Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7B - Grant Application to Board of Innovation and Cooperation DATE: 7B KAY KUHLMANN. ASSISTANT mY MANAGER CONSIDER GRANT APPUCATION TO BOARD OF GOVERNMENT INNOVATION AND COOPERATION NOVEMBER I, 1993 AGENDA NUMBER: PREPARED BY: SUBJECT: INTRODUCTION: The Minnesota State Legislature approved legislation in 1993 that authorized a new state board called The Board of Government Innovation and Cooperation. The Board has met over the last six months preparing guidelines for issuing grants encouraging multi-governmental innovation and cooperation. The grant guidelines were distributed at the end of September. Staff requests Council consider participating in this new grant program. BACKGROUND: The legislature appropriated 1.2 million for the Board to allocate. Of this the Board will be setting aside up to $200,000 for their administrative expenses for the biennium. The Board also specifically will be allocating $750,000 towards the flt'St round of grant applications and $250,000 for the second round of grant applications. Even more specifically of the first round $750,000 allocated, the Board has agreed to set aside $375,000 or approximately 50% for service sharing grant programs. There are three grant programs provided for under this overall legislation. The three grant programs are described as follows: 1. Service Budget Management Model Grant - This grant program has a goal of identifying a means of using existing [mancial resources (for the delivery of a specific service ).to fund an innovative service sharing delivery system. The result is an improved quality of service. The primary objective of the Service Budget Management Model is to involve the customer of a given service in the decision making process. Therefore the Service Budget Management Model will be evaluated on its use of citizens to detennine the improved delivery system. 2. Cooperation Planning Grant - This grant is designed specifically for local governments interested in developing plans for intergovernmental cooperation in the delivery of 4629 Dakota 51. 5.E., Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447-4230 / Fax (612) 447-4245 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER one or more specific public services. The grant is proposed to be submitted jointly by two local government units of government to fund a development of an intergovernmental cooperation plan. The intent of this program has been to see a significant cost savings for local government and to improve the overall quality of service. 3. Service Sharini Grant - The eligibility on this is limited to cities, counties and townships. The goal of this program is to encourage local governments seeking to implement a plan for providing shared services under a joint powers agreement. In order to be eligible two or more local units of governments must agree to enter into a joint powers agreement for the provision of one or more specific public services. Here again, the intent is to provide cost savings and improve the quality of service. DISCUSSION: The City of Prior Lake has several different projects that may qualify for any or all of these grants. Several ideas that have been discussed on a staff level and will be researched prior to the November 1 Council meeting are as follows: 1. Cooperative PLAY Program. Initiate discussion with the P.L.A. y: group and the schools to identify a more effective way to provide youth recreational opportunities currently being provided by all three groups in various forms. This idea would probably fit best under the Service Sharing Grant. 2. Chamber of C-Ommerce & City Staff Person. Much discussion has occurred on the Chamber's request for the staff person. Perhaps a grant from the Board of Innovation and Cooperation would include seed money to further enhance this position and provide more structure to the process. This would probably best fall under the Cooperation Planning Grant. 3. Senior Plaza. Staff and members of the HRA and elected officials have met over the last several years to address the issue of the property located adjacent to the senior high-rise. This program could fit under the Service Budget Management Grant for the HRA, the City of Prior Lake and possibly a local service organization. 4. Youth Community Center. The City of Prior Lake has been contacted by the Optimists Club to consider participating in the construction of a youth community center. Staff would like to work with the Optimists Club and other service organizations to make this a reality. This would fall under the Cooperation Planning Grant or the Service Budget Management Grant. 5. Fire/Amhulance Service. Staff has been informed by a representative of Shakopee that the City of Shakopee may be working with Prior Lake on a possible joint powers agreement between Prior Lake and Shakopee for fIre/ambulance service. The City of Prior Lake providing fIre/ambulance service to southern Shakopee and areas that have a 10+ minutes response time. This grant application would fall under the Service Sharing Grant or could work under the Cooperation Planning Grant. The fIrst stage in the application process is the submittal of the one page application fonn. The application requests a brief outline of the project that is being anticipated, parties involved, and any cost savings anticipated. The Board of Government Innovation and Cooperation will evaluate the application foons based on the very preliminary infonnation and then indicate to cities whether they qualify for the second round of review. At that time the city will be given until January to complete the application and provide greater detail to the state for the grant. The City of Prior Lake has spent little time evaluating the criteria for the grant program. A full application for each potential project will have to be prepared in order for the Council to approve the applications. Staff will be working on these and submitting complete applications to the Council on Monday night. The first part of the application is due on November 5, 1993. Each application must have Council approval before it is processed. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are available: 1. Approve the Applications as submitted. 2. Modify the applications. 3. Deny the request and discontinue discussion regarding the Grants. RECOM.MENDATION: Staff anticipates having the one page application foons available at the Council meeting. Each organization will be contacted to see if there is interest on their part to submit a preliminary application. If the state does indicate interest in any of the areas submitted, staff will pursue the second part of the the application, working in cooperation with the other agencies involved. The Council would have to approve the fmal grant application. Staff recommends the Council approve the preliminary applications as submitted on Monday. ",. SCOTT COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COURTHOUSE A102 428 S. Holmes St. SHAKOPEE. MN 55379-1393 (612) 496-8177 October 25, 1993 Mr. John Heald City Planner, City of Savage 6000 McColl Drive Savage, Mn. 55378 Dear John: As per your request, I accompanied a representative from Sunde Engineering, Brian Mundstock, on a site inspection of the closed Prior Lake dump and the existing Prior Lake Aggregates mine on October 22, 1993. I had arranged for Joseph Otte from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's site Response Section to accompany us. , Our site inspection involved a visual examination of the closed dump as well as the adjacent mining operation. I observed areas of the dump where waste was still .exposed and bulky items remained uncovered. I also detected an odor of what I believe to be landfill gas in the area of the old dump. I did not observe any side slope leachate. We reviewed the proposed plans and compared the existing landscape to the proposed elevations. We generally agreed that if there are confining layers beneath the existing dump that extend into the proposed mining area, there is reason for concern about release of contaminants to a different extent than may be occurring presently. Based on our discussions, observations and the fact that there is virtually no information regarding subsurface geology or hydrology in the proposed mining area, (the lack of which is somewhat puzzling to me) I am strongly urging the City of Savage to require the developer to participate in the MPCA's "No Association Determination" program. As it was explained to me by Joseph Otte, the MPCA would request specific information be provided, such as soil borings and piezometers to better define the site hydrology. If they believed, based upon sufficient geological information, that there would be no increased risk of a release from the old dump resulting from the mining proposal, they could issue a finding to that effect. This finding would provide some assurance to the developer as well as the City of Savage, that this project was not likely to result in a release from the old dump. There are some clear legal advantages to this that I would advise your Legal Counsel to consider. Although our site visit was intended to gain a better understanding of the possible interaction with the dump, it became apparent that a An Equal Opportunity I Affirmatit:e Action Employer Mr. Heald October 25, 1993 Page 2 similar concern exists for the proposed end use plan. I remain of the opinion that the end use plan should have been more fully deve3..ot'ed as part of the EA W as if it were a subsequent phase of the proposed use. To allow those decisions to be left for the future, risks not being able to develop as anticipated, due to unforeseen (but predictable with proper study) conditions. Without additional hydrogeological information, it is impossible to prepare a surface water management plan without simply relying on assumptions. Without a reliable surface water management plan, I question how any proposed end use plan can be considered anything but optimistic conjecture. Changing either the surface water runoff or the ground water recharge pattern in this area, where several local confined lakes are reflections of the ground water table, presents an unknown risk of modifying lake and ground water levels. If this area were not already so heavily populated around these lakes, potential water table changes might not be an issue. I feel it is imperative, therefore, that the developers be required to also prepare a hydrological assessment (surface and ground water) of the impact of the mine expansion and end use plan. As noted in my previous correspondence to you, these two issues, the expanded mine and end use plan as it relates to area hydrology and interaction with the closed dump were, in my opinion, inadequately dealt with in the EA W. I urge that these two potential environmental impacts be more thoroughly evaluated before approval is given to this expansion. If you have any questions regarding this issue, please give me a call at. 496-8177. SiC;;~i?tttl!d- Allen Frechette Environmental Health Manager cc: Mark MCNeill, Savage Administrator -Frank Boyles, Prior Lake Administrator Edwin Mackie, Commissioner District 5 Richard Underferth, Commissioner District 4 Brian Mundstock, Sunde Engineering Joe otte, MPCA