Loading...
03-22-10 CC WS MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORD SESSION MONDAY, MARCH 22, 2010 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL, WORD SESSION Absent: None B. Review Agenda 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. Councilmember Woodruff asked that Item 4 Reimbursement for Damages to Vehicles Caused by Poor City Roads be added to the agenda. Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as amended. Motion passed 510. 2. ROAD IMPROVEMENT FUNDING SCENARIOS Administrator Heck explained that in 2008 Council adopted a 20 -Year Pavement Management Plan (PMP) and Council directed Staff to assemble information about various ways to finance the PMP. The PMP is through 2028 and it estimates the roadway improvements will cost approximately $35 million. Staff has since discussed several financing methods. The methods included: assessing benefiting property owners for a portion of a roadway improvement; issuing bonds to find the PMP; capitalizing the program with the use of funds in the Liquor Fund; increasing the amount transferred to the Road Fund from the General Fund; or, some combination of these. He noted Staff chose not to analyze special assessments because Council has indicated it was not interested in this approach. Heck then explained the analyses were based on a number of assumptions. There will continue to be a yearly transfer to the Road Fund from the General Fund. The PMP does not change. An inflationary escalation cost was factored into the estimated costs. The tax levy does not change except for finding roadway improvements. The bonds would be issued at a rate of 4.5 percent over 20 years. The Liquor Fund is estimated at $800,000. The rough estimates are based on factors existing today. Heck went on to explain that if the current transfer amount of $700,000 to the Road Fund from the General Fund is continued and nothing else is done, the Road Find would go into a deficit state starting in 2012. hlcreasing the transfer amount by an additional $150,000 each year from 2011 — 2015 (the transfer in amount would be $1,450,000 in 2015 and beyond) would result in an approximate 3 percent levy increase each year there is an increase and the Road Fund balance would be approximately $6 million at the end of 2028. A $5 million bond issue in 2011 and the continued transfer of $700,000 to the Road Fund from the General Fund would fund the roadway improvements into 2025 when the Road Fund CITY OF SHORE WOOD K SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 22, 2010 Page; 2 of would go into a deficit state. A levy increase would be required to pay for the debt service from the bond issuance. A transfer of $800,000 to the Road Fund from the liquor Fund in 2011 and the continued yearly transfer of $700,000 to the Road Fund from the General Fund would fund roadway improvements into 2016 . when the Road Fund would go into a deficit state. Increasing the transfer amount to the Road Fund from the General Fund by an additional $75,000 each year beginning in 2011 and also transferring $800,000 to the Road Fund from the Liquor Fund in 2011 would fund the program through 2028 without the Road Fund going into a deficit state. Increasing the transfer amount to the Road Fund from the General Fund by an additional $75,000 each year beginning in 2011 and also transferring $400,000 to the Road Fund from the Liquor Fund in 2011 would fund the improvements through 2028 without the Road Fund going into a deficit state. Councilmember Zerby asked what amount the transfer to the Road Fund from the General Fund would have to be to maintain a positive balance in the Road Fund. Administrator Heck stated Staff has not analyzed that but can do so. Heck noted that all the scenarios that include an increase in the transfer assume levy limits will go away after 2011. Councilmember Turgeon expressed she thought it would be prudent to assume levy limits will continue beyond 2011. Heck stated Staff can analyze additional scenarios, noting Staff has not received any direction from Council regarding possible bonding. Councilmember Turgeon suggested roadways that are less traveled or are dead end roadways should have a lower priority for improvements in the PMP then more frequently traveled roadways. She stated she wanted to be comfortable that the estimated funding needs are based on the highest priority projects. She suggested a traffic count weighting factor also be considered when rating /prioritizing roadways for improvements. She commented it was a given that all of the City's roadways will have to be improved over time. She stated residents ask her why the City is going to improve the roadway in front of their property when the residents think the roadway doesn't warrant reconstruction. Councilmember Zerby stated he thought that discussion would be appropriate, but the topic at hand is how to finance the PMP. He expressed he thought the financing /funding for the extension of watermain warranted further discussion. He stated he thought that down the road future councils are likely to question why watermain wasn't extended as part of various roadway reconstruction projects. Mayor Lizee stated the PMP is being used to help assess what funding methods may be appropriate to find the improvements in the PMP. The schedule for improvements can be adjusted over the years. She indicated she did not think it was necessary to agree to a specific schedule in order to agree to a funding approach. Councilmember Turgeon again reiterated she thought traffic volume should be included when determining the priorities for roadway improvements. Adjusting the priorities could impact the amount of funding that is needed. Mayor Lizee stated the specific roadways targeted for improvements can be discussed as part of the capital improvement program (CIP) budget process. Councilmember Woodruff stated that although lie agreed it's important to wake sure the roadways most in need of improvement are worked on, he thought that could be discussed as part of CIP budget discussion. He then stated he thought it is important to determine which roadways must be reconstructed and which ones could be reclaimed. He commented it's clear that the Road Fund will run out of funds in 2012 if there are no changes made to the funding approach. He expressed skepticism that the levy limits would go away after 2011. He noted State Statute allows a municipality to bond outside of the levy limit. He expressed his strong support for bonding for roadway improvements. The question is how much debt to issue through bonding. He stated the $5 million bonding analysis indicates the Road Fund would go CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORD SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 22, 2010 Page 3 of 5 into a deficit state in 2025 based on current assumptions and estimates. He thought the overall tax increase for issuing $5 million in bonds in 2011 would be 8 percent, and lie noted he was not advocating that for a number of reasons. He expressed concern that the Road Fund balance in 2028 would be approximately $6 million, which is about five times as much as it's anticipated to be at 2010 year -end. He suggested multiple bond issues be done over a spread out timetable. He thought a $2.5 million issue would sustain the Road Fund to 2017. It's his understanding that the City would have to use all of the funds from a bond issuance in three years. He did not think the City could complete $5 million in roadway projects in three years, but it was likely the City could complete $2.5 million in projects in three years. He advocated a multi -issue bonding approach, noting he understood there is a cost for each bond issue, and he suggested the issue amount be $2.5 million. Councilmember Bailey stated he agreed with most of Councilmember Woodruffs comments. He then stated Council has discussed the PMP at great length but he did not think Council had taken any formal action to adopt the PMP. He explained the PMP identifies 30 roadways for improvements through 2028. Assuming the priorities stay as identified in the PMP, he expressed concern that the PMP grossly underestimates the number of roadways needing improvements in the later part of the PMP. He thought it would be higher because of the deterioration of roadways not included in the PMP and he recommended future deterioration be factored into the finding needs. He stated he thought a $2.5 million bond issue amount was reasonable. He explained bonding is one way to finance the improvements; it doesn't change the cost of the improvements. He stated if he had a choice he would rather raise the tax levy to pay for the improvements on a pay -as- you -go basis. The City will easily spend $1 million each year to make the improvements and that needs to be factored into the cost to the taxpayers. Because of current and potential future levy limits, bonding may be the appropriate way to finance improvements in 2011. Councilmember Zerby expressed he is not comfortable with Council's position on extending watermain as part of roadway reconstruction projects. Council anticipated the cost for watermain extension under Meadowview Road and a portion of Wild Rose Lane in the 2010 CIP, yet when residents balked at the extension it appeared to him that Council backed down. He did not think Council could financially plan ahead if it's going to consider extension on a case by case basis. Councilmember Woodruff stated the CIP for 2010 indicated watermain would be installed but there were no funds to do that; the cost would be assessed to the benefiting property owners. Councilmember Woodruff stated the PMP should be considered a living document that should be reviewed at least annually. He commented there are more roadway projects then money to pay for them. He again stated he favored bonding for the improvements in the near future and the levy could be considered in future years when there are no levy limits in place. Councilmember Bailey stated from his vantage point it's appropriate to bond for things such as the City Hall renovation because it's a one -time project that is paid for over 20 years. The City could spend around $1 million annually to keep the City roadways in relatively good shape. The ideal way to fund the improvements year after year would be to tax for the improvements each year. Borrowing for the improvements is just pushing the burden off on to someone else and he would not feel comfortable doing that unless the City was forced to because of levy limits. He recommended keeping borrowing for the improvements as low as possible. The levy should be increased to the extent possible to pay for the improvements in 2011 and the rest should be borrowed. If the levy could be increased in 2012 he would prefer to pay down the bonded debt. He thought the current users of the roadways and current taxpayers should pay for the improvements made now. Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought he and Councilmember Bailey were talking about the same thing but had different approaches to raising the necessary funds. Bonding is the available mechanism for Mayor Ciz6e stated she understood Council to have expressed interest in increasing the amount transferred to the Road Fund from the General Fund and to have further discussion about possibly bonding for some of the improvements. Counci|rnunnhor Woodruff atu1od during the 2010 budget process Council agreed to establish a Community Infrastructure Fund using $l nui||imu in Sanitary Sewer Fund Reserves. The Community Infrastructure Fund imLohelp finance infrastructure improvements. He requested Staff analyze the use of that Fund as well as the Liquor Fund for roadway improvements. Councilnnonnber3orbyexpressed his opposition to using the Liquor Fund tohelp fund ouud`vuy improvements until Council has discussed appropriate uses for the Liquor Fund. Woodruff clarified he was not suggesting that all of those funds bc used, but if a portion were used the amount of a bond issue Could be reduced somewhat. Administrator Heck stated Staff can prepare uscenario using part of the Community Infrastructure Fund. Be explained the $150 increase io the transfer amount for that scenario was for illustrative purposes only. Staff can adjust that to address Connui|nnunohurZerby'e request to know what transfer iuureuoo is needed tobeto keep the Road Fund from going into u deficit state. Counoi|mneoube,Bui|cy stated Staff could take the P&6EI{ rating model and build in udutoriocution fboio, to try to project what additional roadways will need improvements throughout the 20-year period. Director Brown explained there was u municipality that developed u very technical rating system for its roadways and two years later the ratings were no longer any good because of the impact of the free/thaw uyu|c on the ouodvvuyu. }Iu thought the P&3OIl System was easy to use and easy to explain. He explained the City has four ycucu of history on P&SEF( m1iugo that could he helpful. Bovvovor things such as drainage, frost and so forth impact the rate ofdeterioration. He stated engineers think the useful life of roadway im20years. He noted most of the City's roadways were constructed in the 1970s and most of them have not been reconstructed. Therefore the life cycle is more then 20 years. But, the City is behind the curve when d comes \o reconstructing thonn. Councilnocnube, Zorby stated the City's roadways are greatly affected by weather and ihc,efbn: it's difficult to forecast their rate of deterioration. Counoi|onenoher Bailey asked that additional costs for innpnovunnontu be added to the PM9 later in the cycle to address aoruc of the additional innpnovonocnto that will be required. He thought doing so would buo{ benefit to future councils. 3. PERSONNEL POLICY MANUAL Administrator Heck stated in 2008 Council made a decision kz move from u for compensating employees to a performance based system in 2009. The adopted Personnel Policy Manual Councilmember Woodruff stated he asked that this item be added to the agenda because the verified claims Council will consider for approval during its regular meeting following this meeting contains the payment to a resident for damage done to his automobile tires when Ile hit a pothole. He suggested Council have a discussion about how things such as that should be handled during another meeting. He clarified he was not suggesting the claim not be paid as he thought the resident had already been told that would happen. He asked Staff to research what other municipalities did. Councilmember Zerby stated he thought Hennepin County had such a policy. 5. ADJOURN Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session of March 22, 2010, at 6:58 P.M. Motion passed 510. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Christine Freeman, Recorder � a Christine Lizee, Mayor .rran Hec , Ci ministrator /Clerk