Final levy

With each year the city is required to establish a preliminary levy amount that is certified to the county.  This year, after minimal levy increases in past years, a preliminary levy was set with a 5 percent increase.  This amounts to a total increase in the levy of $89,900.  It was proposed that the final levy should be the same as the preliminary levy.  The impact of that increase in the levy, due to growth in taxable value, was a decrease in the tax rate from that of 2016.  The 2016 tax rate was 42.683% while the proposed rate for 2017 is 42.44%; this is 0.243% decease. 

The budget showed both revenue gains as well as expenditure increases.  Some of the more unusual expenses found in the 2017 budget includes a roof replacement for the Public Safety Building, estimated at $52,000.  The phone system that serves both city buildings is in excess of 15 years old and crashed a year ago.  Given the age of the system it was difficult to find replacement parts but we were successful in finding a circuit board that made the system functional but not at 100%.  This system replacement is estimated at $15,000.  Road Improvements, although assessed, consume $115,000 of levy for 2017.  Roadway improvements and seal coat maintenance costs are estimated at $505,500 for 2017. 

We continue to levy funds for future capital expenses.  Salary increases and health insurance also consume a good part of the budget.  A police squad car is replaced annually on a 6 year rotation with estimated costs of $34,850 is included.  Body cameras and a thermal imaging camera are also proposed for 2017.  Public works has proposed a carbide toothed blade for the grader as well as a gravel packer.  The intention here is to somewhat reconstruct gravel roads by stirring up the gravel and flattening it to give the surface a new finish extending the gravel and reducing the amount of grading.  This is proposed to reduce costs and give a better surface.

Not part of the levy, but improvements for the sewer system propose that lift station number 1 include a permanent bypass to the forcemain that delivers sewer to the wastewater plant and the replacement of the control panel there.  The sewer system was installed in 1976 and requires some maintenance and upgrades.  The proposed improvement expenditures here amount to $75,000. 

The overall expenditure budget for 2017 is budgeted at $2,692,663 with the revenue budget $2,703,583.  This gives us a small margin to deal with unknowns.  The budget and levy was adopted at the December meeting.  As such the levy was certified to the county for collection in 2017. 

"New" Public Works Truck

The city this past year purchased a new truck for the sewer department.  The replacement truck was purchased with a tool cabinet box and crane to use in servicing lift stations.  The existing tool cabinet box on the old sewer truck had seen better days as it was on its third truck chassis.  With holes in the tool cabinets we occasionally lost tools even though it had a series of patches intend to prevent these problems.  It had served its usefulness.  But this wasn’t the end of the story. 

With creative thinking the public works crew came up with an idea that created greater benefit out of the existing truck.  The story starts with a 2001 one-ton pickup truck that was used for plowing and had a small dump box installed.  This truck was F-350 and was seeing some wear from 15 years of use.  The dump box on this truck was still useable making it difficult to dispose of when the truck was replaced several years ago.  Keeping this truck as a backup unit gave the city some redundancy in equipment.  It continued to be able to be used for plowing if needed.  It also provided another truck with a dump box for uses that didn’t require a large dump truck. 

The 2008 one-ton truck sewer truck that was being replaced had a good chassis and engine with limited miles.  With the tool cabinet box removed it could be utilized to replace the old one-ton truck with the dump box.  With some effort the public works crew dismantled the 2008 sewer truck.  The tool cabinet with the crane was removed.  The crane had some worth so the box and the crane were offered on Craig’s List and were sold for $300.  The dump box from the 2001 pickup truck was removed and installed on the 2008 truck chassis.  The chassis of the older 2001 truck is now available for sale.  Bids will be received until December 27^th for this truck.

  

Moving things around provided for greater economy in resources from these three vehicles.  It provided some revenue in disposing of the equipment, while making the best of what we had.  The Public Works personnel had a great idea and followed through with it to make it all happen. 

Road Improvement and Assessment Policy

Breezy Point has a Road Improvement and Assessment Policy that was written perhaps 20 years ago.  This policy needed updating in a number of ways.

The policy went into detail about county roads and the fact that these are not maintained by the city.  As a city policy it made no sense to keep this in the policy.  The policy also included one road that was given to the county, Fawn Lake Road.  Another is no longer part of the city, Nelson Road.  We had a reference to Plant Road which has been renamed to Thrane Drive. These aspects needed to be dealt with.  

There was listing of roads considered Limited Access Roads which generally declared them substandard in some way but beyond that really had no policy implications. These roads when upgraded will require some special consideration, such as not meeting minimum specifications for an improved roadway, but no details were included as to what will or should occur. 

Minimum Maintenance Roads were defined as roadways “with no improved properties on them”.  Following this in the maintenance section of the policy was a statement that these roadways would be improved upon the building of a residence.  We don’t allow the building on properties that abut a minimum maintenance road until the roadway is brought up to standards.  This definition had been changed to “roadways not meeting minimum city standards”.  This change concerning how minimum maintenance roads are to be addressed was made when the city adopted standards for these roadways in 2005.  The change was made to the policy to reflect these current approaches.

 

The threshold for a petition for improvements under Minnesota Statutes 429 requires a 35% of the frontage of the property to be valid.  The policy required 35% of the property owners abutting the roadway, rather than frontage.  Another concern was the city policy has been changed to require 70% of the abutting frontage.  The larger threshold for a petition required a more committed group of property owners to want the improvement.  The lower threshold required the city to incur engineering expense to determine a cost, which in most circumstances resulted in property owners objecting to the proposed assessments.  The petition threshold was changed in the policy to be consistent with current policy. 

The financing of improvements required a two year assessment period at 7% interest or 1% over the cost of a bond.  The 2 year duration for assessments was difficult at best for property owners to deal with.  The interest expense was high, should not be set in policy, and should be determined by the city council based on the market at the time of the assessment.  Another problem with this is the city currently is financing improvements in house, there is no bond for the improvements. Changes were made here.

Assessment policies typically deal with corner lots paying for one side at 100% assessment and a 50% credit for the other roadway.  The policy had this in mind but defined the 100% side as the primary access side.  This didn’t address vacant property, what side is the primary access?  In addition we have a few lots with double frontage, front and back, and a few with triple frontage.  How are these handled?  To address these situations it was felt the first side of the property that is improved is assessed 100% of the cost and the second side assessed at 50%.  Properties with triple frontage would see assessments for only 2 sides.   

Finally the policy required at all times a 5-year Road Improvement Plan.  A number of road plans were adopted and halted due to the cost of improvement, the extent of debt service requirement, objections by home owners or other reasons.  The 5-year Road Plan was felt to be unrealistic as it assumed too many things would fall into place to make it happen.  A plan for road improvements was wanted but it needed to be achievable and realistic.  The required, “at all times a 5-year Road Plan”, was removed and we now work on road improvements as conditions allow. 

This rewrite of the policy clarified a good deal of the issues with it.  It really didn’t substantially change how properties would be assessed.  It did bring some clarity into the policy that was lacking.  It brought the policy up to date and it currently includes a track record of how projects are assessed.  We believe the policy as now written has removed the majority of the problems that plagued interpretation.  Hopefully these clarifications will accomplish the goal of a more straight forward policy.