HomeMy WebLinkAbout7. Approval of Minutes: June 07, 2005 (7 p.m.)
t 1,\
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 7, 2005
Mayor Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7: 17 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; Jim Thomson, City Attorney; Mark Themig, Parks, Recreation and
Facilities Director; Andrea Weber, Parks and Recreation Landscape Designer; Kris Wilson,
Assistant to the City Administrator and Dan Hughes, Police Chief.
The pledge of allegiance was recited.
Menden/Helkamp moved to approve the Agenda as written. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Schmitt noted that Norm and Jan Shutrop were present this evening for the naming of the
park on the property located at 6865 Eagle Creek Boulevard. The City purchased this property
from the Shutrop family earlier this year. Mayor Schmitt stated the name of this park, "Idella and
George Shutrop Community Park" would be approved under the Consent Agenda tonight.
Dan Hughes, Police Chief, requested Mayor Schmitt join him at the podium to receive a
donation from Ken Larson, president of the Shakopee Eagles Club 4120, and Ms. Jean Rare,
President of the Shakopee Eagles Auxiliary. A donation of $4,000 was presented to Mayor
Schmitt from the Shakopee Eagles Club to be used to purchase two automatic external
defibrillators and the remaining money to be used for digital cameras. Mayor Schmitt also
received a donation of $500 from the Shakopee Eagles Auxiliary.
HelkamplLehman offered Resolution No. 6237, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee,
Minnesota, Accepting A $4,000 Donation From The Shakopee Eagles Aerie 4120 Club, To Be
Used For Two Automatic External Defibulators, And The Remaining Balance for Digital
Cameras, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0.
Lehman/Joos moved to approve the Consent Agenda as written. Motion carried 5-0
Mayor Schmitt asked ifthere were any citizens present in the audience who wished to address
any item not on the agenda. There was no response.
Lehman/Joos moved to approve the meeting minutes for April 12, 2005, April 19, 2005 (5:00
p.m.), and April 19, 2005, (7:00 p.m.). (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to approve the bills in the amount of $443,741.30 plus $50,030.21 for
refunds, returns and pass through for a total of$493,771.51. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda). [The list of bills is posted on the bulletin board at City Hall for one month following
approval] .
t ~
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shako pee City Council Page -2-
There was a joint meeting between the City Council and the Economic Development Authority
regarding the public hearing on modifying the Redevelopment Plan for Minnesota River Valley
Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 and a Tax Increment Financing Plan for TIF District
No. 13, Open systems, Inc.
The gavel was handed to Chair Menden and Chair Menden called the Economic Development
Authority (EDA) meeting to order.
LehmanlHelkamp moved to open the public hearing on modifying the Redevelopment Plan for
Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No.1 and a Tax Increment
Financing Plan for TIF District No. 13, Open systems, Inc. for the EDA and the City Council.
Motion carried 5-0.
Kris Wilson, Assistant to the City Administrator, reported on the request from Open Systems,
Inc. for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance for the construction of a new facility located in
the Dean Lakes Business Park to replace the building Open Systems is currently leasing in
Shakopee. Ms. Wilson noted the proposed EDA TIF District would provide Open Systems, Inc.
an estimated $170,000 in "pay as you go" TIF assistance over the course of seven years.
Ms. Wilson noted Open Systems manufactured Open Source accounting software and provided
training for their resellers and users. Ms. Wilson stated that Open Systems has been located in
Shakopee for early eight years now. They currently employed about 60 people with their wages
exceeding the Business Subsidy Policy. Ms. Wilson noted Open Systems had decided not to
renew their lease on the current space because now they would like to own their own building.
Open Systems was proposing to build a 25,000 square foot facility in the new Dean Lakes
Business Park with an estimated market value of $2.4 million. Open Systems would be the first
occupant of the Dean Lake Business Park and this would establish Open Systems headquarters
here in Shakopee.
Ms. Wilson noted TIF had been requested because the site has several unique costs that are not
found with other potential development sites in the southwest Metro area. Ms. Wilson noted
what these unique costs are. Ms. Wilson noted in addition to the TIF request, Open Systems was
as an individual developer under the master development agreement that the City entered into
with Ryan Companies, Open Systems would be eligible to get a portion ofthe tax abatement
assistance provided with the master development agreement. Ms. Wilson stated at the time the
master development agreement was agreed upon it was noted that there would be other financial
considerations that would be requested by the individual business'.
Ms. Wilson noted keeping Open Systems in the City and allowing them to build their own
building in the Dean Lakes Business Park would increase the City's tax base and retain about 60
well paying jobs in the community. Ms. Wilson noted Open Systems was hoping to increase the
number of jobs over a period of time. She noted Open Systems brought in out of town visitors to
their site and thus generated business (hotels, restaurants) within the community.
~
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -3-
Ms. Wilson noted this proposed TIP District has been reviewed and unanimously recommended
by the Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC). Ms. Wilson stated the Planning
Commission has reviewed the TIP District as well and has found it to be consistent with the
overall Comprehensive Plan for the development of the City.
Cncl. Lehman noted this was a "pay as you go" TIP District. It was noted if not all of the newly
adopted business subsidy policy requirements were meet the TIP was scaled back accordingly.
Michael Bertini, CEO Open Systems, noted Open Systems was a Minnesota based developer of
software. He stated they were experiencing a tremendous amount of growth right now. He
stated they did not sell direct; they sold thru re-sellers. He stated Open Systems was looking at
about 35% growth this year and they needed a larger home. Mr. Bertini stated the mission of
Open Systems was to partner with the people of the business community.
Mr. Mark Sims, United Properties, stated Open Systems was adding significant costs to their
development because of the conservation efforts in the area, the extra import of fill, the
assessments for the streets and the extra land needed because of the power line easement. V ou
add all the extra costs together and you get a figure slightly over $300,000 of additional costs.
Harry Weinandt, 1259 Maxine Circle, pointed out this was the area that tax abatement was
received on for $2 million. He noted this area was changed from Industrial zoning to Business
Park zoning. He was concerned about the School District not receiving taxes from this property
for seven years, yet this company was going to bring people in here that went to school.
Mr. McNeill addressed some of Mr. Weinandt's statements/comments. Mr. McNeill noted fiscal
disparities were factored in when the amount of dollars for TIP was figured out. Mr. McNeill
acknowledged that the School District would not see the benefit of this additional tax base for
seven years. Mr. McNeill pointed out ifthe assistance of TIP was not there the tax base would
not grow. Mr. McNeill also noted this case was somewhat unique because in actuality this
request was for jobs retention and jobs expansion.
Cncl. Lehman noted this was a "pay as you go" plan and if Open Systems did not meet the
obligations in the Business Subsidy Plan there is no subsidy.
Tom Schneider, 1577 Mike Court, stated he was concerned about what was happening to the
Industrial tax base. He stated much Industrial base had been given away. He did not want to
keep the corporate welfare going. He was concerned about the other businesses in this area
coming in for TIP. He felt this prime property would/could be developed without TIP.
Cncl. Lehman addressed the Ryan Master Agreement. He noted what Ryan Companies
originally asked for in the Dean Lakes Business Park was far more that the amount of abatement
received. He noted what the developer gave the City (taxpayers) in return for this abatement.
He noted the TIP process was set up so each business would be judged on their merits rather than
c.#
Official Proceedings of the June 7,2005
Shakopee City Council Page -4-
give a blanket TIF District. Cncl. Lehman noted he was part of planning this Ryan Master
Agreement. Cncl. Lehman stated he looked at this master agreement as the City invested $1
million to get a $282 million tax capacity in a few years that buys down every taxpayer's taxes in
the City of Shakopee. He noted the City's tax rate has gone down but the value of the property
has gone up and that is one reason why the taxes are seen as going up. It was because of this
type effort that the tax rate was going down. Cnd Lehman also noted this Business Park
classification did not use the City's services like a residential classification did.
Cnd Menden, Chair of the Economic Development Authority, asked if there were any more
audience comments. There was no response.
Joos/Helkamp moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Schmitt stated it was important to recognize what the City was getting here. He was
comfortable with this particular business subsidy because this started to get the Business Park in
Dean Lakes going. He thought this was a wise investment on the City's part. Mayor Schmitt
thought it behooved the City to support and actively market some projects in the business parks.
This is why he supported this subsidy for this project. He stated each project needed to be
looked at on their merits.
Chair Mendenquestioned the number of years being changed to seven when six years was used
on previous TIF Districts. He also questioned the impact on the overall dollars. Ms. Wilson
addressed the impact on the overall dollars. She noted with each year ofTIF the impact was
about $24,000. Mr. McNeill noted the change in the number of years was due to the change in
the economy. Chair Menden wondered ifthere was some way the TIF dollars that the City had
could be managed in a way so others would be able to be benefit with the TIF tool. Ms. Wilson
responded to this concern. She noted TIF was up to the Council's level of comfort. Cncl.
Lehman and Cncl. Joos stated they thought the newly created Business Subsidy Plan would
provide this level of comfort for the Council.
Cncl. Joos stated Open Systems met the criteria in the Business Subsidy Plan and he was in favor
of granting this TIF District. He felt the Business Subsidy Plan was working well for the City.
Chair Menden noted the good of the City needed to come before personal beliefs.
The gavel was handed back to Mayor Schmitt at this time.
Lehman/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 6251, A Resolution Approving Tax Increment
Financing Plan For Tax: Increment Financing District No. 13 And A Modified Redevelopment
Plan For The Minnesota River Valley Housing And Redevelopment Project No.1; And
Approving Contract For Private Development Between The City, The Economic Development
Authority For The City Of Shakopee, Open Systems, Inc., And OS Investments, LLC, Which
Includes A Business Subsidy Agreement, and moved its adoption. Motion carried 5-0.
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -5-
Helkamp/Joos moved to open the public hearing on the proposed vacation of an easement
located south of County Road 42 and west of McKenna Road extended (within the plat of Jeffers
Pond in Prior Lake). Motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Leek reported on the proposed vacation of an easement located south of County Road 42 and
west of McKenna Road extended (within the plat of Jeffers Pond in Prior Lake). Mr. Leek stated
several years ago the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (SPUC) had service territory rights
in a portion of Prior Lake. He noted an easement for a utility facility within Prior Lake was
granted at the time of the granting of the service territory rights to SPUC. Mr. Leek noted the
practice at that time was for the City to go into title on the easement and land ownership with
SPUC. Mr. Leek noted the area for vacation was part of the Jeffers Pond area, which is proposed
to be developed by Wennsman Realty in Prior Lake, and they wish to get rid of the easement
rights in favor ofthe City. He noted that SPUC had already taken action to relinquish their rights
that they had in that easement. SPUC noted a long time ago this service area had been
transferred to Minnesota Valley Electric and SPUC no longer had any service territory rights.
Mr. Leek stated given there is no longer any SPUC interest, there is no public purpose to be
served by maintaining that easement. Mr. Leek noted the Planning Commission has
recommended to the City Council that they vacate this easement.
Mayor Schmitt asked the audience if they had any comments on this issue. There was no
response.
Helkamp/Menden moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0.
Menden/Helkamp offered Resolution No. 6250, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee
Vacating Easement Within The Proposed Jeffers Pond, and moved its adoption. Motion carried
5-0.
Cncl. Lehman noted he attended the Park And Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) meeting
where the CIP for parks was discussed. He noted projects had been shifted around and now a
positive balance was shown in the Park CIP through 2009.
Cncl. Joos noted he held a Visioning meeting. He noted a lot of effort and time went into these
meetings. He noted comments were welcomed regarding how the residents wanted to see their
City developed. He noted he also attended a SPUC meeting. He stated Mr. Themig, Park,
Recreation and Facilities Director was there and Huber Park had been discussed (some
undergrounding, some water issues) at that meeting.
Cncl. Helkamp gave a quick update on the land Scott County Alliance For Leadership and
Efficiency (SCALE) was interested in for the joint training facility. He stated the consultant felt
the annex location in Jordan was a good place for the facility. He noted the County was going to
make application for some State funding. He thanked the Council for their support and the
passing of the Transit Management Plan on the Consent Agenda this evening.
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -6-
LehmanlJoos offered Resolution No. 6258, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota,
Establishing The Name Of Idella And George Shutrop Community Park, and moved its
adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
LehmanlJoos moved to authorize the installation of a pond fountain in Lions Park and allocated
funding from the Park Reserve Fund for installation of the electric service, if needed and moved
to direct the appropriate City officials to develop an agreement that outlines responsibilities for
this project. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
LehmanlJoos offered Resolution No. 6259, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota
Accepting A Donation Of A Datkronics Scoreboard And A Batting Cage From The Shakopee
Youth Baseball Association, and moved its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
LehmanlJoos moved to direct City officials to develop an agreement that outlines the
responsibilities for the scoreboard and batting cage. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
LehmanlJoos moved to allow appropriate City officials to accept the Secure Our School Grant
award, and authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement with the School
District for the reimbursement of the cash match in the amount of $25,108.00. (Motion carried
under the Consent Agenda).
LehmanlJoos moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to apply for the 2005 Secure Our
Schools Initiative Grant. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
LehmanlJoos moved to authorize appropriate City staff to purchase two new Whelen WPS 2805
civil defense warning siren from Front Line Fire & Rescue at an expenditure of $32,246.07.
(Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
LehmanlJ oos moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to enter into the grant agreement with
the Minnesota State Patrol for the project entitled Operation NightCap during the period from
April 1, 2005 to June 30,2005 for the amount awarded by the Minnesota State Patrol. (Motion
carried under the Consent Agenda).
Andrea Weber, Park and Recreation Landscape Designer, reported on the Greenfield West
neighborhood park. She noted this was a neighborhood park that was approximately 4.5 acres.
She explained some ofthe features of the park. She noted the apparent low bidder was SunRam
Construction Inc. from Otsego with a bid for $304,527. She stated the next higher bidder was
approximately $311,000. She stated the bids were fairly close. Ms. Weber noted the apparent
low bid was over the estimate for the construction level of Greenfield Park. The playground
equipment, staff design, construction administration, contingency, and other additional costs that
staff was not aware of at the time (water connection charge, WAC, permits, staking, etc.) were
not included in the cost estimate given by staff.
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -7-
Ms. Weber noted a meeting had been held to discuss some possible cuts to the Greenfield West
Park facilities. The possible cuts were: 1) additional fill, 2) the amount oftrees, 3) replacement
of the decorative waste receptacle with the blue plastic ones for Dick's Sanitation, 4) elimination
ofthe windscreen on the tennis court, 5) modification of the tennis enclosure, 6) reduction in the
number of pedestrian light fixtures from five to three, and 7) removal of the "bench nodes" along
the trail. Ms. Weber noted after these reductions were considered the total cost of the park
would come to about $357,529. She stated this amount was still about $12,000 over the amount
budgeted in the CIP (346,000). Ms. Weber did point out ifall the pedestrian light fixtures were
removed then the cost estimate for the entire park, Greenfield Park, would be within the
budgeted amount. She noted there were street lights in close proximity of the proposed park.
Cncl. Helkamp wondered why a WAC charge needed to be paid for a park. Ms. Weber noted
there were two water fixtures (fountain and water mister) included in the park design. Mr.
McNeill noted the charges for SAC and WAC could be a future discussion with SPuc. Cncl.
Helkamp addressed the fencing and the trees. Ms. Weber noted a home builder had been reached
regarding some tree replacements. She noted she would need further direction if the Council
wanted her to pursue this tree replacement. Cncl. Helkamp stated he preferred to see all the light
fixtures remain in the park and to see if trees could be found by some other method than
purchasing by the City. Cncl. Helkamp stated from a safety standpoint it would be good to have
some lights in the park. Mayor Schmitt agreed with Cncl. Helkamp.
Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6255, A Resolution Accepting Bids For Construction Of
Greenfield West Neighborhood Park Project No. PR2005-1, and moved its adoption noting that
the contract be awarded to Sun Ram Construction at a cost not to exceed $357,529 with staffs
recommended changes.
Cncl. Lehman noted if there were additional park improvements above this approved figure, they
could be brought back before Council.
Mr. Themig, Park, Recreation And Facilities Director, stated Mr. Thomson, City Attorney, had
been questioned regarding the legality oftaking out certain features ofthe bid to reduce the cost.
Mr. Themig stated because these are unit bids the City had the authority to increase or decrease
the unit amounts. Mr. Themig noted the Council needed to award the contract to the low bidder
and then the City would simply reduce the unit quantity for the specific item.
Jim Thomson, City Attorney, noted the best way to handle this bid situation with adjustments
was to adopt Resolution No. 6255 awarding the contract to the low bidder as bid and then to
direct staff on the particular adjustments wanted by Council.
Mayor Schmitt noted the bid amount was a maximum of $304,527.
Cncl. Lehman changed his motion to:
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -8-
LehmanlJoos offered Resolution No. 6255, A Resolution Accepting Bids For Construction Of
Greenfield West Neighborhood Park Project No. PR2005-1, and moved its adoption noting that
the contract to be awarded to Sun Ram Construction, Inc. was at a cost not to exceed $304,527.
Ms. Weber noted what the contingency amount could be used for.
Motion carried 5-0.
LehmanlJoos moved to direct staff to adjust the amount of trees depending on how they were
gotten and to leave the inside park lights in the park design because of the public safety issue
with the cost of the park not to exceed the budgeted amount of $346,000 using staffs discretion
on what items needed to be deleted from the Greenfield West Park to get to the $346,000 figure.
Cncl. Joos stated he preferred to have a minimum of three lights in the park itself.
Cncl. Helkamp noted the bench nodes in the park were used by others as well as park users, so
he would like every effort to keep the bench nodes in the park design if possible. Cncl. Menden
agreed with Cncl. Helkamp regarding the bench nodes.
Motion carried 5-0.
Mr. Themig reported on the bids for the Soccer Complex located on 17th Avenue PR 2005-2.
Mr. Themig noted the City went out for bids on May 5,2005 and the bids were opened on June
1,2005. Mr. Themig noted the soccer complex was designed last fall. Mr. Themig noted the
project estimate for the building portion was $424,500 and the low bid came in for
approximately $528,000. Mr. Themig noted this overage had been discussed and he noted some
of the reasons for the overage. Mr. Themig noted some additional charges he had just learned
about (SAC and WAC, trunk water charge). Mr. Themig noted some additional money in the
CIP had been included for some additional things that would need to be done at the soccer
complex (fencing, ADA modifications, i.e.). Mr. Themig noted SPUC felt they needed to be
consistent with what they do for schools and parks. SPUC felt there was justification for the
trunk water charge even though SPUC's trunk water charge excluded parks and right-of-ways for
roadways. Mr. Themig noted he showed a cost for the second phase of the soccer complex to be
$650,456. The CIP allocation was $480,000.
Mr. Themig noted some things that could be done with the apparent low bid to bring the cost
more in line with what was budgeted in the CIP. These were: 1) eliminate the center canopy
[$90,000],2) eliminate one building, and 3) eliminate trash enclosure [without the trash
enclosure the City Code will not be met]. Mr. Themig noted if the Council wanted to reduce the
scope of the project the bids would need to be rejected and the project would need to be
redesigned and re-bid. He did not think a major redesign was within the architects current
contract with the City.
Official Proceedings of the June 7,2005
Shako pee City Council Page -9-
Cnd. Menden noted he agreed with some of the options but he was concerned about the rising
costs of construction and the cost to redesign and re-bid. Mr. Themig noted some of the redesign
was easy and it was thought the redesign phase might only take a couple of months. Mr. Themig
stated if the redesign was minimal that could possibly fall within the current contract with the
architect. Cnd. Helkamp stated there was not much choice if the Council was not willing to
spend $650,000; the bids needed to be rejected.
Helkamp/Lehman offered Resolution No. 6256, A Resolution Rejecting Bids For Construction
Of The Soccer Complex Building Project No. PR2005-2, and moved its adoption.
Cnd Menden stated he would like to discuss how this project should be redesigned.
Mr. Themig noted the revised Park CIP showed a positive balance. He noted this was
accomplished by moving projects around. He stated the Park Reserve Fund does have funding to
provide the resources to construct the soccer complex at this time, even with the increase of its
cost, if the Council chose to do that. Cnd. Lehman noted the Park Reserve Fund balance was
contingent on a transfer from another fund. Cncl. Lehman stated the City might not have to
transfer as much if the project budgets were not continually exceeded.
Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Schmitt addressed the extra building with an unheated meeting room and a flexible
storage area in the design of the soccer complex. He asked if there would be a benefit to making
this all one building rather than two separate buildings. Mr. Themig noted this had been looked
at last fall and this did not prove to accomplish any financial savings. Mr. Themig noted the
process last fall also removed the canopy to make one building.
Cnd Helkamp stated he thought the park staff should come up with some proposals. The
Council could offer some opinions but he felt staff should give input on the design ofthe
building to the architect rather than the Council. Cncl. Helkamp through out the suggestion of
increasing the size of the canopy but decreasing the size of the building. He thought maybe the
meetings could be held under the canopy. Mr. Themig noted the meeting room provided a space
headquarters for tournament organizers to coordinate all their activities. Mr. Themig noted that
is the reason the building was designed the way it was. He noted any deletion of a segment of
the design would decrease the functionality of the building.
Cnd. Joos noted he had a tough time to eliminate the only shade area (canopy) for children
playing soccer.
Mr. Themig asked for direction from the Council. Mayor Schmitt addressed this question. He
noted he would allow a 10% increase in the cost because of construction prices going up but the
25% increase in cost was not acceptable at this stage of the game.
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -10-
Cncl. Helkamp suggested combining the roofs and taking the canopy out. Cncl. Helkamp stated
a conversation with SPUC need to be held regarding SAC and WAC and water connection
charges. Cncl. Joos noted SPUC was looking at a policy change if some charges were donated to
the City. Cncl. Lehman noted the City went out oftheir way to help SPUC with the well site
located at the soccer complex and it actually cost the City financially to help with the well site.
Cncl. Lehman noted there were a certain amount of dollars allocated for this project and if that
amount was going to be exceeded, Cncl. Lehman wanted the Council to be told where this extra
money was going to come from and was this money planned in the over all budget. Mr. Themig
noted there were funds in the Park Reserve Fund to do this project even with the increased costs.
Mr. Themig stated the money was there. Mr. Themig asked if the Council wanted to pay the
$40,000 water connection charge out of the Park Reserve Fund or did' the Council want $480,000
in total for the soccer complex.
Menden/Joos moved that the total project cost of the soccer complex was not to exceed $520,000
and staff was to bring this project back in line as staff sees fit.
Cncl. Menden noted there was a real rational reason why the soccer complex building is what it
is. The fact of the matter was that this building needed to get done and $480,000 was not going
to get the job done. The $520,000 reflected a 10% increase for the construction of the soccer
complex.
Motion carried 5-0.
Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6257, A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee, Minnesota
Accepting A Donation Of$1013.08 From The Knights OfC'olumbus, and moved its adoption.
(Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
LehmanlMenden moved to recess at 9:04 p.m. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Schmitt re-convened the City Council meeting at 9: 16 p.m.
Mr. Themig wanted to know where the future of the community center should go after learning
the overwhelming results of the community center referendum.
Mr. Themig noted the options proposed besides the referendum had been discussed previously
but were not considered to be good alternatives. He noted staff's workload was such that they
didn't have time to devote too much further work on what the Citycould/should do with the
community center. He noted he was unaware of the commitment level ofthe previous task force.
Mr. Themig stated there were some existing operational issues that had been deferred until the
outcome of the community center referendum was known. These are: 1) water infiltration, 2)
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -11-
exterior landscaping [unsightly trees], 3) exterior painting in certain areas [entrance], 4) a request
from the Hockey Association to install radiant heat in the ice arena and 5) reinstallation of
security cameras. Mr. Themig noted the overall operation of the community center needed to be
relooked at. He noted the feasibility study done for the past proposed community center
expansion did address a plan on how to address the water infiltration problems but the condition
of the wall now was unknown.
Mr. Themig stated he felt it was good to get some feedback now because soon he would be
working on the 2006 budget and he needed to know how he should spend his dollars. He noted
he had looked at twelve other metro communities and the City of Shakopee's subsidy of the
current community center really was not that far out of line in comparison to other City's
subsidies to their community centers. The average subsidy was about $267,000 excluding any
debt service. The debt service was comparable to the City's building rental charge.
Mayor Schmitt began the discussion. He felt it was necessary to separate the ice arena from the
community center activities. The two activities needed to be treated individually. He noted most
community centers did not include an ice arena; the ice arena's were separate facilities. He
noted the attendance at the community presentations for the community center referendum was
extremely low. The average attendance was about six people. He also noted he heard comment
that if there was a choice between a community center and school buildings the school buildings
would come first. He thought the City needed to wait (perhaps a year) and see what the School
District did regarding new buildings and may be in a year or two take another look at the
community center. He stated he thought there was a commitment on the City's part to keep the
old community center but the building needed to be repaired and the water problem needed to be
fixed. The radiant heat needed to be done. Mayor Schmitt stated he did not support a public-
private partnership because normally that resulted in the private entity getting the revenue and
the public entity getting the payment on the debt. He noted he felt the residents were entitled too
more than that. Mayor Schmitt did not think any more work as to why the referendum failed
needed to be done. The people spoke. Mayor Schmitt stated the $40,000 needed to go back into
the budget for the hockey people. Mayor Schmitt also commented that the feasibility report
pointed out that the lighting was not the greatest. Mayor Schmitt thought this should be looked
at also. This was owed to the residents too.
Cncl. Joos stated a year would not make any difference. This was the City's opportunity for the
foreseeable future to get a new community center and the decision was overwhelming. He noted
the City put their best foot forward on the referendum but the people spoke overwhelmingly.
He too did not think there was a need for a post mortem on the referendum. The City needed to
deal with the community center now. He felt it was prudent to go ahead with the needed repairs.
He thought all of the options needed to be back on the table. He did state the hockey arena was
an Issue.
Cncl. Lehman addressed the subsidy to the community center. He stated he too would like to see
the ice arena separate from the community center (at least the number side of it). Cnd Lehman
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -12-
still was concerned about what the State was going to do to the City financially. He did state
there was no doubt that the community center building needed to be fixed. He would like to see
a partnership pursued with the School District [public/public]. Mr. Themig noted he did speak
with Superintendent McBroom regarding this partnership and Mr. McBroom noted this was not
the most desirable approach for the School District. He noted this public/public partnership
could be followed up if the Council desired that follow-up. Mr. Themig noted he could get the
costs separated out [ice arena vs. community center].
Cncl. Menden did not think any post mortem on the referendum was needed either. He did feel
the City had the responsibility to keep the current center up and going and that meant to do the
repairs on the building. He would like to explore possible public/public partnerships. He wanted
to keep up the current community center at least for the time being. Because he was the City's
liaison to the School District, he stated he would follow-up on a possible public/public
partnership with the School District.
Cncl. Helkamp thought the referendum analysis was unnecessary [post mortem]. He thought
there needed to be some more time for the dust to settle [possibly after this summer passed)
before other options for the community center were looked at. He felt the maintenance items
needed to be done and the facility needed to be as attractive as possible for the users. He also
thought the efforts should be continued to further attract users to improve the revenue picture of
the community center. Cncl. Helkamp noted there were other projects that the park staff needed
to focus on for the summer.
Cncl Joos thought the task force and the Park And Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) should be
asked for their input on the future of the community center. He stated the people just voted
down doing anything to the community center. Mayor Schmitt stated the water problem had
been a long standing problem and the City agreed to re-look at the radiant heat issue when the
outcome of the referendum was known.
Mr. Themig stated the money for the fixes for the water seepage issues and for the radiant heat
were not in the 2005 budget. Cnd. Lehman stated the maintenance needed to be done but it
needed to be budgeted for. The marketability of the building needed to be considered and this
meant the needed maintenance needed to be done. The type of land (parkland) needed to be
looked at to see how it could be disposed of properly if in the future the City decided to sell the
community center site. City Attorney, Jim Thomson, addressed this question.
Gretchen Theis asked that the concept of the separation ofthe ice arena from the community
center be looked at. She noted many of the comments she heard while working on the
referendum was "the majority of the residents were paying for the minority's activities" [every
special interest was a minority]. She felt the City owned the hockey association a second sheet
of ice because it had been proven that a second sheet could pay for itself. She stated if the City
was not gong to let a private company come in and put in a second sheet of ice the City needed
to look at funding this second sheet of ice sooner rather than latter. She felt all children should
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -13-
be supported the same. She was willing to wait a long time before she worked on another
referendum. She talked with many rude people who were against the proposed community
center expansion.
John Clay, a member of the PRAB, noted he was on the citizen task force when the five options
were looked at. He stated.now he thought perhaps a breakdown of the community center was the
way to go. He thought maybe a second sheet of ice could be the way to go to reduce the City's
subsidy to the community center. He stated taxes and the Park Reserve Fund were not the way
to finance the community center. Mr. Clay stated as a citizen he did not see how the community
center would service the School District [public/public partnership]. He stated he thought City
staff workloads were to heavy to pursue much of anything right now. He thought perhaps there
should be seven-member citizen task force advisory board, comprised of people who were
opposed to the referendum, for the community center in a year or two. He too stated that the
referendum did not need to be analyzed.
Mr. Themig stated the community center issue was going to put aside for this year and the
community center staff would focus on other projects. Mr. Themig noted the community center
issue consumed an enormous amount of staff time up until now.
Cncl. Lehman noted his understanding was that Mr. Themig was to go back to the budgeting
process and see if he could budget in the maintenance that needed to be done on the community
center building (water problems and tree issues).
Cncl. Menden asked if the Citizen Task Force had been thanked for all their work. Mr. Themig
responded that he has sent letters. Cncl. Lehman stated he thought a resolution should be done.
Lehman/Joos moved to extend the approval period of the final plat of West ridge Lake Estates 3rd
Addition to October 16,2007. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6253, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota
Approving The Final Plat Of Shakopee Valley Market Marketplace Second Addition, and moved
its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6254 A Resolution Of The City Of Shako pee Setting A
Public Hearing To Consider A Petition to Annex Property From Jackson Township, and moved
its adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to accept the findings of, and adopting the "Unified Transit Management
Plan for the Communities of Scott County" report and recommendations to guide future transit
activities and related development. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda). [CC Document
No. 387]
. I
Official Proceedings of the June 7, 2005
Shakopee City Council Page -14-
Lehman/Joos moved to approve a grading permit for United Properties with the conditions
outlined in the June 7, 2005 memo from Joe Swentek, Project Engineer. [CC Document No. 388]
to Mark McNeill. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to install stop signs on local streets intersecting with Preserve Trail, from
Stagecoach Road to the Savage-Shakopee City Limit line. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to accept Patricia Mohrbacher's resignation with regret and offered
Resolution No. 6247, A Resolution of Appreciation To Patricia A. Mohrbacher, and moved its
adoption. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to approve the assignment ofTeri Scherer to the position of Police
Secretary. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to accept the completion of Scott Blom's probationary period as a
mechanic's apprentice. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to authorize the extension of Richard Hartwell's probationary period for 90
days effective April 27, 2005. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to approve the application and grant a temporary on-sale liquor license to
the Church of St. Mary, 535 South Lewis Street, for June 26, 2005. (Motion carried under the
Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to approve the application and grant a temporary on-sale 3.2 percent malt
liquor license to the Shakopee Lion's Club, in the designated beer garden adjacent to the
concession stand at Tahpah Park, June 11 and 12,2005. (Motion carried under the Consent
Agenda).
Lehman/Joos offered Resolution No. 6249, A Resolution Of The City Of Shakopee, Minnesota
Approving Premises Permits for the Shakopee Rotary Club, and moved its adoption. (Motion
carried under the Consent Agenda).
Lehman/Joos moved to indicate that no formal audit presentation, at a City Council meeting, is
needed by the City from the City's auditor for the 2004 Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report. (Motion carried under the Consent Agenda).
Mr. McNeill reported on what future meetings were needed. He noted there were a number of
meetings to schedule (visioning, riverfront walk, budget, and meetings with SPUC, Metropolitan
Council, and EDAC). Two meetings were set up for Visioning in case two meetings were
needed for that process. Mr. McNeill noted all meetings were open to the public and it was
planned to have the Visioning meetings in the council chambers. Mayor Schmitt noted there
, .
Official Proceedings of the June 7,2005
Shakopee City Council Page -15-
would be many budget meetings in August and September. Mr. McNeill tentatively scheduled
the extra meetings on a Monday or Tuesday evening.
Mayor Schmitt noted a few council concerns. These concerns regarded tree replacement issues
on Vierling Drive and some City parks, the elevation of the new public works building and a
party of two was needed to work with the School District on land citing. Cncl. Menden and
Cncl. Lehman volunteered to accept the assignment to work with the' School District. Mayor
Schmitt was also concerned about the donator of certain donations being responsible for the
certain care and maintenance of the donated items. Mayor Schmitt thought once the City
accepted donations the City should be responsible for the care and maintenance of the item
donated. Cncl. Lehman addressed the reason why this donation was worded the way it was in
the report (scoreboard). Cncl. Lehman had a concern about parking around the Church on 1st
Avenue. Cncl. Lehman noted there was a real parking problem and at times it was unsafe. Mr.
McNeill noted this would be looked into for enforcement issues.
Helkamp/Menden moved to adjourn to Tuesday, June 21,2005 at 5:30 p.m. The meeting
adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Motion carried 5-0.
~d - Cr(
Udith S. Cox
City Clerk
Carole Hedlund
Recording Secretary