It's Back.... The Opposed Trail Along Mill Road

Update 8/5/2008: The $704,000 and $202,000 matching dollars is for as many trails they can get with these monies, not just the trail on Mill. As we understand, the engineer has asked the council and the Park and Rec Comm for their top 5 priorities (from trail map on blog)
Whether the matching dollar amounts are a coincidence or typo, this information comes directly from public records.
2008 Budget
Police page three $704,000
Fire page four $202,000
Road Maintenance.... Zero, Zip, Nada!
LINK HERE
Now is the time to send in your objections or your top 5 as Park and Rec meets 8/6/08 and council on 8/13/08

Memo

From: Kim Stephan
Date: July 9, 2008
Subject: Budget Considerations for 2009 From Parks and Recreation Committee

Council Member Tom Lee asked the committee to consider their recommendation for the trail proposed along Mill Road. The City received a Trail Grant for $704,000, with the City's portion being approximately $202,000. Council Member Lee informed the committee that the grant monies received are difficult to get and if not spent the chances of receiving these grant monies again would be greatly reduced. A trail was proposed alone Mill Road with the 2009 street project but the road has been taken out of the project and the residents along Mill Road were opposed to a trail or a sidewalk being added to their street. The committee feels strongly that Mill Road is dangerous to pedestrians and bikes and should have a trail on it as it is a collector street; it is narrow and it is very busy. Taking into consideration the feelings of the residents concerning a trail, the committee still felt it was their obligation to look at what was best for the community as a whole and that would be to have a trail on Mill Road. The committee discussed at length the Mill Road resident's objections verses the safety of the road and while reluctant to go against the resident's wishes would like to recommend to City Council that Mill Road have a trail constructed within the easement using the Trail Grant monies.
Motion was made by Vice-Chairperson Amundsen, seconded by Committee Member Haiden to recommend City Council proceed with the trail being constructed on Mill Road per the specifications in the 2009 street project, the Comprehensive Trail Plan and the plan submitted for grant monies due to the connectivity of the trail plan and the safety of the residents with the understanding the residents of Mill Road will not be assessed for this trail as Federal Grant Funds will be used. All in favor. Motion carried unanimously.

Just who is going to pay the additional $202,000 for the unwanted trail? How many other trails are not payed for with grant money and just what the heck is a "collector street" in a town with such a small population? We need to keep an eye on these people... $202,000 would go a long way on road maintenance!

Contact us privately with City information, news and personal stories. All contact information will be kept private and not posted on the blog unless requested.Email Centervilleblog@yahoo.com

Real Estate Listing

Today I noticed a neighbor listed their house for sale. This property is listed on Brian Drive for $189,900. It made my stomach turn as just a few short years ago, this property would have sold at $225,000 plus! With the Real Estate market in the tank, this is ABSOLUTELY NO TIME FOR INCREASED TAXES! There was a time that houses sold in a day or at least within a week in this market. That time is no longer.... The City Council wishes to impose these tax assessments on us today. All one should ask is why? They are doing nothing but taking our equity and profit away! Having ranked 3rd in the State for highest taxes during 2007 (and let's not forget) 1st in 2006, one has to ask, what the heck is going on? Are we going to be first again? This is nothing to be proud of... But hey, we have five bazillion cops to support, so that makes it alright!

Hugo Spends Less Than 25% on Police and Fire

"The total Hugo 2008 budget (draft) is approximately $3,929,000.00. Our proposed Law Enforcement budget is approximately $458,900.00 and our approximate Fire department budget is $388,300.00; combined, a total of about $847,200.00, or a bit less than 25% of our total budget."
Wouldn't that extra 20% our Council budgets for Police and Fire be better spent on road maintenance? We currently spend 45% of the budget on these services. ($704,000 Police, 2008 and rising) Why are we spending more than Hugo, which has a population more than double ours?
"Hugo has spent a considerable amount of money on our streets and roads. The majority of our over $1,000,000.00 road budget is not necessarily for road repair or maintenance but for new roads for new and not too healthy developments."
Quotes from an email recieved by SaveHugo.com


Contact us privately with City information, news and personal stories. All contact information will be kept private and not posted on the blog unless requested.Email Centervilleblog@yahoo.com

Centerville Trial Map

This is the trail map that they had at the work session on the 23rd. Could you put this on the blog so people know what they are thinking with the trail systems and tell them to direct their questions and concerns to the Park and Rec and the Council? The dollar amounts are attached also. I see the one on Brain Way is on there. It will probably be a last priority though so it will most likely be pulled. Mill Road on the other hand seems to be a big priority for everyone……………….

City Property Tax Comparisons

Some have asked for budget comparisons to other Cities similar in population.
Here we go...
City of Independence, MN
Population: 3,676
Total Budget: $2,997,354
They did budget about 40% for Public Safety but still managed to dedicate $549,011 for Road Maintenance!
LINK HERE

Scandia
Population: 4,189
2007 Total Budget: $1,626,464
Surprisingly low for Police and Fire $369,268. Also budgets for road maintenance as needed, $150,000 in 2004.
LINK HERE

Two examples of similar Cities within our State This research takes time and we welcome input/research from anyone willing to help us out.

Is Such a Grandiose Plan Right For Centerville?

Point of reference:
The blue building at the top is the Elementary School. Somehow, sections E and H will be constructed between it and main street. Take note that phase one, (green) is expected to be completed in 2009. Council has been busy making plans... Everything but road maintenance! During the last council meeting, they did spend about 15/20 minutes discussing colored concrete (and looking at samples) for the new downtown area. The Mayor REALLY wants it!

Click on map to bring up larger image.

A. 7 For Sale Town homes
B 14,000 SF Rental/Office

C. 48 Multi Family Units

15,000 SF Rental/Office

D. 41 Multi Family Units (Affordable)

E. 40 Multi Family Units

F. 60 Multi Family Units

20,000 SF SF Rental/Office

G. 72 Multi Family Units

H. 6,000 SF Rental/Office

I. 40 For Sale Town homes

J. 32 For Sale Town homes

K. 16 For Sale Town homes
L. 20 For Sale Town homes

There goes our small town feeling!

Please Send Comments and Thoughts

We welcome comments, thoughts and general information regarding our City of Centerville. We will never post any personal information without consent.

Centerville City Administrator Lives in Cannon Falls... Huh?

What is the salary for the City Administrator? Is one reimbursed mileage (50.6 each way) to travel for meetings? Inquiring minds want to know... Here is a little history (The Quad Press declined to report) that will make your head spin!

Council votes 5-0 to dismiss Larson At Thursday night’s meeting, the city council approved by a vote of 5-0 a motion to dismiss Dallas Larson as the city administrator. Also on a 5-0 vote, the council approved a separation agreement between the city and Larson, setting November 19 as the effective date for his separation from the city. As of Tuesday of this week Larson had not accepted the separation agreement, which, among eight conditions, calls for payment of four months of salary and other benefits, including continued health, life and disability insurance through March 18, 2005.The motion to dismiss Larson as the city administrator contains 14 reasons as “a representative, but not comprehensive, list of reasons” for his dismissal.
Included on the list of reasons are claims that:
• Larson “has not adequately implemented the City Council’s policy directives.”
• he “has not communicated well with the City Council and has failed to keep the City Council adequately informed…”
• his “management style does not meet the City’s current needs.”
• he has, at times “completely failed to provide critical information to the City Council.”
• “the City Council no longer trusts the City Administrator.”
• “the existing relationship with the City Administrator has eroded to the point where it is difficult for the City Council to do its job.”
• he has “a poor working relationship with members of the public and the business and development community.”
• he “improperly used City letterhead, implying the consent and approval of the City to conduct non-City business on behalf of a private corporation.
”The reasons also include claims that Larson gave “false or misleading information to a potential developer,” that, without informing the council and without city council authorization “instituted negotiations to purchase property;” that he “failed to provide critical information to the city council during the budget process about the nature and extent of various city funds,” and that “if the city council had full disclosure, the city council may have made the city levy lower.”All five council members present at the Thursday meeting voted in favor of the two motions. Those members are Andy Hochmuth, Lisa Wilcox-Erhardt, Mike Bateson, Peter Bodette and Gary Thomas. The sixth council member, Karl Hochmuth, was absent.With input from council members both motions were prepared for council action by Elliott Knetsch, who serves as the city attorney. He told the council that neither Larson nor Larson’s attorney have accepted the conditions of the separation agreement.Larson could not be reached for comment this week.Mayor Glenn Weibel, who cannot vote on a council motion except to break a tie, challenged the accuracy of some of the contents of the two documents and said there were several statements in the documents with which he did not agree.The mayor complimented Lanell Endres, the assistant city administrator who has been serving as the acting administrator during the absence of Larson, who technically is on vacation. Weibel said Endres has been doing an “excellent job.”The city of Cannon Falls may or may not have a new interim city administrator. A city official from a Twin Cities suburb has been selected for the position from among several candidates, but as of early this week had not accepted an agreement approved for her employment by the Cannon Falls city council.The candidate, who has served at different times as the administrator of four Minnesota cities in the Twin Cities area, met with Cannon Falls city officials on Monday of this week but reportedly had not decided as of Tuesday to accept the offer to serve as the interim administrator here.
Related Link
Content © 2008 Cannon Falls Beacon
Software © 1998-2008 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved

Budget Fiasco/No Road Maintenance

Having attended the "work session" meeting this evening, we can tell you that NOTHING is being seriously considered regarding a road maintenance fund! To her credit, Broussard Vickers did indicate that she would NOT sign a budget without the dedicated fund. She again suggested $100,000 annually. Council discussed the fact that the City is "already in the hole" $60,000 for seal coating projections alone next year. This evening the Mayor suggested dedicating $50,000 as a starting point, which will still leave us lacking. There were excuses offered for lack of action, such as

"Who knows what the next council will do? It could overturn any fund we start
now."

Everyone in Minnesota knows that road maintenance is a fact of life and absolutely should be budgeted for! Why are we paying 45% of the budget on Fire and Police while 0% is dedicated to our streets? Minnetonka, an affluent city which ranks 39th in taxes spends 40% of its budget on Fire, Police AND ROAD MAINTENENCE!! Centerville hardly compares to Minnetonka when you actually do compare property value, income, business and responsible council members... But by golly, we are going have those new sidewalks and trails! This behavior would be laughable if not so irresponsible and repulsive.

Initial Centerville 2009 Budget Set To Increase 3 Percent
City Wants To Make Roads A Priority
By Louise Edwards of The Citizen

CENTERVILLE - Budget discussions are underway in the city, and much of the talk is centering around roads. The preliminary Centerville City Council draft budget, which was presented at the city’s July 10 meeting, proposes an increase in the general tax levy of $58,720, or 2.96 percent. For a $200,000 property in Centerville, that would equate to an annual increase of about $60, according to City Administrator Dallas Larson. “We wanted to keep this budget as tight as we could, without it being unrealistic,” added Larson. “It’s very much status quo.
There’s nothing new in here, no new equipment, keeping the same staff and keep doing what we have been doing.” But debate among city council members is already focusing on what, if any, cuts should be made from certain areas so that money can be set aside in a dedicated road fund.
The discussion follows criticism from some residents made during a number of public meetings and hearings on Centerville’s 2009 Street Improvement Project. Some citizens had said the council should have budgeted for street reconstruction and repairs, lessening the burden of special assessments on households. “I don’t necessarily want to change the numbers, but one of the things we have heard very loudly is that we should be planning better for road maintenance,” said Council Member Linda Broussard Vickers. “Any place we can squeeze something and move it [into a dedicated road maintenance fund], I would like to see that happen …” Broussard Vickers mentioned a few examples of areas she would look at cutting back, including funding for the Fête des Lacs festival, the Economic Development Authority, and increasing staff salaries by two percent, rather than the recent standard of three percent.

“I don’t think there’s any way we could ever budget enough to not assess
people for improvements,” added Council Member Jeff Paar."

But instead of mill and overlay [road repairs] costing the average homeowner $1,500 $2,000, maybe it would be $500.”
Mayor Mary Capra suggested putting $30,000 aside every year into a road fund, although Broussard Vickers said she did not believe it was worth having a dedicated fund without setting aside a minimum of $100,000 annually. Finance Director John Meyer will look over suggestions on line items in the budget made by council members ahead of the city’s next budget work session, due to be held tonight (Wednesday, July 23).
A preliminary tax levy must be set at the first city council meeting in September, after which time it cannot be increased, only lowered.

Council Information

Assessment Hearing Sees Low Turnout
By Louise Edwards of The Citizen

There are a couple of residents on Old Mill Road who are rather unhappy with their recent special assessments.
A public hearing was held ahead of the regular council meeting on July 10 to allow citizens to voice their opinion on the sum they will be assessed for the installation of water main, sanitary sewer, street pavement, curb, storm sewer and related drainage improvements which were made last year as part of the Old Mill Road Improvement project.
Only one person spoke at the hearing, Jeff Carroll, a lawyer representing Old Mill Road neighbors Cathy Fruth and Fred Fischer, but he said both his clients were very dissatisfied with the bills they had been sent.
He questioned the assessments, which he said indicated the property values would increase by $100,000 apiece, from a current estimated value of $375,000.

“The current taxes are over $5,000,” said Carroll. “This is going to increase their taxes to $14,000 a year, an increase of 140 percent, which is incredibly substantial.”
Fruth had appeared before Centerville City Council at a previous meeting, at which she claimed her drive had been left four feet above street level since the road improvements had been made.
She was offered two options to remedy the situation by the city engineer at the July 10 meeting, but explained she would need further time to decide which course of action she wished to pursue.
The City Council voted to delay the passing of a resolution on Old Mill Road residents’ special assessments until a later meeting when Fruth’s situation had been resolved.
In other action, the council:
• Discussed briefly the subject of residents’ payments on the 2009 Street Improvement Project special assessments. Council Member Linda Broussard Vickers said she would like to see the monthly repayment kept at or below $100 per household.
• Heard that the Planning & Zoning Commission was looking to alter a city ordinance governing fences to ensure that any front fences must be positioned at least 10 feet back from the front line of a property.

What Regrading Has Already Accomplished for Some on Mill Road

Resident's Driveway Status Left Up In The Air
By Louise Edwards with The Citizen 7/9/2008

It's a puzzler: What do you do when the city reconstructs your road, and your driveway ends up four-and-a-half feet too high? In Centerville resident Cathy Fruth's case, she decided to bring the matter before the city council. At its regular June 25 meeting, the Centerville City Council heard that re-grading work done on Fruth's driveway leading to her property on Old Mill Road as part of a city project had left her with a seven percent grade, which she was finding too steep to navigate. "Twice I have almost hit other cars, not being able to stop because of [the steepness of the drive now]," she told council members. Fruth said that through the snow and ice of the winter, she had been unable to access her drive in her vehicle without crossing the street and "taking three runs at it." Council members resolved to send the city engineer out to inspect the property and report back at a future meeting as to what needed to be done.

Petition Requesting Relief Discredited By Council

Here is an email written by Council member, Tom Lee. If Council can discredit the petition, they can conveniently disregard it and move ahead without consideration of the many people that worked so hard. Is this the local government we want? The email is a direct copy and paste. Typos and all! The only thing added is the commentary, in red. The names of the residents involved will never be disclosed as they are not public officials.

From: JUDY TOM LEE [mailto:lee_family@q.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008
To: XXXX; tomlee@nol-tec.com
Subject: for the record

Ms. XXXX,

I understand you have taken issue with some things I may or may not have stated in a conversation with my neighbor, XXXX. First, the statements I made did not include any accusation of forgery, though I did state that I believe the petition to be less than valid, as I have first hand knowledge that many of the issues represented by the person or people presenting the petition, were incorrect and/or half truths. If you have heard otherwise, there was a misunderstanding of what I said.

Here is what was said by me, let me explain the circumstances of the conversation as well. I guess it was Monday night, my neighbor XXXX came to my house, fuming that the city was going to "rip out her fence and cut down her tree," which happen to be in the street right of way. I wasn't home, I was at work, so my wife got an earful. Tuesday after work and before the work shop, I spoke with XXXX, my first opportunity. After calming her down, she told me that YOU told her the city intended to force the removal of her fence and tree, because she too opposed the road and that as we were going after you "as punishment for opposing the road project..........." I explained that the city had no intention of "punishing" anyone for anything, nor to my knowledge, were we going to do anything about her fence or tree. To be honest, I didn't realize until THIS blow up that the rock that public works recommended be removed even involved your property, it was just an address. That being said, as a combat decorated veteran of the United States Marine Corps, I don't just talk the talk, I walked the walk. I put myself in harm's way when I was a younger man and I am STILL willing to fight and die if necessary, to defend YOUR ability to exercise YOUR rights. That doesn't mean I have to agree with you or even consider your comments, but I fully support your right to express your views without "punishment" from any form of government. To say I resent the implication that a Council on which I serve would enforce an ordinance on you as punishment for exercising your rights is a not only a gross understatement, I am sickened by it. XXXX also stated she signed the petition opposing the street project, primarily because she was told that the city was going to put a trail in our other neighbor's yard (Brian Way) which she thought was an incredibly bad idea. While that path did appear in the initial scope of the project, she wasn't alone in her opinion. The trail was one of the first things removed from the proposal. XXXX also stated that she agreed the road needed work, suggesting that maybe it could just be patched. I told XXXX, that I was certain some of the other names on that petition are there for "bogus" reasons as well. I explained that I myself was approached to sign the petition, I listened to what was said, then identified myself and corrected just about every piece of misinformation that was stated to get people to sign. If I didn't know better, I'd have signed the petition myself. To be fair, you were not the person that I spent over an hour with explaining the REAL facts, I don't recall her name but she was at last nights meeting, seated against the east wall.

I also stated that I have spoke to other residents directly, that told me that they signed the petition only because of misinformation or feeling pressured to sign, not wanting to be continually confronted by angry supporters. Though most of them said they didn't like the idea of being accessed, most agreed the road needed some type of improvement. The result for ME was to view the petition as not completely valid. That doesn't mean that I believe if people were told the whole truth, they wouldn't be opposed to the project, they'd have only been able to fairly access it.
All of what I said was completely true and more importantly...FAIR. The only apology I'd offer would be to XXXX, who may have misunderstood any comments I made.

I also expressed my opinion that it seems you and some of the other "major players" are not only be willing to create animosity to further your cause, but tend to use that tactic as your primary tool. That is something I find very distasteful.

I have attended each and every meeting, including those we were not required to hold, in a good faith attempt to work TOGETHER at finding the best solution to a common problem. It is clear to me that the good faith was generally one sided.

In the future, if there is something you believe I did or said that you've a problem with, perhaps you could send me an email, I'd be happy to discuss it, perhaps saving everyone a little agrivation.
For the record, the petition in question simply stated that We, Your Constituents Would Like You to Step Back and Reassess the Scope of the Project in These Difficult Economic Times. What is misleading about that? Thou protests too much!

Follow Up
Subject: Follow Up Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008
Dear Tom,
Having been your neighbor for approximately ten years, you know that I like to keep to myself and do not engage in idle neighborhood gossip. That being said, I have to tell you that I find the recent events involving the road expansion petition (and our conversation regarding it) disheartening. Although I appreciated your addressing my concern with the easement issue, I feel that I have now been dragged into something I never wanted to become involved with.

I received a forwarded email written by you from XXXX today. I was utterly shocked by some of the statements you made as they pertain to me. I would like to address a couple of points in which I take issue, starting with:
I at no time came to your house to speak with your wife. I did call her on the telephone and mentioned that my address was listed along with 87 others that were in an easement violation. She said she knew nothing about it and would leave you the message that I called. I disagree that I ever “gave he an earful”, as you state in this email. To say so, tends to discredit any rational inquiry. I did follow up with an email to you that evening but you chose to address me in person while we had visitors the next day. The conversation which ensued was extremely unprofessional and made my guests very uncomfortable. In fact, they left because of it.

During this conversation, at no time did you have to “calm me down” as you also state in this email. I very much resent the implication that I was in some way hysterical, as I believe that I was not. I would have been quite content with your answer on the easement but as you know, the conversation went much further. You knew very well who XXXX and her neighbor were as you said they were somehow involved in creating the list of the 88 easement violations and had been arguing with each other. You also said that my tree and fence did not pose a problem for the road maintenance but one of these ladies had rocks in her yard and that the city would move them if necessary. I at no time stated that XXXX had said the city was going to do anything to me as you misrepresent in this email. We did not discuss the possibility that I was being punished for opposing the road expansion and today is the first time I’ve even heard of it.

Regarding the petition, as I remember it you said that some council members had taken it upon themselves to call the residents on the list. You also stated that about 200 residents claimed they never signed, although their signatures were listed, indicating fraud. I remember this distinctly because I told you not to bother calling us. My husband and I both readily signed the petition in question and our signatures were indeed valid. In this email you sent today, you state that in your opinion the petition was being misrepresented by the individuals canvassing the city. I do not remember this being mentioned at all during conversation and I disagree with your assessment of the people involved.

I do not know what the problem is between you and XXXX but I really resent being dragged into the middle of it. You mention in this email that the only person you would consider apologizing to is me because I might have misunderstood some of your statements. I did not misunderstand what you said about Ms Meath, her neighbor or the petition, Tom. I think it is terribly unprofessional of you to misrepresent our conversation and in doing so, attack another constituent. It is unfortunate that I have been forced to become involved in this nonsense and place the blame squarely on your shoulders. You might want to consider a public apology to XXXX as it does look to others that you are retaliating against her for opposing your road expansion project.

In closing, I would like to mention that it is your responsibility to consider each and every single constituents concern and opinion when making major decisions which will affect their lives. I find your statement to the contrary, quite concerning and intimidating considering your position on the city council.

Going forward, if you wish to contact me, please do so via email as I do not want to be misrepresented by you in the future.
Regards

Centerville Citizen

What Residents Are Saying...

Here are some samples of what your neighbors think...
LINK HERE
and
LINK HERE


When will someone stand up to these tyrants? The answer is now and the answer is us! If not, some of us will be taxed out of our homes for no reason!

What Is The Highest Taxed City In The State Of Minnesota?

According to http://www.citizensleague.org/ Centerville ranked at number ONE for 2006 and number Three for 2007. (Who knows what 2009 has in store for our City) Should we really be proud? This is before the road expansion project was crammed down our throats. You may view the PDF file links HERE and HERE.
What craziness lurks behind the walls of City Hall? Check back as we expose it.