HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-02-09 Council Agenda Packet CITY OF CORCORAN
*Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by
Door.
Corcoran City Council Agenda
February 9, 2017 - 7:00pm
1. Call to Order / Roll Call
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Agenda Approval
4. Open Forum
5. Presentations
a. Senator Dave Osmek
6. Consent Agenda
a. Draft Minutes of January 26, 2017 Council Meeting*
b. Predatory Offender Ordinance Update*
7. Claims as Presented
a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500)*
b. All Other Financial Claims*
8. Staff Reports / Memos / Commissions
a. Commission Representatives*
b. Newly Elected Officials Training Report*
9. Planning Business
10. Unfinished Business
a. Draft Assessment Policy*
b. Gambling Fund Allocation Policy*
c. Regional Recreation Amenity Discussion*
11. New Business
a. Code Enforcement Procedures and Goals*
b. Bring Your Own Device Policy*
c. Elm Creek Watershed Commission Appointment*
d. Economic Development Authority Discussion*
e. Deferment of Fees Due Request*
12. 2017 Council Schedule*
13. Council Liaison Calendar
Planning Commission
2/2/17 3/2/17 4/6/17 5/4/17 6/1/17
Bottema Dejewski LaFave Keefe Thomas
Parks and Trails Commission
2/21/17 3/21/17 4/18/17 5/16/17 6/20/17
Dejewski LaFave Keefe Thomas Bottema
14. Adjournment
OPEN FORUM SIGN -IN SHEET
Meeting ���rU Cuv v)(.,
Date
�iJ I
Name
Address
Phone
lei
,�cvtc��y �•d.� -a.
963 � ,�
'OLI
l�r,h �.; ,%v1a�-
n�NSo K�� ���
�t-zo -344 0
LA (C)
31-
Page 1 of 1
CITY OF CORCORAN
City Council Meeting Minutes
January 26, 2017 - 7:00pm
The Corcoran City Council met on January 26, 2017 at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota.
Present were Mayor Thomas, Councilor Bottema, Councilor Dejewski, Councilor Keefe, and
Councilor LaFave.
Also present were City Administrator Martens, City Planner Lindahl, City Clerk/Administrative
Services Coordinator Beise, and City Attorney Thames.
1. Call to Order / Roll Call
Mayor Thomas called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
Mayor Thomas invited all in attendance to rise and join in the Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Agenda Approval
City Administrator Martens noted an addition under Item 5a. Presentations, Representative Hertaus
would be addressing the council when he arrived. City Administrator Martens noted the addition of
Item 10c. to schedule the Goal Setting Session and an additional claim on the Council dais.
MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Dejewski to approve the agenda as presented.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave
(Motion carried 5:0)
4. Open Forum
Tim Laurent, Motor Café, 23030 Highway 55, stood to address the Council regarding the site plan
and conditional use permit. Mayor Thomas asked that Mr. Laurent speak during the Council
discussion related to that Item.
5. Presentations
a. Representative Jerry Hertaus
Representative Hertaus addressed the Council on the current legislature. Representative Hertaus
addressed health care, bonding, and transportation. Council inquired about the Brockton
Interchange, Highway 55, and the Metropolitan Council. Representative Hertaus addressed the
questions. Council inquired about the best way to reach their representatives. Representative
Hertaus noted email or a phone call was preferable and he provided his email and phone number.
6. Consent Agenda
a. Draft Minutes of the January 12, 2017 Council Meeting
MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Bottema to approve the consent agenda as presented.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave
(Motion carried 5:0)
7. Claims as Presented
a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500)
MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by LaFave to approve escrow claims as presented.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave
(Motion carried 5:0)
b. All Other Financial Claims
Mayor Thomas noted with the additional claim the total of all other claims as presented was
$554,175.81.
MOTION: made by LaFave, seconded by Keefe to approve all other claims as presented.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave
(Motion carried 5:0)
8. Staff Reports / Memos/Commissions
a. Commissioner Representatives
Mayor Thomas noted Planning Commissioner Schultz and Parks and Trails Commissioner Meister
were in attendance.
b. Code Compliance Report; report received.
c. Planning Project Update; report received.
9. Planning Business
a. Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits for Motor Café at 23030 Highway 55 (PID 32-119-23-
33-0009) (City File 16-033)
City Planner Lindahl presented the report noting the conditional use permit for auto sales/repair
needs approval as the building was destroyed. City Planner Lindahl noted the conditional use
permit to allow more than 20% metal siding includes a new request to allow exposed fasteners that
was not included at the planning commission public hearing but would fall under the building
materials conditional use permit. City Planner Lindahl noted the applicant also requested to change
the parking lot plan to strip an outline of the display areas but not the stalls. Council inquired about
the display in the MNDOT right-of-way. City Planner Lindahl noted aerial photos indicated this but
the applicant has noted that this is no longer happening. Council discussed the parking lot striping
and the history of metal roofing requirements. City Planner Lindahl noted the historical perspective
of the concealed fasteners and metal roofing was to differentiate between commercial and
agricultural buildings with higher design standards. Tim Laurent, Motor Café, 23030 Highway 55,
addressed the Council, noting they wanted to make the building look nice and the parking striping
provides flexibility to change the car display. Council inquired about warranty on metal roofing with
exposed fasteners versus concealed fasteners. Rich Rothstein, Morton Buildings, addressed the
Council noting that Morton Buildings no longer carries a product with concealed fasteners due to
industry changes and the product carries a thirty-five year warranty. Council discussed asphalt
roofing and the roofing materials in relation to what was heard at the public hearing.
MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by Dejewski to adopt Resolution 2017-03 Approving
Conditional Use Permits and Site Plan for Motor Café, with the amendments of editing Condition 9
to read: allowing more than 20% metal siding on all elevations and exposed fasteners on a metal
roof is approved subject to the following finding and conditions, and deleting Condition 10c.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, and Keefe Nay: LaFave
(Motion carried 4:1)
b. Request for Vacation of Right-of Way
City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the properties have building rights, staff
would be open to vacating the right-of way for 78th Avenue but would request an easement at the
north end of the property for future water and sewer. City Administrator Martens noted staff would
not recommend vacating the Cain Road right-of-way. Council discussed the extension of Cain
Road, the status of the properties, and staff time required for the project. Council expressed non-
binding support. No formal action was taken.
10. Unfinished Business
a. Draft Assessment Policy
City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the policy encompasses water, sewer, storm
water and streets. Council discussed building rights and deferred assessments, pavement of local
neighborhood streets, overlays, a sliding scale for City participation in overlays, and adjusting the
ranges for the reconstruction to smaller intervals. Council discussed managing deferred
assessments differently by quadrant, green acres and agricultural preserve and the impact of
assessments, deferred assessments, and spreading the cost of collector roads among more
residents. Council discussed the formula of 90% of the median value benefit, the trigger for the
deferred assessment, postponed assessments, road type definition, and other options for funding
road assessments. Council discussed whether to require a super-majority, assessing driveway
approaches as part of the project, maintaining the current overlay policy, and other options for
reducing deferred assessments. City Attorney Thames noted that a super-majority is required for
assessments. Staff recorded the feedback. No formal action was taken.
b. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Schedule
City Administrator Martens noted the updated schedule. Council discussed the start time of work
sessions, the role of the Council as the policy makers, and engagement with the public.
MOTION: made by Bottema, seconded by LaFave to approve the 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Update Schedule.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave
(Motion carried 5:0)
c. Goal Setting Session
City Administrator Martens noted that February 27th and 28th were the dates that all members would
be able to attend. Council discussed.
MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to schedule the goal setting session on February
27th and 28th as presented.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave
(Motion carried 5:0)
11. New Business
a. 2017 Legislative Priorities
City Administrator Martens presented the report noting the specific legislative priorities to the City of
Corcoran. Council discussed transportation, business development, and senior low-income
housing.
MOTION: made by Dejewski, seconded by LaFave to approve the 2017 Legislative Priorities.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave Abstain: Bottema
(Motion carried 4:0)
b. Public Works Director/Engineer Recruitment Process
City Administrator Martens presented the report noting that should Council consider moving the
process forward earlier, that there would be a budget impact as the position was budgeted for a half
of year. Council discussed the hiring as a strategic hire, the timing of the hire, utilizing a recruiter,
and council member involvement. City Administrator Martens outlined the proposed hiring process.
12. Closed Session
Mayor Thomas stated:
“Under the authority of Minn. Stat. § 13D.05 subd. 1(d), 3(b) the City is permitted to close a meeting
as permitted by the attorney-client privilege. The City council is going into closed session to discuss
litigation strategy in regards to floor settlement at the Public Works Facility located at 9100 County
Road 19. The need for confidentiality in this matter exceeds the public’s right to know.”
Mayor Thomas recessed the regular meeting at 9:45 pm.
Mayor Thomas reconvened the regular meeting at 10:17 pm.
Mayor Thomas stated, “In the closed session the city council discussed items related to attorney-
client privilege. On the previously disclosed issues, staff and the attorney were provided direction.’
No action was taken.
13. 2017 Council Schedule
City Administrator Martens reviewed the upcoming schedule. Council discussed the regional
recreation amenity discussion. Councilmember Bottema noted he is unable to attend the February
23rd meeting. Council discussed bringing back the assessment policy at the February 9th meeting.
City Administrator Martens noted the February Planning Commission meeting was cancelled.
Council discussed the general liaison schedule.
14. Council Liaison Calendar
The Council liaison calendar was not reviewed, but was available in the Council Packet.
15. Adjournment
MOTION: made by Keefe, seconded by Bottema to adjourn.
Voting Aye: Thomas, Bottema, Dejewski, Keefe, and LaFave
(Motion carried 5:0)
Meeting adjourned at 10:22pm.
________________________________
Jessica Beise – City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 6b.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Director Matt Gottschalk
Topic:
Clerical Correction- Predatory Offender
Ordinance
Action Required:
Approval
Summary:
The Predatory Offender Ordinance adopted at the December 8, 2016 Council Meeting
contained a clerical error. The ordinance referenced Minnesota State Statute 243.052
under the definition of Predatory Offender when it should have referenced Minnesota
State Statute 244.052.
Financial/Budget:
There will be a small cost to republish the corrected ordinance via a new summary
ordinance.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
PROFESSIONALISM
We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are
committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the development
of our employees.
Council Action:
Adopt Ordinance 2017-346 Amending the Text of Chapter 85.
Adopt Ordinance 2017-347 Summary Ordinance of Ordinance 2017-346 and authorize
summary publication.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance 2017-346
2. Summary Ordinance 2017-347
City of Corcoran February 9, 2017
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
ORDINANCE NO. 2017-346
Motion By:
Seconded By:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TEXT OF CHAPTER 85 OF THE CORCORAN CITY CODE,
ENTITLED
THE CITY OF CORCORAN ORDAINS:
SECTION 1. Amendment of the City Code. The text of Chapter 85.02, Definition of Predatory
Offender of the Corcoran City Code is hereby amended by deleting the stricken material and
adding the underlined material as follows:
85.02: Definitions.
Predatory Offender - means any person who has been designated a Level II or Level III
predatory offender under the provisions of Minnesota State Statute 2443.052 or successor
statute, or any similar statute from another state in which that person’s risk assessment
indicates a moderate or high risk of re-offense.
Permanent Residence - means any a place where the person abides, lodges, or resides for
14 or more consecutive days.
Temporary Residence - means a place where a person abides, lodges, or resides for a
period of 14 or more days in the aggregate during any calendar year and which is not the
person’s permanent address, or a place where the person routinely abides, lodges, or resides
for a period of four or more consecutive or non-consecutive days in any month which is not
the person’s permanent residence.
Predatory Lurking - means sitting, standing, or remaining in or around an area, without
legitimate business, in a manner intended to insight, or having reasonable grounds to know it
will insight an immediate breach of the peace or in a manner that demonstrates an intent to
commit harassment as defined by Minnesota State Statute 609.748, stalking as defined by
Minnesota State Statute 609.749, interference with privacy as defined by Minnesota State
Statute 609.746, or disorderly conduct as defined by Minnesota Statute 609.72.
School Zone - means any property owned, leased, or controlled by a school district or an
organization operating a nonpublic school, as defined in Minnesota State Statute 123B.41,
subdivision 9, where an elementary, middle, secondary school, secondary vocational center
or other school providing educational services in grade one through grade 12 is located, or
used for educational purposes, or where extracurricular or cocurricular activities are regularly
provided.
Licensed Child Care Center - means a child care center currently licensed by the applicable
County or the State of Minnesota.
City of Corcoran February 9, 2017
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
ORDINANCE NO. 2017-346
Children’s Recreation Area - means a public or privately owned, improved park or other
outdoor area designed, equipped, and set aside primarily for the use of the general public for
children’s play, including hiking, biking, swimming, equestrian activities, or athletics.
Children’s Programming -means formally organized activities available to the general public
for the education, entertainment, or recreation of children under the age of 18 occurring at
least twelve times per year.
Section 2: Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its
publication and passage.
VOTING AYE VOTING NAY
Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron
Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon
Dejewski, Brian Dejewski, Brian
Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike
LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya
Whereupon, said Ordinance is hereby declared adopted on this 9th day of February, 2017.
___________________________________
Ron Thomas - Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________ City Seal
Jessica Beise – City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator
City of Corcoran February 9, 2017
County of Hennepin
State of Minnesota
ORDINANCE NO. 2017-347
Page 1 of 1
Motion By:
Seconded By:
CITY OF CORCORAN
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 2016-346
AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT
The text of Chapter 85 of the Corcoran City Code is hereby amended to revise the definition
related to Predatory Offender in Section 85.02.
A printed copy of the entire amended Chapter 85 is available for inspection by any person at
City Hall during the City Clerk’s regular office hours.
VOTING AYE VOTING NAY
Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron
Bottema, Jon Bottema, Jon
Dejewski, Brian Dejewski, Brian
Keefe, Mike Keefe, Mike
LaFave, Tonya LaFave, Tonya
Whereupon, said Ordinance is hereby declared adopted on this 9th day of February, 2017.
___________________________________
Ron Thomas - Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________ City Seal
Jessica Beise – City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8a.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Commission Representatives
Action Required:
None – Informational
Summary:
The advisory commission representatives for the February 9th Council meeting are as
follows:
Planning Commission: Dorothy Theis
Parks and Trails Commission: Judy Strehler
Financial/Budget:
N/A
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
OPEN AND HONEST COMMUNICATION
We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and
involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
We believe that every employee and citizen should be afforded an equal
opportunity to participate in all aspects of employment, citizenship, and
governance in the City of Corcoran based exclusively on their ability to
contribute.
Options:
N/A
Recommendation
N/A
Council Action:
N/A
Attachments:
N/A
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 8b.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Newly Elected Officials Training Report
Action Required:
None – Informational
Summary:
This is a placeholder to allow Councilmembers Bottema and Dejewski to share
information from the recently attended League of Minnesota Cities Newly Elected
Officials training.
Financial/Budget:
N/A
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
OPEN AND HONEST COMMUNICATION
We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and
involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees.
Options:
N/A
Recommendation
N/A
Council Action:
N/A
Attachments:
N/A
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10a.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Draft Assessment Policy
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
Attached to this report is a draft assessment policy based upon feedback from the last
City Council meeting. Staff needs direction from the Council in two remaining sections:
1. Deferred assessments for existing unused or newly created building rights
a. Three options are given for consideration on page 11 and 12 of document
2. Improvement instead of overlay
a. Language has been added on page 12 to clarify that if one of the
“exception” roads is improved to a higher standard in lieu of an overlay,
the “exception” no longer applies.
It is requested that the City Council review and provide feedback to staff on proposed
changes to the document. Staff will then send to the City Attorney for final review in
advance of the approval process.
Financial/Budget:
The assessment policy will guide how cost sharing will take place for proposed
improvements.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds
is essential for citizen confidence in government.
Options:
1. Provide staff direction on the draft assessment policy.
Recommendation:
Provide staff direction on the draft assessment policy.
Council Action:
Provide staff direction on the draft assessment policy.
Page 2
Attachments:
1. Draft Special Assessment Policy
2. Draft Special Assessment Procedures
Page 1 of 19
Special Assessment Policy
Purpose:
The City's special assessment policies and procedures have been established to:
1. Provide a stable and continuing source of funding within the financial capacity
of the City, in combination with federal, state, county, and other local financial
resources available to the City, to accommodate infrastructure needs for new
development, redevelopment, and maintenance within the existing community
in the most cost-effective manner.
2. Balance needs and costs for new and existing infrastructure to support and
promote economic development and growth as well as maintenance within the
existing community by providing for the equitable distribution of infrastructure
costs to ensure that specific developments are financially self-supporting to the
extent warranted.
3. Provide a comprehensive, well-constructed and well-maintained infrastructure
system that services individual properties and takes advantage of economies on
a regional scale and flexibility in the timing of infrastructure development.
4. Respond to community needs and desires for health, safety, welfare;
accessibility, and mobility provided by new infrastructure and the maintenance
of existing infrastructure.
5. Function in harmony with the City's comprehensive plan and growth area
plans by providing the infrastructure and amenities associated with those plans
thereby promoting orderly growth in areas where services are available or can
be provided at the most reasonable cost.
6. Provide the City Council and staff with guidelines and methods to efficiently
distribute infrastructure costs to benefiting properties in an equitable and
consistent manner thereby enhancing the value of property by assigning a
proportionate value of the improvements to the properties deriving benefit
from the improvement.
General Policy Statement:
While the special assessment purposes, policies and procedures have been
identified herein, the City Council may deviate from this policy when such
rationale in equity arises or the law is required.
I. Policy Definitions:
A. Adjacent Property: A property directly adjacent to public improvements.
Page 2 of 19
B. Access: Properties shall be considered to have access to public street
improvements when they may enter onto the improvement from their own
private driveway, private road, or public street, or when the street
classification would allow the property to be granted driveway access.
Properties shall be considered to have access to underground utility
improvements when they directly abut the property or may be available to
the property by utility or road easement/ROW, and the City has included the
property within a defined services area approved for immediate utility
service.
C. Accrued Interest (or Compounded Interest): Interest which is calculated not only on
the initial principal but also the accumulated interest of prior periods.
D. Adjusted Area: An area of a benefited property that has been modified by an
adjustment factor to more accurately represent the true benefit that property
receives from an improvement in comparison to other properties in the assessment
area. The adjustment will be based on the improvement design parameters that are
applicable to that parcel, as approved by the City Council. Design parameters that
may be used to determine the adjustment factor include, but are not limited to, trip
generation, storm water runoff coefficients, water or sanitary sewer use, needed
fire flow, and zoning or future land use.
E. Assessed Cost: Those costs of public improvements that have been determined to
benefit specific properties. The assessed cost will be equal to the project cost
minus the City cost. Project costs eligible for assessment include all costs
associated with the improvements, including, but not limited to, land acquisition,
demolition, construction, administration, engineering, legal, financing and other
costs as determined by the City Council. The financing charges include all costs of
financing the project. These costs include, but are not limited to, financial
consultant's fees, bond attorney's fees, and capitalized interest.
F. Assessable Footage: The assessable footage is the total front footage of all of the
benefiting properties, calculated by using the front footage method. (
G. Assessment Rate: The assessment rate for improvements other than streets is
determined by dividing the assessable cost of an improvement by the total number
of assessment units such as the total adjusted front footage or square footage,
acreage, number of lots, or number of parcels.
H. Assessment Unit: Front footage, area, or unit used to compute the costs on the basis of
individual assessments.
I. Benefit: The increase in property value as a result of a public improvement such as a
street, sidewalk, trail, curb and gutter, water main, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, park,
or street landscaping.
Page 3 of 19
J. Deferment: A process of postponing the collection of the cost of public improvements
and funding them as a system cost with the intention of collecting the cost at a later
date.
K. Driveway Approach: That area which lies between the existing pavement to the right-
of- way line; curb cut to curb cut. For assessment purposes driveway approach refers
to the road surfacing, not stormwater conveyance such as ditching or culverts.
L. Front Footage: The distance measured along the right-of-way line that directly
abuts an improvement, not counting Side-Lot Footage.
M. Limited Access Street: A street, such as a major or minor collector street, which
because of its high volume of traffic has been designated by the City for
controlled access, meaning the number of access points to the street will be limited.
N. Lot Definitions:
1. Corner Lot: A lot located at a street intersection having both front
and side-lot footage.
2. Double Frontage Lot: A lot with access to two separate non-
intersecting or intersecting streets but not a corner lot.
3. Irregularly Shaped Lot: Those lots abutting curved streets, cul-de-
sacs, or other lots where there is more than five feet of difference in
length between the front and back lot lines.
4. Rectangular Lot: A lot with less than five feet of difference in length
between the front and back lot lines.
O. Public Improvement: Improvements as allowed by State statute that provide
a special benefit to properties, including but not limited to stre ets,
sidewalks, trails, curb, gutter, sanitary sewer systems, storm sewer systems,
water treatment and distribution systems.
P. Special Assessment: A legal process whereby the benefited property is
charged for all or a portion of the cost of public improvements.
Q. Standards for Surface Improvements: Standards for surface improvements
have been established in the City's Engineering Standards.
R. Street: All public ways designed as means of access to the adjoining
properties. Streets are classified into six groups and classified per a
Collector or Local street status in the City's Comprehensive Plan:
1. Local Gravel – Local gravel streets have lower traffic counts as
compared to collector gravel streets, have a gravel finish, and utilize
rural ditches for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, but are
Page 4 of 19
not limited to, Hidden Ponds Drive, Meadow Circle, Nystrom Lane,
Rush Meadow Lane, and Treeline Drive.
2. Collector Gravel - Collector gravel streets have higher traffic counts
as compared to local gravel streets, have a gravel finish, and utilize
rural ditches for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, but are
not limited to, Trail Haven Road, Cain Road, Bechtold Road, Old
Settlers Road, and Willow Drive.
3. Rural Local Asphalt – Rural local asphalt streets have a bituminous
finish and utilize ditches for stormwater conveyance. E xamples
include, but are not limited to, Cates Longhorn Road, Abilene Lane,
Butterworth Lane, Hunter Road, and Dassel Lane.
4. Urban Local Asphalt – Urban local asphalt streets have a
bituminous finish and utilize curb and gutter for stormwater
conveyance. Examples include, but are not limited to, Bridle Path,
Carriage Way, Prairie Sage Lane, and Sorrel Court.
5. Rural Collector Asphalt – Rural collector asphalt streets have higher
traffic counts than local streets, have a bituminous finish, and utilize
ditches for stormwater conveyance. Examples include, Oakdale
Drive.
6. Urban Collector Asphalt – Urban collector asphalt streets have
higher traffic counts than local streets, have a bituminous finish, and
utilize curb and gutter for stormwater conveyance. Examples
include, Gleason Parkway.
S. Street Treatment Definitions:
1. Crack Seal and Seal Coat - Crack sealing involves patching and
sealing cracks in the roadway. This is followed by seal coating,
which involves spraying the road with oil and covering it with a
layer of small rock. Crack sealing and seal coating is generally
considered routine roadway maintenance. The recommended
interval is 6-8 years with first application about 7 years after new
roadway construction.
2. Mill and Overlay - Milling and overlaying consists of grinding off the upper
layer of asphalt (in urban sections) and replacing it with a new layer of
asphalt. This is generally done on roadways that have a fair amount of
cracking and other surface distress, usually at about 60% of the street's life
cycle. This is considered a structural improvement that will renew the street
surface and extend its useful life.
3. Rehabilitate - Rehabilitating a roadway consists of grinding up the existing
Page 5 of 19
asphalt and mixing it with a portion of the underlying gravel base (typically
4"- 8"). This combination of bituminous and gravel is then used as the new
road base, and a new asphalt surface is paved over this. This is generally
done on roadways that have a significant amount of distress. This can be a
good alternative to reconstructing a road if the existing road base appears to
be structurally sufficient.
4. Reconstruct - Reconstructing a roadway consists of completely removing
the existing road and underlying gravel and sand base material, and
constructing a new road section. This may also include correcting any poor
base material beneath the section, or updating the road to meet design
standards such as width and drainage. This is often done in conjunction with
utility repairs/replacement. Generally done on roadways that exhibit signs of
major distress, such as rutting, cracking, and potholes.
T. System Cost: That portion of the assessable cost that benefits properties whose
assessments are deferred because they qualify for green acres status, are located outside
of the City limits, or are unable to make use of the improvements due to factors beyond
their control. The City may reimburse itself for such system costs from the benefitting
properties when the basis for the deferral is no longer valid.
U. Unit: A unit, for purposes of defining an assessment, may include, but is not
limited to: a household; a parcel/lot; water or sewer main length and size; sidewalk
or trail length, width and depth; driveway approach length, width and depth.
II. Policy Implementation and Procedures:
A. Assessment Classification
The assessment process shall address the feasibility of physical construction and also the
affordability of the improvements. In meeting these responsibilities, a classification system is
established below for public improvement projects based on the design capacity and the level of
use. Cost apportionment is based on the extent of use of the improvement by the benefiting
property owners and City policies for street paving, curb, gutter, and sidewalk construction shall
be used as a basic guide. The classification system groups improvements into the three categories:
• Type I improvements consist of projects that are mostly of benefit to the abutting properties and
include local streets, curb, gutter, water and sewer services, and driveway improvements. Street
construction, sidewalk, paving, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water mains may be Type I if
solely designed to serve the abutting properties.
• Type II improvements consist of projects that benefit a larger, yet definable, area. Street
construction, sidewalk, paving, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water mains may also be Type II
if the improvement benefits a larger area. Collector streets, which are likely to be used by a broader
segment of the public, should be proportionately assessed to a larger area.
Page 6 of 19
• Type III improvements consist of large-scale projects of benefit to the entire City regardless of
location. The criteria for designation of any improvement as Type III are facilities that serve areas
larger than a definable neighborhood or those areas separated by major identifiable barriers, such as
a creeks, collector streets, or county roads. Typically, Type III improvements are financed through
a combination of Federal and State appropriations and available City funds; however, special
assessments may be needed to fully fund the project.
If financial assistance is received by the City from the Federal Government, from the State of
Minnesota, the County, or from any other source to defray a portion of the costs of a given
improvement, such aid will be used first to reduce the "City cost" of the improvement. If the financial
assistance received is greater than the normal "City cost", the remainder of the aid will be applied
according to the terms of the assistance program or at the Council's discretion.
The assessment classifications are listed in Table 1 below. The City Council may from time to time
adjust the classification of improvements to maintain the equitability of the assessment cost.
Table 1. Assessment Classification
Type I Improvements Type II Improvements Type III Improvements
Curb & Gutter
Trunk Sanitary Sewers
(greater than 8" diameter)
Bridges
Sidewalks and trails, 5 feet
wide or less
Trunk Water Main (greater
than 8" diameter) and
Looped Water Main
Community Facilities
Library
Law Enforcement
Fire Station Sanitary Sewer Laterals (less
than or equal to 8" diameter)
Collector Streets
Water Main (less than or
equal to 8" diameter)
Sidewalks and trails, greater
than 5 feet wide Community Parks
Sewer & Water Services Storm Drainage
Improvements
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Local Streets/Alleys Pumping Stations Water Tower
Storm Drainage
Improvements
Water Treatment Plant
Other improvements mandated or authorized by law
B. Methods of Assessment
The City shall use the following methods in determining assessments for public
improvements.
1. Front Footage Method
Page 7 of 19
This method computes the assessable frontage for the project and for each property. The
assessment rate is obtained by dividing the total assessable cost by the assessable footage
in an assessment district. The assessment for each parcel is then obtained by multiplying
the assessment rate times the front footage for each property. Front footage is determined
as follows:
a. For rectangular lots, the front footage shall be the same as the front footage at the
right-of-way.
b. For irregularly shaped lots, the front footage will typically be calculated as the width of
the lot as defined in the City's zoning ordinance, although other methods may be used
at the City's discretion (such as average lot width) if they are determined to be more
equitable.
c. For all corner lots, street assessments, regardless of the orientation of the house, shall
be based on one-half of the footage of the road being improved.
d. For a rectangular corner lot, water and sewer assessments, regardless of the orientation
of the house, the short side of the lot shall be considered to be the "frontage".
e. Double frontage lots may be assessed for any street improvement that it has direct
access to, if the lot is of such size that it could be split into multiple buildable lots. The
front footage for each improvement will be determined in accordance with the above-
described policies, whichever is appropriate.
2. Area Method
This method computes cost on a square foot or acreage basis. The assessment rate is
determined by dividing the total assessable cost by the total benefiting area. A parcel's
assessment is then determined by multiplying the assessment rate times the benefiting area
of the parcel. When the benefiting area includes both platted and un- platted properties, the
gross benefiting area will be used to apportion the benefit among the properties. An
adjustment factor reflecting land use may be applied to a parcel's benefiting area in some
cases. For example, for storm sewer design, the assumed rate of runoff per acre from a
commercial lot is greater than the runoff rate from a residential lot. If all uses are the same
in a project area (single family, multi- family, commercial, or industrial), the assessment
rate is the same for all. Where there is variation in residential density or uses, the
assessment rate may be adjusted to reflect the corresponding differences in benefit.
The assessable area shall include all properties legally eligible for assessments. The
following items may not be included in area calculations: public right-of-ways, natural
waterways, lakes or other wetlands.
3. Unit Method
This method computes the costs on the basis of individual assessment units. For example,
sewer and water services, sidewalks, trails, and driveway approaches are typically
considered separate individual units. The total project cost is divided by the total number
of assessment units to calculate the fixed cost. Assessment units could be determined on a
per lot or per unit basis, or any combination thereof. For lots that may be further
subdivided, the City may determine the number of assessable units based on the number of
Page 8 of 19
equivalent lots that could be created from a particular parcel.
4. Combination Method
This method involves using one or more of the above defined methods to more equitably
calculate assessments. The combination method may be considered when there is varying
land use, undeveloped properties available for future development, or other circumst ances
involving the defined public improvement that may provide assessment inequities.
C. Determination of Assessable Costs, Rate and Term
1. Water System
a. Water Mains: The assessable cost for installing new water main improvements shall be
based on the level of service required by the property. In residential areas, 100% of the
cost of installing water main that is 8 -inches in diameter or less shall be assessed to the
benefiting properties, and up to 50% for reconstruction, see chart below. In
commercial areas, 100% of the cost of installing new water main and 50% of the cost
of reconstruction will be assessed, based on current design standards.
The cost of over sizing the water main for general distribution purposes shall not be
assessed. Where larger diameter water mains are required to serve commercial,
industrial or institutional properties, the increased cost of water main installation shall
be assessed to those properties. Where improvements are designed to serve an area
beyond that of direct benefit, the City may postpone the assessment and fund the
increased project cost as a system cost. The system cost shall be assessed to the newly
developing area as a system charge together with direct benefits for other services.
Reconstruction Assessments – Water System
Years After First
Assessment Levied1
City Share2
Assessed Share2
0-20 years 100% 0%
20-40 years 75% 25%
Over 40 years 50% 50%
1First assessment refers to the original assessment for properties developed or platted at or before the time the
improvement is constructed, or to the deferred assessment for properties developed or platted after the improvement
is constructed.
2Percentage based on project construction cost. The assesse d share of the project cost, as listed in the above table,
will be apportioned against the benefiting properties . The City Engineer will use standard procedures to determine the
benefiting property for each specific project.
b. Water Services: The assessable cost for the construction or replacement of water
services shall be 100% of the project cost. The unit cost method will be used to
calculate the assessment.
c. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for sanitary sewer improvements,
including new construction and replacement projects, is a maximum of twenty years.
Page 9 of 19
2. Sanitary Sewer
Sanitary Sewer Assessments shall be based on engineering design standards. The
assessable cost for installing sanitary sewer improvements shall be based on the type
of service required by the property. In residential areas, 100% of the cost of installing
new sanitary sewer that is 8-inches in diameter; and up to 50% for reconstruction,
shall be assessed to the abutting properties.
Where larger diameter sanitary sewers are required to serve commercial, industrial or
institutional properties, the increased cost of installation shall be assessed to those
properties. Where improvements are designed to serve an area beyond that of direct
benefit, the City may defer that portion of the assessment and fund it as a system cost.
a. Sanitary Sewer Assessment Formula: Assessments to be levied against properties
within the benefited area shall be distributed to those properties on the basis of the
following provisions:
1. Assessment Rate: The assessment rate shall be equal to the "assessable cost" of the
improvement divided by the total number of assessable units benefited by the
improvement. Projects having an uneven distribution of benefits may be subdivided
into separate improvements using multiple assessment methods and rates to more
equitably apportion the assessments.
2. Assessable Units: The assessable units shall be determined as follows:
i. Lateral Sewers. The assessment method shall be the "unit method",
unless otherwise specified by the Council.
ii. Trunk Sewer and Lift Station. Trunk fees shall be charged as outlined in
City Code, Chapter 51: Regulating Public Sanitary Sewer and Water
Within the City of Corcoran.
iii. Sewer Services. The assessable cost for the construction or replacement
of sewer service lines shall be 100% of the project cost. The assessment
shall be based on the number of sewer services installed for each
individual property. This is the unit cost method of assessment.
3. Assessment Formula for Replacement: The following table shows the cost split for
replacement of sanitary sewers (trunk sewers, lateral sewers, and lift stations), if
they are to be assessed.
Reconstruction Assessments – Sewer System
Years After First
Assessment Levied1
City Share2
Assessed Share2
0-20 years 100% 0%
20-40 years 75% 25%
Over 40 years 50% 50%
1First assessment refers to the original assessment for properties developed or platted at or before the time the
improvement is constructed, or to the deferred assessment for properties developed or platted after the improvement
is constructed.
Page 10 of 19
2Percentage based on project construction cost. The assessed share of the project cost, as listed in the above table,
will be apportioned against the benefiting properties. The City Engineer will use standard procedures to determine the
benefiting property for each specific project.
4. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for sanitary sewer improvements,
including new construction and replacement projects, is a maximum of twenty
years.
3. Storm Sewer
Storm sewer improvements shall be classified to include all storm sewer, storm sewer
pumping stations, culverts, ditches, rain gardens, swales, street grading and any other
improvement, which will facilitate drainage. The assessment for the construction of storm
drainage improvements shall be based on the level of service required by the property.
a. Storm Sewer Assessment Formula: Assessments to be levied against properties within
the benefited area shall be distributed to those properties on the basis of the following
provisions:
1. Assessment Rate: The assessment rate shall be equal to the assessable cost of the
improvement divided by the total number of assessable units benefited by the
improvement. Projects having an uneven distribution of benefits may be
subdivided into separate improvements using multiple assessment methods and
rates to more equitably apportion the assessments.
2. Assessable Units: The assessable unit, unless otherwise specified by the Council,
shall be the gross area or adjusted area of the benefited properties, both present and
future, as determined in the project design.
3. Assessable Cost: The assessable cost shall be 100% of the total project cost for
new or expanded storm drainage improvements, and up to 50% for reconstruction,
based on the chart below.
4. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for sanitary sewer improvements,
including new construction and replacement projects, is a maximum of twenty
years.
Reconstruction Assessments – Storm Sewer
Years After First
Assessment Levied1
City Share2
Assessed Share2
0-20 years 100% 0%
20-40 years 75% 25%
Over 40 years 50% 50%
1First assessment refers to the original assessment for properties developed or platted at or before the time the
improvement is constructed, or to the deferred assessment for properties developed or platted after the improvement
is constructed.
2Percentage based on project construction cost. The assessed share of the project cost, as listed in the above table,
will be apportioned against the benefiting properties . The City Engineer will use standard procedures to determine the
benefiting property for each specific project.
5. Assessment Formula for Replacement: The cost split for replacement of storm
Page 11 of 19
sewers, lift stations, and miscellaneous drainage improvements, if they are to be
assessed, will be assessed in the same manner as sanitary sewer replacement as
shown above.
6. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for storm sewers, lift stations, and
miscellaneous drainage improvements is a maximum of twenty years.
4. New Street Construction
The City's general policy and practice is to require new residential street construction
during land use development applications to be constructed to City standards by the
developer/applicant with no special assessments or public bonding support.
5. Street Reconstruction, Rehabilitation, and Mill and Overlays
a. Reconstruction and Rehabilitation - The assessable cost of street reconstruction and
street rehabilitation projects shall be determined by the benefit to properties affected by
the project determined through a letter of benefit or similar from a licensed appraiser.
The assessment shall be 90 percent of the median value of the benefit. For example, if
the benefit for a direct access property was valued from $12,000-$15,000 per unit, the
assessment would be $12,150 ($13,500 x .9 = $12,150). If the benefit for an indirect
access property was $3,000-$5,000 per unit, the assessment would be $3,600 ($4,000 x
.9 = $3,600). The method of assessment shall be based on per unit. The remaining cost
shall be a City cost.
1. For properties with access to the street receiving a reconstruction or rehabilitation,
each existing unused development right and newly created development right
resulting from the project will be assessed an amount equal to the assessment of a
direct access property.
2. Landowners receiving assessments for existing unused development rights and
newly created development rights may have the option of paying the entire
assessment in one lump sum or through deferral until time of plat. During the
period of deferral, the City will add the Accrued Interest to the principal.
Assessments will be filed with the County Recorder.
Or
Landowners receiving assessments for existing unused development rights and
newly created development rights may have the option of paying the entire
assessment in one lump sum or through deferral until time of plat. Assessments will
be filed with the County Recorder.
Or
Landowners receiving assessments for existing unused development rights and
newly created development rights may have the option of paying the entire
assessment in one lump sum or through deferral until time of plat. During the
period of deferral, the City will add the Accrued Interest to the principal during
the years identified for assessments for non-deferrable properties. Example, if the
project is assessed over a period of 10 years interest will accrue on deferred
Page 12 of 19
assessments for 10 years and no additional interest will be accrued. Assessments
will be filed with the County Recorder.
b. Mill and Overlays - The assessable cost of overlays and mill and overlays shall be
determined by the benefit to properties affected by the project determined through a
letter of benefit or similar from a licensed appraiser. The assessment shall be 90
percent of the median value of the benefit. For example, if the benefit was valued from
$1,500-$2,500 per unit, the assessment would be $1,800. The method of assessment
shall be based on per unit. The remaining cost shall be a City cost.
1. Exception: The City has completing initial overlays on roads without assessments,
the following roads will receive one overlay without an assessment in order to
complete the existing program, if the road is improved to a higher standard instead
of an overlay the exception no longer applies: Bluestem Trail, Cates Longhorn
Road, Chisolm Trail, Country Circle, Country Road, Hage Drive, Heather lane,
High Bluff Lane, Hunters Ridge, Jackie Lane, Jubert Lane, Julie Ann Drive, Larkin
Road, Maple Hill Road, Meadow Creek Drive, Mohawk Road, Oswald Farm Road,
Pioneer Trail, Robert Lane, Rolling Hills Road, Rush Creek Drive, Schutte Farm
Road, Sunnyhill Road, Sunset Lane, and Windmill Drive.
c. Length of Assessment - The assessment period for street improvements is a
maximum of twenty years.
6. SIDEWALK
The front footage or unit cost method shall be the basis for assessment. The assessable
cost for sidewalk improvements shall be 100% for both new construction and
reconstruction up to 5 feet wide. Sidewalk maintenance and rehabilitation shall be
repaired or replaced to the original standard and is the responsibility of the abutting
property owner.
7. DRIVEWAY APPROACHES
Driveway approaches from shall be part of the overall project and not assessed separately.
The improvement to driveway approaches should be considered as the amount of benefit
is established.
D. Deferred Assessments for Green Acres
In cases where improvement projects are determined to benefit properties that have been
certified to qualify for Green Acres exemption, the City will determine that portion of the
project cost that benefits those properties, and finance that portion of the project cost as a
system cost. Landowners of benefiting properties may have the option of paying the entire
assessment in one lump sum or through deferral as allowed by Minnesota Green Acres
statutes. During the period of deferral, the City will add the Accrued Interest to the principal.
Once the benefiting properties no longer qualify for Green Acres status, the City may recover
the system cost. Assessments against Green Acres Parcels will be filed with the County
Recorder.
Page 13 of 19
E. Determination of Assessment Rate and Terms
1. Interest Rate on Assessments: The City will charge interest on special assessments at a rate
specified in the resolution approving the assessment roll. If bonds were sold to finance the
improvement project, the interest rate shall generally be one percent (1.0%) more than the
average rate of the bonds, rounded to the nearest quarter of a percent. If no bonds were
sold, the interest rate shall be set using the same formula based on the current bond market.
2. Length of Assessment: The assessment period for all improvements is subject to the
requirements of the bond market at the time of project financing and thus may vary in
length from the time periods proposed.
F. Undeveloped Property
The City shall require the developer, owner or sub-divider of any property within the City's
corporate limits desiring to install street, curb and gutter, sidewalk, sanitary sewer or water
main improvements to follow the City's subdivision ordinance, in addition to the following:
1. Upon written request by a developer, the City Council shall give consideration to the
preparation of a feasibility report to determine the feasibility of construction for the
desired improvements. The developer will prepare a plan and other such information, as
the Council requires, prior to the Council making a decision on the request.
2. The developer and/or the property owner are required to sign a Developer's Agreement
and Petition and Waiver Agreement prior to awarding a contract.
3. At the completion of an improvement, all improvement costs will be recorded or certified
to the County per the Developer's Agreement
G. Petitioned Improvement Proiects
The City will consider petitioned improvement projects. However, the need for specific
projects shall be determined based on engineering standards (e.g. the existing condition
represents a physical or structural hazard, or is no longer cost-effective to maintain, etc.) as
determined by the City Public Works Superintendent and City Engineer and approved by the
City Council. The City may consider the following information in approving or denying the
petition: comprehensive cost of the project; cost to individual properties; demonstrated need
for the project; existing site conditions of the proposed project; geographic scope of the
project area, and any other information the City deems relevant. The City Council has the
authority to initiate non-petitioned improvement projects, if it is felt the improvements are in
the best interest or safety of the citizens.
Page 14 of 19
Special Assessment Procedures
Purpose:
This procedure is for internal purposes to summarize statutory and administrative requirements
with respect to special assessments. Changes occur statutorily on an annual basis and
administratively through Council direction and administrative review on an on -going basis.
Verification of any changes needs to occur prior to utilizing this document as those changes may
supersede the contents of this document at the time of approval.
Procedure:
I. Initiation of Proceedings
Either a petition from affected property owners or the Council initiates Minnesota State
Statute chapter 429 proceedings.
A. By Petition: If the Council chooses to proceed with an improvement based on a petition it
must have the signatures of the owners of at least 50 percent in frontage of the property
bordering the proposed improvements.
B. By Council: The Council may act on its own initiative in proposing a local
improvement and ordering a feasibility report. The Council must calculate the cost of
the improvement or direct staff to do so.
II. Feasibility Report
Whether initiated by petition or by Council, Chapter 429 requires that the city
engineer, or another person with similar skills, prepare a feasibility report. The
feasibility report must cover such factors as whether the project is necessary, the
availability of money in the general fund to pay the city's share of the cost, an estimate
of that cost, whether the improvement is cost effective, and any other information
necessary for Council consideration. The feasibility report must also include the
estimated cost of the improvement as recommended. Since a reasonable estimate of
the total amount to be assessed and a description of the methodology used to calculate
individual assessments for affected parcels must be available at the hearing it could be
part of the commissioned report. The feasibility report is integral to the assessment
process. Best practice suggests that the City Council pass a resolution receiving the
report and provide preliminary notice of the improvement.
Ill. Initial Considerations
The law requires two public hearings commonly known as an improvement hearing and
an assessment hearing; in between these two public hearings Council may order the
improvement, decide how to construct the project and tabulate an assessment roll.
A. Determining Benefit Districts: Determining what area benefits from improvement
projects, or the area against which the City will levy assessments, is a major policy
decision for the City Council. The benefit district varies with the kind of improvement.
For some improvements, such as a water tank, the area benefited might be very large. In
Page 15 of 19
levying an assessment to finance the tank's construction the Council might assess the
entire area the tank services. The special benefit test still applies. City staff, consulting
engineers and attorneys may provide the basis for Council to determine what area or
district to assess for a specific improvement because that area benefits from the
improvement.
B. City's Share: At any time before or after the City actually incurs expenses for the
improvement, the Council must pass a resolution determining how much the City plans to
pay and separate that from amounts to be assessed. Best practices suggest the Council
work with an appraiser and an attorney to determine the appropriate City share of a
particular project. The City has adopted a policy to address the methodology of the
assessment calculations.
C. Non-abutting Property: The Council may wish to levy assessments against adjacent, non -
abutting properties if the properties benefit from the improvement.
D. Service Laterals: City utility ordinance requires that property owners maintain private
water and sewer service laterals. When an improvement project requires new service
laterals the City may require that property owner to install or replace them.
E. May Omit Improvement Hearing: The Council may omit the improvement hearing if 100
percent of the affected landowners sign the petition requesting the improvement. If the
landowners are not paying 100% of the project costs the City will consider holding both
public hearings.
F. Two or More Simultaneous Local Improvements: When the City proposes undertaking
two or more local improvements simultaneously the City does not need to issue separate
notices and hold separate improvement hearings on different dates. The notice will
describe each improvement separately, stating the estimated cost for each one and noting
that there will be a separate hearing, even if held one after the other on each improvement.
IV. Prepare for the Improvement Hearing
The purpose of the first hearing is for the Council to discuss a specific local improvement
before ordering it done. The Council considers all the information in the feasibility report
and any other information necessary for Council deliberation.
A. Publish Notice of the Improvement Hearing: The City must publish notice of the initial
public hearing on the proposed project twice in the official newspaper, stating the time and
place of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated cost, and the
area proposed to be assessed. The notices must appear at least one week apart. At least
three days must elapse between the last publication date and the date of the hearing.
B. Mail Notice of the Improvement Hearing: The City must mail a notice once to each
property owner in the proposed assessment area, at least 10 days prior to the improvement
hearing that states the time and place of the hearing, the general nature of the
improvement, the estimated cost and the proposed assessment area. The notice must also
contain a statement that a reasonable estimate of the cost of the assessment will be
available at the hearing. The City will diligently make every effort to notify citizens about
assessment proceedings. According to statute, failure to give mailed notice of the
Page 16 of 19
improvement hearing will not invalidate subsequent assessment proceedings. Notice to
other governmental entities must be sent out at least two weeks before the improvement
hearing, by registered or certified mail to the head of the instrumentality, department or
agency having jurisdiction over the property.
V. Improvement Hearing
At the improvement hearing, interested persons may voice their concerns, whether or not
they are in the proposed assessment area. A reasonable estimate of the total amount to be
assessed and a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for
affected parcels must be available at the hearing. If the Council rejects the project, it may
not reconsider that same project unless another hearing is held following the required
notice. The Council must prepare a record of the proceedings and make written findings.
The Council may adjourn and subsequently continue the improvement hearing. To provide
proper notice, before the improvement hearing is adjourned, the Council must state on
record, the date, time and place of the continuation of the improvement hearing, if any.
VI. Ordering the Improvement
A resolution ordering the improvement may be adopted at any time within nine months
after the date of the improvement hearing.
A. Vote Requirements for Ordering the Improvement: If the improvement is made pursuant to
a legally sufficient petition from property owners, the Council adopts the resolution by a
simple majority vote of all members of the Council. If there is not a petition, adoption
requires a 'super-majority' vote, meaning the council can only adopt the resolution by a
four-fifths vote of all members of the Council.
B. Time Limits for Local Improvements: The resolution ordering the improvement may be
adopted at any time within nine months after the date of the improvement hearing. Either
arrangements for day labor or a contract must be made within one year of adopting the
resolution ordering the improvement, unless the Council specifically states a different
timeframe in the resolution ordering the improvement.
VII. Competitive Bidding
The law permits the Council to carry out, in advance of the assessment hearing , all
the steps prior to, but short of, actually issuing of a contract for the improvement.
Thus, if the Council wishes to provide firm estimates of costs at the hearing, it may,
in addition to the required preliminary report, prepare completed plans and
specifications, advertise for bids, and open and tabulate them before the assessment
hearing.
Once the Council orders a public improvement, staff or consultants prepare the
necessary plans and specifications and the Council either:
• Contracts for all or part of the work to be performed by outside parties, or
• Orders all or part of the work to be done by city staff and contracts for any
necessary materials and equipment.
In either case, contracting law applies. The City Attorney should coordinate the
contracting process in combination with the special assessment process.
Page 17 of 19
VIII. Prepare the Proposed Assessment Rolls
The City Clerk, with the assistance of the engineer or other staff prepares the proposed
assessment rolls. The proposed assessment cannot exceed the increase in market value
accruing to the property as a result of the public improvement project.
Road Assessment Calculations Components:
A. Future Lots within the Combined Method Calculation: The maximum potential parcels
are calculated with the current zoning.
B. Cemeteries: A cemetery cannot be assessed in accordance with State Statute.
C. Right of Way: Parcels that are entirely right of ways will not be assessed.
D. Rounding: Calculation of assessment will need to be adjusted due to rounding.
Practice is that $.01 per parcel will be adjusted either positively or negatively
beginning with the last parcel listed.
IX. Prepare for the Assessment Hearing
The purpose of the second hearing is to give property owners an opportunity to express
concerns about the actual special assessment. The Council will pass a resolution setting the
date and time of the assessment hearing and direct the City Clerk to publish and mail
notice about the assessment hearing.
A. Publish Notice of the Assessment Hearing: At least once and at least two weeks before the
assessment hearing, the City must publish notice of the hearing in the city newspaper. The
published notice must include the hearing time, date, place, overall project description,
area to be assessed, total cost of the improvement, a description of a landowner's right to
appeal the assessment, and any deferment options, if available.
B. Mail Notice of the Assessment Hearing: At least two weeks before the hearing the City
must mail notice of the hearing to each affected property owner. This mailed notice must
include the amount of the special assessment against the individual parcels,a description of
the landowner's right to appeal the assessment, possible prepayment provisions, and the
interest rate on the assessments. Failure to comply with the requirements for published
and mailed notice invalidates the assessments. The Clerk will execute an affidavit
attesting to the mailing to property owners.
X. Assessment Hearing
The assessment hearing may be adjourned and continued to another time. If the assessment
hearing is adjourned proper notice stating for the record, the date, time and place of the
continuation of the hearing.
A. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll: At the assessment hearing the Council shall hear
and consider all objections to the proposed assessment, whether presented orally or in
writing. The Council may change or amend the proposed assessment as to any parcel.
Council must by resolution adopt the special assessment against the lands named in the
Page 18 of 19
assessment roll. Once the assessment roll is adopted the assessments are set and become
liens against the properties listed. The Council must prepare a record of the proceedings
and written findings as to the amount of the assessment roll at this hearing.
B. Council Decides Interest of Special Assessments: Special assessments may bear
interest at any rate the Council determines. In setting the rate the Council should make
sure there is a reasonable relationship between the assessment interest rate an d the
bond interest rate if the City is issuing bonds to finance the project. If the city finances
the project with funds on hand without using bonds, the Council will want to look at the
interest rate the City would otherwise have eared on the funds.
C. Council Decides Payment Timelines: The Council must also decide the number of years
over which the property owners may pay the assessment. The statutes permit payment
over a period of not more than 30 years.
XI. Sending of Final Notice
The law does not require that the City send final notice of assessment to property owners
if the amount assessed is the same as that listed in the previously mailed assessment
hearing notice. The City chooses to notify property owners of all final assessment
amounts whether they differ from the proposed assessment or not. Staff will also notify
owners by mail the interest rates and prepayment requirements as stated in the proposed
assessment notice.
XII. Certification of Special Assessment Rolls
The City Clerk must certify the assessment rolls to the County Auditor by November
30. The Assessment Rolls need to be accompanied by Council Resolution, certificate with
the city seal signed by the City Clerk and a rate card. The County Auditor spreads the
assessment every year for collection with taxes.
XIII. Payment of Assessments and Interest
Property owners initially have two options regarding their assessment. They can either pay
the total amount of their assessment immediately, or pay the assessments in annual
installments with interest under the terms set by the Council.
The property owner can:
• Pay the entire amount of the assessment within 30 days after the Council adopts
the assessment rolls with no interest.
• Pay the entire amount any time after 30 days, but before any certification has been
made to the County Auditor with interest accrued to the date of payment.
• Any time after the certification the property owner may still pay the entire
remaining unpaid amount to the City. The property owner must pay the entire
remaining unpaid amount of the assessment before November 15 of any year and
must also pay all interest accrued until the end of that calendar year.
If the property owner elects not to pay the entire amount of the assessment at once, they
may pay it in annual installments spread over the number of years the Council has allowed
including interest calculated at the rate established by the Council.
Page 19 of 19
XIV. Postponed Assessments
Postponing assessments may occur at Councils discretion for situations when the City pays
the cost of the improvement but delays assessing it. Examples of situations would be:
• Property is unplatted and undeveloped; the owner will subdivide or otherwise make
it available for building sites in the future.
• The City cannot immediately use a trunk main because of various reasons.
XV. Deferred Assessments
Deferred assessments are certified to the County Auditor but collection is deferred. All
deferred assessments constitute liens on the property and must be paid within 30 years of
the assessment levy. Property owners may request deferment provided the property owner
or the property meets certain criteria. The three types of authorized deferrals are 1)
undeveloped property, 2) senior citizen and disability deferral, and 3) green acre deferr al.
Interest on the assessments discussed subsequently, may be paid or deferred. If interest is
deferred with the assessment it will be computed on a compounding basis .
A. Notice of Deferred Assessments: The City will record deferred special assessments with
the County Auditor. The certificate of the deferred assessment will contain the type of
deferral.
B. Interest on Deferred Assessments: Property owners may pay interest either annually during
the period of deferment, or when the assessment becomes payable. If interest is deferred
with the assessment it will be computed on a compounded basis.
{
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10b.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Gambling Fund Allocation Policy
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
On January 14, 2016 the City Council adopted a lawful gambling ordinance requiring
ten percent of net profits derived from lawful gambling within the City to a fund regulated
by the City. At that meeting staff also presented a draft resolution outlining the use of
those funds which was not acted upon.
Since the adoption of the lawful gambling ordinance an amount of $24,040.00 has been
collected averaging $2671.11 per month of the 9 months the City has been collecting
fees. The City has received occasional requests for the use of the funds and staff
recommends approving an ordinance outlining where proceeds should be allocated to.
Attached to this report is a document showing possible categories of approved
expenditures (second page, codes A1 – A19). Staff continues to recommend code A7
which is “Activities and facilities for youth.” The City Council should direct staff on the
purpose of the funds; staff will then draft a formal resolution for adoption at the following
meeting.
Financial/Budget:
The anticipated annual revenue generated towards the fund is between $24,000.00 and
$30,000.00 which is subject to change based on the net profits of each of the three
sites. It should be noted that if a site does not have net profits the City does not receive
a contribution which has happened.
In 2016 the City contributed $6,000.00 to assist with repairs at the Burschville school
house resulting in a current balance of $18,040.00 in the gambling fund.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds
is essential for citizen confidence in government.
Options:
Page 2
1. Direct staff to draft a resolution allocating lawful gambling proceeds towards
activities and facilities for youth.
2. Direct staff to draft a resolution allocating lawful gambling proceeds towards
other purposes.
Recommendation:
Direct staff to draft a resolution allocating lawful gambling proceeds as recommended.
Council Action:
Consider a motion to direct staff to draft a resolution allocating lawful gambling
proceeds towards activities and facilities for youth.
Attachments:
1. LG510 City or County Annual Report, 10% Lawful Gambling Contribution Fund
MINNESOTA LAWFUL GAMBLING
LG510 City or County Annual Report, 10% Lawful Gambling Contribution Fund
FAX: 651-639-4032
Questions? Call 651-539-1900.
By March 15 each year mail or fax to:
Minnesota Gambling Control Board
Suite 300 South
1711 W. County Road B
Roseville, MN 55113
Name of City or County (may not be township):
This report is for calendar year 20 ______
Street: City:
MN
Zip Code:
Financial Information, 10% Contribution Fund (Minnesota Statutes, Section 349.213, subd. 1)
1.Contribution rate ................................................................................................
May not exceed 10% per year of net profits; may not be a variable rate.
(Net profits are gross profits less amounts expended for: (a) allowable expenses, and
(b) lawful gambling taxes.)
1._______%
2.Fund balance, if any, as of December 31 of previous calendar year ....................
(If none or negative, enter O.)
2.$ ____________________
3.Interest earned, if any, on fund balance for the calendar year ............................ 3. $ ____________________
4.Contributions received from licensed organizations for the 10% fund:
NOTE: Do not include amounts received for:
a local gambling regulatory tax or investigation fee, if any, or
any voluntary contributions made by an organization.
Name of Licensed Organization: Amount Contributed:
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
_____________________________________________ $____________________
Total $____________________
Enter total amount contributed on line 4: 4. $ ____________________
5.Subtotal (add lines 2, 3, and 4) ........................................................................... 5. $ ____________________
6.From page 2, enter the total of expenditures made from the 10% fund ..............
(NOTE: The line 6 amount may not exceed the amount of line 5.)
6.$ ____________________
7.Year-end balance on December 31.
(Line 5 minus line 6. Enter O if negative balance.) .................................................... 7. $ ____________________
Continued on page 2
8/15 Page 1 of 2
LG510 City or County Annual Report, 10% Lawful Gambling Contribution Fund
Name of City or County:
Expenditures - Payee/Recipient Information
6.Expenditures - List the expenditures, if any, made from the 10% fund, using the codes listed below to describe the
purpose of the contribution. Include any narrative that helps to describe the purpose.
Payee/Recipient:Code* Amount:
____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________ NOTE:
A contribution
may not be made
to an organization
that contributed
to the 10% fund.
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
_____________________________________________A_____ $ _________________
TOTAL
(Enter total on page 1, line 6) $ _________________
*Use codes listed below to describe expenditures made above
A1 To 501(c)(3) organization or 501(c)(4) festival
organization.
A2 Relieving effects of poverty, homelessness, or disability.
A3 Program for education, prevention, or treatment of
problem gambling.
A4 Public or private nonprofit school.
A5 Scholarship fund.
A6 Recognition of military service (open to public) or
support for active military personnel and their
immediate family members in need.
A7 Activities and facilities for youth.
A10 Expenditures for police, fire, and other emergency or
public safety-related services, equipment, and training.
NOT ALLOWED: Contribution to pension or retirement
funds.
A11 Church.
A12 With Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (PCA)
approval, citizen monitoring of surface water quality by
individuals. Requires submission of data to PCA.
A13 With DNR approval, wildlife management projects or
activities that benefit public-at-large; grooming or
maintaining snowmobile or all-terrain vehicle trails, or
other trails open to public use; supplies and materials
for DNR-coordinated safety training and education
programs.
A14 Nutritional programs, food shelves, and congregate
dining programs primarily for persons 62 or older or
disabled.
A15 Community arts organizations, or sponsorship of
community arts programs.
A19 Humanitarian service - recognizing volunteerism or
philanthropy.
Acknowledgment
___ I am the official responsible for the financial reporting of the restricted fund, per Minn. Stat. 349.213, subd. 1.
___ I am aware of restrictions under Minnesota law on expenditures from this fund and affirm that the expenditures meet the
definition of charitable contributions as defined in Minn. Stat. 349.12, subd. 7a, or are for police, fire, and other
emergency or public safety-related services, equipment, and training, excluding pension obligations, and are
accounted for in a manner consistent with generally accepted accounting principles.
___ I have reviewed this report and affirm that the revenues, expenditures, and the fund balance reflect the activity of the
fund during this calendar year and is a true, correct, and complete report.
_____________________________________________ _______________________________ ____________________
Signature of City or County Official Title Date
_________________________________________ _______________________ _________________________________
Print Name Phone Number Email Address
The information on this form and any attachments will become public information when received by the Board, and will be used to determine
your compliance with Minnesota statutes and rules governing lawful gambling activities. This form will be made available in alternative
format upon request.
8/15
Page 2 of 2
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 10c.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Regional Recreation Amenity Discussion
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
In April 2012 the City purchased land for the Public Works facility and options to
purchase additional land for the purpose of an athletic complex known as “Roehlke” or
the “Regional Recreation Amenity”. Discussion has taken place on this item for quite
some time without formal action taken. A decision is required in 2017 as the options will
be eliminated if not exercised by July 17th which is 90 days prior to the expiration date. A
slide showing the options is attached to this report.
Staff has presented the item on various occasions over the years and has provided
information showing that the existing athletic space is not adequate at this time and
most certainly cannot support the growth in the community. It is requested that the
Council provide staff direction on whether or not to begin the steps necessary to
exercise any of the options.
Financial/Budget:
The existing purchase agreement outlines the following three options: Option 1: $598,000 + 2% per annum from June 1, 2014 Option 2: $520,000 + 2% per annum from June 1, 2014 Option 3: $520,000 + 2% per annum from June 1, 2014
It is anticipated that it will cost approximately $2,500,000 to develop the site. These
costs are currently anticipated in the City’s five year financial management plan.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds
is essential for citizen confidence in government.
Options:
Option 1: Plan for purchase and development as outlined in existing purchase
agreement and financial plan.
Action steps:
o Finalize financial plan and begin process to bond for purchase
Option 2: Re-visit location and land price
Action steps:
o Staff to look into other potential options for an athletic complex to be
located.
o Select preferred site and negotiate new purchase agreement (if Roehlke
property not selected)
o Finalize financial plan and begin process to bond for purchase
Option 3: Re-negotiate existing purchase agreement
Action steps
o Confirm that the Roehlke site is preferred
o Hire appraiser to understand land value today
o If appraisal shows lower value than purchase agreement, begin re-
negotiating
o Finalize financial plan and begin process to bond for purchase
Option 4: Take no action
Action steps
o Council directs staff to take no action and let the options expire.
Recommendation
Staff strongly believes there is a shortage of athletic space in the City of Corcoran,
especially with the anticipated growth. This is supported through data presented at the
February 11, 2016 work session. This is an extremely time sensitive and important
issue that must be decided by the Council no later than the April 13th City Council
meeting
It is further recommended that the Parks and Trails Commission be involved or kept
informed in the decision making process.
Council Action:
Direct staff on preferred option and action steps.
Attachments:
1. Purchase Options
Purchase Options
Purchase agreement
Signed April 6, 2012
Property closing
October 15, 2012
Option expiration dates
Option 1: October 15, 2017
Option 2: October 15, 2017
Option 3: October 15, 2019
All options require 90 day notice – July 17th
Purchase Options
Regional Recreation Amenity (Roehlke)
Option 1 (Balance of west farm):
$598,000 + 2% per annum from June 1, 2014
$621,159 today
Option 2 (south half of the east farm):
$520,000 + 2% per annum from June 1, 2014
$541,008 today
Option 3 (north half of east farm):
$520,000 + 2% per annum from June 1, 2014
$541,008 today
Cost per acre
Today: $1,703,175 / 124.54 = $13,676/acre
After June 1, 2017: $1,737,239
$13,949/acre
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item. 11a.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Mike Pritchard
Topic:
Code Enforcement Procedures and Goals
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
With a new Council, staff would like to review current procedure s of code enforcement
efforts and gather feedback from the Council on their goals regarding the code
enforcement program. Staff would like to review the policy to ensure alignment with the
Council’s code enforcement goals.
Under the direction of the Council, the City’s Code Enforcement program has operated
under a complaint based or reactionary policy on enforcement procedures. Currently, all
enforcement actions are predicated by a complaint. Furthermore, Staff takes a soft
approach and the process is slow and in many cases can take many months and many
efforts to gain compliance.
Current Code enforcement process:
1. A complaint is received and entered into the system.
2. A site visit is conducted; this includes taking photos and notes of the
property/subject of the complaint. (This may take between 1-3 days or more
depending on severity of complaint and workload.)
3. After an initial site visit is conducted, the information is brought back to the office
and the findings are entered into the system. At this point a file is set up.
4. A letter indicating the violation(s), remedy for compliance, and a timeline for
compliance is written and sent to the property owner/resident. Typically, for
general nuisances, a 30 day deadline is given.
5. If the property owner/resident has not called with a plan of action or scheduled
the abatement, or if the complaint has not been satisfied within these 30 days, a
second notice is sent, typically with a 15 day notice.
6. If the complaint is still not satisfied, the item would be forwarded to the City
Attorney. A summary and all photos and a timeline are submitted. However,
forwarding these items to the City Attorney’s office is expensive, so the City has
instead continued to work with and exhaust all resources before actually
forwarding to the Attorney.
7. If the case is forwarded to the Attorney, the property owner/resident is formally
charged and a court date is set. The matter will go before a judge, and many
times the judge will allow multiple continuances for many different reasons. This
process can take several months, including multiple court appearances and site
visits. When the Attorney is involved, and criminal charges are sought it becomes
a lengthy and sometimes expensive process and costs are not recouped by the
City.
The rational for this policy was to work with residents and educate them on the issues
rather than just enforce them. The goal is to gain compliance and not just punish the
owner/resident for violations.
Staff would like feedback and direction from Council regarding the City’s policy and if we
should entertain a more efficient and assertive approach.
Staff feels there are changes that can be made to make the process clearer and more
efficient and gain compliance without taking an overly aggressive approach . Staff feels
that the complaint-based approach is still basis for the program but a more streamlined
process could be implemented. With the soft approach, expectations become unclear
when action can be delayed.
Options to streamline the process may include:
1. Enact a more assertive/efficient warning/citation type program.
i.e.: Issue the deadline provided by Code and then issue a citation after
the deadline has not past.
2. Issue citations when deadlines are not met.
i.e.: Issue two soft letters and then issue a citation after the second
deadline has past.
3. Expedite the timeline for Attorney referral.
i.e.: Issue two soft letters and refer the case to the attorney after the
second deadline has past.
4. Enact a more proactive approach to specific violations such as signs in th e
right-of-way and/or tall grass and weeds.
i.e.: Actively enforce sign and tall grass/weed violations rather than
waiting for a complaint. Remove signs as needed, notify owner of tall
grass and weeds with abatement order, after deadline passes, abate
and assess the costs to the property.
Financial/Budget:
Depending on the approach there may be a budget impact.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds
is essential for citizen confidence in government.
ETHICS AND INTEGRITY
We believe that ethics and integrity are the foundation blocks of public trust and
confidence and that all meaningful relationships are built on these values.
OPEN AND HONEST COMMUNICATION
We believe that open and honest communication is essential for an informed and
involved citizenry and to foster a positive working environment for employees.
TREATING THE CITIZEN AS OUR CUSTOMER
We believe that citizens are our customers, are treated with courtesy and
respect, and deserve the best services we can provide.
PROFESSIONALISM
We believe that continuous improvement is the mark of professionalism and are
committed to applying this principle to the services we offer and the devel opment
of our employees.
Options:
1. Direct staff to continue the soft letter approach with multiple notices and no
citations. This would remain a complaint based program.
2. Direct staff to take a more assertive approach with clearer expectations and a
stricter timeline including citations, abatements, and attorney referrals. This
would be a complaint based program, but would include notices of violations with
strict deadlines laid out. This program could utilize a paper carbon copy type form
or a similar but electronic format such as Canvas. This approach would work
within the confines of our existing ordinances. Citations would have to be
established and fees adopted. i.e.: Issue the deadline provided by Code and then
issue a citation after the deadline has past. After the second deadline has past,
either an abatement would be completed or the case would be referred to the
City attorney. Take a more proactive approach on items such as signs and
weeds.
3. Direct staff to take a more aggressive and proactive approach. This would
require actively searching for code violations, and enacting stricter timelines,
citations, and increase attorney involvement. This would most likely require
Ordinance updates and more staff time.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends Option 2. Remain complaint based and utilize a more efficient
program.
Council Action:
Direct Staff how to proceed.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item. 11b.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Jessica Beise
Topic:
Bring Your Own Device Policy
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
In 2016 there was some support for moving to electronic packets and utilizing tablet devices
for agenda materials. If Council is interested moving to electronic packets, staff would look
at creating a Bring Your Own Device policy that offers Councilmembers and opportunity to
purchase their own tablet device and receive a monthly stipend for the use of the device.
Staff would like feedback on if there should be a change to electronic packets and if staff
should move forward with creating a Bring Your Own Device policy.
Financial/Budget:
The 2017 budget included funds to provide a stipend to Councilmembers for the
purchase and use of tablet devices.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds
is essential for citizen confidence in government.
Options:
1. Direct staff to create a Bring Your Own Device policy for Council to approve at a
future date.
2. Decline to move forward with a Bring Your Own Device policy.
Recommendation:
None
Council Action:
Direct staff on action regarding the electronic packets and a Bring Your Own Device
policy.
Attachments:
None
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 11c.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Elm Creek Watershed Commission
Appointment
Action Required:
Approval
Summary:
At the January 12th meeting the Council accepted the resignation of Jonathan Bottema
as Corcoran’s representative on the Elm Creek Watershed Commission. Since that time
staff has received an application from current Parks and Trails Commissioner Sharon
Meister to also become the representative to the Elm Creek Watershed Commission.
Sharon Meister has a strong background in the issue area and staff believes she would
be a great representative on behalf of Corcoran. It is requested that the Council approve
the appointment.
Financial/Budget:
The Elm Creek Watershed Commissioner serves without compensation. At the
discretion of the City Administrator, consultants may be directed to support the
commissioner.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
We believe that every employee and citizen should be afforded an equal
opportunity to participate in all aspects of employment, citizenship, and
governance in the City of Corcoran based exclusively on their ability to
contribute.
Options:
1. Appoint Sharon Meister as Corcoran’s representative on the Elm Creek
Watershed Commission.
2. Recommend another individual as Corcoran’s representative on the Elm Creek
Watershed Commission.
Recommendation:
Appoint Sharon Meister as Corcoran’s representative on the Elm Creek Watershed
Commission.
Page 2
Council Action:
Consider a motion to appoint Sharon Meister as Corcoran’s representative on the Elm
Creek Watershed Commission.
Attachments:
1. Commissioner Application – Sharon Meister
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 11d.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Economic Development Authority
Discussion
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
Councilmember Bottema has requested that the Council discuss re -activating the
Economic Development Authority (EDA). It is requested that the Council discuss and
direct staff on further action.
Financial/Budget:
Re-activating the EDA will take staff time and likely have some costs in reviewing
documents with the City Attorney.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
We believe that fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds
is essential for citizen confidence in government.
Options:
1. Direct staff to begin the process to re-activate the EDA.
2. Take no action now and defer until after the City’s goal setting sessions.
Recommendation:
Due to the significant amount of effort it would take to re-activate the EDA, staff
recommends deferring action until after the goal setting sessions.
Council Action:
Direct staff on action regarding the request to re-activate the EDA.
Attachments:
None.
STAFF REPORT Agenda Item 11e.
Council Meeting:
February 9, 2017
Prepared By:
Brad Martens
Topic:
Deferment of Fees Due Request
Action Required:
Direction
Summary:
The City has been contacted by two property owners adjacent to each other in the
downtown area affected by the utility and street improvement project. Both owners
signed assessment and financing agreements which allowed for the connection related
to fees to be paid over 10 years with interest instead of being due at once upon
connection. A term of the agreement is that if the property is sold , all fees must become
due immediately.
One owner would like to purchase the adjacent property who is agreeable to the
purchase. However, the deal would not be possible if those fees come du e. It has been
requested that the City allow for the fees to be paid over 10 years by the new owner
instead.
The process to allow this to take place would be to create a new agreement and have
the new owner sign. It is requested that the Council direct staff on whether that action is
supported.
Financial/Budget:
Minor costs would be incurred to write a new agreement.
Alignment with Values:
This item relates to the following adopted values:
EXCELLENCE AND QUALITY IN THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES
We believe that service to the public is our reason for being and strive to deliver
quality services in a highly professional, cost-effective, and friendly manner.
TREATING THE CITIZEN AS OUR CUSTOMER
We believe that citizens are our customers and should be treated with courtesy,
respect, and deserve the best services we can provide.
Options:
1. Direct staff to draft a new agreement allowing the 10 year payment contingent
upon sale or purchase agreement.
2. Direct staff to take no action and keep the existing terms.
Page 2
Recommendation:
Due to the close proximity of the agreement being signed and the possible sale, staff is
supportive of drafting a new agreement and assisting in the sale process.
Council Action:
Consider a motion to direct staff to draft a new agreement allowing the 10 year payment
contingent upon sale or purchase agreement.
Attachments:
None.
City of Corcoran
2017 City Council Schedule
Agenda Item 12.
February 23, 2017 Councilmember Bottema unable to attend
Planning Project Update
Code Compliance Report
Planning Commission Report
Parks and Trails Commission Report
Parks and Trails Commission Appointments
Planning Commission Appointments
Preliminary Plat Extension – Sawgrass
2017 Capital Improvement Plan Purchases
Hackamore Road/Steeple Chase Connection – Authorize staff to create plans
and specifications
Western Water Loop - Authorize staff to create plans and specifications
Petition for Paving – Sundance Road (from June 9, 2016 meeting)
February 27, 2017
Goal Setting
February 28, 2017
Goal Setting
March 9, 2017
Approve City Council Goals
Garbage and Recycling Requirements
o Residents
o Haulers
Council liaison schedule to commission meetings
Public Works Director/Engineer Job Description and recruitment
March 23, 2017
Planning Project Update
Code Compliance Report
Hackamore Road/Steeple Chase Connection
o Approve plans and specifications
o Authorize staff to quote/bid
April 13, 2017 (Open book meeting prior)
Financial Performance Report
2016 Surplus Allocation