Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: May 17, 2005 (5:30 p.m.), May 17, 2005 (7:00 p.m.) and May 26, 2005 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MAY 17,2005 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden, Helkamp and Joos present. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer and Craig Robson, Police Officer. Also Present: Randy Sampson. CEO, Canterbury Park and Erma Vizenor, White Earth Band of Ojibwe, Sarah Schlatterhoff, representing the Governor's office, Valerie Redhorse, Investment Banker and Ron Valliant, on the White Earth Band of Ojibwe Council. This was an informational meeting only to present the joint proposal with the White Earth Band of Ojibwe for a casino at Canterbury Park. This was being talked about in the legislature and the governor's office wanted to give the City a presentation of the Bill now being discussed. Randy Sampson, CEO of Canterbury Park, opened the presentation and thanked the Council for their support of Canterbury Park in a variety of ways over the years. Mr. Sampson noted the new proposal had two casinos located at the Canterbury Park facility. He noted the addition of this second casino did not change anything in the first proposal pertaining to the Racino that Canterbury Park had proposed earlier this year. The scope and terms of the Racino that was proposed earlier this year for Canterbury Park would remain the same. Mr. Sampson stated technically the Minnesota Lottery would own and operate the gaming machines in the casino (tribal operated) and the Racino. Mr. Sampson stated actual traffic studies had not been done but if this proposal advanced, they would do traffic studies. They expected this area needed to be updated. Mr. Sampson reported that a market study had been done with this concept and it was very positive. He also noted that the White Earth Band of Ojibwe had a vision of a very first class casino. Mr. Sampson stated Canterbury Park was comfortable that the White Earth Band of Ojibwe would build a first class casino and that it would not detract from Canterbury Park's land value; he felt it would be a great enhancement. He noted both casinos would have the same City and County obligations. The market study projected the gross revenues from both casinos to be in the $500 million to $600 million range. Mr. Sampson noted this would amount to about $5 or $6 million to the City and County, significant property taxes would also be generated, there would be the creation of jobs and tourism would increase and benefit other Shakopee businesses. Mr. Sampson noted this Bill in the legislature required local approval but as of yet a referendum was not required. The City Council would need to take formal action on this bill before anything could move forward. Sarah Schlatterhoff, from the Governor's office, approached,the podium to provide some information on the proposal and to provide an update of where the legislature is at in this process. She noted the Governor's office got involved last fall when it began looking at the budget challenge; they started looking at revenue opportunities. She noted Minnesota and several other states (30) were looking at tribal revenue as an opportunity to get some revenue into the state. Gaming was a big industry in the State of Minnesota. She noted the conversations with the various Tribes did not go as hoped so the State started to look at other opportunities and found Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- many fmancial disparities within the Tribes. The State was trying to create an opportunity for some of the Tribes to become somewhat equal financially. She noted the White Earth Band of Ojibwe had some geographic challenges up in northern Minnesota. She noted the White Earth Band of Ojibwe, which comprised about 45% of the Native American's in the State of Minnesota, had a small casino now, called the "Shooting Star", that has a great reputation but is not making a difference financially in the community because the casino was small. There was a need here and the State wanted to create a partnership with this Tribe. She noted that Canterbury had approached the State to see if some kind of partnership could be worked out between the State, Canterbury and three tribes. These Tribes were: the Tribe from Leech Lake, the Tribe from Red Lake and the White Earth Band of Ojibwe. Ms. Schlatterhoff noted two Tribes backed offwhen it was announced that a partnership was being looked at. It was only the White Earth Band of Ojibwe that was still at the table. Ms. Schlatterhoff explained some of the revenues that would be realized by the City and the State. She stated the Tribal entity that would run the casino would be a Minnesota Corporation. The land would be owned as fee land; it would not become reservation property. She noted there needed to be several conversations with the City and County regarding the streets and roads and other infrastructure and public safety issues. Ms. Schlatterhoff stated this casino was unlike other casinos because it would have a partnership with the State. This casino would be regulated like Canterbury would be regulated. She noted there would be audits with a disclosure on this casino and public safety, alcohol and gambling enforcement would be done with the State's Public Safety Division so the Shakopee Police Department would not need to assume this regulatory function. She noted the other casinos were run by sovereign nations and were not in a partnership with the State of Minnesota. Casinos on Trust land were run under different rules. They were under Federal Government Control not local control. Ms. Schlatterhoff stated right now there had been several successes in the House with this Bill. She stated it was not likely that they would be done with this Bill before this legislative session adjourned. She felt there would be a special session. She noted in the House and the Senate the Bill was continuing to move forward. The Governor was still committed to a plan. Erma Vizenor, Tribal Chairwoman of White Earth Band ofOjibwe, approached the podium and described the White Earth Band ofOjibwe. She noted they were one of the poorest Tribes. She noted in the past the Tribal Council had talked about a metro casino for the White Earth Tribe that was located in the metro area. She noted this concept started about five years ago and the White Earth Tribe has been to the State Legislature trying to get support for this concept for the last three/four years. She noted her Tribe needed the additional revenue because of their severe needs. She noted there were several pockets of real poverty on the White Earth northern reservation. She stated they were very proud of the little casino that they have in northern Minnesota. It was well kept and well mannered but because ofthe location there was not a lot of customers. She noted along with the Governor's cooperation a Bill had been drafted and she was Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- very satisfied with what had been done. She noted there was a good trust relationship with the Governor and his office staff. She stated Canterbury and the White Earth Tribe had the same goal and the same interests in rilind. She stated this casino being proposed was unlike other casinos on reservations. This casino would be regulated by the State. This casino would be subject to property taxes. She stated the White Earth Nation would be a good neighbor. Valene Redhorse, Investment Banker specializing in the casino market and raising that financing, noted normally this financing was obtained thru commercial lending institutions. She stated this was a very thought out fmancial plan. She noted a feasibility study of the joint proposal had been done with a well-respected firm so the commercial lending institutions would recognize the name and work. She explained the fmancials in relation to taxes. She noted they were very visible to the capital markets right now and many people had been in contact with her. She noted the financial end of the proposal was very solid and very professional. She noted this land did not qualify to be trust land. Ron Valliant, Executive Director of White Earth, addressed the trust status issue. He did state that right now the White Earth Band up in Mahnomen are trying to put their casino land in trust. This is not what is being proposed for the Shakopee land. Every other casino in Minnesota is on trust land. Mr. Valliant noted it would be virtually impossible to put the Shakopee land in trust. They had no intention of doing that. Mr. Sampson noted that Canterbury had intentions at this point to deed the land where the casino would be in Shakopee out at Canterbury over to the White Earth Nation. He noted the details had not been worked out. Ms. Redhorse noted the Minnesota Corporation would be owned by a sovereign nation but the corporate entity that would issue the debt, own the facility and be the corporate entity running the facility and hiring the management would be a Minnesota Corporation that the City would have jurisdiction over on that piece of property. The Tribe will be required through the bonding process and all of the vendor relationships limited to that facility to sign a limited waiver of sovereign immunity to that facility. Ms. Vizenor noted she would like to see this casino be operated by the White Earth tribal members living in the metro area, other tribal communities and other disadvantaged groups (they would be bused). She did not foresee these people living in Shakopee. She felt this was all workable. Cncl. Joos wanted to know how this would benefit the northern White Earth Nation if they were not going to work the casino. Ms. Vizenor noted there was a formula worked out through the governor's office that a portion of the profits would go to the northern White Earth Nation so they could address their needs at home. Ms. Vizenor noted the profits of the casino would go to the entire White Earth Tribe for the common good of all and not to select individuals. The needs of the Tribe were too great for individuals to receive any money. Ms. Vizenor noted they had a good tribal relationships with all the 11 tribal communities in the State of Minnesota. She noted the White Earth Nation was a very progressive Tribe. They Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- worked very hard. One of her goals was to put together a good business agreement with the State of Minnesota and the community of Shakopee to serve as a model for good tribal relationships with other Counties and the State. She felt this could be done and the barriers would come down eventually. Ms. Vizenor noted the likelihood that the Leech Lake Tribe and the Red Lake Tribe joining the casino agreement after they said no once was small. She noted she respected their decision and there still was a good relationship with those tribes. Ms. Schlatterhoff noted several things had changed because of the two tribes declining the offer in the fIrst place so the Governor's offIce would also be involved if the Red Lake and Leech Lake Bands opted to join again. Ms. Schlaterhoffnoted the language changes made it much more difficult for those two tribes to opt in again. Ms. Redhorse addressed this casino site becoming trust land. Ms. Redhorse did not think the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) would allow this site to become trust land. She also did not see a way to get past the Department ofInterior. In her professional opinion this property did not meet all the criteria that needed to be met for a piece of land to become trust land. Ms. Schlatterhoff stated the host fee and the dollars for gambling treatment where not the same dollars. The Human Services Department would take care of the gambling treatment. Ms. Schlatterhoffnoted she would follow-up on the City's access to grant money because of the host fee. Cncl. Lehman noted he had a couple concerns with the State. He wanted to know what legislation would bind future state leaders specifIc to the host fee. Ms. Schlatterhoff noted that provisions would be in the contract and with the legislation. This would be a dual process. Cncl. Lehman noted there were more needs from the expanded traffIc and police due to the casino and the Racino than the 1 % host fee would cover. There needed to be some other type funding mechanism for those needs. There was more to this agreement than what meets the eye. This was a big concern to him. Cncl. Lehman suggested the State taking a share of the profIts from HF 1664 and giving them to other less fortunate Tribes. Ms. Schlatterhoff noted this had been discussed. Ms. Schlatterhoff noted negotiations were entered into with the thought there needed to be fairness for all the tribal entities that had not received an equitable deal regarding revenues. Cncl. Lehman noted he was thinking along the lines of equal opportunity employment that included residents of Shakopee not just what Ms. Vizenor was hoping for employment personnel. Ms. Vizenor agreed with the equal opportunity but she stated at the same time tribal members expected to have ajob at a tribal casino. She noted 50% of the employees at the Shooting Star Casino up north are non-tribal members. Ms. Redhorse noted the City would have no obligations with the bond sales for this casino. Cncl. Lehman asked how the roads would be fInanced. Mr. Sampson agreed the roads were clearly an issue. Everyone understood that. Mr. Sampson stated he thought Canterbury Park and the White Earth Nation would have an obligation to participate in the road construction in the direct vicinity as developers of the casino development. He stated there were City, County and State issues also. There needed to be communication on the roads/traffIc with all involved Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -5- entities. Ms. ScWatterhoff noted the State thought Shakopee was the way to go but there were other communities interested in the plan. Mr. McNeill clarified if there were strings attached when it came to the local share of money. Mr. McNeill asked if the Council could choose how to spend those dollars. Ms. ScWatterhoff noted that was a correct statement. Mr. McNeill also asked if the legislation as it is currently written needed to have the Shakopee City Council's approval to proceed. Ms. ScWatterhoff noted the legislation did not specifically say that. It said local support thru a governing body was needed. She would follow up on the specific language. She noted if this proposal did move forward it would need to come back before this body. Mayor Schmitt noted right now there was no resolution of support for this particular package. Ms. ScWatterhoff stated right now they were just giving information. Mayor Schmitt noted MnDOT needed to have some say in this proposal also because of the roads. Ms. Schlatterhoff noted MnDOT has just started to review this proposal because it was now site specific. Mayor Schmitt was concerned that they were talking about something that the City was at least three years away from seeing. Mayor Schmitt also stated there was no level of consistency. Ms. ScWatterhoff noted the numbers being talked about now were pretty solid numbers. Mr. Sampson stated the entire fees would not be seen until the entire development was in place. He thought it would be about two years. Ms. Redhorse thought the slots would start quickly. Mayor Schmitt thought a mini Las Vegas was being talked about. Mayor Schmitt stated whatever was invested in this parcel, 40% went to fiscal disparities. . The City of Shakopee did not get the full tax load. Lehman/Helkamp moved to adjourn the meeting to Tuesday, May 17,2005 at 7:15 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. 71~o~' D;c City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SEUU(OPEE,NUNNESOTA MAY 17,2005 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:25 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden, Joos and Helkamp present. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer; Jim Thomson (7:40), City Attorney and Gregg Voxland, Finance Director. The pledge of allegiance was recited. The following item was reordered on the Agenda. Item 15.F.1. Dick's Sanitation Refuse/Recycling Contract Renewal now will be heard following the Economic Development Authority Meeting. Helkamp/Joos moved to approve the agenda as modified. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt noted he was a guest at the St. Francis Hospital Review. He stated there was a lot of progress being made on the construction and the construction was moving along well. He noted St. Francis had been selected as one of the top 100 hospitals. He noted he attended a Scott County Alliance for Leadership And Efficiency (SCALE) meeting last Friday. He noted one of the key items discussed was a possible site for the joint training facility range. He noted the Annex in Jordan was being looked at as a possible site. The following items were added to the Consent Agenda. 14.A. Telecommunications Position Change; 14.B. Consulting Contract - I-Net/Cable Franchise Oversight; 14.F. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Extend MUSA and Rezone Property from Agricultural Preservation to Urban Residential for property located north of Eagle Creek Boulevard and west of Pike Lake Road Extended (former Shutrop property); 15.A.3. Construction of Streets and Utilities for Countryside Prior to Final Plat Approval and 15.D.3. Use of Shako pee Transit Bus No. 3062 by Safcom Staff. Joos/Menden moved to approve the Consent Agenda as modified. Motion carried 5-0. May~r Schmitt asked if there were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address any item not on the agenda. There was no response. Joos/Menden moved to approve the meeting minutes for April 5, 2005 (6:15 p.m. Session) and April 5, 2005 (7:00 p.m. Session). (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to approve the bills in the amount of $604,067.57 plus $293,930.44 for refunds, returns and pass through for a total of $897,998.01. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following approval]. Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -2- Lehman/Joos moved to open the public hearing on the application for a taxicab license - Terry Busch dba Southwest Metro Taxi. Motion carried 5-0. Judith S. Cox, City Clerk, reported on the application for a taxicab license made by Mr. Terry Busch. Ms. Cox stated the applicant wished to put up to two taxicabs on the street. Ms. Cox noted there were several items Mr. Busch needed to get done before he could operate a Taxi in the City Of Shako pee; however, before he went thru the expense of buying vehicles and insurance he wanted to make sure he would be granted a taxicab license by the Shakopee City Council. Ms. Cox stated the Police Department has done the customary background investigations and they could see no reason why this license should not be granted. Ms. Cox noted that Mr. Busch has provided the City a number of letters from businesses in the community in support of this ad~itional taxicab business. Cncl. Lehman asked the applicant ifhe was going to offer any discounts to low income people. The applicant stated he had not thought about that. He was going to offer a discount for senior citizens. Mayor Schmitt asked if there was anyone from the audience that wished to ask any questions or make any comments. There was no response. Ms. Cox stated since there was ollly one taxicab now licensed in the City; she noted the population the City has and with the letters provided by the applicant supporting this request, she felt there was enough justification for this Council, if after their discussions, to make a finding that this business was needed within the City and the Council wanted to allow this second taxicab business. Menden/Joos moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Lehman/Joos moved to approve the applications and grant a taxicab license for two taxicabs and a taxicab drivers license to Terry Busch dba Southwest Metro Taxi, 753 Lupine Court, conditioned upon meeting all requirements of the City Code for said licenses and with the finding based on the community's needed for transportation options. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Thomson, City Attorney, arrived and took his seat. Cncl. Joos noted he attended a Shakopee Public Utilities meeting (SPUC) and the electrical and water at Huber Park was discussed. Cncl. Helkamp noted he was on the steering committee for the Joint Training Facility for SCALE and noted that the consultant had been given a tour of the current annex in Jordan. Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -3- Cncl. Menden noted he did have an opportunity to attend two of the public information meetings regarding the proposed addition to the current Community Center. He noted there was one more public meeting coming up at the Police Department on the community center referendum. Joos/Menden moved to adopt the job description for the Telecommunications Coordinator, and direct that advertisement be made to fill the position. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). (CC Document No. 385) Joos/Menden moved to approve the elimination of the Television Production Specialist position. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to adopt the resolution amending the Pay Plan to add the Telecommunications Coordinator position after the pay plan for officers and non-union employees of the City Of Shako pee is amended May 17,2005 by Resolution No. 6233. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into a contract with Bradley & Guzzetta, LLC for the provision of cable franchise and institutional-network oversight and services for the City of Shakopee. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, introduced the Dick's Sanitation Refuse/Recyc1ing Contract Renewal and Ms. Schaefer presented the recommendations for the proposed renewal. Mr. McNeill noted that Ms. Schaefer, from Bradley and Guzzetta LLC, was the contract hire for the Sanitation Refuse/Recycling Contract. Ms. Schaefer noted there was a memo before the Council that highlighted the changes and additions that were being recommended for the five-year contract for Dick's Sanitation and NRG was being recommended for the processing for the waste from the residential contract for the next five years. Ms. Schaefer noted the new items being offered, some of the current items being retained and the changes to the contract with Dick's Sanitation. Ms. Schaefer stated she thought price was the biggest concern of the Councilmembers and the price for 2006 was decreased by a $1.09 per month. She noted there would be all price decreases until the last year of the term of the contract and then residents would see a price increase on a 60 gallon container of $.10 per container over what they are paying for that size container in 2005. She stated the decreases were significant. Ms. Schaefer noted Hennepin County was still willing to provide waste processing for Shakopee residents; however, they would not lower their prices that were currently being charged. Ms. Schaefer noted NRG, located here in Scott County, was eager to get the City's business and they were willing to negotiate. Ms. Schaefer noted NRG was willing to do the waste processing at a lower cost than Hennepin County would do the waste processing. Ms. Schaefer presented some of the things NRG could do. Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -4- She noted the recommendation from Bradley and Guzzetta was to enter into a contract with Dick's Sanitation for refuse collection and to enter into a concurrent contract with NRG for waste processing. Cncl. Lehman had some questions on the proposed agreement with Dick's Sanitation. Ms. Schaefer addressed the questions and noted she would follow-up on the quarterly residential recycling award with Jim Thomson, City Attorney. Menden/Joos moved to direct the appropriate staff to enter into a five-year service agreement for refuse services with Dick's Sanitation and enter into a five-year processing agreement with NRG. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek, Community Development Director, reported on the Preliminary and Final Plat for Dean Lakes 4th Addition and the amendment to the Dean Lakes Planned Unit Development (PUD). Mr. Leek noted the Preliminary and Final Plat for Dean Lakes 4th Addition was for a portion of the Dean Lakes Planned (PUD). Mr. Leek stated Open Systems was proposed to be located on one of the lots of the plat. Mr. Leek noted the proposed plat consisted of an area that was originally platted as an Outlot in Deans Lake. Mr. Leek stated that Outlot now consisted of a series of five lots in Block 1 of Deans Lake 4th Addition. Mr. Leek noted the specific requests for the amendment to the PUD being requested are reductions in certain setbacks and a reduction of easement along interior common property lines of individual lots. Mr. Leek explained the various reductions in setbacks. Mr. Leek noted Resolution No. 6242 did not contain the easement request. Mr. Leek stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment except for the easement request. Mr. Leek noted Resolution No. 6242 was a Resolution that approved the Preliminary and Final Plat and an amendment to the PUD of Dean L~es 4th Addition. This amendment to Resolution No. 6242 only approved the setbacks variations requested. Cncl. Joos asked the concerns of the Planning Commission regarding the easement request. Mr. Leek noted the concern pertained to design criteria and also there was a concern whether or not the City had an easement for utilities if a utility was needed in the future. Mr. Leek noted the applicant's concern. Mr. Leek noted the criteria regarding lot line easements was carried over because it was standard. Cncl. Lehman noted the conservation approach was initially used for this plat and he wondered if that effect was affected if the setbacks were reduced. Mr. Leek responded to this question. He did not think this took away from the conservation quality of the area overall; that was really preserved in the Outlots conservation space area that was dedicated with the original plat. The applicant would still be bound by the impervious surface requirement for this part of the project in its entirety. The City would need to track with the developer from project to project the amount of impervious surface already used throughout the project. Official Proceedings of the May 17, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -5- Mayor Schmitt thought there should be a condition that protected the City from this developer exceeding the impervious surface requirement. Mr. Leek responded that the underlying zoning restrictions applied to this PUD unless a specific variation had been granted. Mr. Leek noted the applicant was not asking for a change in the impervious surface coverage. They were asking in their discussions that this impervious surface requirement be applied to the business park in total. Mr. Leek noted the action tonight did not approve the concept drawing that the Council had in front of them. Mr. Leek felt there was adequate protection for the City. Mayor Schmitt wanted a caveat added that the impervious surface requirement meet the underlying zoning requirement overall for the business Park. Mr. Leek pointed out condition Roman Numeral II.f. covered the impervious requirement for the underlying zoning district. Lee Koppy, Ryan Companies, responded to the Mayor Schmitt's concerns regarding the impervious surface. Mr. Koppy gave more detail. He noted the plan being represented showed 75% impervious surface coverage and the business park impervious requirement was 80%. He stated it was not expected that the 80% impervious surface would ever be reached but he would like the flexibility to go there if need be. Mr. Koppy noted there were a couple of easements along the north property lot line that were also posing problems (gas main and electric easements). He stated the gas company also had some real restrictions on what could be done in the easement (rationalization for the reduced front setback). Mr. Koppy noted the parkway type feeling along Deans Lakes Boulevard was retained with this setback request. Mr. Koppy noted some of the screening along the Dean Lakes Boulevard. Mr. Koppy noted the moving of an easement area required a public hearing and he was working to assist time lines. It was also a nuisance to everyone. Mr. Koppy stated Ryan Companies agreed with all of the conditions in Resolution No. 6242. Cncl. Helkamp addressed the concept of doing easements at time of building permit. Mr. Leek noted this was workable but it would be more difficult to track the easements for future visibility. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director, noted most/all utilities were in the development already. The easement line was really a matter of recording. Mayor Schmitt asked the applicant what happened to the trail that was servicing this street. Mr. Koppy stated the trail was out there. Mr. Loney noted the trail was on the south side of Dean Lakes Boulevard and there was a sidewalk along the north side of the Boulevard. Cncl. Lehman addressed the easement issue. Mr. Koppy noted to Cncl. Lehman Ryan Companies wanted flexibility to move a lot lone if that needed to be done. Mr. Koppy did not think the recording of the easement would be a problem. Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Mayor Schmitt asked if anyone in the audience wished to be heard on this issue. There was no response. Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6242, A Resolution Of the City Of Shakopee, Minnesota Approving The Preliminary And Final Plat Of Dean Lakes Fourth Addition And An Amendment To The Dean Lakes Planned Unit Development (PUD), and moved its adoption. Cncl. Lehman noted the easement was not changed so if the applicant wanted that easement in the future changed they would need to come back. Mr. Leek concurred the applicant would have to come back. Cncl. Lehman asked if it would be easier to allow flexibility in the motion regarding the easement line? Jim Thomson, City Attorney noted he did think a either/or could be stipulated in a Resolution. He stated the easements had to be shown on the fmal plat; therefore, it could not be an either/or. Mr. Thomson noted if the City wanted to allow the flexibility the option was not to require an easement in the fmal plat and to change the language in the condition in Resolution No. 6242 regarding easements. Cncl. Menden was willing to direct staff to come back with some options to look at this problem from a different perspective (flexible easements). Cncl. Helkamp was not sure it was worth's staff time to look into this problem. He wanted to make sure the easements were on the final plat. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Joos dissenting. Mr. Leek reported on the request of the Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries Board for the City to acquire right-of-way to allow public access to the Cemetery. Mr. Leek noted there was a substantial area of what used to be Jasper Road and part of Hauer Trail vacated several years ago that previously provided public access to the cemetery in the area of Hauer Trail east of Jasper Road and Jasper Road from Hauer Trail to County Road 16. He noted there is still some remaining blacktop in the area of Jasper Trail. He noted the area that the Shakopee Catholic ( Cemeteries Board is asking the City to exercise their authority for is on the north side of the vacated Hauer Trail. Mr. Leek noted there were notices sent but no comment had been received back regarding this vacation. Mr. Leek noted now with a change in some property ownership it was very difficult to gain access to the site; thus, the petition from the Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries Board. Mr. Leek noted it would most likely require eminent domain proceedings to acquire the portion of the right-way needed for public access. Mr. Leek noted he had sent paperwork to the affected property owner who would have obtained the right-of-way as part of the vacation in 1994. Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Cncl. Helkamp asked Mr. Leek if any other way to get this right-of-way had been looked at other than eminent domain. Mr. Leek stated he thought other ways had been looked at but had not been successful. ,Mr. Leek stated the reason for the vacation of Hauer Trail and Jasper Road from Hauer Trail to County Road 16 was the Public Works staff had came forward and noted the costs of maintaining that roadway were to great for the benefit that was provided. Mr. Leek noted initially it was Jasper Road where there was a vacation but then that portion of Hauer Trail was included in the vacation. This resulted in the cemetery becoming land locked, which had not been a problem until the home abutting the cemetery was sold. Peggy Phillips, speaking for the Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries Board, noted how the public access problem came about. She noted the private property lines had been explained to them, which they were not aware of before, there had been blacktop on that land and this blacktopped area had been used for previous access. The property was sold and this new property owner did not want to give public access using his portion of his private land. She stated the Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries Board had tried to deal with the property owner but had been unsuccessful at all times. Ms. Phillips noted she had sent a letter to the City inquiring about the right-of-way. Ms. Phillips noted the answer she received back from Mr. Voxland, from the City, did not address all the needs that needed to be taken of. She noted there must have been some break down in communication. She noted the notices for the public hearings on the two vacations had been sent to the wrong person and the Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries Board knew nothing of the public hearings on the vacations. Ms. Phillips gave to Mr. Leek documents she had referred to this evening. Ms. Phillips noted because of grades in the area there was no spot where access could be gained other than at this requested spot. There were elderly and handicapped people that would be coming out to the cemetery and they would not be able to access the site with the steep grades at other locations. The Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries Board was only looking for access. They could provide a parking lot on their land. Mr. Thomson, City Attorney, noted the City had retained a drainage and utility easement along the vacated portion of the right-of-way. Ms. Phillips noted it was only the portion that was still paved that the Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries Board was interested in. Cncl. Lehman stated he was of the opinion that there needed to be access to the cemetery. The land was landlocked now. Cncl. Helkamp agreed with Cncl. Lehman. Cncl. Helkamp thought it might be beneficial if someone from the City approached the property owner regarding a voluntary dedication of an easement. Official Proceedings of the May 17, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -8- Lehman/Helkamp moved to direct staff to talk to the property owners surrounding the cemetery property and to try and work out a reasonable solution to the access problem to the Shakopee Catholic Cemeteries and to bring their findings back. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Leek reported on the Preliminary Plat for Riverside Bluffs located north of County Road 16 and east of Hilldale Dr. Mr. Leek noted this was a proposal from Ryland Homes for about 101 single-family homes on 57 acres. Mr. Leek noted what other properties were around the site. He did state that staff's recommendation was to deny this plat along with the Planning Commissions recommendation that City Council deny this plat also. The vote from the Planning Commission for this denial was unanimous. Mr. Leek did state that Mr. Sullivan from Ryland Homes had continued to work on a number of the issues that exist with this plat. .However, there were still a number of issues that are outstanding. Some of these significant outstanding issues still remaining are: 1) the location of the relocation of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel [there was no agreement on what the alignment should be], 2) park dedication [there may/may not be enough useable land in the plat after a wetland determination has been made] 3) sewer service and 4) roadway issues. Mr. Leek noted draft Resolution No. 6243 has findings for the denial of the Riverside Bluffs Preliminary Plat. Mr. Leek noted if the City Council wanted to approve this Preliminary Plat of Riverside Bluffs a written extension from the applicant would be necessary so staff could come back with a resolution for approval. Cncl. Lehman stated to Mr. Leek that he disagreed on telling a property owner that his development is contingent on the neighboring property owner aligning the road properly. He disagreed with that concept. Mr. Leek stated it was staff members' jobs to see that roads are coordinated and aligned properly. Brian Sullivan, Ryland Homes, noted Ryland Homes had been working on this plat for several months. He thought they were close to resolving the issues. He stated there were many, many conditions but only three or four issues that still need to be resolved. He noted almost 10 acres of parkland were being proposed and they only were required to dedicate 8.1 acres. He noted he had been diligently working with staff and the property owners to coordinate the greenway; they were providing flexibility for the watershed district for the final design of the Prior Lake Outlet Channel when that was approved and they were working with the adjacent property owners on the road alignments. It was the watershed district that was not ready for the fmal design [this appeared to be a chicken and the egg or an egg and then the chicken]. Mr. Sullivan noted a flood study needed to be done and Ryland Homes had agreed to pay their portion for this study with the cost of the study to be about $10,000. They agreed to pay 1/2 of the cost for the study. Mr. Sullivan noted Ryland Homes had provided right-of-way so Scott County could put in the turn lanes they wanted. He noted since the channel had been at its current location the wetlands appeared to have dried up. He thought they were in good shape regarding the wetlands. Mr. Sullivan stated the Park and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) and the Environmental Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -9- Advisory Commission (EAC) had unanimously approved the plan. He noted this was an area of the City where the City Council wanted to see growth happen. Cncl. Lehman addressed the trail in the preliminary plat and the approval of the PRAB. Mr. Themig, Parks, Recreation and Facilities Director, noted the preliminary plat had been conditioned upon resolving issues regarding wetlands. Mr. Sullivan noted Ryland Homes would be agreeable to extend the time period to allow staff time to write a resolution of approval. Cnc1. Helkamp felt either a time extension needed to be granted by the developer to give staff time to become comfortable with the plat or Council needed to deny the preliminary plat tonight. Mayor Schmitt noted an extension that was long enough for resolution to the issues needed to be given if any thing was to occur. Mr. Loney, Public Works Director/City Engineer, addressed the street alignment issue, wetland delineation and the Outlet channel. He noted the issues were getting narrowed down but the issues remaining could affect the layout of the plat. Mr. Loney stated the developers timing was ahead of the City's and Watershed District's timing. Cnc1. Joos stated it sounded like it was the wetland delineation and the channel that were the outstanding issues now. Mr. Loney noted the flood study was not being done now because the adjacent property owner did not want to pay the other half of the cost of the studr. Cnc1. Helkamp stated he was not willing to approve this Preliminary Plat for Riverside Bluffs right now. Cnc1. Menden asked when the applicant could apply for a new review period. Mr. Leek addressed this question. Chris Enger, Ryland Homes, addressed the request from the City for a time extension. He also stated that Ryland Homes did not agree with the findings in the staff report. He stated Ryland I Homes certainly did not want a denial of the Preliminary Plat for Riverside Bluffs. There were many things with the final plat that Ryland Homes needed to know also. If Ryland Homes ollly had time to do the grading this summer that was fine, too much time and effort had already gone into this plat to accept a denial. He noted he had a letter with him asking for continuance until the next Council meeting. He stated Ryland Homes had just received the staff report this morning and Ryland Homes had an answer for every one of the findings. He was looking for continued cooperation with the City. He stated the flood study needed to get started they would pay more than their fair share if necessary. Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -10- Cncl. Lehman stated he was a looking at minimum of 60 days for an extension or Ryland Homes could start over with the process. Cncl. Lehman and Helkamp stated staff noted they needed at least 60 days to work out the issues. Mr. Leek responded to Mr. Enger's comments. Jim Thomson noted some things could be handled with conditions with the approval of a preliminary plat and some issues needed resolution before the approval; he felt Ryland Homes and the City had a mixture of these issue's with this preliminary plat. LehmanlJoos moved to direct staffto continue working with the developer on the preliminary plat of Riverside Bluffs, with an acceptable written extension from the applicant until June 21, 2005. Cncl. Menden noted he would support staff decisions. Mr. Leek noted the planning staff could work with the June 21, 2005 extension and if issues were not resolved by that date he would let the Council know. He was concerned about the time but he would work on resolutions to the outstanding issues. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Menden dissenting. LehmanlJoos moved to recess at 9:33 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt re-convened the meeting at 9:44 p.m. Mr. Loney covered the modeling issue (flood study) with the Riverside Bluffs Preliminary Plat. Mr. Loney noted he spoke with the developer of Riverside Bluffs and that developer noted he was willing to pay the entire cost of the modeling study (flood study) to expedite the issues that had been discussed. Mr. Loney stated WSB would be doing the study and their estimated cost was between $5,000 and $8,000 with the cost not to exceed $10,000. Mr. Enger stated he did talk with Mr. Loney and Ryland Homes would pay for the study and they wanted this study to begin right away. He noted he would follow-up with a letter of commitment regarding the study to Mr. Loney. Lehman/Helkamp moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with WSB for the final design recommendation for the Prior Lake Outlet Channel from County Road 16 to Dean Lake not to exceed $10,000, pending the City receiving a written agreement from Ryland Homes stating Ryland Homes would pay the cost for this study. Cncl. Lehman noted this was a not a guarantee of approval of the final product. Motion carried 5-0. Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -11- Mr. Themig reported on the consideration of an AUAR for Eastern Shakopee. Mr. Themig noted the Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) discussed the concept of an AUAR for the eastern side of Shakopee. Mr. Themig described what an AUAR would do. He stated he did have some cost estimates for an AUAR and these cost estimates were based on a 1008 acre site. The approximate cost would be about $100,000 and would take somewhere in the range of 9 to 12 months to complete. Mr. Themig noted what portion of the eastern end of Shakopee this AUAR would possibly cover. Mr. Themig stated the goal was to create a better development in the region. Mr. Leek noted an AUAR was used when the City did not have specific parameters of a development. Mr. Leek noted the impacts found with an AUAR would be addressed in the mitigation plan for the impacts. Mr. Leek noted he suggested that the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community (SMSC) land be included in this AUAR because there were many impacts in their land that affected the City. Mr. Leek noted what areas on the eastern end of Shako pee already had some review of some form done. Cnc1. Lehman noted some duplication with this AUAR. Mr. Leek addressed this comment. Mr. Leek stated there might be some areas the City wanted to delete from the AUAR area. Mr. Leek suggested there were rational reasons that this AUAR concept should be looked at. Cncl. Lehman noted there was no way to fund this AUAR right now. Cncl. Joos thought this AUAR should have been done before. He noted what he would like to see this AUAR study and stated one should be done before MUSA was extended to other areas. Cncl. Menden stated he thought there was some valuable information that could still be gained from this AUAR process for the eastern end of Shakopee. Mayor Schmitt thought money needed to be put aside each year for different environmental reviews. He noted these reviews needed to be done in advance of development plans. Cncl. Lehman suggested staff come up with a way for new development to pay for this AUAR because the residents wanted developments to pay for themselves. Cnc1. Joos felt the AUAR was a benefit for the City and a funding mechanism should be found for the City to perform these. Cnc1. Joos and Mayor Schmitt stated they would be interested in using an AUAR as a tool for the EAC and staff. Cncl. Helkamp noted he would like more information on this AUAR and a funding mechanism be looked for to pay for the AUAR. He thought this would be a useful tool when the second tier of MUS A started. He stated the City doing an AUAR for the area being talked about tonight was to late. He was not willing to spend money to do an AUAR on that area. He was reluctant to Official Proceedings of the May 17, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -12- assume if the AUAR covered the SMSC land that there would be much cooperation from them. He thought the City should talk with the SMSC before they decided ~o spend the money on an AUAR for the eastern area and include the SMSC land. Cncl. Lehman asked that the EAC identify some environmental sensitive areas that an AUAR should be done on. Mr. Themig noted he thought it was possible for the EAC to identify some environmental sensitive areas. Cncl. Helkamp suggested giving this request back to the EAC and having a staff member gather some more information. Staffwas directed to work with the EAC on the funding and location of sensitive areas where MUSA will be extended, to continue research, to front load the costs to developers with the City paying the cost up front, to determine a trigger point to do an AU AR and for the Council to review the process of an AUAR. There was general consensus to leave certain areas north of County Road 16 out of the AUAR for the area being talked about tonight. Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6244, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee Approving A Request To Amend The Comprehensive Plan To Extend MUSA To The Subject Property, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [property located north of County Road 16, south of the Southbridge Development and west of Pike Lake Road] Joos/Menden offered Ordinance No. 731, Fourth Series, An Ordinance Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending The Zoning Map Adopted In City Code Sec. 11.03 By Rezoning Land Located North Of County Road 16, South Of The Southbridge Development And West Of Pike Lake Road From Agricultural Preservation (AG) Zone To Urban Residential (R- IB) Zone, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Leek reported on the request to re-guide and rezone property from Business Park to Highway Business (B 1). Mr. Leek noted the location ofthe property. Mr. Leek noted this application was before the Council because if the re-guiding and rezoning were approved the applicant was going to bring a proposal forward for the site for the use of a multi screen movie theater with a conditional use permit (CUP) under the B1 zoning. Mr. Leek stated staffs recommended to the Planning Commission was a denial and the Planning Commission recommended the City Council deny this request to re-guide and rezone also. The concerns for this request are 1) the transfer of Business Park classification to a Highway Business classification in this area and 2) traffic circulation at this location. Wendell Smith, partner with HHC, LLC applicant and small time developer and real estate broker, stated that he thought this site was a win/win situation for all. He thought this was a very good site for retail. He noted when this site was purchased he was told the possibility of rezoning and re-guiding this site was little to none. He stated the furniture stores adjacent to this Official Proceedings of the May 17, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -B- land were experiencing very good sales. He wanted to bring in retailers complimentary to the furniture stores. He was here tonight to get the zoning changed to Highway Business (B 1) and to get the comprehensive plan changed. He stated he knew the Planning Commission and staff wanted to keep this piece of property Business Park but he felt it was a prime piece of property for Highway Business. He noted a preliminary traffic study was done. He stated the preliminary traffic study did show it was feasible to have a theatre there. He stated he would work with the City on this property. Cncl. Lehman noted that he appreciated what Mr. Smith would like to accomplish, but this property was zoned Business Park for a reason. Lehman/Menden offered Resolution No. 6245, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee Denying The Requests To Amend The Comprehensive Plan From Business Park To Commercial And To Rezone Property From Business Park (BP) Zone To Highway Business (B-1) Zone, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. [property located north ofHwy. 169, east of County Road 83 and south of 12th Avenue East] Mr. Loney reported on the award of contract for the 2005 Street Reconstruction, Project No. 2005-1. He stated four bids were opened and the apparent low bidder was S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. with a bid of $1,132,381 ;77. This bid was below the engineer's estimate and below the feasibility study estimate. Mr. Loney stated even adding a 5% contingency fee this bid was below the estimates. He stated it was felt this was a good bid and he recommended the bid be awarded to S.M. Hentges, Inc. Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6238, A Resolution Accepting Bids For The 2005 Street Reconstruction Project No. 2005-1, and moved its adoption and moved to approve a 5% contingency amount on this project for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders or quantity adjustments on this project, and moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute an extension agreement with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlick & Associates, Inc. to perform construction staking services on this project. Cncl. Lehman asked when the City improved a street, if the City could make sure there were no previous assessments still due for past projects on the same properties where c,urrent improvements were being requested. Mr. Loney stated he would watch out for double assessments but with the City's policy on corner lots the full double assessment should be taken care of. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney reported on the award of contract for the 2005 bituminous overlay, Project No. 2005- 4. He noted the City had received five bids and these bids were fairly good. He stated the bid was below the engineers estimate but above the cost estimate in the feasibility study. He noted Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -14- more concrete curb needed to be removed and repaired than the design of the project anticipated. Mr. Loney noted the apparent low bid should go to Prior Lake Blacktop, Inc. Their bid was $135,353.20. Mr. Loney noted only 25% was being assessed but because of the increased project cost for the overlay portion of the project the assessments would increase from $432.00 per lot to $463.00 per lot. He stated the City's assessments went up also. Mr. Loney noted the City was still working with Shakopee Public Utilities to add two more streetlights in each block. Mr. Loney stated the streetlight work would be done in conjunction with this street project. Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6239, A Resolution Accepting Bids For The 2005 Bituminous Overlay Project No. 2005-4, and moved its adoption and moved to approve a 5% contingency amount on this project for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change orders on quantity adjustments on this project. Cncl. Lehman noted the two additional streetlights were not included in this resolution. Mr. Loney noted the City's policy was to assess 25% of the cost of the streetlights improvement. The City would cover the other 75%. Mr. Loney noted the addition of the two streetlights was anticipated to be relatively inexpensive. Motion carried 5-0. Joos/Menden moved to allow the developer of Countryside Addition to proceed with the installation of utilities and street improvements, prior to final plat approval with the following conditions: 1) a hold harmless agreement is entered into with the developer and the City of Shakopee holding the City harmless of any action that may come about before the final plat, 2) the developer pays all engineering fees upfront, 3) the developer obtains an approved set of plans by the Engineering Department and Shakopee Public Utilities before constructing improvements and 4) insurance be submitted to the City naming the City an additional insured prior to construction. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6240, A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For The Valley View Road Improvements, Fmm the East Plat Line Of The Greenfield Addition To County Road 83, Project No. 2004-3, and movedits adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. Loney reported on the relocation of the existing overhead power lines on Valley View Road, from the Greenfield Addition to County Road 83. He noted the necessary easements would be given with the Park Meadows plat. He noted these power lines were overhead and with previous existing overhead power lines for other projects the overhead lines were required to go underground. He stated the estimated costs for the relocation of these power lines were received by SPUC. These estimates were approximately $67,500 for underground and approximately $17,000 for overhead. Mr. Loney stated that SPUC had a funding mechanism in place now to Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -15- pay for the undergounding when existing overhead power lines were required to be undergrounded. He stated SPUC had also budgeted $65,000 in their CIP for undergrounding. MendenlHelkamp moved that the existing overhead power lines along Valley View Road, from the Greenfield Addition to County Road 83 be placed underground. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Lehman dissenting. Mr. Loney reported on the relocation of existing overhead power lines on County Road 77 and County Road 79 associated with the Countryside and new high school developments. Mr. Loney noted the area this project referred to. Mr. Loney noted because ofthe County's clear zone policy for their right-of-way the current overhead power lines will need to be relocated. Mr. Loney also stated because these power lines need to be moved more than 300 feet the City's Ordinance becomes effective and the City could require that these lines be undergrounded. Mr. Loney noted the overhead power line along County Road 79 was a main feeder line. Mr. Loney had received costs estimates on the relocation of these power lines from SPUC. These cost estimates were: for County Road 79 the undergrounding cost estimate is $100,000 and the overhead cost estimate is $25,000 and for County Road 77 the costs estimates for undergrounding is $60,000 and the overhead cost estimate is $15,000. Mr. Loney noted there was one line on County Road 77 servicing one house and that house was gone. However, SPUC wanted the option to place a power line down there for future use. Mr. Loney noted the power lines on County Road 77 and County Road 79 were not expected to be relocated until 2007 and the money was not now in SPUC's budget. He noted the project had been expedited and is now expected to be completed in 2005. Helkamp/Menden moved that the existing overhead power lines along County Road 77 and County Road 79, from Trunk Highway 169 to the south terminus of the construction be relocated underground. [Countryside and new high school developments] Cncl. Joos noted where SPUC could get the money from to pay for this undergrounding. Cncl. Lehman would like to see a report of the impact that this undergrounding surcharge had on all the ratepayers. Cncl. Joos stated he would follow-up with SPUC so the Council could get this information. Cncl. Joos also stated that the Council had determined that there was a real benefit to the City having the power lines underground. Motion carried 4-1 with Cncl. Lehman dissenting. Joos/Menden moved to authorize appropriate City staff to close Lewis Street from 2nd Avenue to 3rd Avenue on Saturday, June 18,2005, from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [Charitable motorcycle run sponsored by Pablo's Mexican Restaurant] Official Proceedings of the May 17,2005 Shakopee City Council Page -16- Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6246, A Resolution Setting The Public Hearing Date To Consider The Vacation Of A Portion Of Prairie Street At 981 Bluff A venue East, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to authorize the use of Shako pee Transit Bus No. 3062 by the Scott County Sheriff's department, on the conditions that; Scott County would be responsible for storage and maintenance of the bus while it is in service by the Sheriff s department, the City of Shakopee will be a name insured on the County insurance policy covering Bus 3062, and should the Sheriffs department at some time in the future no longer have need of Bus 3062, the City reserves the right to have it returned or brought to auction by Scott County. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden offered Resolution No. 6241, A Resolution Ofthe City Of Shako pee, Minnesota, Approving The Registered Land Survey For Ryan Companies, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to hire Ryan Hughes as Natural Resource Specialist at Grade 6, Step D ($47,194), effective on or about June 6, 2005, contingent upon successful pre-employment screening. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Mr. McNeill reported on the amendment to the 2005 pay schedule for the officers and non-union employees of the City of Shakopee. He noted this amendment was necessary because the position of Records Clerk had been upgraded because of the implementation of the electronic imaging system purchased by the City and because a job description for a Telecommunications Coordinator position had been approved and because of the elimination of the position of the Television Production Specialist position. Helkamp/Menden offered Resolution No. 6233, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 6156 Which Adopted The 2005 Pay Schedule For The Officers And Non-Union Employees Of The City Of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Joos/Menden moved to accept the resignation of Mike Johnson as Television Production Specialist, effective May 17,2005, and grant paid leave from May 10th - May 17th and unused accrued vacation and to be eligible for unemployment compensation in accordance with State law as a consideration of the elimination of his position due to restructuring. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to accept the successful completion of Jeff Sindelar's probationary period and grant him regular full-time status. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Official Proceedings of the May 17, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page -17- Joos/Menden moved to approve the City of Shakopee job description for Fire Fighter dated 5/17/05, C.C. Document No. 386. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to authorize the Fire Department to open hiring to fill the 6 current vacancies on the department's roster. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to accept the resignation of Wayne Senst, Shakopee Firefighter effective May 17.,2005. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). Joos/Menden moved to approve the application and grant a wine license and an on sale 3.2 percent malt liquor license to Raul Alvarado dba EI N opal, 815, West 1 st A venue, conditioned upon meeting all licensing requirements of the City Code. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). CncL Lehman stated he was concerned about a possible levy freeze affecting the funding of the operations if there was a positive outcome on the community center referendum. Mr. McNeill responded to this concern. Helkamp/Joos moved to adjourn the meeting to Thursday, May 26, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. ~d. Crs ~th S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA MAY 26, 2005 Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. with Council members Lehman, Menden, Helkamp and Joos present. Also Present: Mark McNeill, City Administrator (8:19); Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; R. Michael Leek, Community Development Director; Bruce Loney, Public Works/City Engineer; Dan Hughes, Chief of Police; and Mark Themig, Park, Recreation, and Facilities Director. Members of the School Board present: Kathy Busch, Steve Schneider, Mary Romansky, Andy Unseth, Bob Loonan and School Superintendent, Jon McBroom. Menden/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6248, A Resolution Canvassing Returns Of Special Election, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Schmitt opened the joint meeting with the City Council and the Shakopee School Board. Mr. McBroom, Superintendent, noted issues tonight for joint conversation regarded a new elementary site, INET issues and shared facilities. Mr. McBroom noted his appreciation for all the support and cooperative effort the Council in the past had give the School District on various Issues. Mr. McBroom noted the School Board had been discussing the need for another elementary school because the trigger point for a new elementary school has been reached sooner than expected. Mr. McBroom noted the School Board needed additional help from the City to help make a new elementary school feasible. Mr. Broom noted the School Board has a possibility of four sites right now for the new elementary school but each site had a number of concerns. School Board Chair, Mary Romansky, noted the School Board had been discussing sites but they were concerned about the MUSA availability to some ofthe sites. They wanted to know where and when MUSA would be available because they wanted to fit in with the City's planning. Mayor Schmitt stated right now the City was emphasizing development on the east side of town in an attempt to capitalize on the infrastructure already there or near by. Cncl. Joos stated the School Board needed to be familiar with the tier one MUSA areas because the Council had determined not to develop elsewhere until the tier one areas had been mostly developed. The tier one areas could be scheduled for development and new MUSA first; however, if the School District was looking at land in other tier areas (MUS A) then the City Council needed to know that so they could adjust some MUSA areas. Cncl. Lehman noted the time line for the School building was important because perhaps by then the second MUSA tier would already be active. Mr. Loonan noted there was an immediate issue. Does the School Board put the new elementary school where growth will be occurring or does the School Board put the new school where growth already is. Official Proceedings of the May 26, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page 2 Mr. Leek explained how MUSA was allocated by the Metropolitan Council and why this was a large factor for development and for the City (costs, wetland issues, access, extension of sewer service, rural residential lots). Mr. Leek noted tier two for MUSA had some real challenges with MUSA and water supply (lift stations). Mr. Leek noted there was difficulty in making some connections because of the location of certain properties in eastern and central Shakopee. Mr. Leek noted the Township land (Jackson and Louisville) was basically all in tier two for MUSA. Mr. Leek stated the City really had no plans for Louisville Township right now. According to Mr. Leek, the potential for a school site in the eastern part of the City south of County Road 16 was better than in the central portion because the central portion of the City did have some challenges regarding MUSA extension (sanitary sewer). Mr. Schneider, School Board member, stated the School District was being forced to look at property in the tier two and tier three areas for possible sites because of the cost of land in the City. Mayor Schmitt noted the City was caught in a situation of having to allocate MUSA to rural residential lots to get to the sites the School District was looking at. Mayor Schmitt noted the development on the west end oftown was also put in jeopardy because of the capacity for sewer in the Shakopee/Chaska Interceptor. Mayor Schmitt thought it was in everyone's best interest to determine ifMUSA needed to be extended and where was the least riskiest location for the City to extend the MUSA. Mayor Schmitt noted there were many issues for every one. Cncl. Joos noted it was not only the extension of MUS A but if the City got the MUSA from the Metropolitan Council there was the question was there capacity to use the MUSA. Right now the capacity to use the MUSA may be the biggest question. Cncl. J oos stated he would be willing to look at other tier areas and work with the School District. He understood schools were needed. Cncl. Leman noted there was wording flexibility in the Comprehensive Plan before the Metropolitan Council where MUSA could be extended to other sites ifthe rationalization was there for that extension. Cncl. Lehman stated he too would be willing to look at tier two for possible school sites. He noted he would like to see development around the site to pay for the infrastructure ifthe City needed to provide MUSA to a tier two area. Mr. Leek noted the Metropolitan Council was very receptive to working out the capacity challenge presented by the Shakopee/Chaska Interceptor. The City and the School Board had many, many issues to come to grips with. This was a real complex issue. Cncl. Helkamp asked if the School District could generate a list of 4/5 possible school sites and then to get the list to the City and they could evaluate the sites according to the City's issues and then something could possibly be worked out with the School District. Superintendent, McBroom, offered three possible locations tonight. Cncl. Joos suggested a task force of two Official Proceedings of the May 26, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page 3 School Board members and two Council/staff members to form a task force and keep the Council informed of what is going on relative to a new elementary site. Cncl. Menden stated it was definitely beneficial for the School Board and City to work together. This would fill the need for the School District was well as the City. He noted he would support the School District's needs. Superintendent, McBroom, stated the INET has been a very cooperative project between the School District, County and the City. He noted there had been some recent work on software and other changes relative to this INET. He saw this INET as a really good partnership that needed to be continued with the County and the City. They were willing to do what needed to be done to keep this partnership alive and well. He noted the new High School site had been planned for with the original construction of the INET. He noted the School District would probably need to extend the INET at the next site and the School District would need help with permitting and other things under the control of the City. Superintendent, McBroom, addressed the shared facilities. He noted there was somewhat of a continuation with the existing agreement but the School District would like to review this agreement and perhaps change some items. He noted the School District continued to share some facilities and to provide help on some items. Cncl. Lehman had a couple of concerns with some of the shared facilities. These concerns are: 1) a lack of maintenance consistency between the School property and the City's property regarding shared facilities and 2) some ofthe space usage of the shared facilities. He would like to see a user-friendly process that both sides could follow. Superintendent, McBroom, thought it would be helpful if these issues were put down on paper so they could be shared when the joint powers agreement for the shared facilities was reviewed. The School Board left to have their own meeting and Gary Sheldon, from Scott County, gave a presentation of the 800 MHz radio system that the County would be proposing at a future time. Gary Sheldon, representative from the County, presented the 800 MHz radio system that the County would like to see every public safety officer using in the County. He noted this radio system was very different from what is being used now. Mr. Sheldon noted what made this system unique from what is now being used. He noted what the current system is capable of doing and providing and what the 800 MHz could offer. He noted there had not been significant upgrades to the current system. The 800 MHz offered a shared digital channel system managed by a computer system. Mr. Sheldon noted the new system was quite efficient and provided a wider area of coverage within the state. This would allow for shared communication and inter communication between various agencies not now available. Mr. McNeill, City Administrator, entered and took his seat. Official Proceedings of the May 26, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page 4 Mr. Sheldon did note the new system was quite expensive but there were opportunities for shared investment because this was a metropolitan wide system. He noted this system also provided the greatest interoperability. Mr. Sheldon stated the current system had been in operation for a long time and did have some issues now. He noted some of these issues. He stated the current radio system was slated to be replaced so if the County was going to move to a 800 MHz system it made sense to make that move now. He noted there were issues with the FCC regarding the current radio system too (this issue was nationwide). He noted the FCC was looking at every one using a wide bandwidth (the County has this) to replace those radios by 2008. Mr. Sheldon stated even ifthe current system did remain everyone would have to replace at least their radios if the FCC determined that was needed. Mr. Sheldon noted the process that the County was going thru. He noted the Public Works and the Transportation Departments could possibly go to 800 MHz radios also. The capacity ofthe new radio system needed to be planned out for future growth. Mr. Sheldon noted the radio coverage within buildings for the 800 MHz radios was not as good as the VHS radios coverage but there were things that could be done to alleviate this problem. He noted a couple of ways to help the 800 MHz radio c~)Verage inside buildings. These were: 1) how the infrastructure was built [where the towers are built at] and 2) the requirement to have certain building treatments of new buildings [antennas]. He noted existing buildings could be treated to make them compatible to 800 MHz radios. Mr. Sheldon noted many things needed to be looked at (there were many pieces to make the system work well). Funding mechanisms also needed to be looked at and certain costs need to be identified along with policy decisions and timing decisions that needed to be made mutually. Mr. Sheldon noted what was going on right now as far as the 800 MHz system was concerned. He did state that the new jail and new Law Enforcement Center (LEC) would eliminate some of the issues because it was going to get a new dispatch center. He did state right now that the County could not operate correctly in emergency situations. He noted new consoles were going to be put in the new dispatch center that were 800 MHz ready. The new consoles could communicate with the old equipment as well as 800 MHz equipment when that system became available for the County. He stated the County had received permission from the Metropolitan Radio system to slowly move to the 800 MHz system (staged). He noted the planning process had been started and the County did receive a grant of$35,000 from the Department of Public Safety for the planning and system design work. Mr. Sheldon noted the planning that really needed to be done. He stated right now Scott County was on track to have all the plans in place in late 2005 or early 2006 for the 800 MHz system. Mr. Sheldon stated it would probably be late 2006 or early 2007 possibly late 2007 before there was migration to the 800 MHz system according to plans now. Mr. Sheldon provided some very rough cost estimates. He thought some ofthe cost estimates were on the high end in some areas. He stated some of the money is already in the County's budget. Mr. Sheldon thought the County was looking at around $7.2 million for a total cost Official Proceedings of the May 26, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page 5 figure. He noted the County would be looking to find some grant funds for some of the costs. He stated generally the City can plan on their cost for migration to the system to be the cost of replacement of their mobile and portable radios for police and fire along with the radios operational expense. However, that replacement cost was not inexpensive. The Police Department had roughly 75 radios and Mr. Sheldon stated you can plan on each new radio costing about $3,000 (today's dollars). Mr. Sheldon noted there was an operation expense to be on the Metropolitan Radio System. He noted the City should plan on $500 per radio per year for that cost. Mr. Sheldon explained why this cost was estimated so high. Mr. Sheldon stated the County was looking for direction. He noted he did not see any alternative. There were a variety of things that needed upgrading right now anyway so this was a good time to make the advance to an 800 MHz system. He stated it was especially important to have the 800 MHz if Dakota County switched to the 800 MHz system because of all the interaction. Mr. Sheldon noted this current plan was not set in stone. Cncl. Joos asked what other items were being used for pubic safety applications other than radios. Mr. Sheldon responded to this question noting what other type systems Scott County is using. He stated there was no way the County could compete with commercial carriers (cellular, PC in the squad cars for data). Mr. Sheldon noted cellular phone service is suspect during times of public safety emergencies and he thought a radio system would always be needed. It was noted the type of communication used was dependent on the type of information that was wanted. Cncl. Lehman wanted to know if the VHS system could be used for secondary service? Or could the current radios be resold. Mr. Sheldon noted there would not be much resale value; some of the current radios could be used for fire paging. Some of the current system would be retained for paging services. Cncl. Lehman posed a question to Mr. Sheldon regarding the proposal ofthe 800 MHz system and the proposal for a joint training facility. He asked Mr. Sheldon which of the two proposals would the County prefer, the joint training facility or the 800 MHz system? The answer - the 800 MHz. Mr. Sheldon noted money wise the 800 MHz system may need to be phased in. Cnd. Lehman asked for a cost estimate for the City of Shakopee. Chief Hughes responded to this request. He stated about $250,000 for radios per department. There were about 150 radios total so the annual cost of operation would be about $75,000 on an annual basis. Cncl. Lehman then estimated the cost to be about $600,000 unbudgeted dollars to get started. Chief Hughes stated he wanted to give the Council a heads up that this issue was coming down the pipe probably in 2006 or 2007. He stated he and the Fire Chief would be talking with the City's Finance Director to see how this could be best budgeted for capital and operating costs. Official Proceedings of the May 26, 2005 Shakopee City Council Page 6 Mr. Sheldon did point out by 2008 the City of Shakopee was going to buy all new radios for the Police and Fire Departments even ifthey did not go to the 800 MHz system. The FCC was going to force that issue. The VHS radios would be a little cheaper but not that much for old technology. Mr. Sheldon did not think this 800 MHz system would be changing rapidly because it was a metro wide system. Mr. Sheldon noted from his perspective he thought ifthe County did not move to 800 MHz now they would in time be told to move it. He thought it was better to plan than to be forced. Mr. Sheldon did state this technology was very flexible. He also stated that right now, because Carver County moved to the 800 MHz, Scott County has lost their backup. He noted the County was at risk to become an island in technology ifthe 800 MHz system was not gone to. The annual operating cost of the radios was discussed. Helkamp/Menden moved to adjourn the meeting to June 7, 2005 at 5:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned at 9:13 p.m. Motion carried 5-0. Wlc).8f tith S. Cox City Clerk Carole Hedlund Recording Secretary