? . What impact did you have? Responsiveness to Citizens (Human Relations) ;What have you done in your current position to ensure or improve the ~taffs responsiveness to citizens? Diplomacy (Human Relations) What has been the most critical situation you have encountered where tact and diplomacy were essential? . What was going on? . How did you display tact? . What reaction did you get? . What was the outcome? Establishing and Maintaining Relationships (Human Relations) What is the best example of your ability to establish and maintain good working relationships with individuals on staff, council, or outside groups? . What makes you particularly proud of this example? . What did you actually do to build and maintain the relationship? · What is the relationship like today? Conflict Resolution (Human Relations) What has been the biggest conflict you've had with your councilor comparable group? . What was the issue? . What position did you take? . Where were they coming from? . How did things get resolved? Negotiation Skills (Human Relations) What has been the most contentious issue where you had to act as a negotiator? . What was the issue? . Who were the parties and what were their respective viewpoints? . How did you influence the situation? Teamwork (Human Relations) What has been the most important thing you have done to build a team with elected officials and stafi? . What prompted your actions? . What exactly did you do? . What impact did it have? Big-Picture Thinking Qudgment and Decision-Making) What is the best example of your ability to "not lose sight of the forest" and see the big picture? . What was the situation? . With whom were you dealing? . What actions or decisions did you make? . What was the outcome? Difficult Issues Qudgment and Decision-Making) What has been the most difficult issue where you have played a role in helping council come to a decision? . What was the issue? . What made it difficult? . What did you do? . How did things turn out? Controversial Issues Qudgment and Decision-Making) What has been the most controversial issue where you have played a major role? . What was the issue? · What role did you play? · How did things finally get resolved? Decision Making Qudgment and Decision-Making) What has been the most challenging or difficult decision you've had to make in your current position? . What made it challenging? . What options did you consider? . How did things turn out? Unpopular Decisions Qudgment and Decision-Making) What has been the most unpopular decision you've had to make in your current role? · What made it unpopular? . How did people react? . What did you do with the reaction? . How was the issue finally dealt with? Political Issues Qudgment and Decision-Making) What has been the most political issue you've been involved in? · What made it contentious? . What role did you take? . What was the response to your position? . How did the issue get resolved? Long-Range Planning (Administrative Skills) What has been the most clear and comprehensive long-range plan you have developed? . How was the plan developed? Who had input? · What role did you specifically play? . How did you oversee execution of the plan? Delegation and Control (Administrative Skills) How would you describe your management style in terms of delegation.and control? . How loose or tight an administrator do you tend to be? . Tell us the last time you delegated something important. . What instructions did you give? . How did you monitor results? Ethics (Personal Characteristics) Tell us the last time you were involved in a situation where there was a potential of compromising the ethics or integrity of your organization. . What was the issue? . What made it threatening? · How did you deal with it? Stress Handling (Personal Characteristics) What has been the most stressful situation you've encountered professionally? . What made it stressful? . How did it impact you? . What did others around you notice? . How did you regain your equilibrium? Taking Responsibility (Personal Characteristics) Tell us about the last time you made a major mistake on the job. . What was the issue? . What mistake did you make? . How was it brought to your attention? . What did you do about it? Self-Confidence (Personal Characteristics) Tell us about the last time you were in a situation where you felt less than fully confident. . What was the situation? . How did people around you know that you weren't completely on top of things? . How did you handle it? Holding the Line (Personal Characteristics) Tell us about the last time you held the line and did not grant or comply with a staff request. . What was requested? . What was your rationale for not granting it? . What was the reaction? Development Issues (Technical Skills) ,what's the best example of your competence in the area of community development? . What makes this a good example? . What exactly was your involvement? . How do things stand now? Budget (Technical Skills) What has been the most serious budgetary issue you have had to deal with? · How did it come to your attention? . What was the impact? · What response did you propose? . How did things get resolved? Fiscal Management (Technical Skills) How do you evaluate your fiscal management skills? . What's the best example of your acumen in this area? Communication (Communication) What has been the most difficult communication you have had to transmit to your mayor and council? · What was the issue? · How did you convey the message? . What was their reaction?