07-29-85 agenda CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 280
Agenda July 29, 1985
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Subject: Council Consideration of a Staff Recommendation to
Purchase the City's Present Four-Phase IV/95
Computer System
Council Members:
At the July 22, 1985 city council meeting, representatives
of Motorola Four-Phase addressed the city council and presented
a packet of information for council and staff review. In the
presentation tc the city council, Four-Phase representatives
indicated that the installment sales agreement option for the
purchase of the IV/95 computer system has been withdrawn.
Subsequently, the only two options available to the city at this
time would be the outright purchase of the IV/95 system for a
lump sum payment of $223,795 or continue tc lease.
Attached to this letter is the backup information previously
submitted regarding the IV/95 system.
Since the last council meeting, city staff has once again
reviewed the options available to the city with the city
attorney, Clayton LeFevere. Based on those conversations, it is
the writer's recommendation that the city council continue the
lease with Motorola Four-Phase for the IV/95 computer system.
In the future, the city staff may recommend to the city council
an early termination of the lease agreement, pursuant to
Minnesota Statute.
Res ectfu ~ ubmitted,
John G. Cartwri ht
City Manager
JGC:sb
Enclosure
//,3
CITY OF RICHFI?LD, MIVN,:,SOTA
Office of City i~!anager
Council Letter Vo. 261
Agenda July 8, 1985
0
The Honorable ,Mayor
and .
Members of the C ity Council
City of Richfield
SL'b~eCt: CCIITJUter St'ady/COIIputyr ~Ur'CC:aSe Status
PROJECT STATUS
Since November of i98~, the City Staff, with the assistance
of DSM Information Services Inc., our Computer Consultant, ras
been in the process of assessing the City's current and future
computer needs and resources. In April, 1985, the City Manager
reported to the City Council that several recommendations had
been formulated as a result of the completion cf the first phase
of the study. Those recommendations included that the City take
the following actions:
1. Purchase the existing system to reduce overall costs.
. According to the Consultant, an analysers of the
City's current lease agree^ent with Four-Phase for
the ITT/95 system revealed that ~160,~C0 cculd be
made 1f the SySteII Here purchased Oi;.tr'_~ht 3S SOOn S
possibly and '_~ept until the end of 1989.
3egin to acquire and install new equipment and 30f`,;var°_
dllring "Y 1986, t:'anSferring all a*JDliCatiCnS tC the
P_ew System.
~ Phase Out ~ he eXi Sting CCmDllter ( TAT/ 95 ~ ?nd SCftWar°
by late 1986.
T_r.c Study 3~ j^v _:~dlCate.''.' tn3`. t,^.e C;i'^"cn ~ ~CUr-P'.:aSe _ T ~
i ~
System and accompany= _yaSe a. rangeWe^.O ,^°n.reS2n:~t1 3CV~ra,
S_xn;flCant ShGrtCOm~n~S. ,or eXampl°, thev_eaSe a~^r+ar~or~er~
f Or thy I'T/95 requ,res the l.1ty t0 xeep an yXtreil' cl y nX-~@:1S=ve
II3inten3_^iCe a~r?eIIen'`, ',Jt h tr?e Gur-i';:aSe '"CmDaily ~ar.D!'OXiIIa ~~;';T
uv^p of current mcnthly lease pay mer.ts cf 500; . T'.e
IIa_rtengnCe 3~r4eIIert ~annOt be d; S., .,_`luyd unlySS ...e
ea Se
agreement ~S terminated. Urt:ler, °aCn t_We the ,_ty Dur^..^_a S2^
3n a~C._tlCnal p~yCe of .._r^wa"'e ..O aC~ tC the S;T `em :.,^_e 2
~ S
:vas 3utOm3t_Cal1v re7i°T.ved f.^.r t:]e f~.;l_ :~Ve year term. _ .e
• or;g:.na1 lease ant.~ncd :.ntC_1? ~ now yX~encS .ntC C,~q
subsequent ^ardwars ^urchases. 1uy
1/ -
-2-
In addition to the unfavorable lease agreement, the IV/95
system has a very limited capacity. Current staff utilization
of the system and software packages now require the system to
operate at approximately 90p of memory capacity. This leaves
little, if any, room for expansion of the system without
additional hardware purchases which would Further extend the
lease. The IV/95 system, however, is no longer in production
and is outdated both in terms of present generation computers
and City needs. Thus the study concluded that the City should
take steps to buy out the expensive, restrictive lease
agreement and begin the process of converting to a newer system.
OVERVIEW OF OPTIONS
Upon receiving the recommendations of the Computer Study
Task Force, City staff began to examine viable options. It was
'determined that the City had four options to•explore:
A) Continue the current lease arrangement at a five year
cost projected by the consultant to be X481,400 if
continued through 1989.
B) Continue the current lease arrangement through December
31, 1986, at a cost of $140,000, at which time the City
could assert that, according to Minnesota Statutes, a
. political subziivision may unilaterally walk away from
any lease purchase agreement at the end of any fiscal
year. T'ris option may also include additional costs for
legal fees and a possible settlement. There is an
element of risk associated with this option, in that the
outcome of potential litigation cannot be predicted.
C) Purchase the computer system immediately for a IuIID sum
purchase price of X223,795, plus time and materials
maintenance.
D) Purchase the computer system immediately with ar.
Installment Sales Agreement for a 5-year total cost for
principle and interest of X275,536, plus time ar_d
materials maintenance.
Option A - Continuation of Curren:ease
Trie current lease/purChaSe agr°eL^ent was entered '_^t0 in
1978 Plith the IV-Phase Company. Sir_ce that time, the City has
modified the system by adding additional ':ardware cn three
occasions. The most recent additicr_ took place in February,
1984, and, due to the automatic renet,~al provision in the
agreement, extended the lease to 1989.
Under the current lease, the City makes mor_thly payments of
approximately X7,500, of which roughly 40p 03,000) represents
maiP.teP.anCe charges. The COIIDUter COIISUlt3P.t, DSi'! InCOrpcrated,
_3_
estimates the following costs for the City under the current
lease through 1989 assuming a 10p increase per year for
maintenance:
1985 $ 90,600
1986 $ 93,200
1987 $ 96,000
1988 $ 97,100
1989 $102,500
$~81,~00
The current lease also allows the 1"7-Phase Company to extend
the lease for hardware additions to the system. This is an
unacceptable position for the City to be in.
Option B - Continue Lease w?th Unilateral Cancellation in
December, 1986
~A second option related to continuation of the current lease
involves a possible early termir_atior, of the lease. The City
Attorney reviewed the current lease and reported to City staff
that, according to ~Sinnesota Statute u65.71 (amended in 1982), a.
municipality may walk away from a lease/purchase agreement at
the end of any of it's fiscal years. However, the City Attorney
added that such an approach was not without risk. Current
federal and state law provide that a legislature cannot impair
a parties rights under contract. Thus, since the contract was
in place before the statute, the vendor, 1~1-Phase, may use such
ar. argument. In any event there would be no guarantee that the
City would be sucessfu l in such an attempt to cancel the
existing lease agreement early.
if the City were successful, this option would be the least
expensive in that lease payments from now until December 1,
1986, would total approximately $1u0,000.
However, to its' disadvantage, this option, ever. i_
SuCCeSSIUI in termiP.ating the lease early, WOUId reQL:'_re 3 new
Computer System t0 be in place n0 later than JanL:2ry 1, 1986,
SO that necesary COnVersiOns t0 the 'leTrl SySteII COUId be IIade
before the December 31 , 1986, deadline. Pre'IiOUSIy, t:le COIIDUter
task force indicated that an 18 month conversion cericd would
be desirable. Shortening the conversion period to one year
(1986) would require every aspect of the purchase and
installation. of a new system r.o proceed in a tiyely manner and
without delay. ';'hat process Mould a'_so have to begin Wit:iin the
next few Weeks.
r _nally, if the City Were unsuccess.ul term_nacing t.e
lease early, the Clty would face Certain legal fees in addition
to either: a) a compromise settlement; b) scheduled buy our of
the lease/purchase agreement; or, c) continuation of the lease.
-4-
Option C - Lumn-Sum Purchase of the IV-95 System .
Pursuant to City Ccurcil authorization, City staff
approached IV-Phase for a quote on the outright purchase of the
current IV-95 system. IV-Phase responded with a quote of
$223,795 for the purchase of the system. It was earlier
estimated by the consultant and computer task force that the buy-
out price would be approximately $244,000.
The outright purchase of the system would allow the City to
save approximately $160,000 over the life of the lease.. In
addition, it would allow the City to choose 3rly maintenance
option available, as well as to add any equipment necessary
without extending a contractual relationship with iV-Phase.
The $223,795 necessary to purchase the system would be
gained throu gh utilizing approximately $100,000 (45 of general
fund "fund balance". T'ne remaining funds necessary to purchase
the system would be proportioned as follows: Liquor - $65,000
(29%), Water - $24,600 (11p), Sewer - 23,500 (10.5p)., while th.e
Central Garage, Data Processing, Self-Insurance and Golf Course
funds would be assessed - $11,750 (5.250 . In addition to the
initial outlay, the City would have to enter into a time and
materials mainter.ar_ce contract with a service provider.
• rcr rough estimation purposes, the time ar.d materials
maintenance costs could be calculated at $400-$500 per month.
Unfortunately, the City has also experienced an unexpected
expense of some $270,000 for insurance premiums. The
combination of $223,795 fcr a lump-sum computer purchase in
addition to the $270,000 additional 1^y 85 insurance premiums
represents a significant drain on all City funds for 1985.
Option D - Installment Purchase of `he IV-95 System
Another eptior. available until July 31, i985, for the
purchase of the IV-95 system is an installment sales =greement
financed by IV-Phase at 8 1/2p interest for a period of up to
60 mcnths.
under this arrar_gemer.`-, the Cioy would purchase t~_e ITl-?base
System 'vii ti, 3n i nStailment Sales agreement Cf 6Q eCUal mCnLhiy
payments OI' X4,591 .00. In COn~llnCtiOn, tale City COUId Car^V
time and materi3lS malntenaP.Ce agreement ;,Tit;: i~T-P!;aSe ar.d pay
Only fOr 3CtL'al SerVlCing incurred.
The total cost of this package would be X223,795 for the
purchase price Cf :he equipment and an 3dditiCnal ~51,74i in
interest COStS fCr 3 total COSt Of ~2^x5,536. .yS the lL1mTJ-
Sum purchase ODtiOn, the City WOUld 3150 inC'.:r 3n eStimateG ~4QQ-
X500 der month for time and Materials ma.~e.^.ance urde„ t
installment purchase plan.
7
-5-
To it's disadvantage the installment sales plan requires the
City to incur ~51,7~1 of interest charges and requires the City
to pay a 3p penalty (based on unpaid principle) at the time of
ary prepayment of the agreement. Further, it does require the
City to keep a maintenance contract with IV-Phase while the
agreement is in effect.
Offsetting advantages of the Installment Sales Agreement
include releasing the City from an unfavorable lease agreement
without incurring a lump-sum cost in 1985. The 8.5% interest
rate is a fairly good rate which is exceeded by the City's
current investment portfolio rate (approximately 9 3/'fin - 10p).
IV-Phase informed the City that as of July 1, 1985, the firm
wou ld no longer offer a time and materials maintenance
contract. Only time and materials contracts in effect on or
before that date would be honored. Without a time and materials
maintenance agreement the City would be f orc~ed to accept a
standard IV-Phase maintenance agreement which would cost X2,100
per month. Such steep monthly maintenance payments would negate
much of the advantages of an Installment Sales Agreement over
the current lease.
• Thus, to~protect this option; the City Manager has
tentatively entered into a time and materials contract as well
as an Instalment Sales Agreement subject to Council approval.
By entering into this stipulated agreement, the option of
entering into an Installment Sales Agreement with a relative_y
inexpensive T & M Agreement is preserved unti'_ immediately after
the Council meeti rg of July 8 , 1985 .
At the time the City became aware of IV-Phase's intenticn to
eliminate T & M maintenance agreements, a reccmmendatier. to
Council had not been formulated and as such, it was felt that
all cp ons should remain open for Council consideraticr..
RECOMMENDATION
While it may appear from a cost pers;cective that CDtior_ B -
."arty Termination of Lease is the least expensive alterriati're,
the Writer reCOmIIendS that the City COUriCiI adODt ~DtiOn ~ -
Installm.en~ JaleS Air°ement. EVen though Sri ear ly term7.riati0n
Of the jeaSe/purchase agreement may be possible renderi.^.g
total of X140,000 iri 'ease payments until December i98o when the
system would be returned to I'T Phase, too many risks are
3SSOClated Trlith this onti en. The City may i near ..izaDle legal
costs, a comprcm_se settlement or at worst, be faced with
purchaSirig the SySteII in December, i 780 , Or COr.tirilling wi DC;?
lease. ur_certainty also exists if the City were to be
successful ir_ having the .'I-95 syste^ lease terminated on
December 31 , 198b. Ti'lit~'1 t;le SVStem removed aS Of thaw date, all
City System COn'7erS10nS WCllld :Dave tC be COmD1~ted curing 1986,
_o_
leaving little if any margin for delay in any phase of acquiring
and converting to a new system.
With the information staff has received from IV-Phase to
date, it is the City Managers recommendation that the City
exercise its' option to enter into the Installment Sales
Agreement for a term of 60 months. The I.S.A. would generate
payments of X4,592.00 per month (see Attachment A), some X2,900
per month less than the current $7,500 lease payments. Of the
$2,900 monthly savings, X400 would be allocated for time and
materials maintenance while the remaining X2,500 could be put
aside for a future buy-out of the I.S.A. or a new system in the
future.
Additionally, instead of requiring funds to set aside lump
.sums for a 1985 buy-out, the funds eculd remain in the City's
investment portfolio which is currently averaging near 10~
return overall. 'While the rate of return for City investments
will decrease in the future, it may be several months or perhaps
longer before the overall rate of return settles to 8.5p. Thus,
the City can gain some interest earnings by retaining the Funds
it might have used for a lump sum purchase.
Finally, the Installment Sales Agreement allows the City to
control when it may be most advantageous to sell or salvage the
IV-95 system. This would allow for a better planned conversion
from the current system to a new system at any point in the
future.
As of this writing, IV-Phase has been made aware of our
contention that t.~e current lease may be terminated by the City
at the erd of any fiscal year. In response, sta~'f attorneys fcr
the IV-Phase division of Motorola have been in contact wit:n `he
City Attorneys office. Further developments in this regard may
take place up until the City Council meeting of Duly 8, 1985.
However, at this time it is impossible to say exactly ~rr.at may
develop.
It i S the recommendation Of the City i'!2Y?2ger, that the City
Council authorize the City to enter into an Installment Sales
Agree mer.t N_th the ,V-Ph33e i~_'7;SlOn Of ''!CtCr01a fCr the
purchase of the I?T-95 computer system for ~ total cost of
~~75,000, including purchase price and ;merest.
Future Direction
T:^.e writer wishes to emphas_ze that the acticn r'commendec
here 3llthOriZeS the City tC buy-OUt Cf arl unf3VCrable lease :~C"
itS' CUrrer,t IV-95 COmDUter 3yS~eII. That DUrChaSe NCUId nOt add
to or enhance the capability of the I~T-95. The I'T-95 system
remains a basically inadequate system to accomodate the City's
data processing needs for new and the future.
-7- .
The long range solution to meeting the City's data
processing needs is the acquisition of a new computer system to
replace the IV-95. It is the recommendation of the computer
consultant (DSM Information Services, Inc.), the in-house
computer task force and City staff that such a replacement
system be ready for installation in early 1986. Staff
recommendations regarding the acquisition of a new computer
system will be presented to the City Council at a future
meeting.
Respe l1y submitted,
.L~~c..
Steven L. Devich
Acting City Manager
SLD/eja `
cc: Data Processing Manager
i'
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Office of City Manager
Ccuncil Letter No. 279
Agenda July 29, 1985
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Ccuncil
City of Richfield
Subject: Council Approval of an Agreement fcr Joint
Assessment with Hennepin County
Council Members:
At the July 22, 1985, City Council meeting, City staff
recommended to the City Council that the City enter into a
contract with_Hennepin Ccunty fcr assessing services for the
years 1985 - 1989• Previously, the City had been under
contract with the Ccunty Assessor's office for assessing
services for the years 1982 - 1985. Thus, ecntract renewal for
the next fcur years was being recommended.
• As a result of action taken by the City Council at the July
22, 1985, meeting, City staff contacted Hennepin Ccunty
officials as to whether the County would be willing to enter
into a two year agreement, rather than a fcur year agreement as
originally proposed. If the County were tc agree to a two year
contract period, the City Council authorized the execution cf
such ar. agreement.
Subsequent to the July ?_2, 1985, meeting, City staff met
with Hennepin County officials regarding the possibility of a
two year agreement. Representatives cf the Hennepin Ccunty
Assessors office indicated that Hennepin County would not lock
favorably upon entering into a contract period for assessing.
services of less than four years. Their reasons for this
position include:
1. The assessing cycle pursuant to state statute, operates
at an assessment of 25~ of total properties each year.
Thus, an assessment cycle is completed in a four year
period.
2. All Hennepin County contracts fcr assessing services are
done on a fcur year basis, and they wish to remain
consistent in that regard.
3. Hennepin County must plan fcr personnel, expenses,
and revenues in their budgeting process with respect to
b
-2-
their various contractual relationships. Hennepin
County prefers to operate on four year contracts, thus
eliminating more cyclical ups and downs in the number of
personnel that they need to hire or lay-off. The net
result is a more stable work force and east basis for
Hennepin County.
However, the County Assessors office also pointed out that
the final authority for granting a four year contract, or a
contract of lesser duration, was within the authority of the
Hennepin County Board and not the Hennepin County Assessors
office. Thus, they could nat speak fer the Hennepin Ccunty
Board to approve of any contract for a shorter period of time.
Finally, County representatives indicated that the current
contract expires on July 31, and after that time if no contract
were approved by the City and the County, the County Assessors
office would feel in a awkward position with respect to
assigning personnel to the Richfield office. Their concern
would be that if no contract were mutually agreed upon by the
two jurisdictions, the Ccunty Assessors office could be
criticized by the Ccunty Board for assigning personnel to the
City of Richfield without contractual authority to do so.
City staff has made note of the concerns expressed at the
July 22, 1985, Council meeting, and has provided greater detail
of the benefits and associated costs and savings related to
contracting for assessing services. Additional cost data has
been added tc the information previously provided in Ccuneil
Letter X6273 and is summarized as follows:
Service
As previously stated, in terms of service to the public, it
is the conclusion of the Administrative Services Director and
the writer that the service available to residents under the
Hennepin County centraet is responsive and professionally
provided. The day to day requests for information on processing
homestead applications are transactions typically handled by the
Assessment Clerk, who is a City employee. In addition, much of
the other day to day public contact is still handled by the
Richfield clerical support person.
Questions regarding property valuations, which relate
directly to the appraisal process, are handled by the Hennepin
County property appraisal staff. These individuals are
physically located within Richfield City Hall, and it is very
convenient for residents tc come into City Hall and meet with
the appraisers tc review their questions and talk about the
valuation process.
Thus, it is felt that service to the public has not been
diminished by contracting with Hennepin County.
-3-
Local Control
• Another concern expressed was that of the issue of local
control. Minnesota Statute 273.061 clearly states that the
Ccunty Assessor presently has the authority to override the
valuations established by any local assessor, and to finalize
valuations. Thus, the City has no less local control under the
joint Hennepin County contract than it would have had we
continued with a in-house City assessing staff. .
The impact of that statute was clearly felt by several
Hennepin Ccunty municipalities as recently as last week. In ten
Hennepin County cities the County Assessor made aggregate
adjustments to the valuations of the commercial and/or
residential properties in each respective community to provide
for more equitable residential and commerical property
valuation ratios.
' In the City of Bloomington, the residential ratios were
adjusted upward by the County Assessor by 3%, so that the median
ratio in Bloomington is 92.5 as compared to 92.7 in Richfield,
and 92.4 in Edina. The County average median ratio is 93~•
Thus, you can see that the City of Richfield has been handled
equitably in comparison to our neighboring communities and in
comparison to all Hennepin Ccunty cemmunities. Attached for
your review is a residential ratio study prepared by Hennepin
County just prior to the aggregate adjustments made by the
Hennepin Ccunty Assessor.
Costs
In the Council Letter from July 22, 1985, City staff pointed
out that substantial savings conservatively estimated at $35,000
for 1985 and 1986 would be realized by the City in utilizing the
assessment services contract with Hennepin County. At the
meeting, the issue of employing an in-house assessing staff was
raised. The attached cost comparison (Attachment B) provides an
assessing, cost comparison between the cities of St. Louis Park,
Edina and the cost of staffing the City of Richfield Assessing
Divisicn with exactly the same eemplement cf personnel as were
staffed in 197g and early 1980 when the City last had an in-
hcuse Assessing Divisicn, and a proposed Richfield Assessing
Divisicn with a reduced eemplement of personnel. Also indicated
in the comparison is the current cost to the City of Richfield
utilizing the County Assessor through the current contract.
The cost for the City of St. Louis Park and their total
budget cost to employ a in-house Assessing staff is $299,340.
Similarly, the City cf Edina expends $217,650 for its total
assessment division budget. The City of Richfield, at 1979
staffing levels for in-hcuse assessing services, at 1g85 costs,
would incur annual costs cf $226,270, and $184,016 for a reduced
in-hcuse assessing staff. That compares with the current cost
of $137,070 for the entire cost of assessing utilizing the
Hennepin County contract and all City related Assessing budget
• costs.
As you can see, there is a substantial savings between the
cost that the City of Richfield would incur if it had an
Assessing Division fully staffed in 1985 as compared to the
cost of the current contractual arrangement. Also provided for
your information, is the total number cf parcels tc be assessed
for the city's of St. Louis Park, Edina and Richfield. The
city's of St. Louis Park and Edina do have more parcels to be
assessed than the City of Richfield, and the assessing process
in those communities would be more complicated than in Richfield.
However, both St. Louis Park and Edina employ a larger Assessing
Division then the Assessing Division proposed for Richfield.
If one were to examine the cost per parcel for assessing
services, utilizing the total divisional budget costs of each
example, and the total parcels of each city, one would see that
the cost per parcel 'for assessing services in St. Louis Park is
$19.56, and in Edina it is $11.75. Under the proposed Richfield
1979 level in-house city assessing division, the cost per parcel
would be $19.16. Under the Richfield proposed reduced staff
level, the in-house assessing division would be $15.58 per
parcel. Currently the cost per parcel under the Hennepin County
ecntract for the City of Richfield is $11.60. This comparison
underlines the substantial savings the City of Richfield
• currently enjoys by participating in the Joint Assessment
Contract with Hennepin County.
Not only are costs reduced by not employing the number of
personnel needed to perform in-house assessing services, but
there are also considerable savings in the types of expenditures
that the City does not need to make by contracting for the
service. For example, the City is not directly incurring
additional costs for professional certification, licensure or
training cf any in-house assessors or appraisers.
In practice in the last four years, the City has not
experienced cost increases in the contract with Hennepin
County. Instead, the test for services have either remained
stable or in some cases have decreased from one year to the
next. There is no reason to expect that the costs cf this
ecntract will increase significantly in the ensuing four years.
The major factor which would effect the cost would be
considerable new building on parcels within the City. However,
even in considering proposed projects, it is not expected that
would make a significant increase in assessing service charges
to the City from Hennepin County.
Beard cf Review
• In consideration cf Council concern regarding. the Board cf
Review process, the Hennepin County Assessing, staff along with
the Administrative Services Director, have informed the Council
-5-
that prior to next years Board of Review hearings, meetings
. would be set up with the City Council prior to the date of the
Board of Review. These information meetings would cover the
criteria used by Hennepin County property appraisers in setting
the property valuations in the City of Richfield, and the
various terminology and methodology used in the process. Such
meetings will help give the Council a better understanding of
how the Hennepin County property appraisers conduct valuations,
and enable a more effective interaction between the City Council
and the Hennepin County Assessors staff in conducting Board of
Review hearings.
Hennepin Ccunty has indicated that it will take all steps
necessary to satisfy the concerns of the City Council regarding
the conduct of the Board of Review hearings.
Thus, in consideration of the additional information
presented herein, it is recommended that the City Council adopt
the attached resolution authorizing the City of Richfield to
enter into a contract with Hennepin Ccunty for assessing
services fo.r the years 1986, 1987, 1988, and 1989.
Respectf y submitted,
John G. Cartw 'ght
City Manager
JGC/eja
cc: Steven Devich, Administrative Services Director
Attachment A
{ r.:.
~ S,! 1°, i~c: ~:I ~.f I,++. Iii '?1t.>?c ,.i
r l i_i l i I r F; i ..l i ~ 1 1, . l.._. P~ E... f i l a (l i t_' it i t `a L.! ,
c
~ ~ ~ c.. ,
~
....1 i .~1i_. ~ h:
I f p.:i 1 . - 1_. I `-4 ~ i t::i .L ? t=i i_i
r,.. _ _L. _ _
1
1
E ~._;i i . . ; l~E _ . ~
.
_
_ ~..I ;
is f I.I~ ~..i ; ~ ,4._
;
~ i i r_..
...t ~.:I ...1 ~
, ~ J. t... _
r~ r c.. _
~f..; f i E_ 1~..
_
I„I I.11 I F:_. { t:.l l' r: F ; i ~ E _ r- ; L, E ; 1. c! .I J. ,
: - : r
~ 1 l..., i ~ , I } , L..
r.. _ _ _ r.. _
i !
.i ~ 1`i .i c- i'.~ l,_ 1. a 1 .::r , „ .
_ ; , . , 1 i.
1_ i
• •
attachment I]
ASSESSING COST COMPARISON I',
RIC[IF'ILLD OP'PION #1 RICUFILa,D OP'PI(Nd #2
; ;COST OF CITX-STAFFED ASSESSING ; ;
; ;DIVISION (based on staff level ;COSTT OF A CITY ASSESSING DIVI- ;
;of Assessing Division prior to ;SIGN WITH A STAFF REDUCTION ; I
ST. LOUIS PARK ;EDTNA ;1980) ;FROM 1979 ;RICIIFTELU
i ; r i
Personnel/Salary ;Personnel/Salary ;Personnel/Salary ;Personnel/Salary ;
City Assessor $ 38,766; City Assessor $ 38,062; City Assessor $ 38,360* ; City Assessor $ 38,360; County staff assignments to
Assessing Supervisor 27,664; Residential Appraiser 26,260; Commercial Prop.Appr. 28,619* ; Commercial Prop.Appr. 28,619; Richfield:
Residential Appraiser 23,998; Cannercial Appraiser 26,620; Appraiser 211,298* ; Appraiser 24,?_98; Principle Property Appraiser
Right-of-Way Appraiser 29,250; Appraiser 26,260; Appraiser 24,2.98* ; Assessment Clerk 14,517; 2-3 Appraisers
Technical Clerk 7_0,696; Technical Clerk 23,322; Assessment Clerk 114,517**; Assessment Clerk 14_,517_; County Contract**11$1011,600
Assessment Clerk 17,300; Clerk 16,120; Assessment Clerk 14,517**; ' ; Assess. C1. Salary 14,517
Assessment Clerk 17,600; ; ; 'Total Salaries $120,311;
Assessment Clerk 14,2.30; Total Salaries $156,2.84; Total Salaries $144,609 ; Cost of Denefits(33%) 3_9_,703; ?119,117
Cost of Eenefits, ; Cost of Benefits(33$)47,721 ; _
Total Salaries $189,504; Supplies, Other Serv. ; ' ; Total Personnel Serv.$160,014; All other ~~osts 1'or
Cost of Benefits(33~) 62,536; & Charges & Cap.Exp. _61,366; Tot.Personnel Serv.$192,330 ; ; benefits, supplies,
- ; ; Other serv.& charges, ; capital outlay,
Total Personnel Serv .$2.52,040; Total F3udget $217,650; Other Serv. & Charges, ; supplies, capital ; etc. 17,953
Ocher Serv. & Charges 39,000; ~.s~.....; supplies (15~ of total ; outlay 24,002;
Supplies '1,000; ; budget) ,33,940 ; ~ Total F3udget $13'7,070
Capital Expenditures 1,300; ; ; Total budget $184,016;
; Total E3udget $226,270 ; ~4w~;
Total Oudget $299,3401 ; ~~»ya ; ~
*Costs of salaries based on Stanton Survey for comparable position.
**F3ased on Actual 1985 salary data.
***Contract includes all costs, including personal services and some supplies.
; ~
ST. LOUIS PARK ; EDINA ; RICHFIELD
Total Parcels 15,300 ; Total Parcels 18,52.4 ; Total Parcels 11,809
~ ,.,~z~..~ ~ a~,...ay
Residential 11,981 ; Residential 1?_,668 ; Residential 10,~i53
Condo/Townhouse ,'_,000 ; Conda/Townhouse 4,431 ; Condo/Townhouse 4(,7
Apartment 151 ; Apartment 77 ; Apartment 188
C<rmmer~~ial 463 ; Double Uungalow 3fi9 ; Double Eiungalcw 178
Industrial 174 ; Cormneroial 340 ; Cornrnercial/Industrial. 370
Vacant 531 ; Industrial 104 ; Land 53
; Vacant 535 ;
Richfield 19 79 -dU Budget
FUND DEPARTMENT DIVISION ACCOUNT NUMBER
General Administrative Assessing 101-4053
Services
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 8Y MINOR OBJECT CLASSIFICATION
1978 1979 BUDGET 1980 PROPOSED
CLASSIFICATIONS PROPOSED
ACTUAL ADJUSTED BUDGET
REVISION
Personal Services
1010 Regular employees $ 98,041 $105,458 $105,865 $106,314
1050 Interdepartmental labor 99 250 100 100
1070 Longevity 1,697 1,825 1,822 1,868
1085 Intermittent 1,123
1091 Retirement contributions 6,022 6,510 6,514 6,547
1092 FICA contributions 4,824 5,573 5,598 5,797
1093 Hospitalization 3,867 4,374 4,554 4,680
1094 .Term life insurance 79 79 79 79
Total $114,629 $124,Ohq. ,$125,655 .$125,385
Other Services and Charges
1100 Rents & leases $ 5,110 $ 6,200 $ 5,100 $ 5,100
1120 Maintenance & repairs 216 140 150 150
1130 Professional services 50 50 50 50
1200 Communications 3,118 3,600 3,350 4,000
1210 Travel-conferences-schools 1,117 1,200 1,200 1,300
1220 Subscriptions & memberships 423 460 350 350
1260 Insurance & bonds 618 850 1,380 1,800
65 Workers' compensation 1,697 1,697 1,697 1,697
Total $ 12,349 $ 14,197 $ 13,277 $ 14,447
Supplies
1300 Office supplies $ 1,302 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100
Capital Outlay
1540 Office equipment $ 100
Total Account 101-4053 X8.280 5139.366 514Q_Q32 5141,032
~r
M ` CITY OF RiCHF1ELD, MINNESOTA ANNUAL BUDGET
~Np DEPARTMENT DIVISION ACCOUNT NUMBER
General Administrative
I Services
DEPARTMENT SUMMARY BY ACTIVITY
1979 BUDGET
1978 1980 PROPOSED
ACTIVITY ACTUAL ADJUSTED PROPOSED BUDGET
REVISION
Administration 4022 $ - $ - $ - $ 52,404
Personnel 4021 49,670 50,850 61,110 55,092
Youth Employment 4900 32,555 37,08 6 38,217 17,848
Finance 4051 134,429 153,462 136,661 98,243
City Clerk 4052 88,973 95,980 92,957 106,406
Assessing 4053 128,280 139,366 140,032 141,032
Total Department 5433 .907 5470.744 5468.97 ,S~/-
71.025
CITY OF RICHFIELD. MINNESOTA ANNUAL BUDGET
FUND DEPARTMENT DIVISION ACCOUNT NUMBER
General Administrative Assessing 101-4053
Services
TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES AND CAPITAL OUTLAY EXPENDITURES
BY POSITION OR MINOR OBJECT CLASSIFICATION
NUMBER OF 1979 BUDGET
CLASSIFICATIONS EMPLOYEES SALARY 1980 PROPOSE<7
tale iaeo GRADE ADJUSTED PROPOSED BUDGET
ADJU3TE~ PROPO~@D RE VIS10 N
Regular Employees
City Assessor 1 1 G-19 $ 26,775 $ 26,878 $ 26,981
Appraiser II 3 3 G-15 56,610 ~ 56,829 57,045
Clerk-Typist III 1 1 G-6 .11,564 11,609 11,698
Clerk-Typist II 1 1 G-4 10,509 10,549 10,590
Total 6 6 $105,458 $105,865 $106,314
Capital Outlay
Chair (replacement) $ 100
CITY OF RiCHFlELO, MtNNESOTA ANNUAL BUDGET
ASSESSING COST COMPARISON
PLYMOUTH ;BROOKLYN CENTER
Personnel/Salary ;Personnel/Salary
City Assessor $ 35,871 ~ City Assessor $ 40,583
Senior Appraiser 29,292 ; Senior Appraiser 29,304
Appraiser 26,378 i Clerk IV 16,548
Appraiser 25,329 ; Clerk IV 16,548
Assessment Office Technician 19,307 ; P-T Clerk & Temp. Appraisers 15,900
Assessment Office Technician 19,900 ~
Total Salaries $118,883
Total Salaries $156,077
Costs for benefits, other
Cost of Benefits (33~) 51,505 ; services & charges, etc. 37,317
Logis cost for valuation
Total Personnel Services $207,582 notices & cards 9,130
Other Services & Charges, ; Total Budget $165,330
Supplies 40,787 ~
Total Budget $248,369
1
PLYMOUTH ;BROOKLYN CENTER
Tatal Parcels 15,012 ;Total Parcels 9,130
•
Residential 9,550 ; Residential 8,406
Apartment 33 ; Apartment 260
Condominiums 981 ; Commercial 172
Townhouses 1,639 ; Industrial 64
Commercial 348 ; Vacant 228
Industrial 46 1
Vacant 2,299
Misc.(Common Areas, Mobile y
Homes, Sea.lRec.& Utility) 116 ;
i
$16.54 per parcel ; $18.10 per parcel
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
• Office of City Manager
Council Letter No. 278
Agenda July 29, 1985
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
City of Richfield
Subject: Approval of Temporary Sign Permit for American
Legion Baseball Tournament
Council Members:
The Naegele Sign Company has placed their pcrtable temporary
sign at 66th Street and Lyndale (Market Plaza site) promoting
the American Legion Baseball Tournament to be held in August.
City Council approval is required for a temporary sign of
this nature.
• The City Manager recommends apprcval.
R ectf ly u mitted,
ohn G. 'Cart right
City Manager
JGC:sb