02-1018�a�o��
Ciry of Saint Paul
City Council Research
310 City Hall
Saint Paul, MN 55102
(651)266-8564
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
�ROM:
SUBJECT:
November 20, 2002
Shari Moore, Deputy City Clerk
Nancy Anderson ��
City Council File - November 6, 2002.
I am forwarding to you the following City Council file and information from the City
Council Meeting held on November 6, 2002:
C.F. 02-1018 (WITHDRAWN)
Communications (Letters & E-mails) received regarding the Public Hearing held
on Assessment Charges, etc. for 2003 Budget.
(Councilmember Benanav referred to his office receiving numerous e-mails for
the record, but none were provided to be filed in the City Clerk's Office.)
The above items are being submitted to you for your records.
NA
Attachments: 1 Council File
Various Communications
,cn�a F.�� � �� �0 4�
Green sheet r � `3 $ $_"1
RES O LUTI ON
CIiY OF S�,1NT PAtlL, 1�3Ii�INESOsA
Prese.^.�ed Ey �
�e_ To
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Date
�-�, - `a
��`�
�
WHEREAS, in 1997 the City of Saint Paul and the Boa� of Water Commissioners entered
into an Agreement for Billing and Collecting Sewer Se�vice Charges whereby the Saint Paul
Regional Water Services through its water billing �d collections function would bill and
collect sanitary sewer chuges on behalf of the C�'y of Saint Paul Sewer LTtility; and
WHEREAS, said agreement expized on D ember 31, 1999, and both the Board and the
Ciry desired to extend the term of said A ement for an additional two years; and
WHEREAS, a First Amendment to e Agreement which extended said agreement to
December 31, 2001 was approved b. e Boazd and the City; and
WHEREAS, both Ciry and Boa staff wish to have the Board continue to provide billing,
customer service and collectio ervices for sanitary sewer charges; and
WHEREAS, The Board id approve a new Agreement for Billing and Collecting Sewer
Service Chazges between e Boazd and City of Saint Paul; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that
action and hereby aF
Sewer Service Cha�j
Paul. �
City Council of the City of Saint Paul does concur in the Board's
ves the execution of the new Agreement for Billing and Collecting
between the Boazd of Water Commissioners and the Ciry of Saint
Requesicd by DeparL of:
�dopted by Counc:l: Date
�doption CertiCied by Counczi Ser, etary
;y,
.pproved by Mayor: Date
r—
Saint Paul ReQional Water Services
B . �`u.u��- . . �t
Y G�eneral Manage� /� �
Form A�prove3 by Ciry Atiorney
�
Mayor for
7/
DEPARTMEM7'/OfFICF/COL'YCIL: DATE I;YITIA'TED GREEN SHEET ro.• 113883 o a.. ���`O
St Paul Regional �Vater Sercices 09/17! 2002 '
CO:YC,�CT PERSON& PRONE: Mm.�uDnTE Im77nWq7E
Bernie R Bullert 266-6274 � D�r,ux.r,�Nr Du�. ��}Q a crrrco��cn.
HUST BE ON COL`e�'CII, AGEND BY @ATE) ASSIGN ? C1TY A'TTORNEY _ CI'fY CLzRK
FINANCIALSERVDIR _ FINANG*�LSEF'.�ACCTG
YUMBER 3 M�1YOR (OR ASSf.)
FOR
ROUTING
ORDER
TOTAL X OF SIGYAI'URE PAGES
ACTTON REQUESTED:
ALLLOCATIONSFORSIGVATURE)
Council Approval of an Agreement for Billing and Collection of Sewer Service Charges between the Board of
Water Commissioners and the City of Saint Panl; the Board has approved said agreement by Resolution No.
4853 attached.
RECONIMEWATIONS:Appmve(A)orReject(R) PERSONALSERVICECONTRACTSii1U5'IANSWERT'HEFOLLOWINGQUESTIOMS:
1. Has this persoNfirm erer worked under a contrac[ for t6is department?
PLANNINGCONL�[ISSION Yes No
CIB COMMITTEE 2 Has this persoNfirm ever been a city employee?
CIVILSERVICECOMMISSION Yes No
_A_ Roard of W ater Commissiorers 3. Does this person/irm possess a sldl! not nortnally possessed by auy curreot city employee?
Yes No
Eaplain al! yes answers on separzte sheet and attach [o gree� sheet
iNIT�TTNG PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTUNITY (Who, Wha4 �✓hen, P✓here. VJhy):
The previous agreement was approved in i997; in 1999 it was amended to eatend to December 31, 2001. This
Agreement remains in effect until December 31, 2007 and specifies that Board staff will continue to provide the
biiling, collection and customer service functions for sanitary sewer and rainleader variance charges on a fee.per-
bill basis. Board staff recently analyzed its cost of service for these functions; study findings support the "catch-
ap" fee increase reflected in the agreement while annual fee per-bill increases are tied to increases in labor costs.
9DVANTAGE3IF APPROVED:
will be current.
DISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
N011O
DIS,IDV:1�'�'TAGES IF NOT APPROVED:
Board will not receive fair paymen# for the services it provides.
TOTAL�YtOUNi OF TR��`SACTION:
FUNDWG SOLRCE:
COST/REVENUE BUDGETED:
ACTIVITY NUMBER:
FINANCLIL INFOR�IATION: (EXPWIlh
�u�3a�c:�! ���'
��� � � ����
� ■ �
?�. s '1 3
r - —
OCT l. t 2€���
�I�� ����9���
L i( C•�f� �l�t �-
os-���
acuEE�rrT
Between
BOARD OF WATER COMbIISSIdNERS
and
CITY OF SAINT PAUL
This agreement ("AgreemenP') dated this day of , 2002 by and
between the BOATiD OF WATER COMNIISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAI7L, a
Municipal Corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota ("Boazd"), and the CITY OF
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA (Saint Paul Sewer Utility Fund), a home rule charter City under the
laws of the State of Minnesota ("City")
WHEREAS, The Legislative Code of the City of Saint Paul was recodified and adopted by
Ordinance No16787 on May 5, 1981; and
WHEREAS, Section 77.02 of the Code provides that sewer service charges in the City be
based on the volume of sewage discharged into the City's sewer system as deternuned by the volume
of water used; and
WHEREAS, Section'77.02 further provides that the Board s1�11 collect such sewer service
charges along with the water charges, and all costs for such collection by the Board shali be included
as part of the sewer service charges; and
WAEREAS, the Boazd desires to be fairly compensated far providing such collection
services to the City; and
Wf3EREA5, Sections 77.03,77.04 and 77.05 pertain to the Boazd's authority to calculate
and collect the sewer chazges based on metered water use and gives the Board the authority to
regulate any collection, refunding or adjustrnent of such sewer services; and
N1CI.ERICAUBOARD�.4GREEMENTS\MiSC\ST_PAUL\PW_SEWERBII.LING_ DOC 1
_ �
WIIEREAS, Section 77.Q6 does state that a11 funds collected from the sewer service
chazges shall be deposited with the Department of Finance and Management Services into a fund
known as the Sewer Utiliry Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms and conditions, promises,
covenants and payments hereinafter set forth, the Board and City agree as follows:
Section 1. Scope of the Board of Water Commissioners.
Fhis agreement shall cover professional services for calculating, billing, coilecting and
providing customer service functions related to sanitary sewer service collection chazges and other
designated collection functions by the Board for the City. This ageement applies to those
properties where the Boazd supplies water service and to those properties served by private supply.
Section 2. Responsibility of the City of Saint Paul.
aa-coc.8'
The Ciiy will establish sanitary sewer rates for residential and commercial customers each
year by resolution. The rates will be based on the volume of water used and will include minimum
chazges.
The City shall be responsible for determining the amount of credit issued to a customer for
sanitary sewer chuges for water that does not discharge to the sanitary sewer system. The City shall
promptly send to the Boazd a list of those credits to be applied to the appropriate customer's bill.
The City will provide to the Board on an annual basis, a list of properties to be charged for a
rain-leader variance.
Section 3. Services to be provided by the Board of Water Commissioners.
The Boazd will be responsible far calculating, billing and collecting sewer service chazges.
The Board will be responsible for notifying customers of the sewer volume chazge and sewer
minimum charge in the first billing cycle of each yeaz.
N\CLERICAL\BOARD64GREE�IENTSIMBC\ST PAUL\PW SEWERBQ,LING 2002DOC 2
o�.-�o�E''
The Board will handle all questions, complaints, notifications, routine adjustrnents, partial
payments, collections, and other customer service requests.
The Boazd will bill and collect chazges for the City rain-leader disconnect program and remit
payment to the Sewer Utility Fund on the Inter-deparimental Invoice used to transmit sanitary sewer
payments collected in the previous month.
The Board and City aclrnowledge that the City may from time to tune wish to provide
information to its customers using a bill insert deueloped by the Board. This will be done at no
additional compensation to the Boazd.
The total amount payable to the Sewer Utility Fund will equal the net sewer billings.
The net sewer billings is defined as the total dollar amount billed through the end of the last
full billing month, less sewer billing adjustments made by the Boazd and credits issued by the City.
The Board will provide the Caty a detailed breakdown of the net sewer biilings for the last full biliing
month on or before the fifteenth (15)day of each month.
Section 4. Joint Responsibilifies of the Board and the City
The Board agrees to use due diligence when collecting delinquent sewer bills; if,
however, collection of these charges is delayed or the charges become uncollectible due to
bankruptcy, tax forfeiture, or a similar situation, the Ciry agrees to reimburse the Board the full
amount the Boazd has remitted to the City.
The Board and the City a�ee to meet each December to discuss sezvice issues, customer
notification requirements and rate changes effective in the following year. The Board and City agree
to monitor the balance due on private supply accounts and, when delinquent, to process according to
water and sewer code provisions.
The Board and the City agree to meet and confer at five (5) year intervals, from the date of
this agreement, to review the billing service charges.
N \CLERICAL\BOAADWGREEMENTS1MiSC\ST_PAUL\PW_SEWERBII.LRVG_2002DOC
07. - �0�8"
Secrion 5. Compensation.
Method of Pavment. In consideration of the Board's performance ofthis agreement the City
will pay the Board a billing rate of two dollars and five cents ($2.05) per bill per account in 2002.
The aznount will be transfened to the Boazd simuitaneously with payment to the City on an Inter-
departmental Invoice. The billing rate shall be no greater than the lowest billing rate chazged to
other municipalities served by the Board for like (volume based) services of calculating, billing and
coilecting.
Additional Services and Compensation. It is possible that conditions might arise during the
term of this agreement that alter the scope of services described in this a�eement. If the City
requests additional services from the Board, the Boazd shall, within thiriy (30) working days,
provide a written estimate of the cost. Upon agreement between the City and the Board as to the
amount of such extza compensation, and if the extra compensation is greater than One thousand
dollazs ($1,000), an amendment to this agreement will be entered into establishing the scope and
extent of the additional services.
Rainleader Disconnect Compensation. In consideration of the Board's performance in the
collection of rain-leader disconnect charges the City will pay the Board eights seven cents ($0.87)
per bill, per account where the rain-leader disconnect charge is applied, in 2002 for services of
billing and collecting.
Future Compensation. Future increases to the compensation the City will pay the Board for
billing service charges will be the average of the most recent percentage wage increases of the
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, Loca1 Union 1$42 of
District Council 14 and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, APL-
CIO, Local Union 2508 of District Council 14. In addition, the City agrees to pay the Board an
N-\CLERSCAUBOARDIAGREEMENTS\MSC\ST PACL\PW SEWERBII.LMC3 2002DOC 4
6'�. -�a CY'
additional three cents ($.Q3) in the years 2D04, 2�05 and 2006 to more equitabiy shaze in the costs
associated with calculating, billing, collecting and providing customer service functions.
Secfion 6. Notice.
All norices, requests, demands, and other communicarions hereunder shall be in writing and
shall be deemed given if personally delivered or maiied, certified mail, retum receipt requested, to
the following addresses:
If to Boazd: Saint Paul Regional Water Services
General Manager
8 Fourth Street East - STE 400
Saint Paul, MN 55101
If to City: Director of Public Works Department
25 Fourth Street West
1000 City Hall Annex
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Section 7. Term of Agreement.
This agreement shall commence on the date of Saint Paul City Councii approval or Board of
Water Commissioners approval, whichever is latest. The agreement shall terminate on December 31,
2007.
Section 8. Amendment.
This Ag�eement may be amended in writing for additional terms prior to the expiration ofthe
current term, or for any other reason, upon such terms and conditions as may be mutually agreeable
between the parties. Both parties expect revisions during the life of this agreement. Such revisions
shall and may be accomplished and approved by mutual written approval of Saint Paul Regional
Water Services General Manager and the Director of Public Works Department.
Section 9. Termination.
This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part by either party in the event of
substantial failure by the other party to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement through no fault of
N9CLERICAL\BOARD�.4GREEMENTS\M15C\ST_PAUL\PW_SEWERBII.LING 2002DOC
ba.-�° �5"
the terminating party, provided that no termination may be effected unless the other parry is given
(a) not less than sixty (60) calendar days rvritten notice of intent to terminate, and (b) an opportuniry
for consultation with the temzinating party prior to said notification of intent to terminate.
This Agreement may be terminated in whole or in part without cause, provided both parties
a�ee to such termination in writing.
IN WITNESS WI�REOF, tt�e parties hereto have caused this A�eement to be executed in
their behalf respectively as of the day and year first above written.
APPROVED:
B y W o�^.� o. /1 �..t-C1�c..'C . n.,�l
Bernie R. Bullert, General Manager
Approved as to form:
sy �,� �r'. � l�-�_
Assistant City Attorney
,...�. �
QI
Director, Public Works Departrnent
Approved as to form:
BY �i SGS �"/ • " �, ��
Assistant Ciry Attorney
BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS
OF THE CITY OF SA1NT PAUL
� ^ ,
y/ �
By �! L '. ^ .:� �./
Jasnes C. Reiter, President
�y����°�
et Lindgren, ecre
SAIlVT PAUL, MIPTNES�3'A
c �, �� ,
Mayor, Ciry of
:
City Clerk
BY JI/!a��'s.s'�CS � (�
Director, Office of Financial Services
N \CLERICAL\BOARD�AGREEMENTS\M6C\ST_PAUL\PW_SEWERBII.LMQ2002DOC
BO.,AD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION — 6EiVERAL FORM
PRESEMED ev glakey
COMMISSIONER
a�-^ ► tg '
No 4853
oA � September 10, 2002
WI3EREA5, in 1997 the Ciry of Saint Paul and the Boazd of Water Commissioners entered into an
Agreement for Billing and Collecting Sewer Service Charges whereby the Saint Paul Regional Water
Services through its water billing and collections functions would bill and collect sanitary sewer
chazges on behalf of the Sewer Utility; and
W I�EREAS, said Agreement expired on December 31, 1999, and both the Board and the City desired
to extend the term of the agreement for an additional two yeazs; and
WHEREAS, a Flrst Amendment to the Agreement which extended said Agreement to December 31,
2001 was approved by Boazd Resolution No. 4b79; and
WHEREAS, both City and Board staff wish to have the Boazd continue to provide billing, customer
service and collections services for sanitary sewer charges; and
WHEREAS, Board stafFhas prepared and does recommend approval of attached Agreement; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Boazd of Water Commissioners does hereby approve said Agreement; and that
the proper officers are hereby authorized to execute said Agreement on behalf of the Boazd.
Water Commissioners
Yeas
Anfang Nays
Blakey
Cardinal
Harris
Vice President Haselmann
President Reiter
Adopted by the Board of Water Commissioners
tember 10, � 2002
In favor 6_ Opposed � �v'�""�' �'--��^ �"'
�-� 3ECY.
4�
Public hearing on the 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Assessments,
Sanitary Sewer Rates and Storm Sewer System Charges, and Water
Service Rates as well as the spending and service delivery plans for
all City departments and offices, the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority, the Saint Paul Regional Water Utility, the RiverCentre
Authority; and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority T� Increment
Plans.
Pioneer Press � 09/26/2002 � Hearing on service fees scheduled for Nov. 6 Page 1 of 1
on Thu, Sep. 26, 2002
Hearing on service fees scheduled for Nov. 6
BY MURALI BALA7I
PianeEr PfesS
�� R�k.'�ML �k M�
Whe���+ °_ � t �ds out notification of Mavor Randas�Vty`�plan to charge higher maintenance
assessments next year, the City Council wants taxpayers to know who brought up the idea.
The council, which has questioned the mayor's use of increasing assessments for such services as street
maintenance and tree-trimming, agreed on Wednesday to mail residents a notification of a Nov. 6 public
hearing for citizen feedback.
But council members wanted the notification to include the fact that the plan is Kelly's and not endorsed by
the council.
Council Member Jay Benanav said it was important to emphasize to taxpayers that "this is the mayor's
proposal."
Kelly proposed using money from the street maintenance fund as a way to make up a$6 million shortFall
next year while the city holds the line on property taxes. The $6 million then would be made up through
assessments payable in 2004.
Negative public reaction to Kelly's proposal could strengthen the council's resolve in urging the mayor to
revise his plan or find other funding sources to balance the 2003 budget.
The council won't adopt the final budget until December, a point several council members wanted to
emphasize on the notice form.
"We want to make people understand that this isn't set in stone," said Council Member Kathy Lantry.
Mu�ali ea/aji can be reached at mbalajiC�pioneerpress.COm or (651) 292-1892.
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/locaU4151232.htm 9/27/02
(x)
CITY OF SAINT PAUL — ROW MTCE
15 KELLOGG BLVD W ROOM 740
SAINT PAUL MN 55102-i613
RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED
NOTICE
PRESORTED
FIRSTCLqSS PAk
U.S. POSTAGE PA
ST. PAUL MN
PERMIT NO. 1 Ot °
2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program Pubiic Hearing Notice
PURPOSE OF To notify Saint Paul property owners that the City Council will be holding a public hearing on the proposed 2003
TH(S NOTICE Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment Rates for 2003 Service Levels as recommended in the proposed 2003
Budget for the City ofi Saint Paul.
After considering property owners' input at ihe public hearing, the proposed budget may be amended.
HEARING TIME: 5:30 p. m., Wednesday, November 6, 2002 PLACE: Councif Chambers, 3�d Ffoor, City Hali, 15 Keiiogg
TIME Blvd. W.
The City Council will hear oral testimony at the public hearing, and will also consider written statements and e-maii
communications. All communication becomes part of the public record. Written statements can be mailed to:
President Dan Bostrom, Saint Paui City Council,l5 Keliogg Blvd. W, Room 140, Saint Paul MN 55102-1613.
E-mail communications can be sent to 2003row@ci.st�aut.mn.us.
ASSESSMENT Here is an example of how a Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment is calculated Eor a typical residentia{ home or
CALCULATION a residentiai street using the proposed 2003 Assessment Rate Per Foot. A house with a 48 foot residential lot
EXPLANA7)ON (Class {II) and an ailey (Cfass IV) vrould be charged 48 x 51.80 (street) plus 48 x$0.57 (aHey}, or $114.00 for 2003
Right-Of-Way Maintenance. We round off ail amounts to the nearest doilar to simplify processing. Corner
residential lots with �rro street frontages or residential lots with two a�ley frontages, are not chasged for the longside
Commercial property includes all apartment buildings of four or more units. Townhomes and condominiums wili be
charged for at least l8 feet of street frontage. if you do not have an alley, your notice will list your street
frontage and NO ALLEY. If you do not have an aliey,you are not charged for one. THE CITY DOES NOT
SNOW PLOW ALLEYS.
Proposed 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment Charges
7HiS 1S N07 A BiLL—THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING NOTiCE
Property ID# Frontage
Property address Class
Proposed amount
�
L
See other side for the proposed amount for your property.
ASSESSMENT RATE PER FOOT
Ciass Descripfion 2003 Rate Class Description
(Proposed))
Class 1-A Downtown Streets $7.95 Ctass IV AtI Oiied and Paved Alleys
C{ass 1-B Downtown Streets (Brick)
Class II Outlying Commercial and Arterial Streets
Commerciai ProQeRy
Residential Properry (1,2,3 family)
Ciass lll All Residential Streets
Commercial Property
Residential Properiy (5,2,3 iamily)
2003 Rate
(Proposed)}
S0.86
$0.57
51.92
57.14
$0.34
50.z3
The Ciry has not increased its summer street maintenance assessment for over ten years. In order to continue to
provide services within the City right-of-way without raising property tares, the Mayor has recommended a Right-Of-Way
maintenance assessment which wili help finance part of the cost of maintenance within the City right-of-way. This Right-
Of-Way assessment will include the oid summer street maintenance assessment in addition to an assessment for winter
I street maintenance, boulevard tree maintenance and trimming, and sidewalk maintenance.
RlGHT Right-Of-Way Maintenance includes sweeping, flushing, patching, and chip sealing streets and alleys, patching,
OFWAY blading, a�d piacing crushed rock o� unimproved rights-of-way, street overlays, litter pick up, ordinance
MAINTENANCE enforcement, and emergency service, snow plowing including sanding and salting, snow removal, snow emergency
including tagging and towing, sidewalk maintenance and repair, and boulevard tree maintenance and trimming.
In previous years the City's winter street maintenance and tree maintenance programs were paid by the City's
General Fund (property tax money). This proposed Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment wifl ensure each
property which benefits from public right-of-way maintenance pays its fair share of the cost of the maintenance.
Properry owners will continue to be responsible for sidewalk shoveling and boulevard grass mowing.
Remember... The City does not snow piow aileys.
The cost of right-of-way maintenance in Saint Paul is about $21.3 million for2003. Of this amount, the Ma�or
proposes to collect approximately $14.3 million in assessments. The remainder comes from Municipal State Aid,
Trunk Highway Aid, County Aid, miscellaneous receipts, and General Fund contributions.
QUESTIONS? If you have queskions about your right-of-way maintenance or frontage, ca(I (651) 266-8857. City staff will be
available to answer last-minute questions in Council Chambers from 5:00 pm to 5:30 pm on Wednesday,
November 6, the same day as the hearing.
NEED REPAlR? If your street or ailey needs maintenance or repair, piease call (651) 292-6000.
S9.95
$4.35
52.10
$3.30
St.8o
Class V
Class VI
Commercial Property
Residentia! Pcoperry (1,2,3 family)
Unimproved Street Right•Of-Way
Commerciai Properry
Residential Property (1,2,3 family)
Unimproved Alley Right-Of-Way
Commercia( Property
Residential Properry (1,2,3 family)
f
f �
�
Z�
� �z
�
� Z O
= Z �
V�v
._I Z O
m Q�
���
a �o
M � �
O , Q
N O �
t0 = �
w �
O � O
� O �
� �
� Z
Z =
W �
�
�
W O
� � �
3' � �
Q }
M �
N �
W r � ^
O v,
' �
�
�
Q! � d
(/� Z I �°- z
W
vQ a�
Z 3
�
� °' 8
Z `
a � z
�
� Z � �'
C7 O
�
W
�oa
�
N Z ' °'
? n
� a ¢ �
� �
O Z Z
m
LL a U
� � � � � �
T
� a � � �
c� o Q c � c �- �
�
r N � � � �
�
� � � � ��
�
n c� c� o- c� r
r
J
O �M� Mt � • M
O
N
O
a
F
w
:�
E
W
0
0
m
C
m
a
m
a`
�
�
�
J
w
w
w
m
�
F
a
m
V
m
c
0
0.
�
m
�
°
u
c
R
c
«
c
�
m
i
y
F�—
a
A
U
m
c
t
m
m
�
U
C
7
V
F
q
m
U
m
c
s
a
e
a
¢
c
s
a
�
�
�
a
c
O
A
V
t
3
�
0
u
Q
O
�
4
0
m
O
m
z
w
�
W
a
M
M
�
�
�
W
3
0
�
w
0
a
0
;i
t
Dear Saint Paul Property Owner,
On behalf of the Saint Paul City Council, thank you for your e-mail regazding Mayor Randy
Kelly's proposal to increase the use of assessment fees in financing the City of Saint Paul's 2003
Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program.
Your communication has been forwazded to the entire City Council and it will be entered into the
official record for the Council's November 6, 2002 Public Hearing on the City's 2003 proposed
budget. You aze welcome to attend this Public Hearing. The hearing will be held from 530 p.m.
to 730 p.m. and will be in the Saint Paul City Councii Chambers, 15 W. Kellogg Blvd., 3`'
Floor, City Hall building (corner of Keilogg Blvd. and Wabasha Street).
This e-mail reply is a response to all people who have communicated with our offices, and is not
meant to be a specific response to your individual communication. If you stated you were
unhappy with the current level of sireet maintenance neaz yow property, your communication
was forwarded to Public Works Street Maintenance Division, for their appropriate action.
Please be advised, the Ciry Council has not taken any ac6on to approve the proposed level of
assessment financing for maintenance activities for summer streets, winter streets, city
boulevard trees and sidewalks. The Council will not make any decisions on the assessment
recommendations until after we have heard from interested citizens attending Wednesday's
public hearing.
In the weeks following this public hearing, the City CounciI ptans on scrutinizing the detaiIs of
the proposed spending plan for the Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program, and on considering all .
other responsible financing alternatives. The City Council will make their financing decisions in
December, after participating in the Joint Truth-In-Tasation Public Hearing with the Saint Paul
Independent Schooi District and Ramsey County. That public hearing will be held on Tuesday,
December 10`�, 6 p.m. at Arlington Senior High School in Saint Paul.
The City Council recognizes that approximately 25% of Saint Paul's properties aze exempt from
paying property taxes. Examples of properties that pay no properry tax aze: hospitals, colleges,
churches, federal, state, and metropolitan government properties. However, these properties
would pay Right-Of-Way maintenance assessments, as they benefit from these services.
There are valid arguments for supporting and opposing the use of assessment financing for the
Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program. The City Council's plan is to listen to Saint Paul property
owners at both pubiic hearings. During the weeks following the hearings, the Council will
deliberate using all the information we have gathered. In December, it is the CounciPs intention
to make a responsible decision, which will be in the best long-term interest of the Ciry and iYs
residents.
Thank you again for taldng the time to communicate; your opinions and concerns are important
to the Council.
RespectfuI(y transmitted,
Dan Bostrom, City Council President
Bs �ax +A
r �
�= �
20 �;
r
e ge
�o x+
d
�
�+
b
C
�
:� �
v
O • O
U �r',,,
�' °
... d
�
.� �
a ��
� o ¢,
.� � o
� b �
d ��/ i
r�.+ F�i �
W ,� M
O � �
C �
OD
.� � O
►�i O N
�x�
�
a��
�
0
ti�z
WI
O
0.
U
r
s
�
E
y
N
d
�
N
Q
d
6�
c
6C
C
d
� �
� �
� �
m �
� V
M �
M / ` �;
' `� �C
;,� � i
� � �
M • � �
� n �
i � �
r ';� �
: C� � �
2
'J
�
J
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
rJ
�
�
�
�
�
t
;
��
�
v
a
V
?
�
ti
�Q��,�� "����
� t t i r�`
►�
� � �
��
0si sr v
0
t �
�
��s
3
a S �o rsaa
�
m
�
�a
�
d
ca
.�
�
m
�
L
�
3
�
�
�
w
.�
�
� �
� �
b �
a �
� �
� d
� L
�
� •� �
� � U
�� d
.. d' t�
U � ��
�
a c, � �
�., o a 3
� a� o
�� i M �
� •� [� (/�
a� a� � �
Y �i O L
CA � � �
�� � O
xi • O N
�x�
�
aa�
�
0
°�z
z
x
a
C
\
f
�
J<
�
�
r
� �� � �
� ;�
.-. N c�1 V Vi �L l� 00 Qi O . •r r .- (�y . . M . ^ .y� � � � � N
es �xt P�
� 9 � r
9�
i +
i
a � to z<
W
z
0
a
�
c
d
�
�
d
y
y
d
t)
C
N
C
d
..+
C
.�
�
A
ta
I
I
1
t I N I t I N I (
� �
►
�I O I � I M I M
� `�
, � �
9� � �
�' � � s
��
� � 9 N
� � � �
� � —
_ � � i� �
�
, �
��
�
��
.
� �
:
r
■
�
. _
� �
� N
� �
W
Uo
�
�
t
�
i
� �,
Ol �
�
�
� �
> _ o.
� `� - �
� S- i
� � �
��
� ) � •.• � .
11�
�
O � l YT P��
O e1
� :�
�g� �� d0 1a
zl a.
C)
�
c
�
E
�
_ _ r�
�
�
�
� Q
_ � m
--, . _. c,�
a �
� �
c
� � �
o �'�' c �
.�
tj s � A
�� � �
U +�
~ � O
� E � ,
�," o d s
� a o �
� ,� �''' �
�
� � �
�ao
.� ,� M
O q v�
CD �
DD
�� � O
n�i • O N
u '►1." �o W
a`"i �
aa�
� z
�
>
0
��z
��
�--� N M V vi �C [� 00 01 C .-. (V t�i 7 Vi �C t� 00 O� C
� V �t � 7 V � 7 7 7 V� V1 vl �n V1 vl v1 V1 V1 �O .
O ���T °�o�
r
� � t
o
p�a
9 � �o a rS e
z
0
x
0.
�+
C
d
E
N
N
a�
�
�
„ a
� �
b �
C �
CC �
C '�'' � ;� ;
D ��' �tlS
U� � �
�� �
U � �
° O
O�•i O. � �+
�.+ �0,� R, �
� � O
� d M �
�
d � i
�ao
� M
O � �
bD �
� � N
O
xi • O O
�x� W
a �
aa�
� z
>
0
ti�z
^�
`V
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
���
;�
�
M
o�
�
�„
\
v
i
S
2
Q
�
�.
f�1-
��
�
, � � � d
� ° " � �/
� . . . .
N M � � � � �
i � ��� t
�I °I �I �I �I �I �I �I �I �I �I °I
stat rAa
� <
>
� �
�o
0�
y � ro ara
�
�
a
.r
_
.�
N
w
O
�
s V
b t
+.
- � L
U �a �
O , O d
U � 'O
Vd m
..� � -
a
a c. �
�, o a
� a� o
�� � M
� � �
d 6� i
y �i O
w
O �,t vi
C �
•� � o
x
�x�
aa �
�
>
0
ti�z
�I .R
�
�
A
d
WI
�
V
V�
�
�
I
� 3
d �
4� '
V l
�
U
1 � �
� �
�2
�
�
�
� �,� �� �� �� �,� _o� �� �� _� _� �� _�� �� _�� _�� N�
0si 9t aA
o �
Z di�4O
<o n�
N
d
Ci
�
0
'a
_
�o
� d
� o
b �
_
es � j
A
• C � �
o . o a
� � �
.�' d' >
0
U � Q
� � � d
a o � �
� � �
� o �
� •p � U�
� � �
y ai o
4„ .d M
O p vj
OD �3
��+ � O
xi • O N
�x�
�
a' a '�
�
0
ti�z
W
z
0
x
a
V M 7 v� �O l� oo O� O N c+i 7 v� �D l� oo O� O
D �D �O �O �D �O �D �O l� [� [� l� l� l� l� l� l� l� 00
1
—_ B e l qi r�
F � �
L ' � �
♦
et l0 1a
\
J\
l
� �
0. �
l
fA
d
V
`�
�
'
C
ts
�
Q. �
� � �
y G
•e
a � � 'cU
a .�'.' � �
0 0 � fx k� 'I
U +"�+ � A •,� I
��' d � ' .> d (�
O
U � �
� „ a
a o, � �
r., O A,
� d � •�
.� � M � �
� � � �
� � i
�xo r�
o � � Jo
C �
�� � O
►�i • O N
u�i� W `�
aa � �
� z
c ,�r� >
►°��z � N
NI NI NI NI NI NI NI �I �,I �,I �,I MI MI MI MI MI MI �I
November 19, 2002
Councilmember Benanav referred at the City Council Meeting on November 6,
2002, that his office received numerous e-mails for the record, but none were
provided to be filed in the City Clerk's Office.
Nancy Anderson
�
\ .
� o 0
� N o
� w
(�j � Q
W a �;
� 2 �
�
�
s
r_''
� �
t�
�
�
� �
b
.
��,
� �
� �
�
� � � �
�
\
\� �\
�, � �
D' � �
� �� .
� �
�t � .
41 �•
���
� � �
� �
�
y
� �
�
\ '
\� \ �� � � \ �
�� � �
\ � � \
�
�C��7 ��< LZuE'/!U� �V •
aS,% I�ltrd G�/, j'.�fly.
.
���'���
. �
--°'-.�
��:,*.
�
t. �,
l �r
��"`".��...�/:
!, „ ,!
,�, ;�,
„ -
� ,l� � �'
y �"� 4.
.�e
.e
�
_.,ai - �
;�s...
....-Y -�Sp
.:, . �
/, ,
�"/!> a- /��3,
� � � �� :`� � � � �F�fi!tII�::°x�ii�N:Et;1If�`��511::f[iti]IfeFf!�il�F�tl�f3EI�
> � �
U � a
� o � i
� � w I
� � i,
b
�
�
O
c
� �
� �
i�
� � �
S� �
,s�"�' � Mrs. Delores L. Vacek
1455 Portland Ave.
Saint Paul, MN 55104
�3� `���
��
�
'�'
�
1
�1
•
\
�
i
�
�` 7 i
�
�
� ��
�
-.
�
� � i �
, �
�
_ I
$ � I
� � �
�
� I �� � �
� �
/
,,
\ ��
� �
` 'i
� ,
\ •�
� � �
i�
V�
L
v + � -
� ,x v
� ?
�
v � a ��
�
0 0 �
� � a� a c�
Av,a
I �(1 Y
�N ti �
/-r C/]
I �
II .-
t
�L � (�j'� s°�-_ ,�,..-°^
, � S O �=t<_. � me�
f r ; ; � + �34v-�.- ��..� �
:` N_-- �
)::3
��.`_ _ �,�- ,�
�J' ,��� y ��`"�
'�" � � , C�, �-a� / ��
1
�
,��'. � ; � .5s�r�a- l�ld
= _ - i : i = =f ; : ._ . ;, t : _ ,., . :.
.: :�.:�:; :_
�- � _
'-VCVY: •..... nii!!?(i:i!3ifF.iii...?iiii i ...... ....iiHiS:!iiiiiZS[E
.�
`� — — -
__._
�� � - - �y _ (�� � �'�'� _ -
-- - - - -- - .
--
�r,.��� �. � F��
__
L '�Cr - -- �—h �t � _ Y 1' �' - ���f , �
_ __ -- — -
_.._ -- - _ _ ..
'- -�''��,__ . �
— - .. .
_ - - . � �� r�� � � - �-,�� _ - �---- -
�:.,;: �, �� � - - �.� �..� -- �,� _-- �----
.___-- --�- ;
- - - -
: � - {�� � � � �-�--� v r� r��
- . -- -
� � � �_ � `�,;,�� �_ � � - �
--- -� - �-`�-� -� -� � -.-�,� �, - �� -- ... - -- -- --
. _--
�- � �,.�-- � -� - � �,�- � - �
��
--
- - - -- --- - -
_ �f iP - - � , - _ _
_ . _ � _ �-,z,__ r�, �,, � � _,r,� �, f -�u,� - _ _ -
---- - _--- ----- --- - - - - - -�- -- �
_ t �'"` ' ' ) ' �
- - - - - (�Z'" �_ .-� � - � _ . � t.� �."w'�
-;
--- - - . -�_ �-_,-r,,C�-�D _ ��- � --��-� -
--
- - --
�_ _
_ -- ____ _ _- - -
'� � -
�- _`�-�- �--�- r� -,,��, -�'�,, - „-�.� -�--�- ----
--- -
�' � � r� .� UP - n� ��� ���� : r - �,, -- -
- - -r - __
=�� �- -. � � � - - -
. �,� �- ��--�--��- --------
----- --
- - ----- --
� _
-
- -- -- -- - ---- - --- - -- - -�� -,�..��-�.-- -------
n► asinio3cn.csa - �v�a '� � �
�`''�' � 'l� ZOOZ �� AON
'" �% �`�'6�P � a
�-� t ��v �� � �
rs"/��V
�
��
i
�'
�
%
i
:
/
�
��
�� �
� #� _
. �, �_
,
�1
,. _�,
,_ _ ,;�
N
O
h
� �
Q �
O 0.
a .�
n n
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
� �
� �
� �
�
��
�
��
S ��
`J
�
� �
� ~
� �
� �
�
� �
;V
\ �
� �
�
C�
�
S -
� �
�� �,$.
:°�'
;,'��
(� i
�. =-
,9�A �,� S r
___.__�,����__:���'.��-. _� �i
-____�'-�-%��� �-- ----
��
--_--__..__�_�. _____,.�, .<._ ----e - -=�T=�-==�=_ -------_-��.�-�r__�._
r /
,_._..,/��±�z;.r� ..���✓��� _�.-.�,��..��e'� ��
G' 4
._._....e.� .d �.�..... _��_._._. ____.__4_.._M.��..._._..�.._......_...�.._�___
..--
c� po
,
�...._...���%f�G..��y.r �-.�.��!__._.��'-r-�z.�G.1_��^�.�..C�,��. � 5-�-�-��'-�.�.__.v...
J � d
.�.....,..__ ��sw✓ �i1--✓`�z' l:(✓_.../__�+..r2-Ca.-L/��:�c�._.R .__.�.___.a__� ._.�_.q....._,......�...�_...
��..�_...._._..�C.��_,..l�tP!"7Y�...��!���E.4:�!'V_�_ ---�- �— ��r�����
_._.�._._ __.._C�.%f.i/_.,�lvn4..�s.t�� � �G.7.�[i' _.�.c.%_.�. ��.�!_GL:yE-ae�-��y-_,.��=�:�_..____._
O
� . : ,
�y r s .-�- �
�_ � �._�-_/-6 _.._�21r��_:v-�-�r �._-✓lw.�e.i__�_ /lai"�c�2tis/ �-_-
_._...__ _._.. �°'y/ O
�� �
� /'
� --L /� is._�4a--a� _✓_�._�_,.._�_ .__�._..�_____.v_._.�....__.,__.w_.._...
��-�-� ..�� ,-- � :s��� _��_��z.e�=G'('_._�c.�`__._.
�_.. _
�..
�
-_. �,.��/��__�.��� _�-�.u�--��-�'`� �-.�`��`�,,`°�-._���.�<�..��
_ _ �7e-_��_--�.��-.-,.�� -�`.�-_�'-�.,— - i -
- � -- "'`��
--- .�e� --.�xLr�� � -- - /-�- . �- . _� .c.C'.�--L/�� - -� �`� . _
----- L���-�'-'��'. _ ' _�"._�u�,.� " --=-���..�-f -
.�___._. ..�.����w-��_=-�_ -- .. �� - �
�` - ��`�:� --... _
_��z�
��-�t-'^ --_ _� _ _ _ - -
-- -- --�-_i __--_-------=�------ --_ --- - � ,_�. ---
� ___ �,l �-�r: _ - . , .
-�= -��--
�
�...__ .__..�r.?�--�-�r-�`"t�--
,
�-��...-���-�-_���'�__.� ._._T _��--�-�"_.�_��..
__�.�i_�..��_.� ._��_�e�_,_.._.��.''�:�..�.� �-� _.
- _ ... � G � ILG � - Y" . _•__ . _ .. � .. � . G , � - 7f// -C:�-�C:�..9`��'�'�°�-°=-� =--_.._
/ � � •-L i . / . 1 �� �_ ,9 d
!
/
__ . - ------__�....._ ---------------�}_�os__ GCi ,___ .C����--�_��._�
----- - -_._--.--------- -----__�'��"�O_._/.�_/,--_��-�-�i_�_____.___._.-
'��
�r ,
r, ,
.,�, <
r m
% � �
�, :
;����
�. � y @ ��
�, °
o��
�
p��
�2
��£�
�o�
�Q \ �
� v iA
N �
." O C
�" h �
�\�
l\
,\
1 �
� �
� Cj- �
�,
�� �
� �� �
c� ��
a_ �
.� �, �
�:� ��
� �' �
����
V�� �
�� � � �
�
�
�
�
��
�
�
�
�
; :,
.
�,�;
.A..
� �i
!..}
..s
_;.�
,�.:
�ggay, �'siza�eCh
`."bi7i:
8ent:
�c:
8u�;ec2
�efay. �I�zabetn
� fonday. .�+o�e,r.oer II4, 2�J02 S:G? At;�?
'2003rat�s@ci.stpaul.mn.�s.'
?.ight af 1'fay h=aring
i i apuSd iike to address t�e issue ai street ra�air in St. Paui
i liY= ai 669 Sumner Strart ibetM�een Ez;+ar� fi.v�er.ue and Elsanor kvenue?. Bac�: in t�EE tise city toek ca�;�n our s:reet
;±�tii ��i7 �(8E iT! OfG�B� YO (8p8i�' I}78 Sl5Z8i. 1��E" 7'J' °fc'aC5 U�JB S$ i's; have isG� ^3tl OUI' 544884 :3i{8i, Cai'8 G's 3t?LI 07 4{J�
�ecasians 4he str�e� Ya� r.z,reu� in. �ne t�me rs:y ne;�h}y�,'s �an �iter�€sy aazn: i^ic she str�e:.
7 i:�GP!!t !30� �t�S''.� �}�,��7?.� F ie5 €?oe�J BSaES°sYllES?i ii i`�.a i.QI�C S8? Ss.!T?£ �i�IG �Y - :"$f:.F(i! �JC �i:!' r;i�:�P�. 3!,.iBE' yE3i5 1'a a;7n�
lICY19 L� 9'��IR fOr St!'2�� 'B�1aIC. :iU'a0 t}�IS Cwi1ltl E30'v€�r,k'z inf� 2 SHfEiY iSS�B if Y�i° Sii'891 b'JQIJ(tl .^.�'2E !,^. SC2S�1.
�Uf78CtS}rs�':$ 4r7QYk b Su��er Street has st@°l7 DiiS l�ack �aain 'a!i� ". Sf31'i' lii?11: �'���. �' :°2Dil�d 8E y�8�'!V
a,�;;reciated ;# th� St. °aui ^i+.y ��uncil �o��d ��ak inia :�e possi�iiiy �i `morinc a�` repa�r s±nce vae ��ve ,, ai;e�+ sa
na,.; �rears.
l am pianning lo aitend the meefir.� ar. November 8
T'�ank y�eu $cr any ass�stanee �au aan previ�e
�3izabefh �e�ay�
b'&� �i99TiF18i ,
�t. Paai. �:9�1 $� E 9&
i$2-6?,�S
�� rs�
f �i Sl2Er�
��������
;�s,� � 2Q02
�, � �
_���..��, ����
^"' 39 � 3 a., m 9
Date: Jun 7
Id G14172 Cmp1t Date OS-Ol-01
1: RESTJL,TS OF INSPECTION BY PUB DEPARTMENT
2:Insp Date OS/O8/Ol Inspector DENNIS.MOODY Close Date OS/08/O1
3:Years ago there was one light on Sumner between Bayard &
a:Eleanor on an NSP wood pole. A project in j��
5:that light and two ornamental street light poles were ��
6:installed. Forestry needs to respond about the tree.
7: -- Response entered on OS/08/O1 by MARGARET SCHWARTZ
8: RESULTS OF INSPECTION BY FOR DEPARTMENT
9:Insp Date OS/02/O1 Inspector TK WALLING Close Date OS/02/Ol
lO:STREET IN RSVP PROJECT AREA IN 2002. NEW TREES, LIGHTS,
11:CTJRBS AND PAVEMENT ARE A PART OF THE PROJECT.
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
Id 314172 Cmplt Date OS-01-01
ON SiJMNER NEAR 669 ST7MNER ST
Details:
l:THE FOLLOWING IS STATED BY THE COMPLAiNANT....
2:CITY REMOVED LIGHT POST AND TREE FROM BLVD. OVER
3:NINE YEARS AGO. HA.S CONTACTED PUBLIC WORKS AND
a:FORESTRY REGARDING REPLACEMENT OF THE ABOVE
5:MENTIONED ITEMS. AS OF' THIS DATE SHE IS STILL
6:WITHOUT A LIGHT OR TREE.
7:
8:
9:
10:
COMPLAINANT INFORMATION
1:Name DELAY
2:Organization
3:Address 669 SUNIDIER
4:Apt# City ST PAUL
Date: Jun 7
INC.DISPLAY.SCREEN
Call Taken By KAY �
Dept INC �s
Call Comp1 By
Pln Dist 15 Cncl Dist 3
�*�*���*��**�*�*�*�*�+:���*�
*Depts Type Date Recvd
* l;pUg C 05-01-Ol
* 2:FOR C OS-01-Ol
* 3:
��*��*��������***�*�**���*�
Note $G to view results
ST H. Pnone 296-2535 Pln Dijt 15
A.Code 651 B. Phone Council Dist 03
fo�
October 30, 2002
President Dan Bostrom
Saint Paul City Council
15 Kellogg Blvd. W, Room 140
Saint Paul, MN 55102-1613
Re: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Program
Properties ID Numbers: 192922320001 & 292922220015
Deaz President Bostrom:
�,_„_�� _„
___ _��;
.- . J S i-I�l'
i�r-.:_.. _,= J�'2.� �,.
This letter is being written on behalf of Croix Oil Company ("Croix") and its sister company Mid
Continent Mazkefing Corporation ("Mid-Con"). Croix owns a Spur-branded gasoline station located at
1440 Rice Street and Mid-Con owns a Citgo-branded gasoline starion located at 406 Maryland Avenue.
Both Croix and Mid-Con are concerned about the sudden jump in the rates proposed for right-of-way
maintenance. Our properties are affected by the rates for classes 2 and 3. The proposed rate increases for
those right-of-way classes are 79% and 87.5% respecrively. While we understand that the City has
refrained from adjusting the assessment rates "for over ten years", that fact does not mitigate the very real
business problems caused by such sudden and severe increases. Business owners need to budget for
increases in costs, negoriate terms in leases and other long term contract, and take other actions in order to
cover anticipated expenses. Obviously, we appreciated the lack of increases over the past several years,
but quite frankly, we would have preferred a gradual increase which could have been anticipated and
budgeted for, rather than the one-time, drasfic increases proposed.
As the owners of properties which are dependant on reasonable and convenient access, Crouc and Mid-
Con fully appreciate the necessity for well maintained rights-of-way, but we would respectfixlly ask that
the Council consider nnplementing the proposed increases to maintenance rates over the course of a few
years rather than all at once. We believe that this balanced approach would meet the needs of the City's
goveuunent, while allowing the City's businesses the opportunity to cope with such increases. If you
have any quesfions or comments, or would !ike to discuss our views on this matter fi�*�her, we would be
happy to talk with you. We can be reached at (651) 439-5755. Thank you for your fime and
consideration.
Sincerely,
CROIX OIL COMPANY
Mark J. Ogren
President
MID-CONTINEN'I' MARKETING
CORPORATION
istopher R. en
President
, ,` �
,.* ,�
,
_ > �
,�
� �_ ---- �
N
�
O
�
�
� Z
r �
x �
o �
m�
O�
a in
�
�
�"
00
�—o�-
p U � N
� � O
oU��
m �'
� � � Z
�U��
� ��
c � a �
�d—d
N c Y c
� � � �
Q, (� r (n
� V�
��\ �
\�
t':�
:�
.; �
I �,
4:;
i7
��;f
;�:5
��.�„.
�
�
�
F
� $
E !�
�
�,,�
.� _ ��
� `- � ^
� ;
� �=--
�
' S
� �
3 � j
� � 5
G �� �
v�
s
� ^.
Q �
��
S
�4� #
s y �$
N �
41 �
S
�
c�
�
r
SLf
D
vF
�
._
�
.
���
� � � v
\ ^
� til
� C
� 9 � �
`
=
�
�
�
i.i
.,;;
•ri
z.
' —a
if�
(�i �
0
Y
r
� mh
@62
tE�
W c'
m
mma
o��
�mN
\
�
/
�
�
W )
�
� � �
� �
� � �
� � �
a
Q
Q � �
-� � � `�S
� s
�
� ��
.
� �
'e
�
S
�
\
Q
�
�
�
�
z
Q
�
�
�
'`� � r � �. �
��� � � S S "e p 1 � 'S ��t
� `� � fi fi �
l3 c r'] v' � �6 S� + � O n s' .�. �
� s ,� � � � � � � � � R� s 3
� � �. � , � � �`. S S
�. c- , � � S �y g �' F _ � ?
� i �` � s ' � Q
� F � � f� � � � !� � 3 � n a � s
n `�' � fi `� ° 5 � " s � 4 G! �
� � S � �` � '� � V ^ S' (� �
^e ' � ' � O � � 1� � Q ° S ` A '� `O rrt (�A
� fi R S h � �`- � O p
7 � � " 3 �.� �' � � � .s " � r� 4 ° F � a
S � �
� +�' � c� f6 � � � 5 n � � , a � , � 3 � p
� {� (6 .. -, f� r� � y
f! S °` � � � 7 ,', " • }
,s �,+ � � � ^$ S 3 ^� Q � S �' y" � � ,��-;'
� . rt,� s n
'6 1 ,�t � o � S � "�^ ' S ' , � ^ 1 - �
� � � i Q �7 � �I . �� � ��
� � dt S � S C/� � !� !�i , Q c.�: �,:
� ,'y,. ,� � ' < � "�`' (� � � � -�' . (�, � ti ,.�
�' '.y, � � � �1 , � � y- .� P o � � �
}� s-° �e �4 ' . �. ^}, w � o , q � y
'C � J � _I � �� � � � � IV
� s S� T S � s o � s €�
O
� � g� fi 1" �, � v� ' s Q � � � e � �f-
Y 5 fi o � F c � .
o � o s S �� g � F�'� fi � �
� � � "� � Q � fi �' � � � \ �� ,� C
g Q s � s o p
K� `�. � S a�( � S s'� W R j
4 � �
.
�
* � � a *� '*' — ' *' , �', , ,�� *„ ,* �
„
;*
� ,
�i ' ,
'�.
�
�
;°
�,
, =;,
�
' � ;>�
�.�,i.r.�a� Iv�a����. ''
2159 Wilson Ave. * j
_, Saint Paul, MN 55119-4033
:Y�n-:s ,
�+V" . '�%l ,
, F`X@.{/i ( .�'z'�°�"/`�� ^ : i r ._ v �
,. �. + ; .
�.����.'-� ��� ,4F; r� hr` t71 U;,^�, C �
� .. i� ,
Ld�-�/� d�-��`' `. � QiYy� � � l.`� .
��� `� �,} �°-.��,� �
�� � , ° �o � a� � a'�" ,* `�
�������'��
�.�«�.�F ����
���
' � � E, _
c�.� o-- �
'1 � . � �
-' ��,�.e.�
° °� t� � e�,Ae�. `r a� `
� � � � �.��.$- a��i�a , e-� �� �, .�g�-"
' ��U y�,,v�[`[ ^°�� IT'`.a.Y.s
� y � �"o��iv � �
� ry .�� �,��;.�.�,�
* � ���-'`. � `�.` _- �
a �*, � � � �"`�,��_
�
, ,
.
, � cv�,,,,�_� � �-
_i,
.�3
�,
o *' ,*' °, � �=� ° � ,*' , b 3 , * � � ' '� �
,* *3
x
�
,�`
V � �
'._
�
`� L
'E�
��
� � \
�6 J�
\�
\�_
�
�
M
O
�
.--i
m h
� �h
Q
�� �
aa
��•�
� N �
S
�
�
gr
,
�, � 3
�, .� -
o �
� '
��
�
�
�
0
�
�
« G
� � �'O �
v�✓
� 9 J J
� � �
� � � /�
� Y Y' �
�
�
r-6 R
p.���. t�� /��. a
� ����
.c.nrc�.e.�� .�,�. -o�iess-z`
��•.�'���-� �-R- -n-�� �
�-r�o� ���- �� � �
- ,�°-°.�v .�.�-t- �,� � �a�n�c-�ea�t�
. . ,Q�n r�vi,(.� ���u--a--c.e-�� X� !7YLs�lA <-y�-
- - J�'�'�"_'
`��_ Q _
. _ ... 7, Cr4'^�� ,�^ /(Y�X��LaLi'
�ae
�� ; �" 3 sa �-�.G�_
��
-_ �e�� �s,.att a a? 57 Occ-G `� /� a
a
*�` �
* �.
� �
� (�
��
�/ � �
K �
M �
� -/�
�
�
���
� �
� \
�
� � 3
�
� v �
�
� ��
� � �
� � ✓
�
�
�
�
�
�
<�
E�•�
�!
y+!
��.
f �d
�;�t
.�
t�� i
�
�
�
�
�� : ��"
�� t. �
C.. � s �o
��t� :�5 s �
�. �o
;=, ` ����
��
�w
O
�
M 0
W
A
�
b
i��i
C
�
U
y
�
O
F
0
Y
0
Qa
�
� y ��
c �'._ �
° �
� � �'� �
C .� � H s�., �
J d ' � �i •� U
Y � �Q � k
� y
ri � � �. �
t0 .r '� � � J
0
� � � � b �d
�+ � y
M y y
� Y� O G'i Q y
4� (�
O � O �O � '+�"
N � CD � � �
O A�• � � . N 00
� � � �'� ��
a� �r � ;i a
,�„ .�4 'U i-� cC k
N G Q f + N
� � �
N'��' 0 3 � >,
�
� U �
G�J � y � � U
O O ^a L�+
rs,N�o�3
a O Y � y '�i
� � Y I--1 4'y ry��
O L,i % W
� � .� � � a- y. +
O O � u c> O
a+ C}:� � � V
� f� Ci GJ
��J � i�+ i� .� W
F a�i � rn � .�
� 7 r ' U � Q� � i.,
fi � O % Y �
d �� �� �
'a> .L�" '� c t' i � O
U q �^`��'!! f'
~ }�j .ti • �i ^ �
.�'i� a+ r`�'i, � t U
'� O D U 'b C+
� � N m � N
� �
� � i-�
�" �' 4J
� y �
� �
Q�
iy
� m L�
� N O�A
O � 'S
� � �hl
o p
tj� M y
� cd O
ti N o
;�^ bp \
� b �
�.
� o
O y M
N O �
� �o
0
U � �
� �
U � �
.� Q O
� �
U �
� O y
y
y ' b
� b 0
�-+ O '-- � L'�
c� �.,
�. ,3 ctl O
3 � d L�'
�� °' E
� 00
� N d
•� y ,� a
U cd �" O
��•� �
b y
0
�
�
F
�
> r.
��
L �
N�
i. �
y �
U ��
� O �
£�„+ N F+
�-�s N V1
October 24, 2002
Dan Bostrom
President, City Council
15 Kellogg Blvd. W., Room 140
Saint Paul MN 55102-1613
Re: Right of Way Maintenance Assessment
Dear President Bostrom and Council Members:
Fo /'-
� ��'����`%
9E� ;'� .;�
e
S� ��, ��
9�- r-G
i� ,
s
i 'J-
I live at 1591 Dunlap Street North. During this past spring and smmner my street was included in the
street improvement project, for which I have been assessed over $1600. While I am certainly appreciative
of the newly resurfaced streets in my neighborhood, I was quite surprised to fmd that the city is proposing
to assess me another $123 to maintain a brand new street! Why do I need to pay for "patching, and chip
sealing" a street surface that is less than 2 months old? As for "litter pick up", I'm here to tell you that I
pick up far more litter from my street than does the city!
This assessment also pertains to work in the alley behind my house. I have a driveway that exits off
Dunlap, into my gazage. I do not have a11ey access to my gazage. My vehicle never accesses the alley
behind my house. I do not believe it is fair for me to have to pay the same assessment as my neighbors,
who have multiple vehicles using the alley multiple rimes during each day. The only use I have for the
alley is the garbage truck, once each week, and only during the months of April through October. (My
garbage is picked up in front of my house during winter months.)
Please take these comments into consideration when determining the street assessment for 2003. I fmd it
ridiculous that I have to pay this amount of money to maintain a brand new street.
Respeet�,
4������
�
Nancy Trip
1591 Dunlap Street North
St. Paul MN 55108
651-487-7735
TxE
F�� �:,��
'1�' 1�..�3
i
� � � ' � �. IJbC
i ������ __ RE�.L fS�A?c D'vf j�
� �t�� _ —_ L�
CARLSO\ J/
P R I\ T �`��i?/���� ___--��Z�� �
G R 0 C P �
`� -'2-
, / � � �� �/i
e
;� � �
�
— �� G%';�z��
9201 Penn Avenue South, Suite 40, Sloomington, MN 55431
(612) 886-3400 1 faosimile (612) 888-299Y
♦ � ' � � � PRE9� ORTED �
PIflSTCLASS MAiL
CITY OF SAWT PAUt — R04V MTCE • • � ' �' '' � ' • � ` U.S. POSTAGE PA,iC �
15 KEILOGG BUlD W RQOPrt 14� •�.. . ( ST. PAUL "v1N
� SA(NTPNllLMN 551d2-1613 i PEfltsIT�0.1o�5 �
� , ..
RE4URt� SERVlCE REQUESYED
��� �� �
I�LI��LL���1116���IL��,ILdL���iL�II,�Li„1���11�6,1
LAUREL D ERICKSON PATRICIA L ERICKSON
1697 YORK AVE
SAINT PAUL MN 55106-3636
, ; � ... > ,. .":"
2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program Pubiic Hearing Notice
P�l�C���e' �F To notify Saint Paul properry owners thai the City Councii tivil! be hoiding a public hearing on the proposed 2003
;,yg� �y����,� Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessmen2 Rates ior 2003 Service Levefs as rewmmended in the proposed 2003
Budget fior the City of Saint Paui.
After considering peopem/ owrers' inpuY at the pub6c hearing, the proposed budget may be amentled.
&4EA�P�3� giB�E: 5:30 p. m., UVednesday, November 6, 2002 PLACE: Council Cham6ers, 3�d Floor, City Hall, 15 Keflogg
Y�BUIE Slvd. V�J.
?he City Goun�if wili hear oral iestimony at the pubfic hearing, and wi{f also consider written sPafemer�ts and e-mail
communicaYions. Aii communication becomes part of ihe public recor�. Wriiten siateme�ts can be mailetl to:
Presitlent Dan Bostrom, Saint Paui Cif� Gouncii, 15 ICeliog� Bivd. W, 9oom i4Q Saint Paul MN 551�2-1613.
E-mail communications car be seni to 20�3row@ci.s�paul.�rn.us.
Ls���SS/�EtV7' Nere is an exampie af h�ow a Righi-Of-Uday P,�ainten_a,nce Assessment is calcuiated for a typical residen4iai home on
�,����t����p« a residential street using the proposed 2��3 Assessment Fate Per Foot. A house with a 4S fooP residential IoP
r�p���y��r��q (Ciass 111} and an aliey (Giass IV) would be charged 48 x Q1.80 (street) plus 48 x$0.57 (alieyj, ar $114.�Q for 20Q3
R�ght-Of•Way Maintenance. We round offi ai! amounts to the nearest dollar to simplify processirg. Comer
residentiai lots with Pwo street frontages or resideniiai IoPs tivith two aliey frontages, are r�of charged for ihe iongside.
Commercial prope�ty includes aii apartment buildings oi fcur or more unifs. Tcwnhomes and contlomiriums wil{ be
charged for at ieast 18 fee± of street frontage. ir you �§ca ns�a hav� �s� al8ey, your rao4'sce s^af!! i:sY yoaze s4peeY
9rsntage and hdd.ALLE!'. Ifi you do not have an atlex, yQU aee ar�t charaeeP noa a�e. FisE CI7�l t3C3ES 4dOF
5�0� RL�VU ALLEYS. �� ���� ��,�� � n �
—�Z ..Z�•' �U�� ��72�'�
;�
Proposed 2003 Right-Of-Wa Maintenance Assessment Char
St4iS 98 NOF ��fLL —TFffS ?5 A gU��'sC HEARiNG i�OTICE
�et^y ID# 272922410120
�e�iydddress 1697 YORK AVE
�roniage 80, so
�,I�SS 3, 4
Proposed amount ��� 5190 _ oo �
3E?1?
See other side for the proposed amount for your property.
ASSESSMENT RATE PER FOOT
Class Descriptron 2003 Rate Class Description
(Propased))
Class (-A Downtown Streets $7.95 Class IV All Oiled and Paved Aileys
Class 1•B Downtown Streets {Bricl�
Class II Outlying Commercial and Arterial Streets
Commerciai Property
Residentiai Property (1,2,3 family)
Ctass Iil Aii Resideniial Streets
Commercial Property
liesidential Property (1,2,3 famify�
2003 Rate
(Proposed))
$0.86
$D.57
$1.92
$L74
$0.34
$023
The City has not increased its summer street maintenance assessment for over ten years. In order to continue to
provide services within the City right-of-way without raising praperry taxes, the RAayor has recommended a Right-Of-Way
maintenance assessment which will help finance part of the cost of maintenance within the City right-of-way. This Right-
Of-Way assessment will inciude the old summer street maintenance assessment in addition to an assessment for winter
street maintenance, boulevard tree maintenance and trimming, and sidewalk maintenance.
RlGHT Right-Of-Way Maintenance includes sweeping, flushing, patching, and chip sealing streets and aIleys, patching,
DF WAY blading, and placing crushetl rock on unimproved rights-of-way, street overlays, litter pick up, ordinance
MAINTENANCE enforcement, and emergency service, snow plowing including sanding and salting, snow removal, snow emergency
including tagging and towing, sidewalk maintenance and repair, and boulevard tree maintenance and trimming.
In previous years the City's winter street maintenance and tree mainienance programs were paid by the City's
General Fund (properry tax money). This proposed Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment will ensure each
praperty which benefits trom public right-of-way maintenance pays its fair share of the cost of the maintenance.
Property owners will continue to be responsible for sidewalk shoveling and boulevard grass mowing.
Remember.,. The City dces not snow piow alleys.
The cost of right-of-way maintenance in Saint Paul is about $21.3 mitlion for 2003. Of this amount, the Mayor
proposes to collect approximately $14.3 mil(ion in assessments. The remainder comes from Municipal State Aid,
Trunk Highway Aid, County Aid, miscellaneous receipis, and General Fund contributions.
QUEST/DNS? if you have questions about your right-of-way maintenance or frontage, call (651) 266-8857. City staff wilt be
available fo answer last-minute questions in Councii Chambers from 5:00 pm to 5:30 pm on Wednesday,
November 6, the same day as the hearing.
NEED REPAIR? if your street or ailey needs maintenance or repair, please cali (651) 292-6600.
$9.95
$4.35
$2.1D
$3.30
$1.80
Class V
Class YI
Commercial Property
Residentiai Property (1,2,3 family}
Unimproved Street Right-OfiWay
Commerciai Property
Residentiai Property (1,2,3 family)
Unimproved Aliey Right-Qf-Way
Commercial Property
Residential Property (1,2,3 family)
October 26,2002
Dear Dan Bostrom
�� �. ����
��� ����,.
�� -
fiF,����������� ��� �
siy .
�y
���
��,�,�
,.
��> 1>
� ,_
� FBTyr ,. .
I am Cha Tou Thao, owner of property address 444 Maryland Ave. W.,
Property ID# 25292321009L I received your PROPOSED 2003 RIGHT-
OF-WAY MAINTENANCE ASSESSEMENT CHARGEDS, which the
amount are too high. $772.00 for 2003. Compared to $423.00 for this year it
jumped over 80%. I can not afford to pay it. My business is too slow, I could
not even make enough to support my family. I am asking you to reduce it.
You can increase up to $500.00 for 2003, but please, not to increase beyond
that. Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
✓ �--- ��--
Cha Tou Thao, Owner of the property
-- � t�' D �
S1 i��i ��� �a
Property ID# 322922110067
Property Address: 401 Hope Street
Oct 25th, 2002
Dear City Council:
� Ea t 5 � ...,�?'
ftc€tL ESIATi DiVtgir„
This is Vang and Soua; we disagreed with the proposed amount of $90.00
You (the city council) post on our property for the yeai 2003. In last
Few years, the charge only $50.00 or $55.00, why the city council
Charge $90.00 for the year 2003? This is too much for small family home
like this one. We are only resident, we aie not commercial home or
building. The snowolow came to our pxooerty only 2 or 3 times per year,
why pay that much. We can survive without the snowplow; we do not need
the snowplow, that way we can save our $90.00 for the children's
clothes to school. As you understand, we work all weekdays just to pay
our groceries at the weekend only.
Thank you for your help. If you need moxe infoimation fiom us please
Call 651 774 6962 or email: vangyu@yahoo.com
Vang and���
�/�
(b � i�:� �����,� ��
�� ���� �� �����
�i� � 3.�z9�3��0���
���� �9, ��z
�i � � ,�
/ �
/l � �'
��� � �� -,�� � � ���
i �
� � �� ��� � ��
� 'i% /
i , , / � ,, ��
.� ���� �� �- � ��.
� � � �/
„ , � . > ���' � � '� , � i ,�
.
� �
�� � �� -
� � � � � �� � i �
r �•� � �' , s � .�� , � ,
i � �� � �
� � � � i
, / i
i % ° i i / .
�L � E . f"i , ia� / .� � �(' � � � 4 /
�./ �` � . /� /.
� ,
� � i � � �. � /_ ./,/ �
i�
i
i.l � � i.. i" j � I� . �' fI./j
�,
�� �
:�, �����
� =� ;� .
��[ f '.;7`
4 �� iT � . ��� `( �f0���
�n.�i�osE.�
co Z�'l� ��yTOF ��i�a�E���c� �ss�ss�� ��il��S
� "� -
�
i � ��� .
• a��j7"L�/
, �.� J� �/ .�!/�i%�
� �
��� / �
��� _
���/ � ��
�
/ %
. � /
- '� ,�
/' D /-'�.
.�
��a� ���/��
� ,�a _ � �F.�p _ `��' ��,.
ov
. __ , `��_oo _ „ _%,
��CEl�1��
.
G `' `L�ul
Fo �
- - - - , ?E.�� - - � OoZ7 _ � ` G� �%CE'Q-C�y!z.:� � i
� ESrqrE �IVIS/�Jf� - � ��`�CG� �/� . .5 _ S// �
- - i -- -
� i
-- -- - -a� �� o� - -- - -- - -
- --
— ',= ��� � - ���-� `�� - �
� �s�'- - - ,�-�-�:,
//J} - - - --- ---
. i_� ✓_ Kf!4V ___ L __J__�/_O�./ _ _ _
- - -�
-- ---- - -
-- _ _- �
-- --�
���-ul��%I=i�+ /')i _ i _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
,p �.
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
� __�?"�C D� �/ `� i� - -�/ �,G l—�.i . �� z;!"� ��-�'-�'_�/
�/ � � //
��/�� /d7_-�'�� � lf�C�.ci ii �l�c�_q� „ L.� �-.e
- = C/ �CI�t-� /' _.r-vt/ -4 .� ' , °� , ._ , ��� f
� i �'� /� � -�"`�� �
� �-�.�- �_ . _�/�1�. s:e���-e-..Gr� �-°� �
_ 2K
� � - �� ���`�v /���� ���'�_�/ � -
- - - �
���_���z � �.5`� �<2°Q /C��v __ � ' _ �
�o-m-�._- fP��-.��i — � �_° ---,a_��-,��-, ' ` - -
�=='���
�_.�-�-���'�� '�,�1/___rm_ �����___a_�-�-<_��_f�--
- - - ` - �� �-a - - .�L� �.� _ �� . � ��� _ .._
--
. --
-
-- --._ . �CV-��. --: -..C�Q.�i<r� -� C/ � - � ///�/� �����'�/ y � -. � Z--.- � _ _� - � -ui2 � '
(/ ✓ �i�2 /
- - -�-�-�- -� �--� ��-�j__ -- -�e�� ���-.� �-�.�.� fi
------ --, �-���u_- -��-���.��-..�,��.���_
-- � ' /
_ � G'� -�� .���, �Y�Z-z��-����� ---
____._ . ....._..Ki+rL:r!�_ �__CXiv!C_/_ ��C/��__._/2/_.� ._.i�,�. .f��—'-'c�.�<�
— -- ---! G -- / _ - -- -.. _ � _
__ - - -
L - i �_.r�� - �- _ _ - -� -- � � �- =� �� -
- - - %�,��_� �� /
--- - ✓�� J � -� - - - ._ ._ '_�S�L.- �..p ____
_
� � � _ ` . "" l._�/ /
: �
. _'_ __ -. _ ' . ' . n '_" __._. _ -. --_�_ _._._ . .Ui2� �
_ _.. .._ c � % ��.._ ��-ay�"_t'i �Z�✓-�L.�_ c�Z� r�g �<_
- - - -
� _ � �/� Q �
---- � - ,- - --/�---- - - .
f - " � -�- -- -�°� - -
-------- --- -- - —�-�- - - -_ �.� .._ -- - -- �
- - ---- - --- - --
, _ . ,''���
--------- �--�--- � �` - --_.__ ° ... �m-G���ar� " _ �-�"-r-. ---
--- - --
_
,_ - -__ _ -�_�_=- - --c --�%'```
----- -- -----� _�� _� _�n___��__�_ ._ ���_� �._ -- � �- ,-- -
d --`/--�---
-� -- - �
1 l g �
i
" __ ' : _ ' _ ' . _ - _ - __ - _ _ - - _ _ _ " " _ �/ ' _ ' _
_ ' _ _ \ � C . _ // Q �
{
i
�
C:
�ECEiti ��
;r � � =3,'i�=7
�,. . _ < '-li V r"
�i0
i
��t _s7n-� ��v,s;o� �C�: a� a od a
,
�� �U���� -
/� = ��-�-�v� ��,� -
� a� ��G-�-- ,t ��� � ������
/'J�'� uJ'e — �S � ,/�t�=� c�i'u�-e�
- � �.�D � ��` cu � ��lii�c.� /�l�d )
_' "! �Y� �e-ta_2. /� 4:��
— G� �a��ii��� �l r �� (� �Irc�J a���
� cr�zQ J � �� .� �
��� �eg�� � �� _ � �
�..�,�.��� .��,�� �. � �°�-����.
�i..� ..:�� � �� .���-� . ��_�' �
,�a,�i� c��y� ��� � ..� �.��� .
��� �� �� � � e���.z� �,� _
� .�/'���� ;� .��'� "�.-� �� � ��
`� .���?���
C � �;��, � � � ���_ �i � � ���
.� .�°� � c� a- �� .� �.''�� � ��
�w-�� .
�
-
,� �'��� �� ���� � ��-
�( ��:� .ti� .� �� r:�� �- � .��.� _
i
' > �
� �
/ � �' � / � i /
/ �
i��� �� , � / �
/ / �
� - r
� ' � I � l i y � .. � / "
--� �--� �-
� � .�
� _. �_..�_`" _ :.
.�_�����' . •
� �- -+
-_ �' � - �.
�- - -----
,. % , � ,
. , � ,
'� � ,!, ii � i ./
i � � � � ,
�
�
—��— --
� �- --- ---------�
� �yJ.��1�. '�'—%��- ---�
�_��� - �
-�:
° �a� _8' �/_.��� �
__-- — -- - — - - -- --
�
�
�// _ � p
_ . - ----- — - -
-
�- �I�G�L� �"E✓ l�za�—�f/'v�_`" W� �'�' �'�L�- •
-- -_� __��___�-- �u��� �- .�� - !
•
�_,�� � .���_ �.�--� --- - �:
__- - --- - -
__----� -� - -- - - .�� -.�.-_-� ,���- �,,� -«
----.-�•�! :_����._ca�� .� _�- �a_�-Q;�_ � �
. , � !
, �
----- G -�-- I __.1/!v�_�-e� �
,. ,/ , .
a-T-- -- - - �
-- --- --- �
�
`��C���j: r�
��� �1
t° k. �if?..
Fo2- z�`'=
�?��t �sr�rfof��rs���,;
October 31, 2002
City Council,
We received the notice for the 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program. I understand
that at the current time we pay around $50.00 to $55.00 a year. I do not agree with the
new price of $90.00. That is too much of an increase for the service that we get.
Last year there were several instances when all the streets around us were plowed after a
snowfall but Scenic Place; the street we live on. Scenic Place is a very short street with
Peterson on one side and Winthrop on the other side. I don't know if it }ust gets
overlooked or if the person plowing the streets figures one short little street isn't
important. But, if we have to pay $90.00 then it would be nice if we didn't have to try to
get to our homes through a foot of snow, get stuck and then drive over ruts for the next
month. I have called and informed someone in the city that we are always overlooked.
Thank you for your time and I do hope this new fee is not accepted.
Kathy Raether
2135 Scenic Place
St Paul, Mn
11 C,A/iJST
_ _ Mr, _Dan_ _Bostrom _
_ _ City Council _Pre_ sadent_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ __ _ __
- We-are.65-years old an3-:ia-ve lived-in -
--
St. Paul all our life. What_are you _
Democrats trying to do to people who have__
supported St. Paul to help all the people
who contribute little or nothing.
We live in a 930 SF house and the taxes
are already rediculous. To have us pay'_
$38 more for a total of 130.00 plus
property taxes in not fair. Why pays_these
kinds of fees for all the low and no
income people you are putting in new and
remodeled housing?
R�� -
¢,r� � ,/ �
5' ' s 5 �
� �,+� �
RfqE FStqrEe/Vls/OP,
The East Side is going in the same direction
Frogtown where we lived the first 22 years
- - - -- - - ----
of our lives.
Stop this tax raisir.g �^d c�,t. back like all
-- af -the families like us did__as we raised
our children. Charging residents extra
- money £or things they have no choice of
refusing is just not right.
Not oaly-tlrat,--ou�-street-is_not taken ver�_
good care of even though we have buses
running both directions.
- 3tar't chiniciny ai�ou� i.`.�_�,���1_e :.�v_ _'�r��rt
_ St. Paul, not your 9g salary increases.
David and Barbara Lauer
2185 E. Maryland
- -
St. Paul MN 55119
r �s, �>> r�.
?E1�_ . _�.:
P
;, �.;: �,;;,
.� _ %��-
REfiL ES7ti'� uf4'ISiCtc
�Q -30 _�200�,
� � i s ' �
r � r... s ��• �' i
/ � ,/
. ' �.� , � �� ��� � �
� �. � , � i
� `�' ; • ,
� �-, � � , � ' , / r/ �.��
-� / � `� I � �.
i � /,
� 1 � � �.
/ / `/� � � %
� ' ♦i
� / � � i
/ /,
�. � �� �� �
` . i
• -
� / � �%
i ` ��
! ,
� !
l � ( � � ✓ �
� .
.
� �
,/ , f .
r
/� ,
�' i
. -. ., /. .
� � i.� �' � !
7, �' � �
/ i � �
/ � � � � �
I � i �.
� � �
/ — �. � , � i .
/ �
�,t,�, �-�. �...�--� ���
`�- `� �:��,��
-�,.��v" � � `��
�`��`'�- ��`'��j� ,� �,
��� .:�- �_ �� �
���� ��� ��� �
� �- ��.er.�_ � � �.
�� � � ���,� ��-
� ����� ew� �
�.�,�-� � ��
�-- �� /�\ \ � ` —
� �//I.( ,-. LJ - II..O / \
� � � �
�.�� ��-�-�-� �-.�
��-� �, ��
�.� �c� �
� - �=������"/�
�
��� �r-�- �c .�
6� � , D , o' '/° `
� �pe.����� �.�
`'t� r�1`�d` � d � F�i
o,I `�id�'�. `�U-�.eJ� d "� ni ��'Q
�- ' ���� �
� ��
�
E
;�c,� �,�s � %0`30% z-
�,n
_ �`'�r0
n ,
':;,;
/�EsioE,./i �Fis�/ ,C30s� Rorr1� _ : .
; .,,,:,
--- - �xz fsr - �.v----
----- ------ _ ---- ----- ---�-------- ----. `?1 fGsi�-----
-_--_ f _ �/17_ _ �EP�f!i N� _'TO _7HE _ �003 /�lf_N%-4f_G(/9'
__ -f�'�-%`'�E %�lA,vcE ���2 n� ,1_G_f/_'4G�G �?__ ��E�"E,C --
- /� . ..T�X ./iy'GQFS�s€_u�,��e__ _Tti_E--f�_ss�.ssia
---- ��a Pos�t �- . _,�i T�tF�,_ GUt� f; _/ T _�'_1_,E� tis /YJO�'�
__ �On��f'_ _�/%IT--OF__/I'lY %DL',t!FT_._fJT._L`_��Isi ..__
_. �i(/l TH_ f}_ 7/9'X_. l!1%�f 6A5F'� _/ T_�,fIN _QE --- --
`
-- C'���n2EO--e^!-�??�__T�tX F�Q.YIs=- �=
--- ��iv_SIt2Esz_ �f_��_._�SF�s�� �/�i�_ �s
---5?A_� EYJ _iN _7H E _ � ,��E,�. _�_ ff�,qvE _- ----._.
__ .}��yS,E_ 7�'�T i.S_-GrJo�z-H __5'�/rl,�cvi�E��---- -
—_��'r���� -_1��__.�I�✓�_200 7�fQus��.�__6�J._.
. ,
_ � ,_Ol� 7'L �'/ n0� _ S`T�2 ,�ET- - � /25 �, __f .. � Q ^�-' - --
---l�nJb�_._�'UH_�'__�>J �L1TG__5°_'in�`�__S_l
-- -.i2�a2E._ //J __O_1��2.__G�!o��s� /�___ff�r�sE_------
__._ __Q/J__���'Jl?'li _T_��1,�. ./Y)/LL�a,�1 -
-- -/�oLL_fl�?s -P-/�-f1�--L._,�SS _���fz/s�_!�--_..____
/s �'a.vsld��eE�_-�L�ss_�_�,__�_._ --- ----- --
-- -- - --�-- - -----�- --- ------ �-_ ---- -
/ ���w ��,� � �i91s��.� %As��'s Do�su fi
__ _ _ _ - - - — ----- ----- ----- —__ ____ __--------- - -
_ �f1fAN� �S�?D de� -0"pLITL��Z�°--_� .___/QA/��PT /�` 1Vi/drq
� 5�3 /32c�,��; aa �I�� ��
- - - - -- -- - ---- - - .------ - -
- - - -_ -
__�� Cp s�_._D_� L�u��%-- /iv�/�E'ft�� G,�1
- - -,� Y _ ��'! �' F,y�F.�/T C'h�E�__f-�1�,E/!A 6 Es._ _ -- -
_ ��
�__��G_Un!_D --2 Q. D_lz- _fl�. _/I7�rvi1�� GUffiC trt - _-- --
_. ._C._0_f22,�s--- 4 /�1 t'--To---- 2 `f_O,_o o_- P�i2 _ �E�2,_ _ ----
--- - -- -- - - - - - --,� --- _ _
__ / � `T/7E SL_'r/doL �E<E�Ei✓�uin �/�SSES
-_�}1'i/O - �ff_�. -- j SS�Sse!11_G'�.1 S . ���,Qo_c%�,0� _/ T .
___ �/�1 �v'C'�� �G_t_T _�f`_��s"l . �lt_'_ �l c7isi/�- -- - ------
4 __ /' M�',t? -��I. s� --�j' f'/?.�L� r� w___GU�<n� �Oc( � E ^j -
____ _._�..._.__��'EO _ /_ /'U_Ca /17�--- _T_�CC.__ _���_ .T%�lf�i HE„� - --- - .
__--/3r -�'_vEP�- ��,e, - r'/l/a�__ �f�'O�I_'T fis��il�
�.r7-� LT1�- L��_k._�__�'as i s�, ��,5_.i.�%G'�2 �S'lsi — — -
_�_ /�,E�r.N�_ ��i���-��s_,_ %�?Y �?��o�r__�,�E- -
____l 2 a w,�,._�.v,�/i�� _rn,�iz�s__��i_Y�? � _ � _ /-��i�?-- - -
_�_.__��'_..��Es_-�02_�D���7�e:� _j!�"! -
�
____/s1/�f_%� .._Gl1YJu�.__�.. _CJOT�.__�O_.!?_ �'4�1L'�Tro�J_._:__
__�/L1�' - -��ss�_.S'r-?_ f'=�� �'TSr }_.,�"��'I�'.r /��"G�
___��? /�'. .��GEI? - �/�O�dttJ<e�l.�.._�D�c1�Y. Q/V- - �J - --
_. ..__ �YS>c�S'/ _ _Tf�i�Z`_T s . �i_PO�E._�__.____ _ _ ___- --- -- ---
___- �- __- � ----- - - ----�H�K .�au__---
� ' A�����f
�C EC� (�JE�
�'w €� i f t� 2r:� �
_ . �UG3 ��2L ��r,i� /%Ctc-!�"�. �—s�C`-� .�..._. ��-���RfRtEST"A7E�14`1S�Qti.._.._
'°�v %
. _ ._. _ , _ . _.�� -. r�Yl �aJ�IG�._ .. _ . , ,. _.
._ _ . . : - - -. _ _ _ . '�'�-+�✓-_ _ i2��.7-�^����2��_. �'__.. _�._ . .'�'���.�_
�. ___._,..____._ _'_._
_ � ho ..r��e. -?-�^- �!�?�: ._ _��. _ Cr�e_. _�' _�_-Y�� .. _
fi��e� �`�'�."�'�- `?r'_ �-..._..__._ - - --- -- - -_ __ __, ._ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ .,�- - - . _ �-f? ..��Lvcc-t , _ �iLP�r.P�t-� _, tiz. __r�.ri� _ _ ��� 2G..� .�!Ce . _ _
_ __ ; v4ee.- .�r�.__/�._ ���1.� !x__r��..�.�--�--�--_.__,
. �� -� _ c�=-.--G -�e�.-�--�,. _�. _ _� ._��. _d�?�_ �� __ _.�.
,�� . �=�'S %��"�' _�' . _ __ _, _ _ . _.__----. � -- -�_ __�_ .__�.. _ ._ _. _ _ _ _ _ , _ � _ _ .___ � _..__
,�1� -��,.�__�,_._. G�-G.-� . � .���_
- - - � ----.�.
_ _ . _ _.._ . . __ . _ ..__ ___..__ _._._
;�- _ -- �._ _ . - ����- ����_ _..
_ _. _ .-23 31 - --__- --- - � -...__r.�
� �I �� -- --�-- �
I
� }� _ ��9.�.3,��.�v�e�---__.__ �.y
. ., . _ . _: _ � _, ..._ ..._ _.- . -- _ - 3�;
-_� ..- -- - -_-_ ......._ .. _ __ ___ _ _ -- .__ _. -'- --.-..�
db
� _._�._._ �__ -_ ___..._�...�- ------
..__. .. .---. ._..ti... - --. _ .. .,___._.. --°---
� �"�'�� ��� � ;
� � �•����
� �� �
,�������
,���� � � �
�������
� ��� ��l
, � ���a�
� � ��
� _ ��� ���
,,�
; �
.
^ w,
�, �:
,
; ��;�,
,; � ,
, � ��
�
3 x �
'Y�-� �
,
� ,
� z '�
��,..-1
� ` �
�� , �
�
�
��
��
L b� .�
mQ�
%�a
C1 M e
� � h
Q
�
�
�
�� �
�
� �
�'
�
�-�-
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
� �
�
�
�
�
�
�
t�
�
L
�
�
�
#it
W:{
v�e
l�
t.k
�
k?
r;?
�G�„ 5; G����, ado�,
j ,�'. j ,� ��z'c�.C` f,
�U� , � ` G�.�/
��ti� � �� � � � �
��,��,�2��. ���.�,; �-.�7` � �.�
� �.� .���� �..;�� ���j�%� 7��
�zuu �c� �i c�y� ��'�� ��v'
�� n.�-Z` �`iv�U ���r� �a����?'�;y
.� ������ �
��'�� �- �� ����. ��--�,�;� �� .
� � -�-� � ������ �� �
.s/-�. �'�' �. � -r-f�f��� .�;� -� -�C�e�
� ��,���� ��
��� �' � � °����..�.� .�.�
a ��� ���
,�,�-�� �,��.�-�— � .,� ��� .���
:� r � �� ,��,� .�.z`�-i �
.,c� e, . � �, �'�� ����. ���..�' � 'a.�
��������������
. �� � �,� ��,�
�.; ��� .� -� -
�� �� ����� � �� �
�,�, � a i���.n.P.z.��� �� �/-/������ -�'
.�� ,
�� ��..��� ��� ���°�
� � �n ���.�e�`- � � � ��-�
� � � ,�`� � ���� �
�� � m�k � ���� � �
� -� � �- �-Lovv�� u�`�e-,� -�� � p�'.�-riZ�
�� � � _ ��� ���,
0'� �0��� � :,� �.��
� �� �
�� ��`�� ��' -�-G �� ��
� ��;�� � � � � .
�� � � � ��� ���
�
��`� �� ,
� ���
��..�� �,
�- ��f, �. �s5 i��
�/-�7/-99,37
CiTY OF SAINT PAUL - RONJ MTCE
'b KE�LOuG BLVD W R00"+1 1�0
SAIVT�AU�M� 55102-1"oi3
RETilr'�N SEr�.V10E REQilES3E�J
IdJnl�l�n�lllluullrcJlulnluulluJlul�luldull�l
KAREN J MCCRAE
22 FLANDRAU PL
SAINT PAUL MN 55106-6811
�
PRESORTED
RRSTCLASS MAIL
I U S FGSTAGE PAID i
� ST. PAUL MN
PERCAi� NO 'Ci5 ;
�
'��Url{!��
,. : ..
v t. - i. i:f q,..
. -'. � �
REA� EStbit �f'YiSlGf';
2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program Public Hearing Notice
u%�����E �F To noti� Saint Paul property owners that the City Council will be holding a public hearing on 4he proposed 2003
d�€gS ����'g�� Righf-Of-Way Main4enance Rssessment Rates for 2003 Service Levels as recommended in the proposed 2003
BudgeY for the Ciry of Saint Paul.
Af7er considaring property owners' irtput at the pubiic hearing, the proposed budgsi may be amended.
������°� �S�9E: 5:30 p. m., Wetlnesday, November 6, 2002 PL�CE: Council Chambers, 3�� �loor, City Hall, 15 Kellogg
'�?��E Bivd. VJ.
The City Councii wiil hear oral tes4imony at the public hearing, and wiil also consider writien sfatements and e-mail
communications. All communication becomes part of the public record. WriPten statements can be mailed to:
President Dan Bostrom, Saint Paui City Council, ? 5 Keliogg Blvd. N/, Room 14Q Saint �aul M�S' 55? 02-1613.
E-maii communications can be sent to 2003row@�i.stpa�9.mn.�as,
�3a�5S�J'r�f�T Here is an example of how a Right-Of-Way �,faintenance Assessment is calculaiad for a ty�ical residential home on
��� ��� a residen?iai street using the proposetl 2003 Assessment Rate Per Foo4. A house with a 48 foot residentiai lot
�%�E�Pl� �'l�v.N (Ciass Ili) ard an aliey (Class IV) wouid be charged 48 x$1.50 (street) plus 48 x�0.57 (alley), or �114.00 for 2Q03
Righ4-Of-Way Maintenance. We round off all amounts to the neares4 doliar fo simpiify processing. Corner
residentiai lots with !wo s4reet frontag2s or residentia! lots with two afley frontages, are no; charged for the longside.
Commercial aropeYry ir�cludes al! apartmenY buildings of four or more :.�nits. Townhomes and condominiums will be
charged for at least i 8 feet of street frontage. If you do �to4 have an al{ey �OliP 9208@C� NVIEi IiS� yfOUf SYfO�t
fra�sSaqe ara� M� P,LLEY. i# uou do not have an ailey,yoaa a>e r�oR ��rar�ed for ane. €�+� C9TY �OES NOT
Sdd�1N PL09N ALLEYS.
Proposed 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment Charges
THI3 !S t�OT A�1LL —T�fIS iS A PU�L?G'r1E�AI�Ca M�TPCE j �
Proper�j ID# 032822140047 Fron?age 117 No A�LEY /f��� ~�
Properyaddrass 22 FLZ�NDttAU PL C!ass 3 % r P �{"'" �
Proposed amount , $ 211. o o �
�_. _._ ---�'"'�
>�9��
See other side for the proposed amount for your property.
ASSESSMENT RATE PER FOOT
Class Description 2003 Rate C►ass Description
(Proposed))
Class 1-A Downtown Streets $7.95 Class IV All Oiled and Paved Alleys
Class i-B Downtown Streets (Brick)
Class II Outlying Commercial and Arterial Streets
Commercial Property
Residential Property (1,2,3 family)
Class III All Residential Streets
Commercial Property
Residential Property (1,2,3 family)
$9.95
$4.35
$2.10
$3.3U
$1.80
Class V
Class VI
Commercial Property
Residential Property (1,2,3 family}
Unimproved Street Right-Of-Way
Gommerciai Property
Residential Property (1,2,3 family)
Unimproved Alley Right-Of-Way
Commercial Property
Residential Property (1,2,3 family)
2003 Rate
(Propose�)
$0.86
$0.57
$1.92
$1.14
$0.34
$023
The City has not increased its summer street maintenance assessment for over ten years. In order to continue to
provide services within the City right-of-way without raising property tares, the Mayor has recommended a Right-Of-Way
maintenance assessment which will help finance part of the cost of maintenance within the City right-of-way. This Right-
Of-Way assessment will include the old summer street maintenance assessment in addition to an assessment for winter
street maintenance, boulevard tree maintenance and trimming, and sidewalk maintenance.
RIGHT Right-Of-Way Mainienance includes sweeping, flushing, patching, and chip sealing streets and alleys, patching,
OF WAY blading, and placing crushed rock on unimproved rights-of-way, street overlays, litter pick up, ordinance
MAIN7ENANCE enforcement, and emergency service, snow pfowing including sanding and salting, snow removal, snow emergency
including tagging and towing, sitlewalk maintenance and repair, and boulevard tree maintenance and trimming.
In previous years the City's winter street maintenance and tree maintenance programs were paid by the Cifij's
General Fund (property tax money). This proposed Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment will ens�re each
property which benefits from public right-of-way maintenance pays its fair share of the cost of the maintenance.
QUESTIONS?
Property owners wili continue to be responsib{e for sidewafk sfioveling and boulevard grass mowing.
Remember... The City does not snow plow alleys.
The cost of right-of-way maintenance in Saint Paul is about $21.3 million for 2003. Of this amount, the Mayor
proposes to collect approximately $14.3 million in assessments. The remainder comes from Municipal State Aid,
Trunk Highway Aid, County Aid, miscellaneous receipts, and General Fund contributions.
If you have questions about your right-of-way maintenance or frontage, call (651) 266-8857. City staff wiil be
available to answer last-minute questions in Council Chambers from 5:00 pm to 5:30 pm on Wednesday,
November 6, the same day as the hearing.
NEED REPAIR? If your street or aliey needs maintenance or repair, please call (651) 292-6600.
•.__-�.—� - `- �
' �JGA>NSi � � `�
- �/ 6 �� � �
P ..�-�--�-�� t �
- �. �
_ � � � ���.-
__ m��� � � �.�
�
-- - ��_ -�.�.,�!. a�. � �.,�
- , � �-�-�� 9..s�e. �-Q.�e
- �!��.s.��_ ,� �e ��
-- - �.-� �Qn���'
- _.�p c�, _ �� C1��.G..-�
' _ __ � ' J��,K, " � _ " _ � 1 .��.�_._ �F�`^NeL1
- 4 `� � � J�.J��J�����
- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ � . , _ _ _ - - _ - - 1.
�
_�;(W�a'�.. F'e _ � _ � �� .�f1-'�c''�--
- - - - --�'GULQ � - - - - � � � _ _
- - .�!'7-� �e --- - -
•�° � -
._ --- -C.7-"-'-� - `- � Q y d , ' �
r �WJ
n - � -
_- -- -- � �J r."'�- -- - -�9'�.�-
- - — _ _
- ;' _ � �. � �-� �?_
--
- — ;';. �.�, � .,�.c�-�.Q� - -�° L-�'�
�
�
ft-a3 �z
-��' �'.�n -�zf�� �"'l`"`"�
�u'-Q-a�° �' ��.�,��`�'"tq �, c o� . a �
- -,i,<, l DS-e0 ,_
- �'t✓�.- r�o��-z �. �-�.9-�-� -
-- ",\�.`�`,-`� a�Q `�{.° ►t"°i�
a - �
- - .�,�.� - �A-�'-� L�`
-- � -�n-�Q. � �
� ,
- ' - ,� c�?�.��""`�� y - -
-- - --- --��-
' �.
- ,:� - - - -- ------ -
-- - --- _ -
-- - �
�
--�������� _ -- - -
�� _
- u�' �� ;��;32 -- - -- ---
- ii
— - — ',� R�dt'c�tk�E IIE4tS(Ofi -- - — - - ---
-- __'':. --
�
�!
- - - _.
jl
__- _J1�-!.. ^ _
!j
�
:a :,
C �, � �
{��. ..._ �.:�i1�
. '`
; , ,}g�t��rrs�'l'• .
:a :
.O 4 � ` �6� .
_ S. n
��. �
P�'h' Y .�;5 e� .
,�
y � #� 3*� .
� �'
�� e
y 1 �'
� M � J R _ � ♦ ^ � .
� l y hY �! ,�� � . r � ,r � ry �
�• - f ..'._ �� � ��.' _ -� C6'� V✓ .. _ . " Y
y. �w ma.�". �a f o?o.o o�.
, � " �
x.w.4ci` ' _3 '�� ' .
��.,i�;� i::i�:,�.A,. .; . ^. .. . .
� ��`�`t,9e.v7" .1��n� �ovTS�a� �EC�I�1�v ,
�''';.� ' • y-
,;.,�`�J� , Gr� �FJt.�iiJ ��`/ t; s� i. k L�i;� �
�;. . ' K.�ir� y�� �a � , ��� `�a � , .
�,�., o .. REfiLESTATE DIVISIG«
. 6 ,�;., �� � � ��, ��oa �- — /� /�3 .
�;� � � ��%i2�.� � �
�%��� , 6''�.e�src�-e�-� �
� p��a.�r [6�c.�C �/B-�uR u o�a� � °Q/�f � e� �
." ° '� � 7'� � S � 90 �
f�kz�� 1.�.�' �r' �e. �R� � �e'Ft r� , � �' s _�
���` �� �-�i�"i�e�-a% � � �� � �` c3'csa ��� 1,��7" ��� :
'�'� �. � %�w./� �" o ui _ T X.e�S f?o-� e 't2 �� �,v r��- � � � �. �..
,. t:
� �� �"j T � .�Z �/;�i�. � �/.-�ri� < . � �? �° � � c�6i
. . � l� � �� ,.� , a . . � ., � .
� � ,11� f ta,c�-T �w . � c5'cPm e �/ �'�.e� �-�G,e y .
�50�1 � f �c�� !�� � I �/. , � � : ��s
�"C@i �� / /C� d�ci%S� v7t G�- �GZ�S,�,' "7' �� �lJ .�oG�
. ��O �2 l�e� f � � < - OG� K'-, . . ft� � ,Z'NSiti,� �— �v
"�j:' i.+.'�n� :. `,��>sl"�, n%�oK�� �<��re/�.P
�
C�'w� ��� ns � .e as-� �,. .h� / � - �"` .
M C� n�� r �� °'� �Al:�IJ �e�-� ��/�- �a�i.,
k O� ,,?„��``�`�?�. �? b . �"7�� �, ,J, !�'� S
� i� �� ks � s o��� j��� sf�-�1�.
h <.....
Fv� °
a ;
�, . _ :. S'w:,-.�
� e
� . -,Q� , 1p �* `. l.-�" _. " '
7 9 � . �`.
c.
� ���-<.
� ' � �n
.�
o" ._
:a
o � : ° " _
��$.•: _ _..,� , e. '
�� �' ' i � "-
�
�� � " t
t ��K�eK .,(w K�- I .
/X�VifiC. � - � . . ' °
� 3��Y"_ . � ' ` ( .
� � t ./_ ,%P.�Lt7' P ' `�y/� /')') .F- 1-i//IJ✓�-<� �U ..Qi � �-� . ,'
n:�w' . . � � � '
7� ��.a // `7�/s -� f`°�'
���a� .:
� , �
,° r�,�� . �as�s�s ��//
�� �efl / ,Ce✓� r � � .�'� �:1/,
. �. � B�� 1�3�° �`'
,.
> --- ' `7 C� r�, o �; �
� a , . �. ; � B,�+ � 1� � `
`���1�' ' �� ��' �����
�; f �Jfs '" ��� � '^` �.
`(��l/ i� � 7"�X �� �� l � s :.Z�!l
,�
` b �- ��'' `-�� � � �� ' ` '�
' � �G-. '� ; ,L.���S c. i � .
C��� � v 7 �'�
` :�t � s � �.-e �/ �d� jy� �=- .t��f l�' � ��`
° �v� � k i�1"v �i�- �- ��
�l � � //��-�-�
, � �-= iv r> �� ,�. �, � u,�'� � .� �.s;e � �. L� r2 �e � ;
°�Fr��v �_, i.— � � � �
�'�� � . . �
l��i�r� /�'� ���
, � �� �o�.g ' _ ��1�, ��-�
a d 1% �s'� � �3� �9 l,��, _
` � � � �'7�i�f$t��./ iyl,�/ :c�c'� lo �'S��/
���»rsT
MEMO
To: City of Saint Paui-Row Mtce
Attn: Dan Bostrom, St. Paul City Council
From: Eddie P. Hill le��\`�C1
1356 N. Avon St.
St. Paul, MN 551 17
���'��''�_
n, � F. ��.�:�
` ,�;�: ,.
t ., ; z,,
�'�A FSrA
Subject: 2003 Right of Way Maintenance Program Public Hearing Notice
I recently received two notices from the city pertaining to property
assessment for city services. The first was for street and alley
maintenance service and the second was for Right-of-Way Maintenance
(ROW), which is a myriad of services that the city provides. Does the ROW
fee include the street maintenance service charge? These are all
admirable services and must be funded in some way. I do not object
paying for these services.
What I do object to is calling the demand for funds assessments
rather than taxes. Call them what they are--Taxes. My objection to this
type of funding is two-fold: 1) it is called an assessment which is a
misnomer because it is really a tax and 2) if they are calted taxes one can
deduct them not only from ones federal income tax but also the state
income tax. In essence the home owner is getting taxed twice.
I recognize that the mayor pledged not to raise taxes and this
probably helped get him elected, but call a spade a spade. Assessments
are taxes, politics notwithstanding.
�
October 28, 2002
Rita M. Bossard
1466 North Aibert St.
St. Paul, MN 55108
Dan Bostrom, President
Saint Paul City Council
15 West Kellogg Blvd., Room i40
St. Paul, MN 55102
Re: Proposed 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Assessment Rates
Dear Councilmembers:
tl�'� Ns
r, ,
������ `�t?
'�` v ;n -
'?Eae FSrarForvrs��(
I wish to express my opposition to the Mayor's plan to charge homeowners an assessment charge
for Right-of-Way Maintenance. In the past, our taaces paid for these services and should continue
to do so. If the Mayor needs to raise taxes to cover the cost, so be it. Do not hide his taac increase
in the form of an assessment that we cannot deduct from our income tax just so the Mayoz can
say he did not raise tases! He is fooling no one! As it is, our tases have and will continue to
escalate due to the increased value of our homes in today's market. Where is this additional taY
money going to be spent? I want to lrnow. Is this money going to pay the increased salaries of
the Mayor's staff? If we are going to be "assessed" for snow plowing, tree himming, street
sweeping, etc., then I expect a deduction of those costs from my regular property taaces.
Please do not pass this proposed assessment charge!
Sincerely,
�
� ���
�ta M. Bossazd
> � �s � n�s r
Vicki L. Miller
1129 Euclid St.
St. Paul MN 55106
President Dan Bostrom
Saint Paul City Council
15 Kellogg Blvd W
Room 140
St Paul NIN 55102-1613
Dear Sir,
�E�EI€��p
r��
`� ` ° � �
_�,�,,;
�'��rATE i�yV,�.S.`Cr`•,
I received the hearing notice on the 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program
and will not be able to attend the Public Hearing. However there are a coupie of things I
would like to mention. The proposed amount is a twenty nine dollar increase from 2002,
and even though you have not had an increase in over ten yeazs, I feel this is rather a
hefty boost all at one time. And believe me, I am all too familiaz with "General Fund
Budgets". I work for the state, and the general fund was cut and my office was
eliminated.
I read the Right of Way Maintenance paragraph and what it includes, and even
though you state within the notice twice, "The City does not snow plow alleys", but if
you have one, you will be chazged for one. I know when I bought the house almost 15
yeazs ago, they told me I was responsible for the alley maintenance. We cannot use the
alley, and I have no access to the alley from my property. My back yard drops offto a
steep wooded hill and the alley just happens to be there below. People, from who knows
where, use most of the wooded hill for their trash dump of tires and/or whatever. I have
never seen, nor have noticed any "litter pick-up" ar"tree maintenance and trimming"
unless we have had a problem with a utility line and they come out and do it. I cannot
honestly say if there has ever been any "chip sealing, patching, blading or crushed rock
placed on the unimproved right-of-way (alley)", because I can't see the alley clearly. The
property I live at also does not have sidewalks, nor does it have boulevards. Is this
assessment rate going to be pro-rated for the properties in the neighborhood that do not
have the above mentioned?
W:en you are tr�;ng to "ensure each property which benefits frcr.i the public
right-of-way maintenance pays its fair share of the cost of the maintenance", I am hoping
the above topics will be considered.
PS The city put in a street light a few years ago across from my house that doesn't seem
to know when to come on. I called a few times when it was new, and the city said it was
the cable company's problem and the cable company said it was a city problem. It is
extremely dark on my street, -as it was this morning - and a light that does not work
properly is of very little help. I gave up. Neighbors try to remember to turn on their
house lights —which in turn cost the residents money. So in perspective, I am not real
excited about this "hefty" increase.
���� �
D�-�od� � a���
/�GR�NST �"oi �'c_ �t���:""<'C.�C`�..
� �«�-c-� M /1� _S�t / G
��ea��.-� ��L ��-�� RECE[�IE[�
,��t�a-�..�-e �`e�-�--� r;; � � ,� _�,�
�� yy: /� ��� �j� j�o V;, � � =;��w�-
//✓( J� NJ , cS f O�, � f G/.7 , RERL ESTATE DfVlSIc?t�t
�x���:
� ���- - .� ��,�.� �-
�
� c��.e�-� ���� � �-,�a��
� ' �- �.�,� ���-�� �'�"�
� � ���-`�.
� a�� � ��-�-�i'� a� �.
� ti��� ��
�� ���
�z� � - ��,�.
� ��.�-�2� a-.ee-
���.����:��-_-� �- � a-��
,�-��.� �� ��� .,� --�=�, � �`
�.��_ :
�� �� .
� ��-�'����.�-�
Rabert Mc Shannack --
I 1820 Nh'mg�on Ax. E.
SatvtPau4 Mli 55119-42��
�tanirv
��
��.�iC����
o�tob�-aa�, zoaa ��� 2 s ����
Mr. Dan Bostrom REA� ESTk7E DtVisf��:
President of City Council
St. Paul, NIlV
Dear Dan and Council Members,
In regards to proposed hearing on 2(1Q3 Right-af Way Maintenance
Assessment Charges.
Vote NO. This should be part of our t�es, even if you have to raise taxes.
To say you aren't going to raise t�es is just plain crazy. You don't know
what is coming in the near future. So we don't need another assessment.
I would like to see alleys plowed. I think it would pay off in better snow
plowing. There is more cars parked an the st�eet as time goes on.
We love St. Paul.
Sincerely,�����
V � ,�,�.�,�,-� Scs�.kQ.v—
Jim and Laurel Scanlon
110 Ruth Street #3 � � ,
St. Paul NTN 55517 9 �:.. � �
; . ,.
��
/-jG',�irNS �
Paul D. Geng
1333 Dale St. N.
St. Paul, Minn. 55117
President Dan Bostrom
St. Paul City Council
15 Kellogg Blvd. W. Room 140
St. Paul, Minn. 55102
..^
r
��`� •' ��
h' ' ,-�� �./�
Fs�,"g�'' �G'l'/
y�'p c �
F/�
Sir,
Who are the Mayor and City Council trying to fool?
By shifting the city services from the property tax to a
property fee, you are only giving the apperance of not
raising city taxes. '
The same people are still paying for city services.
As a matter of fact, if you don't pay the fee when you are
billed, it is added on to your property tax bill.
WHICH SHELL IS THE PEA UNDER?
I have an alternate proposal. Why don't our elected
officials rename the whole property tax to "Right Of Way
City Fee" and then they can say that the city is so effic
ient that we are no longer burdened with a"city property
tax."
I probably shouldn't be so sarcastic, but this notice
of"2003 Right Of Way" really insulted me and rest of the
city tax payers.
I already pay $86.00 a yr. flushing fee for a service
that comes twice a year after a rain.
Please stop this behavior and be honest. I sincerely
request a reply of acknowledgement.
���
raul D. Geng
cc: Jim Reiter
Minn Tax Payers Assn.
0
��caia..�....
To: St. Paul City Council
From: Lyle & Ariene M
v'i� ����
'�Fq " � Js Oct 22,2002
F STR r %
�
I just received your I�t� on the proposed Maintenance Assessment rates. We are totally against
it. We pay over $800.00 in properiy tax each year to the city. I believe that tlus is �ough without
trying to tack on another $i 19.00 Maintenance fee. TLis would be really hard an the elderly who
now have a tough time Just PaYmg taxes and other things to stay in their homes. I again say
my wife and I totally against this Maintenance Assessment Charge.
1� ( �
�\f'� ,
Lyle A. Metty
,• � e , gE 0 aT � � ��° . �����j'�.UB e i �s�...,v. Y .
• • o� ` •�•� ��o T �
�/ •
�� • � e
T � e ti ». v U�4 ��e
s `�"�� � REAI ESTATE DiV4Sf0�S. ° �
' • , f� L � -c � �. �� � dd 3 '�' •
.� ,
o � _ � _ �,r� �„�,:,y.� p� ° Y • o
° � ' 0 1�
• a �..P ..{tLC.u`-2— �"'....� Q���C f/ o e •
][ �� ��-n.,,,..cl . l.¢.1 R- i.l..�-c�-� �"°""'�� _ '��'
T ��. ° .
: ` � � L�-°'"� C! .
. ,��� � � .
� ° r�� ,� �F
o� � � °.
/� ( 6
� o ��� y �%C�„ .
� e �'��.p �� `
e
�� . _— "°' ;, g ,x,s-- -�-'•
� (�J�C�..J W_°�.u�-r� � .
� ��� .�
, �� • .
s
' • �� -� �., a o � �F.
�' '
��
,a�� ' •.
��� a.,,..�..�L� 7 ° � 6-�"- � °
. �.� , � �,�.,,=..-� . •
. ,
.�
a ° f� . a
°° O— _ � _Q.c� ,z,sZ, ��'��<,-�_ ° •.
� � .
� � �.� o�- a^,- •,•
. ��-. /�'�` ""` � �
� � �j � 1 --- 7 •
. ,
.v
a• ,
m
� �
° �-I- � c�L�.o-o� . �"
•' � i 'vv�-�""'� � y .
0 U • 00
� m � � �-�/ � 2 �.
., e :
s 0 (.C"' �°'� � � /^��^, ,`•''�- •
.� " �,� !4 � ` s �
e �° v
�°. ° �� r� �"� �•
.
, �e��°as°¢\—��a�r. ][
• e �. s T
�l���s� G ����� o �
�'R�,sa jJoN �oS�'/�z,nn ___ _ ____
t�E�'RvP°S��r� ��a� Ri��-�7 a +.���-
F� ���,/ y�q�a✓c� �1S"S �'SS t C�`--f-R � �i � . _.
.�/in �t�3���,vey �G�rn�s
7i-�is�'�vPos� C,'
�G}i' p`C, G a% c�1��1 /J � � - -
�� p�` /�G �. �l'�/St"�y�l � — -
�'Ral �a�c� � �✓o �/�.� / -
l
� t�%�v�C�. - - - -
��.s"��,3b �'� _ _
SrP��C ��s�s���-
pr��i'/��ai���.�y���s� -
z s � .�,� �,������ ��,��r�-�� _
G1�o I/ lp �+nd'z-�� N�
ri �..
J �
.1�`,�`�i! �
K
i3r�
.. > . `iJiJ%
N � R � � � ..
i��S��!';
f1GA�Ns%
�°
1d75 St.Paui Ave
St.Paui, MN 55i16-2534
October 23, 2002
Mr. Dan Sostrom,
President, St.Paul City Councii
15 W. Keilog Blvd #140
St.P�ul, MN S51Q2-1613
; _���`�J{��. ,
:, � r eL,'
����sr: ^' � `':�i
. �'rf�
�
Re: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Program
First o#f: to imply, as the notice does, that charges for public street maintenance are
not real{y a TAX, is quite redicuious.
Second4y: I can appreciate--and never have questioned--the responsibi{ity of property
owners to be responsible for SiDEW,4�K shoveiing and boulevard grass mowing.
HOWEVER i object to the way the snow plow blocks the exit/entrance to ..Loyal tax-
payers' driveways. And now 4 have to pay more for the inability ta drive out of my
driveway in the eariy morning after the speeding piows have iced me in.
i don't know what the answer is to this major probfem but , in this highiy technalogicai
age, it seems to me there shouid be a soiution somewhere.
And, do inform the mayor and your associate Coucil members that the definition of
"assessment" in Webster is: "....a valuation of property #or the purpose of taxation."
NO NEW TAXES for homeowners. But how about RAISING GAS TAX for the hordes of
maniacal speeders frequenting St.Paul Avenue Winter, Autumn, Spring and Summer?
Wi�� rM o�'��
President Dan Bostrom
Saint Paul City Council
15 Kellogg Blvd W. Room 140
Saint Paul, MN 55102
October 23, 2002
Dear Mr. Bostrom
������c�
`�^ �
�' � !Cu;
'� �sr
�
The proposed increase for Maintenance Assessment Charges is a great increase for
older people who are trying to stay in their homes. It is higher than you would get
JV'itZ1 3 ��i1t ;i.CTZ2S�. it 1S 1TICTESSZt�1 �7j� .'CCOri�S 2 fOOL rilOT'e WY11C�1 COTrieS t0
another 53.00 and this doesn't cover the sununer assessment. That is a big
increase. It would be better to increase it slowly, over the next few years.
It is one thing for a politician to campaign on not increasing taxes, and get around
that by increasing other areas that impact home owners. I live in a very small one
bedroom home, and I thought I would be able to afford living here into my old
age. I believe it is cheaper for the city and county to keep people in their homes
rather than have to subsidize them in nursing homes or housing programs for the
elderly. I would like to remain in my home, but it will be a hardship for me to pay
a$137.00 assessment charge, and another $100.00 tax hike if the school
referendum passes. And where would I go if I can't stay in my home?
I own one small, modest car, that I try not to drive as often as I could because of
environmental concerns. I walk, I take the bus, and drive only when I have to. I
have very little impact on roads, and I I�ow it is my duty to share community
needs, but it should be more equitable. I don't think measuring footage measures
impact on streets. Cars, size of cars, how many cars, trucks, etc make more sense.
If we were developing a environmental consciousness, and hoped to change
peoples dependency on automobiles, we need to add some incentives, like credit
for not using cars, for walking, using bikes, public transportation when possible.
We need to raise peoptes consciousness about cost and use and what is good for
the environment is better for us economically.
Thapk you for your attenrion G �i���������� ''
�/��
Sincerely, Betty LaSorella 22 Belvidere St St Paul, MN 55107
ii-bb-t�z 5:39PM FROM THOMAS FINN CIN�IPANY 612 45d 8424 p.q
November 6, 2002
President Dan Bostrom
St. Paul City Council
15 Kellogg Blvd., Room 140
St. Paul, Miunesota 55102-1613
Re: Right of Way Maintenance
Program
6l5 Drake Street
Dear Sir:
We have owned the property at above address since 1983. 5ince 1985, we have had to
plow snow in the winter months from ihe location of Watson to our fence gatc because
your drivers on city plow trucks seem to forget that we aze in existence. The entire lengfh
of Drake Street has been shortened.
Sometime ago we also found that the city was billing us around $1600.00 per yeaz for the
entire length of Drake Street (which was closed at our gate to Shepherd Road) and the
southem frontage on Shepherd Road.
Drake Street was also under difficult navigation for about lyeaz recently due to sewer
consiruction. The contractor atso ]eft huge hot holes in front of our gate a�d when we
tried to get something done about it, we were told that the city would do nothing.
Is this new chazge being added to ihe estimates received lately for server and street
maintenance?
Sincerely,
Thomas Fi�� pany �
� 6
J. es Walsh
"s*!ml
11/ 06/2002 09:40 FA% 6123a97990 TCF BANA CENTRAL @1001
ax
Date: ��-
To=
Companylllepartrr,ent:
Fa� A*umber: ( 5/—a L
SenY By; 1�'��
I`
Phoxie #:
�OV
��
�� E ��
Ivo. of pages (� inciudes covcr sheet
oo�-by74
Nlcssage:
Fax #: (612)339-7990
�� �
�� D
��� . �
���e
impunam Nonec;
"ITi> rnMmunic;itmn is unrndcd suiely to Ix: vsni by �hc inA�vtdu�l „r ci�u.� m�ehich it ix:iJ<h'csicq. h�m.
�.,hmhi>pn�-iie_cd.enmiilemiaLoro�henvisep,Y,bil>hrdt,ylu��l'mmJimla>ure. � .
- C,�mmr� mibmratran
ii'ynu arc no� fl�r imn�ded �ceiDinu, or nn cn�loycc or a, rnt ajponsiblc Ibi dclivering ihu nk,iv�c Io A�c mlcnct • i
hell`hy nMifi�� th�l �it)' y�i��4�ppp{ipn. AiStriAuUOn nr eJytn!! DIlbiS GonimOn�Cneiap ie SII121I
li �vu ha�r nxci.•cA diis cummunfc�ii - u rccipicnt, Ynu am
on in crtor. ple�sr qn�il� Ihe <endv minKdi�tely ot �hc pninii�' n oh���e and rrnnn i� h��
I! S. rovt ro �hc scnJcr ar tlic �An.�c �lalresv
,�,�6/2002 09:40 FA% 6125�97990 TCF BANR CENTRAL �002
November 5, 2002
President Bostrom
City o£ St Paui
1Zoom 240
15 Kellogg $Ivd W.
St. Pau1, MN 55102-1613
RE= Right-of-Way Maintenance Prog�am
bear Mr: Bosuom:
d`
��
$�ng a properiy owner on a limited budget, T am opposed to the proposed right-of-way
maintenance program, 'I'h15 $9�.00 should not be assessed as I received any earlier one for
$fi8.00 which seems to cover the same services,
1'eaz' after year property owners a(ways seem to get at least one assessment for some service or
other• I, as a properiy ou�er was under the imp�ession that all of these services were covered in
our properry taxes.
I would iike an explanation as to why property owners continue to receive fees for the same
assessment over and over again.
If you have any queskons, please feel &ee to contact me at 651-644-5640.
Sincerely,
�
a patmy
962 Sherbume Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104
��A��Sr
_ _ __. _ . _ _ . _ �. �
Greg Blees � 2003 Right of Way Maintenancg, _. _. ._� ,. �. _. Page 1,
From: "Bryant, Bruce" <bbryant@pioneerpress.com>
To: "'2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us"' Q003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 1 0/30/02 1 026AM
Subject: 2003 Right of Way Maintenance
Hello,
I am the CFO for the St. Paul Pioneer Press. I do not write for the paper
so this is not an inquiry related to that. It is a business inquiry only.
We just received your mailing about the 2003 Right of W ay Maintenance
Program. Could you please answer the following questions for me prior to
the hearing to clarify this for us.
1) In 2002 and prior years, was this referred to as "Street Maintenance
Service Charge"?
2) Is the program expanded for 2003? In other words when you say this
includes weeping, litter pick up etc. is the City now going to sweep our
sidewalks, ciear off snow and pick up litter?
Please let me know as soon as possible.
Thanks, Bruce Bryant
I can be reached at 651-228-5023
_�__ _ . __, . ��_ __� w, . ___.._ �.- _ ---,
GregBlees_ �� ����, ,._�, Page 1 �
From: "kevin carlisie" <kevincarlisle@usfamily.neb
To: Q003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/29/02 10:10AM
Subject: request for information
I am a resident at 1373 Simpson St in St Paul. I would be interested in making future comments and
suggestions to the maintenance program. However, I'd first like to get a copy of the program itself. More
specifically, how do I get access to the cities future plans tor roads; resurfacing, improvements, etc... I
would like to also make traffic suggestions. E.g. I strongly suggest a stop sign at the corner of Frankson
and Arona. During the state fair, and witness two very close calls.
Thanks,
Kevin Carlisle
St Paul Resident
------ http://USFamily.NeUinfo - Uniimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------
_ . u . . _. .. __ _ _. _ __ . ---_
Greg Blees Right of Mamtenance Program Question , _ _.. . __ . ., . . .. � _ _ . Page� 1
From: <SWANSON_MATTNEW_JC�2Lilly.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/28/02 9:40PM
Subject: Right of way Maintenance Program Question
Dan Bostrom,
I received my 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program Public Hearing Notice
in the mail and was given the opportunity to email you with any questions
pertaining to the charges to my address.
On the statement I qualified for Class 3& 4. This would include that my
properry is rental property and that I have an ailey. My question is
whether or not I should be charged for alley maintenance due to the fact
that I do not have a garage and therefore do not use the alley at all. My
house is simply positioned at the entrance to the alley, yet I do not use
it at all.
Ilookforvvardto yourresponse.
Matthew Swanson
156 McBoal St.
St. Paul 55102
(651)602-9703
_�_ ... _. __� _�__ __ __
Greg_Ble,es Question about County Roads __,_. . _. � ._... . _... _ __ .... . � �. . �. . _ _ . W. _ _ .,.. . � � ..Pa9e ? i
From: "michele hanson" <mchanson58C�hotmail.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/25/02 2:52PM
Subject: Question about County Roads
I live on Larpenteur Avenue which is maintained by Ramsey County. Are my
assessments paid out to the County since I never have a City of St Paul crew
do any of my street work? Just wanted to know how this works.
Thanks,
Michele Hanson
696 East Larpenteur AV
St. Paul, MN 55117
651-774-8807
Unlimited Internet access -- and 2 months free!' Try MSN.
http:1/resourcecenter.msn.comJaccess/plans/2monthsfree.asp
___w._ � . _ � � . _. _ _
��Greg'Blees �ROW Budget .. _ ��� � � � � - _ . _. Page 1 �
From: <Jcopesetic@aol.com>
To: <2003Row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11 /4/02 11:48AM
Subject: ROW Budget
Can you please provide me a detail breakdown of the 2003, 2000 and 1998
Maintenance budget. Can you aiso provide me the reasons or justification for
the increase in the 2003 ftate? W hat goes into the summer maintenance versus
winter maintenance?
Thank you,
James Copenhaver
919 Ciear Ave
St. Paul MN, 55106
� __
Greg Biees - Righf of Way maintenance program �✓- Page 1, 4
From: "Karine Thual" <Karine.Thual@toro.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 12:47 P M
Subject: Right of Way maintenance program
My properry ID is 102823120036 and my name is Karine Thual.
In the past few weeks I have received 2 Assessment charges. I have
purchased this home in dune 2002 and wouid iike to know why I have to
pay a full amount for year 2002 itself even though I have oniy lived
there since June.
Aiso, I beiieve that the Stanford street block 1200 could need some
improvement in leveling and maintenance work. Let me know if there is
anything in the plan for year 2003.
Thanks in advance for your help -
Karine Thual
_, �. _...__r_�..
� Greg Blees - Right-Of-1/Vay Maintenance Program Page 1 i
From: "TOM R WAITE" <waitetom@msn.com>
To: 4003row@ci.stpaul. mn. us>
Date: 10/23/02 9:45AM
Subject: Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program
Comments regarding Nov. 6th Public Hearing Notice.
City Council Members:
1 understand the necessity for maintenance fees. However i believe aifey maintenance fees could be
somewhat Iowered. We have a couple of dozen (seems like more) big heavy garbage trucks going
through my and my neighbor's alley, and they seem to be the cause of most of the maintenance charges,
especially for filling in low spots and repairing broken up pavement caused by the trucks. They even
damage garage aprons (iwo across the alley from me alone).
Either they should pay a portion of alley maintance fees, or we ( the City) should have a system wherein
we get one truck to pick up aIl the rubbish in one alley at one time. That way only one truck a week would
be needed, reducing the damage to our alley.
Please do what you can to lessen the alley damage to lessen the cost to us for that maintenance.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Tom R. Waite
Citizen, Voter, Taxpayer
_ _ _ _. __�___. .__ ._ ._ . . _�.._ ...
Greg Bleea - Gre�eids Sponsors offer Scholarship ._ Page 1-�
From: "Bret Johnson" <johnson@pertormanceweb.org>
To: <peter.white@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10l23/02 8:08AM
Subject: Gre�elds Sponsors offer Scholarship
Hello! We have aii heard of Brownfields and Greenfields. The Performance
institute is happy to announce that "Gre�elds
2002" is right around the corner. If you have not yet received the
information regarding "Gre�elds 2002" I would be
happy to send you the agenda and explain a deal that has been arranged
through our cosponsors to reduce the cost for
attendance. In recognition of tight travel resfictions and budgetary
restraints across the nation our cosponsors have made
it possible for us to offer a substantial price reduction for most
federal, state, and local agencies, as well as not-for-profit
organizations.
These discount passes are limited in number. For information on the
conference and discount passes just reply to this
email. As always, feel free to share this info with your contacts. Thank
you,
BretJohnson
Associate Director
Environmental Performance Institute
P: (703) 894-0481 ext. 205
F:(703)894-0492
jo h nson@pertormanceweb.org
_ _.
: Greg Blees - ROW Maintenance Program . _ Page 1 I
From: "Joe" <jmarro@attbi.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 7:39AM
Subject: ROW Maintenance Program
Council-
I intend to attend the hearing regarding the increase of assessment for right-of-way maintenance on
November 6th, but in the event I cannot due to work hours, I am writing to he heard.
i received notice yesterday regarding the increase and wanted to express my disappointment in the
proposed amount. The notice I received states that there has not been an increase in "summer street
maintenance assessment in over ten years". Regarding that statement, it seems fair enough as I rea{ize I
have not seen any change in the tasks related to this maintenance in the five years I have resided at 413
Burlington. So the question 1 pose is why should there be an increase? I am the onfy one that trims any
trees and picks up any trash on the street when needed. I have never seen a city crew pertorm any of
these tasks on this road. As a matter ofi fact all I have seen is an occasional hole dug in the street, leading
to a loss of water and cones and patches on the street. In one more recent instance, the hole and patch,
which was repeatedly played with, was a two year project-apparently for a water leak.
This stretch of Burlington Road which "horseshoes" the bluff around Totem Road is somewhat of an
isolated area. When electricity goes out, eight times in the last five years, we are the last to be restored.
When it snows, we are last to be plowed, or more than Iikely, because it is an oiled street being assessed
the same rate as a paved street it is scraped poorly because of iYs uneven nature and massive amounts
of salt and sand are spread in an effort to keep our vehicles dirty and the streets sloppy, providing what I
guess is considered "safe passage".
1 believe it was two years ago that the street was chip sealed. I suggest the city contacts a reputable road
builder to realize the waste of effort and money for that type of maintenance on a road in this poor a
condition. I would rather be assessed for a new paved road!
My concern is that this increase is not justified based on the lack of maintenance effort on the cities part.
This particular oiled street is classified incorrectly, and lastly, I must say I agree with the following
statement in the notice:
"This proposed Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment will ensure each property which benefits from
public right-of-way maintenance pays iYs fair share of the cost of the maintenance."
So. appropriately, the assessment on this particular stretch should really only be based on an occasional
layer of salt and sand being spread down in the winter months a�d a one time chip seal.
Regards-
Joe Marrone
413 Burfington Road
Saint Paul, MN 55119
651-714-9116(h)
612-670�003 (cell)
_.. _. _ . w. _ ._
Greg Blees - Right-of-Way Assessment Charges Page 1;
From: "Stacey Marilyn" <marilynshea@earthiink.net>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 10:04PM
Subject: Right-of-Way Assessment Charges
My hope is that if these increased charges get passed, we will see more return for our doliars. I certainly
don't see much litter pick-up or street cieaning now, and St. Paul streets are notoriously undervplowed.
Plow after every significant snowfall and don't plow around ANY vehicles; tow them all! The sanding and
salting just create huge ruts in the street and that is not what I want to be paying 4or. A{so, last summer
my street had an unrepaired pothole in it for months. Barricaded yes, but unfixed for an unreasonable
amount of time. Charge us more if you're going to but make those dollars count in visible services to the
people who provide them!
Sincerely,
Marilyn Stacey
48 West Jessamine Ave
St. Paul
i Greg Blees - assessments Page 1�
From: <PDeva11306@aol.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 5:58PM
Subject: assessments
My property number is: 2�2922430119-1306 Payne Avenue. I have a 25 foot lot.
According to my calculations the cost wouid be 5925. 25 X$1.80 =$45.00.
25 X.57=$14.25. Right or wrong?
i also have a tree that looks like it is growing right into the upstairs
window. Could you please direct this to the right party?
Thank you.
Patricia DeVallier
1306 Payne Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55101
� Greg Blees - Proposed Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program � �� Page 1 �
From: <Kanadul@aol.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 4:18PM
Subject: Proposed Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program
Dear Sir,
I am writing conceming the proposed charge for Right-Of-Way Maintenance. We live on a cui-de-sac in
the upper east side of St. Paul. If the maintainence charge goes up, most of my neighbors and myself
would like to see our streets plowed right away during the winter. A few years back we never got plowed,
until many of us calied and complained. Then a private plowing service was hired. It seems like the
cul-de-sacs in our area get unnoticed continuously thoughout the year.
We live on a slight hill and there is little traffic. So if it snows a good amount ovemight no one can get up
the hiff to go to work. Sometimes the plow truck does not come untii 2 days Iater. When the streets are
being plowed the hired service plows away some of the grass area. I do know the city will replace it in the
spring, but I wouid think the plow drivers could do a better job.
I think the cul-de-sacs are often overlooked, and if the people in these neighborhoods are to pay this
increased rate, then they deserve the same prompt service as everyone else in St.Paul. This includes
taking care of road/street repairs in the spring and summer. People shouldn't have to call and ask for their
street to be patched or placed with crushed rock. This should be a part of normal maintenance by the city.
I can't even remember the last time the "city pianted" trees were trimmed in our neighborhood.
Thank you.
Page 1 of 1
Greg Blees - Proposed 2003 Right-Of-Way Assessment
From: Devora Molitor <kpmol@infi.net>
To: <2�03row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: li/6/2002 227 PM
Subject: Proposed 2003 Right-Of-Way Assessment
I am opposed to the 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment Charges.
Unfortunatefy, I am unable to attend tonights Public Hearing, so I hope you
will consider the following carefully.
I am NOT opposed to paying for the needed Right-Of-Way costs. I am opposed
to the method of payment. Norm Coleman's claim to holding the line on
taxes was partly made possible by shifting funding for some of our
infrastructure costs to fees. I prefer to have my property taxes go up to
pay for these services. The reasons are:
1. Property taxes are based on value. People with expensive homes are
better able to afford these costs than the people who are struggling to
barely hang onto an entry-level home. (In fact, I may well wind up paying
more under an addition to property taxes than as an assessment.)
2. As a property tax item, these items are deductible on InCOme Taxes. As
assessments, they are not.
Thank you for mnsidering my ideas,
Devora L. Molitor
21 Morningside Drive
St. Paul MN 55119-5006
(651)730-7184
kpmol@infi.net
file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\GregB\Local%20Settings\Temp\GW}00OO1.HTM 11/6/2002
Page 1 of 1
Greg Blees - RIGHT OF WAY MAINTANCE
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
"Kenneth O. Turner Jr.,M.Ed." <turnerk@augsburg.edu>
<2003row@ci.stpa ul. mn. us>
11/6/20�2 1:45 PM
RIGHT OF WAY MAINTANCE
To whom it may concern:
My name is Kenneth Turner I own two properties in St. Paul and to ask for more
money to be spent will not only hurt us home owners but also my hurt people who
are just making the payments each month. Since the school board will get 18
million dollars of our tax money this year and tax's are going up this year as
weii as heating are homes will go up, we can't afford any more raises in Yax
money. As a tax payer what more am I to pay to live in St.Paul or the state for
that fact. If it turns out I have to pay this increase what more service will I
receive from the city. Will tress be cut and trimmed, will our streets be
cleaned more that just once a year. Will be able to get our streets plowed as
soon as we have a heavy show or will we have to wait a week before our streets
get plowed. If we must pay more money, then many of the services need to change
for the tax payers of
this city. Thank you for your time Kenneth O. Turner
Kenneth O. Turner Jr., M.Ed.
Academic Advisor
TRIO / Student Support Services
Campus Box #47
Tel. (612) 330-1311
Direct (612) 330-1314
Fax(612) 330-1360
turnerk@augsburg.edu
file://C:�Documents%20and%20Settings\GregB\Local°/a20Settings\Temp\GW}00002.HTM 11/6/2002
_ _ , . __ _ .__ . _
Greg�Biees _2003 r o w � �aintenance,program_notice ___ , _ _ � Page 1, �
_.
m
From: <cbstangl @juno.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/29/02 12:08PM
Subject: 2003 r-o-w maintenance program notice
1 support charging nonprofits their fair share of these expenses.
However, it is cruciai that any fee continue to be tax deductibie for
taxpayers.
Otherwise, we are just giving money to the feds and that doesn't
make any sense.
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
_ _, _ .� _ _ _
Greg Blees W r�tten Statement for 2003 Right of W ay Public Hearing __ __ , ._,._. _____. Pa9?_?_;
From: "Micheile Altier" <micheilerambo@hotmaif.com>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 11/?J02 12:13PM
Subject: W ritten Statement for 2003 Right of W ay Public Hearing
To whom it may concern,
We are a married couple, both 30 years in age, with one child and we have lived in St. Paui our entire
lives. We have received the notice of a public hearing to be held on November 6, 2002 regarding the
proposed 2003 Right of Way Maintenance Program for the City of St. Paul. Unfortunately, we will be out of
town for work purposes on that day and will be unable to attend the hearing. However, we felt it was
necessary for us to voice our opinion and testimony in a written statement to be considered by the City
Council.
The proposed Right of Way Assessment (the "assessmenY') raises several concerns on our behalf. To
begin with, the increased assessment is essentially an increase in the cost of a service provided by the
city to be received by the consumer, i.e. the homeowner and taxpayer. W e believe a process should be
implemented in order to ensure the quality of the serviCe to be provided by the City meets minimum
standards, as agreed to by the taxpayer, prior to payment of any assessment. We can provide many
examples of a lack of quality in the service currently provided by the city including:
a) little or no boulevard, tree or sidewalk maintenance • for the past six years, the has been no tree or side
walk service at our residence, despite the obvious need for such services;
b) inadequate and untimely street snow piowing service - we live on the corner of our block and every time
(the term "every" is used intentionally and literally here) the city has plowed our streets for the past six
years, the plows have left massive snow banks in the street, sometimes five feet high and six or more feet
wide, which block the corners of the sidewalks and make them inaccessible to the public. These snow
banks are often impossible to remove without heavy plowing equipment and despite several complaints to
the city, they continue leave the snow banks;
c) inadequate street sweeping services - the most recent street sweeping service provided by the city
removed, in our opinion, approximately one third of the rocks, leaves and Iitter that were deposited in the
street. In fact, it is difficult to determine whether the street was even swept just one day after the service
was provided.
It could be argued that the quality of the services currently provided by the City is so low due to the need
for additional funding; however, as with any agreement to change or modify a service contract, we believe
the City shouid be held accountable for the service it provides and that the consideration paid by the
taxpayer should be due only after the minimum Ievel of service has been provided. Simply implementing
the assessment without the guarantee of increased service quality would be unethical and could evert be
considered unconstitutional.
Second, our state and property ta�c rates have increased every year for the past three years. The public
hearing notice we received stated that current maintenance is funded by these taues via the City General
Fund and Municipal State Aid. W e find it difticuit to understand why these annuai state and property tax
increases have not been used to supplement the increasing cost of street, boulevard and sidewalk
maintenance. Can we assume that our state and property taxes will stabilize, or at a minimum, continue to
increase at a lower rate should the assessment be imposed? If not, this would appear to indicate
inadequate fu�d management by the City and state to cover its expenses and should not bear additional
liabiiity to the taxpayer.
Finally, our proposed assessment is $90. it is not clear to us, based on our reading of the notice, whether
this is in addition to the $55 assessment we are already paying or whether this would be the entire
assessment for the year. In either case, the percentage increase appears unreasonable to us given
current levels of economic inflation. Specifically, the percentage increase if the assessment is 90$ outright
_. -- -- --- _..
Greg Blees e Wntten Statement for 2003 R��ht,of Way Public Hearmg � e _ __ w _ , � Page 2:
and if it is in addition to the $55 already paid would be 64% and 180%, respectively. Again, giving
consideration to the increases in state and property ta�ces we have already experienced as well as the
generally low level of economic inflation over the past several years, the rate of increase reflected in the
proposed assessment is unreasonable.
We appreciate the opportunity to voice our testimony on this matter and we are confident the City Council
will give appropriate consideration to our statement.
Sincerely,
Steven and Michelle Aitier
176 Richmond Street
St. Paul, MN 55102
(651) 228-1497
CC: "Steve Altier" <steven.altier@ey.com>
�GregBlees Street Maintenance Proposai p � � �� � � � ,_. �. Page 1 ;
From: <.1WM8024WC�aol.com>
To: �2003rowCci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: i l!1(02 627PM
Subject: Street Maintenance Propasal
Dear Council President Bostrom:
I wiil not be able to attend neut week's hearing on the subject so
would like to express my concern in this manner. I am looking at an 83%
increase in the assessment titled Street Maintenance base on the proposed
rate. I realize that some items are being pulled out of the Generai Fund
(I'll bet we won't find the reduction there), and therein is my real concern.
Att of these items that have been put into SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS for the past
many years have cost me an additional 28%plus in income taxes as they are not
deductibie on Federal and because of the "piggybacking" are not deductible on
Minnesota returns either. This is and has been costing me $60 extra in Income
Taxes per year. That amounts to quite a sum over the many years that such
items have been moved from General Fund to Special Assessments. Please, IeYs
not keep expanding that concept. I have been retired for 12 years and do not
have a COI..A on my pension.
Sincerely Yours,
J. W. Marschall
� _ __. . _ . _.� _ _
_ u. �. _. _ _
9 � ,.. . ��9 __ .,. _ _...._. _.. ._. Page 1 :
Gre e ,Blees Pubhe Hear,_ . _ e . , ........ . .... ... . e _.. ..e_ _.. ._ . . . _ _
From: "Blong Yang" <byang1993(�hotmail.com>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11 /1 /02 2:31 PM
Subject: Pubfic Hearing
Dear St. Paul - Row MTCE:
I think that the maintenance should stay the same as iast year. People were
loosing jobs and increase the amount to almost doubie will be a bad idea. I
am totaf{y disagree with the decision. Thanks.
Blong Yang
St. Paul, MN
Choose an Internet access plan right for you -- try MSN!
http://resourcecenter. m sn.com/access/plans/defau It.asp
__�� _ _ --_
_.
_Greg Blees� 2003 Right of WayMamtenance _..__a_ , _._,..� ._, . _, ._._.. ..., __ .. .....,_ Page 1,
From: "LINDA K. BARNETT" <74502.464@compuserve.com>
To: Dan Bostrom <2003rowGci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 11 /1 /02 12:13PM
Subject: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance
Dear Mr. Bostrom,
My name is Linda Barnett. I will be out-of-town for my job on Wednesday,
November 6 and unable to attend the public hearing. I am writing this
Ietter to voice my opposition to the Right-of Way assessment charge.
I feel it is too large of an increase from the previous year.
I feel that we have to pay higher assessments but nothing changes. My
alley never gets any attention. Its never in good shape and if they ever
fix it , they do a terribie job. I do not feel we should have to pay a 40%
increase for the services. If the city wants me to pay that, then they
should snow plow my alley. I have to pay extra for that. Why do we the
citizens always have to get hit so hard. We pay enough as it is.
If you can show me that a 40% increase would really improve the
maintenance, improve the streets, boulevards, trees, litter, alleys, piow
my alley, etc., then maybe I would accept the huge increase. But from
experience, I know nothing will change except for my way of life.
Please record my opposition stance. My property ID" is 102823240217.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Linda Barnett
�__ .,.. . _�, ___� ___..
Greg Blees , 2003 nghf of wa� maintenance pro�ram public ,, , „ , _ ,, _ . _ .._. _... _ _ _.. Page 1 �
From: "Steve Leniing" <lenling@usgo.net>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/1/02 11:40AM
Subject: 2003 right-of-way maintenance program public hearing
I am in favor of charging residents for these or any services they receive, but...
It is unfair to charge the full fee to residents in my neighborhood, Highwood Hills (southeast tip of city
limits).
My Street: Valley View Place
We have no sidewalks.
We have no street lights for safety and crime defense.
We have an extremely few amount of trees considered to be on the boulevard therefore boulevard tree
maintenance and trimming is virtualiy non-existent.
In my yard specifically I can't plant boulevard trees because of the utiiities located there and I assume a
similar situation for many.
It is extremely rare to see cars parked on the street therefore ordinance enforcement including tagging
and towing is non-existent, except the one time when my wife, a St. Paul Cop tagged a car.
I've never seen anyone picking up litter, except me.
And finally our plowing is late and not impressive.
So I ask why should we subsidize others who benefit from these services while we do not.
There should be another class created for us with a smaller fee than the standard.
If you cannot see to make another class, at the very least could you give us some streei iights for safety
and crime defense so that we couid feel some benefit for paying these taxes.
Thank you for your consideration
Steve Lenling
651-578-6889
------ http://USFamily.NeVinfo - Unlimited Internet - From $8.99/mo! ------
_w_ _ � _ � __
� Greg Blees_ Right of way maintenance _, , ._ ..... ... . .. ...... ._ _ . . ,_ . .. _ . Page 1 ��.
From: "Baker, Jenn'rfer K" <.16AKE2@amfam.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/1/02 6:53AM
Subject: Right of way maintenance
My name is Jennifer Baker and I Iive at 1025 Hawthorne Ave. E. in St. Paul, MN, I would like to disagree
with the proposed amount. Last winter my street in the front of the house was not once plowed, sanded or
saited through the whole winter. I also have tons of broken glass on the street. I would iike to know why I
should pay more for street maintenance when none is done in my neighborhood. I find this unaccepiable,
since the streets in my neighborhood are not plowed, sanded or salted through winter I feel that I'm paying
the city to plow, sand and salt other cities and neighborhoods. I would like to put on the record I have a 4
month son and driving in the car with him makes me very nervous as it is and knowing that my streets
never get plowed, sanded or salted makes me even more nervous. Last year there was so much ice on
the roads around my house that on several occasions I was lucky I didn't get into a car accident, there
were occasions f slide through an intersection or had a hard time controlling my car due to ice. I have
spoken with friends that live in other cities and I have found their streets are plowed, sanded and salted
prior to them even leaving their house for work in the moming. I understand St. Paul is a big city and I
don't always expect this to be done prior to 7:00 am, however by the time I pickup my son and come home
for work I beiieve that would give enough time to maintain my neighborhood streets. To increase a charge
for a service never preformed is ridiculous. If I am miss understanding the reasons for this charge please
let me know. I just felt I should make you aware these services where not once provided last winter for my
neighborhood.
Gr�mBlges �2003 Right Of WayAssessmen4 Notice � � _ _ .. .__,_.,._ ,.. ,_,__Page,�1,=,
From: Nancy Becker <njbeckerC�?umn.edu>
To: <2003rowG�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/31/02 3:19PM
Subject: 2003 Right Of Way Assessment Notice
President Dan Bostrom
St. Paul City Council
Comment on Proposed Right of Way Maintenance Program:
I do not object with the assessment charge increase but i question why
St. Paul residents have two mid year charges in addition to the annual
property tax statement. These mid year charges should be inciuded
directly on the St. Paul property taxes statement. If these figures
were listed as total property tax due, the amount would reflect a true
figure of St. Paul taxes and residents could list this total figure
when they complete their federai income returns. I do not know of any
Mpis. or suburban area resident that pays additional mid year property
ta�c charges. All charges are listed on their annual property tax
statement.
Sincerely,
Nancy Becker
St. Paul Resident
1647 Huron St.
St. Paul, MN 55108
-- _ _ -_ _._
Gre�Blees 2003RightOf WayMaintenanceAssessment � _ ,,�e. ,._ ,_,.. Page,i
Prom: Nancy Hasse <nhasseC�biosci.cbs.um�.edu>
To: Q003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/31 /02 12:12PM
Subject: 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment
TO: President Dan Bostrom, St. Paul City Councii
I feel compeiled to write you after receiving the Charges proposed for
RigM-of W ay Maintenance. 1 would not object so strongiy to the increase
(in my case, approximately double what I paid last year) if I feit the
quality of the service was there. I am the only one on the block that
repeatedly has called over the years for potholes to be filled (mostly in
the alley). I thought our alley was bad but last summer made it a point
to go walking within a 3 biock radius (all of the homes have an alley)
of my home and found far worse. In many of the alleys the asphalt in
buckied and very rough surtace. Our alley surface is not smooth and
consequently all summer after any rain we had puddles that mosquitios bred
in. After all the media taik to be careful to avoid standing containers
where mosquitos could breed and the potential for West Nile virus, the
city was certainly not very concerned for its citizens. Have any
of the council members really surveyed the work of the city maintenance
peopie?
It is possible that i could endorse this increase if my alley would be
plowed and remove the work that I have to do to get neighbors to advance $
so I can contract a snow plower each and every winter. As you must know
this is a diEficult task, and most neighbors don't even want to bother
with an expense that they feel should be covered in their taxes. Your
notice says that services involved includes tagging & towing vehicles.
The vehicles parked on my street are NEVER towed in winter and ihis
makes the street horrible to tread on in winter. I can't remember a
time since we moved here (1983) that there was a clean path after
a heavy snow.
I believe homeowners are being taxed and assessed to death! At a time
when businesses are downsizing and ordinary folks are fighting'to keep
their jobs or having to take new jobs at a reduced salary, this increase
just seems terribly unnecessary for the history of the quality of service.
Our househoid income has not even kept pace with inflation and everyone
continues to want more $ from the garbage collector, grocery stores,
parking C� work, medicai co-pays, taxes and now street assessments. I say
enough is enough. These services should be handied thru propertytaxes
and the former less costly street assessments. The money in the city
budget needs to be handled more responsibly.
1 would ask the council to vote "IVO" for this increase.
Thank you
..,.,t�.«..,.........,.«....<...,...�......«.._><,...�......<,,>.,..
Nancy Hasse
1359 Lafond Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
_ , _ _,� � _, .
Greg Biees Right of Way Mamtenance Program Pubhc Heanng ,� �� �� _, y.... ., Page 1_
From: <EKalabusC�aol.com>
To: Q003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/30/02 4:19PM
Subject: Right of Way Maintenance Program Public Hearing
Re: Right of Way Assessment Increase
Properry fD # 082822230058
I am against the increase proposed. I feel an almost 100% increase is in
excess.
The area is an older area with many senior citizens and Iower income
families. The economy is at a stand stiil in many areas. Many companies are
downsizing. The timing of an increase of this proportion is beyond what can
be considered fair and equitable.
E. J. Kafahus, Trustee
George Joseph Augst Trust
CC: <EKalabus@aol.com>
� _w __ _ - r_ __ _ _. �. w. __
�._ ..
Greg Blees Street assessments � ' „ , , _. _ __. _, .,,, , __ r Page_1„
From: "Donald J. McCall" <doncaliGens.net>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/30l02 1023AM
Subject: Street assessments
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am in total disagreement with the logic behind your pian to assess property owners for snow plowing,
tree trimming, street sweeping, etc based on the front footage of one's lot. It is ridiculous to assume that
just because someone owns a larger lot that he or she uses more of the street. The last time that I looked
out my window there were many other cars driving past my 40 feet of my street. These are services that
should be should be provided by general property taxes since the general public is who uses our streets.
This new assessment is the classic case of "figures don't lie, but liars figure". It is a simple case where a
politician needs to save face on his campaign promise not to raise taxes. How hypocritical! Show some
character and call a tax increase a tax increase.
Donald McCall
786 �incoln Ave.
St. Paul
�_� .__ _ �_. u.� _,_ _
Greg,Blees _mafntenance .. _.� _. __. ..._. _.. _. _, ._ ._ _._ � . .... . .... ......_..,.. ?a9e�1_
From: <AUDREYCONNOLLY@aoLcom>
To: <2003row�cistpaui.mn.us>
Date: 1 0130/02 1 0:02AM
Subject: maintenance
To whom it may concern, Mayor and City Coucil,
Hold the line on taxes while we will be burdened with e�ctra assesments??
I agree that perhaps an increase is in order but double is too much.
In my case, the street is low in front of my driveway and does not drain
until it is at least 4 feet up my driveway.
I feel that the proposed increase for maintenance is excessive.
Audrey Connolly
1608 Old Hudson Road
St Paui, 55106
_ _ � � -, , __ w_ .
� Greg Blees �2003 R O W Mamt Pubfic Heanng__ .. . .... _ . . _._. _ _ _ . .. _... ___ . _ ... .� � � . � . � ,. . . , . _Page 1 '
Prom: "M&K Eischen" <mkmm833@msn.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10l29l02 5:56PM
Subject: 2003 R-O-W Maint Pubfic Hearing
Councilman Bostrom:
We are writing to express our dismay and opposition to the Right-Of-Way Maintenance fee proposed for
2003. This fee is rightfuily a TAX, and should come out of the General Fund (property tax funds), not
assessed as a service fee as proposed.
One of our objections to this service fee is that by charging for services in this way, we lose our federal tax
deduction. Many people are not aware that when a city or municipality itemizes charges for services,
these items are NOT deductible on Federal Tax Form 1040 Schedule A. However, if the costs were
covered in the General Fund, the entire property tax is a federal tax deduction. This was verified recently
with the IRS--see note below if you wish to confirm this information. You might argue that this is a
mimimai effect, but we are alarmed that not only are current service fees scheduled to dramatically
increase, but Mayor Kelly has proposed that other city costs can/should be shifted to itemized fees as weil.
Another objection we have to this particular fee is the horrible lack of service we have experienced in the
18 years we have iived here! Maybe part of the problem is that we live so cfose to W est St. Pauf, and we
can see that city's level of service as we look at our pathetic city streets--especially in the winter. Our city
snowplowing is a disgrace, there is not much we can say that is positive about that service. So how is this
service going to improve with the cost shifting to a service fee? If the city chooses to itemize this service,
can a neighborhood opt out?
In addition, our street is not even paved--it is an oiled street! We do not have modern curb and gutter, and
our driveway entry is in sore need of replacement. About seven years ago we replaced our driveway, but
not our street apron because our street was scheduled to be paved in the iate 1990's. That never
happened, and now we understand that the schedule for our street paving is years out. We realize that
paving is not maintenance, but it still raises questions about city funding...how does West St. Paul replace
curb & gutter and paving that is only 35 years old, while St. Paul still has many unpaved streets? We
would gladly pay an assessment to directly improve the value of our property--this is not the same as a
"service fee" for routine maintenance.
It is time to deal honestly and directly with the issues surrounding property taxes--and increasing service
fees and moving costs to the service fee such as in this case-- we believe is not appropriate. Don't hide a
TAX in the guise of a"senrice fee." Don't shift costs to service fees to artificially Iower the ta�c rate on
property owners. We hope you wiii consider these arguments when you debate this proposal.
Thank you for your consideration,
Mike & Kathy Eischen
833 W insiow Ave.
St. Paul
Note: IRS information verified on 22 October 2002, with IRS Agent Bob Oldham, Agent #8401270. Refer
to Publication 17--Taxes, Real Estate Taxes, Items Not Deductible, Itemized Charges for Services/Taxes
for Local Benefits. Phone 1-800-829-1040.Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
http:/fexpforer.msn.com
Greg,Blees 2003Rightof WayMamtenance�rogram�_�_ __._ _. .__. _�_.n, � e.e.n._....... . Pa9e_
From: "Adesegun Adefuye" <Adesegun.Adefuye@state.mn.us>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10l29/021:20PM
Subject: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance program
Hi:
As an homeowner in St. Paul, i begin to wonder how the rate of $58 this
year will go to $111 next year. That is about 48% higher than this year.
I did not get a raise that high and inflation rate is Iess than 3%. Why
so much jump?
I think the rate hike is too much especially since most of the
equipments do not need replacement every year.
I think you all can be reasonable in your demand.
Thanks and God bless.
ADE ADEFUYE
_ _, __ _ ._ �_ ., � _ � _. _ �. ,. .�__ __. �.
�. _ . ,.
Greg Blees _RE Proposed,2003 Right oP way Mamtenance assessment charge , , r. __ eP.. ,Page 1,
From: 'Timothy Haas" <tihaasCmpis.mvh.state.mn.us>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/29/02 1:18PM
Subject: RE:Proposed 2003 Right-of-way Maintenance assessment charge
W ith all due respect, if the City needs more money to pay for services,
piease find the courage to simply raise the appropriate taxes. Peopie
need to be mindfui of the FACT that if we want service from our
Government, we must pay for it!
__�.� _ _ �
Greg Blees �Assessment� � � „ „, , , _ Page 1 :�
From: <Homertick�cs.com>
To: <2003rowCo3ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/29/02 8:17AM
Subject: Assessment
Dear Mr. Bostrom,
For the amount of money that this house has been responsible for in the last
30 years we have witnessed minimal benefits from this particular ROW
Maintenance Program. We have an alley and a 120x100 lot on Clear Ave. which
means we paid a considerable amount last year being approximately $220.00.
In the last 30 years the alley has been repaired twice and we neighbors are
responsible for paying for the plowing in the winter which is an additional
cost. As far as litter is concerned, we have teenagers (of SE Asian decent)
regularly cleaning out their vehicles of their fast food garbage and beer
bottles at the end of our block. This garbage remains here for days until we
who live here gets sick of looking at it and clean it up ourselves. The
reason we know the litter bugs' nationality is because we have witnessed them
doing it over a dozen times and it doesn't appear to be the same vehicle
doing it.
We have called the city about ordinance enforcement regarding having cement
remnants, branches, wood, etc., removed from our neighbor's driveway
(incredible eye sore!) but have yet to get any response after calling twice.
We also know that 15-20 years ago the neighbors of this street paid an
additional assessment for curbs and as of yet we have not received these
curbs although you already received the money. The reason we know this is
because this is the house one of us was raised in since 1971. Therefore, one
of us has witnessed the growth and change of this neighborhood and still has
a parent that can keep us filled in on the past. Not to mention that we are
third generation to live in this house so our history on this block goes back
very far.
We do not support such an increase. Our benefit with ROW Maintenance is
strickly with plowing of the street (which happens 2-3 days after the snow
fall and our garage access is in the alley) and the single sweep in the
spring and single sweep in the fall. In the last 7 years we have yet to have
anyone come out to trim a boulevard tree, do boulevard maintenance (which is
starting to wash away due to the lack of curbs that are already paid for!) or
any type of sidewalk maintenance since they were constructed over 20 years
ago. We believe that the amount we are already paying is more than enough to
cover what little service we receive especially after the last 3 winters
being so light on snow. There has to be a surplus due to the lessened need
for plowing over the last 3 years!
Be aware that there are 6 houses with neighbors that have lived on our street
for 25 years or better with good memories of living on this street. But we
have not benefited from all of ROW Maintenance's program--adding more money
to your pot is not going to make it any different.
Sincerely,
Paul & Kaiy Fick
_ u. ___ � �
Greg Blees, Right of Way_Mamtenance Program Hearing „ _,,,,,, _ Page 1
From: "Erma Mcguire" <emcguire@earthlink.net>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <emcguire@earthiink.neb
Date: 10/28/02 6:50PM
Subject: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Program Public Hearing
__ _. _.
° Greg Blees , ToD, Bostrom dat _ _ _ .. , , ,. _ , . _.__ . _. . _w. _.. .� ...... . ... . .. .. . .�. Page 1 =
To. President Dan Bostrom and Members of the St. Paul City Council
From Erma E. McGuire, 334 Cherokee Avenue # 404 St. Paul, MN. 55107
Subject 2003 Right-of- Way Maintenance Program Public Hearing- November 6, 2002
October 28, 2002
I support continued use of General Fund (property tax money) to fund the enrire list of
maintenance items listed in the paragraph description printed on the Notice of Public
Hearing Program sent to my address. All these items aze the responsibility of city
government to provide and when necessary to do so, raise property taYes.
All too ofren citizens, whether locally, state or na6onally, have found that a"new
assessmenY' allows monies to be freed up or diverted to new initiatives which might seem
desirable but moves away from those fundamental responsibiliries of (city) government to
its residents. The cost of new inifiatives whether it a new program/service or a directional
change in a present program costs real ta7c payer monies which should have conunued to be
directed to the program/services in piace. Almost never are any "new or increased"
assessments ever disconunued and government grows.
As our St. Paul City Council, the body has a responsibility to see that basic services
con6nue to be provided through tases. The expansion and/or change of government
programs and services needs to be exercised through due diligence and stringent control on
behalf of the city residents.
The Council should not approve an increase in the Right-of-Way assessment rate to pay for
winter street maintenance and tree maintenance which is now covered through property tax
money. Please feel free to contact me at 651-224-5272 or emceuireC�earthlink.net
Sincerely,
Erma E. McGuire
__� � � _ _. .. _.__._. . ,� _. .. . ..
,. --- _
Greg Blees 2003 Right of-way Maintenance Program, __ �� __ ,Page_1_ �
From: "Michael A. Klutho" <MICHAELK@bassford.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/28l02 4:AOPM
Subject: 2�03 Right-of-way Maintenance Program
President Dan Bostrom--
I am saddened to write this. I am a St. Paul resident and have been ever since I moved here in 1984.
The City of St. Paul just maiied me a notice of the "Proposed" Right-of-way Maintenance Program. As I
read it, I will now be billed on my property TAXES for city services which up until our current Mayor took
over were paid out of the city's general fund (i.e., other TAXES).
Personaily, I find it intellectuafly dishonest to think that a"she11 game" will work here. Randy Ke11y made a
silly campaign pfedge that he "won't raise taxes in St. Paul!" But all he is doing is really doing is renaming
a general fund TAX (and trying to enlist you and the other City Council members in this plan) by calling it a
"Proposed Right-of-way Maintenance Program" -- a different TAX. Again, a pure shell game. I voted for
Kelly and am greatiy disappointed that he views St. Paul residents to be this lacking in basic common
sense to not understand whaYS happening here.
I have no problem whatsoever paying TAXES for legitimate city services. Even increased taxes if thaYs
what we need. I do, however, have a serious problem with politicians who play games in an effort to try to
live up to a campaign pledge that should never have been made in the first piace. As f view it, when the
govemment was flush = we got "Jesse checks" (I understand thaYS state $$ and not county $$) but we
now face the flip side = we do�'t have the $$, so additional taxes might just be in order.
We achieve a"high" standard of living in our community (and St. Paul has come a long way since I moved
here), in part because we as citizens ARE willing to pay taxes without which our roads, schoois, mass
transit, etc. fall into disrepair (or worse, fall apart). As I see it, if you buy a car and then decide to Sorego
paying for routine maintenance, pretty soon you'll have a piece of junk. 1 happen to like (love) St. Paul and
I know i speak for many when I say we are willing to pay to keep up or even increase the standard of living
in our City. Please let Mayor Kelly know that many, many of us see the value in a robust and vibrant city
and if additionai taues are necessary, so be it!
I wish I could appear in person at the scheduled meeting But am u�able due to a prior commitment. I do
urge you and the other Council members to please VOTE AGAINST Mayor Kelly's ill-founded, and I
submit, dishonest "proposal" to shift the cost of these services to the property tax system -- which is one of
the most regressive, and instead, keep the $$ coming from the same source it has been coming from
AND let Mayor Kelly come up with a straightforward, legitimate and honest way to fund these necessary
services.
Would you kindly forvvard my email onto the other City Council members. Thank you for considering my
comments.
Michael A. Klutho
1527 Osceoia Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55105
CC: <klutho@msn.com>
�__ � �_ , � _
Greg 2 00 3 ROWMTCE__.e..,�._____._..,_._ _,__,_._,�_,n ....._._.. ,... .__._... _._ __.�..?age
From: Delia Ruiz <druiz@mcbw.org>
To: Q003rowCci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/28/02 1:54PM
Subject: 2003 ROW MTCE
I oppose to this assesment charge. Keeping a home is very xpenseive.
After paying the mortgage, taxes, interest, rubbish removal, xcell
energy, phone bill, there is very Iittle money to buy groceries and
personal needs. Now you want to take more money from us. We can not
afford it.
PLEASE DO NOT PASS THE 2003 RIGHT-OF-WAY MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT CHARGES
Delia E. Ruiz
1630 North Hamline Ave
Saiont Paul, MN 55108
- - . _
� Gre�Blees Proposed 2003 ROW ..._, _,_ _ . ...._.... a �._, _,._� _ . ... __. _ .�n.. w,.n� a , _ a, .._ ._. .., . , Page 1 �
From: "Kim Awe" <kawe@co.doc.state.mn.us>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
D ate: 10/28/02 12:09 P M
Subject: Proposed 2003 ROW
i am submitting my objection to the proposed 2003 right of way
assessment charges. I live on a one block street in St. Paul with no
alley. The maintenance on my street is horrendous. Our road at this
point is just gravel that is not maintained adequately. Snow removal on
my street is horrible in the winter considering towing is not enforced.
Piowing is minimal because of the amount of cars left parked on the
street and again, they are not towed so poor plowing occurs all winter.
I opposed 2003 ROW assessment charges.
Kimberly Awe
401 Sinnen Street
St. Paul, MN 55106
_ . _� � __. _, _ _..__. _
Greg Blees _ RE Maintenance Fees � „, , , � � _ ��� Page 1
From: "Murphy, Roy" <Roy.Murphy@state.mn.us>
To: "'2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us"' <2003rowGo�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/28/02 11:44AM
Subject: RE: Maintenance Fees
Dear Mr. Bostrom:
Regarding the proposed 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment Charges I
feel that these types of services are a public good and thus costs need to
be shared by the public via Taxes.
I would accept your logic of "billing" individual homeowners with assessment
fees if in fact they were the oniy beneficiaries of such service; however, I
look out my window and see folks from outside my neighborhood enjoying my
clean streets that I paid for? We are not some private, "gated community" as
a fee-based system would imply.
I understand that it is a good poiitical cry, "not to raise taues", but let
the truth be known and have the Mayor instead say "we will raise fees" to
pay for public benefits and do away with the ta�cing system.
I recommend that you not pass this proposal and instead put the costs where
they belong, in our taxes.
P.S. I understand these "fees" also cover some costs of enforcing
ordinances; albeit I have wifiessed in my neighborhood (see the North-East
comer of Orieans and Stevens St. W) some drastic oversights in building
standards and safety; not to mention aesthetic benefit in our neighborhood.
Thank you.
Roy Murphy
312 Stevens St. W
St. Paul, MN 55107
CC: "Ela Murphy (E-mail)" <murphye@proverbs.csp.edu>
__� � , _ _w __ _._
Greg Blees _ rate hike _ ,..� . ._� _,._.., _...,. ._ .. _.... Page�1 �
From: �Mnkjb@aoLcom>
To: <2003rowC�3ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/27/02 7:42PM
Subject: proposed rate hike
To Whom It May Concern:
1 do not understand the reasoning in St. Paul of separating out all of
these services and biiling them as special assessments to residents. What
difference does it make if you don't raise properry taxes, but you raise this
assessment? It is still an increase in whai homeowners have to pay.
When I lived in Minneapolis, I got one bill for my taxes. Under this
bill was subsumed charges for plowing the streets (AND MY ALLEY!!!!), cutting
the trees,
hauling the garbage. I have to tell you, it was a fot simpfer than living in
St. Paui and everyone on the block contracting with a different trash hauler
so they tear up the alley so I have to pay to have it maintained!!! And
having to coniract with a private service to plow the alley (you know there
are people on my block who refuse to pay into the plow service, so the rest
of us have to pay their share--this should be covered by taues!) And since
this was all called ta�ces, it was deductible from my state and federal taxes,
whereas all of these services I have to pay for separately I cannot deduct.
Property taxes are supposed to support the services needed to maintain
property in the city--they should include trash hauling, street maintenance,
street AND ALLEY plowing, etc. Please raise my taxes an amount equal to this
assessment and let me deduct the increase from my state and federal taxes.
Karen Jeffords-Brown
1928 Berkeley Avenue
.__ _ �._
Greg Blees �2003 Right of Way Maintenance Program _ ��� � Page 1�
From: <Isrobin@att.net�
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/26/02 3:16PM
Subjeet: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Program
! am not sure by reading your informatio� if this charge would be instead of or
in addition to the street maintenance fees we already pay. In any case, I am
already paying $52.00 for maintenance at $1.10 per foot. Now you want to
increase or add another bill for $2.10 a foot? $99.00 more dollars per
properry!! That seems like an exessive amount of money for one household for
the few times it actua�iy snows or for the few times that residential streets
are repaired or cleaned. Property taues wili probabiy be increased due to the
schools need for money and this in addition to that is more than many singfe
person households can afford. Especialiy those of us nearing retirement age.
___ __, _�__�._ w w _.__ . n.w.,_ w v.
Greg_Blees , Right of way,Mamtenance Program _ ��� �, „ � , _ , _ _ Pa_ge 1
From: �mm, Bonnie J " <BJTIMM@stthomas.edu>
To: "'2003rowC�ci.stpaui.mn.us"' <2003rowCci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: t�/25(023:�3PM
Subjeet: Right of way Maintenance Program
To whom it may concern:
i would Iike to protest against this maintenance program. We keep getting
assessed for street maintenance and our streets keep getting worse. In the
winter the plowing is terribfe and in the summer it is not much better haff
or more of our cur6ing is gone and we are Iosing the 6oulevard. We can't
seem to get a answer as to when our streets will be replaced.
Thank you,
Bonnie and Richard Timm
1295 Englewood Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104
Gre�Blees � 2003 ROW MaiMenance Program � � � _„.� �„ Page 1„�
From: "Patricia Wafstead" �nralsteadrp@attbi.com>
To: Q003rowCci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/24l02 9:33PM
Subject: 2003 ROW Maintenance Program
Mr. President:
i cannot argue that this assessment is not needed; 1 do not have the facts to dispute that. But I do not
believe the Mayor or any of the city councilpersons now in office should ever be tempted to lie by saying "I
never raised taxes" because it just will no longer be true. You are taking city services traditionally paid for
out of property taxes and increasing it as an assessment. In my book that is a tax increase. I cannot
argue that a tax increase is not justified but please call it what it is.
Dick Walstead
953 Hyacinth Ave E
�__ _,. _ � _ _. -- .�_
Greg„Blees . 2003 RightofvWayMaintenance,Program_Pubiic Hearing,Nofice _ _ _, ,. �, .,. _ . _._ _...,_ ?age 1_;
From: "RICHARD J. FARRIMOND" <udandabfarr@juno.com>
To: c2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10124/02 8:03PM
Subjeet: 2003 Right of Way Maintenance Program Pubiic Nearing Notice
President Dan Bostrom
St. Paul City Council
Dear Mr. Boctrom:
My Wife and I are a very limited income, and the proposai
the city has outlined for maintenance of our streets is a
Iittle too high. The increase will be an additional $63.00
on our part.
I don't think that we would have minded this increase if we
were getting better servic when it comes to plowing the
streets, as we are always the last street in St. Paui to be
plowed. W hen it comes time to ciean the streets either
spring or fall there is always sand and dirt IeSt at the corners.
Our streets were oiled this summer. They never oil the circled
corners. Why they made the corners curved is beyond my understand-
ing. The oilers and the cleaners never pay any attention to them.
Even the plowers don't either. W e still have weeds growing near
the curbs.
W e really object to this high price we have to pay.
Thank you.
Richard J. and Betty H. Farrimond
1085 Bowdoin Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55116-1802
a.... P._ � . a �, w _ _ _ , . � __
Greg_Blees Assessment Rates � � � �� �� �� � � _ , _, Pa�e 1
__.w_w _� _ . ._� , m,. ..._ .._ _. �,... . _ _. . .. _ _ � . ,. �_.__e _� �.
From: Afan Hopeman <alan_hopemanCmwayzata.kl2.mn.us>
To: "Right-of-Way" <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/24/02 5:57PM
Subject: Assessment Rates
For the City Council Public Hearing on Right-of Way Assessments:
I received a notice of right-of-way maintenance assessment rates on my residence at 1543 Portland Ave.
in St. Paul. The notice is a little bit difficuit to interpret as it does not show last year's rates, but from what I
can gather by reading it, this is an increase over last year's rates. The stated reason for the increase is
that the Mayor has recommended this as a way to continue services without raising taxes.
i oppose this increase. My reasons are threefold:
1) It is based on a dishonest premise. An assessment costs the same as a tax increase. LeYs not
pretend that we are not increasing taxes when we simply shift taxes to assessments. 2) As I understand
the state and federal tax laws, city taxes are deductible, whereas assessments that benefit a particular
property are not. If I am correct, then shifting this cost from general fund taxes to an assessment will
cause the typical homeowner to forfeit the tax deduetion on this expense, which in most cases is probably
on the order of 35°l0 of the expense. Very shortsighted approach. Do we really want homeowners to pay
35% more our of pocket for this, just so certain people can claim that they have not raised taxes?
3) it is extremely disingenuous for our mayor to hide a tax increase like this, then oppose the school
district referendum levy that is so badiy needed. l'he school district does not have "speciai assessments"
in which to hide tax increases. They only have two choices--cut programs and expenses, which they have
done to the tune of some $20 million; or raise taxes. Our ciry officials shouid do the same--either cut the
budget, or be brave and vote for a tax increase.
Alan Hopeman
763-745-5023 (work)
This message has been scanned for viruses. ISD#284
CC: Councilman Jay Benanav <jay.benanav@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
. , w . __ _�. ,� __ ,.
GregvBlees O1 City Service Leveis Pubhc Hearing, ,_ ...._,._ � n W._ � e _ ._ . , . _ . „Page 1„
From: <TanyaKRC�?aol.com>
To: <pat.harrisC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/6/02 12:34PM
Subject: City Service levels - Public Hearing
Council Member Harris-
I am unabie to attend the public hearing tonight on the proposal to shift various city services to an
assessment based financing structure versus their continued inciusion in our property tax structure.
l am opposed to this proposed shift, for the following reasons:
-Preservation of tax-deduction benefits
-Full public participation in the properry tax process
-Accurate reflection in our property taxes of the true and total costs of owning property in St. Paui
-Containinglcontrol{ing the true and total costs of owning property in St. Paul by ensuring these costs are
subject to the maximum increase limits imposed on property taues
-Forcing local elected officiais and city employees to work within their budgets to manage the costs of city
operations
lt is my sincerest hope that you can articulate my perspective on this issue, and advocate against this
proposal.
Tanya Refshauge
2176 Highland Parkway
CC: <2��3rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <tanyakrC�aol.com>
_ , . .,, � _,. _ � _ . _._
Greg Blees, Pro�osed 2003 Right of_Way_Maintenance Program _. ,. , _rv ._�.Page 1a
From: <Margofoxl0@aoi.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 11l6l0212:� 9PM
Subject: Proposed 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Program
To President Dan Bostrom and the St. Paul City Council:
We are opposed to the Mayor's regressive "right-ofi-way maintenance program"
proposaf
because it is unfair. Whether a piece of property is worth $1,0��,00� or
$100,000,
the rate of assessment would be identical.
As an altemative, we recommend a progressive tax based on a property's value
or on the owner's income. A tau based on income would be the best solution;
it would force fewer low income people, including many senior citizens, out
of their homes.
�avid and Margo Fox
1905 Sheridan Avenue
55116
--_ _ _ -_ w _ _
_.
Greg Blees Street Maintenance Assessment Charges e „ _�,_. _,_ _,_,,, _.,. _, _, Page 1,
From: Judy Goetzke <goetz003@ umn.edu>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/6/02 11:09AM
Subject: Street Maintenance Assessment Charges
Please see my comments in the attachment.
Judy Goetzke
1208-1208 Hewitt Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104
goetr003 @ umn.edu
651-645-5808
._..,. �_�.,.. �._, _�. _ _ _.. __..
_ � _ _ ._ ___
Greg Blges a City Mamtenance doc � _.,,_. _ Page 1
Personally, I find it appalling that street maintenance assessment charges aze increasing
over 60% in one yeaz at the same time that properry ta3c revenues will automaflcally
increase with the increase in bousing vatuation. Were there cuts in the budget somewhere
eise that mandated tlus bombshell? Aren't there revenues in place as in other years so
that tius will be a 60% addirion to the money available as in the past? Will this additional
tax be necessary at tlus leve] in future years and aze there guidelines for reducing the tas
if moze is collected than is needed, or will it be squandered on unnecessary l�ixury extras
(we have it, so we can spend it anyway we want to)? A change of ttus nature should be
phased in so that people can adjust to it and that the program is fairly administezed and
can be adjusted to the needs of the time.
Another issue is the tag "right-of-way." Why not call it "right-to-serve?" The tag strikes
me as a slick, sleazy, political way of arrogantly implying the city has a right to taat, to
take, to bully people into submission. Brop the arrogance and call it as it is, street
maintenance.
As you can tell, I am a down-to-earth, tell-it-like-it-is person, as aze most cifizens, and we
want our ciry to be as honest, hazdworldng, and responsible as we try to be. Nobody or
system is perfect, but there aze some injustices that can be reevaluated and changed for
the better. One system that is glaringly unjust is to charge people who live on comer lots
double for street maintenance. Is the underlying assumption that people who live on
comers use the streets twice as much as the'u neighbors? Or that there is extra valuafion
in having traffic on two sides of your home? On the open market, homes do not
command a higher price if locatecl on a corner; in some cases the houses ue harder to sell
because people do not want the extra bother of clearing extra sidewalks or maintaining
extra boulevazd lawn, extra cleanup of ffee litter and leaves, or having the bother of
people cutting across their lawns, loss of privacy, and more pollufion from car exhaust,
eta If everyone uses the streets, chazges for maintenance should be equitable, and corner
lots should be chazged for only one frontage.
Another injustice is ihat everyone is chazged the same but not all citizens have the same
amenities. On my property we do not have curbs and gutters or sidewalks, but we aze
paying for the upkeep of other properties that have these amenities. Also, in the
explanation of what these charges are used for it details that tagging and towing cars aze
costs. Does the money generated from fines go back into the fund for street maintenance?
Why not make this a mini cost center and set the fines to covex the costs?
Thank you for hying to make improvements; please be sure to think through the
consequences of your systems and policies. St. Paul needs you to think clearly and act
prudenfly.
� . � � �,,, . _ _ _. �
�.u_ _ _ _ __.. . .
Gre� Blees,_ Gty Councd Public Heanng_11l6102__Right of-V�lay,MainYe�anceProgram _,, _ ,„_ Page 1�
From: "Kate Borowske" <Kborowske@gw.hamline.edu>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/6/02 i1:Q8AM
Su6ject: City Council Pubfic Hearing i t/6l02: Right-of-Way MaintenanceProgram
Dear Mr. Bostrom: I'm concerned that the purpose of the proposed
Right-of-Way Maintenance Program may be more a way to avoid a necessary
raise in property taues than a meaningful improvement in the way
services aze chazged_ �
t have been unable to find any substantive research on the topic (and
!'m an academic librarian who works with a graduate public
administration program!). ! wish l couid give you a more objective
reason for my concern, but, at this point in time, all I can say is that
it feefs too much like a political move, one designed as a good
soundbite for a future candidacy, much like former Mayor Coleman used
for his recent campaign.
If the decision to switch to a Right-of-Way Maintenance Program is based
on sound research, then I'm willing to try it. If it is a pifot program
that has sound reasons for going forward, Pm wifling to try it.
However, if this is being done more for the sake of appearances--to
avoid raising property taxes--then 1 must disagree.
If property taxes need to be raised, they need to be raised. I'll
gladly pay them.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Kate eorowske
1635 Chamber St.
St. Paul, 55106
u, ��. �_ �
_,.
Greg Blees 2003 Right of-Way maintenance program,�ublic hearing notice_ ,...._ ., we_ , a� __ .,,.. e._ Page 1�
From: "Dunbar, Marilynn" <Dunbar.Marilynn@dorseylaw.com>
To: "'2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us"' Q003rowC�ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/6/02 9:56AM
Subject: 2003 Right-of-Way maintenance program public hearing notice
I am unable to attend the public hearing regarding the proposed 2003
right-of-way maintenance assessment rates for 2003 service levels scheduled
for this evening, but would like to submit the following comments for
consideration.
Why has the city of St. Paul not increased its summer street maintenance
assessment in over ten years? It seems fiscally imprudent to have let so
many years pass, during which time costs have certainly gone up, without
having raised the assessment.
Street maintenance - sweeping, flushing, patching, Iitter pick up, ordinance
enforcement, snow plowing, sidewalk maintenance and repair, and boulevard
tree mainenance - is a basic city service. There is nothing "special" about
it, and so it should be paid out of general funds and not by means of a
special assessment. If it requires an increase in property taxes, so be it.
A tax is a tax, no matter how you try to disguise it.
Thank you.
Marilynn Dunbar
627 Grand Ave., #6
St. Paul MN 55105
(Resident and property owner, City of St. Paul)
v ... . _ _ __ __ __ _ _ ____ _ . ., . _. _
Greg Blees Right of way fees. � � � � _ ro , _ , , „ , „ _ , Page 1 �
From: <NasstoryCaol.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/6/02 920AM
Subject: Right of way fees.
These are excessive rates of increase, almost double. Looks like way to
increase revenue, but say you are not increasing taxes.
St paut property tax payer.
_�__ ...__ � ._ _ _ u,� _. _u__� . . ._
_ . ��_ �_.__, _--
� Greg Blees - right of way maint �rog fee ,, _ Page 1`
From: "don Monroy' <cokeguy50C�msn.com>
To: <2003rowC�?ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11l6l02 8:58AM
Subject: right of way maint. prog. fee
I AM IN RECIEPT OF YOUR LATEST REQUEST FOR AN INCREASE IN MAINTAINCE FEES. I
MUST ASK THAT DUE TO OUR LIMITED BUDGEi AND THE DIFFICULTY IN GETTING RESPONSE
TO OUR REQUESTS TO RE-ROCK OUR ALLEY, W E MUST INSIST ON NO APPROVAL FOR THIS
REQUEST.
OUR ALLEY RUNS BENVEEN KEiVNARD AND WHiTE BEAR AVE. BOTH SIDES OF THE ALLEY
ARE DEAD ENDS AND VERY LITTLE ATTENTION IS PAID TO THEM. I HAVE PNONED TW {CE TO
REQUEST TNAT OUR ALLEY BE RE-ROCKED AFTER THE
STREETS DEPT. CAME THRU AND TOOK OFF THE TOP LAYER OF ROCK ON TWO DIFFERENT
OCCASIONS. THE ROCK HAS NEVER BEEN REPLACED AND WE ARE LEFT WITH A DILEMA OF
DEALING WITH RUN-OFF FROM RAIN WITH A LARGE COLLECTION OF DIRT AND MUD AT THE
END OF THE ALLEY, ALSO HAVING TO DRIVE UP HILL IN MUD DUE TO NO ROCK FOR TRACTION.
IN SUMMER WE DEAL WITH LARGE AMOUNTS OF DUST. IN WINTER WE CONSTANTLY GET
STUCK IN THE POT HOLES THAT FORM. ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS HAS GONE AS FAR AS TO
PURCHASE ROCK FOR HIS PART OF THE ALLEY DUE TO H1S VIECHLES SLIDING DOW N FROM
THEIR PARKING SPOTS OR SINKING INTO THE MUD.
THE TWO TIMES I CALLED I WAS TOLD THAT THE PERSON WHO DID THE EVALUATION
STATED NOTHING WAS WRONG WITH THE ALLEY. WELL, HE DOSEN'T LIVE HERE AND lTS OUR
TAX MONEY THAT TAKES CARE OF THESE REQUESTS. OTHER NEIGHBORS HAVE ALSO CALLED
AND OUR REQUESTS HAVE FALLEN ON DEAF EARS. IF YOU REALLY ARE OUR GOVERNMENT
AND WE ARE THOSE YOU REPRESENT WHY DOES IT TAKE SO MUCH EFFORT TO GET A SIMPLE
REPLACEMENT OF SOMETHING THE CITY STREETS DEPT. REMOVED ? WE'RE NOT ASKING
FOR A LARGE EXPENSIVE ROCK OR A PAVED ALLEY, WE'RE ASKING THA7 OUR REQUEST BE
TAKEN SERIOUSLY AND IF NECESSARY COME TALK TO US WHEN W E CALL AND GET OUR FEED
BACK ON W HY W E NEED TO HAVE OUR ALLEY BETTER TAKEN CARE OF.
AS FOR THE REQUEST FOR MORE FUNDS, AT THIS TIME WE MUST SAY NO !!!!
JON MONROY/FIREFIGHTER-EMT
1732 MARYLAND
ST. PAUL, MN. 55106
651-847-0974Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http:J/explorer.msn.com
�_, ___._ �. � _ .. _..�. __
Cireg _2003 R�ghf Of Way Maintenance Program „ _„ ,,,,,, , � Page 1,
From: "Donald R. Nixdorf" <nixdorf� UMN.EDU>
To: <2003rowC�?ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11l6/02 8:46AM
Subject: 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program
To whom it may concern:
I am responding to your "Public Hearing Notice" mailed severai weeks ago.
Unfortunateiy I will be unable to attend the hearing and wish to briefiy
voice my opinion via this method.
My wife and f are opposed to the proposed "Maintenance Assessment Charges",
or better put - TAX!
At what point is the city responsible for balancing its own budget within
its existing cash flow, or is it the poficy of the city of St. Paul to
always escalate taxes? The existing tax structure, percentage based, is
designed to keep place with inflation. Therefore, were is the need for new
funds? Unless existing funds are being diverted or mismanaged there should
be no need.
From a persona4 point of view my wife and I chose St. Paul over Minneapolis,
and especially Edina, for the fact that it has a"family feel" with a
eclectic mix of people in the neighbor that spans severa{ income brackets.
The policy of raising taxes will slowiy and seiectively push certai�
residents out of our neighborhoods. It also favors multifamily dwefiings,
condos, which currently seems to be already experiencing increased
construction - namely cheap and poorly designed structures.
My recommendation regarding the maintenance of residential streets to work
through the community leagues. Different communities will probably has
different desires on what services are required for their neighborhoods.
Personafly my wife and I highly vaiue living in a community with mature
trees, and would not consider Iiving in a neighborhood without them. The
bottom iine is I have more trust in the iocal community league's ability to
ensure that proper maintenance is provided at a reasonable cost rather than
a flat fee being assessed by the city and questionable services being
rendered. Plus, there are no guarantees that the funds are used for what
they are being raised for, as opposed to whatever project currentiy has the
greatest urgency. Therefore, save the administrative hassle and cost, skip
the tax and work with the community leagues.
As an aside addressing a separate issue, Ayd Mill road should be removed.
The traffic on Snelling at Selby is unbearable. f take public transit,
better known as the bus, and it adds at feast 5+ minutes to my commute
because of single-passenger cars blocking up the road trying to save time by
"cutting through" someone eise's neighborhood. I support the view present
by a UMN professor who does not live in the area, published in the Villager
greater than 1 month ago, the city of St. Paul should be encouraging
afternative methods of transport, not re-enforcing single-passenger car
commuters by making it easier fro them to travel. My additional comment to
that is, especially not at the expense of an excellent neighborhood.
A famity oriented neighborhood is what we bought into when we purchased our
home in St. Paul. If the family component is degraded or the price of
living in the community becomes unproportionally expense, we will move.
�_v � . � �_ .__ . __ . ___. �,� ,� . , �
Greg Slees , Proposed 2003 Right-Of Way_Mamtenance Rrogram�� �� � �� � Page_i �
From: <VRenstrom C aol.com>
To: a2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11l5/�2 9:17PM
Subjeet: Proposed 2003 Right-Of-W ay Maintenance Program
Having read the 2002 Right-Of-W ay Maintenance Program proposal, we
wish to take issue with certain statements contained therei�. First, the
statement that the city has not increased its summer street maintenance
assessment for over ten years is false. Our 2001 assessment was $60.00. The
2002 assessment was $67.00. This is an 11.5% increase in one year. The 2000
service charge rates were quoted as $0.99forfrontfootage and $0.51 or
alley tootage. The 2001 service charge rates were $1.10 for front footage
and $0.57 for alley footage. If there indeed was no increase in the summer
street maintenance assessment, then we are owed a refund of $7.00 in
overcharges for 2001.
Next, we strenuously object to the inclusion of snow plowing in the
"Right-Of- Way" maintenance program. The addition of snowplowing as an
assessment is a misnomer -- this is nothing more or less than a tax increase
without calling it such. Call it what it is -- a tax increase! This is
politician's way of disguising a tax increase and we resent that disguise.
The inclusion of snowplowing from the basic street maintenance program of
2002 amounts to a 50% increase in St. Paul's street maintenance program. W e
would prefer our real estate taxes, which are deductible on Minnesota's tax
forms, be increased to cover these costs. In that way we might obtain some
tax relief through our state tax refund and property tax rebate.
___ �.
�Greg Blees R�ht of waX w....__.�,. _ ,. �� H _. _ _�..��.., » r, ._ ..w_ .___._.. �Page,1
From: "DUWAINE SPODEN" <bigdspoden@msn.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/5/02 4:44PM
Subject: Right of way
Dan Bostrom
Hello.l just have something to say about this purposed maintenance
assessment.You know this wouid be the 4th assessment that I will have
received this year and its starting to get a little annoying.What does a
person pay taxes for if not to take care of this sort of thing.W e have never
had to pay for snow plowing before out of our pockets so why now.W hat
happened to any left over money from last years mild winter?I don't think
you had to plow more than three times.The home owner is not the only person
out there using the roads so why pick on him.it seems that the people in
control are out of control in the money department and need to take a look
at the waistfui spending in the City of St. Paul.lm not complaining about my
taxes just all these little digs that come around every year.lf you don't
have enough money to go around then raise the taxes,l would rather pay twice
a year than 6 times.Thank You
Duwaine Spoden
Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN.
http://resou rcecenter. ms n.com/access/plans/defau It. asp
___ a� _ _ . . __ �. . _, _ .�_ _ . �
�Greg Blees, maintenance assessment charges� _ ._, __ Page 1�
From: <Betsy.E.Turner@HealthPartners.Com�
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/5/02 2:19PM
Subject: mairrtenance assessment charges
1'm AGAINST this proposai !!!!!!!!
Mildred E. Turner
51 S. Avon St.
St. paul, Mn. 55105
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are
intended soiely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the individual
responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, please be
advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that any use,
dissemination, forvvarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the
HealthPartners Support Center by telephone at (952) 967-6600. You will be
reimbursed for reasonable costs incurred in notifying us.
Greg,Blees . �2003 row Mafntenance Program Assessment � Page 1!
From: "Carol Zoff" <Carol.Zoff@dot.state.mn.us>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date; 1 1/5/02 1 29PM
Subject: 2003 row Maintenance Program Assessment
I am very opposed to this tactic and think it is a devious strategy.
Please ciarify for me where an assessment can be levied for maintenance, rather than for improvements.
I was involved in Idigation regarding assessments, argued to be in excess of what the improvement to the
property value was, for a capitol improvement (street rebuilding). It was ruled that the assessment cannot
be for more than the increase to the property value. This is no capitol improvement. Further I Iooked up
Ramsey County tax information and found the definition for assessments to inciude improvements not
maintenance. What has changed??
W hy has the city not added increases to cover the operations budget to the city levy.� The proposed
assessment increases my property taues by at least 10%. What other property tax a/o assessments are
proposed for 2003 for my property?
Please respond.
Sincerely,
Carol Zoff
1410 Berkeley Ave.
St. Paul. MN 55105
.,. _. � �, ,
v _. ,. _ . _ _
Greg Blees - 2003 Right Way,Maintenance Assessment __ Page 1
From: "kciverson" <kciversonCmsn.com>
To: 12003rowC� ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 11l4/0211:34PM
Subject: 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Assessment
Thank you for encouraging public comment through email.
In my opinion this expanded program is for the benefit of certain political leaders who appear to be mostly
interested in sound-bites for six o'clock newscasts in which they can ciaim they didn't raise ta�ces.
Whether you calf the money I pay for pubiic services a tar or a maintenance assessment, it is stiil money
that I must pay to a governmental unit without any choice on my part. For that reason i consider the
Right-Of-Way (ROW) maintenance assessment to be a ta�c, regardless of how Mayor Kelly or former
Mayor Coleman want to characterize it, that should be counted as such when my future tax bills are
compared to my past or current tax bills.
Regards,
Kenneth D. iverson
807 Nebraska Ave West
Owner
_. _ _ _
Greg NOTICE RESPONSE � � � � f � ' Page ? `
From: "Joy O'Toole" <joy.otoole@usgo.net>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/4/02 7:54PM
Subject: NOTICE RESPONSE
Please know that it is one thing to assess independently for services
rendered taxpayers IF, AND ONLY IF, the fees paid previousiy by taxpayers
through taxes for these same services are refunded...or the taxes in like
amounts of the assessments are reduced for those assessments. No one wants
to pay doubly for services; thus, rebates or reductions in taxes should
happen.
It would be a point well heeded that when it comes to residential street
services, street cleaning and snow plowing should happen only when
needed...and not just because we have unions deciding that workers need
something to do...since they are paid whether they perform or not.
Perhaps, it woufd be better to employ seasonal (as needed) workers since
there are still a number of people needing jobs and willing to work as
needed.
Try to consider JUST ONCE the people, like myself, who are retired and on
limited incomes w/o benefit of cost of living increases!
------ http://USFamily.NeUinfo - Uniimited Internet - From $8.99{mo!
_ . .. _ --- . -.
_ . __--- _ _ __._ � _
__.. _ _.
Greg Blees right of way maintenance assessment charges _ Page_1
From: <,lacquie3338@aol.com>
To: <2003rowGci.stpaui.mn.us>, <chris.colman@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/4/02 3:47PM
Subject: right of way maintenance assessment charges
I WOULD PREFER AN ACTUAL INCREASE IN MY PROPERTY TAXES FOR THIS
SERVICE, RATHER THAN THIS "ASSESSMENT"FOR A SERVICE THAT THE CITY HAS
PROVIDED. IT GIVES A FAISE SEfVSE OF keeping COSTS DOWN.
I DO NOT THINK I SHOULD PAY FOR ALLEY CLEANING AS THIS BLOCK PAID TO PUT IN
THE ALLEY AND WAS TOLD THAT MAINTENANCE WOULD ALWAYS BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY.
IT IS NOT BEING HONEST W ITH THE TAXPAYERS
JACQUELINE DE LONG
909 GOODRICH AV.
ST. PAUL
651222-8734
�,�. _w _ __
Greg Blees �property ID 322922230064 _ . _ � . . _ _.._ �.. . __ „ _. _.. . �. , w . .... . . . . . ... ... .. . ....._ Page 1 ;
From: "Steve Dahi" <stevedahlC�kathfuel.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 11 /4/02 10:49AM
Subject: property ID 322922230064
i believe the proposed right -of-way maint. charges are to high. We own a corner lot with a gas station and
already pay very high taues. We cannot afford the proposed assessment of $2062.00.
Steve Dahl
V.P. Kath Fuel Oil Service Co. 651-486-2634
_w. _ _ _. w __. .. � _ _
Gre� Blees � Right of Way Proposal„ � � _, _ _.__ , , „ __ Page 1 :
From: "Karen Cox" <kcoxC�halleland.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11 /4/02 7:50AM
Subject: Right of Way Maintenance Proposal
Mayor Keily must have "mayoritis" i.e. I can do what ever I want - i'm the mayor. W RONG! This increase
in the assessment rate is absolutely unfair. IYs a tax-plain and simple, iYs just done in an indirect way. My
salary didn't increase 64%-did yours?????
If you want to increase your monies, try to ticket and tow the cars that block the plow. We ALWAYS have
a minimum of 6 cars on our street alone that never move during the snow emergencies and the plow go
around them and pile snow in front of the home that don't have cars in front of them. TOW THEM!!! Make
a few dollars. Minneapolis does. Instead of following your own rules and regulations, you decide to
"punish" the good home owners and in this case the non-profits, to get monies for your budget. And
where do you think the non-profits get their monies?
You really need to re-think this one. You already went over the council's head on the Ayd Mill issue. Are
you going to find a way to go over their heads on this one too? Bad case of "mayoritis."
kc
_. �. . _
u , . .� _ _
Greg�Blees__ProposedNEWFEEfor2003RightofWayMaintenanoe ___�__.e.�.....,. .., _..__.?aQe1.�
From: "Jeanne Baumann" <.lbaumannC�Issmn.org>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 11/3/02 12:38PM
Subject: Proposed NEVJ FEE for 2003 Right of Way Maintenance
I couldn't believe my eyes when I got the notice of a hearing for a
proposed ADDITIONAL fee for supposed right of way maintenance.
I- and 6 other households ALREADY pay annually because we live on, or
near, an "unimproved alley." None of us have any idea what we are
paying for now. I doubt the city of St. Paul has any idea this alley
event exists. In the 11 years I've resided on this alley, I've only
known a city vehicle to visit this alley ONE TIME, after NUMEROUS CALLS
for repair.
The residents who live on this alley HAVE PURCHASED, ON OUR OWN,
GRADING AND RE-SURFACING BECAUSE THE CITY IGNORES CALLS AND NEVER
MAINTAINS IT!!!!!
The alley is DIRT - with crushed rock placed by a contractor we, the
residents, hired. The RESIDENTS regularly and manually grade it, fill
holes, shovel and plow it! Come spring that, when non-resident cars and
garbage trucks and delivery trucks all use this unimproved alley as a
shortcut between two streets, it is the residents who TRY to even out
the mud ruts so we can get in and out of our garages. The city doesn't
grade it, level it, or add new crushed rock to it.
And now you want to CHARGE MORE - FOR DOING NOTHING???? One might
characterize what you propose as THEFT - taking something for NOTHING!
The city of St. Paul has no right to nay more of our money, under the
guise that we are going to get something of service for it. You provide
NO RIGHT OF WAY MAINTENANCE now. I'd have to be insane to think you're
suddenly going to start because we're giving you more money. Well,
you're not having my hard-earned money.
I ABSOLUTELY REJECT THE NOTION THAT THE CITY OF ST. PAUL thinks it can
add another $112 fee to the existing $78 it already charges me every
year - to provide ABSOLUTELY NO SERVICE.
I dare anyone of the people proposing this fee to come see this alley -
and tell me and the other residents - IN PERSON - what you benefit you
imagine we might get for giving you more of our money. If the other
households are paying the same as me, you already collect more than $500
and provide no service. AND you want to take another $784 from all of
us and give us even more of nothing!
I'd love a response from you - but I won't hold my breath waiting for
one.
Jeanne Baumann
1399 Albany Avenue
SP 55108
. � u .�_ � .. w_,.._._ _.. _�_ _. _ . . _.-
Greg Blees Right of Way_Maintenance Program_ �� � � �� � �� � �� � � Page 1 "
From: <MlneihartC�aol.com>
To: <2003rowC�ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 11/3/02 11:45AM
Subject: Right of Way Maintenance Program
I do not support the proposed 2003 Right of Way Maintenance Assessments for
the following reasons:
1. These services have been paid out of the General Fund(property tax
money) which the citizens have paid each year. This should continue or the
properiy tax should reflect the elimination of this service. with a
decrease in tfie property tax.
No memtion of such a decrease is included in your notice.
2. This is a new tax regardless of what you call it.
3. Because it is labeled an assessment rather than the new tax which it
is, there is no deduction possible on federal or state income taxes.
Before the mayor introduces new programs which he has already done, he should
recognize that existing services should be covered first.
Sincerely,
Marjorie NEihart
334 Cherokee Ave.
St. Paul, Mn. 55107
� Greg Blees - 2003 Right-0f Way Maintenan'ce Program��� � � Page 1�
From: "Julie Greenwood" <COLORINGWOODSSTUDIO@prodigy.net>
To: "Dan Bostrom" <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 2:40PM
Subject: 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance Program
Dear Mr. Bostrom,
This is in regards to the increase in rates proposed for 2003.
i couid never find justification in the current rate, so I certainiy oppose an increase. For the amount of
time my husband and I have spent on maintenance in our ailey, I propose the city pay us. First there is
the nonstop litter that is picked up on a daily basis. Although, our proximity to University Avenue is partiai
to blame for the constant flow of litter, so is the lack of receptacles outside eating establishments. I
approximate that we fiil 5 large garbage receptacles a year just with the litter found in the parameter of our
house and of the neighbor on each side, and that is just what we pick up, not what our neighbors pick up.
Because of the poor draining system in our alley, our yard and garage gets flooded about two to three
times a year; killing off our grass, and covering our garage floor and plants with dirty silt. It takes
approximately 3-4 hours to clean everything off. Last winter our neighbors garage was flooded in the Fall
and remained frozen shut throughout the winter. We've had ice ruts in our alley over a foot deep, and
have spent hours chopping through the ice to clear the drains, and assisting motorists trying to get out of
the ruts. I have spent hours talking to maintenance people, sending letters accompanied with photos of
the problem to maintenance people, with no results. If the city wishes to plow the alley, maintain the
drains in the winter, and actually repair the alley so that it drains properly, I would have no qualms about
the rate increase. That would seem like a fair yearly rate. As it stands now, the current rate is unfair and I
oppose any increase in the rate.
Respectfully,
Julie Greenwood
946 Sherburne Avenue
Saint Paul, MN 55104
_._ � ._ . a _. _
� Greg Blees - right of way maintenance Page 1,;
From: "Andrea Ess(ing" <andrea@ujfc.org>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 12:58PM
Subject: right of way maintenance
Please tell me how much you make a year. Now tell me if this tax go through
will it come out of your vacation fund or become a hardship.
Weil, I make under $30,000 a year. i have one child in college and hvo in
high schooi. Paying my property tax now is a hardship. If you add this too
this will become too much to bear. Why should I be taxed out of my house?
I have no problem to pay my fair share but this isn't even so. Many more
people besides the people who live on my block use the alley, etc. This
includes NSP, phone, visitors, etc. Are they going to be charged too? 1 can
guarantee you that maintenance on our alley is substandard if done at all.
We have to compiain to get any resuits. There has to be a better solution
than using property owners. This is a single minded thought.
Did you apply for this position or voted in? Well, if you applied you should
be more creative than this. And if you were voted in, you'll definitely be
voted out.
Andrea Essling
1112 Churchill Street
St. Paul, MN 55103
_ . __ . _.. �
i Greg�Blees - I am writing�in� regards to the proposed right off way assessment. Ok first Page 1;
From: "Sherman, JefP' <Jeff.Sherman@bsci.com>
To: "'2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us"' <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10l23/02 11:56AM
Subject: I am writing in regards to the proposed right off way assessment. Ok first
I am writing in regards to the proposed right off way assessment. Ok first
off it is a property ta�c increase, you just want to collect it differently.
Now it states that this increase wiil be used for street maintenance,
plowing and sidewalk maintenance, tree trimming, right? Weil now here's my
confusion.
First, when ever there has been or is work done to the side walks you
people just assess the property owners when the work is done, so the way I
see it happening if work needs to be done on my sidewalk I'll get another
assessment for the sidewalk work, so in actuality I'll be getting double
assessed for that type of work. Therefore I'II be getting ripped off, or
defrauded.
Second, f have never seen any of the trees on my biock being trimmed, heck I
don't think it has ever happened, why am I being charged a special
assessment for that when it has never to my knowledge been done? And from
the looks of the trees it should have been done a long time ago.
Third, plow the streets, I'd actually be wiiling to pay for that, except
that they don't plow my street, well hardly ever. 1 have gotten stuck trying
to get up my street numerous times, and most of them were days after the
snow had already faiien. Why am I expected to pay extra for something that
hardly ever gets done? If 1 have to pay in extra, and the way things happen
i know I will. I want my street plowed and sanded/salted every time it snows
a reasonable amount, I don't want to have to go in reverse all the way down
the street because I can't get up the road the length of 2 houses to get to
the main road, that is ridiculous and not tolerable when I am forced to pay
extra for "pfowing".
Fourth, chip sealing the roads, I do agree that is needed, but the interval
between the times you actually do this is close to 10 years and should
easily be covered by my original property taxes.
During a snow emergency don't you make money from towing peoples cars, and
ticketing them? Why am I being asked to pay for something that brings in
money? Shouldn't you be giving me money from the tagging and towing of cars?
Litter pick up, we all know thaYs a crock, I nave never, ever seen a single
city worker in my neighborhood picking up litter. Why don't you charge the
people responsible for the litter? You know the sanitation/garbage people.
they are the ones that usually make the messes by their haphazard collection
methods, many a times I've seen the garbage people making messes. Why not
hold them responsible?
Isn't there another tax, or assessment that we tax payers are forced to pay
that is suppose to cover some of this stuff? I thought the sewer maintenance
increase was touted as also paying for some road maintenance?
You know in these time when the economy is bad why does it seem that the
expenses tend to always go up? Just what do my initial property taxes pay
for anyway?
I am curious to here your response orjustification, hey maybe I'm wrong in
my views, but I seriously doubt it.
Jeff Sherman
2249 East 6th Street
Gre Blees - Public hearin __ _ ._ �.._ �_ . . ._.._ _ ?a
..
: 9 9 ge 1 i
From: <YangLyfashion@cs.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 11:53AM
Subject: Public hearing
I am notice that this letter is for public hearing for Right-Of-Way
Mainternance on Nov 6, 2002 at 5:30 PM. 1 do not have time on that day
because out of town to Caiifomia. This hearing is too importance to me. I
personally want to let you know that f disagree for this decision. Now we
ali got lay-off and having little incomes to survive. My store getting sale
per day for only $50/day, and rental space is aiready cost over $1500/month.
Now can we survive?.
If you do not stop for the charge, i would recomend the city have to take my
store for the value of $130,000, so I will be free for the dept we owed.
My store location is 474 W. University Ave. St. Paul.
Thank for your consideration
Tong P. Yang
527 Charles Ave
St. Paui, MN 55103
Property ID:
362923230260
_ ._
� Greg Blees - 2203 ri�ht-of-way � � _ ___, _ y _ _ Page 7 I
From: "Lynne" <lynne.tfs@wspan.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 1 �/23/02 11:47AM
Subject: 2203 right-of-way
I think to charge 95.00 for the street service we get is absoultly redicuious.
1 just paid 57.00 the other day and 1'm still wondering what that was for.
They may sweep our street once or twice a year and that is about it. Our
street does not even have curbs. In the letter sent out, is states that
this if for sidewalk maintenance..ha! My curb has had a crooked block for
years and Iuckiiy nobody has ever tripped and really huR themselves or I'm
sure ! would be looking at a lawsuit. It also states that this is for sanding
and salting...never has happen on my street and I pick up the litter in front
of my house...not the City of St. Paul, as it also states that this charge
is for.
I feel that I already pay my share of the maintenance cost.
Lynne Pennington
Travel Fore Seasons
657-439-4634
800-328-1332
t Greg Blees�- 2003 Right-Of-�{Vay Maintenance'Program" � �� � Page 1��
Ftom: <neonjungie22@netscape.neU
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 10:44AM
Subject: 2003 Right-Of-Way Maintenance "Program"
Hello- It was with great interest that I received the news that as a home-
owner i am being asked to pay my fair share of the benefit I receive each
time the city engages in snow "removal" activity. I believe it is more than fair for me to share the cost of
the benefits that accrue to me from
this endeavor. Snow removai is a fine benefit. But what of snow DEPOSfTiNG? Each time the city plows
the street in ftont of my home, it
deposits a huge mound of snow in front of my driveway so that 1 am unable to exit my driveway in a
vehicle until I arrange to clear the mountain of
snow endowed to me by my municipal benefactors. Since I suffer from a heart condi6on, I must find
someone to clear it for me (at a cost ranging from $25-$50) and, until I do, I am unable to travel further
than my feet can take me. The city telis me I must park my vehicle in my driveway- it may not be on the
street- then it proceeds to plow me in, trapping me in my home. Conservatively speaking, the city does this
to me at least five
times per winter at an average cost (again estimating conservatively) of
$25 per time. The aggravation and inconvenience are difficult to quantify,
so they won't be caiculated here. So, thanks to the city, I have to spend
at least $125/year. Since this expense is necessitated entirely and solely
by YOUR actions, it only seems fair that YOU- the city- bear this cost.
Don't you agree? Surely, if it is fair to "ensure each property which benefits from public right-of-way
maintenance pay its fair share of the cost of the maintenance," then, by the same token, each property
made to suffer shouid be fairly compensated by the city for its "fair share" of the labor costs generated by
its actions. If, conservatively figured, this
amount comes to $125 and it is applied to offset the $122 you propose as my fair share to pay for the
beneficial aspects of your acts, then this leaves a balance of $3 owed to me. Where do I go to collect?
Sincerely, A proud citizen of St. Paul
Phone: (651) 645-1503
Fax: (651) 644-2505
EMail: Neonjungle22@Netscape.net
The NEW Netscape 7.0 browser is now available. Upgrade now!
http://channels. netscape. com/ns/browsers/download.jsp
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Maii account today at http:l/webmail.netscape.com/
; Greg Blees - Proposed 2003 Right of Way Mainfenance Assessmenf Charges _ __ Page 1',
From: <MaurizioT@aol.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23l02 1032AM
Su6ject: Proposed 2�03 Right of Way Maintenance Assessment Charges
October 23, 2002
Dear Mr. Bostrom:
I am glad I do not have your job_
This emaif is to communicate to you that the proposed increase for the year
2003 Right of way maintenance program is out of line.
I want to know where my tax dollar is going. What do I pay taxes for?
If my figures are correct from the year 2002, an approximate 30% is being
proposed for the year 2003.
This increase is unjustifiable as this area has been hit substantially in the
last 3 years with tax assessments. Between new streets, lights, aileys,
water pipes and raised property taxes, where do you think this money is to be
generated from the average worker? What do you think the common
worker/retired citiaen should do to cover these increases? Do you think that
they can go to their employer or government official and demand and an
additional 30% increase in their checks to cover these expenses?
I think all government workers should be put on alert that their jobs are in
jeopardy to cover their coworkers pay, instead of making it an expense to the
average citizen, and that way aI� wasted revenue will be put to the use that
it was intended for.
There are fellow neighbors who along with me, protest an increase of this
magnitude.
These assessment charges are being paid out twice a year. How often do they
come and do a thing in this aliey or street? Let me share something with
you, there are approximately a total of 30 houses around this block @$90.00
_$2,700.00 (and this is only for one assessment) that they are collecting
for something that is not being provided for. I tell ya what I will sweep
the alleys for that kind of money once a year and I will invoice you for my
services, at least we know it is done and it is done right!
Here's another thing. These assessment charges were put into place for a
short duration and they were to stop. What a jokei This does not go away
and only comes back with an increase. Our government is breaking the bank,
the very people it was set up to serve.
And here is another thing, we citizens are required to maintain the
boulevards and sidewalks, how about if I bill the city out for my services
rendered over the past 28 years? Who eise in this country can tell somebody
that they have to do something and not get paid and if they don't they will
get fined?, sounds like a Iegai mafia to me!
This whole thing has me so angered, that our very government officials do not
understand just plain basic economics, they are constantly making withdrawals
on the citizens of the community and never give anything back!
Greg Bleea'- 2003 Right-Of-Way response Page 1(
From: "Brian Saunders" <Brian.Saunders@vikingelectric.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 7:15AM
Subject: 2003 Right-Of-Way response
I don't understand, the city hasn't repaired the sidewalk in front of my
house which has been a tripping hazard since I moved in 5 years ago. I
didn't receive a 8% pay raise this year, how can you justify asking for
a 8% raise in my property tax which this street maintenance assessment
would do? I would support such an increase if the basic improvements
and safety issues are taken care of. Any questions feel free to
contact me:
Brian Saunders
134 Sidney Street East
Saint Paul, MN 55107
_. _ _ _ , . ,_ _ �. , . � . __. _� � _ � .____.� __ __ ._
Greg Blees - 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Program Comments Page 1.
From: Glen Meints <glen.meints@juno.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 1030PM
Subject: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance Program Comments
i wish to make a few comments regarding the proposed 2003 Right-of-Way
Maintenance Program.
First, I agree with the concept of moving some of the costs associated
with "winter street maintenance, boulevard tree maintenance and trimming,
and sidewalk maintenance" from property taxes to assessments.
Second, in light of the fact that downtown streets receive up to 18 times
as much service as do residentiai streets, i found it very difficult to
believe that assessments of oniy 4.4 (Class I-A) and 5.5 (Class I-B)
times that of Class III Residential (It is an even smaller ratio when
compared to Class III Commercial.) is "fair'. Yet the claim is made that
the "proposed Right-of-Way Maintenance Assessment will ensure each
property which benefits from public right-of-way maintenance pays its
fair share of the cost of the maintenance."
Third, the percentage increases in the assessment rates are quite high.
Excluding Classes IV and Vi, which have no increases, the increases range
from a low of 63.6% for Class II I Residential to a high of 190.9% for
Class V Commercial. i think it would be better to phase in the change
from property tax to assessment over a number of years so the percentage
increases aren't so great. in light of the state mandated 10% cap on the
increase in property taxes, the proposed assessment increases strike me
as an attempt to get around or thwart state law thereby defeating the
intent of the law. I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that the city
council may leave the city vulnerable to a lawsuit should the proposed
increases remain greater than 10%.
Glen Meints
962 W California
St Paul
Sign Up forJuno Platinum InternetAccess Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com
:�Greg Blees'- proposed'2003 �budget � � � �� �� �� J � � �� �� Page 1 �
From: <SPIKE720@webN.neb
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: '10/22102 923PM
Subject: proposed 2003 budget
I would like to know why the city of st paul is raising their
maintenance tees for next year. l live on the east side of st. paul a�d
was wondering during a snow emeregency while do the snow plows alaways
plow my family cars in our driveways during bad winter weather,this
cause me and my family a lot of time, digging ourselves out of your
people mistake, in other words you piow us in our own driveways causing
us hardships by missing work and appointments.Why is the city of st.
paui raising its maintenace fees? It will be double the cost now.
_�._ . . . .ea,.._ _ .,. .._
� Greg Blees - 2003 row maintenance program Page 1;
From: JoLynn Klev <tklev@cpintemet.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10i22t02 9:08PM
Subject: 2003 row maintenance program
We are not in favor of the proposed ROW Maintenance Assessment.
Sincerely, JoLynn and Terry Klev
! Greg Blees - 2003 Right-of-way maintenance assessmen4 charges Page 1 i
From: "Robert Judd" <Rjudd7@msn.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 8:55PM
Subject: 2003 Right-of-way maintenance assessment charges
I am not in favor of an increase for street maintenance. My taxes are too high now.
You say you want a separate fund for street maintenance and raise my taxes?
1 don't think so. My vote is no on this increase, not that it matters.
RobertJudd
1929 5th St.
St Paul, MN 55'f 19
i Greg Blees -(no subject) � � � � Page 1� ;
From: <RonEGii@aol.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 7:47PM
Subject: (no subject)
Dan Bostrom My taY's are high enough, this assessment is out of
line, I feel we are being ripped off by the city and we cant do any thing
about this.The way the street is plowed and alley is swept is one of the
biggest jokes of the year,and we have to pay for you plowing the streets and
sweeping the aliey. i am a very unhappy citizen of St. Paul.
PropertylD 332923420100
Ronald Gilgenbach
398 Herschel
St. Paul
_ . _ ._ . _
.,. _ y �.._
' Greg Blees - 2003 nght-of-way maintenace progrem _ Page 1;
From: <GLOPHIL2000@aol.com>
To: <2003row@ci_stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 728PM
Subject: 2003 right-of-way maintenace program
Presidend Dan Bostrom and the entire city council,
i have lived at 1434 St Clair Ave for aimost 2S years now, and i think that
the proposed 2003 assesment for right-of-way maint. is totally out of line.
The trees on my boulevard have been trimmed 2 times in 28 years and the tree
in the back yard near the alley has been trimmed once to keep the branches
away from the power lines. As for the alley being swept and cleaned—it
has NOT been done once yet this year!! Therefore, we are strongly opposed to
any form of assessment for these services that are now being paid for by our
porperty taxes, because in essence, we would then be paying taxes two times
for the same services. Thank you very much for listening to our concerns
about the above proposal.
Mr. 8 Mrs. Philip Murillo
1434 St. Clair Ave
St. Paul, Mn. 55105
Greg Blees - 2003 righ4 of way maintenace program Page 1!
From: "Stan Bougie" <sjbougie@earthlink.net>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10l22/02 6:44PM
Subject: 2003 right of way maintenace program
To whom it may concem:
Not being abie to attend your public hearing on Nov 6th. I wish to express some concems.
We live on Larpenteur ave.. Why are we Class 2 and get raised $80 per year and Class 3
gets raised $56. per year. We have no trees to trim and we see the County not the city
sweep the streets once a year. Why the difference in cost. We see no extra cost to the
city to maintain our property compared to the other property owners in St.Paul. We also
do not have any sidewalks . We are located between Agate and hwy 35E.
Does not appear very fair in our eyes.
Yours truly
Stan E Margie Bougie
(we are Sr. Citizens)
_ _� _ _ _ .
Greg Blees - 2003 ROW Assement Page 1;
From: Dan <drb1489@webN.net>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 5:42PM
Subject: 2003 ROW Assement
I believe that if the city looks at cutting the amount of time it spends
on sweeping aterial streets, and looks elsewhere, it could find the
money it needs without raising the assement. An assement for the winter
is just plain nuts. For the amount of time I see the city work on the
streets on the east side,l think they couid make due with what they have
now.
1 respectFuliy ask the City Counci! to NOT APPROVE the assement
proposed.
I thank you for your time.
Dan Boden
1489 Hazelwood St,
St. Paul, Minn.
. ._
-
Greg Blees - Proposed 2003 ROW Rates ' � Page 1;
From: "Daniel Schivone" <Dan.Schivone@worldnet.att.�eb
To: "City of St Paul" <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10i22i02 4:24PM
Subject: Proposed 2003 ROW Rates
Dear President Bostrom and St. Paul City Council,
We received, today, the proposed new rates for right of way maintenance for 2003.
We understand that it has been over 10 years since the summer maintenance assessment was raised
and that there is argument for an increase.
We are not pleased, however, with the fact that an entire decade's worth of increases are occurring at
once resulting in a rate increase of a 63% to us. An increase of that amount is significant, all at once,
especially to retired and fixed income persons like ourselves.
Our cost of living increase will be less than 1 percent in 2003 and in the best of the past several years its
been a little over 10%.
Spreading such increases out would be more acceptable and much easier for us to incorporate into ours
and others retirement budgets.
Thank you for your consideration.
Yvonne and Dan Schivone
1038 Finn Street South
St. Paul, MN 55116
CC: <Dan.Schivone@att.net>
Greg Blees - Mayor's proposed right of way program Page 2,j
Selby and Marshall.
If St. Paul is going to raise taxes (or "assessments")
spend the money on something that will really improve
life in St. Paul. Please don't let the Mayor get away
with a shell game of taking money from one spot and
taxing in another to fund his pet projects.
i appreciate the hard work of St. Paul's City
Councilmembers very much. Keep up the good work!
Sincerely,
Melanie Peterson
1386 St. Clair
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http:!/webhosting.yahoo.com!
i Greg Blees - Mayor's proposed right of way program '�� ����� �Page 1 j
From: Melanie Peterson-Naficiger <melaniepn@yahoo.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 3:16PM
Subject: Mayor's proposed right of way program
Dear President Bostrom and others,
I am writing to oppose Mayor Kelly's proposed increase
in our ROW assessments. As far as I understand, Mayor
Keliy has used the city's General Fund property tax
money for his pet projects like the Ayd Mill Road
test, and is now assuming St. Paul taxpayers will pick
up the tab.
I am not usually opposed to tax increases that support
making St. Paul a better place to live. I would
wholeheartedly support paying to fund programs for
libraries, parks, schools, lead water pipe replacement
programs, increased enforcement of pedestrian and
speeding laws, and hundreds of other programs that
would increase the quality of living for St. Paul
citizens.
But to increase our taxes to indirectly pay for Mayor
Kelly's Ayd Mill experiment, which we citizens and the
City Council were knowingly kept unaware of until the
last minute, is very objectionable.
This year the English classes that my husband is
expected to teach at Central High School have between
39 and 45 students in them. He teaches in half of a
classroom (a room that has a movable wall splitting an
originai room into two) and doesn't even have enough
desks, books, paper and other supplies for his
students. While our schools are in dire need of funds,
the Mayor wants to raise our taxes to fund his
experiments? I say, Mayor find a different way to pay
for your Ayd Mill plans besides sneaking the money out
of our winter street maintenance and tree trimming
budget.
At a MacGroveland Community Council meeting I attended
in September, Ai Shetka and Howard Orenstein pointed
out that after the Ayd Mill test, they can repave all
of Ayd Mill to prepare it to become a freeway by using
the budget that is set aside for maintaining all of
St. Paul's streets. Why has the Kelly administration
decided that it is St. Paul's job to plan and fund
Minnesota's interstate system? Why shouldn't MNDOT or
federal funds connect two major Minnesota interstates?
Funding this connection and the Ayd Mill experiment is
not improving the quality of life of most St. Paul
citizens. In fact according to the Citys statistics,
since they opened Ayd Mill to 35E, traffic on the
stretch of St. Clairwhere I live has INCREASED 13%,
which has also occurred on parts of Grand, Summit,
_. __... ___,. _ ___ .�.
� Greg Blees - 2003 Righf-o� Way Maintenance � � Page 1;
From: <Imkreter@att.net>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/22/02 3:10PM
Subject: 2003 Right-of-Way Maintenance
Dear President Dan Bostrom:
Today I received my proposed "NOTICE".
i am a single homeowner at 535 McKnight Rd ID #112822410005 Frontage 80 No
Alley Class 2. I currently am assessed $88.00 for maintenance and my notice
for the proposed amount for 2003 is $168.00. This is almost DOUBLE!!!!!!!!!!!
I realize that the city has not increased these rates in over ten years. I
believe in paying my fair share, but to get hit with a DOUBLE DUTY rate is not
acceptable. I, as well as other of the many city residents credit your city
council with more inteliigence than this.
Here are four pertinent, valid, following reasons I strongly object to my
DOUBLE DIGIT HIT:
1. I pick up litter all the time on my side of the street in front of my
house. If I don't pick it up, it stays there.
2. There is no sidewalk in front of my house to maintain.
3. There is no boulevard tree maintenance and trimming.
4. When I shovel my driveway, the snowplow plows me in at the end of the
driveway with all the hard sand and salt it carries. I am then worse off for
having to redo the end of the driveway and remove the tough salt and sand.
PLEASE NOW EXPLAIN WHY THIS PROPOSED RATE WILL ALMOST DOUBLE. I STRONGLY
OBJECT TO THIS AMOUNT OF AN INCREASE AND WILL BE VOICING MY OPINION IN PERSON
AND GET A MORE REASONABLE INCREASE.
Regards,
Lisa Kreter
Greg Blees - Right of way Maintenance Page 1
From: "Michaei Davis" <coolout@attbi.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 5:47PM
Subject: Right of way Maintenance
My wife and I are very, very disappointed with the recent news that we are being accessed yet another fee
for owning a home in St. Paul.
This notice comes approximately three weeks after Ieaming that we are being assessed $1700.00 for
street lights, curbs and new improved tar in the spring of 2003!
Do you people realize that we are in the midst of a recession and unemployment is on the rise? We have
not had wage increases in 2 and 3 years! My employerjust recentiy doubied my costs to have health &
dental benefits. I am in need of dental work that i can't afford and my wife has a hysterectomy scheduied
for December which we have to pay, because of crappy coverage and a pre-existing condition that our
previous health care provider said we didn't need! The price for our auto insurance recently jumped up 15
percent and the cost for gasoline is on the rise, not including the rise in gas taxes that will drop on us after
the elections. Property taxes are going through the roof and we are being asked for another $18 million
dollar school referendum this fall! is it ever going to stop? We already are in debt up to our ears and then
you show up with some stupid ass fee that should be covered by our property taxes!
A couple other things that are hard to digest is the fact that you are going to charge me footage (39ft) for
an alley (class VI), that my driveway or property doesn't enter in any way we could use it! In the 13 years
we have lived here, we have never driven through the alley yet we are stuck paying for our neighbors
usage. I suppose my neighbors upon hearing this will force us to help pay for the alleys snow removal too!
Its also ridiculous that we have to pay for fancy street lights, curbs (we have those from the sewer
construction project), new improved tar (we live on a dead end that gets very Iittie usage and has never
needed a pot hole repaired, because their isn't any!) and trees (St Paul forced us to pay for a new one
after they removed a 100 ft tree to make way for the sewer)!
The people of the Dayton's Bluff area are made up of fixed income retirees & blue collar workers that
struggle to make ends meet. Having us pay for unnecessary improvements to the infrastructure is a
burdon that will hurt many of us that are struggling to make ends meet and Iittie hope for the future.
Thanks for nothing
Michael and Jamee Davis
1299 E 4th St
St Paul, MN, 55106
651 774-9283
�, Greg �lees - Notice � � � � � � Page 1 �
From: KeithDeckert<Keith.Deckert@state.mn.us>
To: "'2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us"' <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/24/02 936AM
Su6ject: Notice
i oppose the maintenance assessment charge. This is the second assessment
notice of the year. My 2002 property taues totalled $284. The two
assessment charges amount to $58, which is 20.42% of the total property tax
bill. If someone with a$2D00 property tax bitl had a propoRionate
percentage charge, his or her bill would amount to about $400. These fee
assessments are a form of regressive taxation which hit lower income people
harder than those with more ability to pay! It would be much fairer to
impose a slight property tax increase. Furthermore, the city's notice does
not state what has been done to try to reduce costs. What about reduced
library hours? Every city job, service, function, and activity should be
evaluated to determine costs versus benefits. Thank you.
; Greg Blees Maintenance Assessment Charges � Page 1'
From: "LYNETTE ROHRER" <f16cdmac@msn.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/24/02 9:33AM
Subject: Maintenance Assessment Charges
City Council,
I'm a three year home owner on Burgess street. Every year I have lived hear
I have received a notice by mail of my annual cost to me for the street to be plowed and the ally-ways to
be repaired if need be. Every year that cost has gone up. I have yet to see any repair of the ally-way
except some gravel tossed in the vary large holes this summer. From my view and personel opinion the
ally-way gets more use then the front street by myself and my neighbors. I do not have a problem with
cost to maintain are roads I do have a probiem with the cost being almost doubled and nothing being done
about the sink hole problem
in the aliy-ways.
Please explain to me why I am forced to pay for ally maintenance and do not reseive it.
"I understand that the allys do not get snow plowed"
1051 Burgess
i Greg Blees - ROW� � � ��� �� � Page 1 i
From: Beth or Mike Waliin <sugarshack1240@yahoo.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/24/02 9:26AM
Subject: ROW
Dr. Dan Bostrom,
I appreciate the need for increased assessment fees
however, why wiff I be charged for sidewafk
maintenance and tree trimming. i have no sidewalks,
no boulevard trees, not even any curbs.
I cannot believe you would want to increase assessment
fees for somethings I do not have. I will not be able
to attend the council meeting, i must be at work.
I would like some sort of response to this e-mail. If
need be I wiil take the evening off. I am appauled by
this request.
Sincerely,
Beth Moshier-Wallin
Do you Yahoo!?
Yf Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http: //webhosti ng. ya hoo. com/
_ _ ..�. � _.
Greg Blees - 2003 ROW Maintenance Program P �� Page 1�
From: "Amy Loughrey" <aloughrey@MetLife.com>
To: Q003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/24/02 8:59AM
Subject: 2003 ROW Maintenance Program
The other day I received your letter indicating the increase in maintenance
charges.
Not only was I disappointed, I was disheartened. You indicated in the blue
outlined
box(presumably to indicate the importance) that the city has not increased
its
maintenance assessment for over ten years.
I have been a resident of St. Paul my entire life and I have never seen
such
growth as I have in the past ten years. Our downtown is now aiive and doing
very well, which
in turn must bring in nice income for the city. So why in the time of
incredible growth and
prosperity should our assessment charges increase?
Not to mention what you are proposing is a 164°/a increase to my
assessment charges. Do you realize my raise was only 324%??
i urge you NOT to pass this proposal. Not only will you Iose residents to
less expensive
suburbs, the remaining residents won't speak as brightly about the city of
St. Paul.
Thank you.
Amy J. Loughrey
Evaluator
MetLife Auto & Home
952-948-5050 X7774
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is for the intended addressee
only. Any unauthorized use, dissemination of the information, or copying of this message is prohibited. If
you are not the intended addressee, please notify the sender immediately and deiete this message.
_ ._ _ . _
I Greg Blees - 2003 right of way mntc program Page 1 i
From: "Barb Meyer" <barbara.meyer@rnva.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaui.mn.us>
Date: 10/24/02 S29AM
Subject: 2003 right of way mntc program
We are strongly opposed to having to pay extra for street maintenance or
tree trimming
of boulevard trees.
If the city needs more morney, I would suggest they start looking at having
some of the non-profits pay some sort of property taxes or a percentage of
what they shouid pay. From looking around at all the new
buildings/additions going up, they must have support money coming from their
members.
I think we need to take a look at where we have been spending money in St.
Paul - putting where we need to spend money - what we have coming in - and
do some reorganization. Our spending is aIl out of proportion. We have
focused too much on the downtown the last 8 years and forgot about the
residents who are paying the bills.
Nothing is done about the animal problem in Highland Park, i.e., the deer
problem that is now overv✓helming for us. Say nothing of the other animals
we "live" with in this area.
Barbara and Roger Meyer
1741 Colvin Ave.
St. Paul 55116
_ ._ _ . _.
Greg Blees - 2003 Righf-of-way maintenance Page 1'
From: <HankKBOGQWQo cs.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 6:19PM
Subject: 2003 Right-0f-way maintenance
1 do not feel that the proposed method is the proper way to maintain our
streets. When a fee is accessed on property it is not tax deductible.
Why not forget about looking like heros when you do not raise taxes.
Lets have some common sense applied to our operating revenue problems.
The continual attemps to charge fees just erodes the retirement pay seniors
receive.
Raise the taxes so we can at least deduct it on our federal and state taxes.
If there is a problem with tax exempt property, then charge tax-exempt
property for services.
Henry J Gillis
2209 Mitchell Ave.
St Paul MN 55119
i Greg Blees - Right of 1Nay is a bad idea �� Page 1���
Prom: "Doug Hanson" <Doug.Hanson@visi.com>
To: <2003row@ci.stpaul.mn.us>
Date: 10/23/02 620PM
Subject: Right of Way is a bad idea
Today 1 received the notice on the 2003 Right of Way Maintenance program. I believe this program is a
bad idea. Why make our taxes so confusing. It seems that the city is trying to hide an individuals tax rate.
It is deceiffui to continue to invent new types of taxes. The intent seems to be to nickel and dime the
taxpayers. The city will be able to brag about not raising property taxes, when in fact, taxes are being
raised, they are simply being cailed by another name.
it seems to me, property taxes were supposed to be used to maintain roads. The problem is, those funds
have been raided for so many programs, that it is no longer enough.
Gas taxes are also supposed to go to roads, but they are being robbed for other programs like light rail.
How about using the money for what it is intended for... if teh city wants to start other programs, then it
should create a new tax for those programs and see how the public reacts. I would guess the reaction
would be very negative and the city knows that.
The letter also say's that this will be a more fair way to collect the street taxes. That makes no sense. The
same formula could be used and the dollar amount for street maintenance could be added into the current
property tax program. It appears that sense this would be politically unpopular, a new tax is being created.
I vote no for teh Right of Way Maintenance. I will be happy to pay my fair share in property taxes. I hope
St. Paul abandons this bad idea.