Donna Schmitt For City Council

Here is information about Columbia Heights, straight from Wikipedia: The medium income for a household in the city was $40,562.  The medium household income for Anoka County was $57,754.

Here is some information about our schools straight from Food Service News:  65% of our students are on free or reduced lunches.  Compare that to statewide, 33 percent of public school students are on free and reduced lunch.

Did you notice something about this data?  Columbia Heights is not a rich city.  Columbia Heights has always been a blue-collar suburb and the majority of our homes are labeled affordable by the state. As our residents age, add to that we have a large group of retired individuals on a fixed income.

Our largest employers in Columbia Heights are Public School District 13, Crest View and the City of Columbia Heights.  Two of those three employers are funded by the households that are earning less than the average household in Anoka County.

As a city, we will not be able to sustain our current spending and it will need to be cut and cut soon because at this moment we are in freefall and will be unable to meet the basic needs of our city unless cuts are not put into effect, across the board.  Our bonded annual interest debt has increased from $118,000 to almost a million dolars over the past four years.  This is just the interest that we are paying on long term debt.  (Per CAFR 2009 report, page 19 and CAFR 2007 report, page 25.)  All of this when people are losing homes and jobs.

Let’s get our priorities right and make a difference in how our city is run.  Make sure you let the city know that they need to start making serious cuts.

For a couple of years the City of Columbia Heights has been purchasing older homes, paying to have them demolished, and then sitting on the vacant property in anticipation of selling that property when values have gone back up.  Many times the cost for these purchases and demolition ends up costing the city around $50,000 to $60,000.  The idea is to remove from sales homes that are hazardous to live in.

The concept is commendable but maybe it is not necessarily the best one.  Some of the problems are:  1) You have now eliminated that property from the tax rolls so less income for the city. 2) Now this property is becoming a debt to the city because it has to be maintained on a seasonal basis.  3) These properties that have been taken off the tax rolls mean the rest of us will have our property taxes go up because the city’s budget has not decreased.

I proposed another plan at the city council meeting on Monday night.  Why not take that $50,000 to $60,000 and offer a $10,000 to $20,000 grant to a purchaser to rehab that home.  That way you keep the home on the tax rolls, the home is fixed up to current code and it helps the neighbors by upgrading the home’s value.  By offering up to a $20,000 grant you take that same $50-$60 thousand dollars and have fixed up 3-6 homes rather than torn down a single home.  You also are allowing a family a way to purchase an affordable home and yet providing a way to make sure it is a ’safe’ home.

There could be several stipulations on that grant.  You could make sure that the rehab is done in a timely manner.  One way to do this is to decrease the grant if the rehab is not completed within 4-6 months.  You can also offer a larger incentive if this is an owner rehab vs. a property flip.   But I would also recommend a smaller grant, possibly $10,000 offered to someone that rehabs a home and sells it to someone else just because it still is accomplishing the same purpose, refurbishing homes and making the safe for families.  This also could be offered to groups such as Habitat to help them with projects in the city.

With a $10,000 to $20,000 grant the purchaser could even pay to have that home demolished and build a new home on that property.  But the difference is that all of this is done while still providing property tax income to the city and eliminates the need for the city to maintain that property over the years.

For anyone that has watched DIY, HGTV or faithfully watched ‘This Old House’ over the years you know that anything can be rehabbed.  To say that a house is not fixable is not being realistic.  Can anyone fix up a home?  No!  Are there times you need to call in an expert?  Yes!  With this type of grant you are providing more incentive for the purchaser to get it done quickly and getting that home back into a livable condition, and keeping it on the tax rolls.  It is a win-win situation for the city and for the purchaser.

There are other home improvement programs offered but all of these have limited funds and are usually grabbed up quickly.  This would be a great idea to sell to realtors and get them to help market this idea in our city.  This would be just another incentive and would work especially for those homes that are in foreclosure.

This is the time for the city to re-evaluate it’s demolition goals.   The City of Columbia Heights has set aside funds for demolition over the next couple of years.   We need to make sure that we are getting the best value for our dollar and a home improvement incentive grant could be what we need to improve our home values rather than what is currently in place.

Over the past week I have been looking at the CAFR – the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 2009 that will be discussed at the upcoming city council meeting on July 12.  It has been interesting comparing that report with the 2007 report.

A couple of items that I have noted is that the city took in an additional $2 million in property taxes compared to 2007, in the midst of foreclosures, vacant homes and businesses closing.  It is no wonder that many residents have complained about their taxes going up!

The other thing that I have noticed is that over the past four years we have seen an increase of our long-term interest.  It has jumped from around $118,000 to what it was at the end of 2009, to almost a million.  This is just the interest!  What happened to common sense spending?  What happened to budgeting?  What happened to cutting our budget to live within our means?  This council needs to get this under control, immediately, or we will be unable to fund our basic services.  We can not depend on the federal or state government to bail us out.

Monday’s meeting will be interesting but could be very long.

Sorry this is out late but with the Campaign Launch Party on Tuesday I had several items I needed to wrap up from that before I could get this out.

• Just a comment: Why does it take a month for the EDA minutes to be posted and approved by the city council?  The EDA is dealing with items that need to be acted on in a timely manner.  Why are the minutes taking so long to be posted and approved?  The minutes from the EDA meeting of May 25, 2010 were not included into the City Council minutes until June 28, 2010.  Compare that with the Planning & Zoning Commission minutes that are included in the council minutes by the next week.

• RE:  The purchase of 2 A2B Electric Bicycles.

For those not familiar with an A2B bicycle, that is a battery-operated bicycle with the option of pedaling when the rider chooses.  Typically, the bike weighs an additional 70 pounds just from the weight of the battery.  Top motorized speed is 20 mph on a level surface.  Since Columbia Heights has a number of steep hills, you will not be able to go 20 mph up a hill unless you also pedal.  Going down one of our steep hills, there is a potential of going faster than 20 mph.  The battery life is about 20 hours before it has to be recharged.

With a purchase price of almost $4,000 for each of them it seems a little steep for something that can only be used for a few months a year.  It almost seems like a small motorcycle would be a better investment.  I do understand this is ‘grant’ money so the purchase probably needed to be ‘green’ friendly.

Just because there is ‘free’ money out there doesn’t mean we should be applying for it just so someone else doesn’t get it.  We still need to be wise in our choices.  Any grant money is money that taxpayers are paying for.  We need to take care and be wise in all of our decisions.

Can we use these bikes?  Probably.  Are they just a fad?  Definitely.  Could we have potentially purchased something that would be more practical for our city, considering the terrain?  Yes. 

• RE:  Renegotiating Contracts

This is something Bruce Nawrocki and I have been stating for a long time.  We need to be going out and getting bids for our contracts on towing, car washing services, and auction of surplus items.  Thanks to staff that took the time to get bids on these services.  Thanks to the city council for taking the time to look at these bids and come up with common sense reasons for their choices.

There was a practical reason for the city not to take the lowest bid on car washing services.  They chose Auto World because of their 24-hour service.  It makes sense to have car wash services available in the middle of the night for our local police.  None of the other companies offered that option.  As for the other services, the lowest bid was taken.

• RE:  2009 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report

This will be discussed at the July 12^th City Council Meeting.  I haven’t had time to look at the report but this is an important report that needs to be thoroughly analized.  The city council work session for July 6 has been canceled because only two council members would be available for that meeting.   Because of the budget discussions that will be handled at the July 12^th meeting, expect a long meeting that evening.  The council will have the material to look at for two weeks, but there is a holiday in the middle of that time so in reality they will only have a week to look at this material.  Not a lot of time for something this important.

• RE:  Paid Bills

The city paid out $312,000 over the past couple of weeks for our pedestrian bridge.  Hopefully, this will be reimbursed to the city from the state or federal funds as have been promised.  It would be interesting to see how much we can attribute to this bridge that wasn’t supposed to cost Columbia Heights a lot of money.  Originally, it was estimated that the city’s portion would be around $500,000.  I know we have spent several thousands just for looking at the proposal and also for construction.  Because of the condition of our federal and state finances reimbursement should not be depended on until we have the money in hand.

REMINDER:  Next city council meeting is on July 12, 2010 at 7:00 p.m.  After the meeting the City Council is scheduled to look at city union contracts.  That may be an extremely long meeting!

Thank you to everyone that made it to my campaign launch party at Puerta Del Sol. We got enough donations to start working on a new brochure. Time to get busy!

The July Planning and Zoning Meeting has been canceled.  There were no new items to be discussed.  The July meeting is typically a hard meeting for members to attend because of the Independence Holiday.  So enjoy the time off!

The next P & Z meeting scheduled is Wednesday, August 3, 2010, because on Tuesday, August 2 is National Night Out!

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

7:00 – 8:30 p.m.

at

PUERTA DEL SOL

3800 Central Ave NE

Join us as we launch Donna Schmitt’s campaign.
Come for the chips & salsa!
Pick up a lawn sign and show your support
with a donation or
sign-up to be part of the Schmitt Team!
(Paid for by Donna Schmitt for City Council)

This Friday, June 25, is our Columbia Heights Parade. I still could use a few volunteers to help pass out candy and business cards at the parade. Contact me if you can help!

Parade was canceled because of rain & hail!

Thanks for all of your help!  See you on Tuesday

for the Campaign Launch at

Puerta Del Sol!

7- 8:30 p.m.

As has been requested – here is my recap on the Planning and Zoning meeting from June 1, 2010:

1. The Planning and Zoning Commission approved the request for a larger sign, an additional 200 sq. ft.) at Savers.  This was actually 150 sq. ft. less than they originally had asked for.  Jeff Sargent (City Planner) admitted that the city’s wall signage ordinance language doesn’t cover large block commercial sites and a 200 square foot limit is not appropriate for that large of a building.  In the end they submitted a 200 square foot variance.  To put this in perspective, the current signage on the building is 97 square feet.  The new signage includes signage telling people where to drop off donations and includes signage on the west side (the side facing Central).  This is especially important because of the larger pedestrian bridge that will be interfering with the ability to see those signs.

Savers will be keeping their pylon sign.  Pylon signs are not allowed along Central Ave. but are grandfathered in.  This is a wise choice on their part since a monument sign would be lost behind the bridge.

2.  Fireworks tent request from Renaissance Fireworks to be located in the parking lot at the Columbia Heights Mall was approved.  This is the same company that has been there in the past.  This is located at 40th and Central.  It was approved to be set up for 90 days.  What that means is this company could potentially set up for 30-days before the July 4th holiday and then set up again another 30 or 60 days at anytime within a year, though they have never done this.  This does not go to the City Council so they can set up at anytime.

3.  The rezoning of property 4555 Washington St. from a duplex to a single family home was approved.  How this property was ever given a license by the city is still beyond me.  This property obviously was not inspected before they were given the license because there were multiple violations.  There were bedrooms with no egress windows and cooking facilities that did not meet code and an infestation of bugs.  The only way the city was able to get in was because of a child endangerment issue.  Several neighbors attended and commented on other properties that had too many people living in a single home in the area.  Mayor Peterson reminded them that the city has no authority to enter a property to check on this unless there is another issue.  If they knock on the door and ask how many people live there they cannot go in and check without the owners permission.  City ordinance limits 2 adults per bedroom but the city cannot go in and check this.  In this case, a child endangerment issue, they had the authority.  The question I was confused about was doesn’t a licensed rental have an inspection? Somehow this property was never inspected in over 5 years.  (After the meeting Jeff said he didn’t want to blame anyone but he was also confused as to how this slipped through.)

4.  Outdoor Seating Ordinance for restaurants was not approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on a vote of 1-yes (Rob Fiorendino) and 2-no(Mike Peterson and I).  This ordinance will now go on to the next City Council meeting on June 14.  The City Council will then determine
if this is appropriate.  There were some changes that were made to what the city staff recommended.  Two changes that were made:  a.  a restaurant that is not licensed to sell alcohol and has outdoor
seating does not have to submit an affidavit to the city stating that no alcohol will be served outdoors.  b.  Temporary outdoor seating can be handled administratively.  This would cover those restaurants that would have an event, such as Mexican Independence Day at Puerto del Sol and Ramadan at Marina’s or events like church picnics in a parking lot or a beer tent at Immaculate or the Jamboree.  (I am not sure if a one day event is going to require permission from the city for an event like a church having a parking lot picnic.  I assume not but maybe should be clarified since that seems unnecessary.)  Comments made from the audience stated that downtown Minneapolis has no
problems with tables right next to the sidewalk serving alcohol, why should we be worried about this?

Then, Mayor Peterson mentioned that he seemed to have problems with this ordinance and gave an example of what the city liquor store has been approved for.  The Boosters will be selling beer and brats in the parking lot of the city liquor store.  The patrons will purchase their beers inside the city liquor store and the brats at the Boosters wagon in the parking lot and will be able to drink their beer and eat their brats in the parking lot.  There will be no barriers, as is required by every restaurant.  There isn’t even a requirement to have a tent with limited access as is required at events like the Jamboree and IC.  Interesting that the city is exempt from their own laws!  I really have no problem with the Boosters selling their food in the liquor store parking lot.  What I would like to see changed is that restaurants are given the chance to serve their patrons the same way that the Boosters are given.

(Since this was written, the liquor store has added a barrier to protect patrons who are sitting at the picnic tables from a car crashing into them.  But the type of barrier that is required by city ordinance to separate a patron from a passerby taking alcohol from the table is not there.  The other item is that the ordinance does not allow tables to be placed on parking lots.  For the liquor store to set up their tables now means they are grandfathered in.)

Read June 8, 2010 edition of the Star Tribune for the latest on the saga of the Central Avenue Streetcar Proposal.  According to the Star Tribune, Minneapolis is looking for help to pay for a $600,000 “study” to determine if this Central Avenue Streetcar Line would work.  Since Minneapolis has already designated  $250,000 just to do a study for this proposal, now they are looking for Columbia Heights and Anoka County to help pay for more studies?

Comments made by a couple members of the City Council and staff member Scott Clark at the May 24th Columbia Heights City Council meeting were that “It’s not going to cost us anything to look at.”  Thankfully, Bruce Nawrocki, Bobby Williams and Bruce Kelzenberg were all ready to vote ‘no’ when Tami Diehm suggested that there not be a vote but just recommended that the staff continue to follow Minneapolis and their discussion about a potential streetcar line. This allows the item to come up again at any time in future meetings.

Let’s put this into perspective:  How many jobs will be lost in the City of Columbia Heights to help fund this study? If we pay out ‘our portion’ for this study what are we going to be cutting in other areas to finance this study?  The budget for 2010 has already been set.  Which job are we going to be cutting first to help pay for this?  I don’t see the staff or council lining up to take a cut in pay.

This is not the time to be looking at spending money on studies for streetcars.  Let’s concern ourselves with balancing our budget and living within our means.