2014.10.09 Work Session Packet4141 Douglas Drive North • Crystal, Minnesota 55422-1696
Tel: (763) 531-1000 • Fax: (763) 531-1188 • www.crystalmn.gov
AL
CRYSTAL CITY COUNCIL
WORK SESSION AGENDA
Thursday, October 9, 2014
7:00 p.m.
Conference Room A
Posted: October 3, 2014
Pursuant to due call and notice given in the manner prescribed by Section 3.01 of the City
Charter, the work session of the Crystal City Council was held at p.m. on Thursday,
October 9, 2014 in Conference Room A located at 4141 Douglas Drive, Crystal, Minnesota.
I. Attendance
Council members Staff
Peak Norris
Selton Therres
Adams Hansen
Budziszewski Revering
Deshler Norton
Hoffmann
Libby
II. Agenda
The purpose of the work session is to discuss the following agenda items:
• Labor Negotiations*
• Street Maintenance Fund update
• 2015 budget follow-up
• Robbinsdale referenda
*Portions of this discussion may be closed pursuant to State law
III. Adjournment
The work session adjourned at p.m.
Auxiliary aids are available upon request to individuals with disabilities by calling the City Clerk at (763)
531-1145 at least 96 hours in advance. TTY users may call Minnesota Relay at 711 or 1-800-627-3529.
M emorandum
C11 Y of
CRYSTAL
DATE: October 2, 2014
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Kim Therres, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Labor Relations
The Council will be discussing labor relations in general as well as future contracts at its
October 9 work session. In accordance with state law, portions of the meeting will be
closed.
The arbitration award in the case between the City of Crystal and Law Enfocement
Labor Services, Local 44 (Patrol Officers) has been received. The award calls for a
2.0% increase in 2014 and a 2.5% increase in 2015 with no market adjustment. The
agreement will also include changes to insurance contributions and some language
changes. The 2014 adopted budget and 2015 preliminary budget includes sufficient
funds for the wage and benefit increase.
This is the first settlement of the three bargaining units for 2015. The Local 56 (Police
Supervisors) are not settled beyond 2013, and the Local 49 (Public Works) are settled
through 2014. Meetings have been scheduled with Locals 56 and 49 for late October.
Labor Relations Attorney Frank Madden, City Manager Anne Norris and I will be at the
work session to answer questions.
Memorandum
Wy er
CRYSTAL
DATE: October 2, 2014
TO: Mayor and City Council
Anne Norris, City Manager
FROM: Charles Hansen, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Review Street Maintenance Fund
A new Street Maintenance Fund analysis is attached. Several of the underlying
assumptions have changed since the last time this was discussed at a work session.
The current assumptions are as follows:
• Mill and overlay projects will be 60% assessed to benefited properties and the
assessments will be collected over ten years instead of the five years assumed in
the earlier analysis. This worsens the cash flow situation since it now takes ten
years to collect the special assessments instead of five years.
• Costs that can be submitted for reimbursement from Municipal State Aid for
Streets (MSA) will be submitted. This helps to cover the 40% of mill and overlay
project costs that aren't assessed, but there is still an unfunded revenue gap.
• The third sealcoat project following reconstruction has been eliminated since the
mill and overlay projects happen before the third sealcoat comes up. The first
sealcoat following the mill & overlay happens at about the time the third sealcoat
project following reconstruction would have happened.
• The first and second sealcoat projects following reconstruction are paid for by the
transfer from the General Fund because residents are still paying for the
reconstruction special assessment.
• Three sealcoat projects are shown after the mill & overlay. The first sealcoat
following the mill & overlay is paid for by the Street Maintenance Fund because
residents will still be paying for the mill & overlay special assessment.
• The second and third sealcoat projects after the mill & overlay will be assessed
to benefited properties and the special assessments will be collected over three
years.
This analysis shows the fund balance going negative in 2018, recovering briefly from
2021 through 2024, then going negative for the remainder of the period analyzed.
Substantial additional revenues need to be identified to cover the 40% of the mill &
overlay projects that aren't assessed and sealcoat project costs that exceed the transfer
from the General Fund.
10/2/2014 2:39 PM
CITY OF CRYSTAL
_
STREET MAINTENANCE FUND ANALYSIS
Mill & overlay assessment
will equal 60% of the costs
and
will pay off over 10 years
and 5% interest will be charged.
Seal coat assessments
will pay
off over 3
years and 5% interest will be charged.
Assumes 20% of properties will prepay special assessments. The third
sealcoat after reconstruction won't happen because the mill
& overlay will happen first.
Residents will be
assessed for the second &
third sealcoat after mill & overlay. MSA will pay for mill & overlay of MSA streets.
-�-Post
Mill & Overlay
�,
-
- -
-- - --
--
-
-
----
Mill & Second' Third,
Overlay, Sealcoat Sealcoat'
Other
Sealcoats after Reconstruction
5867
Business Unit 5866
Sealcoats after Mill & 0 rlay Ending
Gen FD
Special'
Special 1 Special
City
Invest
First Sealcoat
Second Sealcoat
Patch
Mill & Overlay
First Sealcoat
Second Sealcoat
Third Sealcoat Fund
Year
Contrib.
Assmt.
Assmt.i Assmt.,
M.S.A.!
Reimb.
Earnings
Phase, Costs
Phase Costs
Ph 1 -3
Phase
Costs
Phase'i
Costs
Phase Costs
Phase Costs Balance
2010
65,3001
5 43 60
�
272,773;
55,419
1 101,366
36th Ave,
752,012
1,989,992
9,425
47,107
--
-
2&3 289,528
8,738
36th Ave';
862
1,908,638
-
'
- -- - - -
2011 167,250' 34,9921
2012,
69,300
��
37,387
I
23,159
6 158,450
7,025
36th Ave
84
--
1,872,925
2013
71,400;
45,904'
20,726;
3,815
7 114,355
45,626
79
_
1,854,710
2014
72,800
147,437
24,390
18,547
40,000
1',
1,000,000
1,077,885
2015,
74,300,
116,322,
1
0
10,779
j8�
_
40,000
1,239,285
2016'
76,529
105,550'
6,764
18,589
97,547
4 105,023
20,000
1,224,148
2017
78,825
240,376
62,533'
24,483
2
1,270,000
-
360,365
2018'
81,190
196,1881
I
7,5
9,009
9i 98,577
5, 57,976
-
-
3'
1,365,000
-
- - -
-- -
- -329,239
2019
83,6251
285,8681,
--
108,626
14, 588
9,877
10' 141,215
4
903,000
_ -897,624
2020''
86134
-
242,353
---�_
335,369
0'
-26,929
�
_
',
-- -
- - - -
- -
-
-260,696
-
2021
88,718,
218,5381
398,0461,
10,318
-7,821
11'1 77,384
6, 121,751
1
101,528
_
146,440
2022
91,380
277,925
351,081
100,634
4,393
12 114,776
7 74,604
--
5'
760,000
_ 22,473
2023
94,121'
237,140
-�
64,368
8,319
674
8 119,970
_
307,125
2024
96,945
285,074
�-
14,4311
9,214
13 122,217
_
2'
134,393
456,180
20251
99,8531
425,6431
- --
230,706'
11,652
13,685
9 121,238
61
1,659,955
3
142,373
--
-685,847
2026
350,644
108,877
20,575
14
119,373
10! 173,677
___-
7
_ -_
1,017,159
4
---- _--
101,192
_
I -1,096,421
_�
2027--
10 391459
582,442'1
298,4821
56,712;
32,893
-
-
8
1,635,684
-1,721,427
20281
109,112'
460,521
23,755' - -
11,928
-51,643
15 126,135
11'
-__
95,172
1' 124,866
-1,513,927
2029
112,385
_- -
40,225
170,996'
-
79,420
-45,418
_
_
_ 12
141,160
9
1,652,965
5'
80,252
_
-2,462,516
2030
115,757,
729,575
35,132
547,948
129,041
- 73,875
16
151,318
10
2,367,920
--
-3,498,175
--
2031
619,802
57,231'.
17,749''
-104,945 --�-
13
150,311
2 165,287
- - ', -3,104,706
2032
_119,230'
122,807 -
85,550
_
65
40,329
3,141
- --
11�
--
1,297,586
7
168,531
3 175,101
124,453
-3,881,244
2033,
126,491;
8108,088
128,323,
620,142
17815
-196,437
141
146,814
12
1,924,580
103,270
4'---
-4,486,424
203 t
130,285
941,421'
128,349;
499,250
22,528,
-134,593
-�
_13
1,989,659
T
166,067
-5,054,909
2035,
134,194,
1,024,629
77,192
_
29,216
351,641'
96,347'
-151,647
_
15'
155,130
14
1,886,762
- -
_
11 153,570 -5,688,800
2036
138,220
843,213,
44,518,
49,472
29,899
-170,664
9
167,822
5; 98,700
-5,020,663
2037
968,350'
26,785',
43,208:
373,056
33,114
-150,620
16
186,102
-
15'
1,993,643
10
240,409
- --_
j -6,004,557
E142,366
1
23,393
70,387
280,955
79,341
I
--
16
2,322,012
2 203,28211 -7,052,776
2039'
15,037
983,829'
59,4821
105,215
-
T
- 2811 583
_-
- -
- --
----11 -
131,741
-
6 207,272
3 215,352 -6,580,027
2040
g
155,568, 771, 83
91,261
157,822'
37,632
-197,401
12
195,398
7 127,009
4; 153,0621 -6,038,631
2041
160,235 629,975
135,286
157,853
16,399
-181,159
13
202,005
8 204,241
-5,526,289
- 5,470,654 15,054,419'1 956,483'
613,173 5,502,3121 1,457,594 -1,040,521
1,612,057
2,039,821
161,389
25,839,961
2,225,691
1,226,929
725,265
10/2/2014 2:39 PM
Memorandum
CITY of
CRYSTAL
DATE: October 1, 2014
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Anne Norris, City Manager
SUBJECT: 2015 Budget — Future Work Session Discussions
At its September 2 meeting, the City Council approved the preliminary levy for the 2015
budgets. The general fund levy was 2%, and the overall levy for all budgets was slightly
over 2%. The preliminary levy for the general fund generally maintains the current level
of services. Based on the Council's 4-3 vote, I assume there is some dissatisfaction
with the budget as presented. At the last budget work session in August when the
proposed budget changes for a 2% levy were presented, several councilmembers had
concerns about some of the suggested changes.
Once the budgets are preliminarily approved, the Council typically spends additional
work sessions refining the budgets prior to final adoption in December. Before bringing
the budgets back to work sessions for additional discussion, it would be helpful to know
what additional information the Council needs or wants.
At its October 9 work session, the Council should provide direction and what other
information would be useful for future 2015 budget discussions.
Attach:
Memorandum
CITY of
CRYSTAL
DATE: October 1, 2014
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Anne Norris, City Manager fj"V—
SUBJECT: Robbinsdale Area Schools Levy Requests
As you know, the Robbinsdale Area School District has two levy requests on the 2014
general election ballot. One question is regarding renewing the existing operating levy
and the second question is regarding the addition of a technology levy.
In the past the City Council has considered endorsing local school district funding
requests because of the correlation between good schools and strong communities.
The Council should discuss whether to act on the current Robbinsdale levy requests.
Attach:
On November 4, Robbinsdale Area School District
residents will be asked to vote on two school funding
requests:
Question 1: Renew the existing operating levy
Question 2: Add a technology levy
Q1: Renew existing operating levy
1. No tax increase if approved by voters
2. Helps maintain lower than average class sizes
3. Funds daily school and district operations such as
classroom supplies, staff salaries, building
maintenance and transportation
4. Provides $20 million per year, which is the
equivalent of 225 teachers or the entire staffing
costs of five elementary schools
5. The school board has made tough decisions,
cutting more than $18 million since 2000-01 to
maintain a balanced budget
Q2: Add a technology levy
1. Robbinsdale Area Schools is one of the few school
districts in Hennepin County that does not
currently have a voter -approved capital project
levy to provide funds for technology
2. Technology is necessary to adequately prepare
students to thrive in our digital world and join a
highly -skilled 21st century workforce
3. Funds would be used to increase technology
access for students and staff, support personalized
learning and expand technology for teaching and
learning
4. A technology levy would provide a stable source of
funding to enable the school district to fully
implement its comprehensive, research -based
technology plan to support student learning
5. If approved, the tax impact on the median value
district home ($195,000) would be $7 per month
VoterRequest Monthly
Q1: Renew existing operating levy $0
Q2: Add a technology levy $7
* Tax increases are based on the $195,000 median value
home in the district
sdale Area
:hoofs
1 How was this decision made? 1
1 The two levy requests are based on a thoughtful, 1
deliberative process - the school board spent several
1 months reviewing district finances, technology needs, 1
community surveys and funding options before
1 unanimously deciding to put both levy requests on the 1
1 ballot. The operating levy is a renewal, not an 1
increase, and the capital project levy for technology
1 is lower than most neighboring districts. 1
6 .. i
The school district would be able to continue to
offer lower than average class sizes at all grade levels,
sustain its wide range of quality educational options and
maintain a balanced budget - with no tax increase for
homeowners.
The school district would need to begin planning for
$20 million in budget reductions that would be
necessary for the 2016-17 school year. $20 million is the
equivalent of 225 teachers or the entire staffing costs of
five elementary schools.
Robbinsdale students and staff would have increased
access to up-to-date technology in 21st century
classrooms, allowing more efficient ways of teaching.
District staff could move forward on a 10 -year
technology plan knowing there is a stable funding
stream that would sustain both its quality and
effectiveness. Specifically, technology levy funds would
be used to:
• Help teachers manage student learning
• Provide instant feedback on assessments
• Help students learn according to their learning style
• Give students more learning options
• Provide access to information from anywhere,
anytime
ology Need Year One
Budget'
Technology for schools, classrooms and students -
Add and maintain interactive whiteboards, digital
projectors, classroom sound systems, classroom
assessment tools, computer tabs, mobile technologies,
teacher workstations and audio/video equipment to $2 520,000
improve the classroom learning environment. Provide
and maintain a personal learning device (Chromebook
or comparable device) for all students in grades 5-12 to
ensure anytime, anywhere access to classroom learning
resources and communication tools.
Technology Systems, Support & Training -
Provide instructional technology systems, support and $720,000
training to deliver and sustain more efficient and
effective teaching and learning practices.
Network Infrastructure - Maintain and replace access
points, routers, servers and other network equipment $260,000
to ensure a secure and robust network environment.
Total Year One Budget S3,500,000,
The school district's technology plan - which details how
technology will support student learning - would have
to compete for funding with other basic district capital
needs, such as security equipment, textbooks, roofs,
parking lots and other building maintenance. Without a
fully -funded technology plan:
• The school district would struggle to provide
updated computers and other technology for students
and staff. Equipment would become outdated, slow
or unusable with increased repair expenses.
• Students would not have access to the same
opportunities that neighboring school districts offer,
resulting in a technology gap.
• Student access to online classroom resources and
tools would be limited.
• Staff would be limited in the amount of attention
they could provide individual students and would not
have the same level of information about each
student's progress.
• Cuts would need to be made to the district's budget in
order to maintain basic levels of technology.
• There would be slower turnaround times for family
and community requests of teachers and district staff.
Prepared and paid for by the Robbinsdale Area Schools.
This publication is not circulated on behalf of any candidate or ballot question.
Robbinsdale Area Schools is one of the few school districts in
Hennepin County that does not currently have a voter -approved
capital project levy to provide funds for technology. If approved, the
technology levy would generate $3.5 million per year to help fund
the Robbinsdale Area Schools technology plan.
Did You Know?
Research shows that public school quality is
one of the most important determinants of
home value.
•
Schools directly affect a community's vitality
and home resale values.
ROBBINSDALE
Area Schools
Individual focus. Infinite potential.
6.19.2014
Technology is a vital tool for students to be career and college
ready. Technology -literate graduates are prepared to thrive in
our digital world and join a highly skilled 21st century workforce.
However, Robbinsdale Area Schools is one of the few Hennepin
County school districts without a voter -approved capital project
levy to provide funds for technology. A technology levy would
provide a stable source of funding for the technology tools that
students and staff need to succeed in today's digital world.
What is the technology levy request?
�w-:,;KAE-- The request is for approximately
$3.5 million per year for ten
I`" years to fund the school district's
comprehensive, research -based
�., technology plan. This plan is
updated every three years and is
the basis for all technology
purchases and decisions.
Without a technology levy, this
plan must compete for funding
with other important district capital needs such as security
equipment, textbooks, roofs, parking lots and other building
maintenance. The current district budget does not include enough
money to fully implement the district's technology plan to support
student learning. If voters approve the plan, the tax impact on the
median value district home ($195,000) would be $7 per month.
What role does technology play in Robbinsdale Area
Schools?
Technology Helps Teachers
Manage Student Learning - }
Teachers use software in the
classroom to share classroom
information and to
communicate with students t»
and families. Teachers use
Schoology, a learning
management system, to
organize resources such as links and videos for students and
families, accept assignments digitally, host online discussions and
provide online quizzes. Each student and family has their own
secure account through which they can communicate, learn, access
and provide information. The Compass Odyssey integrated learning
system helps students in grades 3-5 gain math enrichment and
support; grades 6-8 receive math and language arts intervention
and acceleration; grades 9-12 take hybrid online/in-class courses,
credit recovery, and advanced course options.
Technology Helps Students Learn According to their Learning
Style - Not all students learn in the same ways. Classroom
learning can be personalized to accommodate individual learning
styles through the use of technology. Teachers can upload videos,
provide links to detailed articles, and load practice assignments.
Students can learn material in the way they learn best - either
through auditory, visual or hands-on methods.
Technology Gives
Students More
Learning Options -
The options for learning are
expanded through the use of
technology. One example is
the use of Open Educational
Resources (OER), which are
freely licensed documents
and media that are useful `
for teaching, learning,
educational, assessment and research purposes. Some OER courses
are already in use, including 6th and 7th grade social studies
courses; 20 more courses should be ready to pilot in fall 2014.
Another example is the use of hybrid courses, which combine online
learning with in -class learning. Robbinsdale Area Schools has
developed and offered 12 semester credits of hybrid courses in the
high schools.
Technology Allows Access to Information From Anywhere - Cloud
computing makes communication and learning mobile - available
anytime, anywhere. One example is Google Apps, which provides
storage and applications that work on any wired or mobile device:
desktop, laptop, Chromebook, tablet or smartphone. Students use
applications to integrate their notes, web resource links, audio and
video clips and other resources in one place, creating a cumulative
portfolio of learning over time. Lost notes and forgotten
assignments are a thing of the past.
What Can Technology Look Like in a 21st Century Classroom?
Robbinsdale Area Schools has worked hard to integrate
technology into its classrooms for student learning, but
limited resources have made it a challenge to sustain the
level of technology that students and teachers need.
The following are examples of opportunities currently
available in some classrooms that could be expanded to
more classrooms with additional technology funding - or
opportunities that could be added if dedicated technology
funding were available.
1. Collaboration - Students gather in small groups to work
on a project using a Chromebook laptop to access the
information they need, take group notes and post
responses to teacher questions.
2. Science Experiments - Students use Vernier technology
and probes that link directly to computers to complete
science experiments, log data, do graphing/analysis and
solve complex science and math problems. By using these
tools and learning these skills, students develop into the
next generation of scientists and engineers.
3. Online Accelerated Learning - Students who have
mastered a lesson can move ahead to the next lesson
ahead of their peers by using their Chromebook or other
personalized device and the Compass Odyssey integrated
learning system and
curriculum. The teacher can see which lessons each
student has mastered and facilitate the learning of all
students in the class at each student's own pace.
4. Unique Presentations - Students use digital
presentation and video creation programs on their
devices to present book reports, share information and
complete assignments.
5. Accessing the World - Students use Skype and
teleconferencing programs to join lectures at universities,
zoos, international events, NASA and much more.
6. Interactive Learning - Teachers use SMART boards, or
electronic whiteboards, and handheld devices to
demonstrate a lesson through interactive learning
activities that can be built like games to motivate and
engage students in their learning.
7. Instant Feedback - Teachers use digital assessments to
provide instant feedback to students on their assignments.
Knowing each student's progress enables teachers to make
changes to the teaching or resources provided.
8. a -Books - Students read e -books on Chromebooks, iPads
and other digital devices, with the ability to make notes
online, add bookmarks to flag key information and
download new books instantly.
Funding: Technology for Learning
Technology for schools, classrooms and students -
Add and maintain interactive whiteboards, digital
projectors, classroom sound systems, classroom
assessment tools, computer labs, mobile
technologies, teacher workstations and audio/video
equipment to improve the classroom learning
environment. Provide and maintain a personal
learning device (Chromebook or comparable device)
for all students in grades 5-12 to ensure anytime,
anywhere access to classroom learning resources and
communication tools.
$2,520,000
Technology Systems, Support & Training - Provide
instructional technology systems, support and $720,000
training to deliver and sustain more efficient and
effective teaching and learning practices.
Network Infrastructure - Maintain and replace access
points, routers, servers and other network equipment $260,000
to ensure a secure and robust network environment.
Total Year One Budget
$3,500,000
' The school board reviews its educational priorities and expenses annually
and will adjust these expenditures as necessary for changes in technology
and priorities over the ten years of the levy.
Hopkins
Eden Prairie
Bloomington
Edina
Wayzata
Richfield
Minnetonka
St. Louis Park
Westonka
Orono
Robbinsdale
(if voters approve)
Osseo
Robbinsdale (current)
Voter -Approved Capital Project/Technology Levies
$0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200
Dollars Per Student
Source: Minnesota Department of Education. October 2013 Enrollment and FY14 Levy Certification
Robbinsdale students and staff would have increased access to
up-to-date technology, in 21st century classrooms, allowing more
efficient ways of teaching. District staff could move forward on a
10 -year technology plan knowing there is a stable funding stream
that would sustain both its quality and effectiveness.
Specifically, technology levy funds would be used to:
• Help teachers manage student learning
• Provide instant feedback on student assessments
• Help students learn according to their learning style
• Give students more learning options
• Provide access to information from anywhere, anytime
The school district's technology plan - which details how
technology will support student learning - would have to
compete for funding with other basic district capital needs,
such as security equipment, textbooks, roofs, parking lots and
other building maintenance. Without a fully -funded technology
plan:
• The school district would struggle to provide updated
computers and other technology for students and staff.
Equipment would become outdated, slow or unusable
with increased repair expenses.
• Students would not have access to the same opportunities
that neighboring school districts offer, resulting in a
technology gap.
• Student access to online classroom resources and tools
would be limited.
• Staff would be limited in the amount of attention they
could provide individual students and would not have the
same level of information about each student's progress.
• Cuts would need to be made to the district's budget in order
to maintain basic levels of technology.
• There would be slower turnaround times for family
and community requests of teachers and district staff.
Impact of the Technology Levy
• Up-to-date resources and tools for students
to prepare for career and college.
• More personal learning devices for students,
allowing 24/7 access to digital classroom
resources and communication tools.
• Classrooms with effective technology
systems for 21st century learning
environment.
• Tools and systems to manage personalized
Learning for all students.
• Tools to deliver immediate feedback that
empowers students to manage their own
Learning.
• Streamlined administrative functions,
increased staff productivity and more
value -added services to families and the
community.
• Reliable, secure and robust equipment
and networks.
• Necessary technology support and training
Did You Know?
Research shows that public school quality is
one of the most important determinants of
home value.
Schools directly affect a community's vitality
and home resale values.
• A widened technology gap between
Robbinsdale Area Schools and neighboring
districts.
• DQI I ICI J lV VI ]Line I.IQJJI VVI11 resources 41 I.GJ UU
tools, limiting student's learning
experiences.
• Additional expenses to repair aging
equipment.
• Unusable, outdated technology.
• Limited opportunities for innovation.
• Delayed and less personalized feedback
that limits teachers' ability to focus on
individual students' needs.
• Less efficient systems and services that
reduce productivity.
• Slower turnaround times for family and
community requests of teachers and district
staff.
• Reduced instructional time due to slow
performance, increased log -in times and
system failures.
Prepared and paid for by the Robbinsdale Area Schools.
This publication is not circulated on behalf of any candidate or ballot question.
ROBBINSDALE
Area Schools
Individual focus. Infinite potential.
6.19.2014