My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-07-2020 City Council Minutes
Orono
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2020-2024
>
2020
>
12-07-2020 City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2021 8:20:36 AM
Creation date
1/14/2021 8:20:27 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE <br /> ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br /> Monday,December 7,2020 <br /> 6:00 o'clock p.m. <br /> PRESENTATION—Continued <br /> years—the operating disbursements;however,the cash balance has not changed too much and is still able <br /> to support those operations. Regarding the cable fund, Ms. Schwieger noted Orono does not have a <br /> reserve goal and there is not a lot of activity that flows through;there were some capital purchases this <br /> year and that is where they see a decrease in cash. She then gave an overview of all of Orono's funds, <br /> noting it is important to understand that although the City has a few bank accounts with a lot of cash held, <br /> it is broken out into these separate funds they just talked about. She showed a chart onscreen that <br /> illustrates over the past three years what of all those separate fund cash balances look like and what pieces <br /> they each hold. The next slide looked at cash balances as far as how Orono can use them. She explained <br /> some special revenue funds are restricted and they also have some restricted debt service funds;there is a <br /> portion assigned for capital and the unrestricted there is the general fund which is for operations, and they <br /> also have the enterprise fund. She clarified this gives an overview of how Orono can use their cash <br /> balances for different things. Ms. Schwieger said they take information from all of the other cities in the <br /> State of Minnesota and put them in to charts that compare how Orono is doing compared to Hennepin <br /> County, and also compared to Class 4 cities,which is based on population. The first chart illustrated their <br /> tax rate compared to Hennepin County and Class 4 cities,noting Orono is very low on that comparison. <br /> Orono's taxes per capita,as they have a higher home value, can still be very high in comparison to those <br /> other cities. She showed a chart on debt per capita compared to those peer groups over the past four <br /> years. As seen on the debt maturity schedule, it will continue to go down until they issue more debt. <br /> Current expenditures per capita will be higher because of the City's public safety contracts;this does not <br /> take into account the revenues that come in,but rather looks at the total public safety spending which is <br /> higher than other cities in the area because Orono serves other communities. Capital expenditures per <br /> capita were higher as well; however,Orono has more projects going on so that fluctuates quite often. She <br /> showed a chart outlining water fund debt service coverage,which focuses on how much operating <br /> receipts does the City have coming in to cover the debt payments and the higher that is the better—they <br /> want to have enough revenues to cover debt payments going out. <br /> The Council thanked Ms. Schwieger for the presentation. <br /> PUBLIC HEARING <br /> 21. LA20-000072—3570 Ivy Place, CUP—Permanent Dock <br /> Jeremy Barnhart said last December the Council approved a Conditional Use Permit(CUP)for a <br /> permanent dock at 3570 Ivy Place;when the Council approves a CUP,they approve a plan and if any <br /> changes to that plan are desired by the Applicant or the City it needs to go back through the CUP process. <br /> He noted there is no minor change clause in the variance process, so they are going through the public <br /> hearing process for this dock. The Applicant missed the deadline for the December Planning Commission <br /> meeting and is asking the Council to waive the Planning Commission review and have the Council hold <br /> the public hearing. Barnhart explained the code allows the Council by unanimous consent to waive the <br /> Planning Commission review and then the Council would hold the public hearing and react to the <br /> application. The Council has done this occasionally in the past(2 applications in 2018);the Applicant is <br /> seeking the Council to waive the review to allow construction in January 2021,rather than waiting until <br /> February. The Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has approved the revised dock configuration and <br /> Staff has analyzed the proposal based on the criteria for CUP and is recommending approval. There are <br /> two actions needed tonight 1)The Council waives the Planning Commission review of the public hearing, <br /> and 2)The Council opens the public hearing and reviews the proposed application. Staff recommends <br /> approval of the dock application. <br /> Page 6 of 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.