Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/14/1989 TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ. SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 14, 1989 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding. 1) Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2) Presentation by County Highway Engineer on the transportation improvements in Shakopee including the Bloomington Ferry Bridge and Interchange with the Shakopee Southerly Bypass. 3) Pavement Management System 4) Resolution No. 3141 - Setting the Preliminary Tax Levy and General Fund Budget for 1989/90. 5) Other Business 6) Adjourn to November 21, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator OL MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer RE: County Road 18 DATE: November 8, 1989 INTRODUCTION a BACKGROUND: Several weeks ago a neighborhood group approached the City Council with concerns over the relocation of County Road 18 between the Shakopee By-pass and County Road 42. The City Council agreed with some of the concerns raised by the neighborhood group and made a motion to support the efforts to keep the alignment of County Road 18 where it presently is and to keep it as a two lane rather then a four lane and execute a traffic speed zoning study. City Council also directed staff to work with the Scott County Highway Engineer to resolve these issues and to provide additional information. As a result of these meetings and at Council direction, staff has scheduled a worksession for November 14, 1989. The worksession is for the purpose of providing Council with additional information regarding the County's plans for County Road 18. At this time, the County is not asking for any action on the part of the City Council, but simply wanted to provide Council with additional information. In December, a public hearing will be held on the Bloomington Ferry Bridge and at a later date, probably in early 1990, the County will be approaching the City Council for approval of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge and interchange with Shakopee By-pass. The relocation of County Road 18 south of this interchange is a completely separate County project and the timing on when the County will be requesting Council approval on that project has not been determined yet. The neighborhood group has been notified of the November 14, 1989 Council meeting and will be in attendance. Staff will be more then happy to answer Council members questions regarding this project prior to the meeting. 3 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator' �Mp'� FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engine eE �/ SUBJECT: Pavement Management System DATE: November 8 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Staff is requesting that the City Council consider utilizing a Pavement Management System for the City of Shakopee. This item was eliminated from the 1989 budget due to funding, but the issue came up again during this year's sealcoating project. A work session has been scheduled for Tuesday , November 14, 1989 to discuss Pavement Management Systems in general, the benefits it can bring to Shakopee and a proposed funding plan. In addition, staff has arranged for a representative from a company called, Pavement Management Systems, Inc. to give a presentation on their particular services. BACKGROUND: The current method of evaluating streets for the Pavement Preservation Program is to perform a "windshield inspection". By that I mean that on an annual basis City staff will drive every street in the City of Shakopee in an attempt to determine which streets are in need of overlaying , sealcoating or beyond preserving and in need of reconstruction. This is an extremely time consuming task and very unreliable. On the surface, a street may appear to be in relatively good condition but if the sub-base is deteriorated the street may actually need reconstruction and any money spent on overlaying or sealcoating would be wasted. Due to the technologies today and the need for municipalities to get the most out of the tax dollar , a more systematic and reliable system of evaluating pavements is needed . What is Pavement Management? Pavement Management is the process of making maintenance and rehabilitation decisions for the streets in a network. In the face of limited budgets , rapidly accelerating costs and deteriorating roadways, cost effective and timely decisions must be made if tax dollars are to be expended in the most cost effective manner. The heart of an effective Pavement Management System includes: 1 . An accurate and comprehensive condition survey ; i 2 . Development of reliable prediction models or performance curves ; 3 . Proper timing and economic evaluation of maintenance and rehabilitation procedures ; and 4 . Analysis of buget level impact on annual programs. Pavements deteriorate at different rates depending on traffic level , pavement thickness, soil condition and climatic conditions (freeze/thaw cycles) . Consequently, pavements in one part of the City will deteriorate more rapidly than residential streets. Streets which carry heavy traffic loads will reach a critical point of deterioration at which the load bearing capacity and the ride quality diminish at a much more rapid rate than in the earlier years of the pavements' life. Residential streets (low traffic volume) tend to deteriorate at a much more consistent rate. The critical point of deterioration is considered to be the point at which a major repair strategy, such as an overlay, is needed in order to restore the pavement to its original quality in terms of ride quality and load bearing capacity. If this critical point of repair is missed by one or more Years the cost of full pavement restoration rapidly increases Generally a delay of two or three Years will result in a rehabilitation cost four to five times as great as repair costs completed at the appropriate point in time . Precious tax dollars have been expended ineffectively . The attached graph clearly illustrates this point. It has been proved that a Pavement Management System will pay for itself in 2-3 years due to cost savings in proper street construction strategies. Without proper pavement condition information and reliable prediction models engineered to account for local conditions, the determination of the point at which a pavement will reach its critical point of deterioration is very difficult, if not impossible. City engineers and street maintenance staff can more readily make timely and cost effective decisions when utilizing the data produced by a well engineered Pavement Management System. Cost Suvary Staff has contacted several consultants in this field and has investigated which system would best serve the City of Shakopee. One of the consultants, Pavement Management Systems, Inc. will give a presentation on their service at the November 14 , 1989 Council meeting. 3 The services provided by Pavement Management Services, Inc, would cost the following: 1 . Data Collection a. Surface Distress and $120/Mile b. Deflection Survey $200/Mile Total $320/Mile 2. Reports and Analysis a. Hard Copy $ 5,000 b. Computer Software Series 20 $18,000 Series 30 $30,000 Series 40 $60 ,000 There is approximately 100 miles of City streets, so that total cost for the field collection data would be around $32,000. This number could be reduced by concentrating on urban Shakopee streets first. In analyzing the software capabilities, Series 20 or Series 30 would best suit the City of Shakopee. Staff feels that the Series 30 software would provide Shakopee with the best service in the long run and has much more capability in the number of variables that can be added in to the decision trees. Another consultant has submitted a cost estimate of approximately $250 per mile for the data collection and $20 ,000 for the software. A formal proposal will be sent to staff shortly. Several other firms presented their services to staff, but they do not meet the City of Shakopee' s needs in terms of providing direction in street construction strategies. These firms mainly collect the data and staff would need to analyze the information. Based on the two firms that would suit Shakopee, the total cost for a Pavement Management System would be around $45 ,000-$50 ,000. In addition every 3-5 years the field data would need to be upgraded to reflect new streets and new conditions. At this point in time, staff has not determined if this could be done in- house or contracted out . The surface analysis could theoretically be done by staff, but the distress survey would need to be contracted out due to the special equipment needed. FUNDING The City of Shakopee currently budgets $90 ,000-$100 ,000 annually for the Pavement Preservation Program. This money is used for overlay and sealcoat contracts. The 1989 budget is $95 ,000. Staff contends that the purchase and implementation of a Pavement Management System is n excellent use of that fund. In 1989 , a sealcoating contract was done at a cost of approximately $61 ,000. The remaining balance of the Pavement Preservation Fund is $34,000 . Staff feels that this balance can be utilized to obtain some of the field data in 1989. If not, part of the 1990 fund could be used for that purpose. The computer software could then be obtained in 1991 . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Authorize staff to enter into a contract to utilize Pavement Management Systems, Inc. to provide and implement a system in the City of Shakopee over a 2-year period, funded out of the Pavement Preservation Program. 2. Direct staff to solicit formal proposals from a minimum of 3 consultants before a decision is made on this request. 3 . Deny the request and direct staff to submit this request at budget time next year as an Engineering budget item, rather than use the Pavement Preservation Fund. 4 . Request additional information and table the request until staff can present this information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 or No. 2 . Staff feels strongly that a Pavement Management System is essential for ensuring the best use of City funds and tax dollars for street projects. This system will pay for itself within 2-3 years in cost savings for street construction by using facts and the actual condition of the streets to determine which construction should be done, rather than guessing at the proper strategy using a windshield inspection. A Pavement Management System will provide Council with a systematic way of prioritizing street projects annually. Other cities and counties in the metropolitan area are realizing the importance of such systems and the overall benefits in spending tax dollars wisely and are currently using some type of Pavement Management System. The Federal Highway Adminstration will require all state D . O . T.S to have a system by 1991 . Clearly, the technology is there and the City of Shakopee should use it. While staff feels the Pavement Management Systems, Inc. is a leader in this field and a very reputable firm, soliciting other proposals would certainly assist the City Council in making the final decision on this issue. 3 ACTION REQUESTED: Discuss the overall request and advantages/disadvantages of a Pavement Management System and direct staff to take the appropriate action. DH/pmp PAVEMENT 0 75% Time r FIGURE 1 j 40% Quality 0 Assume Slurry or Chip Seal Here Drop c� --Lowest Annual -Resurfacing-Cost ---------- - ---- Each =1.00 of Renovation Cost Acceptability Index Here o --------------------- ------------- - ---- ---------- -- - a Will Cost 14 to } 5 if Delayed to Here 40% Road Deterioration Quality a vs Drop Time 0 CL To Failure � 12%Time 4 8 12 I6 Years 3 g road he does it with a substantially S 75% Time different outlook than an engineer. FlGURE 1 The consumer evaluates only rough- mss. Panels of people were used by amnr AASRO to rate several lest sections. 'g amaw S"a,Clio scot tine fifep they were subjected to loading. The ratings were termed present se viceabUity rating (PSR). PSR was Pwowmn Cwt converted to present serviceability o ____.tm_emeilny kMex____________ index through curve filling in order to a wAl Cost !a to reduce evaluation costs,write a per. oLL 15 if Bilbld formance equalion, and encourage spy, lox n, the development of equipment which $ Rom Det mann n tluokly would produce the erre data as the asp panel. Time Of course,a jursidiction can estab- 8 Total Nil. hsh any lypeofcriterfaorlevelofser- tg%Tkw vice which it desires. For example, skid resistance mold be identified as the long parameter which, when it a e 2 16 decreases to a certain level, would neo,: trigger the need for work,Few juris- diction,today havethe fundsto follow What Is Pavement Management? this as a a,rakgy Most haves and counties strugglingo dee b have suffe- mai t funds a meet immediate programs a requirements. Capital programs and rehabilitation idue to pro- OENnt POLNILt., P.E. agement application of pavement grams have been gutted due to f the Pavement M oinsid ), Systems work levent el questions am: Some net- tion and budget cuts In view of the (Colorado). work level questions are: emosanic factors in Play today.mitt Lakewood,Colorado • What is the current level of ser- jurisdictions are concerned only will vim? maintainingrfor the maximum mount of PAVEMENT management is the ♦ What over happen w the levet of integrity f the minimum amount of process of making decisions service over thenext few years if the money. That means either( ar about pavements.It is a daffy activity budget is set now? preventing potholes.The situation at of agencies responsible for pave- • What streets should mains - the One locallevel n desperate. menta. In the context i which mance consideration for mainte- One pavement parameter which e dpavement management"is used lo- nonce or would th symptomatic of structure is surfed day,n infers utilizing more ireforma- ♦ What would lu the impact of a distress. Several standardized tion in ander b make those decisions change at traffic characteristicsi methods of performing surface ed. better. • What et maximum activity is re- tress surveys have been developed. In pavement management, l e at mornie to gel maxima_m benefit out of The most dmmon are:Asphalt Immune,tions are considered to be made at nffes expended? tote,Texas Transportation Institute, two levels: the project level and the mMy ssaur same pavementparalyse- Army Corps of FSurf di and Prov- network level. t total pavement ters may a meas firedprojectornevel twork level ince of Onmriu r ado distress and management system includes level may si measured y, network level vet's are popular among cities and project seven analysis, network level rutting, ride quality,skid resistance, counties because they are relatively analysis, and d information t - rutting, and structural capacity. simple b perform.They en be per- change back and forth between the Those most itypically used are ride formed by in-house engineering stag two levels. qualityroad (which g more commonly or i local consultants The befanra- Prokinlevel analysis uthe Process termed road roughtural surface adequacy. tion conte usedbesappl •'tows of looking intensely at particular tress, and structural adequacy. needs and has limited applications for en- big the rehabilitation the purpose to y being Pavement Management System has when summarized property for en- ing the ed for at pa emetegy being management a network level pavement gindring, maintenance, and man- con l anal (iniac pavement Project management systems based on rade agement )eves analysis is considered a en- of there three parameters asur of en referring b Figure 1, it can be management application o. pavement ally,serviceability but usually uses a measure l- byo eat he S times unco ifroha Lsinerease managementinformation. serviceability ),wind mics, deco- deferred only b5timesifrehabilitationle Project level analysts may include icy index ss, surface which uses all. and deferred mmy 12 percent ata pave- parameters,s of several pavement Roughness, uncydistress, and ment'e design life. For typical pave- parameters,cutting, as fide quality,skid converted adequacy are measured, twoments,y 12 percent view of this b t,about de- restsbnce, rutting, and structural converted et indicts, weighted, and two yeses bi view of this fact, de- capacity.y. The single parameter con- added b get PQLmli (erred Good management is very expen- s Network most lo structurals the pr. $¢Nleea611lty sive.Good management gone on that Network level analysis k the p (or rehabilitation ocean ata fine eas b est of Inking at entire system(or The during g the y concept was ein-st derive the greatest benefit ibl exThe network)of pavements.This is done in 19 donne the MSNO hood Test cion le serviceability) possible. The s answer network-wide questions, in was The opsit the et' concept problem becomes very compkxsinre such as which projects should et con- an ceffortonsumer him the perception of each different pavement structure MeMerad fors is co siden. Network theesconsumer into proper considers- has a different performance curve t analysis is considered a man- tion.Thatis,whenamommerfatesa and on similar structures with similar PMS PUBLIC WORKSJ"July. 19M construction is geneany considered Table 1—Annual Cost Summary, Utah DOT(1977) tobesuch a majdeofrerlakingthaHt uclassified ouc"de ndehakingt rain Annual Costs in Millions Dollars a third(capital project)category. System strategy Surfacing Maintenance Total Maintenance costs increase as ser- viceability declines. Tbis fact has A 484 1.35 629 been verified by several studies. PRIMARY 8 644 1.59 am The most widely known is research C 7.92 1.61 9.59 done by the Utah Department of D &85 1.16 10.61 Transportation (UDOT) which was referenced in NCHRP Report #58 A 523 2.71 7.94 (see Figure 2 and Table 1). For all SECONDARY 8 7.78 3.17 10.95 categories of roadway the least cost C 9.81 am 115 strategy was"AJ'where the highest D 10.37 3.50 13.87 service level was sustained. The highest cost was strategy "D" at A 2.53 082 3.35 which rehabilitation was deferred URBAN R 324 0.96 4.20 until such point that substantial in- C 3.97 1.01 4.98 creases in maintenance activity were D 433 106 5.39 required in response M public pres- sure to sustain serviceability.at a minimum acceptable level. Strategy "D" had been UDOT's mode of op- curves different pavements will be at Maintenance is defined as thoseaeon. a different point in their service lives. routine activities necessary to sustain One One of the best documented cases An important point can be con- the integrity of the pavement ctrl of successful implementation of a eluded here.Unless a jurisdiction has ture. Maintenanm activities include: network level pavement manage- a0 the money it needs for rehabilita- crack sealing, chip sealing, and ment system is the Regional Muniei- tion,it is almost certainly a mistake to pothole patching. They do cot add polity of Ouawa-Carlebn, Canada, program rehabilitation on a "worst- scantly to the pavement ffiuc- whose Transportation Director is first^basis.Maximum benefit errant lure and do not extend serviceability. Michael J. E- Shefhn, P.E. In 1980, be derived from the limited public Maintenance activities preserve ser- Onawa-Carleton's road budget was funds available if an agency,binds it- viceability. 14 cre ntlessinadualdollarsand,13 self to a "worst-first" programming Rehabilitation is def ed as those percent less in inflated dollars than it philosophy. activities which restore the pavement was in 19Tf. Al the same time,aver- Within the field of pavement man- stmdure in whole or in part to ongi- age service level was improved.Shef- agement the terns of maintenance nal condition.Rehabilitation activities lin gives credit for this accomplish- and rehabilitation are distinguished would metude:overlaying,recycling, cut to the progressiveness of his Dean each other. padding,and shrtdual patching.Re- council. O® OMIeEilblim YNn W O eeM6it on.IMea 25 S S err,b aabll c. .easy i. ._arab 4 1 _________--______--_ it zt 2 S O 6 20 25 30 35 40 45 5 p IS 20 25 30 se a1 TEAe9 Y C na+e9Mbe Mdv Ea O 4l'" 14hm90NKe 5 n5 archly Iza I araly as o3 --_as _— —— ------- g 1 I c 5 5 10 LS 20 30 W 40 45 YEOAS YEARS ■ FIGURE 2 GrapNnl representation a the tour rehabilitation strategies. 0PMS_1U1_nf_ LIC WOor July, 1982 y MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Resolution No. 3141 Setting Preliminary Tax Levy for 1989/90 DATE: November 9, 1989 INTRODUCTION: Pursuant to Council discussion of November 8, 1989, Resolution No. 3141 has been prepared to implement the consensus of Councils intention regarding the pay 1990 tax levy and general fund budget. BACKGROUND: The new tax law recently adopted sets a November 15th deadline for cities to certify a preliminary tax levy and budget to the County Auditor. Resolution No. 3141 sets the preliminary levy and general fund budget in accordance with Councils discussion at the November 8th meeting. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Adopt Resolution No. 3141 as drafted. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 3141 as modified. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1. ACTION REOUESTED: Move to offer Resolution No. 3141 a Resolution Setting the Preliminary Tax Levy and General Fund Budget for 1989/90 and move its adoption. Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: 1989 General Fund - Fund Balance Date: November 3, 1989 Introduction The General Fund fund balance at the beginning of the year was about 49% of the current year appropriations. Council has the discretion to decide what to do with the funds. Background The Council has set a fund balance target of 30-408 of expenditures. The previous target was 25-308. This was increased due to Moody's viewing a higher fund balance as favorable and uncertainties about the reliability of state aid payments. The fund balance at the beginning of the year was about 49%. Council has up to $800,000 to work with less the use of some fund balance for the 1990 budget. This is a general fund resource and Council can use it for any legal purpose. Two years ago, Council transferred $296,000 into the Capital Improvement Fund. The State Legislature started looking at the level of city's fund balance this year with the possibility of reducing aids or levy limits for those cities with larger fund balances. Therefore, it is suggested that the Council take action before the end of the year to transfer or reserve some fund balance in order to preclude or mitigate unfavorable action on the part of the legislature. All of the alternatives below relate to tax relief in some manner, either by direct levy reduction or by avoiding or reducing the need to levy in a future year. Alternatives 1. Create reserve for capital equipment expenditures in the General Fund. 2. Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund. (City Hall, Community Center, 2nd Fire Station, Front-end financing for other projects, Revolving Fund for internal financing) 3. Transfer to a Capital Project Fund to reduce need for future tax levy (3rd Ave. will be paid for by $700,000+ in tax levy) 4. Transfer to Capital Equipment Fund 5. Levy reduction for payable 1990 below the levy limit. Recommendation Alternative #1. The Capital Equipment Fund is being depleted . and additional funding sources are needed to meet the equipment needs of the City. Setting up the reserve in the General Fund should shelter the funds from State scrutiny and yet allow the Capital Equipment Fund to be closed when depleted which make for easier understanding of City finances and simplified administration by having fewer funds. Not recommended is Alternative #5 due to the pattern of the state cutting off andy unused levy limit authority as was just done for 1990 when the City did not use all of the levy limit authority for pay 1989. GV:met TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: 1990 Budget DATE: November 6 , 1989 Introduction The City needs to publish notice of the public hearing for the tax levy for 1990. Council should decide the amount of tax levy to be included in the notice . Backeround Council needs to set a new date for the public hearing on the budget and the tax levy. The notice must be published in the Minneapolis Star Tribune . The cost of the ad will be $215 . 16 for the community section. Also , a new certification of the maximum tax levy and the budget must be made to the County Auditor by November 15 , 1989 . Final certification is December 28 , 1989 . The tax levy for 1988/89 was $1, 730 , 198 and the proposed levy to be certified to the County Auditor is $2 , 167 , 859 . This represents a 25 . 38 difference. It must be kept in mind that because of the new tax law, the city loses local government aid (LGA) in exchange for more tax levy authority. Theoretically, there is a tax trade between cities and schools with no net effect on the tax payer because of the swap . The City loses $361 , 780 in LGA for a net increase in revenue between tax 1 evy and LGA of 2 . 7% or S88 244 . The school gains state aid and loses tax levy authority. The School Board levy will not be known until after the election. The County levy was previously announced in the local paper as increasing by 11 .+8 , but this may not be the final number . Factors affecting taxes payable 1990 include ; 1) School referendum of 19 mills recalled but may be replaced by one for 13+/- mills , for a net reduction of 6 mills . 2) Based on the school' s biannual cycle of tax up and downs , next year should be a down year for the school tax levy. 3) Auditors error in reporting values will be corrected in 1990 for an estimated reduction for one year of 14 mills (total taxes) . The consultant doing the tax study has estimated that the effect on City taxes will be as if the city levied $200, 000 to $250 , 000 less for payable 1990 . 4) End result of the new tax law is unknown. Council should consider the merits of raising taxes next year in an effort to stabilize taxes as well as the factors of keeping taxes down and meeting the needs of financing city services . The following budget cuts are already built in the draft budget that Council has previously received: Contingency (leaves $160,000) $50,000 Accountant position (new) 27 , 200 Planning Intern (existing) 15 ,000 Street LEO position (1989 hire) 25 ,000 Police Workers compensation premium 4,000 Police liability insurance 11 ,000 Street Fuel 3 , 000 Street Equipment maintenance 8 , 000 Street Professional services 6 ,000 Pool equipment maintenance 2 ,000 Forestry professional services 2 ,000 Street surface material 3 .000 156 , 200 The draft 1990 General Fund Budget at this point is a 4 . 18 increase over the original 1989 budget (expenditures and other uses) . It also represents a deficit or draw down of fund balance of $214, 593 and that is with the proposed maximum tax levy included. Council may want to use General Fund fund balance for the below listed items . This will reduce the pressure on current revenues (taxes) and use some of the fund balance that is in excess of the target range of 30 - 408 . Fund balance used for; Contingency $100, 000 Murphy' s Landing 50, 000 Paint interior fire station 3 , 000 Scott County Transportation Coalition 10, 500 Repave Library parking lot 15 ,000 Furniture for Engineering 1,800 Public Works Carpet 1 ,400 Paint interior of PW Shop 2 , 500 Pool concession plumbing 5 . 000 189 , 200 The pool concession plumbing, 3M Opticom and second fire station site are not in the draft General Fund Budget. It is now recommended that the 3M Opticon System and the second fire station site be budgeted in the Capital Improvement Fund and paid for by a transfer of fund balance from the General Fund in 1989 . Adding the pool concession remodeling in gives a budget deficit of $219 , 593 . Using fund balance for $189 , 200 worth of expenditures offsets the deficit of $219 , 593 for a net deficit of $30 . 393 . Recent changes not included in the draft budget that have an impact include : Comm. Dev. Director position not filled ($54 , 360) Secretary position (28 , 565) City Administrator not at top step (8 , 170) Police Chief not at top step (5 , 600) Add Planner I 30 ,000 Asst. Administrator increase 3 ,000 Temporary police officer 10 ,000 Add Clerk Typist II 26 , 100 Council Salary 9 ,495 Pool concession plumbing 5 ,000 Add' 1 1/28 wage provision 11 .000 Total Savings or reduction (2, 100) Any reduction of tax levy results in using fund balance for regular recurring operating expenditures unless more budget cuts are made. Alternatives 1 . Discuss budget/tax levy and decide what levy amount and budget to certify to the County Auditor and to put in the public hearing notice . 2 . Adjourn to November 9th or 14th for a work session to decide what amounts to levy and put in the public hearing notice . Action Beauested Discuss and give staff direction as to what tax levy and budget amount to certify to the County Auditor and to publish in the notice of public hearing for the tax levy. General Fund 1990 Budget Overview 11/6/89 Taxes Pay 1989 Levy $1 , 730 , 198 Maximum Pay 1990 Levy 2 , 167 , 859 Increase 437 , 661 25% Loss of state aid (361 , 780) Net increase 75 , 881 4% Expenditures Original 1989 Budget $4 , 268 , 924 Original 1990 Draft 4 , 442 , 095 Increase 173 , 171 48 List of changes C2 , 100) Remaining increase 171 , 071 Use of Fund Balance Original 1990 Draft drawdown (104 , 880) Revised (new tax law 6 max levy) (214 , 593) List of changes _ 2 . 100 Net 212 , 493 List for use of fund balance 189 , 200 Fund Balance Level Draw down to 308 level - available $800 , 000 Transfer to capital Improvement Fund 2nd Fire Station Site (200 , 000) 3M Opticon System (80 , 000) 1990 Budget drawdown (212 .493) Balance available for other use ? 307 , 500 City of Shakopee Budget Calendar November 8 Discuss budget November 9/14 Budget Worksession November 14 Adopt Resolution certifing preliminary levy and budget to the County Auditor November 15 Levy 6 Budget certification to County Auditor November 16 Submit Hearing notice to Star/Tribune November 22/3 Hearing Notice Published December 7 Public Hearing December 12 Continuation of Public Hearing December 7/12 Adopt 1989/90 tax levy Resolution (final) December 19 Adopt 1990 budget (final) December 28 Certification of final tax levy and budget to County Auditor April 15 Tax statements mailed to propertyholders by County Auditor General Fund 1990 Budget Overview 11/6/89 Taxes Pay 1989 Levy $1, 730, 198 Maximum Pay 1990 Levy 2 , 167 , 859 Increase 437 , 661 258 Loss of state aid (361 , 780) Net increase 75 , 881 48 Expenditures Original 1989 Budget - $4, 268 , 924 Original 1990 Draft 4,442 , 095 Increase 173 , 171 48 List of changes (2 , 100) - Remaining increase 171 ,071 Use of Fund Balance Original 1990 Draft drawdown (104, 880) Revised (new tax law 6 max levy) (214, 593) List of changes 2 , 100 Net 212 ,493 List for use of fund balance 189 , 200 Fund Balance Level Draw down to 308 level - available $800 , 000 Transfer to Capital Improvement Fund 2nd Fire Station Site (200 , 000) 3M Opticon System (80 , 000) 1990 Budget drawdown (212 ,493) Balance available for other use ? 307 , 500 odev gg6".eS5 SQ, MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Deputy Chief John J. DuBois DATE: November 14, 1989 RE: Replacing existing vacancy of Police Clerk Typist II RESUME: After advertising and reviewing applicants for Police Clerk Typist II, and then conducting oral interviews, I am recommending the hiring of Donna Hyatt, who has been employed by the Eden Prairie Police Dept. for the past 13 years. She comes with a strong background in all phases of police clerical and administrative duties. I am recommending that she start with the City of Shakopee Police Dept. at one level below top pay grade for Clerk Typist II and after six months be evaluated and upon a successful evaluation be placed at the top pay grade for Clerk Typist II. I would recommend her employment start on Monday, December 4th, 1989. This time frame fits with the applicant. I am confident Ms. Hyatt would do an extraordinary job for the Police Dept. and the City of Shakopee. Sincerely, Deputy .ef