HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Packet 09-12-1995 SpecialPLYMOUTH CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1995
7:00 P.M.
City Council Chambers
I. Set Preliminary levy for 1996 Budget
H. Establish 1996 Budget Public Hearing Dates
M. Approve Agreement with Metropolitan Council for
Metro Mobility
IV. Review Citizen Survey Results
hum "
Agenda Number: -1 jz
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
SUBJECT: Approval of 1996 Preliminary Budget and Levy
DATE: September 7, 1995 for September 12, 1995
1. ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached resolutions which approve the preliminary
1996 budgets, approve the preliminary tax levy, an set public hearing dates for the budget
for November 29, 1995 and December 6, 1995 (reconvene date, if necessary).
2. DISCUSSION: During August the City Council has had an opportunity to review and
discuss the proposed 1996 budget at two study sessions. The City Council must approve a
preliminary budget and a preliminary tax levy rate by September 15, so that Hennepin
County can produce Truth in Taxation notices. Once the Council adopts the preliminary
rate, the tax rate can be lowered by cannot be raised when the budget is formally adopted
in December. The 1996 levy rate is proposed for 15.05, a decrease from the 1995 rate of
15.84.
We must also establish the dates for the Truth in Taxation public hearings. Based on the
dates already taken by other governmental entities, we recommend November 29 as the
Truth in Taxation hearing, with December 6 as the date to reconvene the hearing if
necessary. Budget adoption could take place either on December 5 or December 19.
The resolutions for adoption are as follows:
Adopt the Proposed 1996 Budgets
Adopt the Proposed Property Tax Levies for Taxes Payable in 1996
Set the Truth in Taxation Public Hearing Dates for. the 1996 Tax Levy
Also attached are changes to the budget pages made following the August 31 study session,
and a copy of materials to be provided to the media on the proposed 1996 budget.
3. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend adoption of the attached resolutions, which
approve the proposed 1996 budgets and tax levies, and set the dates for Truth in Taxation
hearings on November 29 and December 6, 1995.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -
ADOPTING PROPOSED 1996 BUDGETS
WHEREAS, the City Manager has prepared preliminary proposed 1996 budgets for
fiscal year commencing January 1, 1996 based upon the requirements of .the State Tax
Law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVM- BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, ESOTA, that the preliminary 1996
proposed operating budgets for the following funds are hereby preliminary approved:
General Fund Budget 13,957,624
Recreation Fund Budget 793,228
Facilities Management Budget 510, 897
Water Fund Budget 3,03100
Sewer Fund Budget 4,912,548
Solid Waste Fund Budget 602,400
Water Resources Budget 224,281
Central Equipment Fund Budget 1,524,340
Risk Management Budget 561,936
Design Engineering Fund Budget 2441800
Employee Benefits Fund Budget 1,097,780
Information Technology Services Budget 870,450
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, (I) that the City Council concurs on the 1996
Plymouth Housing and Redevelopment Authority budgets in the amount of $ 1,500,094
ii) that this proposed operating budget resolution and the accompanying proposed tax
levies contained in Resolution No. 95- are being submitted by the City in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, and other applicable law in effect on this date; (iii)
that the applicable law; and (iv) that the City Council declares its intent to take all
necessary actions legally permissible to the submission and approval of the City's
budget and tax levies both proposed and final.
Adopted by the City Council on September 12, 1995.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -
PROPOSED PROPERTY TAX LEVIES FOR TADS PAYABLE IN 1996
WHEREAS, the City Council has preliminary approved the proposed operating
budgets for the period commencing January 1, 1996 and certain monies to finance said
budgets are preliminary required to be raised from taxes on taxable property in the City
of Plymouth.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that the following sums of money
be raised by tax on taxable property in the City of Plymouth for 1996 as set out in the
preliminary approved 1996 City budgets are hereby proposed to be levied:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the said proposed tax levy be certified to the
County Auditor of Hennepin County on or before September 15, 1995.
Adopted by the City Council on September 12, 1995
Levy Before Levy After
HACA HACA HACA
General Purpose:
General Fund 10,138,294 1,377,893 8,760,401
Infrastructure 1,044,110 421,410 622,700
Total General Purpose 11,182,404 1,799,303 9,383,101
Special Levies
General Obligation Debt 221,000 0 221,000
Housing & Redevelopment Authority 383,789 21,960 361,829
Total Special Levies 604,789 21,960 582,829
Total All Levies 11,787,193 1,821,263 9,965,930
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the said proposed tax levy be certified to the
County Auditor of Hennepin County on or before September 15, 1995.
Adopted by the City Council on September 12, 1995
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -
SET TRUTH IN TAXATION PUBLIC HEARING DATES FOR 1996 TAX LEVY
WHEREAS, the City is required to set public hearing dates for the truth in taxation
hearing on the 1996 budget and tax levy; and
WHEREAS, these dates cannot conflict with those dates for school districts within the
City of Plymouth or Hennepin County; and
WHEREAS, the City needs to set =Dates for the initial truth in taxation hearing date,
and a proposed continuation hearing date should one be necessary.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the City of Plymouth has
set November 29, 1995 as the initial truth in taxation public hearing date and December
6, 1995 as the continuation date for the truth and taxation public hearing if necessary.
Adopted by the Plymouth City Council on September 12, 1995.
DATE: September 6, 1995
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Dale Hahn, Finance Directo
SUBJECT: 1996 PROPOSED BUDGET CHANGES
Shown below are the proposed changes to the 1996 budget draft as discussed during the budget study
sessions.
Reduce General Fund taxes and increase HRA taxes $7,000 for an HRA Intern
Increase General Fund transfer to Recreation $4,500 for Music In Plymouth
Continue Council members salaries at current level ($2,604)
Adjust the net changes of $8,896 through the General Fund Contingency
These changes are reflected in the schedule below:
GENERAL FUND RECREATION FUND HRA GENERAL FUND
Revenue:
Taxes ($7,000) 0 $7,000
Transfer from General
Fund 0 $4,500 0
A.500 $7,000
Expenditures:
City Council Budget 2,604) 0 0
Transfer to Recreation 4,500 0 0
Temporary Salaries 0 0 7,000
Music In Plymouth 0 4,500 0
Contingency8( 896) 0 0
7,000) 4,500 7,000
Original Budget 13,964,624 788,728 367,500
Revised Budget 13,957,624 1123-.228 374,500
With the following proposed adjustments, the revised budget total for the General Fund is $13,957,624,
the Recreation Fund $793,228 and the HRA General Fund $374,500. I have not included any changes
for additional cigarette license fees which will be surveyed and recommended before the November
29th Truth In Taxation hearing.
Page 1
City of Plymouth
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY OF REVENUE
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND 101
1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Manager's
Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue
TAXES REC - GEN FUND PURPOSE
401.00 Current Ad Valorem 9,134,265 9,403,853 10,105,812 10,105,812 10,145,294 10,138,294
Less: Cane. & Abatements 699,718) 356,927) 375,000) 275,000) 0 0
Delinquent Taxes 100,000) 50,000) 50,000) 50,000) 50,000) 50,000)
TOTAL TAXES REC - GEN FUND 8,334,547 8,996,926 9,680,812 9,780,812 10,095,294 10,088,294
LICENSE FEES
411.00 Auto service station 1,980 1,430 2,100 1,650 1,700 1,700
412.00 Cigarettes 900 1,590 900 1,000 1,030 1,030
413.00 3.2 malt liquor 7,063 8,254 7,300 7,300 7,520 7,520
414.00 Off sale liquor 2,840 3,300 2,900 3,000 3,100 3,100
415.00 Dog 14,140 12,751 14,000 12,200 12,560 12,560
416.00 Garbage removal 2,162 2,791 2,300 3,320 3,400 3,400
424.00 Other licenses 13,037 4,183 9,300 4,200 4,320 4,320
425.00 On sale liquor 80,241 78,033 77,300 78,000 80,300 80,300
TOTAL LICENSE FEES 122,363 112,332 116,100 110,670 113,930 113,930
PERMITS
431.00 Building 690,602 795,909 680,000 700,000 700,000 700,000
433.00 Plumbing 127,578 146,772 125,000 113,000 114,000 114,000
434.00 Htg vent & air conditioning 63,485 112,080 62,000 84,000 85,000 85,000
436.00 Sign & billboard 3,626 4,938 3,800 4,200 4,300 4,300
437.00 Plan checking 433,540 483,633 408,000 420,000 420,000 420,000
Page 1
Page 2
City of Plymouth
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY OF REVENUE
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND 101
1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Manager's
Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue
439.00 Other 16,730 23,584 16,800 20,000 20,000 20,000
439.01 Alarm permits 79,800 62,255 72,000 65,000 66,950 66,950
TOTAL PERMITS 1,415,361 1,629,171 1,367,600 1,406,200 1,410,250 1,410,250
FINES AND FORFEITURES
451.00 Court fines,costs,fees 419,391 373,408 504,400 499,000 511,500 511,500
452.00 Impounding fees (dogs) 5,831 4,233 5,000 5,100 5,250 5,250
TOTAL FINES & FORFEITURES 425,222 377,641 509,400 504,100 516,750 516,750
USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY
460.00 Int on special assessments 3,299 3,420 3,400 4,000 4,100 4,100
461.00 Int earned on investments 314,410 297,857 340,000 1 325,000 330,000 330,000
TOTAL USE OF MONEY & PROP 317,709 301,277 343,400 329,000 334,100 334,100
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUES
470.00 Pres. Primary Aid 0 0 0 0
471.00 Redistricting Aid 0 0 0 0
473.00 MSA Maintenance 53,325 52,770 54,400 54,870 56,500 56,500
507.00 Civil Defense Grant 8,000 14,314 8,000 8,000 8,200 8,200
510.00 Tree Grant 16,621 0 0 0 0 0
510.01 Cable Grant 0 0 0 0 0
511.00 Schoolliason 34,312 65,000 67,000 65,975 67,450 67,450
512.01 Police Cadet Grant 1 1,416 1 12,741 4,000 4,000 9,900 1 9,900
Page 2
Page 3
City of Plymouth
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY OF REVENUE
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND 101 I
1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Manager's
Revenuel Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue
510.02 Hazardous Mat'I Grant 0 23161 19,600 19,600 20,000 20,000
510.03 Cop Ahead Grant 0 25,000 25,000 25,000
TOTAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL
REVENUES 113,674 167,986 153,000 177,445 187,050 187,050
CHARGES FOR CURRENT SERVICES
482.00 Accident reports 6,202 5,980 6,300 6,300 6,490 6,490
483.00 Zoning charges 7,224 10,478 7,000 8,500 8,500 8,500
484.00 Platting fees 21,937 40,191 20,000 26,000 25,000 25,000
485.00 Spec assess searches 4,314 2,339 2,000 2,300 2,400 2,400
487.00 Police services 4,246 3,252 4,000 3,600 3,700 3,700
488.00 Towing fees 6,730 6,427 6,300 6,400 6,590 6,590
489.00 Tree assessments 31,721 7,712 5,000 6,000 6,200 6,200
490.00 Other services 17,460 20,921 12,600 15,000 15,000 15,000
490.01 Rec. Rental Fees 1,780 3,055 2,100 5,000 5,200 5,200
491.00 Street lighting 344,083 373,999 431,000 387,156 422,000 422,000
492.00 Weed assessments 5,160 2,820 16,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
498.00 Newsletter advertisements 0 0 0 0 6,200 6,200
497.00 Protective insp. fee 0 39,785 52,000 40,000 41,200 41,200
500.00 Engineering services 174,824 184,471 125,000 125,000 115,000 115,000
500.04 Engineering admin fees 0 87,400 103,000 103,000 103,000 103,000
TOTAL CHARGES FOR SERVICES 630,481 788,830 792,300 739,256 771,480 771,480
TRANSFERS RECEIVED FROM
Page 3
Page 4
City of Plymouth
GENERAL FUND SUMMARY OF REVENUE
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND 101
1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Manager's
Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue
501.01 Water and sewer 70,600 72,700 74,900 74,900 77,150 77,150
501.03 Park Dedication Fund 34,700 35,700 0 0 0 0
501.04 Police State Aid 240,000 240,000 230,000 230,000 250,000 250,000
501.06 Solid Waste Fund 25,900 26,700 27,500 27,500 28,320 28,320
501.07 Transit Fund 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 70,000 70,000
501.08 Park Replacement Fund 0 0 0 0
501.09 Drug Abuse Forfeitures 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,300 10,300
501.11 DARE Reimbrsmt . STA 3,000 1,500 1,500 1,500
TOTAL CONTRIB RECVD FROM 461,200 468,100 422,400 422,400 435,770 435,770
OTHER REVENUES
553.00 Miscellaneous 124,376 146,991 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
TOTAL OTHER REVENUES 124,376 146,991 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
FUND TOTAL 11,944,933 12,989,254 13,485,012 13,569,883 13,964,624 13,957,624
Page 4
Page 5
City of Plymouth
GENERAL FUND BUDGET
FOR YEAR 1996
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES
1996 1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Service Mgrs
Exadtrs Expdtrs Budget Exadtrs Budget Budget Buduet
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
101 City Council 60,355 75,828 83,005 80,901 81,501 0 78,897
102 Administration 287,884 273,899 317,777 311,676 311,436 700 311,436
103 Communications 160,532 161,156 192,443 183,337 189,958 2,000 189,958
104 Elections 33,920 51,354 41,290 46,057 63,333 0 63,333
105 Human Resources 65,954 77,430 118,892 107,725 137,636 20,550 142,636
TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT 608,645 639,667 753,407 729,696 783,864 23,250 786,260
LEGAL
110 legal Services 349,767 319,922 350,000 350,000 325,000 0 330,300
TOTAL LEGAL 349,767 319,922 350,000 350,000 325,000 0 330,300
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
118 Administration & Support 0 0 0 0 150,964 2,000 152,964
119 Inspections/Fire 129,110 153,199 171,710 164,816 144,640 0 144,640
120 Planning 267,212 332,986 405,764 387,122 370,561 131,155 376,436
121 Inspections/Protective 48,707 54,022 74,185 61,343 74,969 3,000 74,969
122 Inspections/Construction 389,955 413,759 424,197 428,278 351.789 0 343,289
TOTAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 834,984 953,966 1 1,075,855 1 1,041,559 1 1,092,923 1 136,155 1 1,092,298
Page 5
Page 6
City of Plymouth
GENERAL FUND BUDGET
FOR YEAR 1996
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES
1996 1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Service Mgrs
Expdtrs Expdtrs Budget Expdtrs Budget Budget Budget
PARK & RECREATION
123 Park & Rec Administration 166,945 176,747 179,353 172,665 290,790 15,131 290,790
124 Park Maintenance 1,285,685 1,389,504 1,016,144 1,012,052 615,167 100,506 688,664
125 Forestry 249,250 272,555 301,109 300,203 311,158 47,240 336,738
126 Trail Maintenance 0 0 93,900 93,900 151,307 84,000 151,307
127 Athletic Field Maintenance 0 0 277,350 277,377 472,648 59,500 472,648
128 Ice Rink Maintenance 0 0 0 0 106,565 0 106,565
TOTAL PARK & RECREATION 1,701,880 1,838,806 1,867,856 1,856,197 1,947,635 306,377 2,046,912
FINANCE
130 Finance 516,775 536,509 604,583 598,513 542,666 56,560 557,685
131 Assessing 312,560 312,201 367,644 369,895 401,506 43,696 401,506
TOTAL FINANCE 829,335 848,710 972,227 968,408 944,172 100,256 959,191
PUBLIC SAFETY
155 Community Service 0 0 35,304 35,784 251,526 0 251,526
156 Patrol 0 5,004 471,665 474,552 2,587,317 80,341 2,638,135
157 Public Education 0 0 45,250 59,456 1 89,974 5,030 89,974
158 Investigations 0 0 122,772 122,772 713,895 66,793 715,195
159 Traffic Enforcement 0 1 0 119,400 118,320 1 115,240 8,378 1 115,240
Page 6
Page 7
City of Plymouth
GENERAL FUND BUDGET
FOR YEAR 1996
SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES
1996 1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Service Mgrs
Exadtrs Expdtrs Budget Exadtrs RAW Budnet Budoet
160 Administration & Records 3,755,100 4,122,005 3,648,588 3,658,641 820,185 86,656 820,185
161 Emergency Management 7,391 4,125 13,500 13,500 13,700 18,000 13,700
163 Fire 702,285 767,885 860,224 849,575 867,802 55,535 884,572
TOTAL PUBLIC SAFETY 4,464,776 4,899,019 5,316,703 5,332,600 5,459,639 320,733 5,528,527
PUBLIC WORKS
168 Street Cleaning 0 0 76,975 75,049 139,257 5,300 144,257
169 Snowlice Control 0 0 255,475 222,646 455,821 21,950 456,471
171 Engineering 315,226 300,371 363,102 358,740 367,239 84,748 411,787
172 Street 1,459,586 1,415,386 1,242,657 1,242,708 967,508 39,800 959,636
173 Drainage Maintenance 0 0 55,575 55,575 133,321 4,800 133,321
175 Street & Traffic Lights 418,870 434,561 517,700 469,977 508,400 0 508,400
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 2,193,682 2,150,318 2,511,484 2,424,695 2,571,546 156,598 2,613,874
OTHER
188 Volunteer Coordinator 0 22,698 29,490 28,767 31,076 0 31,076
189 Community Services 299,391 326,398 389,700 398,292 423,731 0 422,931
190 Other 67,109 0 218,189 54,344 84,067 0 146,257
TOTAL OTHER 366,500 349,096 637,379 481,403 538,874 0 600,264
TOTAL GENERAL FUND 11,349,569 11,999,504 1 13,484,911 13,184,558 13,663,651 1 1,043,369 13,957,624
Page 7
Page 173
City of Plymouth
RECREATION FUND SUMMARY OF REVENUE
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND 202
1996 1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Esmtd Service Service Manager's
Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue
TRANSFERS
501.01 From General Fund 175,000 191,600 227,400 227,400 237,472 241,972
TOTAL TRANSFERS 175,000 191,600 227,400 227,400 237,472 0 241,972
RECREATIONAL PROGRAM REVENUE
490.00 Recreational Fees 474,217 550,037 532,017 533,000 546,900 546,900
TOTAL RECREATIONAL PROGRAM
REVENUES 474,217 550,037 532,017 533,000 546,900 0 546,900
OTHER
461.00 Other 3,954 2,301 4,000 2,000 2,100 2,100
506.00 Contribution from Surplus 15,618 ' 4,454 0 0 2,256 2,256
553.00 Music for Everyone 0 0 46,500 46,500 0 0
TOTAL OTHER 19,572 6,755 50,500 48,500 4,356 0 4,356
FUND TOTALS 668,789 748,392 809,917 808,900 788,728 0 793,228
Page 173
Page 174
City of Plymouth
RECREATION FUND BUDGET
FOR YEAR 1996
RECREATION FUND
FUND ACTIVITY
202.202
1996 1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service, Service Mgrs
Enku Expdtrs Budnet Exadtrs Budget' Budnet Budnet
PERSONAL SERVICES
601.00 Regular salaries 197,555 182,292 223,370 213,508 210,104 210,104
602.00 Temporary salaries 199,798 256,250 262,800 266,028 230,500 230,500
603.00 Overtime 1,143 242 720 720 500 500
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 398,496 438,784 486,890 480,256 441,104 0 441,104
MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
701.00 Office supplies 2,140 1,452 2,300 2,300 2,369 2,369
702.00 Print & publishing 664 231 700 700 721 721
703.00 Postage 5,834 5,570 4,680 4,680 4,820 4,820
704.00 Photo copying 9,200 8,170 10,200 10,200 10,506 10,506
712.00 Uniforms 13,131 13,297 15,900 17,855 20,035 20,035
721.00 Minor Equipment 0 460 460 1,125 1,125
751.00 Photography 41 10 100 100 103 103
761.00 Items for sale 8,098 9,067 8,200 8,200 8,446 8,446
766.00 Park & Roe supplies 20,601 21,499 22,200 22,888 23,781 23,781
TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 59,709 59,296 64,740 67,383 71,906 0 71,906
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
805.00 Medical fees 1,104 488 1,750 604 604 604
810.00 Other contractual services 73,265 72,070 75,200 75,200 77,456 ` 77,456
811.00 Employee training 1,850 1,361 2,600 2,600 2,743 368 2,743
Page 174
Page 175
City of Plymouth
RECREATION FUND BUDGET
FOR YEAR 1996
RECREATION FUND
FUND ACTIVITY
202-202
1996 1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Service Mgrs
ftl1ftLS Exadtrs Budnet Exadtrs Budnet Budnet Budnet
812.00 Conferenceslseminars 700 156 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400
813.00 Mileage 2,066 2,670 2,100 2,100 2,500 2,500
814.00 Registrations 8,924 9,042 9,800 11,074 11,164 2,250 13,414
816.00 Subscriptions/memberships 377 423 730 730 735 735
819.00 Scholarships 0 3,012 3,100 2,636 3,100 3,100
822.00 Medicare 2,864 351 7,060 7,060 6,389 6,389
825.00 Group life insurance 900 1,026 1,660 1,660 337 337
826.00 Group hospitalldental 14,600 23,940 26,447 26,447 20,237 20,237
827.00 Workers comp/wage disc 1,600 1,824 1,600 1,600 1,600 1,600
828.00 P.E.R.A. 9,293 10,384 10,740 10,740 9,413 9,413
829.00 F.I.C.A. 27,089 33,253 30,170 30,170 27,432 27,432
831.00 Long term disability 1,700 1,824 1,120 1,120 882 882
836.00 Rental private equipment 5,687 4,900 5,900 7,336 7,995 7,995
837.00 Rental private property 12,902 16,208 15,500 18,500 19,338 19,338
838.00 Rental City equipment 6,100 5,600 5,800 5,800 5,974 5,974
847.00 Data Proc Allocation 8,000 8,200 8,700 8,700 22,487 22,487
857.00 Telephone 8,354 8,868 10,500 10,500 10,800 1,000 11,800
899.00 Contributions to others 12,001 22,391. 25,110 25,110 26,481 26,481
899.20 Music in Plymouth 9,000 9,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 500 15,000
899.42 Unemployment compensation 256 577 500 500 500 500
899.00 Reserve 0 0 0 0 2,243 0
865 Bank Service Charge 543 840 900 900
TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 208,632 238,111 257,487 262,427 272,711 4,118 278,718
CAPITAL OUTLAY
Machinery & equipment
Page 175
Page 176
City of Plymouth
RECREATION FUND BUDGET
FOR YEAR 1996
RECREATION FUND
FUND ACTIVITY
202-202
1996 1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued, Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Service Mgrs
Exadtrs Exodus Budget Exodtrs Budget Budget Budget
921.00 1,947 1,236 800 800 1,500 1,500
TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 1,947 1,236 800 800 1,500 0 1,500
DEPARTMENT TOTALS 668,784 737,427 809,917 810,866 787,221 4,118 793,228
Three payphones for playfields
Page 176
Page 195
City of Plymouth
HRA . GENERAL FUND SUMMARY OF REVENUE
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND 234
1996
1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Manager's
Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue Revenue
TAXES RECEIVABLE
401.00 Property Taxes 327,349 379,932 383,200 377,400 369,300 376,300
Less: Abatements 0 16,395) (13,700) 13,700) 3,800) 3,800)
TOTAL TAXES RECEIVABLE 327,349 363,537 369,500 363,700 365,500 372,500
INTEREST EARNED
461.00 Interest on Investment 2,924 356 5,000 2,000 2,000 2,000
TOTAL INTEREST EARNED 2,924 356 5,000 2,000 2,000 2,000
FUND TOTALS 330,273 363,893 374,500 365,700 367,500 374,500
Page 195
Page 196
City of Plymouth
HRA GENERAL FUND BUDGET (TAX LEVY)
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND ACTIVITY 1996 1996
234-234 1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Service Mgrs
ExadtrsExadtrs Budoet Exadtrs Budget Budeet Budget
PERSONAL SERVICES
601.00 Regular salaries 3,372 21,045 55,830 55,674 58,805 58,805
602.00 Temporary Salaries 0 6,836 0 3,530 12,480 7,000
603.00 Overtime 334 193 0 316 0 0
3,706 28,074 55,830 59,520 58,805 12,480 65,805
MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
701.00 Office Supplies 24 314 500 320 340 340
702.00 Printing & publishing 7 0 1,000 200 210 210
703.00 Postage 394 895 1,000 910 960 960
704.00 Photocopying 0 400 400 420 420
751.00 Photography 0 59 50 50 50 50
TOTAL MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 425 1,209 2,900 1,830 1,930 0 1,930
CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
802.00 Legal fees 1,413 3,204 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
810.00 Contract services 2,481 60 12,000 12,000 12,000 12,000
810.32 Senior housing rental sbsidy 0 32,137 275,000 248,160 270,000 270,000
811.00 Employee Training 0 48 1,000 600 500 500
812.00 Conferences & Seminars 0 180 500 600 1,000 1,000
813.00 Mileage 0 10 200 30 30 30
816.00 Subscriptions & Memberships 0 250 350 250 250
822.00 Medicare 67 800 800 850 850
825.00 Life insurance 9 13 170 170 497 497
826.00 Group hospital insurance 75 594 5,098 5,098 5,736 5,736
Page 196
Page 197
City of Plymouth
HRA GENERAL FUND BUDGET (TAX LEVY)
FOR YEAR 1996
FUND ACTIVITY 1996 1996
234-234 1993 1994 1995 1995 Continued Increased 1996
Actual Actual Adopted Estmtd Service Service Mgrs
Exadtrs Exadtrs Budnet Ex dtrs Budcet Budnet Budget
827.00 Workers compensation 15 82 100 100 100 100
828.00 P.E.R.A. 0 785 2,500 2,500 2,634 2,634
829.00 F. I. C. A. 84 2,032 3,460 3,460 3646 3,646
831.00 Long Term Disability 9 24 280 280 247 247
838.00 Rental City Equipment 0 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
847.00 Data Processing Allocation 0 1,500 1,500 1,605 1,605
864.00 Facilities Management 0 1,400 1,400 1,470 1,470
899.00 Reserve 0 5,312 5,312 0 0
TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,086 39,236 315,770 288,560 306,765 0 306,765
CAPITAL OUTLAY
906.00 Office Furnishing & Equip't. 5,500
921.00 Machinery & Equipment 0 0 0
965.00 Contribution • Other Fund 720,166 0
TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY 720,166 0 0 5,500 0 0 0
DEPARTMENT TOTALS 1 728,383 68,519 374,500 355,4101 367,5001 12,480 374,500
Page 197
DATE: September 7, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
Dale Hahn, Finance Director
Kathy Lueckert, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: 1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
We are pleased to present the 1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy for the City of
Plymouth. The proposed budget continues programs begun in response to the City
Council's goals and objectives. The City's overall tax rate will decrease from the 1995
level of 15.84 to 15.05. However, the 1996 budget will entail a tax increase of 1.4%, or
about $5.31, on the average home. This increase is needed to maintain the current level of
city services and to fund some new initiatives. No utility rate increases are proposed. A
decrease from $2.00 per month to $1.58 per month in the annual solid waste fee will be
possible in 1996, due to favorable markets for recycled materials. After balancing the tax
increase with the decrease in the recycling fee, the net impact of this budget on the average
home is 27 cents per year.
I. The 1996 Budget Process
The City Council's goals and objectives are the starting point for the annual budget
process. Staff reviews progress to date on the Council's goals, and identifies those areas
for emphasis in the upcoming budget. In 1996, the emphasized goals and objectives are
managing the City's future development and improving the City's technological
capabilities.
Ideas for the 1996 budget began with input from employees at the May Chat Sessions. At
these meetings and through a written survey, City employees were asked if they felt their
work group had enough people to provide service, if any new equipment was needed, if
there were areas in which cost savings might be recognized, and if there were any new
services the City should consider. As in 1995, employees identified many ideas, which
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
were forwarded to department managers. They analyzed the requests as they formulated
departmental budgets and proposed new initiatives.
Budget proposals included thorough justifications for 1996 requests. Department managers
defined clearly what requests are required to continue existing service levels, and those
requests which represent an increase or major improvement in service levels. All new
personnel and equipment proposals are shown in the "increased service category" for
discussion and review purposes. Department directors also prioritized all requests for
increased services, and a master priority list of all requests was created.
Budget review meetings were held with all supervisors, and there were numerous meetings
with department directors about the 1996 budget submission. Careful scrutiny was given
to the continued service budget before any consideration was given to requests for
increased service. Directors were asked to explain any significant deviations from their
projected 1995 expenditures and their 1996 request for continued service. The culmination
of many hours of discussion is this Proposed 1996 Budget.
This budget continues our transition to a program budget format. Each department
submitted its budget by program, and allocated personnel, material, and other costs to each
program. Because this is the first program budget, the historical information is not readily
obtained from the individual program pages. Therefore, we have included a departmental
summary page which shows total expenditures across several years, as well as the number
of employees in each department. In future years, historical expenditure information by
program will be more readily available.
II. Major Factors Influencing the 1996 Budget
Developing the 1996 budget required addressing a number of challenges:
Fiscal Disparities. The 1996 budget is impacted dramatically by fiscal disparities.
The following table shows the City's tax capacity contribution to fiscal disparities, the
amount we received back, and the net impact from 1994 to 1996.
Year Contribution Receipt Net Impact on Tax Capacity
1994 ($12,375,225) $4,452,858 ($7,922,367)
1995 ($ 8,459,244) $3,881,684 ($4,577,560)
1996 (est) ($11,263,724) $4,358,869 ($6,904,855)
This chart shows that 1995 was an aberration in fiscal disparities for the City. Our
research indicates that the significant drop in value of the City's commercial and
industrial properties during 1993 and 1994 artificially deflated the impact of fiscal
disparities. Thus in 1995 the City experienced something of a windfall when our
ii
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
contribution to fiscal disparities dropped so significantly. Our research further
indicates that the net tax capacity numbers in 1994 and 1996 are more in line with
what the City should expect in fiscal disparities. However, the $2,327,300 tax
capacity swing between 1995 and 1996 was an important negative factor in
developing the 1996 budget.
Projected 1995 Surplus. Revenue and expenditure projections through the end of
1995 indicate that the City will end 1995 with a general fund surplus of $385,000. A
key challenge in the 1996 budget was to identify ways of using this surplus to help
mitigate the impact of any possible tax increase in 1996. Another goal was to
earmark some funds to replenish some of the City's reserve funds. Recommendations
for the 1995 surplus include using $200,000 to offset the impact of future tax
abatements, $85,000 to fund lease payments on a tandem dump truck purchased last
year, $50,000 to the Building Reserve, and $50,000 to the Computer Reserve. These
recommendations represent "one time" costs, and do not involve any long term impact
on taxes.
Tax Abatements. Tax abatements are difficult to predict. However, we reasonably
project our tax abatement "exposure" to be around $130,000, based on cases already
filed in tax court. The same forecasting methodology was used as in the current
budget. Fortunately, value losses are decreasing compared with prior years. A
portion of the projected 1995 surplus will be designated for tax abatements.
Loss in HACA Funding. Recent legislative actions reduced the City's HACA aid in
1996 by $78,590. This is a one time loss, according to law. The HACA reduction
will be absorbed by the Street Reconstruction Fund; a 3 % tax increase is
recommended for that fund to help offset this loss, and is incorporated as a part of the
overall proposed city levy.
Building Permit Revenue. The 1996 budget estimates that building permit revenues
will increase only 3 %, despite the recent Council action to increase fees and rates by
20%. The revenue estimate is based on a slowing of building activity as the City
becomes more fully developed. This is the first step in reducing the City's reliance
on growth fees for General Fund revenues.
Recycling Cost Savings. Currently the markets for recycled products are very strong.
This has a beneficial impact on the City's costs, and it is possible that the current
recycling fee of $2 per household can be reduced during 1996 to $1.58 per month.
Replenishing Reserve Funds. Two of the City's reserve fund, the Building Reserve
and the Computer Reserve, have had significant "draws" in recent months. The
Building Reserve contributed $1,000,000 to the City Center expansion project, and
the Computer Reserve will fund an estimated $600,000 in computer upgrades in the
coming months. The 1996 budget identifies the future demands on these funds, and
iii
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
then adjusts the rates charged to departments to begin replenishing the reserve funds.
As mentioned earlier, a portion of the estimated 1995 budget surplus also is
earmarked for the two funds.
Personnel Recommendations. During the last two budget cycles the City has added
over twenty new employees. These employees were needed to keep pace with the
workload which comes with a growing population. In other cases, employees were
added to initiate new programs, such as Design Engineering or Traffic Enforcement.
Employees also were brought on board to implement programs established by the
Council to meet goals and objectives.
The 1996 budget recommends five new positions in several departments. The
recommendations generally reflect the need to keep pace with existing work in the
City's various program areas. With a current total of 208 employees, the five new
employees will increase our workforce by 2.4%, which approximately equals the
City's growth rate. Much of the funding for these positions is in non -tax supported
funds. More detail on the personnel recommendations is provided later in the letter.
IV
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
III. Budget Overview
A. Setting the Tax Levy Rate
City revenues from all sources in the General Fund will be $13,964,624, a 3.6 % increase
from 1995. Of this amount, $10,145,294 (73 %) comes from property taxes. We propose
a decrease in the tax rate, from 15.84 in 1995 to 15.05 in 1996. The following table
compares the tax levy by fund for 1995 and 1996:
GENERAL PURPOSE LEVIES
General Fund
General Fund HACA
Infrastructure
Infrastructure HACA
Total General Purpose
SPECIAL LEVIES
1980 Park Bonds
HRA
HRA HACA
Total Special Levies
TOTAL ALL LEVIES
LESS:
Fiscal Disparity,Tax
TAX CAPACITY VALUE
MARKET VALUE
1995
Tax Levy
10,105,812
1,377,893)
1,090,000
500,000)
9,317,919
383,200
24,573)
571,627
9,889,546
647,281)
9,242,265
58,347,632
3,141,193,900
1995 Tax
Capacity Rate
17.32%
2.36%
1.87%
0.86%
15.97%
0.37%
0.66%
0.04%
0.98%
16.95%
v
1996 1996
Proposed Proposed Tax
Tax Levy Capacity Rate
10,145,294
1,377,893)
1,044,110
421,410)
9,390,101
221,000
376,789
21,960)
575.829
9,965,930
691,142)
9,274,788
61,615,981
3,413,509,300
16.47%
2.24%
1.69%
0.68%
15.24%
0.36%
0.61%
0.04%
0.93%
16.17%
1.12%
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
The owner of an average value home in Plymouth ($166,800) will see an increase in their
1996 City tax bill of $5.31. The chart below shows the tax calculation for the average
home for recent years:
1996
1996
1995
General Fund
1994
13,485,012
1993
793,228
Estimated Market Value 166,800 158,600
1,713,319
152,500
3,031,800
147,300
Sewer Fund
Homestead
4,593,810
Solid Waste Fund 602,400 583,750
Risk Management Fund 561,936 556,302
72,000 @ 1% 720 72,000 ® 1 % 720 72,000 ® 1 % 720 72,000 Q 1% 720
94,800 @ 2% 1,896 86,600 @ 2% 1,732 80,500 @ 2% 1,610 75,300 @ 2% 1,506
Total Tax Capacity 2,616 Tax Capacity 2,452 Tax Capacity 2,330 Tax Capacity 2,226
Tax Capacity: 2,616 Tax Capacity 29452 Tax Capacity 2,330 Tax Capacity 2,226
City Tax Ext. Rate X 15.05 City Tax Rate X 15.84 City Tax Rate X 16.67 City Tax Rate X 18.04
City Tax 393.71 1 City Tax 388.40 1 City Tax 388.41 1 City Tax 401.57
Despite the small increase in City taxes in 1996, the average homeowner will still pay
fewer City taxes in 1996 than in 1993.
Overall, the City's market value grew by 8.7 %.' This growth reflects an increase of 4.3 %
due to new construction, and a 4.4% increase attributable to appreciation. The residential
segment of the tax base increased by 10.4%, and the commercial segment increased by
3.8 %. However, due to the changes in fiscal disparities, the tax capacity of the City grew
by only 5.6%. Other factors involved in setting the levy rate include:
a reduction the state Homestead and Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA) from $1,877,893
to $1,799,303, a decrease of 4.2%
a slight increase in the Infrastructure levy of 3 % to offset the HACA loss to this fund.
B. Proposed Expenditures
The 1996 budget proposes General Fund expenditures of $13,957,624. This represents an
increase of 3.5 % over the 1995 Adopted budget. The chart below lists proposed
expenditures in all major operating funds:
vi
1996 1995
General Fund 13,957,624 13,485,012
Recreation Fund 793,228 809,917
HRA 1,500,094 1,713,319
Water Fund 3,031,800 2,761,000
Sewer Fund 4,912,548 4,593,810
Solid Waste Fund 602,400 583,750
Risk Management Fund 561,936 556,302
Central Equipment Fund 1,524,340 1,471,270
Water Resources 224,281 0
Street Reconstruction 244,800 240,000
Employee Benefit Fund 1,097,780 1,054,910
Information Technology Services 870,450 0
Total 29,321,281 27,2®69, 0
vi
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
C. Recommended New Staff
The 1996 budget recommends the addition of 5 full time new staff members. Four of
these positions received funding from other funds or revenue sources; only one position is
completely supported by the General Fund. Listed below, by department, are the proposed
positions and cost accompanied by a statement of need for them.
PUBLIC SAFETY
Police Officer. This position is partially funded through a three year federal grant.
The 1996 net cost of this position is $21,839. The additional police officer will enable
the department to continue progress on reducing committed patrol time and increasing
time for proactive crime prevention activities.
FINANCE
Accounting Technician. ($37,547 total cost, $15,019 General Fund). The City's
accounting practices and procedures are complex and time consuming. This position
will enable the Finance department to improve customer service, to maintain the fixed
assets records, to perform purchasing duties, and to assist with other accounting tasks.
This program has not added a position in over five years.
PARK AND RECREATION
Park Maintenance Worker. ($ 26,750). Each year the City opens new parks and builds
more trails. Citizen expectations about park maintenance services continue to increase.
This position will assist with the full range of park maintenance activities. Park
Maintenance has not added a position since 1993, and will have more trail maintenance
requirements in the coming years. In addition, Park Maintenance is having increased
difficulty finding qualified part-time and seasonal workers to meet growing needs.
PUBLIC WORKS
Assistant City Engineer ($61,134 total cost, $30,568 General Fund). Since 1993,
most of the time of the existing Assistant City Engineer has been devoted to managing
Plymouth's Metrolink and Dial -a -Ride systems. These responsibilities leave little time
for duties typically performed by the Assistant City Engineer. The 1996 budget
recommends the addition of an Assistant City Engineer, who will perform general
engineering administrative tasks.
Water Maintenance Worker ($27,821 cost). The City maintains over 282 miles of
water main for distribution purposes. Approximately 18 miles of water main and 208
hydrants have been added since the last new position in 1993. The new position will
enable the Water Distribution program to keep pace with the demands of continued
growth in both water and sewer maintenance.
vii
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
D. Recommended Capital Equipment
The 1996 budget recommends the purchase of various types of capital equipment. The
City's equipment replacement program proposes expenditures of $770,600 in 1996, an
increase of 16% over 1995 levels. These expenditures are made from the Central
Equipment Fund, and a list detailing the proposed replacement schedule follows the
Equipment Maintenance budget. Key proposals for capital equipment include:
Fire Truck ($300,000). This truck is slated to replace an existing fire truck in 1997,
when it will be twenty years old. However, designing the specifications for a fire
apparatus and its manufacture can take over one year. Purchasing this vehicle one year
in advance means that it can be in service early in 1997.
Replacement Equipment. Significant equipment slated for replacement in 1995 is a
single axle dump truck ($90,000), a street sweeper ($100,000), and a one ton chassis
with plow and dump box ($62,000).
Complete Radio System Upgrade ($50,000). This project was begun in 1995. The
additional funding will enable the completion of the radio system upgrade.
Other New Capital Equipment. The 1996 budget recommends the purchase of a dump
truck for the Forestry program ($26,000), a pick-up truck for Park Maintenance
14,000), a 72" mower for Parks ($20,000), and dump truck liners ($13,500), and
thirty minute air cylinders ($14,000) for Fire.
Computer Improvements ($244,400). 1996 budget recommendations for computer
equipment include network upgrades, additional printers, GIS workstations, replacing
some personal computers, increasing memory, and installing software upgrades. The
1996 budget doubles the efforts to improve technology from 1995 levels. Work will
continue on the migration to new software and hardware for the City's major system.
E. Other Funds
The 1996 budget also recommends some initiatives in funds other than the General Fund.
These include:
Recreation Fund Under 1996 budget proposals, the Recreation Fund will receive a of
3,250 more than the 3 % annual increase already planned for the fund. New initiatives
include $2,250 for a new registration process, and $1,000 for telephones at recreation
sites. The Recreation Fund will finish 1996 "in the black." Also included in the
Recreation Fund is an additional $5,000 for Music in Plymouth.
viii
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
Information Systems Fund. In 1996, Information Systems will be a separate fund.
The major computer initiatives begun in 1995 will continue in 1996, and the existing
computer reserve will be reduced in the coming years. To replenish this fund, the
Information Systems charges to user departments will increase by 7% in 1996.
Risk Management Fund. A new program is recommended for 1996, an employee
Wellness Program. This program is designed to emphasis wellness awareness through
an optional health screening and on-going wellness seminars throughout the year. The
program was developed and recommended by an employee committee, and included
feedback from a survey on wellness. The committee's goal is to reduce health
insurance costs over time by helping employees make positive changes in their
lifestyles. The cost per full time employee is estimated at $35.
IV. Progress on City Council Goals
The 1996 budget was designed to direct the necessary resources toward implementing the
goals and objectives established by the City Council in 1994, and amended in 1995. The
City has made significant progress on many of the goals. Listed below are those areas on
which the 1996 budget recommendations will focus:
Management of Development. The last year has seen significant progress on
Downtown Plymouth. A major initiative in 1995 and 1996 will be the update of the
City's development regulations, and continuing work on Northwest Plymouth and
Downtown Plymouth.
Interagency Relations. The proposed budget will maintain our existing contractual
relationships with multi -city groups and social service agencies, allowing some increase
in funding for some agencies.
Improving Citizen Confidence in the City. The 1996 budget contains several
recommendations to improve customer service and heighten citizen confidence in their
government. Both the Accounting Technician and Assistant Engineer positions are
intended specifically to respond more promptly to citizen inquiries and concerns. The
Maintenance worker positions, in Park and Recreation and Water Distribution, also will
help us meet expectations. The new police officer will help reduce committed patrol
time, and enhance community activities and crime prevention. During 1996, a great
deal of organizational effort will be spent on upgrading the City's technological
capabilities and making these technologies improve our service to citizens.
ix
1996 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
V. Conclusion
On September 12, the City Council must set a preliminary levy rate. Once the proposed
levy is adopted by the City Council, it may be decreased but cannot be increased. The
1996 budget detail does not need approval at this time, and may be increased or decreased
at a later date. However, the City Council must approve a preliminary tax levy so that
each property owner can receive a Truth in Taxation notice indicating the proposed 1996
tax on the property.
We hope the Council and the citizens will agree that we have found a way to meet many
important goals of the City in 1996 with a minimal impact on our citizens and businesses.
x
CITY OF PL YMO UTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
1995 Typical Tax Bill Robbinsdale School District
School 1,648 53%
County 918 30%
City and HRA 388 13%
Special Districts 138 4%
Total 3,092 100%
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
MAJOR OPERATING FUNDS
1995 1996
GENERAL FUND 13,485,012 13,957,624
RECREATION FUND 809,917 793,228
HRA 1,713,319 1,493,094
WATER FUND 2,761,000 3,031,800
SEWER FUND 4,593,810 4,912,548
SOLID WASTE FUND 583,750 602,400
CENTRAL EQUIPMENT FUND 1,471,270 1,524,340
RISK MANAGEMENT FUND 556,302 561,936
WATER RESOURCES 2249281
DESIGN ENGINEERING 24000 2449800
EMPLOYEE BENEFIT FUND 1,054,910 1,086,552
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 8703,450
10Y
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
MARKET SEGMENT COMPARISON
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
Payable Payable
1995 1996
2,317,175,400 $2,558,394,600
824.018,500 855.114}700
13,141,193,900 $3,413,509,300
CHANGE
10.4
3_8
8.7%
1993 1994 1995 PROTECTED
NEW DWELLING UNITS: 628 650 411
j 0Y
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
MARKET VALUE TRENDS
Payable Payable
1995 1996
RESIDENTIAL NEW CONSTRUCTION 111,038,200 115,485,800
RESIDENTIAL APPRECIATION 57,230,100 39,796,700
RESIDENTIAL LAND 38,978,200 85,906,700
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL NEW
CONSTRUCTION 8,695,800 19,696,200
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL LAND 1,941,800) 4,960,400
COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL LOSS/
APPRECIATION 7,879,700) 6,469,600
TOTAL GROWTH 206,120,800 272,315,400
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
ESTIMATE OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX
1669800 HOME
Residential Homestead Taxes Payable
Actual 1995 Est. 1996
Market Value $ 158,600 $ 166,800
1995 Percentages:
1 st $72,000 of MV X 1.0% 720
Balance of MV X 2.0% 1,732
1996 Percentages:
1st $72,000 of MV X 1.0% 720
Balance of MV X 2.0% 1,896
Total Tax Cavaci
Tax Capacity Rate*
Tax
Includes HRA
452 1 2,616
15.84% 1 15.05%
388.40 1 $393.71
0 CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
THE BOTTOM LINE
CITY TAXES ON SELECTED HOMES
HOUSE VALUE PROPOSED
1995/1996 1995 1996
INCREASE/
DECREASE
OVER 1995
80,000 / $ 84,100 139 145 6
158,600 / $166,800 388 394 6
200,000 / $210,000 520 524 4
250,000 / $262,000 678 682 4
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
MAJOR ISSUES
Fiscal Disparities
Significant drop in value of commercial and
industrial properties in 1993 and 1994 artificially
deflated impact of fiscal disparties in 1995.
Significant negative change between 1995 and
1996 ($2,327,000) in net impact on tax capacity
is equivalent to $384,000 in tax revenue.
1994 and 1996 more accurate reflection of fiscal
disparities.
Y:0 CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
MAJOR ISSUES
Use of Projected 1995 Surplus
Revenue and expenditure projections indicate a
1995 budget surplus of $385,000
Use funds to mitigate impact of tax increase and
replenish reserve funds
Recommendations
200,000 -- offset future tax abatements
85,000 -- lease purchase payments on dump truck
100,000 -- replenish Building Reserve and Computer
Reserve
1:0 CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
MAJOR ISSUES
REPLENISHING RESERVE FUNDS
Major reserve funds have had significant "draws"
in recent months
Building Reserve contributed $1,000,000 to City
Center Expansion, balance now $508,000
Computer Reserve will contribute $600,000 to
fund computer upgrades
Reserve funds important to funding replacement
equipment and addresssing emergency needs
1996 budget adjusts rates to user departments to
begin replenishing reserve funds
Use of 1995 surplus for one-time infusion of dollars
into these funds
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
MAJOR ISSUES
REVENUES
Tax Abatements -- value losses are decreasing
compared to prior years, estimate "exposure"
at $130,000 in 1996.
HACA -- legislative action reduces HACA by
78,590 for one year. Loss will be absorbed by
Street Reconstruction Fund.
Building Permit Revenue -- 1996 budget assumes
3% increase despite recent fee increase. Lower
estimate contemplates a slow -down of building
activity as City develops.
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
PERSONNEL REQUESTS FOR 1996
New Full Time Tax Supported Positions % General Fund Amount
Police Officer*
Assistant Engineer
Accounting Technician
Park Maintenance Worker
New Non -Tax Supported Positions:
Water Maintenance Worker
Partially funded by Federal Grant
100 21,839
50 30,568
40 15,019
100 26.750
94,176
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
1996 PROPOSED BUDGET
CAPTAL EQUIPMENT
Continue Equipment Replacement Program
Replace Fire Truck
Forestry Dump Truck
Park Maintenance Mower
Thirty minute Air Cylinders
Computer Improvements
network upgrades
GIS workstations
replace PC's
software upgrades
300,000
269000
20,000
149000
244,400
Agenda Number:
For Expenditures Exceeding $15,000
DATE: September 7, 1995 for the City Council Meeting of September 12, 1995
TO: Dwight D. Johnson, City Manager
FROM: Fred G. Moore, Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF PARATRANSIT SERVICE (METRO MOBILITY)
1. PROPOSED MOTION: Make a motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the
Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement with the Metropolitan Council to
provide Paratransit service within the City effective October 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996.
2. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM, ISSUE, OR PROJECT: As a result of shortage of
State funding to continue the existing Paratransit service (Metro Mobility) as it has
previously operated, the Metropolitan Council has made reductions in the service. They will
also be increasing fares. The change in hours of operation will affect the entire service area.
There are seven communities where total service is proposed to be discontinued since it is
not legally required to be provided by the Metropolitan Council under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). Plymouth is one of these seven cities. In July the Metropolitan
Council voted to discontinue this service in Plymouth but directed their staff to work with
the City on a program to provide a continuation of service. Currently there are
approximately 2,300 monthly Paratransit trips with either a beginning or ending destination
within Plymouth.
3. ALTERNATIVES: City staff investigated and considered the following options:
Choose not to provide a Paratransit service.
Implement a mid day fixed route transit service which could make Plymouth
eligible for Metro Mobility Service.
Contract with Met Council for Metro Mobility service.
Expand the existing Dial -A -Ride service, provide accessible Dial -A -Ride
vehicles, and implement a limited Paratransit service with connections into the
Metro Mobility system at Ridgedale or other connecting points.
CoNMPAR.WC
SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF PARATRANSIT SERVICE (METRO MOBILITY) r
Page Two
Implement a Paratransit Program, including the establishment of a dispatch
center.
4. DISCUSSION: The cutback in service is a result of inadequate funding provided by the
State Legislature. Before a decision is made by the City to establish a long term Paratransit
Program the City should work with the Metropolitan Council and other affected
communities to obtain adequate funding for a uniform program throughout the Metropolitan
area. For this reason, it is staff's recommendation that we enter into an agreement with the
Metropolitan Council to continue the Metro Mobility service in Plymouth. This service
would be changed to the same operating hours as the remainder of the Metropolitan system.
To implement this recommendation, staff has negotiated an agreement with the Metropolitan
Council staff for this interim service. Attached is the proposed agreement. The major
provisions of the agreement are as follows:
The agreement is for a period from October 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996.
Either party can terminate the agreement upon 90 days written notice.
Either party can terminate the agreement immediately as a result of lack of
funding.
Plymouth is responsible to pay the subsidy cost for all trips beginning within the
City. This is estimated to be 53 % of the total trips.
The Metropolitan Council will pay the subsidy costs for all trips beginning
outside the City but have an ending destination within the City. This is
estimated to be 47 % of the total trips.
The City of Plymouth can fund our portion of the cost for the service from our
unbudgeted Transit Tax Levy (Opt -Out).
5. BUDGET IlVIPACTS: The estimated cost for this service for the nine month period is as
follows:
City Cost: $166,354
Metropolitan Council Cost: 147.521
Total $313,875
CONTUPARMOc
SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF PARATRANSIT SERVICE (METRO MOBILITY)
Page Three
The City's share of the cost, $166,354, will come from our unbudgeted Tax Funds which
are levied as part of the transit tax (Opt -Out). We estimate that there will be $305,000 of
unbudgeted funds. At the end of the year one-half of the unbudgeted funds are taken by the
Metropolitan Council and placed in the overall Transit System Account. For this reason the
actual expenditure from our Transit system will be $83,000.
6. RECOMA ENDATIONS: A Paratransit service is a much needed service for our residents
and businesses. They have relied on the service which has been provided for many years by
the Metropolitan system. It would be a hardship to completely discontinue service. It is the
staff recommendation that we enter into an agreement with Metropolitan Council to provide
service for an interim period while the City and Metropolitan Council work with the
legislature to obtain adequate funding for the entire system. If adequate funding is not
provided by the State, then staff will develop other alternatives and make recommendations
to the City Council before the service is continued beyond the terms of the proposed
agreement.
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
attachments: Resolution
Proposed Agreement
CONWPARMOC
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION NO. 95 -
APPROVAL OF PARATRANSIT SERVICE AGREEMENT
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND CITY OF PLYMOUTH
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has voted to discontinue Paratransit service within
the City of Plymouth effective October 1, 1995; and
WHEREAS, an agreement has been prepared which will continue Paratransit service for
the period effective October 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the agreement provides for the cost sharing of this service between the City
of Plymouth and the Metropolitan Council; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to continue Paratransit service on an interim basis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA: That the Mayor and City Manager are
authorized to enter into the Agreement with the Metropolitan Council for Paratransit
service.
Adopted by the City Council on September 12, 1995.
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS.
The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of
Plymouth, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a
meeting of the Plymouth City Council on , with the original
thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this
day of
City Clerk
APPARATR.DOC
08/29/95 19:15 FAX 812 229 2709 _ RTB Z002/007
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND
THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of between the
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL, ("the Council'—'), and the CITY OF PLYMOUTH ("theCity").
WHEREAS, the Council is authorized by Minnesota Statutes section 473.388 to provide
financial assistance to eligible providers of replacement transit services in the metropolitan area;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Plymouth contracts for the operation of transit services within and toandfromitsjurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City has applied for financial assistance as provided in Minnesota Statutes
section 473.388; and
WHEREAS, the Council provides complementary paratransit services in the metropolitan area
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA); and
WHEREAS, the City is eligible to receive financial assistance pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
section 473.388, and the Council desires to grant financial assistance to the City; and
WHEREAS, the Americans with Disabilities Act does not require the City to provide
complementary paratransit services.
NOW THEREFORE, the Council and the City agree as follows:
I. DE)F MITIONS
1.01 "Paratransit" means specialized transit service provided to persons with
disabilities who are certified by the Council.
1.02 "Complementary Paratransit Service" means paratransit service provided
as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
1.03 "Demand" means paratransit trips requested by ADA certified users consistent
with rules established by the Council.
1.04 "Demand Passenger Trip" means all delivered trips that includes demand
08/29/95 19:15 FAX 612 229 2739 RTB Z003/007
passenger hoardings and demand passenger no shows where no boarding occurs.
1.05 "Demand Subsidy" means the complementary paratransit subsidy to operate the
demand system consisting of the 150 publicly leased / owned vehicles. Schedule to
calculate demand subsidy is provided in Attachment 1.
1.06 "Average Demand Subsidy per Demand Passenger Trip" means the monthlydemandsubsidydividedbythemonthlytotalpassengertrips.
YI. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
The Metropolitan Council was established by Minnesota law to plan for the orderly and
economical development, public and private, of the metropolitan area. The Council is
required by Minnesota law to coordinate transit operations within the metropolitan area
and is authorized to levy taxes and issue general obligation bonds for transit purposes
within the metropolitan transit area. As part of its responsibilities for regional planning
and coordination of transit operations, the Council is authorized to provide financial
assistance to transit providers in the metropolitan area. The City of Plymouth may
operate transit services within their jurisdiction as part of the replacement service program
and have applied for Council financial assistance pursuant to Minnesota Statutes section
473.388. This agreement expresses the understanding of the parties regarding the
Council's financial assistance to the City, so as to promote the Council's interests in
coordinating and maintaining the integrity of the metropolitan transit system and in
ensuring adequate documentation of and financial accountability for expenditures of publicfunds.
III. TERM OF AGREEMENT
This agreement shall be in effect from October 1, 1995, through June 30, 1996. This
agreement may be extended upon mutual consent of both parties.
IV. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES
4.01 City Source and Use of Funds. The City is hereby obligated to pay the entire
monthly demand subsidy amount for all complementary paratranist passenger trips
originating in the City's political jurisdiction. These payments shall come from the
proceeds of the Council's transit tax levy in the City. The City may use its current year
transit operating levy and/or its budget carryover funds for any transit -related purpose
authorized in Minnesota Statute section 473.384, as amended. There is no requirement
that the City must fully spend its program's current year available resources before being
authorized to spend its budget carryover funds. There is no time limit requirement as to
when the City shall program and spend its respective budget carryover funds. The demand
subsidy will be calculated on a monthly basis as set forth in Attachment 1.
4.02 City Payment. The City will execute a payment authorization form and provide
08/29/95 19:16 FAX 612 229 2739 RTB 2004/007
to the Council for the monthly demand subsidy amount within thirty days of receipt of the
Council's monthly invoice.
V. COUNCIL RESPONSUBILrMS
5.01 Provision of Service. The Council will provide or contract for
complementary paratransit demand service in the City including management and
operations during the term of this agreement. Scope of service will be daily service with
the first pick-up in the City scheduled beginning at 6:00 a.m. and last drop-off scheduled
in the City no later than 7:00 p.m.
5.O2 Council Share of Subsidy. The Council is hereby obligated to incur the entire
monthly demand subsidy amount for all complementary paratransit passenger trips
originating outside the City's political jurisdiction with passenger alighting in the City's
political jurisdiction. The demand subsidy will be calculated on a monthly basis asset
forth in Attachment 1. These expenditures will be charged to the complementary
paratransit program funded through state assistance.
5.03 Service Invoice. The Council will generate and submit to the City a monthly
invoice documenting monthly passenger trips, demand subsidy and subsidy per passenger
trip within 45 days of the conclusion of each month.
5.04 Council Funding. The City recognizes that this agreement is funded in part bylegislativeappropriation. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this agreement, the
Council will incur costs to provide service into the City only if the Council has adequate
transit funding available to operate complementary paratransit service into the City. If the
complementary paratransit system becomes fully funded, defined as sufficient funding to
operate the system in the geographic area and hours of service as operated during the
period January 1, 1995 through September 30, 1995, the Council will cease invoicing theCityunderthisagreement.
VI. ACCOUNTING, RECORD, AND AUDIT REQUIREMENTS
6.01 Operating Summaries. The Council will produce monthly summaries for the
City as documentation for the monthly invoice. The complementary paratransit demand
system summary will include all operating cost and passenger data in a format consistent
with Attachment 1. The Council will produce a monthly Plymouth Ridership
Summary capturing all the data contained in Attachment 2. The Council will provide each
month a payment authorization form to the City as contained in Attachment 3.
6.02 Audit and Inspections. The Council shall permit the City or its designee to
inspect and copy all accounts, records, and business documents, including those of any
contractor.
08/29/95 19:16 FAX 612 229 2739 RTB X1005/007
6.03 Reconciliation After Audit. If, as a result of final audit, the Council determines that it
has over invoiced the City, the Council will make payment to the City for the
overpayment amount within thirty (30) days, If, as result of final audit, the Council
determines that it has been underpaid by the City for complementary paratransit services in
the City, the City will reimburse the Council for the underpayment from funds as identifiedinSection4.01. Should the amount of the City's available funds as identified in Section
4.01 be less than the amount of the underpayment, the City shall within thirty (30) days
refund to the Council the amount of the remaining underpayment.
V11. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
7.01 Indennnification. The City assumes liability for, and agrees to indemnify, protect,
and hold harmless the Council from any liabilities, obligations, losses, damages, claims,
injuries, penalties, costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising out of
the performance of this agreement by the City_
The Council assumes liability for, and agrees to indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the
City from any liabilities, obligations, losses, damages, claims, injuries, penalties, costs and
expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising out of the performance of this
agreement by the Council.
7.02 Insurance. Upon the Council's request, the City shall furnish an acceptable
Certificate of Insurance documenting the insurance maintained by the City. The Council
shall be listed as an insured under the Authority's policies. Alternatively, the Authority
may warrant to Council that the City is self-insured and able to entertain claims in an
amount sufficient to indemnify the Council under paragraph 7.01 above. Neither this
paragraph nor any insurance maintained by the City shall be construed to waive the limits
of liability provided for in the Minnesota Municipal Tort Claims Act for either the Council
or the City.
VIII. TERMINATION
8.01 Default. The City shall be in default under this agreement if it fails to comply with
the terms of this agreement. The Council shall be in default under this agreement if it fails
to comply with the terms of this agreement. Upon a determination of non-compliance,
and in recognition of the unique circumstances of the problem, the party claiming non-
compliance shall notify the other party claiming non-compliance through any of the
following steps prior to declaring a default:
oral communications:
written notice requesting corrective action;
written notice demanding corrective action; and
formal written notice of default.
After receiving written notice of non-compliance, the party shall have seven (7) business
08/29/95 19:17 FAX 612 229 2739 RTB Z006/007
days to cure the claimed default or show good cause for the claimed default, after which
time, if the default continues without good cause, the party claiming default may declare
the other party in default and terminate this agreement with forty-five (45) days' written
notice. If this agreement is terminated due to default, the parties shall not be precluded
from recovering actual damages to which they may be entitled and may exercise any other
rights they have in law or equity to secure performance of this agreement.
8.02 Unavoidable Occurrences. The Council shall not be held responsible for failure
to provide on-time service due to weather or traffic conditions, unavoidable vehicle
malfunctions, or naturally occurring disasters. The Council shall not be responsible for
any loss or damage sustained or claimed to be sustained by the City through the failure of
the Council or its contractors to maintain at all times a timely operating schedule. The
Council shall not be required to furnish the service or any portion in the event of its
inability to do so by virtue of any concerted refusal of its employees to work or any strike
on any kind or character of its or its contractors, including a so-called wild -cat strike or
slowdown or stoppage; any riot, civil strike or disturbances; closing of streets, roads,
routes, or bridges; destruction of any means or methods of any of its property necessary
for the performance of this agreement; flood, fire, or any other cause beyond its control.
8.03 Termination. Either party, upon ninety (90) days' written notice, may terminate
this agreement. In the event the City decides to contract with a provider other than Metro
Mobility for provision of its complementary paratransit service in the City, the City shall
provide to the Council ninety (90) days' written notice. Either party may terminate this
agreement immediately with written notice to the other party due to insufficient funding tofulfillitsobligationsunderthisagreement.
8.04 ADA Status, The City shall not provide or contract for regular route service
during the term of this agreement that would qualify it as an ADA required service area.
IX. GENERAL PROVISIONS
9.01 Amendments. The terms of this agreement may be changed by mutual agreement
of the parties. Such changes shall be effective only upon the execution of written
amendments signed by authorized representatives of the Council and the City.
9.02 Consultation. The City and the Council agree to consult with each other in the
event there is any change in conditions, local law, or any other event that may affect the
terms of the agreement.
9.03 Compliance With Law. The City and the Council agree to conduct the activities
under this agreement in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.
9.04 Notices. Notice for purposes of this agreement shall be sufficient if given by
certified mail to the addresses listed below, and shall be deemed to have been given the
day of mailing.
08/29/95 19:17 FAX 612 229 2739 RTB
To the Council: Metropolitan Council
Office of Transportation & Transit Development
Attn: Systems Evaluation and Implementation Manager
Mears Park Centre, 7th Floor
230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101
To the City: City of Plymouth
Director of Public Works
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, Minnesota 55447
Z007/007
4.05 Equal Employment Opportunity and A#Tirmative Action. The City and the
Council agree to comply with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations relating to
nondiscrimination and affirmative action in public purchase, involvement, and use. In
particular, the City and Council agree not to discriminate against any employee or
applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation,
national origin, marital status, disability, status with regard to public assistance,
membership or activity in a local civil rights commission, or age, and to take
affirmative action to insure that applicants and employees are treated equally with, respect
to all aspects of employment, rates of pay and other forms of compensation, and selection
for training.
9.06 Acknowledgments. The City shall appropriately acknowledge the financial
assistance provided by the Council in any promotional materials, press releases, reports
and publications relating to the activities funded by this agreement.
9.07 Nonwaiver. The failure of either party at any time to insist upon the strict
performance of any or all of the terms, conditions, and covenants herein shall not be
deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach or default in the terms, conditions, and
covenants herein contained.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their dulyauthorizedrepresentativesasofthedayandyearfirstwrittenabove.
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By
James J. Solem
Regional Administrator
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
By
Its M a Y o r
Or
I i 3 C: t' Y Mo. -2- p
08/04/95 10:41
At+a.C1%r+%eMt 1
N0.057 DE,
METRO M013I LITY RIDERSHIP STATS FOR
JUN 1995
NET TRIPS IN OR OUT OF PLYMOUTH
Includes trips provided and no shows)
FR ELPCHAI2.
TO PLYMOUTH•
4WlAEE AY............. 137
PEAKp ............ 77
TOTAL RIDERS::::::::.....67 144
LP&
MOI TO ALL OTHER CITIES:
L
OTHER CITIES TO PLYM H:
L CHAIR.........
DAY ............. 1.
g081
L RII Et$::::::::....
495
1.082
SUB TOTAL 1,240 FOR 53.4
SUB TOTAL 1,082 FOR 46.6X
TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS 2,322
RIDERS ............... RIDERS ............... 1„ 0961,096
SUB TOTAL 1,240 FOR 53.4
SUB TOTAL 1,082 FOR 46.6X
TOTAL PASSENGER TRIPS 2,322
A t a. C,k>,, w+ G % t ?.
Y•i 0 x OF Arr ual Hxdpit
PROVIDERS
43171
Jan
lu7x
FSDLl11pl
2360
March
33377E
QRdf
u67%
d9pL
3&00%
hiffi AdX
1993
BUDGET
BUDGET
eALA74CE
x ar
BUDGET
USEDTplalExn
Deem" Service
Maytlowei Total 451,104 413,000 461,297 340,139 453,133 420,741 9805 2,638.375 6.583571 2,445,196 4725% Fird
vada
110.601
352.304
98.401
314,200
90.601
362.496
0
34Q/36
98,p01
354933
98.001
321,041
90.001 392.603 1,196.477 605,b74 49.46%
4desto Hide Total 359.237 349,975 371,244 347,945 362,578 349,305
ISS
127 269
2.045572
2,267,553
4,38rp(,4
4,247,048
2 99.52?
2.030.395
46 L5%
52.76% Fwd 27.268 127.266 127,M 127266 127266 121.268 127 260 890 613 1.533,677 642" 50.9% WAat4
HendkabeTotal
231.910
155.5%
222.706
t49,525
24.7.927
160,250
220.677
552,997
23"11
152,656
222.038
t53¢88
0
45,466
376u600 2.764.271 1.207.591 49201
Feld 45.456 45.458 45.456 45.438 45.456 45.456 45.436
968,230
348.180
1,A74709
46,536
906.471 61 AS%
V"i"
fud Expense
110.103
46,536
1043010
97.074
114.791
64,811
107,542 147.401 100.132 0 660p@ 13281165
220-W
674123
622%
48.94%
Sub Total 1,054,437 1.009,582 1.107.602
30,495
923,573
43,73?
1,012,304
76.137
997.77t
O
271.679
4 I91
4.344,948
1042
127'09,203
572,192 45.14%
SKP1rwa4ry iuxLt
Uand Se Moes 9.207 8.316 9.207 Oslo 9.207 8.910 0 53.757
Taal Suppkmemary Stoke 9.207 5.316 9,207 8110 9,207 8.910 0 53,757 111,909 58.152 48.44%
FARES"
CisA Tole! 138.616 35.424 360862 34528 37.641 37r 0 220.298TKWTotal50.365 50,648 61.070 SSCOW 62.507 60,540 0 339,9120.50 5,360 5.559 6,601 5,561 6,939 6.183 0 35„6011.70
CoiponTotal
45.006
10,610
45.069
13,194
54,470
513,498
49.132
906
58,258
8.179
64,3155 0 304.314
0.60 1.017 1.497 IA" 1,483 1.371
71359
1.19E
0
0
62726
1.70 9,593 11,698 11.854 8,403 6.609 6,161 0
SAW
4319FurlTaxRattr7d
3461
15,202 16,111 14.269 13,519 4.147 18.651 0 81,898TrialPiovid" Cost 959,461 915,716 S74AM 827.746 917.126 690= 271,678 56756,597
56WAttows 56.037.2 35.546.2 41607.4 36,5603 41.2VA 190.394
SWWA&Jas 606,266.1 647A124 4576946.4 569.495,8 853.477.0 a230.790Pu»6271 59,433 57,478 64 948 611461 64.734 306.002
op. 5.aa47dyPorP&&&*V/1 16.14 1593 MA* 13,92 14.17 SWIM down StS.01
P _"aVa4 Pet hfts 1.5 1.6 1.6 t S 1.6 011/341 tDlY/Gl 1 S
NETC01mC& PAYMENTS MACE TO PFKYADeRS AND CIRECTLY TOPRW OM VOK OFIS O.E., REM, vQ* E MANTEWNCE.)
10TAL OPERAi714G COSTS LESS CASH AND TYCKET REDEWMNSA FUEL TAX REFtN08.
7114/95 gms
OD
O
1r
kDLn
O
A
N
DATE: September 7, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kathy Lueckert, Assistant City Manager 6kle
SUBJECT: 1995 Citizen Survey Results
The 1995 budget included funding for a citizen survey. Similar general opinion
surveys had occurred in 1982, 1985, and 1987. A 1995 survey provides yet another
snapshot" of general citizen opinions and views about living in Plymouth.
The firm of Motivation Dynamics was retained to conduct the survey. Questions were
developed during the spring, and the actual survey was administered by telephone in
April. Motivation Dynamics achieved a response rate of over 90 %, completing 541
surveys out of a goal of 600. Unfortunately, Motivation Dynamics was not timely in
the data analysis and report phase of the survey, and the firm's capabilities in this
regard were somewhat limited. Thus some of the survey results (such as responses to
the open space preservation question) now are not particularly useful. We did receive
disks with the raw data from the survey, and we will do further data analysis and cross -
tabulations this fall.
The survey results are attached. In the first section, Motivation Dynamics offers data
on selected questions. Also noted are comments made by citizens to the surveyors
which are not necessarily a part of the official survey results, but do provide insights
into citizen perceptions. The second section details the percentage responses to each
question, and lists verbal answers to specific questions. The third section contains
graphs which compare this year's results with previous surveys for those questions
common to all four surveys.
Some observations about the survey results.
Quality of Life. 98 % of respondents rated the quality of life in Plymouth as
excellent or good. Location (28 %) and safety (21 %) were the factors respondents
liked the most about living in Plymouth. The cost of living (20 %) was identified as
the least popular aspect of living in Plymouth.
Taxes. 41 % of those surveyed consider Plymouth taxes about average. 48 %
consider Plymouth taxes to be relatively high. However, 49 % identified correctly
that 10-20 % of property tax dollars goes to the City.
Satisfaction with City Services. In general, citizens seem satisfied with basic city
services. High satisfaction ratings were accorded park maintenance (94 %), snow
plowing (84 %), police services (94 %), recreation (89 %), and recycling (94 %).
Trail plowing received the lowest satisfaction rating (57%), but this is a relatively
new service. Only 69 % were satisfied with the quality of city drinking water.
Speeding and Sidewalks. Speeding in neighborhoods was a concern of 52 % of
those surveyed. Concern about speeding in the city in general was indicated by
39%. An overwhelming number (80%) do not want sidewalks in their
neighborhoods.
City Planning. 76 % surveyed said that the City's development was well planned or
somewhat planned. 71 % said that they thought this planning was environmentally
sensitive and responsive. 69 % said that Plymouth should continue to grow, but at a
slower pace or should grow, but not into undeveloped areas.
Downtown Plymouth. 39 % surveyed think that the City should encourage the
development of a downtown area, but 39 % feel that the City should not encourage a
downtown.
Affordable Housing. 64 % feel that the City should actively support affordable
housing as a part of Plymouth's development, but 30 % disagree. A mixture of
housing types was supported by 81 %.
Environmental Issues. 50% stated that Plymouth's water quality is good, but 43%
said that water quality was fair, or should be improved. When asked about a fee to
improve water quality, 46 % responded favorably to a fee but 42 % were not in
favor. 54 % indicated that their sump pump drains outside their home. 25 % said
that their lawn fertilizer contained phosphorus, but 51 % did not know the
phosphorus content of the fertilizer. 48 % applied fertilizer themselves, 30 % use a
contract service.
Recreation Services. 94 % feel that preserving one of the City's golf courses is
important. 66 % feel that the City should study a possible community center. 41 %
identified that additional recreational facilities were needed for ages 1 - 19.
Customer Service. 56 % said that the performance of City staff is excellent or very
good. 33 % said that performance was adequate. 75 % of those contacting city staff
were satisfied with the service they received. Of those who had visits at their
homes from city staff, 80 % rate staff as excellent or good. 43 % said that extending
City Center hours after 4:30 PM would be convenient for them.
The survey results, in particular the comments associated with specific questions, offer
many insights. The results also point to some areas in which we need to focus, such as
providing timely responses to citizen inquiries. We will use the survey results and
comments in our on-going customer service efforts.
Overall, the 1995 Citizen Survey contains good news. We have improved in several
categories over previous years. The survey shows that in general citizens are pleased
with their city and with the services provided. Folks like living here, and seem to take
pride in Plymouth as a place to live.
Section 1
Overview:
This study was developed for the City of
Plymouth at the request of its Planning
Department and City Council.
Former studies (1982. 1985, and 1987) gave
citizens an opportunity to help shape current
policies and activities. The development and
growth of the City, as well as societal changes
over this 8 -year period, indicated to City
planners and representatives that surveying
citizens would be useful in assessing,
understanding and addressing future needs.
It was determined that a sample of 600 persons
could be drawn to statistically represent the
adult population. Recording their responses
would discover current levels of satisfaction with
life in Plymouth and help citizens give voice to
their concerns and ideas.
It was determined that a sample of 600 persons
could be drawn to statistically represent the
adult population. Recording their responses
would discover current levels of satisfaction with
life in Plymouth and help citizens give voice to
their concerns and ideas.
The sample size reflects 1% of the total
population as estimated by Metropolitan Council
Statisticians. The Population Count from the
1990 census showed a population of 50,889, a
61% growth from 1980"s count of 31,000; the
Council uses a variety of means including
housing permits, school census and other data
to develop population projections. According to
their 1993 figures, the most recent available,
Plymouth has a population of 55,137. Their
1994 projections will be available at the end of
July, 1995.
I believe we do have opportunity to
voice our opinions... it's just taking
the time and making the effort... that
doesn't happen enough."
Respondent
Sample:
Registered voter lists were the
primary source for the 600 persons
randomly selected. The major
common characteristic was that each
voted in both the primary and general
election in 1994 as attested by the
Voter Registration Department,
Minnesota Secretary of State's Office.
An equal distribution of men and
women was chosen, and the sample
was drawn to represent Plymouth's 32
voting precincts. This helped assure
that respondents included all age
groups 18 years and above, and that a
variety of homes, incomes, and
interests would be included in the
sample. Apartment renters, home
owners, those who live in single family
as well as multiple dwellings such as
townhomes and condominiums are
represented, and the sample includes
voters who are students living on their
own or with family members in
Plymouth.
Preliminary Postcard
In the experience of Motivation Dynamics, the
survey consultants, alerting those in the
chosen sample assures a higher quality and
number of responses. It had been determined
that 85% of the sample would be considered
adequate. Motivation Dynamics actually
achieved in excess of 90%, for a total of
541 completed surveys out of the 600 -person
sample.
Establishing The Survey Process
Devising Questions
Questions from prior surveys
were analyzed to determine
pertinence and relevance as
well as whether responses
would supplement present
information and resources.
City staff, elected
representatives and members
of planning commissions
helped formulate appropriate
and useful questions.
Most of the data sought
was objective and quantifiable;
however, subjective
information and opinions are
important and queries were
developed to elicit and
document these as well.
04
SOUND OFF!
Your name was randomly selected to participate in a survey
of Plymouth residents. Your opinions and ideas are needed
to help City staff and elected representatives do the best job
possible in planning for the future of Plymouth. You will be
called by Motivation Dynamics, an independent research group, between April 12 and April 27, 1995.
All information is strictly confidential and maintained according
to state and Federal guidelines. No answer or idea will be .
attributed to any individual. Your replies will not affect you or your
property in any way. If you need more Information, call 470-1389.
Thank you!
Elilbeth Fuller, Motivation Dynamics
Postcard
Among reasons for incomplete surveys
were:
Death in Family Failure to reach the person
after 6 -10 tries . Interruption by respondent
before completion . Telephone no longer in
service. Language barrier . Hearing impaired,
unwilling to respond . No longer living in
Plymouth, although telephone number was
correct . Outright refusal (5)
I'm interested in this ... I think
others are too. It makes for a yell -run
community." -
J"wot-ty iornefitttej ... it gee/rr,.i Re f{tin//g;i will
Aange too At, and tl t they ffjttst decline. "
This is good. I come from the
East and we used the Town
Meeting approach. I like this. "
Respondent comments
Applying the Survey
Skilled callers contacted each person
in the sample group. Callers received
the person's name and telephone
number only. In order to assure
confidentiality, no survey or sample
list was maintained in such a way that
individual data could be tied to a
specific respondent after the form was
completed.
If the individual said he or she
could not answer the survey questions
due to lack of time, other
commitments, or other reasonable
needs, an appointment was set to call
back and complete the survey. This
was very effective; in fact, one person
who was delayed at work called to re-
set his telephone appointment for the
next day.
3
In Their Own Words.. .
a nice atmosphere here... the
personality" of the area, the
aesthetics... it's good."
There's serenity, but a good business
climate, too "
Sometimes I miss urban life.."
It's a blend here: retaining the
wildlife areas, beeping business and
industry, but not too close to residential
area ... zoning is strong, and it should
e.
tt
There are times when l just long for
the farm, the country, the space."
Processing the Data
Developing Preliminary Reports
Creating Final Reports, including graphs,
charts and tables.
Examining Specific Responses
Throughout this report the main
objective has been to provide a thorough
compilation of both objective and
subjective data.
Examination of each question has
been made with three basic
criteria in mind:
Significance of the number of
responses in a category;
Percentages of responses
measured;
Representative characteristics of
the population selected.
4
Sections and Subject Areas have been
developed which place data relating to
similar concerns together, although the
questions may not have been grouped on
be questionnaire.
Subjects of each section are defined.
Questions are referenced in the
appendix so that answers to specific
items are accessible.
We Love it Here
and we're here to
stay!"
Most of the respondents (42%)
believe they will remain in
Plymouth for six to ten years;
225 or 42% of the respondents
have lived in Plymouth more
than ten years;
132 or 24% have lived in
Plymouth between six and ten
years.
More than 10 years
42%
00/030/0gyp
pless
than oneyear
V /G J /C
101/0G
YEARS OF RESIDENCY
24%
years
21%
P
Many of the respondents indicated
that they might move to another
house, but would probably stay in
Plymouth.
15% indicated that they would like to
move. Of that number, 20% say they
would move somewhere in the City of
Plymouth. Another 15% said they
would move to another suburb, and
19% would move away from
Minnesota, and 10% would like to live
in a more rural area away from the
Twin Cities and its suburbs.
Retirement will bring some
changes. Moving might be one."
the cost of living could get to be a
problem... that and urban sprawl are
concerns."
I love my house! We're on a
cul-de-sac on the edge of the
trail. It's beautiful here."
AGE GROUPS
Each respondent represented his or her
household. These households had a total
of 1830 persons in the following age
groups:
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Age Groups Represented in Sample
36%
0 to 6 to 13 19- 36- Over
5 12 to 35 55 55
18
Many of the respondents indicated
that they might move to another
house, but would probably stay in
Plymouth.
Of those who said they would
like to move ...
20% would move within the City of
Plymouth;
15% said they would move to another
suburb;
19% would move away from the Twin
City area; 10% would like to live in a
more rural area away from the city and
suburbs.
6
The balance of age groups and
the diversity it brings to the
community is apparent. Having a
blend of older people (12% over
age 55 and 36% in the 36 to 55
age group) validates the
perception of community
members that the City of
Plymouth will continue to offer a
positive quality of life.
Quality of Life
Dedine Fair
r<'
GoodExodentR
S
6a
Points of Origin: Where did they come
from?
Nine County Metro Area: Annandale,
Anoka, Apple Valley, Blaine, Bloomington,
Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Burnsville,
Champlin, Crystal, Dayton, Delano, Edina, Eden
Prairie, Elk River, Farmington, Fridley, Golden
Valley, Hamel, Lakeville, Maple Grove, Maple
Plain, Mound, Minneapolis, Minnetonka,
Minnetrista, New Brighton, New Hope, Orono,
Prior Lake, Richfield, Robbinsdale, St. Anthony
Village, St Louis Park, St. Paul, Shakopee,
Wayzata
Other Minnesota Towns, Cities
Specifically Mentioned: Austin, Faribault,
Fairmont, Farmington, Mankato, McGregor,
Owatonna, Princeton, St Cloud, Rochester,
Wright, Zumbrota
Alabama
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Dakotas
Florida
Illinois
Indiana Iowa
Maryland
New Jersey
Michigan
Nebraska
Ohio
Tennessee
Utah
Wisconsin
Argentina
Europe: Holland
Alaska G'
Arizona
Carolinas
Connecticut
Delaware
Kentucky
Idaho
Kansas
New Hampshire
Massachusetts
Missouri
New York
Pennsylvania
Texas
Washington
Canada
Scotland
Most Residents Are Proud of Plymouth
as a Place to Live...
Decline Little ® Decline
1% 3%U Little
A Great Deal
38%
some U Same
21% t3ALot
A Great Deal
A Lot
37/6
Pride in Plymouth
NEIGHBORHOOD
APPEARANCE
59% RATED THEIR AREA
EXCELLENT"
41 % RATED THEIR AREA
GOOD"
Why were the respondents attracted to
Plymouth? Most Commonly Mentioned
were:
Job transfer: Realtor (R) suggested area
Schools, opportunities for kids and
family
Open space, good feel to area
New area, type of housing and
development
Accessible, centrally located
Family members lived in area
Comments ranged from the very specific,
such as "desire to live in a condo in
Plymouth", to "we found just the right
house", to "it looks good here", or "it
seemed nice."
8
Human beings often prove
contradictory; this study is no exception.
Many of the most liked aspects were on
someone's least liked list! Commonly
mentioned as "least liked" are:
congestion, lack of culture, lack of
upscale atmosphere (others felt
area was too upscale!) no
community center, too many
people, growing vandalism, youth
crime, graffiti, restriction and not
enough restrictions. In general,
however, most people are
basically satisfied.
LEAST LIKED ASPECTS
they said :
Growth seems inevitable. There's
demand, so there will be growth."
Traffic is a matter of perspective... this area is
wonderful compared to other urban areas!"
Condo restrictions are a problem sometimes, but
they protect us, too."
I wish we had a movie theatre dloser."
We're looting forward to the new
library..."
Why isn't there a health club out here?"
Where do they shop?
1. Ridgedale
2. Target/Greatland
3.101 & 6
4. Brookdale
5. Wayzata
6. Edina
We listened, they said:
We could use some fine dining."
I think we'need a good
hardware store, something for
paint and home repair items."
A children's store is a lack."
WHAT ABOUT SIDEWALKS?
SIDEWALKS??
E
IAmenities Which Could Add to Quality
of Area:
Better Restaurants - Upscale, but
not too expensive
Bakeries, Children's Stores,
Department Store like Kohl's
More Culture, More Events
HOW ABOUT A SPECIFIC
DOWNTOWN"?
DOWNTOWN??
SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY
OFFERINGS
REPORT CARD:
SELECTED CITY SERVICES
SERVICE SAT UNSAT
Park Maintenance 94% 1%
Snow Plowing 84% 7%
Trail Plowing 57% 1 %
Police Services 94% 1%
Fire Protection 76% 1%
City Streets 77% 15%
Drinking Water 68% 25%
Animal Control 80% 8%
Recreation 89% 4%
Recycling 94% 2%
10
SAFETY
98% Feel Safe in Neighborhood
SPEEDING
22% are Very Concerned about
speeding in the neighborhood;
30% report Some Concern
47% are Not Concerned
CITY SPEEDING
55% are Not Concerned about
City speeding
25% have Some Concern
14% are Very Concerned
Parks and Recreation
Services
Levels of Satisfaction and Perceptions
of value in parks and park services are
markedly high:
Specific events, using
parks for group outings, for daily
walks and children's play were
mentionerl-
fireworks
music in the parks
Cross-country skiing
community celebrations
daily walks or runs
Opinion of Park
and Recreation Opinion of Park and Recreation Services
11
Most common reason for not using the
recycling services is no need.
Townhome and condo owners andparapartmentdwellerswereleastlikelytouse
these services.
Dissatisfaction with recycling
I'm disgusted with the recycling
service. They make a big mess, drop
things and don't pick them up. The
regular trash services are better."
They said it would pay for
itself and it never did. I think we are
re -using too little of the waste; if we
could really use it, we shouldn't have
to pay any fees!"
Additions to Recycling Pick -Up:
egg cartons, food packages, batteries,
more plastics, mattresses, furniture,
appliances, metals, fluorescent bulbs,
computer papers, paint and paint cans,
containers, glass, more paper (phone
books), wood, construction materials,
aerosol cans, carpet....
We should have a wheel -out cart
with bins for separating..."
12
fertilizer use...
25% use fertilizer which contains
phosphorous
23% use products without
phosphorous
50% don't know (this number
includes people who live in
multiple housing units)
fertilizer application...
48% of users apply it
themselves
30% use a lawn service
1 % don't know
I would be willing to pay something
more if there were more things picked
up."
When asked about willingness
to pay a small fee if extra items were
picked up for recycling, 356 declined
to answer; 185 (34%) gave an opinion.
Of this number,105 (57%) said YES!
80(43%) answered NO.
Only 15% felt they would change
their recycling if mandated.
Contact with Elected Officials
Nearly 62% report little to no
contact
66% report very little contact
4% had a great deal of contact,
and 2% report a fair
amount
Contacts with City Government,
Elected Officials and Staff
Contacts or Visits to City Hall
58% (40% had no contact, 2%
declined to answer)
75% of contacts were satisfactory,
22% unsatisfactory
City Staff
Don't Know Excellent
16% 2%
Adequate
Poor »:r:< .;.>..••-: 530/0
Bio :>:.:;;::.:::...
Very G
srxro:#.:
22%
Elected Representative
13
Contacts with City Government,
14
the cost of
GOVERNMENT .. .
Sure, it costs, but you get what you
pay to some extent."
Taxes
Percentage of property
taxes used for city
government:
City Codes Enforcement
About Right 72%
Not Tough Enough 15%
Too Tough 2%
Decline - 11%
Percentage of Taxes Citizens Believe Apply to City
Government
600-
100%
500-
400
300-
4
200
100-
19
0
Less than 10% 21 to 30% 41 to 509: 1 Q%.n't Know15% 4%
15
TRANSPORTATION
PUBLIC
RESOURCES
We need them, but I
never use them!"
85% agree
13% use public
transit occasionally
PRIVATE RESOURCES
98% OWN CARS
92% HAVE TWO
6% Own Three
5% Own One
Traffic//Congestion
While few people were
interested in light rail — one said,
1 hope people have finally given up
on that stupid idea..." while several
remarked, " We need light rail in to
Minneapolis. Another suggested a
system similar to Boston's light rail.
Many felt more busses, more
stops, better schedules, longer hours
of service and more express runs -
could be used to improve feasible
public transportation use. Express
to the airport, the Community
Colleges and a fast train -- 3.5 hours
to Chicago were among suggestions.
Those who had tried the Dial -
A -Ride had mixed reviews. One
reported the system was inefficient
and the time schedules unreliable.
It seems 169 is the worst!"
16
We have good
access to these
major highways
and they really
aren't too bad.
There is traffic
everywhere."
These metered ramps cause
more problems than good. We
don't need them."
SECTION THREE: FUTURE
INTERESTS
housing
Affordable Housing
Plymouth should actively support
affordable housing as part of City
Development"
Mixed Housing
rlymouth should continue to support
a mixture of housing in terms of sizes,
types, prices."
Planning Issues
40% believe Plymouth is
somewhat planned"
36% believe Plymouth is "well
planned"
16% believe Plymouth is
somewhat poorly
planned."
17
PLANNERS SHOULD STUDY
A POSSIBLE COMMUNITY CENTER
YES: 66% NO: 28% NO OPINION:6%
Planning and Developing Housing
1001/0
socio
80% Mixed
700/.
so0/o
50%
40%
30%
20% Affordable
o
00/6
strongly agree disagree strongly No
agree disagree opinion
rlymouth should continue to support
a mixture of housing in terms of sizes,
types, prices."
Planning Issues
40% believe Plymouth is
somewhat planned"
36% believe Plymouth is "well
planned"
16% believe Plymouth is
somewhat poorly
planned."
17
PLANNERS SHOULD STUDY
A POSSIBLE COMMUNITY CENTER
YES: 66% NO: 28% NO OPINION:6%
Preservation and
Improvement
Key Points: growth
Growth in Plymouth over the past
few years has been Too Fast - 49%
About Right - 45%
Growth should:
Continue as it has - 28%
Continue, but slow - 44%
Grow, but not into
the undeveloped area - 25%
They try to get people
involved in the planning
process... certainly you can be to
some extent. But decisions have to
be made and I know they can't
wait for me!"
52% feel they have a say in
planning and development other
than voting.
38% feel they do not. (9% had no
opinion.)
IM
Wetlands Improvement Fee
I might be willing to pay a small fee
to improve the water in lakes and
ponds; they should look into it and let
us know."
Quite a few of the persons
surveyed agreed with this person.
46% said they would be willing to
pay for improvements. However,
42% said they would not be
willing, and
12% had no opinion.
Let's save all three golf
courses!"
I don't play golf, but they are a
community asset.. we should
save them — they add to open
space and nature."
Preserving open space is
Very Important 70%
Somewhat Important 17%
Not Important 9%
Not Important
No Opinion
3*/0
100/0
IM
4all
PRESERVING
OPEN SPACE
golf courses...
600 -
5W
4W-
3W -
2W -
100
0
Should Shouldn't No Total
save save opinion
19
SECTION FOUR: INFORMATION
RESOURCES
PLYMOUTH NEWS
98% RECEIVE THE NEWS
90% READ THE NEWS
78% use the Park
and Recreation
Bulletin
91% favor continuing
to send the Bulletin
with the News
Readership of the
Public Press:
Wayzata Weekly News 59%
Plymouth Sun Sailor 85%
Star Tribune 93%
Are they watching?
Council meetings on cable:
37% not usually
29% Occassionally
31% Declined (includes
those without cable)
I think they do a pretty
good job ...we read that
News very thoroughly."
We tend to watch meetings if there
is something we're interested in."
rating information
20
Section 2
PLYMOUTH QUESTIONNAIRE
1. About how long have you lived in Plymouth?
Less than one year 3%
1 - 2 years 100/0
3 - 5 years 21%
6 - 10 years 24%
More than 10 years 42%
Don't know/Declined 03%
2. In what city and/or state did you live just before moving to Plymouth?
02%
Minneapolis 18%
Suburbs 48%
Minnesota 10°/,
Other State 22%
Other Country 2%
3. What attracted you to Plymouth?
Area 30%
Schools 9%
Houses 23%
Friends, Family 11%
Work Related Reason 12%
4. As things stand now, how long do you expect to continue living in Plymouth?
Less than one year 02%
1 - 2 years 14%
3 - 5 years 11%
6-10 years 42%
more than 10 years 26%
don't know/no answer 4%
Tell me, how many people in your household are in these age groups ... we'll start with the oldest:
5. First, persons over 55? 12%
0 76%
1 7%
2 or more 170/6
6. How about 36 - 55? 36% 0 34%
1 9%
2 56%
3 or more 00/0
7. ...and 19 - 35 14% 0 720/6
1 11%
2 16%
3 or more 1%
8. ...in the 13 -18 group
0 71%
1 22%
2 7%
3 or more 1%
9. Anyone 6 - 12? 0 59%
25%
1 25%
Don't know/no opinion
2 15%
1%
3 or more 1%
10. ...or 0-5? 0 72%
1 23%
2 4%
3 or more 1%
11. How do you rate the quality of frfe in Plymouth ---excellent... good ... fair...or poor?
Excellent 56%
Good 42%
Fair 11%
Poor 00/p
Don't know/no opinion 1%
12. What do you like most about living in Plymouth?
Location 28%
Housing 8%
Safety 21%
Family/Community 5%
Parks/Recreation 180/0
Other 16%
No Response 3%
13. What do you like least about living in Plymouth?
Growth/Change 13%
Cost of Living 20%
Traffic 3%
Schools i%
Politics/Planning 6%
Other 12%
No Response 45%
14. Over the next five years, do you believe the quality of fife in Plymouth will:
Remain about the same 55%
Improve 25%
Decline 14%
Don't know/no opinion 7%
15. How much pride do you take in the city of Plymouth as a place to live?
A great deal 38%
Quite a lot 37%
Some 20%
Very little 3%
Don't know/no opinion 1%
N
16. Would you like to move away from your neighborhood in Plymouth?
As you know, property taxes are divided between the City of Plymouth, Hennepin county, and
your local public school district.
20. For each dollar you pay in property taxes, about what percentage do you
think applies to Plymouth City government?
Under ten%
Yes 15%
49%
No 82%
31 % to 40%
Maybe 2%
11%
Decline 1%
If "yes", ask:
0°/G
Over 70% 0°/C
17. Where would you like to move? say, to another neighborhood...
Don't know/no opinion 11%
In Plymouth 20%
In another suburb 20%
In City - Mpls/St. Paul 0°/G
Away from Twin Cities' 8%
Out of Minnesota 15%
Don't know/not sure 17%
18. What makes you want to move to another neighborhood?
Community 40%
Personal 270/6
Climate 19%
Other 14%
19. Do you consider property taxes in Plymouth to be
About average 41%
Comparatively low 3%
Relatively high 48%
Excessively high? 4%
As you know, property taxes are divided between the City of Plymouth, Hennepin county, and
your local public school district.
20. For each dollar you pay in property taxes, about what percentage do you
think applies to Plymouth City government?
Under ten% 15%
10% to 20% 49%
21 % to 30% 19%
31 % to 40% 4%
41 % to 50% 11%
51 % to 60% 1 %
61 % to 70% 0°/G
Over 70% 0°/C
Don't know/no opinion 11%
21. Do you feel your municipal water and sewer charges are comparatively high, about right,
or comparatively low for the Metropolitan area?
Comparitively high 17%
About right 59%
Comparatively low 3%
Don't know/declined 21 V
Includes 6% who live in condomimiums,
apartments, and other multiple situations
3
22. Overall, do you consider park and recreation facilities in Plymouth
Excellent 51%
Good 41%
Fair 3%
Poor 3%
Don't know/no opinion 3%
Here is a short list of government services, please tell me whether you are generally satisfied or
dissatisfied with that particular service:
33. For any "dissatisfied' response in 23-32 ask: Why are you dissatisfied with
See Appendix 1)
34. Do you feel safe in your neighborhood?
Satisfied Dissatisfied Both/Neither Don't Know
23. Park Maintenance 94% 2% 20/6 5%
24. Snow Plowing 84% 7% 5% 5%
25. Trail Plowing 57% 1% 2% 32%
26. Police Services 94% 2% i% 3%
27. Fire protection 76% 1% 2% 15%
28. City Street Maintenance 77% 15% 5% 1%
29. Quality of Drinking Water 69% 25% 5% 1%
30. Animal Control 89% 5% 5% 6%
31. Recreation 89% 4% 7% 6%
32. Recycling 94% 2% 3% 1%
33. For any "dissatisfied' response in 23-32 ask: Why are you dissatisfied with
See Appendix 1)
34. Do you feel safe in your neighborhood?
YES 98%
NO 2%
35. Are there safety issues which particularly affect you?
YES 34%
NO 66%
What are they?
See Appendix 2)
36. How concerned are you about speeding in your neighborhood?
Very concerned 22%
Somewhat concerned 30%
Not concerned 47%
Don't know/No opinion 1%
37. How about speeding in the City in general?
Very concerned 14%
Somewhat concerned 25%
Not concerned 55%
Don't know/No opinion 5%
38. Would you like sidewalks in your neighborhood?
Yes 14%
No 80%
No opinion 6%
4
39. How much first-hand contact have you had with the Mayor and the City Council?
A great deal 4%
A fair amount 17%
Very little 61%
Don't know/Declined 18%
40. Based on your own knowledge or what you have heard, how would you rate the performance of the
mayor and City Council?
Excellent 20/6
Very good 22%
Adequate 53%
Poor 7%
Don't know/Decline 16%
41. How much first-hand contact have you had with the Plymouth City staff?
A great deal 4%
A fair amount 22%
Very little 66%
Don't know/Decline 7%
42. Using your own knowledge or what you have heard, how would you rate the performance of City staff?
Excellent 7%
Very good 49%
Adequate 33%
Poor 1%
Don't know/Decline 9%
43. Do you believe Plymouth residents have an adequate opportunity for input when decisions are made
by the City?
Adequate 53%
Somewhat adequate 25%
Inadequate 11%
Don't know/Declined 9%
44. Have you contacted anyone at the City of Plymouth for information, services, or to register a complaint
In the past 12 months?
Yes 59%
No 40%
Don't know/Decline <1%
45. What was the nature of your most recent contact ... that is, what did you need or want?
Information 43%
Permits/Inspections 14%
License 8%
Complaint 64%
Other 15%
J_
46. In general, were you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way your need was handled?
Satisfied 75%
Dissatisfied 22%
Don'tknow/Decline <3%
47. What was it that left you feeling dissatisfied?
Inadequate Response 30%
N=119 Dissatisfied) No Help 25%,
No Answer 27%
Other 17%
48. The City is considering adding business hours at City Center. What time of day is most convenient for
you to do business with the city?
Early morning, before 8 a.m. 4%
Late afternoon, after 4:30 43%
Other 18%
Current hours are convenient 37% --
Don't know/Declined 2%
49. Do you find the present mix of Plymouth recreational facilities, including parks and trails, sufficient to
the needs of your household and its members?
Yes 87%
No 11%
Don't know/Declined >7%
If "no" in question 49, ask:*
50. What additional opportunities would you like the City of Plymouth to consider?
51. What age group(s) do you think need(s) additional facilities?
Of those who indicated a need, in their opinions, for additional opportunities for specified age
groups, the following responses were elicited:
Pre-school (0-5 yrs) 14%
School age (6-12 yrs) 100/0
Age 13-19 17%
Other 24%
Don't know/Declined 34%
In the past, the possibility of building a community center has been discussed. This center might
contain an ice arena, pool, senior citizen center or general recreational facilities.
y
Parks 2% 14%
Column A is based on comments made Paths 2% 12%
by all respondents, whether they said "yes" Center 6% 45%
or "no". Column B is based on those who Other 4% 29%
commented. No Comment 86%
51. What age group(s) do you think need(s) additional facilities?
Of those who indicated a need, in their opinions, for additional opportunities for specified age
groups, the following responses were elicited:
Pre-school (0-5 yrs) 14%
School age (6-12 yrs) 100/0
Age 13-19 17%
Other 24%
Don't know/Declined 34%
In the past, the possibility of building a community center has been discussed. This center might
contain an ice arena, pool, senior citizen center or general recreational facilities.
y
52. Would you like the City of Plymouth to study a possible community center?
Yes 66%
No 28%
No opinion/Declined 6%
53. What do you consider your principal retail shopping area?
Ridgedale 42%
Greatland/Target 13%
County 6/101 8%
Brookdale 4%
Wayzata 6%
Downtown Mpls. 4%
Other 24%
54. Do you find the current mix of commercial/shopping facilities adequate for the members of your
household?
Yes 64%
No 28%
Don't know/Declined 6%
If "no", ask:
55. What additional facilities would you like to have available?
Department, Other Stores
Restaurants/Entertainment
Kids' Interests, Needs
Other
No Comment
56. In your opinion, is the general appearance of your neighborhood?
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know/Declined
Let's consider the City's enforcement of codes:
13%
16%
15%
9%
50%
59%
41%
1%
1%
1
57. Concerning enforcement of City Codes on nuisances such as animal control, garbage disposal, junk
cars, and noise, do you feel the City of Plymouth is...
Too tough 2%
About right 720/6
Not tough enough 14%
Don't know/Declined 12%
If answer is "Too Tough" or "Not Tough Enough", ask:
58. What is the reason you feel that way?
Junk 5%
Noise 4%
Animals 9%
Other 8%
No Comment 74%
59. Have you had City of Plymouth employees come to your residence?
If "Yes" to 59, ask:
60. What was the purpose of their visit(s)?
Yes 53%
No 44%
Don't know/Declined 3%
Building Inspection 25%
Engineering Dept. 22%
Police/Fire/Safety 27%
Assessor 20%
Other 7%
61. How do you rate the overall performance of these employees?
Excellent 33%
Good 47% -
Fair 6%
Poor 4%
Don't know/Declined 9%
62. Does development of the City of Plymouth throughout seem well planned for the future of the
community?
Well-planned 36%
Somewhat planned 40%
Somewhat poorly planned 16%
Poorly planned 1%
No opinion/Declined 7%
63. Do you think community development has been environmentally sensitive and responsive?
Yes 71%
No 21%
Don't know/Declined 80/0
64. Do you or other members of your household work within the boundaries of the City of Plymouth?
Yes 6%
No 94%
Number. 1 - 50/o
2-1%
65. Should the City try to encourage the development of an "identifiable" downtown area?
Yes 39%
No 39%
No opinion/Declined 22%
V
66. Plymouth should actively support affordable housing as part of City development.
Strongly agree 9%
Agree 56%
Disagree 26%
Strongly disagree 4%
Don't know/declined 4%
67. Plymouth should continue to support a mixture of housing in terms of sizes, types, prices.
Strongly agree 20%
Agree 61%
Disagree 11%
Strongly disagree 3%
Don't know/Declined 5%
Now ... thinking for a moment about the currently undeveloped areas of the City...
68. In terms of growth in these areas, do you think Plymouth should continue to
Grow as it has 28%
Continue to grow, but at slower pace 44%
Grow but not into the undeveloped area 25%
Don't know/ No opinion 4%
69. Growth in the City of Plymouth over the past few years has been
Too fast 49%
Too slow 2%
About right 45%
Don't know/no opinion 3%
70. Other than voting, do you feel you can have a say in the way decisions are made for development in
the City of Plymouth?
Yes 52%
No 38%
No opinion/Declined 9%
Managing solids wastes(garbage, recyclables, yard waste, and hazardous wastes) is a
challenge. Please answer the following:
71. Which of these recycling services and/or facilities has your household used in the past 12 months?
E
Me$ No
City Curbside Recycling Pickup 970/6 3%
City Recycling Drop-off Center 66% 33%
Special Recycling Collection Days 49% 51%
City Yard Waste Drop-off Site 56% 44%
Hennepin County Household
Hazardous Waste Drop-off 47% 53%
E
If none of the services of facilities has been used, ask...
72. Which of the following reflects most closely your reason for not recycling:
Number not recycling: less than 2%
Yep NQ
Unaware of available programs 0 1000/0
Inconvenient .005% <100%
Do not produce enough waste to use the services .0080/0 <100%
Service is unreliable 0 100%0
Seems unnecessary .002% <100%
Other .001% <1000/0
73. Are there other materials you would like to see included in either curbside or drop-off recycling?
Boxboard (cereal, cookie, cake cracker, or other boxes) 11%
Batteries/Chemicals 33%
Bulbs 7%
Mattresses/Furniture 100/0
Other items 23%
Decline 16%
74. The monthly fee to maintain the current level of recycling services is $2 per household. Would you be
willing to pay more per month for additional materials you mentioned to be included in recycling?
Yes 33%
No 31%
Don't know/Declined 35%
75. State law requires that communities recycle 45% of waste by 1996. State and regional planners are
discussing mandatory recycling for residents and businesses. If state law required it, would you
change your recycle habits?
Yes 8%
No 77%
Don't know/Declined 15%
76. Would you like to see more information about
77. Does the fertilizer applied to your lawn contain phosphorous?
Yes 25%
No 23%
Don't know/Declined 51%
10
y -Q2 NQ
Recycling 37% 63%
Waste reduction 44% 56%
Disposal methods for household hazardous waste 45% 55%
Recipes for alternatives to hazardous products 500/0 500/0
Safer lawn care and composting 45% 55%
Energy conservation 42% 580/0
Water quality 45% 55%
77. Does the fertilizer applied to your lawn contain phosphorous?
Yes 25%
No 23%
Don't know/Declined 51%
10
78. Do you apply fertilizer or do you have a contract service?
Self 48%
Service 30%
Don't use 1%
Don't know/Declined 20%
Now ... about water quality in Plymouth..
5%
Two
79. How would you rate the quality of Plymouth's lakes and wetlands?
Three 16%
Good 50%
85. Do you or others in your household use public transport?
Fair 21%
1%
Should be improved 22%
Occasionally
Don't know/Declined 6%
80. Would you be favorable to the idea of a small fee ... say, a few dollars per month ... for improving water
quality in Plymouth's lakes and ponds?
Yes 46%
No 42%
Don't know/Declined 12%
81. Does your home have a sump pump?
Yes 72%
No 21%
Don't know/Declined 6%
If "yes",
82. Does your sump pump drain to the outside of your home?
Yes 54%
No 23%
Don't know/declined 22%
83. Do you or any other household members own automobiles?
Yes 98%
No <2%
If `yes", ask:
84. How many automobiles are owned by those in your household?
One 5%
Two 92%
Three 16%
Four+ 5%
85. Do you or others in your household use public transport?
Daily 1%
Weekly 1%
Occasionally 14%
Never 85%
86. How would you rate traffic on the major highways in Plymouth—Highway 55, Highway 169, Highway
494?
87. Do you currently use Park -and -Ride services?
Very congested 800/c
Congested at rush hour 11%
Not very congested 4%
Don't know/Declined 5%
Yes 3%
No 63%
Occasionally 100/0
Decline 25%
88. Is the public transportation available (Plymouth MetroLink and Dial -A -Ride) adequate for the needs of
you and others in your household?
Yes 46%
No 46%
Declined 3%
89. What additional transportation services would you like offered?
More busses 2%
More service hours 14%
Downtown service 3%
Light rail 120/6
Other * 14%
No Comment 74%
Examples: Airport service, service to all suburbs, all shopping areas
10°/a
Regular service to hospitals, medical clinics
90. Dial -A -Ride presently serves the city of Plymouth, Ridgedale, Downtown Wayzata, and Golden Valley
Center. Should other areas be added?
Yes 29%
No 49%
No opinion/Declined 21%
91. In your opinion, what areas should be added? (See Appendix 3)
92. What is your primary source of information about city government and key issues in the City of
Plymouth ---newspapers, radio, television, city publications, neighbors, or some other means?
Papers 29%
Radio 4%
Television 17%
City Publications 500/0
Neighbors 4%
Other 10°/a
If specific media are named in question 92, ask:
p.,
93. Would you tell me which(newspaper, radio, TV station/city publication) comes to mind first?
94. Do you read:
Newsletter
Star
Sun/Sailor
Weekly News
None
All
Dec
Yes
The Weekly News? 59%
Plymouth Sun/Sailor? 85%
Star/Tribune? 93%
53%
10%
13%
2%
3%
2%
16%
UQ Occasionally
28% 3%
2% 13%
3% 6%
95. Do you watch City Council or Planning Commission meetings on Channel 37?
Frequently 3%
Occasionally 29%
Not Usually 37%
Don't know/Declined 31%
96. How would you rate the City's overall performance in informing residents about important local issues?
Excellent 7%
Good 64%
Only fair 24%
Poor 3%
Don't know/Declined 2%
97. Do you recall receiving the "Plymouth Newsletter"?
Yes 98%
No 2%
Declined 1%
If "yes" to 97, ask:
98. Do you or any members of your household read the "Plymouth News"?
Yes 90%
No 4%
Don't know/Declined 5%
99. What types of articles of information are you most likely to read in the "Plymouth News"?
Scan entire issue 29%
Read closely 34%
Read most articles 27%
Not applicable 9%
100. Are there topics or kinds of information you feel should be in the "News"?
Enjoy present topics 57%
Meeting notices, information 7%
Issues 14%
Planning 5%
Other 17%
13
Every two months, the "News" features a Park and Recreation Program Booklet.
101. Do you use it?
Yes 78%
No 16%
Don't know/Decline >5%
102. Would you like this Park and Recreation Booklet to be separate from the Newsletter?
Yes 8%
No 91%
Don't know/Decline 1%,
103. Is preserving open space in Plymouth important to you?
Very important 70%
Somewhat important 17%
Not important at all 9%
Don't know/Decline 3%
104. Currently there are three golf courses in Plymouth which are open to the public. Each of them is in the
path of future development. Should the City take positive steps to assure that at least one of these
courses remains available to the public?
Yes 94%
No 3%
Don't know/Decline 3%
Iq
Supplemental Report
CHARACTERISTICS:
RESPONDENTS WHO INDICATED DESIRE TO MOVE
1,
CHARACTERISTICS:
RESPONDENTS WHO INDICATED DESIRE TO MOVE
Records
Years Attraction Remain? Age:55+ 36-55 19-35 Pride Move to..?
20 10more 1 6-10yrs 1 1 0 little out MN
40 6-10yrs 4 3-5yrs 1 0 0 grt deal dec
90 10more 5 6-10yrs 0 2 0 grt deal dec
131 1-2yrs 1 6-10yrs 0 0 2 some out of MN
239 10more 4 6-10yrs 0 2 0 grt deal out of MN
272 10more 5 3-5yrs 2 0 0 grt deal out of MN
276 3-5yrs 6 6-10yrs 0 2 0 grt deal out of MN
391 6-10yrs 5 1-2yrs 2 0 3 some out of MN
405 6-10yrs 3 6-10yrs 2 0 0 lot out of -MN
442 10more 4 1-2yrs 2 0 0 grt deal out of MN
459 6-10yrs 3 yr or less 0 2 1 grt deal out of MN
534 dec 1 6-10yrs 1 1 0 lot dec
11 10 6 7
Out of the 12 respondents who said they would like to move,
seven indicated a desire to move out of Minnesota; scone of
the twelve had any household member under the age of 19.
The group represents 27 persons: 11 over age 55, 10 in the
36-55 groups and 6 persons 19 to 35.
1G
Supplemental Information, Comments
Question 2
Detroit Lakes, MN*
Morton Grove, Illinois
Wyoming
Milwaukee
Nebraska
Scotland
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Massachusetts
Texas
South Dakota
Maryland
Argentina
Omaha, Nebraska
New Hampshire
Oklahoma
Vermont
Missouri
Scottsdale, Arizona
North Carolina
Mt.View, California
Rozell, Illinois
Largo, Florida
San Francisco
Libertyville, Ill
Westchester County, New York
Flosmore, Ill
Wilmington, Del
Watervliet, Mich
Pittsburgh, Penn
Elk River
Anoka
St. Anthony
Champlain
Wright City, MN
Burnsville
St. Cloud
Rochester
Delano
Lake Minnebelle, MN
Maple Plain
Lakeville
I't
Zumbrota
Delano
Mankato
Annandale
St-Louis Park, MN****************
Illinois**
Iowa
Clearwater, Florida
Washington, D.C.
California
Fridley
Omaha, Neb
Mound
Richfield, MN*
grew up in the Plymouth area - moved back
Sioux Falls, SD
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Hamel
San Carlos, Calif
Maple Grove, MN**
Dayton
Lakeville
Chicago, Illinois****
St.Paul, MN*******
St.Anthouny Village
Wayzata
Pennsylvania
Blaine
Duluth
Minneapolis***********************************
Brooklyn Park, MN******
Brooklyn Center, MN***
Baltimore, Maryland
Robbinsdale**
Springfield, Illinois
Eden Prairie*
Austin, MN
Cincinatti, Ohio
San Diego*
Memphis, TN
Santa Clara, CA
Trumble, Calif
Shakopee
Minnetonka**********
Minnetrista
1
Kentucky
Dayton, Ohio
Annandale
Grove Seal, Michigan
Hillsboro, NJ
New Jersey*
Anoka**
Blaine*
Princeton
New Hope, MN*************
Prior Lake
Delano
Madison, Wisconsin
Wisconsin
Indiana
Fairmont, MN
Des Moines
Bloomington****
Wausau, Wisconsin
Fairbault
Eau Claire, Wis*
Crystal, MN******
Lenexa, KS
Wankegan, Ill
Mankato, MN
Golden Valley, MN*********
Wisconsin*
McGregor, MN
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Elk River
Maple Grove*
North Dakota
Plano, Texas
New York State*
Edina**
Utah
Coon Rapids
Houston, Texas
Aberdeen, SD
Apple Valley, MN
Federal Way, Wash
Plymouth*
Dallas, Tx
Wayzata*
Coon Rapids
Boston
New Brighton
Aberdeen, SD
Annandale
Annandale
Anoka
Anoka**
Apple Valley, MN
Argentina
Austin, MN
Baltimore, Maryland
Blaine
Blaine*
Bloomington****
Boston
Brooklyn Center, MN***
Brooklyn Park, MN******
Burnsville
California
Champlain
Chicago, Illinois****
Cincinatti, Ohio
Clearwater, Florida
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Coon Rapids
Coon Rapids
Crystal, MN******
Dallas, Tx
Dayton
Dayton,Ohio
Delano
Delano
Delano
Des Moines
Detroit Lakes, MN*
Duluth
Eau Claire, Wisc*
Eden Prairie*
Edina**
Elk River
Elk River
Fairbault
Fairmont, MN
Federal Way, Wash
Flosmore, Ill
M
Fort Wayne, Indiana
Golden Valley,MN*********
grew up in Mpls
Michigan
Hamel
Hillsboro, NJ
Houston, Texas
Illinois**
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Lake Minnetonka, MN
Lakeville
Lakeville
Largo, Florida
Lenexa, KS
Libertyville, Ill
Madison, Wisconsin
Mankato
Mankato, MN
Maple Grove*
Maple Grove, MN**
Maple Plain
Maryland
Massachusetts
McGregor, MN
Memphis, TN
Milwaukee
Minneapolis***********************************
Minnetrista
Minnetonka**********
Missouri
Morton Grove, Illinois
Mound
Mt.View, California
Nebraska
New York State*
New Brighton
New Hope, MN*************
New Hampshire
New Jersey*
North Carolina
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Omaha, Neb
Omaha
Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh, Penn
Plano, Texas
Plymouth*
Princeton
Prior Lake
Richfield, MN*
Robbinsdale**
Rochester
Rozell, Illinois
San Francisco
San Diego*
San Carlos, Calif
Santa Clara, CA
Scotland
Scottsdale, Arizona
Shakopee
Sioux Fall, SD
South Dakota
Springfield, Illinois
St. Cloud
St.Anthony Park
St.Anthony Village
St-Louis Park, MN****************
St.Paul, MN*******
Texas
Toronto,Ontario, Canada
Trumble, Calif
Utah
Vermont
Waukegan, Ill
Washington,D.C.
Watervliet, Mich
Wausau, Wisconsin
Wayzata
Wayzata*
Westchester County, NY
Wilmington, Del
Wisconsin
Wisconsin*
Wright City, MN
Wyoming
Zumbrota
Question 3
A
location in relation to metro area********************
parks****
move out of metropolitan area
looked for a growing community**
near Interstate*
property (lot size a big consideration)***************
housing**************
spouse from area*****
good quality developments**
closer to work**************************
job transfer***********************
family in area******************
family member boards horse in community so decided to move closer to stable
western suburbs********************
area potential*
slower growth than other suburbs
schools**************************
Realtor
friends************
closer to church**
closer to northern Minnesota*
open space********************** ***
safety****
Chelsea Woods
potential for a solid family upbringing -safety ,parks, the whole quality thing"
zoning and planning
Larger home****
townhouse
nice place to raise a family
quality of life***********
Question 12
convenience and location********************************
layout, walking and biking trails*******
good fire and police services
no rental housing within one mile of them, no theft, peaceful
family and friends*******
suburbs*
housing*
closer to work**********
accessibility to major roads**************
activities to share with children
75
small town atmosphere
good values
quality of
closer access to northern Minnesota
safety issues*************
hockey
programs and activities
open spaces*********************
enjoys the growth and new people
parks, trails and natural environment******** *******************
nice community feeling in neighborhood****************************
central location******************************
variety of wildlife
like West Bloomington before growth
property size****
nice place to raise a family*
tax base*
street repairs are prompt
low traffic
feels safe to live here, low crime**********
good city services
clean area*******
quality of housing
well run community*
house on cul-de-sac on the edge of a trail
close to cities******
schools**************************************
civic interest -interest in community
good shopping and services******
library
serenity***************
rural lifestyle********
good business climate
blend of retaining wildlife areas, zoning is strong, industry not being set up near residents
personality of the area" -aesthetics
Question 13
curvy streets*
Wayzata school*
very rural
lack of police
no downtown*
road development
distance to work***
2`j
train
rising cost of living
image of Jim Willis problems and council behavior
no downtown
miss farms
miss urban life
water bill
previous city government
traffic during rush hour*
congestion
urbansprawl that is happening
winter
not enough police enforcement
need to drive everywhere*****
problems associated with growth******
not upscale enough
lack of culture
new element moving in -vandalism, noisy youth, graffiti
growth and traffic
not very ethnic
police service
quality of drinking water
property taxes*********************************
weather*
expense of bureaucracy
traffic*
unsynchronized traffic lights on Hwy. 55
school board creating excess debt
speeding
politics
traffic
neighbor
dealing with city government**
no community center -no sense of community
too many people/ growth************
clay soil horrible -concrete keeps shifting -excess expenditures
four different school districts
focus of Wayzata Jr. high school curriculum
restrictions on condo rules
open schooling policy
losing country atmosphere*
too political -mind set towards large scale moneymaking projects verses church and smaller
expansion ideas
unfriendly and elitist*
5,
street dirty west of 101
traffic/speeding cars**
not enough restaurants
population growth****
lack of athletic facilities for elementary age children
dogs feces left on lawn by irresponsible owners
road noise*
grew up in subsidized housing but the way such housing is dumped in Plymouth is crazy. Also
growing drugs in school.
sterile, relative newness, miss big trees
too much construction
geese
city industrial planning needs to be looked at
lack of "fine" dining
Question 18
not happy with easement; neighbors
upgrade*
smaller town
change of scenery
move to smaller house
too urbanized -seek country setting********
employment*
divorce
Out of MN
warmer climate*
more privacy
change in housing*
unhappy with builder
school districts
move back to family
Question 24 -snowplowing
last one to get plowed*******
less dumped at the end of the season
mailbox knocked over
closes the driveway with snow*
sloppy plowing by mailbox on cul-de-sac*
lawn torn up
plowing slow and could be more efficient
overturns garbage cans
street not plowed*
improvement in service*
A
snow piled up in inconvenient areas
Question 25
not enough stop signs -dangerous
ice build up -not plowed enough*
want plowing of Soo Line in winter
plowing inconsistent between Deerwood and Zachary Park
snow not plowed on Garland between 19th and 24th streets
street snow the is plowed is left on the path
Question 26
called 911 about car in the yard. Police never showed up and insist that they did not receive call
from dispatch. The dispatcher said call was received and delivered.
never see patrol cars on residential streets*
police harass residents for traffic violations (manners and attitude are poor)
slow response time and poor attitude
lack of police
when calling the station , no one was there to help with the call at that moment
no response after called about a prowler
Question 27
charge for visit after first false alarm
personal observation of a brush fire -it took 30 minutes to find it
Christmas day fire -response was delayed and the firefighters were grumpy about having to be
there
Question 28 -city street maintenance
quicker repair on curbs damaged by snow removal*
potholes filled faster******************
park access and parking lot in snowy weather could be plowed
road bad between 42nd and 36th Streets on Zachary
blacktop falling apart and slow to repair******
no street lights*
frost heaves very bad north of 101 on route 24
never see street cleaners
streets dirty
garbage service could be better
tar on road doesn't do well in the heat
late plowing and build up at the end of cul-de-sac
new roads developed with rock on top but never finished -cannot roller blade on this, etc.
i- 9r
Question 29 -water quality
quality is poor(smell, taste, color)**************************************
too much chlorine**
water pressure low**
water leaves scum on top of coffee
high copper content
water had excess lead and copper content -had to personally take extra steps to remove them
only drinks from bottled waters*
concern if city is meeting Federal standards on lead content*
public health issues
water too hard*
need to put in a water softener*****
mineral content high
purchased a water purer*****
too much fluoride
Question 30 -animal control
more enforcement of unleased dogs and fecal matter left on ground************
too many dogs -causes friction with neighbors*
feces left in park
dogs run loose on his property
geese problems
need cat leash law
cat population out of control
Question 31
more bike trails
more softball leagues
more park facilities in smaller parks -tennis courts, ballfields, hiking, basketball courts, picnic
areas
slow to construct
Question 32
too picky on what is taken
doesn't like the threat that if she doesn't pay monthly fee it will be deducted off property taxes
Question 35
neighbor's teenagers
71
not enough squad cars
speeding-lack of police presence
industrial area down the street from home -concerned with the ramifications of this on traffic and
intrusion
granddaughter would be safer walling on a sidewalk
undisciplined and unruly youths
traffic control on nearby major streets
street lighting
guns in schools
concern for growth
safety issues about security of apartment building
safety due to traffic from industrial development in a residential area
children's safety
youths roaming neighborhood committing vandalism
number of cars that drive across lawns
burglary concerns
growing youth problems
feel need for security system(fear of burglaries)****
speeding*****
vandalism
interested in crime watch*
worried about the new football games at school
vandalism
speeding by Schmidt Lake Road
speeding by Rockford Road and Larch Lane
teenagers recklessly driving in residential neighborhood**
neighborhood watch working in residential neighborhood
deal more forcefully with juveniles
too difficult to get onto 101- too much traffic
speeding on 25th Avenue
street lighting****
no sidewalks -unsafe for walking*
snowmobiling affects skiing and walking
worried about commercial building next to residential with truck docks, too close to school, kids
and bike trails
more evening patrols for safer evening walks*
schools open door policy is concern
trail behind the house is very public
youth behavior at Oak Square, Oakwood and elementary school (cigarettes, drugs)
Question 45
information on local development changes
zoning laws
rules on building permits
aI
billing and payment with city
information on licenses
information on hours open
confirm course time in Parks booklet
construction equipment behind house and garbage dumping there too
information on homestead (complaint -no one answered because day was a government holidaybutthispersonhadtogotowork)
regarding Peony Lane and land use of northeast quadrant(complaint-matter still not resolved)
construction of neighbor's house (complaint -told it was left up to the builder, not the city;
affected value of their home)
information on the city charter
building permit***
maps
activities to do
snowplow knocked over mailbox(complaint treated rudely and not reimbursed for mailbox) "
very sensitive alarm went off by dog and sent a note with the payment charge by the city to not
charge them till they figure out the problem(complaint-no response to the note)
street assessment process(complaint-did not receive an answer)
car driving and children on walking path
city maintenance (complaint -no return call)
information on payment schedule for out of town resident
street road construction
plowing issue
call in report of stolen property(complaint-response was unprofessional and disrespectful)
needed 911
information on water sprinkling system inspections(complaint-not resolved yet)
easement conflicted with their garden(complaint- still not resolved -issue floated seven months
without communication
vandalism by youths (complaint -youths caught but not prosecuted even though over one
thousand dollars damage done to home.) Why isn't city more proactive before county takes
over?
permit(complaint-still awaiting permit to build deck -way too slow)
dumping rules and junk cars(complaint-more enforcement)
dog license and rules***(one complaint was that the process in confusing)
recycling****
dogs-concern in neighborhood
license
railroad train whistle violation
garbage schedule for the holidays
concerning Schmidt Lake Road -what are they going to do for Fernbrook to Vicksburg?
complaint-did not get an answer
snowplow tore up lawn (complaint -still not taken care of )
community education*
speeding issues/assessment(complaint: feel city has ignored petitions and residents' needs)
summer watering
30
speeding in area (complaint -it hasn't slowed down)*
fire alarm/security system problem**
pond must be treated (complaint -no follow through)
preadolescent facilities (baseball diamonds, soccer, indoor basketball)
fender bender
question on pond and lake access
an underground pipe broke -only after talking to the mayor did action occur to remedy problem
use Parkers Lake facilities for an event
information on city services and permits
information on parks and recreation
questioned need for a permit for homeowner pond improvement
information on leaf collecting
information on parks and events
concerns of loitering kids -vandalism (complaint -we need more enforcement)
property taxes**, road maintenance, police
barking dog*
question on chlorine in water
called police to Imperial Hills because youths were drinking and were loud
bicycle license
no response to a complaint about a barking dog(complaint-not satisfied)
question about the perimeter of property
live at end of a dead end street -needed plowing services
wetland issues -contacted engineering department**
was victim of an armed robbery(compla[int-action of the courts)
55 Alive classes
general information(complaint-no return call)
concern for barriers on Rockford Rd. -some people not notified of public meetings (complaint -
seemed non-responsive—)
Road Fund -Hennepin County (complaint -sounded non-responsive)
Safety Office (complaint -requested sidewalks -told it is individual/neighbor responsibility)
information on swimming classes
voter registration
question on pile of dirt left in the street(was not able to find out who was responsible for the
removal -city or neighbor)
pond flooding on property
special assessment of church(complaint-taking too ling)
basketball hoop
neighbor is littering own yard during construction -unsightly mess to look at(complaint-no action
taken)
recycling and yard waste
maps and directions
park programs
snowmobile ordinance
library
taxes-raised every 5 years without time for review
31
complained about storm sewers, trees and recycling
snowplow leaves snow at end of cul-de-sac by driveway
dredging of Plymouth creek and loss of trees
why does city require both spouses present to file for homestead
information on deer hunting
speeding issue in neighborhood(complaint-police only spent two days observing area)
forestry issue concerning a trail nearby and possibly doing landscaping
traffic problems associated with creation of Industrial Park to be built
deer hunting trespass
parking unlicensed vehicles in neighboorhood
snowmobiler's trespassing on property
need for a four way stop at 35th and Nathan(request granted)
Question 50
snowmobiling opportunities
more boat facilities
solar lighting on trails, walkways to connect trails, better maps needed
girls baseball and softball fields
downtown area with more retail
community and recreation center (i.e.with indoor pool and ice rink)************
outdoor children's pool
children's play center
more connecting trails**
more recreation facilities
pool
more accessible facilities for handicapped persons
swimming pool, workout gym
tennis courts
more trails better road maintenance and less monies spent on park system
need community center*
more busses**
community center
more parks
better senior housing
repair Zachary lane and widen it
extend walking paths between road and 76th Avenue adjacent to Zachary Lane to 40th Avenue uptoOldRockfordRoad
purchase more land for parks
cut taxes
community center
better recycling program
school board to offer vouchers to allow children to go to private schools
more walking places and wider shoulder walkways
attract new and retain old business in area
3-
bike trails on west end Plymouth
new developments with soccer fields close by
more parks in the 101 and Medina Road area(northwest quadrant)
too many portable toilets in neighborhood(eyesores and dangerous -full of germs and a place a child
could get locked in)
more water pressure
Question 53
Target*********
Holiday
Brookdale ********
Rockford Road and 494************
Wayzata**************
Edina
Cub for groceries**************
Cty Rd 9 and 494****
New Market*
Colonial Square
101 and 6**
Question 55
bigger Ridgedale including larger department stores such as Nordstrom's
retail on Vicksburg and 55, Walmart, entertainment, movies, restaurants
more gas stations*
hardware stores****
Laundromat
Kohl's Department Store
Farm Fleet
Target
Restaurants*******
dry cleaner
pet shops
children's store
discount store
specialty store
reasonably priced women's clothing stores
reasonably-priced furniture stores
bakeries
moderately-priced shops
movie theater*
Gf7
selective discount store -wholesale "club"
sports club built in "downtown" area
health clubs
late night medical clinic
Kids-R-US store
Ben Franklin -type store
paint store
tall girl shop
Sam's Club
shoe store
Walmart
quick shop stores
breakfast restaurant (not a chain)
Hardee's
Discovery Zone" or Circus Circus for kids
Question 58
more enforcement
a car was sitting for 9 months without a ticket but an overnight visitor was ticketed
cut bureaucracy -people are responsible enough without so much regulation
speeding enforcement
neighbor's yard is full of vehicles and items and it is unbecoming to resident*
dog feces enforcement
clean up junk, *enforce loitering laws*
Noise complaints*
not able to freely work on vehicles, et. in own yard
animal control*
lack of enforcement of free roaming dogs and cats*
parking not enforced
junk cars
noise issues
cars for sale
cats run free
Question 60
building inspection*********************
animal control
car accident
water main inspection
police*
complaint to police and city inspector
police-someone knocked on door in the middle of the night
water inspector/meter
31
water testing
drainage problem - had to tile to the street and had to do some surveying
police - had wrong number house
assessor**
street repair
police- shining car lights shining into resident's bedroom
drainage issue/trees
alarm went off
locked out of car -community service officer unlocked the door
crew working on street repair*
called police -nativity scene stolen
inspection
inspection of furnace
person driving car in the backyard
animal control
underground leaking pipe
barbeque illegal
police intervened on an insistent salesman
ambulance
had a house fire
fire
easement
street repair**
barking dog
police about speeding
accident
wetland situation*
tax assessor
emergency call to police**
sprinkler system
police-car accident in his yard
Dutch Elm disease
water main shut off temporarily and was informed about it
community liaison came over -locked out of car
Question 68
don't grow
Question 73
egg cartons*
paint cans
furniture*
yard clippings*
3:5'
hazardous waste*
Christmas trees
aluminum foil
telephone books
aerosol cans
antifreeze
carpeting
paint cans***
Styrofoam
old gas cans
metals (iron, scrap metal)
oil filters paint cans
chemicals
batteries
too specific on plastics*
more cardboard (cereal boxes)
bottles
wood timbers and other construction materials
more paper
cardboard
plastic bags**
mattresses
fluorescent bulbs*
request wheel out cart with individual containers
pizza boxes
pop cases
grass clippings
computer paper
empty paint cans
large appliances
weed killer, insecticides, paint
polystyrene
Question 89
3 ;6 hour rail from Minneapolis to Chicago
light rail to Mpls.*
single lane on highway a waste
system like Boston's light rail
not enough busses into downtown
more busstops
light rail
light rail to cities*
more consistency in bus drivers(stop at specific stops)
Express bus to North Hennepin Community College in Brooklyn Center
3
Express bus to U. of Mn.
airport
Question 91
to closest ice rink
Maple Grove
Ridgehaven
Methodist Hospital in St. Louis Park
Hopkins*
more northern towns
to all school districts
Brooklyn Park
airport
downtown Minneapolis**
hospitals
adjacent suburbs
Mall of America**
Crystal
Eden Prairie
Minnetonka center
service to Interface outreach and Community Partners (IOCP)
Cottonwood Plaza
airport
Eden Prairie
Golden Valley
Question 99
sports and recreation
park and recreation***, recreation programs, family activities
articles on children's activities and recreation***
community education edition*
school issues**
recycling, classes, development, recreation
events
park and recreation, development*
recycling hours, maps of trails
park and community events************
environmental issues*
government issues*************
council agenda/summary***
development issues************
changes in services and major issues
special projects**
37-
recreation, taxes, school, education, senior citizens' activities
strategic plan/future planning
special recycling programs
planning and expenditures
road construction**
when waste yard opens and other seasonal information
regulations and policies
recycling****** *
city events, developments, water billing changes, etc.
information on water flushing mains and related issues, city planning, crime reports, park information
gardening
sports
business
information pertaining to taxes, wetlands, zoning
exercise, golfing lessons, plans on development, housing issues
dog information
city planning and improvements
construction articles
general information concerning programs, environment, trails
music and watering schedules
street cleaning schedule
message from the mayor
question and answer column
zoning changes made clearer
children's sport section
Question 100
planning issues**
more information on future planning
council-process when decisions are made
about people who make decisions in government
more police reports
teen opportunities
master plan for the future(five years from now)
robberies or crime report
summer events
community meetings, issues before they reach the council***
family issues
development issues, number of homes, commercial zoning
more on who is issued permits for building
reports on council* police, public safety
ordinances
more personal stories
more sports
31
business issues
new businesses in the area
government issues
environmental issues
academic achievements of children
issues impacting expenditures
information on roads and new school
goose feces issue
environmental activities, schools, property taxes, where Federal monies are spent
council agenda - highlight information so it is easily seen
39
Section 3
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
1. How do you rate the quality of life in Plymouth?
60
50 Excellent
40 Good
30 ® Fair
20 Poor
10 Don't Know
0
1982 1985 1987 1995
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't Know
1982 43 49 6 1 1
198540 54 4 1 1
199750 47 3 1 0
199556 42 1 0 1
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
2. How much pride do you take in Plymouth as a place to live?
60
50
A great deal of pride
40
Quite a lot of pride
30 IM Some pride
20
Very little pride
El Don't know
10
0
1982 1985 1987 1995
A great deal of
pride Quite a lot of pride Some pride Very little pride Don't know
198228 38 26 7 3
1985 27 52 24 5 2
198730 42 22 5 1
1995 38 37 20 3 1
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
3. Do you feel safe in your neighborhood or home?
100
90
80
70
60 Yes
50 No
40 ® Don't know
30
20
10
0
1985 1995
Yes No Don't know
198594 5 1
199598 2 0
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
4. How would you rate the job performance of City staff?
Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know
19825 50 25 4 16
1985 10 55 16 4 16
1987 11 61 11 4 14
19957 49 33 1 9
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
5. How satisfied are you with city street projects and maintenance?
90
80
70
60 Satisfied
50 Dissatisfied
40 Both/Neither
30 Don't Know
20
10
0
1985 1987 1995
Satisfied Dissatisfied Both/Neither Don't Know
1985 69 24 3 5
1987 88 9 1 2
199577 15 5 1
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
6. How satisfied are you with Park Maintenance
100
90
80
70 Satisfied
60
Dissatisfied
50
40
Both/Neither
30 Don't Know
20
10
0
1982 1985 1987 1995
Satisfied Dissatisfied Both/Neither Don't Know
1982 69 7 2 22
1985 82 4 2 12
198792 3 1 5
199594 1 1 4
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
7. How satisfied are you with snow plowing?
90
80
70
60 Satisfied
50 Dissatisfied
40 ® Both/Neither
30 Don't Know
20
10
0
1982 1985 1987 1995
Satisfied Dissatisfied Both/Neither Don't Know
1982 83 14 2 1
1985 80 19 2 0
1987 85 9 1 4
1995 84 7 5 4
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
8. How satisfied are you with Police Protection?
100
90
80
10 Satisfied
60
Dissatisfied
50
40
Both/Neither
30 Don't Know
20
10
0
1982 1985 1981 1995
Satisfied Dissatisfied Both/Neither Don't Know
198287 5 1 7
1985 88 6 4 3
198791 5 1 1
199594 2 1 3
Plymouth Citizens Survey Responses
9. How satisfied are you with Fire Protection?
90
80
70
60 Satisfied
50 Dissatisfied
40 ® Both/Neither
30 Don't Know
20
10
0
1985 1987 1995
Satisfied Dissatisfied Both/Neither Don't Know
1985 78 3 5 14
1987 85 3 1 11
199576 1 2 15
DATE: September 7, 1995
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
THROUGH: Dwight Johnson, City Manager
FROM: 0 Craig C. Gerdes, Director of Public Safety
SUBJECT: Captain Paulson's status and change in Police Department Organizational'
Structure
As many of you are aware, Captain Paulson was involved in an off-duty motor vehicle accident
in August of 1994. Because of this accident, Captain Paulson is unable to return to work for the
City.
Captain Paulson started working for Plymouth as a police officer August 1, 1967. His service to
the City for 28 years has been outstanding. He has worked in every position in the department -
developing many programs himself. Denny is one of the finest law enforcement officers I have
ever met. He will be missed by everyone.
Based on Captain Paulson's departure, I have requested the City Manager's authorization to
change the structure of the professional standards unit. The unit was lead by Captain Paulson,
who was assisted by Investigator Nesbitt. I am recommending that this unit be lead by a
Lieutenant and assisted by a Sergeant.
This would change the total organizational structure as follows:
Current Change
1 Captain
2 Lieutenants 3 Lieutenants
8 Sergeants 9 Sergeants
7 Investigators* 6 Investigators*
NOTE: There is no change in the number of investigators working in the investigative division.
The investigator position assigned to professional standards is being changed to a sergeant
position.
One entry level officer will be hired as a replacement. There is no change to the total number of
sworn personnel in the department. If you have any questions, please contact me.
Regular Meeting of the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission
Sept. 14, 1995, 7 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Visitor Presentations
a. Athletic Associations
b. Staff
c. Others
4. Report on Past Council Action
a. Approved purchase of Ess property
b. Approved purchase of Mission property
c. Approved purchase of Hartenburg property
5. Unfinished Business
a. Private swimming pool update/Wayzata School Dist. pool study
b. West Medicine Lake Park update
c. Open spaces update
d. Playfield/highschool update
e. Study of youth sports facilities update
f. 1996-2000 CIP update
g. Recommend MightyDucks ice arena grant application
6. New Business
a. Name for new playfield #9
b. Review citizen survey results
C.
d.
7. Commission Presentation
8. Staff Communication
9. Adjourn
Next regular meeting - October 12
September 8, 1995
SATHRE - BERGQUIST, INC.
150 SOUTH BROADWAY
612) 476-6000
Mr. Fred Moore
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
Plymouth, MN 55447
RE: SUGAR HILLS 2ND ADDITION - Storm Water Pond
Dear Mr. Moore:
WAYZATA, MN 55391
FAX 476-0104
y
SEP 1 1 1995 —
L
I have been in contact with Judy Martin and the City of Plymouth regarding the
problems with the wetland and ponding area behind her house. I have scheduled a
survey crew to verify the berm elevations around the pond. This work will be completed
early next week. It is my understanding that the berm was overtopped during the storm
that occurred last month of approximately 4 inches of rain in less than 2 hours. This
storm would exceed the 100 year storm event that the pond was designed for, however
the overflow did go directly to the wetland and did not flood any homes or structures.
As soon as I have field data I will forward this to you. Any corrective grading work
required would be completed by our contractor.
I do not feel that the ponding area was improperly designed or elevated above the
existing wetland. As with all drainage improvements there are decisions made
concerning storage volumes, water quality, and pond location. The ponds are sized to
handle 100 year storm runoff and provide for water quality during the lower intense
storms. To achieve these goals the ponds need to have adequate dead storage and
bounce volumes. We felt that the elevation the pond was, set at fit the existing area
and saved more upland trees at the time of construction better than lowering and
enlarging it as suggested by Mr. Dobie. I do not believe that the slight amount that this
pond is elevated above the wetland has an adverse affect on the trees between the
pond and wetland. However if the pond was lowered with the same volumes many
trees would be removed to accomplish this. There are always tradeoffs looked at to
complete projects such as this and I believe we designed this ponding area properly.
The outlet pipe from this pond was designed to be submerged at the pond and outlet
on the north side of the berm to the wetland. This pipe was backfilled with existing site
soils. The existing soils within this area do allow some seepage. The seepage through
the berm is very minimal and does not appear to be causing or that it will cause any
problems. It is my belief that to bring equipment back into this area to try to stop all
seepage would do more damage than good.
After being on site a number of times I still have the question as to whether these trees
are really dying or whether they are just stressed due to the high water table that has
occurred during the year. These trees must be able to withstand considerable and
varied water conditions just based on their elevation and proximity to the existing
wetland. I would be interested in knowing what the City's Forester thinks of this.
If you have any questions, please call me at 476-6000.
Sincerely,
SATHRE-BERGQUIST, INC.
C 6
Robert E. Payette, P.E.
cc: Marty Harstad, Harstad Homes, Inc.
September 11, 1995 CITY OF
PUMOUTR
Ms. Judy Martin
16140 - 37th Avenue N.
Plymouth, MN 55446
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR INFORMATION
Dear Ms. Martin:
As requested on Friday, September 8, enclosed is the following information:
1. Application for Corps Permit and WCA Permit for Wetland Alteration
2. Permit issued by Corps of Engineers for Wetland Alteration
3. WCA Permit issued by City of Plymouth for Wetland Alteration
I am also enclosing the response which I received from my letter of August 30, 1995 to
Sathre-Bergquist, Inc. and Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch, Inc. on the letter from your engineer,
Brian Dobie, Professional Engineering Consultants. You have previously received
copies of my letter to both of these firms. The letters attached are as follows:
1. September 8, 1995 letter from Jim Dvorak of Strgar-Roscoe-Fausch,
Inc. concerning future County Road 9.
2. September 8, 1995 letter from Robert Payette of Sathre-Bergquist,
Inc. concerning the storage pond.
Sincerely,
Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
enclosures
We Listen We Solve We Care
MARTIN2.DOC
3400 PLYMOUTH BOULEVARD • PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA 55447 • TELEPHONE (612) 550-5000
SRFSTRGAR-ROSCOE-FAUSCH, INC.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
TRANSPOKrAnON CIVIL STRUCTURAL ENVIRONMENTAL PARKING
SRF No. 0931782
September 8, 1995
Mr. Fred G. Moore, P.E.
Director of Public Works
CITY OF PLYMOUTH
3400 Plymouth Boulevard
Plymouth, MN 55447-1482
RE: FUTURE COUNTY ROAD 9
PLYMOUTH PROJECT NO. 310
Dear Mr. Moore:
We are in receipt of correspondence from Mr. Brian Dobie of Professional EngineeringConsultants, Inc. dated August 24, 1995, regarding a perceived drainage problem on
Ms. Judy Martin's property adjacent to the referenced project. In his letter, Mr. Dobie
alleges that the County Road 9 project was not properly designed as it relates to the
wetland abutting the Martin property. Mr. Dobie also comments on what is termed a
detention pond." This pond is actually a sedimentation treatment pond constructed by
the developer and we have not addressed any issues raised by Mr. Dobie regarding the
pond.
It is our opinion that the County Road 9 project has not had any impact on the water
elevation in the wetland on the Martin property. We have met on-site with representatives
of the City, the developer's consultant and the property owner several times. In addition,
we have performed extensive surveys of the wetland, the Martin's property adjacent to the
wetland, and the drainageway that outlets the wetland. (We provided you with copies of
this survey information previously.) In Item No. 2 in Mr. Dobie's correspondence, the
issues of the temporary stockpile and the temporary 8 -inch outlet are raised as factors
contributing to higher water levels in the pond and, therefore, higher groundwater levels in
the vicinity of Ms. Martin's trees. The temporary 8 -inch pipe which provided an outlet for
the pond was between 3.5 and 4.5 feet lower than the trees on the Martin property and at
least one foot below the natural drainageway that controls the wetland's water elevation.
The temporary stockpile placed in the wetland on the edge of the roadway embankment
did not impede the runoff of the water from the wetland.
The following summarizes the survey and inspection data collected over the last two
years:
The elevation of the wetland abutting the trees on the Martin property ranges from
979.4 to 978.4.
The elevation of the drainageway that outlets the wetland ranges from 977.4 to 976.8
Suite 150, One Carlson Parkway North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447-4443
612) 475-0010 FAX (612) 475-2429
Mr. Fred G. Moore, P.E. - 2 - September 8, 1995
The elevation of the temporary PVC pipe that was installed by the Contractor was
974.85. This pipe has been removed because the permanent culverts have been
installed.
The permanent drainage system conveying water away from the wetland consists of a
pair of 36 -inch pipes. The elevation of the east 36 -inch Arch pipe is 973.83, the
elevation of the west 36 -inch Arch pipe is 973.93, and the design elevation is 973.84.
At no time was the wetland water surface at the temporary 8 -inch pipe observed above
the top of the pipe.
Water elevations in the wetland have remained relatively constant during the last two
years.
The temporary stockpiling of material in the wetland has not had any effect on the
water elevation in the wetland.
The wetland's drainage area is less today than two years ago because of the roadway
construction.
Based on the data presented above, it is clear that the roadway construction has not
created any ponding of water that would reach an elevation that would impact the trees on
the Martin property. The outlet for the wetland has been maintained and was between 3.5
and 4.5 feet lower than the trees on Ms. Martin's property at all times.
We hope that this clarifies any questions or misconceptions regarding this issue. We are
available to discuss this matter with City staff and other interested parties at any time.
Sincerely,
SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Aozol
emn'ioior
es R. Dvorak, P.E.
Associate
J R D/smf
cc: Dwight Johnson, City of Plymouth
Judy Martin
Brian Dobie, PEC