080405 CC WS AgP
?"-,..it
I I I I I
~. ~~rll
~ j~ ~.~
"!!i ~ ~,
~
d~
lB' CI)
o ~ =
f.J. ~. .:
It I
f;l8~ ~
=
c "'"
...
fIl fIJ
IJ i
Cfj c)'
.~ ; -
.. ~
c
~
~,
- Z l7J
.Z . 0 C)
- -'.~
0 ~ ~
Ii l7J -~
Q. ~ 1
Cfj
~ e
~.=. ...... / {;
of;; a ~ z
~~5 ~ ...... 'S: i '~
......
=B~- ~ -~
~- O'J I
o . '" 8
iJ~> 0
~oi 0 < ~ m -~'
ou u 0
-ti~ ...4 " fIi ...;
I
~
,.t .
..
'4a
CITY OF
SHOREWOOD
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD · SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 · (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 . www.cLshorewood.mn.us . cityhall@cLshorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
City Council
Craig W. Dawson, City Administrator f\ ~
July 29,2005 Vy
Proposal re: SLMPD Funding, Resolution ofIssues (Special Work Session Item)
Coordinating Committee Approves Recommended Budget: The Coordinating Committee of the
SLMPD met this morning to consider its proposed budget for 2006. Eventually, it approved the
recommended budget for 2006, which would result in a 3.7% increase over the recommended city
payments for 2005. It also reviewed the discussion by the Chief about what would result if there
were no increase in the required payments from the cities in 2006, and concurred that it needed to be
shared with the member city councils. The SLMPD proposed budget will be on the Council's agenda
for August 8, and the budget (and extensive narrative) will be included in the agenda packet for that
meeting at the end of next week.
Related Proposal Arises: A proposal came up during the meeting that became a major focal point
of the meeting. Though technically separate from the budget, it became intertwined with several
Committee members' consideration of the budget. As Mayor Love and Councilmember Callies will
not be present on August 8 and the Coordinating Committee promised that their city councils would
vote on the proposal at their next regular J;l1eetings, a special work session has been called.
The proposal proffered by Greenwood Mayor Bob Newman is attached. It is an attempt to fully fund
the SLMPD for 2006 and to buy another year for the cities to work through SLMPD issues. It calls
for the Excelsior payment to be reduced 3 percentage points and Shorewood's to be raised 3
percentage points, and for the "final agreement" to be reached by December 31, 2005. Failing that
final agreement by that date, the process for dissolution would begin.
Some confusion occurred whether the Coordinating Committee should recommend a budget based on
Mr. Newman's proposed allocations, or whether the city councils make their funding decisions on the
proposed allocations, or whether the Coordinating Committee might want to revise its proposed
budget in mid-August after the city councils had acted upon the proposed allocations.
Discussion: Other Coordinating Committee members and staff made several points about Mr.
Newman's proposal. They follow in a hopefully logical order:
n
'-" PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
..
..
SLMPD Funding, Resolution ofIssues
August 4,2005, Special City Council Work Session
Page Two
. The JP A requires the City Councils to set their funding levels for next year's operations by
September 1. Lack of action by anyone city council results in the required funding level to
remain the same for next year (i.e., a 0% increase).
. The proposed funding allocation would require an amendment to the joint powers agreement;
the Coordinating Committee can not make this change. The Coordinating Committee can be
a forum for the cities to consider changes.
. It is doubtful that a JP A amendment could be approved by all four city councils by September
1. It is possible that an amendment could be made after September 1 that would waive that
date for the 2006 budget, but
. It is not prudent to base budget decisions-either the Coordinating Committee in
recommending its budget, or by the city councils in their funding authorizations-on
speculation about what change might occur in the funding allocation among the cities.
. The JP A remains in effect. Unless the SLMPD were to be dissolved prior to September 1, the
organization is required to provide service for the following year.
. Any changes to the organization would begin in 2007 at the earliest.
There was a belief that as the June 30 deadline had passed regarding the Issues Group
recommendation, Shorewood now has a formal proposal to dissolve the SLMPD. Mayor Love
clarified that the action of the Shorewood City Council was to begin to explore alternatives regarding
dissolution.
Excelsior Mayor Ruehl mentioned that his city council was unclear whether the funding allocation in
the Issues Group recommendation was still on the table. Mayor Love and the other mayors said that
Excelsior would need to act on the recommendation first, and then the other city councils might
respond.
Consideration for Action: The Coordinating Committee will have a special meeting sometime
during the week of August 15 to review the action taken by the city councils on Mr. Newman's
proposal. The City Council should discuss whether it wants to take formal action on August 8. If it
does not wish to do so, Council should decide whether there is a sense-of-the-Council that can be
communicated to the Coordinating Committee.
...
Temporary "Make-Whole" Proposal
1. That all cities make a one-year commitment to fully fund the proposed 2006 SLMPD
Budget at the following Operating Budget percentage contribution levels:
Excelsior
Greenwood
Shorewood
Tonka Bay
~ Z{,.5
8.5
49.0
16.0
100.0
2. That JP A conflict resolution oriented communication continue in written form, but
only with acceptance ofItem #1 above and with a deadline of December 31,2005 for final
agreement.
3. That should the deadline pass with no agreement, dissolution procedures shall
commence.
Related Points:
Item #1: Reestablishes full police protection for all cities.
Gives F,Jtelsior an immediate 3% decrease in contribution percentage.
Relieves stress of disharmony.
Eliminates the 2~ Tiered system.
The Police Dept. is reassured offull support.
No city will have to pay more than their fair share.
Item #2: All cities agree that a JP A, which is equally fair for all cities, is in all cities' best
interest.
Communication in written form is for clarity.
A fully paid-up budget encourages Good Faith negotiation and aeftete8 denotes a
serious attitude toward resolution.
The deadline means this has gone on long enough and an end to dialog must be in
sight with consequences for failure.
"
City of Shorewood
Interim SLMPD Resolution Affecting 2006 Funding
1. All four cities conclude a binding written agreement to amend the JP A consistent with the
following provisions to have effect for the 2006 budget year.
2. All four cities make the same one-year commitment provisionally to fund the 2006
SLMPD Operating Budget at the following percentages:
Excelsior:
Greenwood:
Shorewood:
Tonka Bay:
27.0%
8.5%
48.5%
16.0%
3. All four cities agree to continue with the work begun by the SLMPD Issues Group.
4. JP A discussions will continue and must be completed by December 31,2005, unless
extended by all four cities.
5. If agreement cannot be reached by the December 31,2005, or subsequently agreed upon
completion date, procedures to reorganize the membership or conditions of membership
shall commence immediately thereafter.
6. Approval of the 2006 SLMPD Operating Budget, as proposed, will eliminate any tiering
of services, and all members will receive full service during 2006.
7. All four cities must agree to this proposal no later than Monday, August 29, 2005.
/
Changes in Baseline Payments for SLMPD
Based on Excelsior and Greenwood Funding Proposals for 2006
August 3, 2005
Excelsior proposal- Excelsior to pay 26.5% of Operations cost of$1,556,100
Excelsior payment for 2005 =
Excelsior payment for 2006 =
Increase from 2005 to 2006 =
$400,000
$412,366
3.09%
Greenwood proposal- Excelsior to pay 27.0% of Operations cost of $1,556,100
Excelsior payment for 2005 = $400,000
Excelsior payment for 2006 = $420,147
Increase from 2005 to 2006 = 5.04%
2005
City Baseline 3.09% 5.04%
Excelsior $ 400,000 $ 412,366 $ 420,147
Greenwood $ 115,254 $ 118,815 $ 121,063
Shorewood $ 623,729 $ 643,002 $ 655,165
Tonka Bay $ 216.949 $ 223.653 $ 227.883
$1,355,932 $1,397,836 $1,424,258
2006 Recommended funding = $1,556,100
Difference = ($ 200,168) ($ 158,264) ($ 131,842)
2-
It was moved by Caron, and seconded by Viesturs, that the City of Excelsior will agree to
fund the proposed 2006 SLMPD Budget at the proposed amount, contingent on:
1. All four cities conclude a binding written agreement to amend the JP A consistent
with this resolution for budget year 2006;
2. All other cities make the same one year commitment to provisionally fund the
2006 SLMPD Operating Budget, with the understanding that the budget baseline
will not be affected by the one year amendment, at the following percentages:
Excelsior - 26.5%; Shorewood - 49%; Tonka Bay - 16.0%; and Greenwood-
8.5%;
3. All four cities agree to continue with dispute resolution, to include: discussions in
written and oral form, facilitated discussions, and mediation, as necessary;
4. JPA discussions will continue with a deadline of December 31, 2005, unless
extended by all four cities;
5. If agreement on a revised lP A cannot be reached by the December 31, 2005
deadline, dissolution procedures shall commence on, or other specific
consequences shall take place, and such consequences shall be determined prior
to, December 31, 2005;
6. Approval of the 2006 SLMPD Operating Budget, as proposed, will eliminate any
two-tier service, and all member cities will receive full service, during 2006; and
7. All four cities must agree to this proposal no later than Monday, August 15,2006.
The vote on the motion was unanimous.
3
_~ 08/El31.2El05 El9:47
9524749575
KELLV LAW BUILDING
PAGE El2
~ SLMP-J).1I1t-elim-ResekHietI
The city of Greenwood will agree to fund the proposed 2006 SLWD budget at the
proposed amount ~ntinp npott:
1. All four cities conclude a binding written agreement to amend the lP A consistent
with this fesohWon for the..bmlget Yea!" 2006.
2. All other cities make the same one year commitment to provisionally fund the
2006 SLMPD Opetating Budget, with the. undemanding that the budget baseline
will not be affected by the one year amendment, at. the following percentages:
Exc>>1slor 2?O.4; Shotewoea 43.9.4; Tonka. Bay 16%; aAd Greenwood &.5%.
3. All four cities agree to continue with dispute resolution, to include discussions in
written and oral form, facilitated discussions and mediation, as necessary.
4. lPA discussions will continue with a deadline of December 31, 2005 unless
ex.tended..by aU. four cities.
5. If agreement on a. revised JP A cannot be reached by the December 31, 2005
deadline, either dissolution procedures shall commence or other specific
consequences shall take place, such consequences to be determined prior to the
December 31 ~ 2005 deadline.
6. Approval of'the 2006 SLMPD Operating Budget. as proposed, will eliminate any
two.-Uet $etVice, and aU ~ber citic$. will f~~i\le t4l1 servi,e c1utiDa 2006.
7. All four cities agree to this proposal no later than Monday, August 15, 2005.
4-
Assume 2006 budget of $1,566,100
Excelsior 26.5%
Shorewood 49%
$412,366
$762,489
Assume Excelsior holds to the 2003 budget level and other 3 cities "make whole"
Excelsior $400,000
Shorewood $754,239 ________
Assume 2006 budget of $1,566,100 ~ No financial impact to Shorewood
Excelsior 27%
Shorewood 48.5%
$420,147
$754,708
. Restores Excelsior to full service
. Excelsior has paid $400K per year for 2003, 2004 and 2005-no increase
. Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay have contributed additional
amounts over the 2003 level to keep the department budget whole-- $60K
in 2004 and $144K in 2005
PROPOSAL FROM GREENWOOD WILL MATCH EXCELSIOR'S VERBATIM
WITH THE EXCEPTION OF INCLUDING A DIFFERENT FUNDING
FORMULA-
EXCELSIOR
SHOREWOOD
GREENWOOD
TONKABAY
27.0%
48.5%
8.5%
16.0%
5
Lakeshore Weekly News I Minnetonka, MN I 'Time to accept compromises'
Page 1 of2
PIIlIJ
a
o
ClOSE
eshore
_ _Weekly
ews
'Time to accept compromises'
By Woody Love
I serve our city as mayor, and with the mayors of our cities as members of the South Lake Minnetonka Police
Department (SLMPD) Coordinating Committee, its governing board. In both of these capacities, we mayors are
committed to providing the most economical, responsible, and responsive police services to our cities and our
community.
As Coordinating Committee members, we have the responsibility to act in the best interests for the success of the
police organization.
The saga of disagreements over our collective police service began in 2002. It has gone on far too long and done
great disservice to our four cities' residents and businesses, and to the staff of the SLMPD. Several attempts to
engage in dialogue to resolve matters over two years proved futile. Last November, the Coordinating Committee
offered a proposal that all of the city councils agreed to. Finally, there was promise of a breakthrough with the
formation of the Issues Group and the process it would follow.
As everyone wanted finality and to be ready for the 2006 budget process, all cities agreed that the work of the Issu
Group had to be finished by May 31. When the Issues Group presented its recommendation, it was agreed the cit)
councils would vote on the package by June 30. A number of items the Issues Group did not cover would be
addressed soon after.
As it turned out, Shorewood, Greenwood and Tonka Bay followed directions and acted on the recommendation by
June 30 - and we all approved it. The Excelsior City Council discussed the recommendation during June, but did
not fulfill its obligation to approve or reject it; rather, it asked for further discussion.
What each city pays for services has been a perennial issue during the 32-year existence of the SLMPD. Recent
discussion about what's appropriate for each city to pay has been buried in data, and beliefs that somehow the dal
speak for themselves and show technically what's right. This battle of the numbers has mired any progress.
The discussion should be about guiding principles and realities.
One argument being made is that police services should be provided to the one single South Lake Minnetonka
community in a way that results in one tax rate for all properties, regardless of which city they're in. This is
sometimes referred to as the "tax capacity approach."
Many have worked in many ways to interweave the cities into working as one. In reality, we are four partners in the
business arrangement known as SLMPD to provide police services.
One can look at the SLMPD as a kind of four-partner public safety insurance pool. In any insurance group,
policyholders are treated differently based on the risk they present. Experience is mostly used to determine who he
higher risk, and accordingly who pays more for coverage. Next-door neighbors may have the same insurance
b
http://www.weeklynews.com/print.asp? ArticleID= 1160&SectionID=27 &SubSectionID=3 8
8/2/2005
Lakeshore Weekly News I Minnetonka, MN I 'Time to accept compromises'
Page 2 of2
company, but pay different rates based on how much of the resources of the insurance pool they use.
Under a pure tax capacity approach, Excelsior would pay about 15 percent of the costs to operate SLMPD. Under
the insurance analogy, Excelsior's cost of SLMPD's operational resources would be significantly more. Both
perspectives can be argued.
The formula included in the Issues Group recommendation was a compromise between these two approaches.
It's often overlooked that the cities are paying for the new police station on a tax capacity basis, because facilities i
not related to anyone city's use of services. Thus, Excelsior pays about 15 percent of that annual obligation. The
cost for the former police station was included as rent in the operating budget, for which Excelsior paid 29.5 percer
When the Issue Group's new formula of 25.5 percent of the operations cost is combined with payment for the new
police station, Excelsior would pay just under 23 percent of the total costs for police.
This compromise is closer to the tax capacity approach than it is to the insurance analogy. And it's the lowest shar
of costs for Excelsior in the 32-year history of the SLMPD.
Excelsior's own analyses and consultant studies have demonstrated that it would receive its best police service at
lower costs with SLMPD - even without changes in the funding formula.
No one wants to follow altematives that will result in more costs and reduced services to all of our cities. We also,
however, need to look at what's best for SLMPD in light of the commitment of the cities to the partnership.
The Issues Group recommendation recognizes changes that are appropriate to strengthen our commitment and 01
public safety. Any changes require the agreement of all four city councils. We can continue to provide a broad ran~
of high-value police services at a very reasonable cost for all of the cities and all of their residents and businesses.
It is time to accept the compromises that have already been made. We owe it to those we serve in our community
begin moving forward for their safety and security.
The writer is mayor of Shorewood.
Related Links
Content @ 2005 Lakeshore Weekly News
Software@ 1998.2005 1upl Software. All Rights Reserved
7
http://www.weeklynews.com/print.asp? Artic1eID= 1160&SectionID=27 &SubSectionID=38
81212005
Lakeshore Weekly News I Minnetonka, MN
Page 1 of3
July 19, 2005
rs~ar~h......l
Advanced Search
Search Sponsored
.AI~,".~
EVERGREENE
J i ,. I: i,. .: .lil
!I~IljeWeIi!it&.cGm
News
City Hall
Happenings
Police Reports
Sports
Community Events
Arts & Leisure
Senior Calendar
New In Business
Opinion
Guest Column
Letters
Legals
Construction
Corner
Classifieds
Real Estate Form
Contact Us
Archives
Advertising With Us
Job Opportunities
at Lakeshore
Weekly News
eshore
_ _Weekly..
1;~~g~'~~~~'~t:'y~~i..~gklJA~.. ..
ews
Mi
~
6
http://www.weeklynews.com/main.asp?SectionID=27 &SubSectionID=3 8&Artic1eID= 1119 7/19/2005
GUEST COLUMN
I Print this Article
I=: = "I Email this Article
Monday. July 18,2005
'Excelsior's proposals are preferable'
By Nick Ruehl
At its meeting on July 14, the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department
(SLMPD) Coordinating Committee faced the consequences of failing to come to
agreement on a mutually-acceptable formula for sharing the costs of operating
the department.
In the absence of a mutually-acceptable formula, our partners in the joint powers
agreement (JPA) have proposed to proceed by: dissolving the JPA and re-
forming as a three-city department; providing Excelsior law enforcement services
on a contract basis; or reducing the size of the department by two officers.
We believe that these options will reduce the quality and cost effectiveness of
law enforcement for all four cities in our community.
We also believe that this reduction in quality and cost effectiveness is
unnecessary.
Excelsior has proposed a unified approach to funding the operation of the
SLMPD based on fair treatment of all neighbors within the police district - "same
street, same service, same rate of cost."
Under this proposal, each of the four cities contributes its police-related revenues
(such as liquor license fees, fines and forfeitures, and police-related Local
Government Aid) to the funding of the department.
The costs not covered by those revenues would then be shared among the four
Lakeshore Weekly News I Minnetonka, MN
Page 2 of3
Guest Book
lake 'm innetQpka
':::',,,!"',_'("'.l.
cities based on each city's share of the four-city community's tax capacity.
Feedback
Home Page
Under this plan, residents throughout the four-city community pay the same rates
for the same police service.
This proposal would reduce the large subsidy that three of the cities have been
providing to Shorewood.
Recognizing the dramatic impact on Shorewood that would come along with this
proposal, Excelsior offered to compromise by adjusting the Excelsior, Tonka Bay
and Greenwood contribution levels upward from the unified proposal.
This compromise proposal results in a minimal additional cost - the median
household in Shorewood would only pay one additional dollar per month beyond
what has been offered by the three other cities.
We have also offered to phase the changes in over several years, reducing the
additional impact on the median Shorewood household to mere pennies per
month,
Excelsior calls on Greenwood, Tonka Bay and Shorewood to reconsider our
proposals. The alternatives being proposed by our JPA partners will increase the
costs and reduce the quality of police services for each of the four cities in our
community.
Excelsior's proposals are preferable to laying off dedicated officers from our
police department. Adopting one of Excelsior's proposals will unite our cities,
strengthen and support our excellent police force, and provide for a long-term
solution that will end future discord,
The writer is mayor of Excelsior.
Article Comment Form
Please feel free to add your comments,
Article comments are not posted immediately to the Web site. Each submission
must be approved by the Web site editor, who may edit content for
appropriateness, There may be a delay of 24-48 hours for any submission
while the web site editor reviews and approves it.
Note: All information on this form is required. Your telephone number is for our
use only, and will not be attached to your comment.
Name:
Message:
Telephone:
E-mail:
!J
http://www.weeklynews.com/main.asp?SectionID=27 &SubSectionID=38&ArticleID=1119 7/19/2005