HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/03/1981 6
MEMO TO : 1Maylor and City Council
FROM: .John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Non Agenda Informational Items
DATE : February 26 , 1981
1 . Louisville Township has executed our new fire agreement . I
have mailed a copy of the same agreement to Jackson Township
for them to execute . I will bring it before Council when
they have agreed to the new format .
2 . The regional trail proposed for the abandoned Milwaukee Rail-
road R/W has been tabled for the Shakopee area by the County
Park Board. They have recommended submitting a proposal to
the Shakopee-Farmington Association for purchase of R/W from
Prior Lake Greenwood Bridge to Cleary Lake as the first seg-
ment of a "total trail" .
3 . Shakopee Housing Co . Petition. This item regarding the
"classification" of property for appraisal purposes for
Low Income Housing on 4th Avenue will be handled by the
County Attorney. Rod and Larry felt that since its just
a technical classification question the County could handle it .
4. Earlier this year we applied for a "Main Street" pilot
program grant . We were notified last week that we were
not selected, Faribault and Milaca were selected.
S . Our first mediation session with the Police will be held
on March 3 , 1981 at 1 p.m. at City Hall . I have been
conferring with Cy Smythe and he will attend the meeting,
again at no cost to the City .
6 . Attached is a memo summarizing the results of the joint
meeting February 17 , 1981 with SPUC .
7 . Attached is a memo from LeRoy regarding the house that
blew-up .
8 . Attached is a newsletter from Tom Rees .
9 . Attached is a registration from for the League Legislative
Action Conference - please note Judy' s request in the right
hand corner.
10. Attached are the 13th month financial reports .
11 . The City was successful in its condemenation , SPUC vs .
Minnesota Valley Electric Corp . , case before the Supreme
Court . We finally won a big one !
JKA/jms
MEMO TO : Mayor, City Council and SPUC
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Replacement of Industry Agreement , etc .
DATE : February 18 , 1981
City Council and SPUC, at their February 17 , 1981 joint meeting,
discussed the above mentioned subject and arrived at the follow-
ing informational needs to move ahead in finding a replacement .
Information Needed Provided By
1 . Water Utility - A specific contribution SPUC and/or their
to the City based upon (modified by) consultant
reserves needed, inflation factor,
capital programs and competition .
2 . Electric Utility - A specific contribu- SPUC and/or their
tion to the City based upon (modified consultant
by) reserves needed, inflation factor ,
capital programs and competition .
3 . Franchise Fee - A specific dollar figure SPUC and/or their
based upon monies generated from a % consultant
charge on SPUC, REA and NSP electrical
sales .
It was agreed that the above information should be gathered by
March 18 , 1981 for documentation to SPUC and Council .
The information to be gathered for #1 above was the result of an
agreement that the water utility contribution to the City ' s
General Fund should be continued as modified by the information
concerning reserves , etc . gathered by SPUC or its consultant .
JKA/jms
,,�,1pfCt?att , CITY OF SHAKOPEE 7
4„ ,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I� ��, 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
MEMO
TO:
John Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official
SUBJECT: House explosion - Thrid & Naumkeag
DATE: February 20. 1981
I responded to the call 30 minutes after the explosion.
Listed below are the steps I took to provide protection to
the public , the homeowners and to determine the cause of
the explosion.
1 . Arrived at the site at 5 : 45 p.m. Requested Street Dept .
to secure the building site with snow fence to restrict
access to site to prevent distruction of any evidence
which may show cause of explosion.
2. Had Gas Co. air test gas line from street shut-off valve
to gas meter on house. Pressure tested at 200 lbs. for
30 min. Results: no indication of leak.
3. Contacted State Fire Marshal . He viewed the property and
stated it is evident it was not arson and so it was under
my investigation.
4. The next day I entered the house and inspected it . I
concluded because of the depth of char and the condition
of the floor sheathing above the furnace, that the point
of explosion was the furnace.
5. I contacted Jim Hauer to arrange for demolition of the
unit as there was a possibility of the structure collapsing.
I requested Hauer to remove the water heater and furnace so
they could be inspected. This was done and the controls
for both units were taken to Ries Heating & Air Conditioning. I
Frank Ries tested the controls and found the water heater
control to be faulty and would not shut off. Both units
were vented into a common chimney. It is both of our opinions
that gas escaped from the water heater went into the chimney
and instead of going up the chimney because of downdraft , was
transfered into the furnace plenum area through the furnaces
horizontal vent into the common chimney. After the gas
collected in the plenum, the furnace pilot light went on and
the house "blew up" .
6. I made arrangements for emergency housing for the property
owners and put then in touch with the County Agency for
emergency financial assistance if they needed it.
LFH:plk
F N Minnesota
Tom Rees
District 36B �� . �^
House of
Carver-Scott Counties
Committees: Representatives
Governmental Operations
Financial Institutions and
Insurance Rodney N Searle.Speaker
Energy and Utilities : "?
Alternative Energy Subcommittee. Chairman t likor +" N
REES REPORTER — FEBRUARY 1981 FEB 2 3 19 81
TO SCOTT AND CARVER COUNTY LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALSCITY OF
SHAKOPEE
At the time of this writing, we're almost through with our seventh week here
in the legislature. I serve on four committees, and as of yet have not voted
on a single bill. I'm not really looking forward to the long hours that will
face us as we come down to the May 18, 1981 constitutional deadline when we
have to have our business finished here.
Reapportionment. Currently the state is gearing up its resources to handle
the information that will be transmitted to us from the census bureau so
we can complete on a reasonably timely basis the necessary reapportionment
of our state. This, too, will affect many of you and if there are any specific
questions or statutes that you have questions about, feel free to contact me.
Budget. President Reagan has announced his specific program cuts to the
American public and they will affect both state and local programs to one de-
gree or another. In talking with many of you I have found that the real crux
of the funding problems are at the level of the mandated programs, either
state or federal, that require expenditures without allowing innovation on a
local level to solve problems. I would appreciate hearing from you about spe-.
fic mandated programs be they state or federal, that you feel you could solve
the intended problem more effectively if you had more latitude. I might also
offer as a resource if you have questions on the federal level, Senator Duren-
berger's office. Senator Durenberger is the chairman of the Senate Subcom-
mitee on Intergovernmental Affairs. Mr. Phil Cohen is Senator Durenberger's
legislative assistant in the area of local government. He can be reached at
725-6111.
Metro Council Appointment. Mr. Bill Sando of Spring Lake Township has been
appointed by Governor Quie to Metro Council District 16 representative spot.
Bill's number, if you need his help, is 447-2056. Feel free to call him with
your concerns in the area of regional government and its affects upon your
job.
Mandatory Deposit Legislation. On February 16, 1981, Senator Luther intro-
duced Senate File 382, which is his 1981 version of the ban the can bill.
This new bill proposes to establish a complex network of county licensed re-
demption centers. The bill proposes a 3 deposit system. One cent to be
returned to the recycling centers with two cents being returned to the cus-
tomer. County boards would license service centers in each county. Re-
tailers would either act as a redemption center for a wide variety of mat-
erials or would contract with the licensed local recycling center to handle
redemption of containers. Retailers would collect 3 per container transferred
to the county auditor who would then transfer it to the center. The center
Reply to: 0 365 State Office Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 296-6926
U.
0 Box 46, Elko, Minnesota 55020 (612) 469-4190
Page 2
Rees Reporter
would keep one cent and pay the customer two cents for the redemption.
Counties would not be reimbursed for their costs and retailers apparently
would not be reimbursed.
Scottland Site. Although this is a local issue, it does have significance
throughout the county. In conversations with the owner of the Scottland
site, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, they at this time have no
plan for use of that property. Conversation has been generated by the
bill that I introduced requiring them to sell the site and I'm hopeful
that without passing the legislation that the result will still be attained.
Education. The school aids committee is beginning to put together their omni-
bus bill which will reach the House floor the latter part of the session.
They commenced action by replacing, in the coming biennium, state aids that
are being withheld this year in order to balance the state budget. Some
changes have been made concerning special elections on discretionary levies.
Currently, transportation, special education and teacher mobility provisions
are being considered. Although substantial decisions regarding funding levels
are not likely to be made until April, house issues and other changes in the
law will be considered throughout the next several weeks. These issues will
cover a broad spectrum of topics ranging from secondary and post-secondary
vocational training to computer use as an aid to education, learning, and
management, community education, library funding, pre-school screening, and
the hot lunch program.
In closing I would just like to quote several passages from Governor Quie's
Comments to County Officials at their recent annual meeting. He said, "The
real solution is not to have the state give property tax relief with one
hand and take it away with the other hand through income or sales tax in-
creases. The real solution is to cut down or hold down spending."
He also said, "Keep in mind that no state in the nation provides more ex-
tensive welfare assistance than Minnesota."
He closes his presentation with the following two questions. "First, if
you don't agree with the cuts I've made in requests, where specifically
would you make your cuts?
"Second, if you want the state to spend more, which state tax would you
raise--the sales tax or the income tax?"
I appreciate the calls and letters that I've received from many of you and
it allows me to do a much better job for you.
Workes ' pmproblThe Wilson Foods Corp. as entered the de $250,000 payroll now pays$6,450. If the rate hike
over Minnesota's unreasonably high workers' request is granted, the cost will soar to$9,500. In
compensation costs. The firm, which employs Wisconsin,a restaurant owner pays$2,950.
some 1,600 workers in southeastern Minnesota, is What's the problem? It boils down to two
threatening to move if the Minnesota Legislature items: who gets paid., and how much. Minnesota's
doesn't do something to improve the system. • , workers' compensation system has simply be-
Back in the late '70s,Paul Thayer, chairman of come a social welfare system financed by the
the board and chief executive officer for the LTV business community. These additional costs must
- Corporation,owner of the Wilson operation,visit- be either passed on to customers, or absorbed,
ed the Twin Cities, in part to talk about Minneso- placing the Minnesota operation at a competitive
ta's declining business climate. Even then, work- disadvantage. Eventually, the business is forced
ers'comp was in the forefront of his discussion. by economic considerations to pack up and move
Company attorneys, he explained, never enter out of the state,taking its jobs with it.
a workmen's compensation hearing in Minnesota Originally, workers' comp was established to
with the intent of winning, but just to try to mini- protect workers from economic hardship caused
mize the loss. "We haven't won a case in three, by on-the-job injuries. In Minnesota, the program
four years,"he said. has gotten totally out of hand. Workers with
Since then, the picture has worsened, prompt- questionable job-related injuries are milking the
ing the pullout threat. system. They are being aided and abetted by
How expensive is workers' comp.in Minneso- short-sighted judges and hearing officers who be-
ta? Wilson plant manager Dick Western told re- lieve any injury that* interferes with work, re-
porters that Wilson — which is self-insured — gardless of where and how it occurred, is covered
paid out about$2.1 million in workers'comp ben- by workers'comp. Furthermore, the sky appears
efits last year to its Albert Lea, Minn., workers. to be the only limit as settlements not only pay
That was more than the combined total for all for medical expenses and lost wages, but occa-
four of Wilson's Iowa plants, where the total paid sionally even create millionaires.
, out last year was$1.6 million. But there is hope. The Minnesota Legislature is
Ironically, the system is hurting the small presently discussing a bill designed to hold down
businessman — the ones doing the most hiring— escalating workers' comp insurance rates. It
the most the giant corporations have the finan- would accomplish this goal by establishing rea-
cts'resources to insure themselves. sonable limits on various benefit programs,elim-
In general, Minnesota's rates for workers' inating the automatic inflation adjustments for
• compensation insurance are from two to 10 those receiving short-term disability benefits,
times higher than rates for comparable coverage and encouraging injured workers to return to
in neighboring states.Some examples: work immediately after their injuries heal.
•A cement manufacturer in Minnesota with a Normal benefits under the proposal would re-
- $250,000 covered payroll (from 10 to 15 employ- main equal to or better than benefits contained
ees) now pays $29,850 annually in workers' comp in workers' comp programs in surrounding
. insurance premiums. Under a proposed 26.5 per- states. But the revised Minnesota system would
cent rate hike, that cost would jump to $41,200. no longer encourage the outright excesses which
In Wisconsin,the rate is$5,050. are threatening to topple the entire system.
•A logging operator a $250,000 payroll in In the past, Minnesota legislators, blind to the
Minnesota•Alg now must pay witha$98,900 a year in work- realities of the cause/effect relationship, have
• ers' comp premiums. Under the rate hike re- pointed worried fingers at escalating workers'
quest, the bill would rocket to $165,175. In Wis-•
comp insurance rates and then staunchly resisted
• consin,the rate is$54,250. pressure to alter benefit schedules.
• •A tree trimming operator in Minnesota, with Win Bordon,a former legislator and now pr esi-
that same *250.000 dent of the Minnesota Association of Commerce
payroll, must now pay & Industry, is convinced the proposed bill will
$101,850. If the rate hike is approved, the cost pass only if the Minnesota business community
will soar to $134,300. In Wisconsin, the cost is joins forces and demands passage. Employees of
$15,800. small firms who value their jobs ought to lend
• A Minnesota restaurant owner with a their support. After all, their jobs are on the line.
( ( I
it
i
How U.S. Aid Pie
:ditorial.Page 8 Wednesday, F I8, , :
Gets Divvied Up
. . A new report on federal aid to
BERNARD H.RIDDER,18433-1975 :state and local governments dis-
BERNARD H.RIDDER JR,Chairman._closes someprime targets for
/, Y ,, THOMAS L.CARLIN•Publisher g
WILLIAM G.SUMNER.Editor ,.;President Reagan s program to
�O Paulder P .JOHN R.FINNEGAN,Executive EdiWc reduce government spending.
J. DAVID HAI L,Managing Editor The study shows the distribu-
tion, state by state, of some 90.1
- billion in Washington's tax dollars.
?• . - `:G. , 1 . 4 for job-training plansurban and
business � � , _ EEE
Two studies released last week clearly demon- -labor union member-std. p,'and in average weekly other purposes in 1980.
strate that Minnesota's business climate not only manufacturing wage. For an idea of just how heavily
remains unhealthy but is,in fact,getting worse. The second study, this by The Minnesota Busi- state and local governments rely
In a study of manufacturing business climates ness Partnership, Inc.,-compared Minnesota's on federal aid—
in the 48'contiguous states, Alexander Grant & economy to that of 25 other states. _ -
Co. ranked Minnesota 37th most desirable, down Again, the information is depressing. Minneso- Alaska Per cap ;1A14
from a 32nd ranking in 1979. to ranks 3rd highest in state and local taxes paid Vermont $ 690
When compared to its Midwestern neighbors, on a $20,000 income earned in Mankato,the sam- South Dakota $ 634
Minnesota ranked a dismal 11th out of 12. North pie community.Minnesota also ranks 3rd highest Montan g $ 6620
09
Dakota, which was 13th nationallylastin the $30,000 income category. OnlyNew York Montana $ 709
year, g y New York $ 539
zoomed to 4th place nationally— and holds fi3- t and Massachusetts have higher tax rates at those North Dakota $ 524
place in the Midwest. South Dakota, Kansas, Ne- income levels. New Mexico $ 507
braska, Missouri, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio Minnesotans earning $50,000 in the sample Rhode Island .-.$ 500
and Illinois topped Minnesota in the regional community will bedelighted to learn that, out of Massachusetts $ 498
the 26 states studied, they have the second high- west Virginia $ 481
rankings (albeit some topped it not by much).
Michigan, with the lowest national desirability est state and local tax burden. Only residents of Or o $ 474
ranking(48), was the onlyMidwestern state with Utica,New York,carryMainen $ 464
In a complex a heavier burden. -.- Maine $ 461
a�worse ranking than Minnesota's. ‘ , , comparison of corporate income Mississippi $ 459
`Pretty- depressing information, especially and property taxes for plant relocation,Minneso- Delaware S 459
since the study concerned itself with actions of $ 433
came out 7th highest. Iowa was the only Mid- Maryland
state and local governments to make business western state with a higher tax burden in this Georgia $ 430
more profitable. "Business climate, at least iii Portion of the study. Not surprisingly, South Da- - Wisconsin $ 427
the context of this analysis," explained Selwyn kota garnered the most favorable rating. Michigan $ ago
Nevada
y p y In a related stud this concernin cor rate $ 413
Price, a managing partner of Alexander Grant in y, g P° Idaho -....:.._.. $ 110
Chicago, "is the ability of--a state to keep and income and property taxes relating to a plant Arkansas $ dos
gain industrial jobs." addition, Minnesota finished 9th highest. Iowa's Minnesota ' $ 406
-`tax rate was 3rd highest, while South Dakota Alabama _ -
-
So, based on the study, Minnesota has been $ 402
doing a bad job of keeping and attracting busi - again finished with the lowest rates among the 26 Washington $ 3400
98
ess. A successful businessman looking fora tater. . U.S.AVERAGE :. 398
$
home in Minnesota would quickly discover that A fourth section of the study dealt with t:12- tax Kentucky $ 398
burden on small businesses. The Minnesota en- - 111inofS....••..•••` • •.• ..$ 3ss
36,other states offer a better economic climate Utah _•$ 3ss
than Minnesota's. Likewise, a flourishing small tepreneur tops the tax burden list, hands down. New Jersey $ 379
businessman looking toward expansion •would Such a finding, although expected, proves once Pennsylvania $ 375
businessman
s and the cost of again that the small businessman doing most of New Hampshire $ 375-
find
suchhier basicin all thingsbut 11 taxesother statnd. his business within the state pays the highest cor- Connecticut $ 369
The Grant study found that Minnesota ranks- porate income tax in the U.S., the highest annual Caiitomia $ 367
income and property tax per $100 of investment, Louisiana._ $ 367
5th highest in the 48 contiguous states in state .plus the highest income tax and second hi hest Tennessee $ 347
and local taxes per capita, which is certainly not property tax in the 26-state comparison. g Oklahoma $ 347
Surprising. P Nebraska $ 346
We also have poor rankings in the field of workers' compensationcost per a final note of warning:
ployeeswent Mota's issouri nsas $ 342
workers'compensation costs(again,no surprise), from 5th highest to 4th highest. South Dakota South Carolina $ 339
average annual unemployment benefits per coy- was 25th highest, North Dakota 21st, Wisconsin Colorado $ 339
ered worker, highway spending per mile, state 17th,and Iowa 10th. Iowa $ 337
debt per capita, and annual manhours lost per- Concern over Minnesota's sagging business cli- Virginia $ 329
worker because of work stoppages. gg g NorthioCarolina $ 325
mate first was sounded in the mid-'70s.It grew to Ohio $ 316
On the positive side, Minnesota ranks high in outright alarm by the end of the decade. Al- Arizona $ 302
private pollution control expenditures as a value though we are now into the second year of the Indiana $ 290
of industrial shipments, and quite high in voca- '80s, the situation has continued to deteriorate as Honda $ 289
tional education expenditures per capita. We're both the state's administration and Legislature Texas $ 274
near average in energy cost per million BTUs, have chosen largely to ignore the warnings.
U.S.NEWS&WORLD REPOR—,Feb.23, 191
If you are interested in
attending, please let Judy
IIII know by Tuesday, March 3rd.
1111-111-
u VIIIJ CIT
OF SHAK®PEE
league of minnesota cities
February 13, 1981
TO: Mayors, Managers, Administrators, Clerks, Legislative Contact Persons
FROM: Duke Addicks, League Legislative Counsel
RE: 1981 LEAGUE LEGISLATIVE ACTION CONFERENCE
The 1981 League Legislative Conference will be held at the CAPITOL HOLIDAY INN near the
State Capitol in St. Paul on Thursday, March 12.
Legislators have received invitations for the RECEPTION, 6:00 - 8:00 p.m. If you plan
on attending, please let your legislator know you expect to see her/him at the RECEPTION.
You may even wish to go to dinner with your legislator after the reception.
An agenda is enclosed with this registration form.
If you plan to attend, please complete the form below and return it to:
REGISTRATION FORM
City (please type or print)
Name Title
Name Title
Name Title
Name Title
Name Title
Registration fee - $25 per registrant Mail to: Gayle Bortz
League of Minnesota Cities
300 Hanover Building
480 Cedar Street
St. Paul , MN 55101
/ / Check enclosed in the amount of $
300 hanover building, 480 cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 C6123 222-2861
•
mil 76,
league of minnesota cities
LEGISLATIVE ACTION CONFERENCE
March 12, 1981 - 8:30 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn Central , St. Paul
(I-94 at Marion Street)
A.M. SESSION
8:30 Registration - coffee
9:30 Policy Review/Adoption - Capitol Hall Room
Review and adoption by League members of legislative policy recommen-
dations.
11:00 BRIEFING SESSION: "PRIORITIES FOR CITIES IN THE 1981 LEGISLATIVE
SESSION"
LMC Legislative Counsel will review for city officials legislative
issues affecting cities under consideration by the 1981 State
Legislature.
11:30 - 12 Noon POOLSIDE REFRESHMENTS/CASH BAR
12 Noon LUNCHEON
Remarks to City Officials:
1:30 p.m. Speaker of the Minnesota House Majority Leader, Minnesota
of Representatives - Representative State Senate - Senator
Harry A. Sieben, Jr. Roger D. Moe
P.M. SESSION
1:30 - 2:30 Meet with your state legislators.
Officials discuss city legislative concerns with local state
representatives and senators.
PROGRAM
2:30 - 4:00 Discussion
Presentations by legislators on major issues of immediate concern.
4:00 - 5:00 "CURRENT HAPPENINGS" : LEGISLATIVE UP-DATE
Presentations by LMC Lobbyists
Question and Answer Period
6:00 - 8:00 RECEPTION FOR CITY OFFICIALS AND STATE LEGISLATORS
AH:rmm
2/13/81
300 hanover building, 480 cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 C6123222-2861
IIII
L11-13
league of minnesota cities
February 13, 1981
TO: Clerks, Mayors, Managers
FROM: George Latimer
Mayor, City of St. Paul
President, League of Minnesota Cities
RE: LMC Policy Review and Adoption Session, Legislative Action Conference
March 12
Enclosed please find a program schedule for the Legislative Action Conference.
Registration forms for the conference and over-night accommodations are included
on page 14 of the February issue of Minnesota Cities.
Please notify local legislators of your plans to attend the Legislative Action
Conference and make arrangements to meet with them at the reception!
Also attached please find a copy of legislative policies recommended to LMC
members for adoption by the LMC Legislative Committee at its January 15 meeting.
Please circulate this information and make copies of draft policies available
to interested city officials.
Actions taken at the Legislative Action Conference (March 12) to review and adopt
the attached policy statements constitutes official League policy for the 1981-82
legislative session. (This is a change from the League policy adoption schedule
which placed the policy adoption process at the LMC Annual Conference in June) .
Note this change in date.
GL:rmm
Enc.
300 hanover building, 480 cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 C6123222-2861
ci
Committee: Government Structures and General Legislation
Title: Tort Liability
Priority: A
The municipal Governmental Tort Liability Act was enacted to protect the public
treasury while giving the citizen relief from the arbitrary, confusing, and adminis-
tratively expensive prior doctrine of sovereign immunity with its inconsistent and
irrational distinctions between governmental and proprietary activities. The Act
has served that purpose well in the past. However, increasingly the courts forget
or ignore the positive benefits secured to citizens damaged by public servants as
a result of enactment of the comprehensive Act which includes some limitations on
liability and some qualifications of normal tort claims procedures.
Recent court decisions increasingly eroded the concept of a special act qualifying
the tort liability of local government. However, the special vulnerability of far-
flung governmental operations to debilitating tort suits continue to require existence
of a tort claims act applicable to local governments or local governments and the
state. In order to protect and continue the effectiveness of the Municipal Governmental
Tort Liability Act, the League proposes the following amendments.
1. The workers' compensation law presently gives an injured person or his represen-
tative an option to collect damages in a regular civil action against a tort-feasor
who is not his employer or to collect workers' compensation from his employer if the
worker is eligible for workers ' compensation for the injury. The workers° compensa-
tion act grants workers ' compensation insurers or self-insurers paying such claims a
right of subrogation for the amount of the claim and reasonable attorney's fees against
the party causing the damages. The governmental tort liability act, however, purports
to remove the above mentioned election and to permit only the workers' compensation
claim if a city is the alleged tort-feasor.
In order to clarify the interaction of the two statutes and to convince the courts
that it is the legislature's intent to permit only the workers ' compensation claim
against cities when the injured party is covered by workers' compensation from his
own employers, the right of the claimant's insurer to recover the amount of compen-
sation payable together with attorney's fees should be set out in the Governmental
Tort Liability Act as well as the workers ' compensation statutes.
20 Punitive damages do not serve their purpose of making public employers exercise
some modicum of responsibility to the public if there is a requirement or even a
likelihood of reimbursement by the public employees. Nor is the likelihood of
promoting diligent and reasonable performance of duty enhanced by unlimited or large
punitive damage liability possibilities which encourage officers and employees to
shift the responsibility to insurers and thus back to the publico Therefore, the
League urges that the Government Tort Liability Act be amended to prohibit reimburse-
ment of punitive damage awards by public employers. Further, the Act should be amended
to limit awards of punitive damages to $1,000,00 per incident, an amount sufficient to
permit vindication of citizen rights when actual damages are insignificant and to make
public officers and employees take their responsibilities seriously.
3, The limits on individual and aggregate liability under the municipal and state
acts should be made coincidental and raised to more realistic levels.
4. In the event that the legislature determines to make further changes in the
existing law, those changes should only be in the direction of making the local
government tort liability statute more similar to the state governmental tort
liability law.
Committee: Land Use and Environment
Title: Erosion and Sediment Controls
Priority: C
The League opposes any mandatory program requiring cities to adopt and enforce
sediment and erosion controls. Cities presently have the legal authority to
adopt these types of land use controls. The League urges the Pollution Control
Agency to develop a model ordinance and guidelines to assist cities in becoming
involved in these types of land use controls.
Committee: Land Use and Environment
Title: Minnesota Municipal Board
Priority: B
In 1979 the Legislature adopted an orderly procedure for the consolidation of
cities. This procedure should be broadened to include the consolidation of entire
townships within the city consolidation process The League supports the clarifi-
cation of the annexation law to sermit a cit. to asree to co!m.ensate a town for
loss of tax revenue for a imited perio.. o - years as kart o, an or'er;y annexation
proceeding.
(Amends last paragraph (page 32) , 1981 Legislative Policies)
Committee: Personnel , Pensions and Labor Relations
Title: PERA Benefits Financing and Administration
Priority: A
5. The League supports the continuation of the Minnesota Adjustah3e Foxed Benefft Post
Retirement Investment Fund as a means of providing post-retirement increases in the
pension benefits of retirees under the statewide pension funds, The em4st4ng def4e4t #n
that fund has 419 the pasta and 4s 1.4ke4y fn the 4mmed4ate future; te prevent payment ef
ef any systematfe adjustment te ret4rees7 The League supports state funding of the fund
deffeft deficits from general funds or amortization of the deficits by crediting a
reasonable portion of excess earnings over statutory assumptions to that retire deficits
and payment of the remainder of excess earnings te that def4e4t and payment of the
refflafnder ef excess eainfngs to retirees as a cost of living adjustment without
establishment of any guaranteed adjustment, (In the event the legislature determines
that some mechanism other than the Adjustab4e Foxed Benefrt. Post Retirement Investment
Fund is more appropriate for providing retiree inflation protection, or that the
Adjustab4e F4xed Benefft Post Retirement Investment Fund should provide a guaranteed
inflation adjustment, the League urges the legislature to provide that: (a) no
increases be made during the first three years after retirement or until the Consumer
Price Index increases at least ten percent; (b) a specific limit be placed on the
increase granted in any one year; and (c) the cost of such increases, including any
resulting deficits, be financed from the general funds )
(Amends paragraph 5, page 15, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
Committee: Personnel , Pensions and Labor Relations
Title: PERA Benefits, Financing and Administration
Priority: A
7. The League recommends enactment of enabling legislation to allow the transfer of
pension contributions and equal employer contributions plus accrued interest of in-
dividual employees, at their request, to and from other states with similar reciprocal
legislation. Furthermore, the chief cit. administrator should be allowed to select a
deferred compensation p`.an as an a ternative to �ER.�=cove �e
(Amends paragraph 7, page 15, 1981 Legislative Policies, )
-2-
6/
Committee: Personnel , Pensions and Labor Relations
Title: Volunteer Firefighters Relief Associations
Priority: A
Through the some 558 735 municipal volunteer fire departments and more than 29 25
non-profit firefighting corporations, hundreds of cities throughout the state pro-
vide fire protection services to their citizens in a very economical manner. Most
of these departments and non-profit corporations provide their volunteer members
with some type of pension as partial compensation for their community service,
Traditionally, the type and level of pension benefits provided as well as the
administration and investment of the pension fund has been handled locally in accor-
dance with benefit limits and financial standards specified by law. Although this
system has worked very well , the League proposed that there is need to provide cities
more flexibility in the use of state-aid funds so that the ma use state-aid funds
for any fire department purpose after payment of funding ob, iations_ or pensions,
Further, the legislature is urged to carefully monitor local fund ng since effective
limits on benefits have now been removed.
(Amends 1981 Legislative Policies, pages 15 and 160 )
Committee: Personnel , Pensions and Labor Relations
Title: Taxation of PERA Contributions
Priority: $ A
For several years, litigation has been pending in federal courts to consider
whether employee contributions to PERA and similar public pension systems should
be subject to federal income tax laws during the year in which they are contributed
to the system, as opposed to the year in which the employee actually receives the
benefit° To our knowledge, no similar litigation is pending regarding the appli-
cability of the state income tax.
It may be argued that the individual employee does not have the use of the contri-
butions which he makes to PERA in the year in which they are contributed and therefore,
the contributions should not be subject to either state or federal income taxation,
but should be excluded from the employee's gross income. Rather, it may be argued
that the contributions should not be taxed until the benefits are actually received,
Such a position would be consistent with the way in which the municipal contributions
to the employees pensions are taxed.
Therefore, the League recommends that the PERA and state income tax laws be amended
as follows:
Employee deductions to PERA and similar public employee pension systems should be
deducted from the employee's gross income and other deferred compensation plans
presently permitted by law and not subjected to state income taxation during the
year contributed to PERA.
(Amends page 17, 1981 Legislative Policies )
Committee: Personnel , Pensions and Labor Relations
Title Referred 6empensat4en
Priority: G
9eferFed eempensatiee plans have prev4ded 4nd4v4deal4Eed; pertable means to supple-
ment ret4rement systems fer mun4e4pal emp}eyeeso -Fer the west part; empleyees at
thein ewe expense defer eerfpensatiee; Raking 4t a less expens4ve means of prev4d4ng
-3-
ret4reRent benef4ts than trad4t4enal pens4en pregrafs- The League enderses deferred
eerpensat4en as an ept4en ter run+e;Fpal emplreyees and urges that apprepr4ate eengres-
seena4 and adm4n4strat4ve aet4ens be taken te 4nsure that 4t eent}nues te be ava44able7
she League urges that; 4n 4mplefflent4ng federal deferred eempensat+en prev4s4ens3 IRS
net restr4et el4g4b444ty beyend the prey*s4en of the federal statutes-
(Amends page 17, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
Committee: Personnel , Pensions and Labor Relations
Title: State Board of Investment
Priority: A
In order to test the concept of the advantage of smaller funds and to give an additional
yardstick of the investment performance of the State Board of Investment, a portion of
present and future SBI revenues should be placed with outside investment management
firms,
Committee: Personnel , Pensions and Labor Relations
Title: Volunteer Ambulance Retirement Systems
Priority: C
Proposals to integrate ambulance and rescue volunteers not part of local volunteer fire
departments into the program for retirement for volunteer firefighters have met re-
jection from organizations of volunteer firefighters. Creation of another system of
local relief is not in the best interest of the state, its political subdivisions or
its taxpayers. Therefore, the League urges Congress and the state legislature to
remove arbitrary limits on salary (presently 4 salary) which may be placed in tax
deferred status by employers of volunteer ambulance personnel , thus providing an
efficient, simple and inexpensive means of providing retirement benefits to ambulance
volunteers. In addition, the League urges the creation of a state money purchase
retirement plan for volunteers only,
(Amends page 18, 1981 Legislative Policies, )
Committee: Public Health and Safety
Title: Dram Shop Notice of Claim in Contribution Cases
Priority: A
The purpose of the required notice within 120 days of injury for claims under the
Dram Shop Act is to permit alleged suppliers of liquor to investigate the claim
before witnesses disappear and memories fail , To allow an unlimited notice period
for suits for contribution by one alleged supplier of another alleged supplier
defeats the purpose of the notice provision. Therefore, the League supports
establishment of a notice period for Dram Shop contribution limited to 60 days
after the initial 120-day notice period, i .e. , 180 days after the incident.
(Amends paragraph 2, page 26, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
Committee: Public Health and Safety
Title: Fire Personnel Standards
Priority: A - page 23, 1981 Legislative Policies
3, A local (state) coordinating and advisory board composed of a representative
statewide selection of firefighting personnel and elected officials should be
established to address the issue of improved and expanded firefighter training to
be made available and funded by the State for local governments and fire departments,
-4-
and further that adoption of any OSHA firefighter training standards be accomplished
only through the process of consideration by a representative advisory body.
(Legislative Committee voted to table consideration of this amendment to 1981 legis-
lative policy on January 15, 1981. )
Committee: Public Health and Safety
Title: Issues in Law Enforcement Personnel
Priority: A
5. The composition of the POST Board should be altered to increase membership from
11 to 13 members, to add two elected officials from 4th class cities outside the
seven-county metropolitan area.
(Amends paragraph 5, page 24, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
Committee: Public Health and Safety
Title: Building and Energy Code
Priority: B
1. Option local (city, county or town) inspection and enforcement, except that the
code remain mandatory in the Twin Cities area.
After Paragraph 4, insert these new paragraphs:
5. The law not require cities to enforce the handicapped provisions unless the city
has the building code.
6. Repeal the law providing for a vote and permit any city adopting building code
after January 1, 1977, to repeal the code in that city by vote of council .
(Amends paragraph 1 and adds paragraphs 5 and 6, page 24, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
Committee: Public Health and Safety
Title: Fire Codes
Priority: B
Cities should also have the option to make the uniform fire code apply to structures
existing on the date of the adoption of the code, as well as to new construction.
(Amends page 25, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
Committee: Revenue Sources
Title: Municipal Bonds
Priority: B
Add:
Municipal Bond Sales Control By The State. Legislation proposed in the 1980 session
would have made the State Attorney General Bond Counsel for all municipal bonds and
placed authority for selling all bonds with the State Investment Board. This could
lead to increased bond costs and lengthy delays in bond issuance. It would take the
Attorney General 's Office several years to obtain the background and reputation
necessary for their opinions to be accepted by bond buyers. The marketability of the
bonds could be adversely affected, and taxpayers would hear the burden of higher
interest rates. This would be a step in the direction of government bureacracy taking
over a function of private enterprise which is competent and is working at a time when
the public trend is demanding less government instead of more.
The League opposes any legislation making the Attorney General the Bond Counsel and/or
the State Investment Board the sales agent for municipal bond sales.
(Amends page 10, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
-5-
Committee: Task Force on Industrial Revenue Bonds/Tax Increment Financing/Housing
Title: Tax Increment Financing
Priority: A
Tax increment financing has permitted many cities in various parts of the state to
define and carry out rehabilitation, redevelopment, housing, and economic development
projects on their own initiative. It represents the most feasible and effective legal
strategy which is currently available to cities 4R preseiv4ng and 4mgrev4ng the to
preserve and improve their physical and economic environment 4A the4r eemmew4t4es.
The League commends the 1979 legislature for passing one of the most flexible and
comprehensive tax increment laws in the nation. The legislation incorporates sub-
stantially the League's position. The League believes that presently no substantive
changes are necessary; and reeemmends that ee sebstaet4ve ehamges be made by the
}eg4s4ature until. there has been sai:i°4e4ent exper4enee to determ4Re 4f ehaeges are
needed other than a clarification relating to the qualification of unimproved land
as a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes 273.73, Subdivision 10,
Paragraph (3) . The League supports legislation to clarify that only costs due to
unusual terrain or soil deficiencies may be counted in qualifying unimproved land
as a "redeve opment district" , and that costs related to road improvements and other
im•rovements which can be said for b s•eciaf assessments be s•ecificall excluded
from computing "the estimated cost o. preparing the .an• or use w en qualifying
unimproved land as a redevelopment district.
The League further supports legislation which would clarify that property consisting
of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriate y used or infre•uently used railyards,
rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way would qualify
as a "redevelopment district:1'
Committee: Task Force on Industrial Revenue Bonds/Tax Increment Financing/Housing
Title: Industrial Revenue Bonds
Priority:
Strike all current language and insert in lieu thereof:
The League supports the policy of this state to encourage cities to take an active
role in their economic development and redevelopment. This po icy is particularly
ex•ressed in Chaster 474 of the Minnesota Statutes, the Munici •al Industrial
Development Act. Chapter 474 provides for the use of industrial revenue bonds by
local units of government to prevent or remove blight and economic deterioration,
to create new jobs and retain existing ones, to maintain and strengthen tax base,
and to retain existing business and attract new business.
The League has found that the current system for gathering and reporting data on
the use of industrial revenue bonds is inadequate, and supports changes to Chapter
474 to require more detailed reporting of information by cities to the Department
of Economic Deveropment,
The League believes that the development and redevelopment needs of cities are
very diverse, and therefore recommends that no legislation be enacted which
limits in any way the types of projects for which industrial revenue bonds may
be used.
The League supports the principle of responsible local decision-making and
therefore would recommend changes in the law to require that any unit of govern-
ment issuing industrial revenue bonds adopt and follow local guidelines setting
forth conditions under which projects will be approved, including that each project
is consistent with a community's development plans or policies and zoning requirements.
(Amends page 12, 1981 Legislative Policies. )
-6-
r
Finally, the League supports working with the legislature on any concerns that they
have with the use of industrial revenue bonds.
Committee: Legislative
Title: Control of Narcotics Paraphernalia*
Priority:
The League supports the development of state-wide legislation prohibiting the sale
of narcotics paraphernalia in Minnesota and enabling legislation granting local
enforcement of such legislation.
*(A) priority to be recommended.
GL:rmm
-7-
,102.
-N - -, •- -. -'' ' r-IPT
,. 4.1 ..... . .S S ... > ...!, '! ..) ,./, 4 ,S 1 ,..I Là 4.1• '.4 ;./ ,'" 3) I.); .,) a ,I•)) r4 r: r .4, 0 .1 5
..- IrS.1..... •
4.1 r a. 4 - r . 1 , 'AI ,. , , _7+9 ) , , I LII , al c 0.5.:_. 3 11: .-1 a .-. Ca , ".....„..:3...,-_2 f 00.
2 2
I , I •
. 2 .
• !
; 1 ;
, , . • .-
L4 C,01.4 LA '• L.40.44 C4-1.41.4 4.4 (.41(.4 CA (4(4(4 CA,C4 CA L4 CM *, CA 14(9(4(41(4 L.4 C.4 (4(9 C41C4 (4(9 :a La • La L4 C4 C...41(.4 L4
'LI EA 1Ln En -• C 4141 LA C-4 1.4 CA(.41(9 41 Lod CA(A 4.4 I C4 cm CA (9 •1 4.4 1-0,m.•-• 4- 4-•4-•*.;-•4-•4-•I.. .. . .• a[C C (4(C) ID v.C
o-•=.[.z,.- [lo. ;7%,LA 0 CA (4 14 C9141 N N N N 1•4;0 0 La rp s,• .0 c...(...4(9 (4 1(4 CA (A 14(4(A 0-4 PA, 1.-..-.4... ,• N.).1‘.... I-.p...11-.0-• in 2
o0C) , • JICIJ01.4NO.,...141N33..AJIJC2 -.40% • "DJ03 -404..A .00ANtmcalc.A .0a4,N5r ;* Np..lailr.30-. no
1 ; ; o
P1 P11.4 o ofnno.0onir- nonacn-nInomx r-' cconmoIrcxvorm0I'tnicor -4 1110.-41.nm0 C el
z zlz a) ..0 0170 0 0.-4 -1-4 IL.7 .-4 -4 0 -4 rum • .0 o -.1 -4 OA ,...I- ri 1.-1 rn r-c o o -4-4 rn ....I • ...CI Z 12 ri z,.. I.••••
LI o•o -C I• I:. ›, C r'.! I• L. .a i CI < •', . I.C!-r•I In 'C C CI i .....In C in c r- n C --.0 CII rin C) .e Irn as /4 Cn r*n • ;• 2 ....1-• :-1
• G.,• .-4 2: el,2 2 0-.[-4-4 a,Is .-4 -.I.... -4 rn.> • ri 14 rn r- rn r9 rn rn,r- C Zr-C In 0. 0...z a. ri 1)-. • IC • --- -4
2•mz -4 -, -)Cl m rn n 1r- I--11 rn rn..v i I 0 0 r" 2! -.) • rn...4 7 0 1 11. C 0 r-,• ... o 0 o ro r.! r.!..,1 a
0 In ri .44 Ln II 10 -C M 21 rn 0. m • -,rn 0 I -,1 -4 a. -0 2-• -4 -4w ! Cl r- .
CC--.rlj<r- ,PI 0
m"1 < ton -4.1 '1 0 rn 1 GI 0 (4, C) CCI in rn I -4 7 .4 (A. ,n -4 72 m c-tial -4 Go•-. 3:1 7 ,,C i'4 rn '11)RI
'a 13
In -• a. -e[el C cn C a-0 1 c, I 4,r-4-4 10 Cl Cl 0 T an; .0 0 n ,.. n o C)ra rn lc--) r) r- I-1 0 O..41 AC Cl 2 •
-.I,.0 •••!-4 -c •< -n 0.•o 0 o!• C o -. 2-Itinclma rzmoo ,-.12-2, .. m . ti < mm o
mz... .... › D. • •= 1, 1>, • =!-imznzmi > 2 7.a' _Ik. trele-ol•-[rM'larricili•-• 1› 2n (/)14)
0 in -.. -4 •••4•In I-3 -4 7 is,• z Z.-. -4 a i GI Z PI En IM Z -4 1-4 rn rn :,1 II I-. S LI Cl 0 Xl i3. ,C... I .13 I> 3.
-II .44 0 Z 'I I r1 n J.n t 0 ... z Cf) 21.3 -.) 71. • c., -*Jen!...11Mm.73r. b.01.-. =riZ ..., , 51C ....tr. A
ii en C c 'fl .'a 0 I-. "C:is Cl 7 -. -1,m rn: ,,, ,m;-,1 CI rn v 1C G. ;C1 rl In ml In 721-4 A 10;41 (-1 .... -'a
-1(9 (411
0-OM7A CC) )0 ;LI 2• .•-• .l2 Nit i Al! 1:1 • 070 • C.-. .....0 MM -4, Cl •-•,, 0 4-110 C (491
112 ;-;,,97 ,, m -4 00 Cl ... -,•1 ,-n 'ril 1 -4 -.Cl 1 '11. 7' 44 -4-4 -e n.rn C z a rn
< 0 0 :n < -Z 0:-4 • rs, CCI En .-0 0 0 0•-•11 •-•I V) V) 2 :r CO C.4• .....'f). 7: =!..T. .X3 Z .9
,-,
In (- -4,-. • --4. m (4-Cl 44 - ; -e rn rn -I 121 ..4 f A i.-. rn 4 rn .4 m •-•,71 NO • CD
C7 0 rn • 0 a 01 z 0...3 0.- 0; -. no,,n 0 21 cn rn C)0 r-• VI Tn 2'Z 2
P,rn ,n B, C) 0.4 -4 Z Tm -4 ' -1 :c ,e 4 0 In .4, 000,-4 -4
.,IM 11.0M .-c) -4.z rt o ...-4 -412 in, Cl o
I
7 o -4 0 -4 -4 Cl)1 • 'Cl) • , 4 Il 1
0- Cl)CO ;in • C;
. 10 21 .
v)I 0 0
! • '7
• . . . •
. ;
. .1 , •
. .
. ,
PI
•
• , !
t ,
.• t 2
2 ' •
...
2 ;
. 2
. .
xi
.
. t . -Cl
.
. .
.
.
. .
. . z
• . .
; c
I ;
i 115 A
• 1 1 i I
, .
, I
•
,•.... r;I
1 34
-.; 41 c.11 Ja ' 441 4* NJ cr. a. [ca C, . G 73
. I a . I . . • 0 a 0 1
1 0 .'Z I ,0 . fr.' Cl) (4 0 • I .4 .41 -4 j I r" Cl
WI (ii 441 0 0; II.) a• Ln 1 io Ix. .0 I .0. z• I
ro, CI N.)I c.5 , 41 ..o , Ln GP CI ICA CA I 'Cl
..
.
• • • • • • • • • . • • 6 • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . . . . ,0 j• • 1 a • • • • 1.4 ..4. rc
.9 „...„ r, (4 C)...„.,... ., ,,tC4 0D ,10C%ca 4%105 ,51 J J La 4110 CD Ca J Ca Ca CC) 3 CN.
V CAI C . Ca Cori A C2 Ca r, (ICC CO 'Z,40 CD A C5 C4 IC: irn
..;11 I ..-1 ....,1,.o 14 • C) 0 . 0 0. .01 , •/.. C) C.4 D.. -,0'7 ...7 .7 o' 0 12 1.4 (9 (4 ; I C)CI CC • ,'a-) C3 IN IN 10 a 0 La,C I', 1
, 1 - r- s '2
. I
i .
1 (CC
. ! I. .
• I
I PI
;
; ! • I .
I
. I
• = Ix)
.
'40
1,1 a
. 1 ;
1 , , 1 1
: , • ' 1 I. I .C1 0'7
,
. . . ; A ;
.
,
; I 1 '; I I
I 1
I i 13
I .
, t .
I ' •
, 1.-1
i I .
1 . . .
. . I , •
. I
. I
N
...- .L4 .. •-•• •••• 1 , (A , (A <A
.
!
, la.11••, 1.• 1%.10434 t CM ;LA r%)I
4.I o 4.1 o IN i I-. .
L11 I..4 0 -4 01 LA LII, LA••.011U1 1N L4 1.' 17% 7 CI! Cl .0 Ca ca Ica 4.9 0' 14 J I IN
0 0 • • • , • • • 0'.• • • a a a ' • • aa . • • 0 • 1 • 1
(44 0,LA ,1 az L41 L.7 .1; 00 0 <1 -4 cD'Oa 112 LA(4-00 -4 CA C) 4**. C),D C (4.147 4-'nJ102 CA ca C4;
,-, ;7 ClIj 2 02 I Ci 0: .0 0 L,4 ul 0:0 IN LI 0•CA LA N.01 0 0(.11 ) C.0 CI al 0 0-4N 0 10 a 1 so •rn j
O ......);r0 .3 ... al 0 C. ;A 01N 0 0,0 1C3 0 (41c) co
1 000400000 00 = c7LAC2 1'0 CI! .4 -c i
• • • I • • ,• • • • • • 16 • • 641 • 0 • • • • • • • • • • 6 • • 41- • 41 6 t• • • l• 6 .0, 0, 411 • • fn 1
r•CMIC) ,:. 0 01.) 0 0•0 0°IL, 0..3,Ca J"3 A J 010 0 ,-) 0 49 0 0 0 0 0 0,.)c...1,-, 0 -.1,0 C) 1.a 0 IC)0 0 0 a •,2
I
0 0 G"• .... 0 01.0 n •,3,,..1 ci 010 0 ...i 0 Gn 0 C 0. Gi 10 0 0 c..0 0 a ..., en 0 1.1 L-1 J J .7 (415.3 ca 11 .-a I..2 an.c....z .75 g i
• 1 -4 !
I . .
I . .
•
. 1 . •
• !
. ,
, , I
, 1 . rn
, )-. •-• •
• . Ln .0 I 0. •
1-, -4 ..0•1 0 L.4 I 4-.N 1 LA .44 -31 1 L.1 ; ... fr. is.)14, 1 LA IN N .0 i .
NI,C4 I.- A I *.' (MC)IN) IN 0• a (414 .0 I 0 ,4-..r4-. (AN)IC) LA Ul LP L.41 IC0 ••_,4 1 C
4. 4. 0 0 ' 0 0 ' • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VP , 0 .0 .1 ••• 41 •• •• • r• • •' • ;
r)..)1\10../1 IN L4I C) C) ...I co!ca 0 0.csj LA cp L..,.piz crti ra1*-7J *. NC.41*.44102 .0N2 -4 IC44 C411*." 0% 0
4--•-•0 c".• ca =I Q3 cm i .00 (91L4..ci c e:co rs.) .ct. .c. 0;.•• co Ln go 0 ('.3 0' 0,a• en c. 2,ICA Li) ca 4.4 LA !J. ,a t$,3 . rsi ra --I 0../1
U1(9.0 .' a, (4 (4, CA C4iN4 GA 4*,,0 •4 I(4(4 4.4 GA' 01 -0,0 .0 0.L4 LEI GA 7, 0 .4 10 7 C1'41.-Lri ;40 ,..a n..... ! CI
• • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 61 • 04 • • ',• • • • • • • • • • • i• . 1,16 ,11 ,,. . -40
C.)cl,ca -4 ,.... ca•.„„a 1,0.0......4 cn r..),..•.•0 ,..,,CI, CI,....rill, ••SLI,I.... 4.-I LA (4U_2.0 ..414.11 01(419 0,10 1,-4 0 (41.0 14 1,1J CCI 41(4(4 IA 0 L.
C)t9,,11 ", a, C2.f'D N) '3:1,,3 C.4 ,'D. L. "3 .4('.) . .,-4 4:a UI'C) 0,j -1 ,'• 0 0 010 4' -0, L/1 CI 01,3 C) .0'UI 0 cs,) (NM (C CD,C Ca ,7
!1
.
1 . • ; .
, , . • *.
. , I .
! , n• ,i
. . C.
i -
I • 4 .
. • . •
• , , ,
• j ,_ 1.3 , • . 4. in co
.0. 1-. .
N C' CD L., L4 0. 4.-1--. ,- 3A1 4* ,c. Ln IN -44 ! (4 1'),c) .
. -1 (9 12 43 • ,"
. •• 0 4 ' • • 4 • ' • • ' • • • • • • • • • <
.../,,-.Z . 1'..) ! .0 LI.41 J 0:1 LA 0 ,Cr, NJ.°.C.4 02 01 17% -41.4 *.14.14 h. I CA Ln cr. Ln it-. ILA 00
CC -1 -, to 73 CM. 0 CNI LA D3.4.Nj 1.0.a ,0041 cA; Na A 43 Nal.. 0 CN0Ca cm ask., 0 , .0 (.71 .43^5 -.I 70 I
cllin,..L ....% .„.7) a,•' '. ..a -41 00 .s.-*= .... 1.1 4) 7 a% cr,• 0...o .0 CM U)(31'C's ,:= -A ic3 tr 0 /..11 is 4)it..1 • •
-4 N.
• a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,• • • • • • • • • • • ,• • • • ,• • a-
'7
0 .0 •... 0 •.,. A I., A ,-.4.c.*fit,... ...0 L.0 -3 i 0 LA.:..444 r.1 :43 La...0 44 4,1 Ln LA G..; Oa J 0 0 0 0 0 (.2 t'.2 j)VI 0 L110 Cl1 '2:
(4(4,C -) (Ta 7 , NJ .c---2 J C3,-7 -4 '1 C4 Na DI-. a% 41 aa GNI 4 '23 ', CI '2IA 0% r2 [011 41I,D J -2,Ln c..) i•-xl a%,52 aa ,DICa NJ A 0
1 1 • 4 . i 1 ; 1 I I I 1 , ,1 ' 1 I ri I I 1 PI :7
,.. •-• ..a- C..' ,•-•, .... G• '•-• I' .4, ra(1/n.) 63,1.4 C-'1,... ).4 .41 .a. ,+,.• F.,
-4 •En •a CI I...1"0• -0 47 1 0 -4 0•c..., LA •-• 0.2 ••••• 44.•-• ..L4 X.441 Col 4- Na NJ NJ LII I'D ca J. .4) 4-' I ,43
..... .4,-) .5, 0' LA; ID (.4,'Cl 1-0 .:3'.. J•• Co. 7.2 '3 .0 .4, .0 ,.....r. (41(11)--i-- 113 IN t CA 7% C5 0 ID CO ,DI XI 1 as [ •
• • • , • • • • • • ,... • • • • • • • • '• • • • • '• • • • • !• • • .1:3 I
.4,40 .0 . I 1- ' ...I -4,... A.1 .00 l',. ,0 ; .3 .1 ,03%, ;1 -401J;-4 .11.4,72 ,m00, 07 , LA a% DI I N In •••• ••
i14 •-• .--
"! 1 . • I .
, I i
. . i
0
,
I . ,
• . ..0.1•0,0101..i....•.1010,,.0....7...WS
.....
01114 ..;.011C...1•••C.
• ( . . --- - . .• .
• -. . . ... i
•...-.". 1 f.11', , , a v . . . • 3 . a .3 . • ' , ....'7.-1-",;-.-•-'-, ..• ... .../ ' • , .7-77-7Th '4 .1 , ---...-"-"- --
!. . .1 ••• 0 a. U . 1 '', . .L., , •• ., . - oi ..1 .7. Ili i u ,v,t. c..; ;' 1 .4 - 1 ;. 1 7, : 7si °- ,.
t ---r-- --1 • ___ _,
-
• ; ; ;
i : •
1 1
;
I .
I . •
•i ;....4 c..4 CA i...1(...s.4 0 La C.4 4.4 r.o di Col LA o•.c.A +.4(..410 f..0.0 C..0i0 CA Col:CA(A c....;(A 0 {...t..‘...010 CA 11 1•44 -
• .
•
. ; • •I 0 0 0 CD 0;02 ,1:t 37 O -.I -41 es •JI 0 0 L71 010(11 cll,C.II CII UllUl CJI Ul'Ul 0 0110 Ul U1'0 0 0 C.I'l C71 7.C kt)
. i .1 .0 La Lit U)LI'NJ r..) ,••• 1••••• 4P(A•OA A A,A 40(.4 I(..,(A CA 1 CA(A Mt NJ.N.) r%)Is)NI NIP-.0- 4-1-••-•••••,•-•m n z ;02
. i .1 a r••• a a .,.0 a Is) cn...,-.1c3 (..1 rj,,-.a 01 4. +.,.;IL)'I--a ..4 a' .rst C.44,7 m al= -7 as VI 4 4, 0 IV I.. n
•
1 ; 0
1 ,1 m •-..7).... -1,I.-4 0 ,-.... 73 010 -C 0•I. cei z++ -a -a mix n nil" vs m:c -0 a I 0 g -11 la-a(A 1 1++; 13 c in
; .
-+Ii +--+ Z:rn z rilz rt. .z'z rn rtt,o.44. x;orn n t•-•-•• o;,-4 0 oI.-. xt•-•,n c zI-4 t-t ..•,C r"x•.!enr- ,zo it-.
A CA 'IIIC r. 0 -.-4 AIC tri .-...M 74. n123 a c /,;, z xt,02 fI (11.ri CO COM fit nam re n-,,rit t. '-4.. 1-A
,,ti a . c-..,. 3;› rn C:41 7.0',2,-) 2•••(r+t-41r1 171 z•r) (7 rs;-.r1 nIct 1-=1.71 m 4-4:4c-I min z
Al I-9 z n r..r- V) 70 -4• 2'0 C 0! 0.• 71M12 • •-• '.1 • z r2 vi 'LII CO
r-
n o.44. t-4 zlo -,rn z ai-c t-44.47 z m!z n : ce) 44;0 o -04-5 n ai-4 0,-c i 010 m ot a to
al; r r-In CO rn!CI 31 m;In rri no -n z,-+ z I r. r. -a!-+,+n cn I - -n;c't rn! -r+ . a" 7+I-x+ x ol.m i-n
. 19; 1.2.• z; -c -+ a a r., a a -.+-11-.g r-rn;a•-••-•,73 • -•se re:el O -n n rn rn Cl (n 2. ;
71' <I 2 -4 Os n -4•C) M r)10 0 2.4 ••0 r-mil-to co> n c -I a a;rn c rm..- r+.1-3;7.ci x..;rn iv)
C ri i ri .3. la ,CO ... 2.. 190:C.: I- r-'co r-7 70,i'l 0 0•-• 2 Z:Z .> 7('•-• O<I-0 -0 M,(47 0 .r•t-4 7C m 77 TS
2: .1, 0 V) 0 C-..1 C. -.41 r*1 I-'77 m I 7C MI et Cl en 01 a 01 CA,7. 7C a,r•rn r)2 131 -a
,- 0, C• a ('i in ;a;m-c :a, rn r-'-4 .-.In -rt Ci tt; .7. ?•,7) I I,71 c) • a' La r-,•-•77 7C I to iris 71 -4 r 15
1 . ml ,/, .-4 m ,r-s rn (A • 7(/) 0-a 0:11 2 311 l'C' f A i 77 -I . te im M •-• '0
' ••••4 (A 1 3 -1 2';--I 12 19 71 r) 0,0 0 -73111 0 7110.4 01 ,-1 111:ri 3 < M iS.In 0'1 .'0
n . In Ln tni -n 71' (-1 j•-••.- 2'11 1 .....i 111 .-4 •-•t Al(/I,-3 2 V•7. m i r1 = ,m 2 C 'Cl-s, n C 1-11 a n x:z (III -n(41(42 e• 71=n r- M 4 77• 2 1 0 M I In 7 111
7• .471 eni 19 , elm m Cl 11 7,Cl•ae ....77•••••1 11 a ;-r o I
C-- -4,v) al II -I, Ole/1 • 0 0 0..-• I el 0 32. 2 C) In
0 M Cl 0 13 01 M ra n .-n•rn r- , , z 1 0 .
*I-I i , -4 ri ;41,v)0 r• 0
-< 4/3 ;
-c.in 1 (.1 n •
_ .
197 71 ' .:// ,...
. (I ' 0
-IC) I Cl Cl
•
. ,
t •
, 03
. •
1 1.1
, .<
. z
. c
. 1171 A
' 1 C
' ' • . ,
' •
.... . I
. ' CS i A, , ry t-• ; 33
N.I I tIll ,
: •-• •••• 0 r,-* I 0
, • .i . . . . . nt
. ::.! c.41 .7. 1‘..) 0 31 •••••1 In
. I ;
t3,1 I .1( 1••• (A a a -.4 ris tv 6-4 rIn r.;z
i -4 c..4 i40 c3 0 s-• 'n <
. . : . • • . • . • • ,• • • • • • • • • • • • ,• • . • • • .• • • • • 4 . • • • • ...•••••••
A, (Pi 00“.7 co C. .• a ra,.. n a •-•,' CIO 0 a a ca aja a 0 a •-• .0 I. :'I;-1,I a ca a a .-a:II 0 0 :a trt
r\t; cAl -a ,.. .a C.3 C3 • 0 (.7 4%2 0....) J's a :-.)c) t.., L...1 1., CI •31a a a 0 0 13.)INA 0 0 0 C. -:4 0,..3 0 0 .--3 3.
r---..s X
, •
0 C
, •
i z m
. 1
,• , .4.
•
i•
1.ra
,x4 PI
;;-4
12* I13
t2'
n 0
;rn
• 22
I
. ;
. I • 441
13
. ,a
'4
I.--
!,1,1
,
0. A 1 /•••• v)
CP: A CP IN ...1) N , .. ..-• I 1-4•
611 031 A..) -4../i i.J11U1 1. (...1 0 0 1-• LA j 4...
, •• •' 0 • 1 • a ... • ,•• • • . •• • . •• •• . • I ;
1 ••••,,• SO I ..•,,, ..r•' 1....i r;,› ala 01,;,„4 LA N .3 L.111 LA Is) a .r.t 0%ca -2, ,Is)0•13•-•CO 12'
1 c,-•. -.41 A s1 I 4:3 ...31A ca a 0 J 0121 a 0 Ji 0 A 0 1.1J1 0 A j1 J In
aNt all a ; cm a o arta a,at o o a oto o a at J<2 43 .,3 C3 C3 A C3
• • i • • • • • 1• • • .6 • • ill • • 4 • • • • • 01 • • • • • • * • • • • '• • • • • :PI
C' Cli ,2 i.'"10 CI 0 1 0 0 a•,:a a 0 0 0 010 0 0 0 0 010 0 Ca 0 0 0I0 CI 0 0 0 0•0 0 0 0 0 2'
..7..., • 0 I 0 0,,0 0 a --) o a a a.a a a alo a o a a otta a a a a --4a 47 a o a a ia rs a C3(0
, 1 • .
1 1 01.
. I . .
1, • 1
. • 1 1 I
*411 CA 1 •••••t 1 i 3.
,
. . . f..-• WI ! IV i IN OIN I t-4 f‘.• 1..• 1,-) i
. .•.4 I .ral .0.., .21 1.• ...... 3.11S1 t../11:..11 N..1 .1e. J1 N ••••CA N 1••• N I 2
• 0 . . • •1 • . .• • .. • '..• ... . • •. . • • 1 0 • , • .
-, s.12 VI IV•(A A i 0 1-.'a' olog .0;(A••••NI i 1‘3.73, 4.,U) .0 '.4 ,cs -P ,•-•as IV 1(.1 4.11 ! 11!
F.I MI ...f 41.I.J. avcr.a a,#- .71r..7 4> ...s,-4 Co co1P-' C.4 4.41 1-.1a iv a•;na attia IV •••32 1.1110 ft.) ;224-4 ;v4
02; as, La 42 •3 Ni1.•VI C)141. CA1-1. -. 217''41 21.-4 ...N.) NI a:A 01..4 I..... 1-• V UI a'.....43 'n• •
• • • • • • • ,• • • • • • • • • • • • 6 • • • • • ,• I • • • • '• • • I • • :• • -I 0 ,0
••), toi, fr.'3,•••C.4.3,Cr,CD C,,(A CI 4.4,Cm (7,,..)av CO w!c:o co 0 10 CO...“1 0 A• 0l(A 0 0:47 0 0 0 .7 so o SY C I"
..x,I ., 0,03 0 ;C) 0, 0•to 0 01 0'3 U•I 0 I(„,,,a cpia a ala a I-) C) a 414a a --,;c,.. a ; a a -41.7-,-I 0 .
1 1 I I . ,1 1
1-•
. .
i 1
. . T. 1
•
• , .
, • 1 1 . -.1
. . e
, .
A• CV CA i 1-*, 1. 1 i ! I N 71 !07
, 7,, co; ...... -4; •-• c-, ....e, . ,-• I 4. IV m .•-•
. ••• • • , 4 • • • VI • . , • • I ' • < 1
U)' ti 1 .4.IV•CA 4:4( a t--;Q4 P.7 -4s- . la N3 L.1 t(.1 NIDI a (A I U) Gil 1 CA CA N -el .3.
3 1 a, N ..t...S. ...CP C3 J 1432 .0.3.-4 A 0).4 30 001,-. CA -410 1-.10 1,4 63,133 •••••k.1 Is) !-II IA r
3 P".0 C./11C2 N 2
si I J. AP ..31.3 CA t t.4 U) • :...1, 0 CP'...11 A 0.33 0 .0 1••••I ,--• s.),,-) Is.), 3 La up-.7 sci I•-••-• • 3,4. .0 ••••
• • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • , • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,• S • .• • r•
13
•-•L all :.12:zt-c4 .0,CP 0 a .75.-7 .01 Cr‘ 0", C),Nj o 721a u1 01 CI a 01c2 4, 0,03 '0 010 a 0i0 0 4•11./.0 2 0 it'
22. r,.); 0, ,,,cr. . ts.,,Ln cr, ••;at •) tj1,.7 Ul ,..., cA r..)cy,a .a ,, '1(\II'23 .71, .0,03 5-4,r ii4,4 0 0 10 0 .4 I a I CI
1 1 I 1 1 ' II 1111 1 • 1 .1 111 1 1 1 1 1•1 .CI
-••-•1.•i 1... 1"."` 14. i...P... I 1.4 - 1•••!N N r
li1'1
.2 I 01 '0 si i ,..,3 p 1-.4 .4) Ci C3 4.1 '73 -41 cal cr, 41 t 0-*1a' a+ ,-.i a' (Al(.4 U) 1
. • ...1, till •-• , .41 2 03;'2 2 .-..-4.01 0, 44*, .0, I-•,-.1 L.,CP -, !• • •C.,.-4••3:A..• ,
• . • • • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • •
1
I ,
Vs 1 • ,
-1/.I L/1 Cs.
1,) '0 -.4 ..2,..'• .42 Al 4' 4., ! '
•-•. Ts ,....,I, r , • .11
ut! a• a 4-4 -414-) -.1 .n i
.4 13.)
I , I
, • .
. . I
• • ' ' i
. .
' ! •
• 1
• ! : .
•, , 3 ', ,, 3, ., ,! 3 7 3 3 3 3 1 3 , • 3 .„.:• . s . . . . , . . a , .a c,--.7-.. ,..,,, ,---J-•._,.•:a .,3 :.1, •.: •; ..2, ••„3., L•+. •:3 , , ,,,, „ .,; :-.---, ...---'-e 3•a.4- a a..4)3.......,.-7,-) ...._........_,.....i
.-- ..-. 1
Tar:
NIZY. ..:1,,,1
• r •-. , .
• .. ... ,
,.. I :0, .1 .1 ll 1 l. lb 1 lb • J 4./ ta T 0 'so I/ , ..., 01 I./ I/ 7-77-71- ./• ll •/ I, , // ; .., ,. „a
r_.............„._.L. ..... .4.L.,- 0 0...._.L. ,•, 4 : 0 . - ....i...... .r. .., ... .. ,.4 . -, 0 , • bl .` .0 t l/ 0 !;•/i-• 0 *; "I NI ..3 , lb 4 1 ,‘.i. .. - - - -
I .
I .
;II• ai • I0 0 at * '-‘• a .0I0 a A; • a.
A .0 a A• .0 a faL4,, Jr 41.1 A.1a4a 4s:a a a 1. . a a a ala a. a J•.f•a .t•..e.. a ala a "71 ...."
•* CA 4 • CA:4(.4 1 • (I LA NI I(.4 CA(A. •• i ry N)4, r(,)NI IV 1 NJ ro NJ.1M NJ to 14\)NI to INI IV N30 NJ • .-••..41•-•r....•-•......kr I...•.• Div C !..0 : •
• N I • to NJ 1,31 • •-••••• 1-.11-•••••-• ;(../1 UII (.,.•(A i.,,4 (.,4(A t IN,,)NJ to:Ns n.) •-• .. Ut Ut L
IA a, 'a(A CA 1-.0 C')2 a
a 011 a IV I.•Cl a 0 a.4...4 1 NJ•-• a' * •-•0 0 L.4 to 4-1 0 a 4....4;NJ 4-4 01 Ul a 04.to 1.-•a 1 c• •• N3 4-•1 a to 4-4<4 NJ fa 1,3 0 r)o ,a
; a ,
1 ; .
-7 -4 1 (7 0 -.1 '0 i 17 -0 a I a 0. r'''' (/) I CA (.0..... 0 v• -alaa c r)..< aa P1 I CA v) r) r, alo -a! C sclz is ilk)cn tn to v• c 'el ;
x al 0 r'l ri 0 I x --1 r-cal Z c PI I c ;.-1 -.c-»3 ri r41,:a -4 o Irn r- ct z It•r-•ca z rn1•fi m; z oirn m in Iri rn la •c a• z a 1•-•
i• es 1 '..Z '1-r" 0 f 0 T > 70 0 C) If 1 a it la;0 >-4 j is.4 -4'r(7 C,,c• 71 0;-4 rn zi-ri a. ;71 70,a. Z 2;33(c r•I a t- -1,-4
< <1 m •-•a -41 -40 a z ,-.4..... 04., a ...., 2 a(- 010 r- ;:r4 7-414-71 -4,0 It ml.-• 0 V, IX11- 0 UI'>a a.-!a a •••••• -4
A 1 C ret C "0 1.! a z at 1 z -•r- r- 1,-a LA r) •z x 1 • r) • -tc!r• r -t 2:1 .4 3310 0 0 M 1-I-.4-4 l 03 XI 1-4 73 0
r- r-1 2 t'l:11.- 01 C.,) . .....4711r1 : ....4 1,..., 7• a a r)-im y r- t • 1 -C..-4. aa.ia z I-r,112 0 0. 10,....1.-•-4 rn a Io
r as a 71; rn Ti 7 U7,la 0 til I f•I I D NI 2 (A 0 2!> -c en•47. 14. -4 1-4 7! a 2.•4-1 In, A 71 2 2! V'411-t a en la 1 It
. 7,; 0 -• ,.! •-• it a I-6 1 it a: (A ,0 -I-I; D a I•••1 fil -4; ... ro I a en 0 C 47 en r-! -4 (411c• fit en: a 01 71 f it r) z
>4 i n ti 0 0 cl,.-. 1:1 a, . a .37 M-4 -1 -4 en 3 2-4,0 C 1 471 0 filIC 'X 1 I I UI i • I ,73 rl l 0
'0! -4 0 2 it Z!Z .-1 G: tie :.0 •-• 0 .r..4 a 7'1 -1 3*--4 2 i r- 0 01.4- C 1 0 Cn; a A I I"' a a! I.01 -A •-•73 12
a I ..... a a • GS 2.-4• •-4 17 r'I-1 2 lo I•-• 'V Ia'I-. -41 '0 1,1•Crl MITI a. 2 014-4..... -I. 73 !C C a la ;r•
Z t 0 a r- c.! • (1 a ,t--•-• 2 Cl -.oz. --c'2 Q•• 'De CO a 73' '0 f• 33 -4 21-•1 73 CI. t• ' r-C" -1 r- ,5
0; 7! < en .,1 1,1' 03 'sit 7. -ec,.., a!r• 't - C•-• 17) r•r•-• . 11,1,I a boo •II 1:01-. e- .4 'a
RI: ,,, .4 , 0 a 0111 CA 0! 13 • 7 a•• 33J 0 n z;• 30 (* it in • . irn ^.• cl . 1 al o It .13
• 0 • a 33 n!a a n ! -I, •••1 •-• D i a I CI CA 17 e- MCA e 1, (0-l ev -1 1-I -4 r'S
,Z C 1
71 • . i
0 < ll< JD •-• -C I rl 2 D Z I-.;0 '0 A I.2 0 C IA la' S.21,Z • -•••/.4 , Z ,R1
, < -• -41 4-4 < a a fa'172. a! -.I :7. Is r*4 70 0 713 a 1 73 cil jut , - i-le -it to
n Elr-) --• tn --1 I-I --I U7 I • -4;70..1 171 4.1 /-4,it ; • CC •-•Irn a
rn rn a.Ci a a E. a • a 33 70 0 71 '0'..4 it I it .
' =
1 (.0 (i) 1:11V1 11 , it r = Ze "C7 -4!UI -c 0 I7.1 JO ,
'TI I I
• "11 1•4 ••-•I t a ••I lo a rn at I Z!2
tt• a r) •-• 22 01 0
rn rn .
a (•• 0 -0 -1-4 . '
VI 0 2 0
. -
; . .
•
, .
. 1 4
a
, .
. .
. ,
1. -0
•
!IT)
. .
I .
. I
• ' I I AII
: .
I ; '
. f ,0
. . .
•
)....
I ;I.
•
:-4
I •
. I
..0
. •
•
I. .
iI c
f v 1,rn
. ix
i 7.7 i
: . 1 i r .
I
UI c. I I-' r.,,1 •-• Ns •-• IN2 4.• 0 1 Ia!.
! • ,• ,. • i • 1 •
• • • . ! a Ca
'4 ' 0 ' C, 46 l•-• at! -4 •-• 1 ....•4-.1 -4 I...I CO 03 N •-• /V A A 1 I CJI -4 i rn
I
'0 ,i, •-• • (A Ni, ,ft it IC -4 j UI 1-.01 ...0MI0 Mit.ON00 071,1,000 fsar
r!r
a u
0 0 1,0 A ,.0 IAZ I.z
0 0 1 01 (A (• .4 1 ll s ca as (Ai rLs 1-!4. ..)on!-4 a!--•1%1 SA 43 NJ! ;7 r,1,31 c4 ,
• • • • • • . • .• • • ;• • • • • • • • • • • • • 1. • • • • • ,• • • • • • • • • a ,• • • • •
,l) 0 I -0 r-a, Ni! ‘1.4 A 0 01.•0 O. 47 0 V 4.1110 0•••••• 0 IV 1-4 0 0 1-• 0 La los as co -.I -.I a a a a a las La a a a IC
1
0
-13 J 1 Na :,..J -• U)! N.) 1-*0 0•a 0 0; NJ 0 it 0 1 fa 0-4 0 0 UI it 0,4,1 1 43 0 4.J1 f Off 4-4 ...4 33 0 0 0 a 0 0 lir.0•D 0,a3 ;1.
I I . 1 •r- a •-•
!
I o •-•
I , •
I 1 z c
l
t M rn
I .4
!).
I La
1,-•
. 1 .
I.• it
1
1 !2
:t" a
1rn
: I ,
I
1 ! '0.
i .
. _._
a
! I I
-t.,!
1 r) it
,-•
, , 1 -•
• , ,
4-'
i I .
a ' ;D•
f •
.
.
4-4 , • NJ ;
0 1
1 . . ; 4- -4 i 73
f•-• ; 0 LA ;Ir. (A, 0 1 U' IN•-•N.) !LA to '01 04 (.44-C.4;CA 0 1 4-•.43 113
1.7, 0; 7 (a(.41 i.11 N)Ul 1/-• 0 at a I•••Ut 0,na 0.41 VI(A UI I t•-•us CA rs)•-•LA la, LA 43 a T. 64,0.,o -4 r3!o , calt.4 Ln !-:a
. .1 . a *1 . . ., ,. . • l . I. . . . . . •-• . . . . . . . . . ..• . . . i ..,. . . ., .I. . •o
r r-o gs a uNI .• 0 a !LA Cc! r iiNj LA NJ,7 0 ca LA Ut -41L4 P.LA LA LA 0-32 1-,0 sa a! 040 •• .4:40 04i•-• LA rg
La uii c4 rs rl (.4 N..)a ],..,0 of Ln la a -410 0 0 0 C5 1‘314.Ut LA ca ...• a UI a a a cn! 03 tA 0 CA I-0 ...0 0 0 '04
0 01 UI • to UI! A.,) V 0 !UI'0 °! 03 a a LA la a 01,04 a utle 0 0,0 0 01c0 0 0 0 Nil (A 0 UI ••• UI U' 0 QS li•A
,
• • : • • • • , • s • • i• • • • II • • • • • i• • • II • • 1• 6 • ,• • • • • ' • • 111 • • 'II • • • • ;IN,
0 01 0 0 0 01 0 a 0.140 to ." I 0 0 0 0,0 a ala 0 0,0 0 010 0 010 0 0 a at 0 0 Go 0 010 0 0 0 0 j..1
'0 ,7; a a a r-fi 0 0 0 en!0 0 0f 0 -0 0 0:0 0 010 0 t-+1,0 o 0 a 0 o10 0 0 0 01 0 ala 0 010 0 0 0 0 1.....
,0
.
I 1 . 1
. .
; I .2 44"
'1
1 ; ; .
1 . 1
. .
•-•1 r rn
. , • i
! .
. I
1 ,
1 .
I , .
1 •
.7. 1 1.• CO
' , , ••• r I to 1
' r• • •-• 1 0 .7 1 .0; 7, , 0 •••.6(..• ILA (.4 ,01 04 GA 0.IS.) t.11 4-1-..0
I
Li LAI a a oil La a .La 0, 0' 07 --.1 d-•(A-4 •-•I U11.0 VI r3 P-• J,1,4,..0,1-J a! •-•,0 ...1 -.4 lt,..1 N 49 LA it 1
• • • • • • • • • • ,a • , • • ,• • ; •1.0 • • • ol, • •
4! " ..i• -43 03 •4 'D Cl; a' V (Ill L4 UI tains •-•N.)i 0%V al- UI(...•P.),0 U) C...4 1 0 03 i 04 so I UI V CA 10 C13 i 4-•00 1 2.
a -a, La a a! at cn lul a! L.+ , NJ -7 I s.0 I-•0 I L4 a ,.0 le-.4-ail-. 41 (.11 0 NI v.CA NI 1 LA cola as ati.. air.) V .T.-4 !CA
(A L,..t v •-•UI! a NI 0, 0 1 at . cn v as.) as 1.4'.e- .3•4;(.4 (3%01 01 •• •.,,.....4 ,..0 (Cl,it it I fit(A,a.,(al,43.0 '01,b, Nj 0
• • . • • • • • • • • • • 6 • ,• • • • • 9 le • • -• • • • • • • • • • • , • 4 • • • .0 • • • * :-40 .3
LA Li, 0 0(1/42 V. LA .00 047 a 4.41 i•-• c...) V U.,;NI IV Oi I 0 IP 0 i CA Ut'.4104 NJ Uhtt, 1.•612 kJ) ITI, g,010 0...a i.6.CD tit I 0 a ;0 i"
0 0 ....1 -3' CN sl• Ni r• 0 0,0 0 I-.; U1 '0•-••-•;-4 +I CR i.•••33 .4.00 a 4,311O -4 4-.10*1..4 ;0! cr.a!-0.o 1-1-0 0 oho c') , '
i I I 1r•-•c I
. , , , : • r
I • !
, , , I 1, st• 1•
; . ,
. . . • ,
1
, I I
, ! .
• 1 i
, , 1 -4 caL4
i
;•
. 1 .
i ! !
! ! 1 •-. pa •-• , rt ,a)
,
•-, • 1,- ;
•
e..) ' NI , 0 .4(Cl N3 0 C.!: iv 1.0 1-•••••;I.••• I 14. ,..,,i '•• a'! ,-• (.11 i..Crt I rkj pal .-1-it (AIN) IV I 44 0 : 4....
• • • • • • • , •• • • • • • ,• • • • , • ,• • • ;• • 1 • 1.• • ,• W.I. • ,•C
NJ 4,31 0 Ut • a (0 a !a- .o a! a r.)N3 NI!NI a.41-4 LA al-4(.11 CO,,1.. -.i - Ut-.4 * 0'! L4 .0.4.0 ') 0 ala(A !V. i
O 0!. .r.4 n..) .4)1 (..• (A 0 'a 0 .a1 a a IN) (A,Crs it 0 144 0 C.4,NJ 0, LA:CO a .a,t,...4 -4 -41(A •), (..4 01:33 .4•,iv 0 IN OS I 13 I
I
Ir` Cr,I -4 ,0 01 IO 0 ...0 a -3 Ulf 7 .0 aL%),-.4 L.(.43 5-' '0 CA I 0 CM ‘,;.,C• "13 AJ ....4 ,-, 0,0 491 (1)0114.4 -4 I414 010 fn l•-•
1
• • • • • • • • • • . • • 1• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • ,• • • • ,• • • • • • ,• • D.
(Cl UI I.17 I.7... V -.1, Ul 03 o 0 i A 0 i-., a- ;•-, -4 a 1-4-4 01 10 (.4 4.4,r-lit 0.7 .4 4*--a 0 coI UI Lai, ON 01 0 0 4LJ.0 a 0 la a z 1'3
0- (0; V •, 46 ...J. N.) ••'.3 (3.0 ..-, UI -Jr ...•,CA tA chi a NJ 4.4,N.,0 to.30 4.4 0 re..7 43 1-44 1-4 r-), i7/ g.I ON a bp I/•••• 0 SO 1 VI C2 'n 1 0
I I I I I I I ' II . I I I I i I ' I 1 1• 1 PI
II i 40
' •-• •-•11•••• •• I ,rn
•-t! •-• I,. 1.•, 11.4 ....••-•. ,....,...*. .....,-.... ,.... .....1 p•-•
.4) ,U! a 0 al 0 ••• V ,..4 i 0 1,..2•-•-Ut 03 h.,{.4 4.)1,0 0 Ni 0" M 010 .t.NI.. ..‘ Lai-4 a alas ria a ' I
3, 0,1 LA a to; a a a C's, 0 NJ .0 NJ ti a I I* A to,4-•GA 0:0 7 0,f.0 ..1 1-1 q....• .4)! c./11 0 0...3 0-• Nu vi..-. t
I• • • • , • • • • • • • • • • • :• • • .• • • • • • • • • • • • I• • • I• • i• • .-0
.0, as! las a' ,JI I N.) 0 •-.4 1.'11 .0 (...4 ...1, i.,1 L.4 4,) (Cl „A 4:•,,•) V 1-,;-,4 •••(\)..0 C..• ...do" ,j, =1,,,, •-, J•t•0 -,••I 0 I....1 ,a
, 1
, - I -4
I . ,
• I .
. ;
. I
. .
I . I
I , '
v<1 il 1104. •.,:". ::: •101 !"-3 3:', 3 '.1!. -f. 1-.1., 14: !:1 1 '3 !.', 3"1 •1 1 .-!, Y.' 3 t •2•.,' .!: :: .1 ': ' fi ± •t ';', 1 1." .; '', 13 1::: '3-1:7. ',I ...! .1 •::1:3 I; 't 7.: %tt t, .3 .4.,. ...--c, ° - :......A..._____.,
• l - •
- --
. kr _....r.....---,..----......-.---- ....--_-__.--....---.--_.- - -. - •
,1 I
II ( 7-JEI -'
•
.'-71-7 7-7.1 • .• 0 • s a. A A A A A A A A . ,a .41 4 t..4 : •.., 0 ta; . . V . . . A' - - - - - - -• r ...; , ,,..7;
.. ...; r 0 A I .] . .. _A......'r.1 2 ',CT,... , .. . •.• •. -----r0 2 ,....24 :, 2 6. ..I ..;.- I) A Z . 7 IA A ,/;, ,..-__,2.., ----1 I •
, 1 ,
, , I
•
1 , , • ,
, .
1 • I . ! I ,
• .0 0 0,,.0 •j 0 0 .0 AP 0,0 • .1. .i.1 JP 41, 4a. * 1.A A 0,0 A 0141. A A • 10 A A, s ,a a ' 11 •••
.4 CT%i • 00 411411 0 0 0 al a 0, a a Jot0 • 44 4..,44.44 L.41, * 4....L. 1.44.41LA 4.4.1-41(.4 0, P . (.4 c.4 4 6 1 tri t.6 To C 43
p•,.•1 . .. ••0•,•CI ..,,,, pi 43 0 4.4 Pa P...• • ,a 4alo -4 .4). • los 33 33 02 72 -41-4 -4 -4, .. ',1, 0, as, . ;Lii o r) Z__. 20
4:4••, • 01,4.14-.1470012 -4 Pi 0M0U10,0 44, J.. .011\240 = • ..0 :..., Nr0C...4.PJ100, 0 .1.44-40, 0, ii- c) no
i o
-u.....1 nann'nnz.-a Iv M .-.44-40n1C- n mran, C !rnamr
,aolczmi ... kvai 13, Imr :c n 1
71 Z i
D '-4 0 7.'P. 0 r''a xi, •-• z zr-a;r• c,". m ai..c 3, -• .0 a r• nit. x•( ; 2i0 .7 3 In' A. :331i ,20 ..-1
33 6.4 1 /3 2 9 91,9 13 0.= -.I es 21,2 2 rn 01r, in 21 --• 9 9 rs •-• z 731-• -•'9! 0 i-r 0 21 .... .•-• .9 •-••-• ;..4-•
=rn •-• in •••••-•'...."••• Cil (1 M i CI ..• I•J "X)I r.-. 11 . 1 7 C 101 4,r1 71' 0 .-4 2 0 0 3210 C 4-1 k a !.-. -a • , z !2 so ....... I
=. -4 73 --4 -•1--. .. 0; in r"r-0;,11.--. • •-• (.412 uni •-• i n n .-,-a • I= z 0, 72 In . . -4 ;-44 r- 'a
z:n1 . 0 7.4.> 0 • 10 21 0,-4...• Z'0 Lf), 2 10 Q.• 73 1 -4 C2 111 Z. .-•22 C11 233 > 10 2,•. ..., .4-4 19 0 i 0
41 011 0 4-4 0 0'0 r CA . r"00 ••••• -4 173 C/ Cl 0.•1.11 o's. ,-• .0 .3 2 M-4 1 0.4. 2 I rn 2* , Z 12 2 LA 0 in I
2 4 1 I 2• rn a:: la oi ,..-• S VI (A 7' In ,....in 72 0 2 In n n i f-' at ;;;) 0 el 2 1
-4 .,.1 73 3303 0. Z .D0W0,0 0 M131 041 N 1710 -..C, .0 .01 0 .-4. in .2004-.. I -4 33.3 0
II 71 0 -4v .0 74 I 11 zo -4 V)l I"" 0, C #1 CC- :Z C 73 10 7 1 30 -4. ! sz r.1 05 i go 1..... •-•XI =
....1 la i b... 0 11 G t "C -4 33 21; 0 C.. C.0.9 1 r-' 9 21 0 0, 211 fn.... 33 1.1 0 u11 Cl)-C 1 ;M 6-4 33, 1 .3 339 30
33 -e 1 2 4,C •-• .--, In in = CI c rn rn .4 A 1 n •0, C') . 17 9;-"I Z 0. 0 r• • : 33 ;X)M '-1 0 2
0 -•I i't rn 4-3 11 1. 73 C 1- , 0(-4 4-1 rl .33 . 7 -r 1 -In ,.:,,, x? M
0 1..., -• 7.....z ,,I ve . C." rn • rn '
Z I r 1, 73 2 ;,‘ 2:/--, 4n > .01 -4 -1 2 .xl • 11,r! '"' in 1 rn-I- ... ,-.. si,-,1 -13 1113
r 7, n 11 71 Cr ...4.2 C...1 I I 9-G 0 m .34 11 rn 2 I= 2 3441- 01 S 33 2. 2 i73 -0 2C M I
11 -44. 4c Z oi 7.r" C 0 -I -ri 0•.•-• 0 -4. -•ni 4 ,rn •.• t 0' -4 '• 6-4 CA 0 10 C 2 In
0.1 .vl• -V ..I el ---.1,r.-1 13. V.. CI 1 r•I 2 MI -42 I. 12 .4e1 cl 4-4 7 0 n .0 a . a ;
73 Z 0 C Ca 01. 4.1 mill 0 , 0 0 r- ;-4 0 131. :2 (i) 33' 0 ,.0 I- •-! , i'
VI -4 •••• (n -41 C./i f A 7 04 0 'la rn i w) a 3.! n
Cl) 9 0. ..il 0' .r7 C) . 7:12 -4,
. 0/). ' -4 -r 1 ,*-. 2
0o• 0 I2 2
2rn' '0 •-•
1
7 r- 01 .
-• -• . Pi
, .
• ,
. i
o.
• . • 9
.
. 9
I
• r.Do
.0
73
,....
1
. :30
. . •-.4
• ,.. I
r-1
7 CI
,
L G
r
. I ('I
. • =
. . ••• 1 70
a ••• ;'..4 ' Oa Ir. 02 U1 iv 4-• .....- , -0
• • • , 1 . .41 04 • • • • .., • -
UI 41 1.. 0, I ui U'1 N2 1 UI -4 3'.)I ..) u•oa 1 in rn
•-• -4 ' 0 II-. , ....4.4.1i -4_4 ! I
0 n n2 10 0i a% ...(..• co :,-.0 a. 431 CM 0 0 1 -.1 4-4 U11 i n 103 -4 3:44 2
Cl . c c i 4....3 , al cz, . 0%; 4.11 . ,... Jr, if„,,,0 1,,,•1 a, 0 co 1 a •-• so 1 a• 0 t... .n 2
• • • • • • • • . • • . • • • • • • • • . • • • • ,1 • • ,• • .. • • • i • • • • • 41 •
, i
.401 M n4.:.-J3c4c-44 01 a -710.:30 = -.4i C2043 :-Ir ,21 7433CA;003N004441 4_ 4_0c3 0 .. 0 C 10 I
,-3 431 A 4:3 .0 F!r) ,..:.: ct,.-:.,J N I pj .'3.0 0.31.3 i.,4! 0 c7 0 .2 u4 .fs Ln ru -U0 0 i.•0 0 -4 I (4.2 r4j c 0 4\4 4.4 P..• A I 1
I
C- 2 2 .t•-•
, I 1 .
I .
:
I
, . 1 0 ••-•
I
[ 1 II I
. 1 2 iC . I
1
• .
It
I , 142 Irl
I
.
I 1"
I ' Ow
12'
• i In 4'ln
.
In
• i I !,;::, 1
• 1 I 173 ,, i
',0 1m
. .
. .
. 1 ,--i
...4
. [ I
, .
. ! 1
I . • IV
•-• I...
'
I
,
L• 0 •-••,..•I' . ' N.)i 4-4 1 ...,1 1... i 42 4-4 P.1,1 L01 ,I• 1•1 P. )..
I
• iv; 4, , pj -.Aid, V 4,4.., .... LAI 1.4. 001 0 ,amoi •-oP-cpwl -4 11.1430%! ...4 ow
33
I
• • i • • • • • 4 4 •• • 0 • ; 0 • • ; 4 • •• 4 I, • • • • • , • Ca • • i • 1•• • 0
.
0 4.1 4* cA NJ0 .• 0 :J11 A 4.41 0 .4.4 ,a a 0- , J., 0 0 -4 4.44 4.4 424 fa CT 43 UI 4 213 11-4 4:-.1 1.11 f a• .0. L4 13. .
U'0i LA - c.LA!,1 .
•
. ha Pa 0' c 0 c NJ 1 C L44 IV h.) U11 43 c C c,c a -4 NI 444 Ut 1 .•••••• 12 0 al i N.1 IN3 C3 .33 i
CD 0 1 •0 ..4111414 r„,n J1 0, 0 0 0 co: us Im•4./1(A (.4 1 0 0 0 0100 413(.1) 0 0 1 0 pm .30 i in I U' 0 .-•
• . ! . • 4 • .• • • 1 • • • • • • 0 • 1 • • ,• • • 1 • • • • 0 • • • 11 • • • • • 1 41... 141 • ,A• . 1
,....J ,' , CO J ..,;}01 C3 0 0,0 0 0 0:0 0 0 10 0 1 0 4.*C.0 0 I CI 0 0 Op 0 0 0 0 0. 0 H 0 01 0 'C.1 0 '-4
0 01 0 Il n 01,r3 -4 n,.:7 0 0 n'0.0 0-3 C.21 0 010 C3 C2I 0 0 0 0140 0 (3 433 Cl.31 ',., '3 0 01 0 0 0 r 1
• , • ; •
. ! 1
, . r
••••• ; 1
. ••••
Lo. 0 •.• 40.1,{i . 1 •
1 NI 1 4-.1 -4 4-4. I .0 ....NI 0 CA 1 I-.
,,,..., .0 4-4 0 11, 01 (...3 •-•i 0. 1.11 U11 - .0 CO 0 1 1 0 0 0,. ,3 a% o•i 0' l0 a. m i
. . . . . . . . . . ,, . . . ,,. . . , . • 1 ... I. 4
V 4I i 1,3 L4 Co 1.7%!Co. , P., 03 A !CD 141 ON 4.11..cn ull P. 1N3 P AIM 4, Ln Ni Ca :73 Co I.- uk Iro,o ; ;1„,
CI C3• -••• 2•• -4 Co -4 Chi CN pa .-4 444 4.4 4.144 0 01 lip 4... ...4 4.44:3 4-• oa .11,1 -4 'N)0:0 Cm 4. 10 CO 19.... 'on
ca• ..-:, -4 pa.--..Ln . 0' (A , .3 1 Ul 0,1 ,41)414 1 01, (..4 444 4 -1 ... ul -4 10 00 40 NJ 1 P. 1.43 P..... .4 ,03 Ca
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ,• • • • • • • ; • • • • • •. • • • • 0 i• 4 0 1 II l• • '-i 0. 1
0 0.....4...i.1*0 10 ci i .4.1 0 40 p.)- I.3 n2, ..0 g0 na Ul I .... 70 `J..(..•!.:3 0 .1.1 Ca .4(-11 1 -4 14-4 4-4(Ill a 1 UI 'J C. 1 .
,9 00 „,,3 ,..., -. ..,4 10,-n ;,, ,c, 4...j .... ,'/1 rsj 0 I.= 001 C. 4•0 ...3 LA 1 A -T, 1.4 NJ if"n (.111n.-4 0 I 0 '1403 in .-..1 UI Ito)LA lift 0 1
1 i 1 ,
I 1 1
I
, 1 ,
, . i 1 ' 1 1.1 I I ' P 1 1 .
, • i
• , . 1 i
i ' (A
, .
. . .
' 1 ,
• , 1 1 , 1 '4; t31 I
C
, 1 1 i rn co .
•-• 0 , ,,,.03 (Al 1..•1 P.1 •-•, , •••1 1-4 1-.1.. 4-4 TV; La '••••N) 0 1 .‘ ' '••••
. . 7,"1 . • . . • • • ir • • 1 • I• • • i • C i 1
0 4- uri 0 .0,c.,1 U11.0 031 LA 4211 1‘3 '01 p3 n.)4-4,UI 44 4.4,0 c..4 a,4 cD LA 1.. CA 1 13 .4. CA
U1 1 73 a 41 4-3 - Lil "Am ill
P.2 ,7,N2 .., .•CO,..4 P. ,31 U) r- ....1 1-4 00 Jpin3 CO 42, ON 'Ln 0%Col .4 1(.01 I.+ MI i
.47 NI -4 12 0,-4 , Is 1 ,... •n I co ,M 1.12. .-•. a% U1 t r-. ...0 .0. -.I 6.- a V!.= CI (04 i.41,{)r) •••• '-1 al ....I -.I :<A•-•
• • ' • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • '• • . • • A. • • • • • • • • • • • .o ' • • • • , • • • t• I i
N) t..11 LA 01 A CD,3 0 ,..43 i 0......1 43 AA (7,164 -Ai i P.2 C.44142 -4 0. 4-* -.) 0 (A,0 0-4.0 Nj ..11 1 -4 43, C.4 i 1.11 ,Us 11-1 Z 1,77
'.I' -4. .-• •'-' ;.A -4,0 •-2, -••,, 43;, .47 ,, •-)N) 01N) .o, 0 3'i,3 .- -414 0 -1 1.4 PJ CD 0 010,0 a' 03 0 Ln ).-! La IN) .. el 1. I
I , I ! ,.. . I 4 4 I 1 I I I . 1 I P1a
•-, -4. .. , • •-• ..- •-•I 4.4 1 •-•. .-. 1 P2 1 0, !'71
0 0' 6.43 ,41,47,..4.7 0! .4.3 Q ' ,..0 1 Cr, -Ii(.3)4.0 •
43 4:7 42 ,C1 NJ-a' CI i .0 p.'. C3 i -4 01 43 10 33
0.-2! 0. , 0 44).0. a'. 0 -4 --.1 N)r 144 431C, 1.7, CA I Cl .o-•• -I p... (33 1..1 N3 1-4• 02 .17 0 0 1 Ul !03 0 .
• • • • • • . . • • • • • • .• • • • '• • • • • . • • • ,• • • • • 1 111 • .3 I 1
0 0 IQ,.42 ,...., ...., ,-. .cys IN), p,,) 0,..,1-.1,- 4,3 ,;0. 0 ,.. a•-•,-4 41-.1 i , .;,), P. 33 C3 .•%. 0 ',VI C.•4 n i
1 I ..',
1
I ! i
' .
I i
t . • • 1 ! !
1 ,
. , I
1_ )
''.i••••••l' ::1,i4: 2 :i ,P t >' ,.1 15- 4; -. . 1.1 :, ..! : t , i•,. , t• :?, r-i 1 ' ;4 e, ..;-::', t' :: "•:; 11' 's;'2"---..,.,, ,‘,,77,-a-u . 0 .i3O.7.'r-C"---i'.:!;,:.,,' ...-
.. -
_ ,
1.��� > f]'7 J ..t j a J V •1 J f U l J J V 1:'' ' V I P 'S >•U .J 1 1
�l . I i
i i t
ass•O i,al b b ,n ir•.
• •I .n .0..a.41.01.0 to s C 143 •
. * .O ,t)V33 Oa Dila N A Z W j
• -. o.v r-01 O u A 0> 0
0A 4
0 n r.•-4N .0
z71= 33 . I
-11 o z n,2 min ri z .. 1
1 f !
-ri z c x'r'-Ill A t -I r.. 1.4
I , 33I ..1.-Cil N Z12 -. 0 I 1
2-.f O1n -/ rl G7. 10
1 mI r1 0 -I N!2 n 'N nr 1� i
1 r f XI 'i b o 2 n 2
; '}1 i 'L7 2 0 t 7i; i•-4 n .A rq IN 1
C; r1I A 71 lc')r1 -.A ;2 1
I Z. Z -t L in 13 n ID
0 0 r,1 ti r -n r 'Mc j
! I Ar f�1 In •
• I -1• -1! -41 '0 9 0-n.. l '
n, C f l a r1 2 C. 'r1 1
N1 1 ,y
f ; r" I
•
1 .12
i '
f
A
! 1 m, I 03 Ix
1 o 1 .0
I
' I i u i N G b P>2
• • • .• • • • • 1.4 y-
. j r' tit 0 0Ica ON1 0 0 ,C0
yl V 0•7 IO-o .. 0 u 1?
I ! II 0 -•
1
I I y I
I<2 rs
I 1 n
r -
ro
i •
` 1 y
I I .n
.o ;'o
u
1 0 0 i !
1 r" 17
I
� j rl Lit u i 0. V
01 1.41 a f o 'R
O1 f o 0 i o
1 i O• j 0 o 0fO'O-"7 0 0 -4
..711 c o.n10,CM 0 o 0 I..
j 2
, .
I I
I 05
I AI b
1 0 I W r j + 1. k:
• 'e
, co! o w Iw.-.a— n
I . , b! (n -r-•olu n-/ !N
wi 0' d > CA 3301,-. 'A'
I i • •. • • • • .• • :..1 0 '0
i ! 41 0 aou U
lI vw o ic 1-n II
0•I 1.11 0 ' L., v u1{U O '2
2 ', !
1 -I
�1 �AI, �•
CO I U11 .- col 1-.. b 1 U
0. 1 n
•7l b -1 -J 0 I W .Z7
O▪tf t010. ,-01f..1 -1!•-55 o z IV
.0! UtI o 0 -.r Ul 1I1 0...J n r1 '7
•1 1 j
i -I (A
I I
....‘,........3, /
N J 0 a , -a ? . J • N ,21.7.!
N J) J ] J P 1] i Ul O V P A i W N'J,P' _J •
o.N<.«.C,.o..,C,.C. .•,
or ,
!V ? UI ♦ VYIY . • • ♦ ♦ N - ,A'I. OJOY N UNN IN NN ) ® '
P I Y ♦ U ♦I Y - NJO
O b U N NY O J O Y ♦ y N - . b J" b Y ♦
U U:.1 4 4 4 CAU 4 4 4 4 U 4 u 4 4I CA Co u 4 4 CA 4 U :A 4 4 CA 4.:s 4 4 4 '1 4 4:4 U 4 • LA A 4 M
Ut Ut Ut N Ut U1 Ut:(n C.t N ()1 ... 4 CA 4 CJ CA 4 (r 4 4 4(A-4 4 4 •. • 000 A.0 1
(J G .7'0 ♦ 0 ! 4 4 4 4 N N N N O 0 .7 J • 4 4 4 4 L.4.4 4 4 4 r I..r r • N N ." n 2 II
'A 1 ,n O L.N r A .J .n -1'• • AJ a N r 0 4 N r C .O z• -1 3' • J) a -. .1 U..» 4 N r 0 CA:a 4 N •• • ,N C).•. r, C) t
0.-
01 3 N p 69> J m m .-. D n N :7 "] N D r :1 0 o 41 n CJ Z 3 I : N m 0 C 2 la 0 V O 2'.(1:77'O r -1. '1 q n C- n
-1 -. Cr DtnrL2 z J A 133 -ti -tC --, -( D - n . 0 o -. -.rm .*1mf C00.-.. ..r'1.-. a,. .' nm zo ..
A.(/1 A s. r rn b 17 Cl •C z > C C r b -.rl < D : u 1 r't 3 o n - m A ill )C r n C•-• J C9 Cn:1 Z('i 0 )(',, (n r Z --1---•. -a
mnG -. m.' Z • 12 ^, -17-. .- -1-- -4D . 11 .-. m mmnllr-x- ri na0M = ;C n . • a, •t
01 .- m cA 61 z '❑ z -1 . n '1 n r r m n n t 0 0 r z • ,n - A,1 x.. J3o r •:. 7:0•J O 0 D a..
1 -( I :) N n G7 :'1 m .-• 0 'J -t :'t 2. I^. T .. -1 rl (.4. -. A -0,2',.J... ..... i''t r A r A r 01-,.17. O
'1 n -n Z Z a•n < cn -[ S m n 0 V n rlt 1- in 2 ,-. e. r„-•7! T. 1a in 7) -..TO ... A-'1 0 m '11
M )3n ^ 14m24 ,7CM -. ?• S )r rn IC O mr ... 730 ;1O2 rn 4Cln 1, CI C•)r' mCa nr rtO < r).-2'>`.
^t.O .. '1 1 2 n '_7 .-. Z A . -+ .: -•1 1 G M D A D • A :) - G 17 D Z 1-D r .-0: 00M111 11:11 A.:I N
-113n ; s. - 7(m (:: ). 1. • o D • 3 -1 rn z D D 3 r•- 1 (n r D •.r 7 ,r1 0 D z n 0m ..A
D m n z r Gl ,'1 -r .. n -+ 2 A • Z .7.-. t O.2 r'1 Z ? -.ti, ..1 1•i m g r .S N) m -'J 9 1 'II'b P
-. A X t .)61 71 -n -. 0 z :7 D n L. ... 7 N A 1 A C .. .1 1q..11 A 1)(• 0 1.1-.r-a r7 2 -yr- X
3 .-I 4 < .'1 M 1'1 1A'U G N.. n ..n. d •1 2-+ m t'i 07,'t a P1- 2 -+ 00r."0 .4 . -t :1 O
-< 11 D P. m m i'1 0 r1 r D 2.. .-. AZ 2I A: .. 0 J m...-(1 (A(-'1-.. 01 0:-1-- Q
mu ".7 A 2 .-./71 .-. -. C'7 Cl 0 t. .0 U -C -' -. r^. Z2 ,) -.. 1 A Z:'C' m
A 1.1 1 (7 :J -1 ('t U . )' A •.l 0 ..... 7 .0 .-. 1 0-0004 1...M0 •-. D A 11
nt ,1 m : C - 1 D a C m m .-. -0 --1_. CA .-.:.Pt I" Y :9 .J'.:.
2 0 m n '1 r'1 O r• co z › A D 0 M3:103 69 m n-o r- V7 m Z
-• 2 A r'1 11..9 'J Ll -J Z D :2X (A m M1
D C L(,'1 111” O -.17 PC -. n
-14 (/) N •
-
V) - - -4s• V/ 0 m
•
rl
V).
-4..
In.
m
C.
m n:
C-
I 73
..K.1 _ ro A
Cl
N a C) .D .O .8. (1 NU -4i Imoa N
C) C r._O Q' .7 N N co, I-O a N N d A LA N a,•O .f D07•
4.7 cA .,0 N 4 N A •-. r 1.a O -1 O -1:V1 4 0 J' Ut.a-C O n C
1 • C. . • • .. ., • . . • .. •. •.. •, • .. .. • . -..-1..
.:1 C •1,.. .-:IOM L). -, •J . 9 = •:.) (3 () Cl C J O m tJ C) ) N G . ,-30 0 0 0 O O v 0 C)G C 0 O - O O .1 C m
_. .J.. C.. C) •.1..: L.11 .1 'D -1 ,. .: ,').) ,) •., ) 1..1 .J .0 '>. J G 0 ,400000000000110 O 000 7►'
I I I I r 3., 2
o:. C
T. m .
-4
.c.=. M
To,
Z
.! O
M I
A
V
> .
l0 N I---,
0` n
)•)
V U)I{J 0 •I-II N I--N W r •. N W N y.
I-, 4- r- 0U-00 00 00-1 o .•rr 0 -- WO'0 ' . '0 • W -.
V
�)Y No .v1-.) OVoo� in wow 0 tv l,). •P-• r VIOL...) 000- .�..' co m
0•V10 •00•000 r 0000 O'OInW O• In 1n00• 000000OD• N •• v m
0•00 .00.000 .L� •P..00 0..0N O. O 00010 00.0 000 000 0
. . . . • . • . • . • • . .. •, •• • . . .. ... •. I • • ., • • m
17 •l • •1 •) .7 0 c) •.l .7 - 0 1 ,1 •7 LJ Cl n 0 ,7 ().J C) A !'J ,1 C) . •-) 0 .9 r•)0 0 0 0 U 0..3':] a7 O C):; Cl O 'J2'
L)..l .. ) 1 .'l r)..) ..) .. . :.7 .l -1 .7 r. J 7 0. .1 0 .'1 0 -) 1 .7 (3 ..) .J "a 7 O.7 •3 .l ,J ,3 r7'.0. 7 •- rJ... ,.) i :1 C
I "1
I v.,
1
rr N i N
N .-- N a Cl 0 .0. 1.0 Ut N U1 1 r'.D N
G o r 0 J' Q N. I N 1A r O A N N O 0 Ut N . O. U1 �•-b_ N
.J 4 c.1,4 .O N L.J r .� 11 010• ..4 .41.4101, 0 .0-0 0 • • n
• : : :: ;:
laCl1 T:: T: : T::DrJ I,) N N Im O 0 p'
-. I LA'0 N 4 N -, 0 -43 10114. •4J`.cA a•u 'J ••••
J U 1 •) W A r) • 1 a :)• •) . .J O.-1 • •)IJ•J) ..) •-) •J .,1 'a •) ..J A J 0 A A J :AIU ..J (J •.) r, an - 7 :7 7 9
) .) .• . .. ) .-.•1 )n ) l .0 , 1 ) ., �w .) _. l ..1 i 1 J . a_ 1 .l 0 :7 0 M •7 V •")0 :J l .]' 7 7 J n D
f I
- I N .... Y, �r.l•
' I . -I -I . e J 0 M • V N
..::: : rJ, °roa ,, ,.,T. . .,m,o Y - uiu ". - . _ •i•,?. y . "_Y 4 " 4 Mi'_' _ . . .
. . .
.1.... . ,. .. _. n .l �.. J
_ =MT".'"'"-r.,.."..."..221EalttiZreeSSEME=1........ao...a.'1/41/4 i•la.A.....e..-...n.............t=•71'-'
0 ( -. • -.1/4 ''.• .... .1 ..-.. ....
'-
, , , , & &
I g g 1 g g r.,I.t g O 0 J 0 tt t 6• P• t 0.1'kg 1. t4 CI tl 'Id:1 OL: t '6' : 7 7, : :1 7. t.' Z 7 g ; ; :,-, ;i- - - - - - . e -4!
V • 1.1,..) ..• (..!
1 1 Cod (...) '-)1(..) L4 G.1 0 0 0 LA 0 0 0 0 0 GA 0.L.1 G.4 0 0 0 1...Go L.... 0 6.1 /1 ..
I . .0 .0 0 .2.KZ 13 :0 la --i -a 0 0 Lrl 0 1.31 411 u1 U1 U1 0 U1 0 ul(.11 Ul 0 0 s.C ..0
• ‘0 0 ...11 ,....I ru for••••.4 .0 /...,•-•.a. .ar• -13, 4. Go 0 IV 1,..1 I'V AA I.)Ai r, 2 02
1.. 4-1 1-' , -3'-0,.0 1,-1 ..-1 •-• •-• Cl 0 A.)1.-• Cl J( . I.A.Cu•-• Cl -.4 0 4. LA l',/ <-7C)
Cl 0 ,-• .,
I
,0 Z ,-. -77 -0-..4..-. .-. a :,1 CI X En ›, co '> -n 'I `J :=ri in -n (.1 ..2 4 ri) C Cl
1-4 11 0•-••-• 0.. .3 0 ..... .73. •-•.-11 Z Z --.J -.
II' vl cn -1 m <r- .0 -.. ...1 "J CM a••••• 2 C).. :-1 .7777CulZZ77 r• cil rl a -4.-- -I
n n • c z a I.*,c 01 > -n a n m-4 c4) -4 rn V1 2...nr) .-) .-.. 1,1 (1 0 i.. ....• -4
Q "4 Z .0 f-- GA :0.-4 .. -4• :2 (...1 0 1/4, 1/4, • 1,1 ..Z • 0
r- no2,-. 0 -..:120 -c 0-• Ca 7- rl (") 0 Ll Ca 3 --.3 ,1 r, 0) 0
:a r- r-in ,1 0 'II-.I 0 en in ,a Z-.4 z r- n -T1"r1 C.1 Gn -n x c A V)r4 '4
.4 au. Z -.1 -. 0 Cl Cl C:10 -• -• -4r-r1Q... ... -...1 • -. -e n z
,--. :0 --, 0 CI r) .1.0 ..2 * 0 r-r4 r-,-) 0 3>0 C .. 0 1.•rn (1
.7; 1'1 Cl ...t 37,-. IP n o c r-r- ,41 4-1 ,a rrt(/)vi .--• z z-. z r. x ... < -. 73 X
7 7 0
(n :0 -.C. -4 0 ii r- ,:, .-n 1 x rn n Cl 0 0 - 0 0 Z 3.. -0/.... 2.
0 C C .1 .0 r11 -4 21 01 r- -I(-•0 -ri..1 -0 e• 14 14 1 1 14 0 7 0...- --4f'. 7C
Cl (/1••• .-. D. Cl Cl ,-) • 2 rn 0 -4 Cl fl 2 11 r....Vs •-• Cl
--. v) Z -1 -0 0'1 -rt n .. ..3 C/1 :t7 r4 0 T1 01 ...... 0 -.-r11 0 0 'l '7
•-) til cz rn XI -14 Cl•-• 0 14- 1 -' la, -)...r"0 0 7 -0 'C 7,.-...- rn
, (I C -n 0,1 .-.:: z .1..,) n o(A ia.2 7o ci r n < .. 2 .1
-. II Cl 2) 7" Ea rri Cl .-3 ,..-4 .4.• .-4 .0 Cl
r- -.1 V) A ri -4 v 4.1 -0 C0 ,-. Cl CI
en
r Cl In 7:1 .., t- af Cl rn m
m X -4 C-1 -4 ri
re i 4 .4 ,1
rn Z -r4
'-'-C
•
•
1,1
- 0•
-4
•
0:f
C')
, <
4-1
z
a
v C
79
.o :0
Lr. .
--4, P-• •••4 P• .0
- .. .. . ..., ..• 01
0, CA sO Lit I-.• Cl
--4 (..i CJI s.0 .... Cl 0 0 I a 2.7
Jr .c• 0, 0 .- .0 -•• 77 .. Cl
• - - - - - • • • • • •.. 8, • • • • • d• • • • • • • • • •
,il .0 Go ....1 1-11 0 r3 0 0 0 0 U1 C 0 0 40 ,... .3 C) Z,J%4:5 a., 0 0 r_, 43 0 .-. .0 C ."11
CI in. n‘:.1 ..9 0 0 CV 0 t) .-3 .,3 0 C-1 0,:., 0 0 0 0 o 0 ,..• .-..1 0 ,0 0 AS 0 0.
I I I I I i r- X 7!
•
•
I .
n
•
•
-4,
-F-- •• 1--. • is.) .- .--. --
00 •• %.0 •%.0 ui-C--.- In
V V V V V V v • Vo V
.g.. .0 (:)t-. 0 (:)ro u) Olni‘,..) r.) c:).g., ch ,CL
a .0 0_04.0 CoC:p 40 000 OH og o Cl
• 0 .II. e. L., 0. 0 0 O • 00 0 0 •0 g 0 <
• . • . • • 4 6 • • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1, • I 4 Cl
Cl '3 0 0 .0 0 0 0.3 l., .;).D ,.1,.3 C, 0 0 0 ,i cn 0 :1 ,, 0 0 0 0 .3 Z
0 Cl 0 ,I .7 ..7 .0 a .7 ...-) .z ,...7 -3 ...1 0 0 1 ,3,.0 0 0 0 0 (.0 0 0 .3 0 c.
1,1
.4
C')
a
.-•
‘fi -4 * -4 a 4.. 73
Ics -4 (.4 .0 I
. . . . o ....
,..
:: 0 0 '43 Cl'.0 .
X.,...4. 0
.0. a' .0 ,..• XV•4. 0'.
..•e . - - - - - - . • • • • . . • • • lb 4., IV. • • • .11, 4o, $. • •
IX LA 0 ,J1 0....• 0 ....•-• 0 LI) 0 0.... Cl ....• 0 0 co 0 0 0 0 O.-0 0•••• 0 ,... ,I
Cl 0 0 Sr ) .:.) ,-1 0• 4) 0 C0 0 00 .:3 ea ::3 la .a •:. a NJ •=./...) , 2....
I 8 i i r---0 4-
D i
C.... .
o .
I
I .-
I , Cl I-4 r• V .0., b.*
. .• . . .. <
1
0' .9 CA .0 Lt%0•-• Cl
1 -4 0 tri Q.) , ra,0 .:.3• a 23
I .2
I•
.2. 0 ....1
• • • • • • • • :" .0 a 01 o
• • • • • • • • 8 • I • •-.. • • • .••
>
/ t '..11 c•A .1 Ui J Co .-1 .a • ../ .J1 .1....• .... a a ..a 1.0 Z 0
I .-• J 5, 49 -1 .) • ..I , •-, a .) iia 1 I • •-) ..... La ....1 .1 .1 s.1 4) ...")IN,) 3 Cl o
I
1 I I 1 I I r4 0
Cl
f .0
I n
-5 rJ
I ,
I I I I I
. ...1 .: ,.1‘. 1.: : :?• : :1: :: .ti: : : :Ir. : ::':?. : t.: .; • •'' ' . •''' ' ' '''-r-- - Ictl :1,4 ,1,:!:r..,....1g . . .1. .. .,.. _0
.,,,, ,,, ••• - 0_0 9 . 9 •., 4 1. ... - .--- . -- --....-- ---- -16 y.......".
,-.-- 2
was I-a.w.o..c 0071
dr ( ,.
14 4 4 4 4 41 4 4 A _A •I • ► A y y yI g ti y y Y yy N N N N N1 N N N N N
O 4 ♦ Y N O WI Y V P Y A UI N - O O p VI p Y > y N - 0 0 p V O 4 • Y N 0 a a J O Y • al N O W 0 V p Y •177,7
•: a • a A A • a a a a A • A a a A as-.A A A A A a a A a a a A a A ► a A A a a -a .2 a a a -71 V
• W • W W C... ► W W W W(A • N N N NNN N N Na N N.N N N N NNN N • .'-.-•.4.4 .4 ..+ .+.+ .+r b:C. 142
a- (.) • .NNN • - 0-..-3.•••••• r • (71 U1 a-04. aA W W W u-,1 NNNIN.NN.. • (,TUi(n a a 41. 44 W .-.a C) 2 Ip
•-,. J • N.+C) • UI a N .+V • r 7 a W.:N.+O A W N :-+:J UI a :a:)0+CD O * N r. U N .+ C)N.41 N -0 r7,...1
O
-Ir. .q 41 O -r 13 'O O-O rn a r" CI Cl•A.+ Cri CA'.13 A C Cl G C 01 N N C1 2.()C) Ca - - C:.IG 2 'O 7 -0.44 U) O G1 C Cl
A:' 2 O rn r'1:] a -4 r- C,^I C. -r.4 n 47 C)b c -r :-3 r1 r a 3 a.4 C7-.2 r'i i 'i 2 O /'1.^1 in '''1 rn a < D 2 '.:1 -4
q:: n "r r-r'cn o 11. c)O C) -0 c1 A Om..-• Is.-. z -r r1 C'7. 11 Cl-r.r'1 2 '1 7) rn 44 C. a a_ a:.4 -- rn r -4.+ -4
4: G 3 ..I'1 -• -11 I)2-• .. l• C '-+ Z C.r:)O r 1 .• 0.1 r- ri -.O-Z.(1.• N 2:7f-r 0 Cl D..rT1 2 ."C a -• -4
rn 0 ) C C'O ? rn c.7 2 -0 r r. C U) n 2' :C • CI .. O r -ti r 2-•:0 Cl O -2 Z --1.4 .. ;O 2 -r .0 O
r" r- r'1 2 to U) .4rn .4 .-. T O Orn.Y Z V) • r`3•. -{ -• C) a r1 2 r-rn S O L.,4... .a rn C C)
9'O rn (11 V 2 rn T Cl) rn 2(n 2 U)r).2 D -4 (n rn a.X'-4 7. 7 .r Q J..Z 2 2 2'C-1 Z:l N-C) 't
31 !) .4 2 .+ C)n D ('•1 (/) C7 -t -4 : 1W :1 -• -< .•-Co O rA C1'C r N r -C G0 CO rn Ln (A el'Cl(n rC1 2
XI 1-1 D C] 11 DD A0 2 3 -6 r•1 -. Ot 2 Z'. C7 C 1 I''1 U) 'O C a 1 1 in 1 I 0 I- )
-• N 11.. 2 .4 G 1•... 2 .• G A.•3 A r- -.I)a -.1:;2 r O -air- C ') (n :'t C)r n1 -n I. y1 '11 ...
Da 2
A rn a it Cl 2.. -4 11 r F.2..C..4 = r'1 .-.. -1 1)r1 (n C 13 m 2!:.C?... I-•.. 11:.:.. C C -0:.C n
A 1- • CO 11 r -. ZG) -4D 22 C'•. 1: r A 13r C -r:3 -1 33 Cl 1.15rr -•r x
(n 2 < (Al (n rn PI •n 7 -2 -4 : r)r 3 -. : C -.Ln .2+' r.-. G )1('1 rn v -4 7f r C- -4
1 v) •+ V) I") P1 N 4) "0. • .:) A •. A (n 1. 2 • 71 J• A 01 • •-•1'I --4 rl •. A Ca 11 +
n. .r1 A A r1 m -4 .• .- n rn Cl n r'1 r rn'/1 n -5.•0.. -1 -• -. 2 C r1
... C 1'1 2:. a 2,-. .0 10:A IC C C .(/) 1':.y.` .•.- 2: C'I
Gv vG A n M s. : 1- .d 9 C.rR C. C",4 1, 'tt'in.N r Z Z Cl
..41 C). C).• (1). -4 r -4 N • -.5.4..;.'O Ln .-. C • C C .. C1 01
,1 n1 1,1 n (41 n rRm 72.b-.rn 14 .-.. a a s
CA .A 0 rI Z r :0 r -
• D N 3 C) b C' .l
,1 .••A .-r D. A Ill Ti. 2 Z
J2 C' (-) .J.... 2 Z Cl () 1
r C> ..a C. -) -4. )' r'I
al 0:4 2 in
A.:
0;
a
•0
7:
.•
n
-4
C)zn
C
m
a,_
0 x
O (04 Q` :0
.+ r .0 W N N a. .+ .+(J 0
I • s-.• • ..) • • •. I+1
a.. a 11 S J1 - C' 4-'- F. T N CO UI N. CO r a7 C•1
C, :.4 a A C) a a O (fl Cl a N N h+ O -a- r.O J q' 2
,A .0 . •
:n Q1 . : N; ,. o • . `0 N N :0 r -J. C4 y O Cl 2
♦ •> • • • • • • a- • • • •. S. •: • • • • ••'•': • • • • • • • •. • • • • •.- • •
Com
V 4A r.. T G C)G J C1 W CD C) J C) 2,23 0 G 0 0 0 4214:3 O C) C) .`7 a J ...D O.O C-. ,3 N.:C1-/C) N C. J
m_ J. i1 '=) CJI -A -d d.0 O :) J 40 L- c) •7 :7 G O u O .'l«.c).,31(3 O(= O.'"0) a U) UI u O r i.1 U .+-C -1 N A T.
0:. -1
2: C
-4 DO
<'2 I1
A,
A
P.O
a . A
Z:'..
t-): r1
r1
no
0
10
O A
y
r
+ a
na .. .1 1)
.• r -4 A r N (04 U1. r.N r 01... (.1 o W a •' W 01 A .0 0
'a ,JA 91 N W v tJ u v A N -J a .• Cr).0 r W N UI N N O A N N N 01 A'.0 V(D CA Q
C. G •) UI U7 Ln 43 .a UI -1- •-)•J O CJI O a'O.+r a U1 N W,-1 UN W a1 -1 :D N r. r V H C
c7 a OJ1 (:3 N .4 .4 u O N Cl J O Cl Na a-O -JO a 0 004.11 W r aW O U1. O NN 3")+'.
n C) C).7 Cl O' c0 O O. Cl.7 21 o U1 O O.(j1(a O O O C3G0O O O O N0 U1' Ca.a UC ^•'
• •) - i. • • • • II • • • •. • • • l•.. • •
` • • • •. R • • • • •a • ••: • • _•: • • • • •' • • • I•-
.'d ':J ")O C) o 00.J J O O' CI o r10 U CI J O O O.0 0 0 430C2 Ca O O o .7 0 0 CO 0 0..000 0 1
J C. .. C.) C.o C: C ra C) ) G 0 a .) 0 0 O O:a (5 J G "1 O n 0 0 0 O:O C) O .7 O n J Cl 1-1 o O r7 O O,
y-41
0+ C.
O W (71
.0 WN NA' rrW X)
d. A .J1 S C T 3-.. • 4- O, N.'.b U1 NI ;D:.+9 7
6 a .1 Na r o A_ r .a r a--i; 01
.0 O a a u A ( . 1%1 a .O N N Cn r v a (4.4
: " W : O C)
• • • • . 0 • • • • • • • • • • II • • • •'
•
a) .2 I-• G).+0 Y1 4. 0 GJ u UN W 1_+ Ca V 0 Cl.V(J .3 0 ClQQJ Uu v V)LI A V C) O v o W IN) 0-.4 T N C-
: Z1
C) :) Ll '3(II .7 -1 0 J.(J '1 -4 .a'S: O ::) O C) O C) G O '0)0:)O Co O .>CZ O.C)A.UI UI ,3:n... p .7 .4,7-1 N a C'
r-,i
a. 1
w
w CO
N ,O .4 1
I4-41 r V A: r N W .0 W r W Q1., ,0 W ('1- (1
-4_. -4 UI I N W N ca c) (.) .0 JI -1 .a, r O1,0..-...rp N (.t CJ)ni Ir A N Na+ (T.4 W. (7 -4 a
Ul l JI
art 3 O ±") 7 UI .7•-C O' Jl0'c1 c)r a .!I Na O V N Q1 S NO 2 J CO N t l'A D.
.O Oil n N Ln N N J ,A Q1 .J o40 C) N l a Cl .r Cl n r) O 7...A O (.r r.-• O a r a) U1 Un 7':
.. ,..0 .O .n (J U1 ) 2 .r ) •) '3 M J1._)::) N -. ) ) C)r) Cl -4 •I • N C ..) 0., .0) . C1.N N .+.
• • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • _ • • ♦ 2 1)
N.. Na ) (l',)) r] W O O .l J W 4* . .J J.J 4) ):a J .� v,_ .., J :l U1 r.) J i_' ,0 L) .+ y!-) AJ W ti
c:
c • c)a .:..J1 :f 0[1 43 (0 J ,O r.) W a) T 17.. a
t.. U) -J.:1) :-) (r. J )fit N . .. •J ... . _ c:J -):3 a �1 rn ,1
r1
..
sa
U1': JO ). a N J1 .0 ,.01 .J 01.. r:
.+ V A .4r r •-• .0 r 70 •0 .1) J 0` 4.N W -. • .... .-
(:4_41 • 31;12 4 PIP V pP 3:3318:3 V p 44PY 33 3 J O U IAU N AIO x Q V y 1 ylEyy vi WJP Uig Y NNO WWVI...Y N--?_:_',.L..4• I•yY ":- _i\-_
- /
_ 1
rV MI • ul4 O O 0 .•i :It a U N _l�IO O p u a+U N =14 O O14 O u, : u N N O O w V .1. • .1 . .. O O w c1 Y -lc N
a,:ala a ally ♦ a a A-a r a Aa a A •_ N
.D .p .D .D V I(T * UIt. ?,.A a a s ►: a co a A A`a A O F A a I '71' r-.
CO CO CO D -.''-. • H.�. r .-. ! �;) (3 N .+n. ! 0 4 J .D O • U (.4 U U.CLA U U U U • U C., U r U)(A T C .O
D C)r C) .,Q I CA N • C a N .. '.) A A A 00.M V V 6V-. V •, f O 47 ! .6-. U1 iC 'Z '
-+ nAsro n onnfl ro a • xnc n or- o -) c m � J
b n r .1 :11� a -+ n n a z Z r' C a S�a r G) L 2 ;� .. 1 7 *] i C n -
X -rn 172 C 1• ro D. C CCr-. CJ -4 C "1 aIC.2 as ar 2 1'171 '1 - C Tv
'l i'1 C C) Din u C1,,,-...4 (n n IA 3 z r7_i C o n 'l z r -'1 * I IC C.7J-1 C n C - O z ..a G1 -1-F+ .41
v)/) ; ...,*-... -) 4rC(1 -, 7CC ,1 r -. rt7 i (1 C ro 2 Za �.,.
o a z .•q a 0. .0. -0. z rI„• H,.Ln Z m `4.. O n .-..-. . 1 73 n . y..; -. (_ .pl
-4 ,12.7 - G, r .-. r r r r 10- 2 C C 2 V) ?a A -• o f'1 C('1 o a x a'. .o „y,
n O 2 -. Z 1 ! a r^11 -. C n G1 @• 2 H. C 7 2 2'.( r C 2'. r Ga 7• Z Z Cl z T
:e -) ', 1 1 .D C o rn c a ,C (O-.. 07 c C Cl 'D -c c1 z r� n n r ::� : cl o =I-1
1,) r 1 4' 't C C 'l C;. ...1.v) r C :K D. 0 n L) 7 n < -417 "1 -' Cl ?. C H. „, ,'7. 1� (n
C C C'G I� o 0 -y - a 7• a=C •-a
M -41>
3I< C C -. r-.C I0 Z rn cn ., 3 n N ?C fes, .. 17 C r V1 rn < 0 ... n �¢ :.4....
z ls A y n C z n Cl n :"1 .1 z C x) .• -1/ y - : Z n o CI • r i in r CI
a C 7 .. Q. ti a s 3. gal r '1. r`l -4 C 1. A .... tn C 'C C rn .3 O
'1C 0 •i�'�L Mn n Imo.... C. 0 r1 1 11 7 2 33 > n r 0 2 C p C n' M - Ir C rn
1 X 1 0c Cl ... k. ( ;'0 In '3 o :r r. -I-IC ( - :1 3 Z C 'cr. O'.
a O) ... -A Cn .n Z C) (n. n 7 z V) �
r .3 .n r r Z n .n C a - n ..
I1 1 z b > 1 -1 a vl
-i r rn• n o
z
1 C1
D..
C
V
Al
O
'4
13
D'
I -4
4-4
o-
Zn
C
in
Fs
73
H•
X
.. . V
'13 O) ul 0 (aF U /.. r'
N Cl U V N. .O U1 N:. N N N Cl
V O aZ
_ ,, • • ...a !. • •.. ‘11 .n n 2
•.a SI CD i O O C) O 7 CD O v O. O.4 O O a.C -. O .7 T Ca(1 0 O O .J .1. CD O O CI 0. O C, C7
� J N •'J r7 .) C :7 iJ.O O ') p. d'.V7.3 O Q. .J.:. O O V 0.::G):O J J J Lk.., C) O O Ci.'.: O O D.'
rC ...
O - -4
2 C
HC
62: )1
M•
7.
M
a'_ A
Z
f') -: r`)
Im
ro
C
0
C) C
-e
--4
,..
GI 41 4-• T
•- (A N -4 al u p N r• r � p. r. v. . w o C4 s UN CM r CM r w U) u) 6.(1 o A_
• • • • •I r• v . . . . - a r . . r r • . •
c::ra X' Ja U1 o N a J. C3 LA o Ca N.-. ., U. cJ --..-• a U a N. '9 CP A O).. a:v V
.l •. J O N O U) N V O o o'O C) O :7 Ca .7 U) 31 Aa N O Aw
O 4 rC o J C1 'C O p.®O U) U1 (3 C) O O O O.3 O. O .J O U)::. _no i.-t:.
• • • . • • • • •. • • • • • • • a F • V • .. •- •. • . • • • • • •: • • n.
7 :) 7•1 •.:J O :> rJ r7 r•7 r7 •7 (3 '30 .4 :7 0 O d O . (•J :] • •J 4 O r'] C) 7 O r3 O O O d O O .4
,'1 ) •> r, ] C1 ') ,7 47 J 7 'J Cl O O '.3 .7 7 O C) -3 Cl I f]
.J :7 :] .3 d C].J Cl !•) 'J C) r) ..) r7 CI: O
J
z".
644
r• 4.1
1+o a
03 I3, I
i j :9 d I f I LA U U I.•. H.. a.:--4 N
V r c_.
v Ni .17 N N N. Na
.. . u 44 . • . I• . . a -.1 CI O. V V .D: .D n
vuc;,.. a 4,oIoo .l.:) (A uv • uuo • • c • • • ♦ Ca •.. • • •. •, • • • • • • -.0:: O
? '..)N , u 1 r] ry I:�.�7 C O) .+ y♦ yr. r=l u S d U.V V u o u. 0 0 o c, u u 4. 1
•, r, 4 O o 7 'T V .7 -7 J C:a+7 C) O '1 .l ( (7:. 4, :7 rl .-7 d O a
0'
I ID. 1
U
C71 1 I 03 4-4
r... u. V .1] .D M N 4- r a I r.. - .-. V.. N O r-N. L. H ._A N r ..a in .•.
CP
LA Ji -3
N J o C) (.9 -.) '' C7 W FI C11 ? ('1 �.0 VIN U) C) ;D IO .-. V a 41) a u. V Q) -r 0,: a N C
. 1 J .., a J )I - _ Ul U ;p 7 N N I V •) o V ;.l 1 O I V 0040 to4IN N N 0 .
• 41 .44 4woo Do
_ .1 -3 •.I.) .3 .. ,(3) r c.. a _, 3.s . .,' -o•7 7 Cl a 1 ice:. to , :4 13 u r).7 a 0 .:3; 7 7 1 r3 ,-'a L ro
4 a a ca.7 F i Cei .� (..I;::, .J o .. r7 , ,3 e :.3 ,� n n.
I. i
. . I • i .. • _ 1
• .4 N
v N V �w w w UIQ w o w w Y Y Y I I I i I t
L______,_____
VaUI - O < Y Vw ♦ yN- O Ow V pj• Y`IY YY ♦ tu ♦ ♦isU UIy U, y yyryry 8N ; � � '� .Iw..w YI} 40 / I
1 N - O O�iO V p Y � O O O VQ j yiN 9 plq V O UA U N~i0 O; V�w w; UIN O ��
® NL N
p'Kl 4Ki.00.0 n.c
�Id R C yyQ •P W► V• ► O Wtl W0 WVW4 WY WN Y W0 N0 N0 VN NP YN WN_ N1 01 i
. . . . .. . .11NY + IPWJIN
N0 + + +
. ,
0 01Y • Y1N 0 0 0 V P Y 1IY0
N +
•
w. . (^).Z
• '.. n J:., -
O
O n C n
1 0 a
-•r -•
,0
f CI 0
1,1
x ,*7 n z
T - fir,}.
C mn .( a
L z t 'D.7a= D
O 0 -4 1 11X
n
C, C 7`C
y :O Z. a
-0
a
a
b
1.4
•
II
z n
C
m
0-•
sl 4-.
:.,
1 .O Cr. in
7) N 7>>Z
a -4 n Z
-.�
-• Z.") o C 0
r N o D
i
0 -1
ZIC •
<,
b
m
-a
• 0
1,
n z
h•
.J .O S
N N O A
O
A W -v
33 0 -a
• • • D
a a a -1..
C( O .71
Z
•
•
Y A
r.
.T•
43 O'`)
Q) N 74.-1:. Vl
ri -4 a
• • • -•-o o
Y. C
- N O y,.
• I--o
14.
I
z 1
j • 1••••
a r
-474, 4.0 -.r
t
W 0 W >•-
U( N 0 73
• •. •
• N W a z 7
.4a a a
,.,1.
m
•
0
-4 W
V V J J O�Y ► WIujP O ,PYNP g U'Y u•P14 0 47c; O utit, y gIA NiIN NW N 2 3 OVIPY•Y -O •• I•Y N
���,
TENTATIVE AGENDA
SHAKOITEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
i
Special Session March 3 , 1981
Chairman Hullander presiding
1 . Roll call at 6 : 30 P .M.
2 . Approval of minutes : October, 21 , 1980, December 16 , 1980,
January 6 , 1981 , February 3 , 1981
3 . Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project
a . Development of Additional Lots for 1981 Construction
Period
b. Invitation for Contractor Proposals
4. Other Business
5 . Adjourn
Jeanne Andre
Executive Director
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SPECIAL SESSION Shakopee , Minnesota OCTOBER 21 , 1980
Chrm.Hullander called the meeting to order at 7 : 10 P.M. with Comm .Lebens ,
& Colligan present, Leroux & Reinke arrived late . Also present were
Jeanne Andre , HRA Executive Director, Thomas G. Brownell, Acting City Admr. ,
Bo Spurrier, City Engr (late ) , Gregg Voxland, Finance Officer (late ) and
Jack Coller, City Attorney.
Lebens/Colligan moved to accept the special call. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Hollander moved to authorize the purchase of a lateral, five-
drawer file cabinet at a cost of $432 .00.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes ; None Motion carried.
Comm.Leroux arrived at 7: 13 P.M. and took his seat.
Colligan/Lebens moved that appro riate HRA officials be authorized to
execute the Protective Covenants for Macey Second Addition, to be placed
on file with the Scott County Recorder, a copy to be placed on file as
Document Number 3, in' the HRA Executive Directors Official Record of
Documents. Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Colligan moved that appropriate HRA officials be authorized to
make , execute and deliver deed to Lot 2 , Block 2, Macey Second Addition
to Haefner Enterprises, Inc. , in accordance with the contract for deed
between Haefner Enterprises, Ind. , and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority, for the purpose of conveying said property to authorized
buyer identified by the HRA. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Lebens moved to adopt the revised Promissory Note for Payment of
Lot Value upon Resale by Homebuyer and file it in the HRA Executive Director's
Official Record of Documents as Document Number 4, which hereinafter super-
cedes Document NuMber 1 .
Roll Call: Ayes ; Comm.Lebens , Colligan and Chrm.Hullander
Noes ; None
Abstain; Comm.Leroux Motion carried.
Comm.Reinke arrived at 7: 19 P.M. and took his seat.
Colligan/Lebens moved to approve Change Order No. 1 for Lots 1 & 2, Block
3 Macey 2nd, changing side-light from one with panes to solid glass panel
(#100) . Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Colligan moved to approve Change Order No. 1 for Lots 7 & 8, Block
2 , Macey 2nd, changing side-light from one-half panel with panes to full-
size solid glass panel (#100) . Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Leroux moved to approve Change Order No. 1 for Lots 9 & 10, Block 2,
Macey 2nd, changing front door from one with glass window in door to one
with no window but similar decorative motif (#326 ) . Motion carried
unanimously.
Colligan/Lebens moved to approve Change Order No 1 for Lots 9 & 10, Block
2, Macey 2nd changing side-light from one with diagonal panes to solid
glass panel ( #100) . Motion carried unanimously.
Proceedings of the HRA
October 21 , 1980
Page -2-
Chrm.Hullander introduced Mr. Steven Ruegg and Mr. John Mullen of Barton-
Aschman Associates, Inc .
Mr. Ruegg showed slides and made a presentation of the alternatives available
for a pedestrian crosswalk for the residents of the Elderly Highrise , to be
located between Fuller and Atwood.
The two alternatives presented for the mid-block pedestrian crosswalk were :
1 ] a pedestrian bridge to be served by either an elevator or ramps on the
north end, but only by elevator on the south end with stairs to be provided
as a back up wherever elevators are used at a cost of $170 ,000 for a two
elevator overpass or $150,000 for a one ramp and one elevator overpass .
This cost does not include any costs for acquiring needed property or ease-
ments . 2] a pedestrian island to be located between the two east/west
lanes° with traffic signal lamp units and pedestrian signals at a cost of
$45 ,000. This cost does not include any costs for acquiring needed property
or easements .
Considering the advantages in tendency to use and construction cost , a
signalized crossing appears to be the most feasible solution, Mr. Ruegg
stated, and recommended that a signalized, at-grade crossing be construct-
ed at mid-block between Atwood and Fuller Streets .
Discussion followed.
Colligan/Hullander moved to proceed with the ground level crossing and
directed staff to pursue with whatever steps are needed to investigate
purchasing of needed property. Motion carried unanimously.
The Engineer suggested looking into having the State prepare the design
and the cost of their so doing.
Lebens/Leroux moved to adjourn at 8 :07 P.M. t o November 5th at 7:00 P.M.
Motion carried unanimously.
Jeanne Andre
Executive Director
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE
•
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DECEMBER 16, 1980
Chrm. Hullander called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Comm. Leroux, Reinke,
Colligan and Lebens present. Also present were HRA Director, Jeanne Andre; City
Engineer, H. R. Spurrier; Finance Director, Gregg Voxland ; City Attorney, Julius
A. Coller, II and City Administrator, John K. Anderson.
Leroux/ Reinke moved to accept the special meeting call. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Reinke moved that the IHHA authorize the expenditure of $1135.00 for plumb-
i ng and electrical work necessary to install the kitchen equipment at the Shakopee
Senior Multipurpose Center at 200 Levee Drive and authorize the payment of up to
$82.50 for modifications to the ductwork for the stove canopy.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Reinke moved to authorize the HRA to pay to the City of
Shakopee the amount of $25 ,800.00 for property described as :
Lot 6 , Lot 8 EXCEPT the East 20 feet of the South 112 feet ;
Lot 9 EXCEPT the South 112 feet of the West one-half (W 1/2) ;
All in Block 6 , City of Shakopee , EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE
NORTH 30 FEET OF ALL THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRACTS .
for the purpose of inclusion in the redevelopment district of the
Elderly Highrise Redevelopment Project No . 1 .
Roll Call: Ayes: Hullander, Reinke, Leroux, Colligan
Noes: Lebens Motion carried.
Reinke/Lebens moved to increase the cost of each unit of homes built by Goodwin
Builders in the amount of $161.25, this increase to go to the buyer, to cover
the additional cost of installation of underground electrical service and the
increased building permit fee.
Colligan/Leroux moved to amend the motion to add that if payment of this amount
by the buyer increases the purchase price above the maximum provided in the
purchase agreement, the HRA would pay this amount directly to the builder. Motion
carried on the amendment.
Roll Call on entire motion: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The HRA Director informed the authority of the request of Goodwin Builders for
additional funds to cover sewer and water lines, water meter and state deed trans-
fer tax. A discussion was held regarding the responsibilities of the builder
and developer for these extra costs.
Mr. and Mrs. Goodwin explained that these were unexpected costs to them and they
would like reimbursement in the amount of $490.00 per unit, which is the actual
amount they will have to pay to the plumber.
Leroy Houser, Building Official, gave his estimate in the amount of $312.50 per
unit which he figured is due for extra work for sewer and water connection. This
does not include the meter, which is the builder's responsibility.
SHAKOPEE-HRA P"
December 16, 1980
Page 2
Comm. Leroux stated that the extra work for the sewer anu water connection was the
developer's (City) fault, and should be paid for by HRA.
Leroux/Hullander moved that the HRA pay to Goodwin Builders $312.50 per unit for
the units on Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of Nacey's Second Addition.
The HRA Director asked where the money would be taken from as she
didn ' t think it could be allowed as a project cost . A discussion was
held on where the money would come from and how the HRA fund would
be reimbursed . Comm. Reinke asked if we were setting a precedent
so that if another lot came up with the same problems , we would be
liable there also . He was answered that a precedent would be set .
Leroux/Hullander moved to amend the motion to add that, the staff make all effort
to acquire these funds from the grant, and if not able to do so, that money be
paid out of the HRA general fund.
Comm. Reinke stated that he couldn't support the motion if HRA fund was not reim-
bursed. He doesn't like HRA funds being used for anything else. He suggested the
City Council be asked to reimburse HRA, as it was a city staff error.
Comm, Colligan asked if we could split the cost between the HRA and the buyer.
Comm. Lebens agreed that would be a logical solution.
Colligan/Lebens moved to amend the motion to state that $156.25 would be paid by
HRA and $156.25 would be added onto the cost to the buyer.
Comm. Reinke asked if this additional amount of the above motion would push the
purchase price over the maximum amount from the previous motion. The HRA Director
answered that it would not for the units in which the points were locked.
A vote was taken on the amendment regarding the amounts of $156.25 for the HRA and
the buyer, and the motion carried with Comm. Reinke voting no.
A vote was taken on the amendment regarding the payment of $312.55 per unit to
Goodwin Builders by HRA, and the motion carried with Comm. Reinke voting no.
Roll Call on main motion with two amendments: Ayes; Hullander, Lebens, Leroux,
Colligan Noes; Reinke Motion carried.
Sharon Goodwin asked the HRA to pay something towards the title work and state
transfer tax, as this also was unexpected costs to them.
The City Attorney responded that this was covered in the agreement they signed,
that the builder would assume these costs.
Gary Goodwin stated that they could see it was a cost they will probably have to pay,
but they brought it up to recommend that things like this be more fully explained
in the future. He also said he is experiencing a problem because the city supplied
the fill so late he wasn't able to get the sod in and therefore has to escrow $2,000.00
and will also have to pay the inspector's fees next spring. Chrm. Hullander said
the HRA Director is keeping a running problem list, to help alleviate any problems
in the future.
SHAKOPEE HRA
December 16, 1980
Page 3
Gary Goodwin asked if the HRA would pay the inspection fees next spring. Leroy
Houser suggested that he could contact the FHA office and ask that he make the
inspection on behalf of FHA.
The HRA Director reported that there are faint rumors of positive actions regarding
the frozen 235 funds. She will continue to work to divert funds to the unit already
built by Goodwin and will attempt to reserve funds for all of the units we hope to
construct next spring.
The HRA Director reported on the meeting with some of the city staff and two repre-
sentatives of the Chamber of Commerce. Chrm. Hullander asked the Director to inform
HRA and City Council of these meetings so they can endeavor to have a representa-
tive at the meetings.
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize the payment of the bills as
presented .
1 . National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials
(NAHRO) , $60.00, for individual memberships for Jeanne Andre
and Richard Hullander .
2 . Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority , $542 . 50 ,
for administrative overhead for five Minnesota Housing
Finance Agency Home Improvement Grants administered within
the' City of Shakopee during 1980 (@ $108 . 50, as per Coopera-
tion Agreement of October 28 , 1980) .
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Reinke/Leroux moved that the HRA request the City of Shakopee to reimburse the
HRA for additional expenses incurred in the 4th and Minnesota Street project
due to an error in location of the sewer and water line service.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Reinke/Leroux moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 8:10 p.m.
Jeanne Andre
Executive Director, HRA
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
SHAKOPEE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Annual Meeting Shakopee, Minnesota January 6, 1981
Chrm. Hullander called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Comm. Lebens,
Reinke, Leroux and Colligan present. Also present were HRA Director, Jeanne
Andre; City Engineer H. R. Spurrier, City Admr. John K. Anderson; City Attorney
Julius A. Coller, II and Mayor Harbeck.
Reinke/Colligan moved to approve the minutes of November 5, November 18, November
24 and December 2, 1980 as kept. Notion carded unanimously.
The HRA Director informed the Commissioners that the kitchen equipment has been
installed. She has arranged for the cleaning staff that does other work for the
City to include the highrise. Mr. Bergstad is willing to donate chairs and tables
and as soon as they are delivered meals can start to be served there. There is
approximately $390 left for other purchases, such as garbage pails, more chairs
and tables, etc. The Lions stated they would donate about S200 after the first of
the year. The open house will not be held until the receipt of the furniture.
The County, which provides staff for the seniors, will divide its time between the
highrise and the previous location at the bank. There was a request for a piano,
and it was suggested that an item be put in the paper asking for donations.
The HRA Director stated that there is some money left at the national level in the
235 fund after its audit, so she is expecting to hear shortly exactly how much will
be allocated to this HUD Area.
Reinke/Lebens moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make, execute and
deliver deed to Lot 5, Block 2, Macey Second Addition, subject to inspection and
approval by staff of improvements constructed therein, to Goodwin Builders , Inc.
This action to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin Builders,
Inc. and the Shakopee HRA, for the purpose of conveying said property to authorized
buyer identified by LIRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize appropriate HRA 8fficials to make, execute and
deliver deed to Lot 6, Block 2, Macey Second Addition, subject to inspection and
approval by staff of improvements constructed therein, to Goodwin Builders, Inc.
This action to be in accordance with contract for deed between Goodwin Builders,
Inc. and the Shakopee HRA, for the purpose of conveying said property to authorized
buyer identified by HRA.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Reinke moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to grant an easement
to Jay and Penny Skare in Lot 6, Block 2, Macey Second Addition for the right to
dig, install, maintain, repair, use, enlarge, modify and service installations in-
stalled therein for the benefit of Lot 5, Block 2, Macey Second Addition.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize the selection of Jerome Jaspers to perfonii the
audit for the 1978 Community Development Block Grant, at a cost not to exceed
$3,600.00 without prior authorization.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The NRA Director elaborated on her memo of December 19, 1980 regarding landsaaping
for the Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization Project, stating basi-
cally that landscaping is only an eligible project cost prior to transfer of the
unit to a buyer. A discussion ensued regarding financing for proposed landscaping.
Shakopee HRA
January 6, 1981
Page 2
Leroux/Reinke moved to authorize the landscaping package of 51,74.9.35 proposed
by Al' s Landscaping, and to the extent possible compensate the HRA General Fund with
whatever costs can be conveyed to the project which would normally be carried by
General Fund.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The HRA Director stated she would like to delay in releasing the contracts with
Goodwin Builders, Inc. and Joseph Miller Construction pending further negotiations
regarding spring construction. She would report back on the progress at the next
meeting. The Commissioner's concurred.
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize payment of the original contracted amount of
$1,000.00 to Barton-Aschman Associates for consultant services for a study of the
pedestrian crossing for the new elderly highrise.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Lebens nominated Richard Hullander for chairman of the HRA ,for 1981.
Leroux/Lebens moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be cast for
Richard Hullander for Chairman. Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Colligan nominated John Leroux for Vice Chairman for 1981.
Lebens/Colligan moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be cast
for John Leroux for Vice Chairman. Motion carried unanimously.
Reinke/Leroux nominated Dolores Lebens for secretary for 1981.
Leroux/Reinke moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be cast for
Dolores Lebens as secretary. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm. Leroux suggested that Comm. Lebens go as our representative to the conference
in Washington, D.C. She said she would get together with the HRA Director to check
out the dates and her availability and let the Commissioners know.
Colligan/Hullander moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 7:37 p.m.
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 3, 1981
Chrm.Hullander called the meeting to order at 7 : 07 P.M. with Commissioners
Lebens , Reinke, Leroux and Colligan present . Also present were Gregg
Voxland, Finance Officer , John K. Anderson, City Admr. , Jeanne Andre , HRA
Director, and Julius A. Coller, City Attorney.
The HRA Director reported on the status of the Federal 235 Homeownership
Program Construction of Homes in the Fourth and Minnesota Revitalization
Project and that there is no qualified applicant with a $10, 000 down
payment for the single family home to be constructed on Lot 1 , Block 1 .
The HRA Director explained that the two buyers for the Goodwin Builders
double bungalow indicated that they would be willing to pay the 27
increase provided for in the Goodwin contract if the home is to he
constructed now on Lots 1 and 2 , Block 3 .
Colligan/Reinke moved that staff continue negotiations with Goodwin
Builders , Joseph Miller Development and Haefner Enterprises for the
purpose of construction in 1981 units previously scheduled for 1980
construction on Lots 1 & 2 , Block 3, and Lot 1 , Block 1 , Macey 2nd Add'n.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Colligan moved to concur with the HRA Director ' s recommendation
and authorized payment of $4,031 . 95 to Alois and Bertha Menden as a final
relocation claim for their displacement from their former residence at
215 West First Avenue as part of the Elderly Highrise Redevelopment District ,
Project No. 1 .
Roll Call : Ayes ; Unanimous Noes ; None Motion carried.
Reinke/Colligan moved to approve the bill of Richard Hullander in the amount
of $20. 54.
Roll Call : Ayes ; Comm.Lebens , Reinke , Leroux, Colligan
Noes ; None
Abstain; Comm.Hullander Motion carried.
The HRA Director reported that Goodwin Builders are being requested to
renew the letter of credit for the second one-half of the double
bungalow located on Lot 5 , Block 2 , Macey 2nd Add' n. , which has not yet
been sold .
Colligan/Reinke moved to adjourn at 7 : 33 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Jeanne Andre
H.R.A. Executive Director
Judith S . Cox
Recording Secretary
3
MEMO TO: Members of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Executive Director
RE : Development of Additional Lots in the Fourth and Minnesota
Neighborhood Revitalization Project
DATE: February 23 , 1981
Introduction
The Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) needs to act
now on the development of the remaining lots in the Fourth and Minne-
sota Neighborhood Revitalization Project . However previous discussion
by the HRA regarding the development of the remaining lots should be
reviewed and clarified prior to a decision on which lots are to be
developed now.
Background
Funding for future 235 mortgage financing is tenuous , but the Area
Office of the U .S . Department of Housing and Urban Development has
recommended that the Shakopee HRA proceed as quickly as possible
with development of additional lots to try and secure what funding
is available . Those lots in Macey Second Addition which are still
available for development are listed below, and can be viewed on
the attached plat drawing.
Lot 11 , Block 2 (single) Lots 6 and 7 , Block 3 (double)
Lot 3 , Block 3 (single) Lots 8 and 9 , Block 3 (double)
Lot 4 , Block 3 (single) Lot 10, Block 3 (single)
Lot 5 , Block 3 (single)
In 1980 two discussions were held by the HRA regarding the remain-
ing lots in Macey Second Addition scheduled for development in 1981 .
Initially it was suggested that Lot 11 , Block 2 and Lot 10, Block 3
be held back to provide more open space to the neighborhood . The
suggestion was not to dedicate these lots as parkland , but to delay
indefinitely the development of the lots . Subsequently, on Novem-
ber 5 , 1980, the HRA discussed the possible movement of utility
poles located on Lot 3 , Block 3 . The utility poles as now placed ,
need a 15 foot easement on Lot 3 , Block 3 , which severely con-
stricts the development of the lot . The cost of moving the utility
pole is estimated to be over $9 ,000.00. This amount includes
moving the whole line running across Lot 3 , Block 3 and Outlot A
of Macey Second Addition . The cost of moving the line would be
charged to the developer, which in this case is the HRA. Since
the only immediately benefited property is Lot 3 , Block 3 , the
HRA has the difficult decision as to whether it can be considered
that Lot 3 , Block 3 would benefit in the amount of $9 ,000.00, to
justify this move . IL is unlikely the block grant has funds
Shakopee HRA -2- February 23 , 1981 3
remaining to absorb this cost . This question was unresolved at the
November meeting but it was suggested that perhaps Lots 3 and 4,
Block 3 could be exchanged for those lots originally designated
for delayed development (Lot 11 , Block 2 and Lot 10, Block 3) . Then
the question of moving the utility pole can be resolved concurrent
to the decision as to how Outlot A will be developed. If moving
the utility pole would improve development of Outlot A, the expend-
iture could be better justified. If any lots are withheld from
development , the HRA should budget for maintenance of the property
during the holding period.
Alternatives :
The HRA can choose from a range of options in developing additional
lots in Macey 2nd Addition .
1) Develop all nine lots now available .
2) Hold some lots from development at this time :
a) Lot 11 , Block 3 and Lot 10, Block 3 . These lots are
at the end of the cul-de-sac and would be the safest
area for children to play .
b) Lot 3 , Block 3 . This lot is the one with the problem
utility easement . If it is subsequently decided to
move the utility poles , this lot could be more easily
developed. In the interim, it would also provide
more open space to the neighborhood.
c) Lot 3 , 4 and 5 , Block 3 . Holding all three of these
lots open would delay the decision on moving the
utility pole , provide additional open space to the
neighborhood , and leave a more manageable parcel of
land to possibly replat with Outlot A when that
parcel is developed. A variation of this plan would
hold back only Lots 3 and 4 .
Recommended Action :
I recommend that the HRA provide six lots (Lot 11 , Block 2 and
Lots 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 and 10, Block 3) for development now, and
hold indefinitely Lots 3 , 4 and 5 , Block 3 from development .
It is expected that the decision on development of the lots held
back would occur when a plan for the development of Outlot A is
considered by the HRA.
JA/jiw
` L L:..Y 4 L i /,,,_ 1/c„„-- ` ;_ ..:
4e,lef Street.
0
3q E Ota
5.o°43/S"E o 5 IC• 62 7Q '
—/00.00 ---
• .(
` � w Cd
1
I � ---- --7--;------- 1
Q r
�31ii �-
w ^•« cb ` `+i cv mac' �77---- \
Ni --------\
O ° N.E' (74. air' O,
I NI ti o Dov - C.:'...
Iri %till \ *k -..-... <:c" -P C' el„.$ , .}... NI
vi ____.-------------'"r,:. --goQ
/ -, ,
6 I.�/s 54 /,Z W 60 ZZ
60 3,r 0g
��.39 s •
1C a3 59
E --1 f/30.o4 •
221-:-- � � 70.0=
E
kr6 6 t.o 0__-- -
o
a.
--\
1 N `` V?3
Is1 CM \e \ Z\ �� � Q N •� h \ '
,O
Iw �i A o u•1 C\ _ \°‘
I it t; (.>1I; I 4k I� 1 3�\ \I \ ��� cr• , s, \ \ ,,, ___\
�i I �I "1 J
I 1 � l Q=3°Z — . ,'�' 46•` 5
Q 1
J r}4=2034:,,,"I �a-3°1/291 �--a s8 g 1 .
52.59 c�8 57 ;41,' %.,1 �'G!/ l
v�0 5� �1 N / J3 Ste" w
k•1/411 �o, o i/5.60
oo
109 70 _
I R=/?00.00 _ 01 c
v.,
S'TRE"E ,.- . 3B
of ' . - ��" 1� �� 1
s • I • v'.
Q'' I 1 a=,?°4975 o o o - 1 0
0p� o �, m __ -3q -s,
��°�► I I ►.i $ /4 2. �1:
A� I —
°�' .� 39--- o
t.,, m . /58, „w c
I l cbI ` N/0°43 S9
'O O
o0k'N
—'. p ilb V �- • 0
W _ _
LI CP\
‹P \ ,
�1 ' o.
1 IZ I
sw
I 1 �`Nc
I I s�,
J 55.00 • — ,?.
�, "'69. 09
�5. ;39-
---I88•,66 w o
ij 9.67 1
a
o
Iv c-
(-I\ . , .
• Mfoccy /Yoe t,
.
!.• '4„:-.;'44,..e.,':'' ,�tt 7 'r,i �.P itl�si} '�i'i:te� It int J0 A ,k ,.t.,...--.1Y'rd:` . •,...,,,,c,„p +"a Ix x „4.
s ' e.st�4474V,I* }5 `r '4it sc , `,10 %"f 'a"e ,, C� 1.F 4. t ,. , € , ,�'S.M fiF
I*,k;4" � r .. Y .,'...01. 9N,...p..,,..:f >! ',4"-A;1:447,,,, a' 4f k i a h ,, r a `; v a
�;. � � � 5,x.. > �' � �;� �, �� � d en R� $ . -, yx,."��• ��b•s'. `4'�, k,s �
a
/0 � •
44 4 /" // _!_
i_ t,11.. /
a
a �
1.)\ 1:. —
•
� o .F[
(. „7..?
. N
y
V
‘r-‘ /
G\ 4i
c)J
J
4�\ S O°43'/S""E
C\
265 85 1
� • 70.57 48.12 48.82 48.82 _ 4d 8.;,
.. r \/
NA 0
A As
,gyp r\ L — ` I
/.25.66 o 1 ti 1
1� b0 00 moo \ t I [ — —-
Y' ; �s ati ,• 488.2 4992 48.8-2 _ 41#78:,
•Q 69.14(.14) �� t`rs t`V)' o I v
\O v.C) bb 6569 ��14 y' % '^ N O°43'/5"W _
1
a\2\r-�4?`( r4No°� r� "wo� po
. Iola
27 - co ?a3 96
' 4/00_ 4/00 M/NNES'DTA
4/.00 4/.00 37.,
i p - -
a. kl 1 I
'\\ ! f/ \ ' Sp06 /� 1
r. _ ___-
il
�r . ,.....c2.,„ ..._ „. o e c,, if„, ,, , ...k) ul o •t.
, cl,z, 0. 1 siz. k.,1 1,
0,..;,
% __,,._._ —v-.. ..-
u.; 1()(:, ,INI
0\ .,z tz, ,,: s, to
,.; .0 . .v . -,z,,,,,-- --,2-_, - . t.r, ,,:.
4/ ,,,,- i kl (3-\ -5-.---..,:_az, k :
Nil U, •k) 0 % �� 3�zb � N. ,#
I
/ I I
L 77 .03 < - -} 8_S -- .Q . .1i , .; 4/.00
'' 388. 5:
\ C7 O NO'43�/5"W 4 t /
41
c <� m 54.0.. ►1� .111 Qy c,1
e
cl •a
0.
0 0 1t/es ter YY/29
' ty�i$ S5teiLY , c .iris- 9) o }R 1: +F `# ,r, " ? y :'" 45hy .m:rti---.a+.�na• �
.
r.
.js � ".''''0..'''''..
tit; -,,,,;1,,,e344-::1, -,_;:',...,.,-:.,; Sa g f-as ''':010-, rc . -- K' w9 ;w��.?J _f�k�� ifi Y ;A1� ra"�'0 'rC14."'",n'-,,?'� t.� 4r;
a '.`
3b
MEMO TO: Members of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE: Contractors Proposals for Additional Homes in Macey
Second Addition
DATE: February 25 , 1981
Introduction
The Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) has served
as developer of lots in Macey Second Addition. The HRA scheduled
twelve lots to be developed in the 1980 construction season. Homes
have been built and sold to eligible buyers on nine of those lots .
Construction of the final three homes was delayed due to the freeze
in 235 funding, but should proceed this spring. Nine additional
lots are available for development and the HRA should now invite
proposals from contractors for those lots identified for develop-
ment for the 1981 construction season. The U.S . Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) cannot assure 235 funding for
these homes , but has indicated support for continuation of the
project . If 235 funding is unavailable , HUD staff would support
flexibility in the block grant requirements that would allow
other mortgage mechanisms to be applied to the homes constructed .
Background
In 1980 the HRA invited proposals from contractors to build the
initial twelve homes in Macey Second Addition. The invitation was
published in the legal section of the Shakopee Valley News with
notices sent directly to builders who had previously contacted
the HRA staff to express interest in the project . Attached are
draft copies of an invitation for proposals for the 1981 construc-
tion season. The format is similar to that followed in 1980,
but provides greater detail than previously provided in response
to questions and concerns raised by contractors who participated
in the first year of the project .
Alternatives
1 . Schedule no further construction of homes in Macey Second
Addition for the 1981 construction season.
2 . Devise an alternative means for development of lots in 1981 .
a . Construction of homes according to plans and specifica-
tions provided by the HRA and bid by contractors .
b. Sale of lots to eligible buyers for private development .
3 . Development of lots on format similar to that followed for
the 1980 construction season, according to draft format
attached, or as revised by the HRA.
Members of the Shakopee Housing and 3
Redevelopment Authority
Page Two
February 25 , 1981
Recommended Action
The Shakopee HRA authorize advertisement of an invitation for
proposals to be submitted by contractors who wish to build
homes on lots scheduled for development in Macey Second Addition
in the 1981 construction season.
JA/jms
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
INVITATION FOR CONTRACTOR PROPOSALS
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) invites proposals
from contractors for homes to be constructed under the Housing and
Urban Development Section 235 Mortgage Program in Macey ' s 2nd Addi-
tion, on Minnesota Street between Fourth Avenue and the Milwaukee
Railroad tracks . (See lots on attached plat) .
All proposals are to provide materials and construction which
meets FHA minimum standards , the Uniform Building Code and the State
Building Code . In addition, side walls of the homes should be insu-
lated to at least R-16 and ceilings to at least R-38 . Site plans
must meet the City of Shakopee Zoning Ordinance , including asphalt
driveways . Attached is a list of those items to be submitted as
part of the proposal , as well as standard forms to be completed and
submitted with proposal .
Proposals will be reviewed in comparison with others submitted
and will be evaluated on design, quality , space provided, special
features and cost . If contractor proposes to construct more than
one home of the same plan , variations in facade , roof line , etc . ,
should be included in the proposal . Preference will be given to
plans providing two floors , either split-entry or two-story.
Site is underlain by Shakopee dolomite . Although most sites
are suitable for basements , field borings must be taken to verify
actual rock elevation .
Building ' s elevations and lot grading shall conform to the
FHA approved lot grading plan on file at Shakopee City Hall . Any
fill required for conformance with lot grading plan shall be the
responsibility of the contractor.
Individual water and sewer services have been installed 60
feet from center street line into lot . Services for double lots
are not located on the lot line ; exact location of all service
lines will be provided upon request . Existing driveway curb cuts
shallbe used or modified at the expense of the contractor .
The HRA will sell lots on a contract-for-deed to contractors
whose proposals are accepted . Construction financing on the home
will be arranged by the contractors . Sale price for lots will be
$1 .00; terms of contract will call for builder to meet requirements
of the HRA, which include but are not limited to :
1 . Insurance coverage including standard workman ' s compensa-
tion, builder ' s risk, and public liability insurance of
not less than $300,000.00.
2 . Performance bond or letter of credit in the amount of
125% of total quoted construction costs .
3 . Sale of home to buyer identified by the Shakopee HRA.
Copies of contract format are available on request from the
HRA.
'87
Cost of building permit and points for closing mortgage should
not be included in quoted construction costs , but will be added in
to sale price established for buyers . Contractor will assume cost
of FHA appraisals , inspections , as-built lot survey for double units ,
and other costs normally assumed by seller in real estate transactions .
Homes are to be financed with mortgages under the 235 Homeowner-
ship Program. The intent of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment
Authority is to keep basic costs , including approximately $4,000 for
building permit and points , as close as possible to the mortgage
limit . Under the 235 Program morgage limits are $38 ,000 for two or
three bedroom units and $44,000 for four bedroom units .
Proposals are invited for :
(2) Duplex with attached garage , 2 or 3 bedrooms
(5) Single family homes , 4 finished bedrooms
Questions regarding proposals should be addressed to Jeanne
Andre , Executive Director of the Shakopee HRA at 445-3650. Propo-
sals should be submitted no later than 10:00 a .m. , Friday , March 27 ,
1981 , to:
Jeanne Andre , Executive Director
Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee , MN 55379
The Shakopee HRA reserves the right to reject any or all propo-
sals , to waive irregularities and select the proposals in the best
interest of the HRA.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 3, 1981
Acting Mayor Reinke Presiding
1] Roll Call at 7 : 30 P .M.
2 ] Approval of Minutes of February 10, 1981.
3] Communications :
4] RECOGNITION BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ANYONE PRESENT IN THE AUDIENCE
WHO DESIRES TO SPEAK ON ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
a] Gary Laurent
b] Jake Manahan
c] Others
5 ] Old Business :
a] Nominations to the Police Civil Service Commission
b] Authorize execution of an agreement with the Milwaukee Road
for purchase of property No. of the Huber Building and
authorize the making and deposit of a certified check for
$5, 925 payable to the trustee , ,Chicago, Milwaukee , St. Paul
and Pacific Railroad Co.
c ] Lease with State cf Mn. DNR for Riverside Park
d] Authorize Hiring of An Appraisal Firm for the Holmes Street
Appeals
) i e ] Financing of the Holmes Street Reconstruction Project (80-3)
including Change Order No. 1
f] St. Francis Hopsital Parking Study
g] Cost for Installation of A Storm Drainage Pan in Prairie View
3rd Addition (bring memo from 2/17 agenda)
3 � � h] Storm Sewer Costs for Furrie 2nd Addition
i ] 1981 Sewer Fund Budget
6 ] Planning Commission Recommendations : None
7 ] Routine Resolutions and Ordinances :
a] Resolution No. 1796 , Establishing A Uniform Policy Regarding
Communications From Cable Communications Companies and Their
Representatives
b] Resolution No. 1798, Appointing Special Counsel To Review
Documents for the Shakopee Professional Group I .R. Bonds
8] New Business :
a] 8: 30 PUBLIC HEARING - Application for $1 ,000,000 Industrial
Commercial Development Revenue Bonds from Shakopee Professional
Group - Memo coming Monday
b] 8: 45 PUBLIC HEARING - Application for $850,000 Industrial
Commercial Development Revenue Bonds from Valley Health
Properties - Memo coming Monday
c] Supplemental Agreement to Lease Agreement, 200 Levee, Drive
d] Brief Cases for Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee Members
e] Legal Services for Shakopee Cable Franchise Process
7
TENTATIVE AGENDA
March 3, 1981
Page -2-
f] 1981 Swimming Pool Fees And Program Plan
g] Revisions to Liquor and Beer License Fees
h] Planning Fee Schedule
i ] Amending Assessments for Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo 2nd Addition
Resolution No. 1797
j ] Approve Change Order No. 1 for 80-10KT CR16/CR83 Watermain
within Tax Increment Project , reduction of $1, 510. 95 and
authorize execution thereof
k] Authorize partial payment of $4, 294. 77 to Richard Knutson Inc. 1
for work in East View 1st Addition
1 ] Accept bid of $4,183.05 from Auto Energy, Inc. for the
Conversion of Three Primary Patrol Police Vehicles
m] City of Shakopee vs James J. Hauer and State Surety Company,
authorize filing of a reply to counterclaims
n] Approve easement agreement - Sandlewood 1st Addition
o] Reconveyance of Part of the Land Containing the Old Shakopee
Treatment Plant
p] Fiscal Disparities Judgment - If Council wishes to appeal ,
direction to legal staff is needed
q] Revisions to the Shakopee Community Services Agreement
r] Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District Request for Help in
Acquiring Outlet Easements
s ] City Planner
9] Consent Business : (Any item a Councilperson wishes to discuss may be
removed by requesting such action before a vote on the consent
agenda items . )
a] Authorize payment of $33.00 to Treasurer of Scott County for
State Transfer tax on transfer of title of library property
b] Authorize purchase of four ' Scott Air Pak 11 ' s and cases from
Elvin Safety Supply in the amount of $2, 588.00
c ] Authorize purchase of video equipment , includinginstallation,
from Century Camera Company for $3 ,546. 27
d] Approve the completion of the probationary period for Janette
Shaner and authorize a salary increase
e] Authorize and direct city officials to enter into a contract with
the Minneapolis Star and Tribune Co.
10] Other Business :
a] Awarding Bid on 81-1 VIP Sanitary Sewer Interceptor - Res . 1792
b]
c]
d]
11 ] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
12 ] Adjourn to Tuesday, March 17 , 1981 at 7 : 30 P.M.
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Citizens Wishing to Address the Council
DATE: February 27 , 1981
Mr. Gary Laurent would like to address the Council regarding:
1 ] the feasibility of obtaining tax increment financing
for mulit-family residential development
2 ] the priority of No. 18 on the 1981 Improvement List, which
is currently scheduled for the 1982 construction season
3] the policy for (continuous) project inspection
Mr. Jake Manahan would like to address the Council regarding the
interest now due on the assessment levied on Lot 1, Block 1, Halo 2nd
Addition. (Memo to be delivered on Monday) Please do not confuse this
with Item No . 8i on the agenda, which is a separate issue.
JKA/jsc
1/ 1)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Interest on Assessments for Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo 2nd Addition
DATE: March 2 , 1981
INTRODUCTION:
Jake Manahan, on behalf of Wally Bakken, wishes to address the
Council regarding the interest on the assessment levied against Lot 1,
Block 1 , Halo 2nd Addition.
BACKGROUND:
On Sept . 15 , 1980, a developers agreement was signed by the developers
of Halo 2nd Addition as a part of the final platting requirements .
In the developers agreement , the developers requested the City to make
the improvements of sewer , water, sidewalk and deceleration lane and agreed
that costs be assessed against the lots and spread as are other assessments
(usually 10 years ) . The developers chose the pay plan whereby they deposit
with the City 10% of the total estimated cost of the project and then pay
100% of the assessments as each lot is developed. The developers agreement
also requires that the assessment be paid off when a building permit is
issued, rather than continuing to be paid over the ten year period, or
whatever time may be left.
On October 14, 1980, a building permit from Mr. Bakken had been
approved by the City Engineer, Building Inspector and the Planner and was
ready to be released for the construction of a motel on Lot 1 , Block 1 .
At this point, it was discovered that the park dedication (included in the
building permit fee) was in error and the building permit was not issued
in order that the park dedication fee contained in the developers agreement
could be corrected. The actual amount which should have been charged to
Lot 1 , Block 1 was greater than what appeared in the developers agreement .
Staff decided that it would be best to correct the developers agreement
before issuing a building permit so that the correct park dedication fee
could be collected. Staff kept , but did not cash the check for the permit .
Because the error was not that of the builder, Mr. Bakken, he was permitt-
ed to begin construction with the understanding that the building permit
fee would be revised upward to include the higher park dedication fee when
the developers agreement was corrected and a building permit would be issued
at that time .
Keep in mind that sometime prior to this point , Mr. Bakken actually
bought Lot 1 , Block 1 and had escrowed in an account held by Mr. Manahan
an amount to cover the estimated assessment and the smaller park dedication
fee (as the error had not been discovered at the time the property was
purchased) .
Interest on Assessments for
Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo 2nd
March 2 , 1981
Page -2-
On October 21 , 1980, the assessments for Lot 1 , Block 1 were adopted
by Council and levied. As is City policy, after the assessments were
adopted, the Finance Department did mail out statements to the fee owners of
Halo 2nd, including Mr. Bakken, notifying them of the assessments , that
they could be paid within 30 days without interest, and that they would
acrue interest at the rate of 8. 75% thereafter.
Sometime after Mr. Anderson' s arrival as City Administrator I brought
to his attention the fact that the assessment fcr Lot 1 , Block 1 should
be collected when the building permit is issued, pursuant to the developers
agreement . He concurred and Mr. Spurrier agreed to notify Mr. Manahan to
this effect .
On February 17 , 1981 Council moved to approve the amendment to the
developers agreement correcting the erroneous park dedication fee .
On February 28 , 1981 , Mr. Bakken paid : $44 , 808 . 16 :
Building Permit Fee $ 8 ,499 . 55
Park Dedication Fee 3 ,234 .00
Assessments 32 ,075 .00
Interest on Assessments 999 . 61
and obtained his building permit and also a certificate of occupancy for
the motel .
Mr. Bakken has pointed out that he only received $1 , 736 .00 from Mr.
Habbegger for park dedication (which was escrowed at time of purchase of
property) because of the City ' s error . He is not questioning the increased
park dedication (from $1 , 736 .00 to $3 ,234 .00) .
The question is why $999 . 61 in interest is due the City when the
assessment amount was in an escrow account and could have been paid when the
assessments became due . I believe this is a valid question ; hewever, I
do not believe it is the City' s responsibility to resolve it . The City
made the assessment , sent out notice thereof , and the assessment automatically
accrues interest until paid . The assessment could and should have been
paid when it became due , if there was no desire to accrue interest . The
fact that the City was going to require payment at the time of issuance
of a building permit does not mean that payment had to be delayed until
that time.
SUMMARY:
Sept . 15 , 1980 Developer ' s Agreement signed
Oct . 14, 1980 Building Permit approved , but held up
on being released because of park dedication
fee error
Oct . 21 , 1980 Assessments Adopted
Oct . 24, 1980 Statements on assessments mailed to affected
property owners
Interest on Assessments for
Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo 2nd
March 2 , 1981
Page -3-
Feb. 17 , 1981 Park Dedication error corrected
(yet to be signed by developers )
Feb. 20, 1981 Mr . Bakken and Mr. Manahan notified
of total building permit fee due
Feb . 27 , 1981 Mr. Bakken paid $44,808 . 16 , received
a building permit and a certificate of
occupancy
Feb. 27 , 1981 Mr . Manahan asked to address the Council
regarding the interest changed on the
assessment
Granted , the City made an error in assigning the park dedication fee
to the proper lots ; however , it is the opinion of the Finance Officer ,
City Clerk, and City Administrator that the park dedication and delay in
issuance of a building permit is a matter totally separate and distinct
from the assessments on the plat , when they were adopted , and when they
started accruing interest .
The fact that the work on the improvements has not yet commenced
should not be considered, as this will happen every time a new develop-
ment is assessed prior to the letting of a contract and interest starts
accruing. And of course , should the improvements not be made , for some
reason , any assessments and interests paid would have to be returned.
ALTERNATIVES :
1 ] Deny the request of refunding the interest paid on the
assessments .
2 ] Adopt a resolution amending the assessments on Halo 2nd
Addition, addressing particularly the interest. The Council
must find that the assessments were in error, per the City
Attorney.
3] Require only the original park dedication fee of $1 , 736 . 00
rather than the $3, 234. 00 and also require the $999. 61 interest
as required in the original resolution adopting the assessments .
(The developers agreement as executed will require the
$3. 234. 00 be paid against Lot 3 , Block 1 instead. We won' t
be loosing funds just collecting them against a different lot . )
(Note : The Park Dedication Ordinance requires a park dedication
against a plat , but doesn' t address how the fee is spread within
the plat . )
RECOMMENDATION:
If Council wishes to give some relief to Mr . Bakken, staff would
recommend alternative number three . Rescind the motion of February 17 ,
which approved amending the developers agreement for Halo 2nd regarding
park dedication, authorize the return of $1 ,498. 00 park dedication fee
overpayment, and diiect staff to deposit the $999. 61 interest collected on
the assessments for Lot 1 , Block 1 Halo 2nd in the proper fund.
jsc
f
i
( JULIUS A.GOLLER, II
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 612-445-1244
1859-1940
2 1 1 WEST FIRST AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
55329
February 25, 1981
Memo to: The Honorable Walter C. Harbeck
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
John Anderson
City Administrator
Members of the Shakopee City Council
In re: Purchase of parking lot from the
Milwaukee Road
As you recall there has been sporadic negotiations between the Milwaukee
Road and the City of Shakopee for the purchase of the parking lot located on
the property where the former Simons Lumber Company sheds were located and
little was accomplished and the matter became rather inactive after the City
renewed its lease.
In the fall of last year, negotiations were resumed and on October 28, the
Milwaukee Road made an offer to sell the property at $2.50 a square foot
or $74,062.50 subject to verification by a survey and upon receipt of the
above letter the Council authorized me to negotiate with the railroad,
which. I did. As a result of the negotiations the railroad is agreeable
to selling the land at $2.00 per square foot which would bring the sale
price to approximately $59,250, again the accurate figure to be verified
by a survey which is to be undertaken by the railroad.
If the railroad's figure is acceptable and of course is considerably less
than their asking price and considerably less than our appraisal, the
Council should then authorize the making and deposit of a certified check
for $5,925 payable to the trustee, Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific
Railroad Company,and should authorize the execution of the proposed agreement.
R tf.,, sub fitted,
/ #
Ju #us K. Coller, II
City Atttorney --
JAC/nh
.
rid
M/EWAaKEE Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul
" '° and Pacific Railroad Company
P Y
• Rcom 2`L6 Un n S ith
516 West Jackson Boulevard •
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Phone 312/648-3000
CHICAGO - February 13 , 1981
Refer to : S - Minn . - Shakopee
City of Shakopee
80139
•
Mr. Julius A. Coller, II
Attorney at Law
211 W. Shakopee Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Coller:
Please refer to our meeting of February 9, 1981 regarding the purchase
of a portion of the Railroad Company's property Shakopee, Minnesota.
I am willing to recommend to my management and to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division,
which has jurisdiction over the reorganization proceedings of the Railroad, .
the following proposal:
SELLER: Richard B. Ogilvie, not as an individual but solely as Trustee
of the property of Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad
Company, Debtor.
PURCHASER: City of Shakopee or nominee.
AREA: Approximately 29,625 square feet of Railroad land as shown
outlined in gray on the attached print dated January 28, 1981.
SALE PRICE: The sale price of the land to be conveyed will be at the
rate .of $2.00 per square foot with the actual figure to be calculated on
an area determined by a certified survey. The total sale price will he
approximately $59,250 net to the Railroad Company.
•
METHOD OF PAYMENT: The Purchaser will deposit with the Railroad Company
$5,925 by certified check, cashier's check or bank money order payable
to Trustee, Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company
upon execution of this agreement. Any balance will be due and payable
at the time of closing in a similar manner.
APPRAISAL: Upon execution of this agreement by the Purchaser, the
Railroad, at its option and expense, may arrange for the preparation of •
an appraisal of the real estate by a qualified appraiser of the Railroad's
choice. Should the appraised value of property be significantly greater
than the negotiated consideration as stated herein, in that case and
only in that case, the Purchaser will be advised the appraised value and
I
Mr. Julius A.. Coller, II
February 13, 1981 •
Page 2
that the Railroad is not agreeable to the conveyance of the land for the
negotiated consideration. Should the Purchaser still desire to progress
the sale, a new sale price will be negotiated in line with the appraised
value. If the Purchaser is not agreeable to paying the new sale price,
the sale proposal will be cancelled and any of the Purchaser's money on •
deposit with the Railroad will be refunded to the Purchaser in full.
CLOSING: Closing will be at a mutually agreeable time and place unless
Purchaser prefers to close in escrow in which case Purchaser will pay
the entire escrow fee. The escrow agent shall be acceptable to the
Seller.
CONVEYANCE: The property will be conveyed by Quitclaim Deed from the
Trustee, free from liens and other claims and subject to all existing
leases, easements, lfrenses and rights of the public whether of rererd4
or otherwise.
MINERAL RIGHTS: Mineral rights are included in the consideration and
will not be reserved in the deed .
CERTIFIED SURVEY: The Purchaser, at his expense, will have a certified
survey prepared by a land surveyor registered in the State of Minnesota. This
survey will be prepared in accordance with the Railroad Company's survey
specifications dated May 2, 1975, a copy of which is attached and shall
be subject to approval by the Railroad Company's Chief Engineer.
TITLE: The Seller has no abstract of title, title report or title
insurance policy on this property and any such abstract, report or
policy as may be desired by the Purchaser shall be obtained by the
Purchaser without expense to the Seller.
SALES EXPENSES: The Purchaser will assume all expenses in connection
with the sale including transfer fees.
TAXES: A portion of the sale property has been leased to the Purchaser,
and lessee has been responsible for paying locally assessed taxes. The
balance of the property has not been locally assessed for real estate
tax purposes. If it develop that any taxes are due on or applicable
against this portion of the sale property, Purchaser agrees to accept
title subject to such taxes.
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS: The Railroad is unaware of any special assessments
for public improvements presently levied against the sale site. The
Purchaser by signing of this agreement and subsequent closing of the
sale, agrees to assume the responsibility for the payment of all existing
or future special assessments levied against any portion of the sale
area.
110 , Q
lHXIhi4YYffF;I
ROAD.`
Mr. Julius A. Coller, II
February 13, 1981
Page 3
LEASES: Lease 80139 in favor of the Purchaser will be merged into the
sale and the rentals will be prorated at or following closing.
COURT APPROVAL: Since the Railroad has filed for reorganization under
Section 77 of the Federal Bankruptcy Act, it will be necessary to obtain
approval of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division. In order to provide marketable title, a copy of the
appropriate order of the court will be furnished at or prior to closing
of the sale.
•
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES AND SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE: If this sale is not closed
within 30 days after being notified. by Seller because of default or non-
performance by the Purchaser, then Railroad may retain the deposit, as
provided herein, not as a penalty or forfeiture but as liquidated damages
and just compensation, and declare this agreement terminated. In the
alternative, the Railroad may proceed to have this agreement specifically
enforced.
EXPIRATION: If the sale terms and conditions as outlined herein are not
accepted on or before March 31, 1981, this offer will be null and void
unless extended in writing by the Railroad Company.
If for any reason this sale is not approved by the Railroad 's management,
Trustee or U.S. District Court, the total deposit, as provided herein
will be refunded and this agreement will be cancelled.
If the foregoing sale terms and conditions are acceptable, will you
please have the attached duplicate copy of this letter executed, dated
and returned to me as evidence of our agreement together with the deposit
as provided herein. Upon receipt of the signed proposal and deposit, I
will submit the proposal to the Trustee and the Court for approval and
confirmation.
Sincerely yours,
E. J. Stoll, Vice President
Property Management
/
• R. regory
R .nal Mgr :'roperty Mgt.
3 648-3018
TERMS ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED TO:
.
By •
Date •
GRANTEE'S NAME TO APPEAR IN THE DEED AS FOLLOWS:
D Tn /:
1
MEMO TO: Jopn K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE : Lease with State for Riverside Park
DATE : February 24, 1981
Introduction
Our most recent lease with the State for use of Riverside Park
has expired. On February 19 , 1981 we received a letter from
the State of Minnesota DNR reminding us that we do not currently
have a lease and if we wish to continue to use Riverside Park
we must enter into a lease and provide the required insurance .
Background
This matter was before the Council in September and Council
approved the lease for three years at the some amount as paid
in the past . On October 7 , 1980 the matter was brought back
to the Council because one of the requirements of the lease
was that the City provide liability insurance of $100/$500 M.
The City carries $100/$300 M coverage which is our statutory
limit of liability and Council had earlier declined to increase
it . On October 7th the Council chose to take no action on the
lease because of the insurance coverage difference .
Additional Information
Mr . Muenchow, Community Services Director, has informed me that
Riverside Park is Shakopee ' s major baseball park. It is used
by the Cubs , the high school , Sr . Babe Ruth League , the Mickey
Mantle League and the American Legion.
Mr. Voxland has checked with our insurance agent and additional
insurance to $100/$500 M on all city property would cost approxi-
mately $558 per year; however , an additional insurance policy
of $100/$500 M on just the park could be obtained for approxi-
mately $100 per year.
Because the State statutory limit of liability is $100/$500 M
everyone leasing property from the State is required to carry
the $100/$500 M. Mr. James E. Lawler of the State of Minnesota
DNR explained to me that if Shakopee only carried the $100/$300 M
coverage and a suit was settled at $500 M, the State would be
liable for the difference , thus they have the requirement that
coverage be carried in the amount of $100/$500 M.
Mr. Lawler also indicated that the City Attorney could work
with the D .N.R. Attorney and try to come up with a valid reason
why the D.N.R. should make an exception for Shakopee and accept
John K. Anderson
Page Two
February 24, 1981
the lessor coverage . However, he did indicate that others have
pursued this avenue and to no avail .
The Council needs to weigh the benefits against the cost and
determine if the benefits are worth the cost .
Alternatives
1 . Cease using Riverside Park.
2 . Do not enter into a lease , but use the Park until the Attorney
General ' s office issues us an ultimatum (which is close at
hand) .
3 . Enter into a lease and obtain a new insurance policy for River-
side Park only, in the amount of $100/$500 M (and drop it
from total City package) .
4. Increase our total City liability coverage to $100/$500 M and
enter into a lease .
Recommendation
I would recommend entering into the lease and obtaining a new
insurance policy covering Riverside Park only, in the amount of
$100/$500 M at an approximate additional cost of $100 per year
(alternative Number 3) .
Recommended Action
Move to approve a lease with the State of Minnesota D.N.R. for
the use of Riverside Park, for five years ending March 13 , 1985
at a total cost of $25 .00 and direct appropriate City officials
to execute the lease and obtain the required insurance .
JSC/jms
•
RECEIVED
STATE OF FEB 191981
fl l CEJ S CDUIQ AKOPEE
»- DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESO&
BOX , CENTENNIAL OFFICE BUILDING • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA • 55155
DNR INFORMATION Land Bureau
(612) 296-6157 February 17, 1981 FILE NO. 3250-15
City of Shakopee
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Lease #144-15-85
Vars. 1-115-23
Scott County
Dear Lessee:
On August 4, 1980 you were sent a letter requesting signature of four
lease copies and an advance rental of $25.00 be sent to this office so
that the above described lease could be issued in your name.
To date we have received none of the above. If this has been an
oversight on your part, please send to this office the above requested
items within ten days of receipt of this letter.
If we do not hear from you within this time, we shall request a field
investigation be made. If this investigation indicates this state
land has been used by you, the matter shall be turned over to the
Attorney General 's offices for appropriate action as provided by the
laws of the state.
Any questions you have should be mailed to this office at the above
address or phone (612) 296-4496.
Sincerely,
es E. Law , Lease Specialist
JEL:jad
CC: Chuck Kartak-MN Valley Trails
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
0
� l I` CITY ® F Sg-HAK •� EE
/ter" �1 SCA'
�`�:
,p .1I,• ! 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
•'; .7'r::. e 'My`
t .0.
`,.•/,
<<;�tt1_yh%
MEMO
TO John Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Larry Martin, City Assessor
SUBJECT: Holmes Street Aopea]
DATE: February 24, 1981
Introduction:
Subsequent to the installation of improvements, by means of
the Holmes Street Project , six property owners have petitioned
to appeal their assessments.
Background:
The nature of this type of appeal requires an opinion of value
before and after the project is complete toidetermine if benefit
has been rendered.
I have been directed to perform the appraisal ' s and serve as an
expert witness in these appeals. However, after discussing the
details of the appeals with legal staff, I have found that pre-
paration time will require 2 to 3 weeks and court appearance
will roughly require annt:her week or :;o.
Considering the time invo] ved , I do not believe it possible
for_ the assessing staff to complete the project in time and,
complete the 1981 assessment.
Alternatives: -
1 . Request a continuancy. This would require cooperation from the
Court and Appellants.
2. Hire an appraisal firm. This would require an expenditure of
roughly $2,000 to $3, 200. Funds would be extracted from the
assessment account.
Recommendation:
I believe the best way to proceed is with Alternative #2 . If we
were able to get a continuancy a probable court date would be
July 1st. Even within this time frame the Assessing Department
will have its hands full with Boards of Review and preparation
for valuation appeals.
_f(JL
John Anderson
Page 2
February 24, 1981
To arrive at the estimate of $2,000 to $3, 200, I contacted
two firms that have worked for Shakopee in the past. They
are Wiley Appraisals and Patchen Appraisals, The Wiley firm
gave an estimate of $1 , 500 to $2 ,000; the Patchen firm quoted
a figure of $2,000 plus $50 per hour for court appearance time
with a minimum of $200 per day which would equal out to
approximately $3, 200.
After talking with the appraisal. firms I contacted Rod Krass
Asst. Attorney to discuss any preferences stemming from pro-
fessional performance. Rod stated ..that he has seen work from
both companies and recommended the Patchen firm.
I too have reviewed work by both companies and also recommend
employment of the Patchen firm.
LDM :plk
r
5"T
MEMO TO: John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer ik;,(
RE: St. Francis Hospital Parkin .tudy
DATE: February 26, 1981
Introduction:
At the request of City Council, the Engineering Department was asked to
study parking in the vicinity of St. Francis Hospital and determine the
value of placing more limited parking in the vicinity of the hospital.
Background:
Engineering Department has met with the Police Chief and conducted a week-
long survey of parking in the vicinity of St. Francis Hospital.
The results of the parking survey clearly indicate the impact of the posted
2-hour parking in the block numbered 5 on the drawing.
During the week of the study, the average number of cars parked in the
vicinity of the hospital, as shown on the attached drawing, totaled 183 cars;
76.5 percent parked full-time in the vicinity of the hospital. The study
indicated those cars were concentrated near the entrance on 4th Avenue.
There was another concentration of cars parked full-time in the vicinity of
3rd and Atwood near the emergency and employee entrance.
The survey simply reinforced the fact that cars will park as close as possible
to the entrance.
This survey indicated the distribution of parked cars in the vicinity of
the hospital. Not visible in that survey, is the fact that should the City
restrict parking in other areas around the hospital, employees as well as
visitors will be forced to walk greater distances to the entrance. These
employees and visitors will be parking in areas not previously impacted by
St. Francis Hospital parking.
By itself, the peril of walking one additional block to St. Francis Hospital
is judged sufficient reason for not placing any other restriction on parking
in the vicinity of the hospital. The second matter of impacting other
residential area not previously affected lends weight to that reason.
John Anderson -2- February 26, 1981
The two principal entrances of St. Francis Hospital on 4th and on 5th focus
parking toward residential areas. An entrance which would focus parking toward
the non-residential area would have a beneficial affect.
Conclusions:
City staff concludes that additional parking restrictions in the vicinity
of St. Francis Hospital would have a detrimental affect.
An entrance focused toward non-residential land would have a positive impact.
A parking lot in Block 57 will not be effective unless a convenient entrance
is located near that proposed parking.
Recommendations:
City staff recommends that no other parking restriction be placed in the
vicinity of St. Francis Hospital.
Staff reiterates its recommendation that St. Francis Hospital be encouraged
to construct an entrance on the East side of the hospital between4th and5th
Avenues.
HRS/j iw
cc: Thomas Brownell
Chief of Police
Attachment
_57
MEMO TO : Bo Spurrier
City Engineer
FROM: Ray Ruuska
Engineering Coordinator
RE : St . Francis Hospital Parking Survey
DATE : January 29, 1981
As requested, on-street parking was surveyed for one week
starting January 21, 1981 and ending January 28 , 1981.
Counts were taken at 8 : 30 AM, 1 : 00 PM and 3 : 45 PM. Data
from the counts is as follows :
Average Total Parked Cars at Count Times
8: 30 = 139 1 : 30 = 151 3 : 45 = 114
Average Total Full-time & Temporary
Parked Cars By Block
(See Attachment)
Block No. Full-time Temporary
1 1 1
2 14 3
3 14 3
4 13 3
5 11 10
6 14 2
7 5 3
8 21 4
9 2 1
10 10 4
11 25 7
12 10 2
Bo Spurrier -2- January 29, 1981 ✓
A shift-change occurs at 3 : 30 PM which would account for the
lesser counts at 3 : 45 and the "temporary" counts may be actually
full-time parked cars on the later shift .
It should be noted that Block 5 is a posted two-hour limit
and has a problem with illegal parking.
RR/j iw
Attachment
CIV
RESOLUTION NO. 1796
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A UNIFORM POLICY
REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS FROM CABLE COMMUNICATIONS
COMPANIES AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES
WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee is now in the process of seeking
a cable communications system to be operated in the City through
the approved cable franchise process ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council of the City of Shakopee has deter-
mined it is in the best interest of all those participating in the
franchising process that all communications be public to avoid
misunderstandings and unwarrented accusations that could otherwise
develop either against the City, its Council Members , members of
the Shakopee Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee , or the City
staff ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council has determined a policy must be
adopted which will be consistently followed by its Council Members ,
Committee Members , and staff .
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA, that :
1 . It is the policy of the Shakopee City Council that all communi-
cations regarding any matter involved in the introduction of
cable communications system in Shakopee shallbe directed to
the Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee , appointed to act on
behalf of the City Council of the City of Shakopee . Communi-
cations to the committee should be presented to the committee-
as-a-whole and not to any individual member of the Committee
or City staff . Presentations may include oral information pro-
vided at public meetings of the Committee or written communi-
cations distributed at the meetings or delivered to the Shakopee
City Hall for distribution to Committee members . It is not
intended by this policy that communications by a citizen acting
in a private capacity will be prohibited .
2 . When the Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee has presented
its deliberations on issues related to the selection of a
cable communications system for Shakopee to the City Council
for discussion and approval , the policy on communications.
Resolution No . 1796 Page Two
will also apply to the City Council . That is , communications
should be presented to the Council-as-a-whole and not to the
Mayor , individual Council members or City staff . Presentations
may include oral information provided at City Council meetings
or written communications distributed at Council meetings or
delivered to City Hall for distribution to the Mayor and Coun-
cil members . It is not intended by this policy that communica-
tions by a citizen acting in a private capacity will be pro-
hibited .
3 . The City Clerk, of the City of Shakopee , on behalf of the
Shakopee Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee will request
each applicant or potential applicant proposing a cable communi-
cations system for the City of Shakopee to provide a list
designating those persons who will be the official speakers on
behalf of each applicant and potential applicant . The Clerk
will from time-to-time provide a report to the Committee mem-
bers and the City Council listing the names of the representa-
tives or official speakers for each applicant or potential
applicant .
4 . Each applicant or potential applicant proposing a cable communi-
cations system for Shakopee shall be provided a copy of this
policy , and shall in writing acknowledge receipt of said policy
and agree to adhere to said policy .
5 . This policy shall be effective as of the date of its adoption
and continuing until an ordinance granting a franchise for a
cable communications system is adopted , and during any chal-
lenges to said ordinace .
6 . Violation of this policy by any applicant , its agents , employees
or representatives may constitute grounds for rejection of any
proposal by such applicant .
•
Resolution No . 1796 Page Three
Adopted in session by the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of _ , 1981 .
City Attorney
%7
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
RE: Appointing Special Counsel to Review an I .R. Bond Project
DATE: February 27 , 1981
Introduction
As you are aware , the Assistant City Attorney, Rod Krass , does
have an ownership interest in the Shakopee Professional Group,
currently requesting Commercial Development Revenue Bonds .
Background
Mr. Krass has been reviewing all legal documents for the City
dealing with Industrial/Commercial Revenue Bonds . Because of
his financial interest in the Shakopee Professional Group, the
Dorsey firm has suggested, and I concur, that someone else
review the documents for this project . The Dorsey firm also
indicated that they would be willing to review the bonds if the
Council so desired.
Because they are reviewing the bond sale already (for the appli-
cant) to make sure it is in accordance with the law, and are
familar with IR bonds , it seems reasonable for them to review
the documents and proceedings on behalf of the City in this
case .
Alternatives
1 . Utilize Mr. Krass for legal counsel for the Shakopee
Professional Group I . R. Bonds .
2 . Adopt Resolution No . 1798 , appointing the Dorsey Firm
as legal counsel for the Shakopee Professional Group
I . R. Bonds .
3 . Appoint the City Attorney to review all documents . Jack
does not have experience in this field .
4 . Appoint a fourth party to review the documents . There
are not too many firms with experience in this field,
and since the Dorsey firm is familiar with our I .R.
Bond process , it should be less time consuming for them.
Recommended Action
I recommend the appointment of the Dorsey firm.
Offer Resolution No. 1798 , A Resolution Appointing Special Counsel
to Review Documents for the Shakopee Professional Group I .R. Bonds ,
and move its adoption .
JKA/jms
2
RESOLUTION NO. 1798
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING SPECIAL COUNSEL TO REVIEW
DOCUMENTS FOR THE SHAKOPEE PREFESSIONAL GROUP I .R. BONDS
WHEREAS , the Assistant City Attorney has an ownership interest
in a project proposed to be financed by Commercial Development
Revenue Bonds of the City of Shakopee .
NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA , that the firm of Dorsey , Windhorst ,
Hannaford , Whitney and Halladay is hereby appointed as special
counsel to review on behalf of the City documents and proceedings
with respect to the Shakopee Professional Group Commercial Develop-
ment Revenue Bond Project .
Adopted in _ session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day
of , 1981 .
City Attorney
t '
?aJ )7 -11\7
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
RE : Valley Health Properties and Shakopee Professional
Group Request for IR Bonds
DATE : March 2 , 1981
Introduction
City Council has established several review criteria for the proces-
sing of IR Bond requests including : completed application form,
site plan review and review by Springsted Incorporated prior to the
public hearing date . To date Council has received the completed
application forms for the above mentioned projects (please bring
them to the meeting if you wish to refer to them) .
Background
Attached for your review prior to the public hearing are the
Springsted Report from Bob Pulscher and the Site Plan Review
from the City Planner .
Recommendations or concerns listed in either report or brought
up by Council can be addressed between the date of the public
hearing and the following Council meeting at which Council would
act on the resolution authorizing the Bonds .
Alternatives
1 . Decline to act on the request and state Council ' s reasons .
2 . Act on the request by instructing staff to draft the appro-
priate resolutions .
3 . Act on the request by instructing staff to draft the appro-
priate resolutions and list information and/or conditions
to be met prior to action on the resolution .
Recommendation
Staff recommends Alternative No . 3 .
JKA/jms
SPRINGSTED
INCORPORATED
PUBLIC FINANCE
ADVISORS
27 February 1981
F'r { f M'
Mr. John K. Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee E)61
6Z
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
CITY
OF
Eri-
AKO
Dear Mr. Anderson:
We have reviewed the two applications for revenue financing submitted by Valley
Health Properties and the Shakopee Professional Group. Our comments relative to
these applications are outlined hereafter by project.
Valley Health Properties
There are several items required by your guidelines which were not presented.
These include:
I. There is no finding that the real estate value shall be equal to at least
90% of the total value of the note issued. A calculation of the
estimated costs contained in the application at the lower end of the
range of estimates, indicate a land and building value of $830,000
which, if $850,000 of notes represent the maximum to be issued,
would represent 90%. In the event you desire further substantiation,
we suggest you request an architect's certificate of estimated value
which can be reviewed by your assessing staff.
2. There is no indication of a firm commitment for interim financing as
required by the guidelines. We do not know if interim financing will
be required.
3. It would appear from the application that the debt instruments to be
issued will be mortgage revenue notes, and we recommend your
preliminary resolution provide that as a condition to issuance of the
final resolution.
There is no indication of whether the security to be pledged will include any of the
partnership or individual assets. While your guidelines do not require that specific
information, if security is of concern to you, you will need to inquire as to what
additional securities, if any, beyond a mortgage, will be pledged.
Shakopee Professional Group
We have the same questions about this application, as with the Valley Health
Properties application.
No finding that real estate values will be equal to at least 90% of the
800 Osborn Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 (612) 222-4241
Mr. John K. Anderson
27 February 1981
Page 2
value of notes issued.
2. No commitment for interim financing, if such financing is required.
3. We recommend your initial resolution be conditioned by requiring the
issuance of a mortgage revenue note.
There is no specific showing of security which might be pledged by the partnership,
or an individual within the partnership. If you are concerned about security, inquiry
of this matter should be made.
General Comments
We have made no review of these projects as they may affect your limit of total
aggregate outstanding industrial revenue bonds to 25% of the City's taxable
assessed valuation.
The project would appear to meet all other requirements promulgated by the City
relative to industrial revenue bond financing.
If security for issues of this kind is a concern of the City Council, we suggest a
minor revision of your guidelines and application form which will require more
specific information. The current application is inadequate for that purpose.
If you have any questions about these matters please feel free to contact me. I am
enclosing the material sent to us relative to these projects.
Very sincerely yours,
ii..A'N-'11.41..j'd-Robert D. Pulscher
Enc.
/gf
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: Tim Keane
City Planner
RE : Shakopee Professional Group Amended (2/28/81) Site
Plan
DATE: March 2, 1981
REQUEST :
The applicant is requesting approval of Industrial Revenue
Bonds in order to develop the 20, 520 square foot Shakopee
Professional Group offices . Staff has reviewed the site plan
for conformance with City standards . Comments are noted below :
Parking: The City parking requirements for an
office building are 1 parking stall/200 square feet of
net floor area. Based on 17 ,442 square feet net floor
area, 87 stalls are required. The plan proposes 92
stalls . The site plan does not specify which parking
areas will have curb and gutter. All paved areas
carrying surface drainage should have curb and gutter
to be approved by the City Engineer.
Drainage : The drainage plan proposes to carry the water
via surface drainage to County Road 17 to the west and
to a drainage culvert along the railroad tracks to
the north. The City Engineer requests the applicant
to prepare plans specifying the design of the drainage-
ways to both County Road 17 and the railroad culvert ,
with the provision of any necessary easements .
Landscaping: The site plan includes a landscape plan
indicating plantings around the parking areas and shade
trees around the perimeter of the building. Final
approval of a detailed landscape plan will take place at
the time of the building permit review.
Access Drives : The plan proposes a 24 two-way drive
onto County Road 17 and a 24 foot two-way drive to
County Road 16 . These curb cuts are subject to the
approval of the County Engineer.
Waste Management : The site plan indicates the trash
dumpster to be located near the north/east corner of
the building. Staff would request that the plans include
the construction of a dumpster enclosure .
John K. Anderson -2- March 2 , 1981 re,
Additional Considerations : This site was platted as
Lots 4 and 5, Furrie ' s 2nd Addition. That plat approval
included a required berm and planting screen between
this plat and the townhomes to the east .
County Road 17 is a minor arterial and as such the City
requires sidewalks on both sides of the street . The
development plan should include a sidewalk along County
Road 17.
County Road 16 is a collector street and as such,
sidewalks are required on one side of the street . Since
the boulevard grades do not permit a sidewalk on the
south side of County Road 16, staff would recommend the
construction of a sidewalk.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Shakopee Professional Group
Office Building site plan as part of the Industrial Revenue Bond
approval conditioned on :
1) Approval of drainage plan by the City Engineer
with provision of the necessary easements .
2) Provision of sidewalk along County Road 17 and
County Road 16.
TK/jiw
Attachment : Amended Site Plan
IC(F6
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: Tim Keane
City Planner
RE : Valley Health Property Site Plan
DATE : March 2 , 1981
REQUEST:
The applicant is requesting Industrial Revenue Bonds in
order to develop the 14 ,710 square foot Valley Health Property
office building.
Staff has reviewed the site plan for conformance with the
City standards. Comments are noted below:
Parking: The City requirements for an office building
are one parking stall per 200 square feet of net floor
area. Based on a net floor area of 10, 900 square feet ,
73 parking stalls are required. The plan proposes 75
parking stalls . Since medical office facilities generally
require more parking than standard office facilities , staff
would recommend that the site plan be reviewed to explore
the inclusion of additional stalls at this time . Staff
would note, however, that the proposed plan does meet the
Code requirements for parking as proposed.
The site plan does not specify which parking areas will
have curb and gutter. All paved areas conveying drainage
should have curb and gutter to be approved by the City
Engineer.
Access Drives : The plan proposes two drives on County
Road 17 . The drive to the south is a 24 foot two-way
curb cut and the drive to the north is a 16 foot one-
way exit cut directly on to County Road 17. County
Road 17 is a minor arterial and as such, curb cuts onto
this road facility should be minimized wherever possible .
Staff would request that the developer work with City
staff in developing a parking plan that can reduce the
curb cuts to one two-way drive unto County Road 17 . These
curb cuts are subject to the approval of the County
Engineer.
John Anderson -2- March 2, 1981 i/`
Drainage : The drainage proposes to carry the entire surface
water via surface drainage to the railroad drainage culvert
to the north of the site. The City Engineer requests that the
applicant prepare plans specifying the design or the drainage-
way to the railroad tracks to the north and include the
provisions of any necessary drainage easements .
Landscaping. The site plan includes a landscape plan
indicating plantings along County Road 17 and shade trees
around the perimeter of the building. An amended site plan
to the Shakopee Professional Office Building to the south
includes a planting strip between the two parking lots in
order to separate traffic movement and accommodates no
storage between these two office buildings .
Waste Management : The site plan indicates the trash
dumpster to be located near the northeast corner of the
building. Staff would request that the plans include
the construction of a dumpster enclosure.
Additional Considerations : This lot was platted as Lot 3 ,
Block 1 of Furrie 's 2nd Addition. This is an "L" shaped
lot that has frontage on the railroad tracks to the north
and County Road 17 to the west . As part of the plat
improvement , was a requirement that berming be included
along the east side of the property line of this sub-
division that abuts the Patricia' s 1st Addition town
homes . The site plan does include the possibility of
future expansion of this site in the dogleg portion of
the lot to the north.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION :
Staff recommends approval of the site plan for the Valley Health
Property Office Building as part of the Industrial Revenue Bond
approval, subject to the following conditions :
1) The drainage plan be approved by the City Engineer.
2) That the developer work with City staff to develop
a parking plan that minimizes the curb cuts onto
County Road 17
3 ) Provision of sidewalk along County Road 17 .
TK/j iw
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE : Supplemental Agreement to Lease Agreement , 200 Levee Drive
DATE : February 18 , 1981
Introduction
The City of Shakopee has entered a Lease Agreement with 200 Levee
Drive Associates , Ltd. for the space now known as the Shakopee
Senior Multipurpose Center at 200 Levee Drive in Shakopee . Attached
is a Supplemental Agreement to the Lease Agreement .
Background
The above-listed lease was executed on December 18 , 1979 . Prior to
execution of the lease agreement , discussion was held regarding the
possibility of reserving parking spaces in the building parking lot
for visitors to the Senior Multipurpose Center. The building owner
also indicated an interst in using some spaces in the nearby Red
Arrow Municipal Parking Lot for resident parking. However the park-
ing issue was not addressed in the executed Lease Agreement . The
attached Agreement provides for an exchange of five parking spaces
in the building parking lot for those in the Municipal Lot and allows
up to five additional cars of building residents to be parked in the
municipal lot beyond the posted limit .
The Supplemental Agreement does not specifically call for parking
permits to be issued to specific building residents , or for specific
parking spaces to be assigned to building residents . It is hoped
this parking arrangement can be executed on an informal basis ,
however if problems arise more formal arrangements will be made .
Alternatives
The City Council can drop the issue of parking altogether . Alter-
nately the Council can chose only to request parking spaces for
Multipurpose Center visitors or only to provide spaces for residents
in the Red Arrow Municipal Parking Lot without linking the issue to
use of the building parking lot . The final alternative is to adopt
the Supplemental Agreement dealing with parking in a comprehensive
manner. This agreement could be adopted as is , or the number of
spaces in each category can be revised up or down.
Recommendation
I recommend the City Council approve the Supplemental Agreement to
Lease Agreement of December 18 , 1979 , between 200 Levee Drive Asso-
ciates , Ltd. , and the City of Shakopee , and authorize its execution
by appropriate City officials .
JA/jms
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT
TO
LEASE AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, on December 18, 1979, a lease was made and entered into by and
between 200 Levee Drive Associates, Ltd. , a Minnesota limited partnership
(hereinafter referred to as the Lessor) , and the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Lessee) ; and
WHEREAS, It appears that certain provisions for parking should be provided
as an addendum to said agreement of December 18, 1979.
THEREFORE, This agreement for good and valuable consideration is made and
entered into the day and year hereinafter written by and between 200 Levee Drive
Associates, Ltd. , Lessor, and the City of Shakopee, Lessee, as follows:
1. That the Lessor will provide as a part of its agreement with the lessee
five (5) parking spaces on the premises occupied by the lessor and described as
Lots 6 through 10, Block 6, according to the original plat of the City of Shakopee.
These spaces are provided for use by senior citizens using the facilities at
200 Levee Drive but who do not reside on said premises.
2. That the lessee will provide for use by the lessor its, licensees and
permitees, up to 10 parking spaces in the municipal Red Arrow Parking Lot for
parking beyond the posted parking limits but none of such parking spaces shall
be used for dead storage and provisions will have to be made by the lessor for
moving the parked vehicles for cleaning and snow removal purposes undertaken by
the City in the Red Arrow Lot.
3. That the effective date of this supplemental agreement shall be the date
that the lessee enters into occupancy of the premises leased by the agreement of
December 18, 1979 and shall terminate on the same date as said agreement unless
terminated earlier by mutual consent of the parties hereto.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the lessor and the lessee have caused this agreement
to be executed upon proper action by the lessor and the lessee and executed by
authorized officers,all as of this day of , 1981.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE 200 LEVEE DRIVE ASSOCIATES,LTD.
By By
Mayor
By
City Clerk - Administrator
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE : Brief Cases for Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee
Members
DATE : February 24, 1981
At the February 23 , 1981 meeting of the Ad Hoc Cable Communications
Committee , the Committee moved to request the Chairman of the
Committee to designate a person to purchase six brief cases , at
a cost not to exceed $450 .00, for members of the Committee . The
brief cases to be returned to the City when the Committee is termi-
nated. Randy Gorman was designated to purchase the brief cases .
However I think the City Council needs to authorize this purchase .
Can this issue be discussed at the March 3 , 1981 Council meeting?
JA/jms
g )
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE : Legal Services for Shakopee Cable Franchise Process
DATE : February 18 , 1981
Introduction
The Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee has come to the point in
its activities where legal services will soon be necessary. The
Committee would like direction from the City Council regarding the
provision of legal services .
Background
The formation of the Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee was
authorized by the City Council of the City of Shakopee in Resolu-
tion No . 1600 of May 6 , 1980. The Committee has met since July 8 ,
1980 to consider the possible provision of a cable communications
system for Shakopee. The Committee has periodically reported to
the City Council regarding various steps in the process of adopt-
ing a cable communications franchise , including formation of a
Cable Service Territory and assessment of the community needs re-
lating to cable communications . On January 6 , 1981 the City Council
adopted Resolution No. 1772 , requesting the continued involvement
of the Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee in the franchise pro-
cess (Resolution attached) . A number of activities the Committee
is to undertake require the advice and cooperation of legal counsel .
I estimate , based on discussions with other communities in the cable
franchise process , that 60-80 hours of work will be involved. This
includes time to draft the ordinance and attendance at about ten
meetings of the Committee and the City Council during the later
stages of the franchise process .
The City Attorney has indicated it would be difficult for him to
provide services to the extent contemplated in the time table
anticipated by the Committee . The Assistant City Attorney has
indicated a willingness to assume this task. However as legal
services for cable communications were not specifically budgeted ,
Council approval should be secured before taking this line of
action. Council should be aware of the fact that costs related
to the franchise process can be passed on to the selected cable
franchisor, as a front-end franchise fee . However the City would
be assuming the initial burden of these costs until the franchise
is awarded . (Estimated range is $2600 to $3500. )
Alternatives
The City Council has a number of alternatives to resolve this
issue :
1 . Slow down the activities of the Cable Committee such that
the City Attorney could more easily assume the necessary
legal functions .
John Anderson
February 18 , 1981
Page 2
Alternatives Continued
2 . Request the Assistant City Attorney to become the legal
counsel to the Cable Committee .
3 . Hire an outside attorney specializing in the area of cable
communications law to work with the Cable Committee .
Recommended Action
Request the Assistant City Attorney to become the legal counsel to
the Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee , with the understanding
that expenses incurred will be charged to the selected cable
communications franchisor.
JA js
RESOLUTION NO . 1772
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO . 1 600
ESTABLISHING THE Al) HOC CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
WHEREAS , the City Council of the City of Shakopee has recom-
mended the establishment of a cable service territory for the
municipal boundaries of the City of Shakopee ; and
WHEREAS , in Resolution No . 1600 the City Council established
an Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee to advise the Council on
certain matters relating to franchising a cable communications
system ; and
WHEREAS , members of this Committee have served the City con-
scientiously in issues considered by the Committee to this date ,
and
WHEREAS , the duties of the Committee as outlined in Resolu-
tion No . 1600 are to terminate upon completion of a community
needs assessment and recommendation to the City Council regarding
continuation with the franchise process ; and
WHEREAS , the Committee is near completion of its assessment
of communication ' s needs in the community ; and
WHEREAS , the Committee recommended to the City Council that
the City proceed with the franchise process at the September. 23 ,
1980 Council meeting ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council concurs with the Committee recommen-
, dation to proceed with the franchise process and desires the
Committee to continue its efforts .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA , that the duties of the Committee as
provided in Resolution 1600 are hereby amended to include the
following additional activities :
1 . Draft a Request for Proposals (RFP) from cable operators
for the operation of cable communications in Shakopee .
2 . Hear presentations from cable operators submitting pro-
posals to operate cable communications in Shakopee .
3 . Recommend to the City Council the cable operator who
can best serve the needs identified for cable communica-
tions in Shakopee .
4 . Prepare for consideration by City Council an ordinance
establishing a cable franchise i n Shakopee .
. r
Resolution No . 1772 Page Twog ¢
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Committee shall continue to
function until disolved by action of the City Council subsequent
to the adoption of a cable franchise ordinance for Shakopee .
Adopted inYj(//1) session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this eigi da y o 'di 41
1981 . / i
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
MIIIII
I . 0 . IR
C' 1er,:I _ .
i
f f
CITY OF SHAKOPEE LIONS PARK SWIMMING POOL
1281 PROGRAM/PLAN
A. Introduction
The Lions Park Municipal Outdoor Swimming Pool first used in 1969 has been a
summer focal point for thousands of fun seekers, swimmers, and sun bathers.
For a number of years the facility was able to meet on site costs from revenues
generated. In the past five years this has no longer been possible due to rising
costs of supplies and personnel. The 1980 subsidy was approximately $1,000.00.
The City has operated the pool as a major service to its constituents. The
goal has been to provide a pleasurable atmosphere within the framework of safe
conditions. Educational swimming instruction has been emphasized.
B. Background
Weather conditions are the major factor that determines to what extent the
pool is used each summer. If the temperature soars into the 80's and 90's
people will flock to the pool in great numbers.
Economic conditions seem to provide a framework of a wait and see attitude
on the part of many potential pool users. There seem to be more individual
tickets now sold rather than Family ones. There is a hesitancy to buy
season tickets if there is a possible chance that they can get by purchasing
only a few daily tickets instead.
1. Hours Of OReration Summer 1981
a. The season will begin Saturday, June 6, and conclude Sunday,
August 16 72 days. Same number of days as 1980.
b. Staff will meet for a few hours (paid time) prior to the start
of the season to prepare facilities and participate in staff
training. A few will work for a few hours after the season
(paid time) to button down the facilities.
c. Open Swimming Hours will be from 1:00-4:30 daily.
It „ " 6:30-8:30 „
d. Swimming Instruction will be from June 15 - August 7 weekdays.
Hours are 9:30-12:30 and 5:30-6:15. Lessons are in blocks of
two week periods and follow the Red Cross Program, Beginners
through Advanced Lifesaving. Weekdays only.
e. The Pool is available for organized groups to reserve the pool
for private splash partys after regular hours. Not too many
groups have taken advantage of this opportunity.
The trend of groups holding picnics at Lions Park and including
a swim in the pool during regular hours continues. This adds
to the usage of the pool.
2. Budget And Expense Comparison 1938-1981
(See attached report)
11
clot
tzci 'to ef),-. a.Eio-r..t.
' . o .Ls Jet-isev: I s a 7..4:t .teso; er)`,t c.)-7 .
cre, rT..S. [arl(JC: 't 3• 0
s 1307 asrf 7
•-• a'iT -a ' I. T72 -"8-f rnx•-•,,1.4 sabk)--)1..qo efi :so1
2111
t *-1:1J-01->ri ertok,tt.bn:oo
e ?.`if;(2.F. 4,05F, '),seu )o/
e-4.t o.t t„.11.70;.
.3i• TO"! ").F1
•a..-19P,rr I O)i L5± ryrtsmID 1ST 9
Loa. r'
•; : .:.4ortsrfo ; e.tero f.4 8
.;9)fo.t.t --;[kb
nok,tn-Lp,.:L '10 e•-x.o.o:f _.1
r i,Si.eaal'.1%.!,-,!3:_. .,708Flea 9riT
. 51'-in-Urr e )r
7••••' 13 "1(.)-t ten 171:1V0I13 .ci
1IisJ r± . tisq 113-T60"Tr4 otrioese)s; pcfit '10
) rf S 101 *low 111..t.:, we A
tosei arfi. rlwob ojjr o.t ( „;-oir
„-.) [1.1).%- eiuoU n rn±w nog')
. 'T ;1
. Fit 2 E ed ii_hw j-erfT. b
at.Ityryl
; wc; 1. NI,- 7. •
• a', a st • .7 1_7:s1 T 0:IAra roq
- rr èL 'TO - r t ') C.
7, 7 e-i 19:1.1:3 8,17.7.,Vi'y
cf:f 710 "")78 rriEvi).S :"fc)...410 evArf eqxs
- 03 o eTun-.1.-, lo b .L,
a0f.r E4 LLI Td-W
• erf,t 0
)E.... ) ,...• -t-c,,q
t
I T _
• 1 ,t
1 II
1 , 1
a �I 1 it
•
�
�.,1 i� (NI I I
i W E4 0 trl 0; 0 0 / •••••1. Cf11
T 'I h ' h 11
CV
. ri 4 0 . , ;
• •
1 Ili
.........
.,• -Nit-7, ----7-7:•• i. , "--,-7.. ••• ...,-,..,----7-7 ------- , ., . : . ... _ : ; c - , • '7 I .- ' , r - , - . :. 7-77 _
. .
. . ,
•
! ;
I
et
1 • .
, t •
• !
.
.
ji ' • I ; .
• :
: .•
41 ,
. 1 I ' .- •
.
0 I
4.1I , •IJI
I I
I . .
. .
, . .
CL I ' : 1 ;
I I I 1
'
i 0 0 I CV -4 ,r, 1 •
., c),• a H H ' cr\ N 0
!
4i4
1
I
I
: H H
. in
, ce\
•••• •
•
! c\I H cr\
0 I I
i I 1
i I a
I 1 a
•f l::::: i...: 0 I 1.-• .- ... a ..-. I...: ..., ... I:::::: ..., .
.J Z• I I I I
1
1.....•-•1..I I ez. c, I ,a I C-: In; .
I CC L.)O. . 06 c, I :ca I C:
111 I k
...
1 :in
- ii 1-4 ‘...4 .r; •
•
1:31
lc: : 0 a' I : I
I
I . act,
a 1 o Lc
' 1 ' I a
A .
1 1 -
t'a I
PI. .
0 1 .. 1 0.4 1.4i1 ••_ 0..1 I.!1 6•0 I. 6..., 0.1 6. 1.1. •
a', 2:I, Oa is , I .
•D! ;....IX Z a! o I c 01 I ( I 0 ,0 UI'
1:0 0 01 1Oil 0 c.'I 0- 0 '0 2.1
Ir
i I s 30 4). an I 'in ci i s ea co ;co NI
WI II :::-.: ..-: N I N. . I.
0j
1 I
.
. ec I
i 1 I
I I .
VII • ' • a a
II !
i •
4- .1 I 1.4 .41 I.. I lb. ••• I 4.. I a. ... .... ;.... ..,
1 ,
:00 O. 0
:In LJ 0 1
,
I 401
ei
in ;c- 050 lo
,,n cc 1 0 10
an a a o !co I cc aro
1 co a'
I cc co .
i-o c Li I .41 •-, 0,1 IISJ 1.2 1.4 5,5;
a
5.-1 cc I ,
; o i tol
a.5t 1 o a
o
1
1'11 I, s
II I , I I I •
0. I ..411 ••••• I I-. al •-• .-. ... II... •••• .... I a-
i a
1 ,
IC'4i 1 01 en a i 0 inl •
3-i 1E0 0 0..1 1 01 ,0 I ,o I 0 'VD!
CC: I Os Li Lc' ' in I !tr a 1.4a ;4:1 t•-,j :
t i 1.•-•1 4C 5I .41 I.4 I 1.4 i.-• .4aI ;
ri I
I ; I I .
5.- . I 1
L1 I ali I .
LJ i I I I
S.I1 I
al i
VI). CC 1 ,
V I Ca I ii . !CO .. Cr• •••• •
cZ,; a .4 sI , I 1.• Os 0 Os'
0' 4- In I , I 14.
a I .
' i -.4 in I
a- a-• ..1
U
CD .
o
M CL.
CC 0 i 0 0 .0 C; 0 0 1 0 In
In -I 0 ;I,0 c• o 0 I 0 or
i et a. 1 co N 'C) 0 0 ih- I p. In •
i 2' 12. ; I..-s ('4 0,1 ••• I.... an
Z .-a acC 1I
.
0 :
4
. 1
I I
V). I
.
I I
>1
-I .../ *X col I n co 0 11co . I. \C
o CI Cr, X CD I Cal 4.1 .-. I 0,1 WI I act 0.1
0 '- 4- Iin I tri1 c0 i CC' " C
Ct. Cr, 0 •••4 I.-4 I^-1 ..., c0 0
I , CV C.
O ,• I .
Z
I 1 I
.... One I ' 2
0,1 X
:•-•• ;
4 I
0I
I
I In cc co oi5 in 1 in i
E
1 A cc. m 1
r- a-, 0 ICJ 11-1 an cii N
N N ‘.13 .0 0‘, ..0 P-s ft ,..0 -.
:If
...I ch uI 1,1
..., 1 .-;;;
I
etd 0 ••• 4f
' I
1
•-•
0 i . ,.:
••• ' 1
.... I I
.
I >
C4 C
I I
" '1.- I-
1 tr;
,0I
I bC II'..
;2 7^
M 1 IL) '
I 0 •‹ > 'Li I a. Z
IC' ") IC J I 0 o
I° , ..." I 0 <
. • VII I G ..
G. L^ I..i- 0In
In LI; .0 1 52 t...' 0 '"
V) ...) 01 .cc a- I .-, C- ic. >,
Ll 0- 0 tor I ;ccr 2 I , I„„: „_,
,
41 , 4../ 0 4It' '0 la I .0 a. C C'G.
O. I Z
T.' Si.., U in 7 ''x r o 1,0 a- o cc
o 1 t: Q.I I _i .L,- U ..i.: V
. )
V 0. 1 1.") Ir., I Z .1 I < 41 j ....1
el I I.- 1 1 . 4) cs ;c 0!I I. Li X I CIC X I •
X X 1 Cl. At 114.. 411 Li IN XI I . .0 00 1 I..../ /••••I C
U) ,_ i... C. 2 X V I.-• t...1.1 ...- I,- ).- 0 IX. •
O I CC IC' ‘c I cC I I I ca ICJ 41 1 4.- V) 01
La. 4, 1 0 42 H .- .../ I LL .1'i L.) 42 .- 0 i0 .-
O ,VI 2 .J I a 1 5 I a I-5 1 2
-J Ito In I-J L , 4: 1._i c-'i -J ,1 5 1' -J I-o
0 w ... az] U i< 6-.1 I . !L.: I., st I C X <I
. a; I C o.- ce va 1.- O.,. .- 'Cr -.' > IS- WI CC;
.-.1 LI 0 I a:, .--: c a II C .L.1 .s: 2 0
Li 2 10- -....c :1-- u 1 2' ;4-• I.); I ,- 2 co, 5. o 5- a-.
41 I LI 1I
'
C,I C 11.1 I . • ....1 f S. • ••,,i I • .C-• 1. C.7 I• •X I I:,
ce, I....: r . ...I 0, .,, ....a • ...0- flI 0, I• ,-
.... •-• IW el • • I .Is 47 • I Vil 1 • II?- I u- i!, • 41..41 ••!
•• e. CL * I.. a-1 4. ,• a •P,I • ;4. a It 4` 1 1• $.•l a
I ,
. .., • . ., ,,. . .1'2 : V if.' !. l''.'if.
I-' 7i L:o,n; `-''
L.... "Jc
.... ....; O.-- '..... i...., o...... 5-., c...., ‘.... -- -/ .-' • .. ..... t. _) V
3. Personnel 1981
The operational staff would consist of a Manager, Assistant Manager,
Cashier, seven Guards/Instructors, six Aides, and a backup crew of
parttime employees. Each of these personnel are scheduled on a regular
basis as needed. All perform important functions. Many are valued
returning workers. We are indeed fortunate: Their wages are the major
costs incurred in this program. Proposed 1981 Wages:
Proposed
POSITION 1978 1979 1980 1981
a.
Aides $ 2.30-2.40 $ 2.40-2.50 $ 2.80-3.10 $ 3.00-3.25
b. Guards/Instructors 3.40-3.60 3.60-3.80 3.80-4.00 4.00-4.20
c. Cashiers 2.70 2.95 3.50 3.80
d. Managers 4.40-4.65 4.50-4.80 4.80-5.10 5.00-5.30
4
4. Proposed Fees
Category 1978 1979 1980
a. Family Season by June 1 - $28.00 by June 15 - $25.00 by June 15 - $27.00
Ticket after 6/1 - 31.00 , after 6/15 - 31.00_ after 6,15 - 31.00
b. Individual
Season Ticket 16.00 16.00 16.00
Family 7.00 Family 8.00 Family 8.00
c. Guest Tickets Individual 3.00 Individual 3.00
Children 6.00 Children 7.00 Children 8.00
d. Instruction Adults 8.00 Adults 9.00, Adults 10.00
e. Sr. Citizens free free free
f. Gate - Child _ .75 .75 .75
g. Gate - Adult 1.00 1.00 1.00
Proposed
Category 1981
a. Family Season by May 4 $28.00
Ticket after Mav 4- 31,00
b. Individual
Season Ticket 1600
Family 8.00
c. Guest Tickets _ IndividuaLl 3.00
Children 9.00
d. Instruction Adults 10.00
e. Sr. Citizens free
f. Gate - Child .75
g. Gate - Adult 1,00
.i251,10Ifri
tW1Eg fiszte
e •.•:,.te \ei-nsu neves
r.c„-1 e-Lsf .inoei ID .eef-,rtplcpr9er.Lt .
-7!•`T. . 1J tc'iis ..rno`isi :LA .b-.beerf es ei,e,
• 3,- "4: I ba5b; -rt
; bseogo'l 0'1'7 e
•
: . 3 • ,. , :
•
VIOn
E • SiTrr7, J . - 7.15-Tts'i —s
„ _ r‘ L2Lr
•
•"• 1-7.Lbcf.,7" •
• ,
, lce.seP
,
•
j• mr,:";
•
iL : •:),2.
: ,„ •
_ .
—
• •
••••
. -
.„. •
-'10ne
—
`t•!') ,• f).1
)•. 'VA Z`:
)
f)0 .
•
f37-13:,) .
Tickets sold in 1279: Tickets sold in 1980:
a. 404 Season Tickets @ $25.00 = $ 10,100.00 346 Tickets @ $27.00 = $ 9,342.00
b. 0 " " @ 31.00 = 0 33 " " 31.00 = 1,023.00
c. 69 " " @ 16.00 = 1,104.00 108 " " 16.00 = 1,728.00
d. 2 Guest Tickets @ 8.00 .= 16.00 6 " " 8.00 = 48.00
e. 8 Guest Tickets @ 3.00 = 24.00 16 " " 3.00 = 48.00
f. 737 Child Lessons @ 7.00 = 5,159.00 689 " " 8.00 = 5,512.00
g. 3 Adult Lessons @ 9.00 = 27.00 2 " " 10.00 = 20.00
TOTAL $ 16,430.00 TOTAL $17,721.00
(less refunds) - 1.80
GRAND TOTAL 1 62 20
C. Alternatives
Staff recommendations are to increase Family Season Ticket prices $1.00
from the previous season for those that make their purchase at the Shakopee
Showcase on May 4. Those that purchase thereafter will pay the same as the
previous season - $31.00. It is furthermore recommended that the children's
Instruction fee be increased from $8.00 to $9.00.
The rational fuer specifying May 4 as the only time for allowing the Season
Ticket reduction is that this will encourage people to make their purchase
at that time when more personnel are on hand to help them. This, in turn,
frees up the regular office staff during normal office hours.
The June 15 cutoff date instituted the past two years to encourage people
to buy season tickets in reality has not worked. Weather conditions are
what encourage ticket sales to happen.
Other prices lower or higher can be used if desired, but there is no
guarantee that they will be any better or worse than the above.
D. Recommendations
Staff recommends the above fees to be instituted for 1981 with May 4
being used as the cutoff date for purchasing reduced rate season tickets.
MEMO TO:._.. John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE : Liquor and Beer License Fees
DATE : February 26 , 1981
Introduction
If the Council is desirous of increasing liquor and beer fees for
the 1981/1982 licensing year, this is an appropriate time to do so .
Background
About three or four years ago , City staff recommended the Council
increase the fees , which had not been increased for sometime . At
this time a survey was made of surrounding communities to aid in
revising the outdated fee schedule . Also the Administrator did
recommend that the fees be increased some each year rather than
waiting a number of years and adopting a larger increase . I would
add , City costs to provide services to these establishments also
increase each year.
Recommendation
The Minneapolis/St . Paul consumer price index annual increase is
10. 7%. Therefore , it is recommended that the City Council increase
the various liquor and beer licenses by approximately ten percent
(10%) rounded with some exceptions and specific conditions .
On Sale Beer License :
1980 - $250.00
1981 - $275 .00
-- Last year the increase was only $10.00
Temporary Beer License :
1980 - $10.00
1981 - $10.00
Off Sale Beer and Set-Up License :
1980 - $80.00
1981 - $90.00
-- 10% would be $8 .00, I rounded to $10.00
On Sale Wine License :
1980 - 1/2 of On Sale Liquor License
1981 - Same
John K. Anderson
February 26 , 1981
Page Two
On Sale Club License :
a) For National , Fraternal , Religious or Veterans Organizations :
1980 - $200.00
1981 - $220.00
b) For all other clubs :
1980 - Same as On Sale Liquor
1981 - $300.00 (200 or less membership)
$500.00 (201-500 membership)
$650.00 (501-1000 membership)
-- Maximum allowed by law
Off Sale Liquor License :
1980 - $150.00
1981 - $150.00
-- This fee is set by statute and cannot be increased
Sunday Liquor License :
1980 - $200.00
1981 - $200.00
-- This fee is set by statute and cannot be increased
On Sale Liquor License :
Customer Used Floor Area (square feet) -
Bars Restaurants
1980 1981 1980 1981
Under 1 ,000 $3 ,200 $3 ,500 $2 ,700 $3 ,000
1 ,000-2 ,000 3 ,700 4,000 3 ,200 3 ,500
2 ,000-3 ,000 4,200 4,500 3 , 700 4,000
3 ,000-4,000 4, 700 5 ,000 4,200 4, 500
4,000-5 ,000 4, 700 5 ,000
5 ,000-6 ,000 5 ,200 5 ,500
6 ,000-7 ,000 5 , 700 6 ,000
7 ,000-8,000 6 ,200 6, 500
8 ,000-9 ,000 6 ,700 7 ,000
9 ,000-10,000 7 ,200 7 ,500
Over 10,000 7 ,700 8,000
I have suggested $300.00 across the board increases which is
approximately ten percent of the lowest fee paid . I think that
across the board increases are better than a flat percent because
it keeps the same relationship in place between the various size
establishments .
John K. Anderson flu
February 26 , 1981
Page Three
Alternatives :
a) Chose not to increase liquor and beer license fees this
year .
b) Approve fees recommended by staff . (Note : this is the
same recommendation made by staff last year, however,
Council chose to increase on sale liquor license fees
by $200.00 rather than $300.00 . )
c) Adjust the increase recommended by staff .
Recommended Action :
Approve the liquor and beer license fees recommended by staff
(as amended) and direct staff to incorporate the said fees into
the fee resolution being prepared by staff .
JSC/jms
eY
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE : pn Sale Intoxicating Liquor License Fees
DATE : March 2 , 1981
Introduction
In my memo of February 28th on Liquor and Beer License Fees I
neglected to address the method of payment . I believe this
needs to be addressed at this time also .
Background
The City Code states that the license fee is part of the appli-
cation and is set by resolution . However , for the last two
licensing years the City has accepted the on sale liquor license
fee one-half in June and one-half in December . Because of this
the City lost $2 ,350 in revenues in 1980 because an establishment
closed down and did not make their second one-half payment . Had
the full fee been collected in June , this lost revenue would not
have occurred.
Five municipalities of seven surveyed do permit one-half fee paid
in June and one-half fee paid in December.
In a memo to the City Council , dated December 9 , 1980, from the
Acting Administrator a recommendation was made " . . . . to require
full payment of the license fee when it is initially issued and
for two consecutive renewal periods allowing for two installment
payments upon the third renewal . "
Alternatives
1 . Maintain the current language in the City Code and require
all license fees at the time of application.
2 . Rewrite the City Code to allow the second half of the on
sale intoxicating liquor licensee fee to be paid in December ,
when an application is made for a third , or more , renewal .
This will require a business to have been in existance at
least two years .
3 . Rewrite the City Code to allow one-half of the on sale intoxi-
cating liquor license fee to be paid in December. This would
be equitable to all establishments , new and old , and will
present less of a financial burden for new licensees .
John K. Anderson r
March 2 , 1981
Page Two
Recommendation
I recommend alternative number one , maintain the current City Code
and require license fees for on sale intoxicating liquor license
to be paid in June and submitted along with the application .
The City is not in the business of financing budgeted expenditures
of businesses , particularily when it could lead to lost revenue for
the City.
Recommended Action
Direct staff to comply with the City Code and collect fees for
all beer and liquor license renewals at the time applications are
submitted .
JSC/jms
2 A
MEMO TO: John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: Tim Keane
City Planner
RE: Fee Schedules
DATE: February 25, 1981
Introduction:
This memo is in response to your request for a staff recommendation concerning
an appropriate fee schedule for processing planning requests.
Discussion:
The reason for charging fees is to insure that those parties that make certain
requests of the City (plats, conditional use permits, variances) , pay some
portion of the cost of that service. The alternative to charging fees is to
provide that service at the expense of all taxpayers. The actual costs, to
the City for typical requests are noted below:
Preliminary Plat Approval
Mail Public Hearing Notices (20 @ .25 each) S 5.00
Publish Public Hearing Notice 15.00
Planner's time ($9.25/hr. x .14%) $12.95 x 18 hrs. 133.10
Meetingswith developer, prepare case reports,
meetings with staff, Planning Commission
and Council meetings, misc. , calls and follow-
up
Other staff time ($15.00/hr. x 14%) $17.10 x 10 hrs. 171.00
(Admin. , Eng. , Clerk)
Secretary's time ($5/hr. x .140) $5.70 x 4 hrs. 22.80
Recording Secretary $5.50 x 2.5 hrs. 16.50
$363.40*
*This does not include the overhead costs of office space, copying, misc. staff
time, holding meetings and public hearings, maintaining maps and base information.
Variance
Mail public hearing notices (20 @ .25) S 5.00
Publish Public Hearing Notice 15.00
Planner's time ($9.25 x .14) 5 hrs. x $12.95 64.75
Meet with applicant, prepare case reports, meet
with staff, Planning Commission (Council) meetings,
misc. calls & follow-up
Secretary's time ($5/hr. x .14) 3 hrs. x $5.70 17.10
Recording Secretary $5.50 x 1 hrs. 5.50
3106.35*
John Anderson -2- February 25, 1981 3,
*This again does not include overhead costs noted above. The above costs are
calculated quite conservatively. Resource commitments frequently exceed
these estimates and rarely fall below them.
The present fee schedule for planning items is as follows:
Preliminary Plat $100 = $2/lot
Conditional Use Permit $ 50.00
Variance 25.00
Rezoning 100.00
Alternatives:
Staff has identified the following alternatives for charging fees:
1) Flat fee per request with no increase for additional effort.
Pros -- There have been no complaints from applicants.
Cons -- Understates the time cost of the request to the City.
-- No incentive for the applicant to do
2) Maintain fees similar to those now charged, with an additional
escrow account to draw on for the actual expense of staff time.
Pros -- This may serve as an inducement to applicants to
come to the City with well-prepared proposals.
-- This may be the most equitable fee where the user
pays their full, actual cost,
Cons -- The Finance Director reports that setting up the several
accounts for billing is not possible under the
computerized accounting and would create more problems
than it is worth if done manually.
-- The billing of staff time against an account would create
more paperwork for several individuals and increase the
front-end cost to the applicant.
3) Increase the flat application fee in those categories where there is
a great difference between the present fee and the cost to the City
to process.
Pros -- The fee would more accurately reflect the cost to the
City of processing the requests than the present fee
structure.
-- This fee system would be fairly simple and inexpensive to
administer.
Cons -- This fee system would not be a pure "user fee". Some
petitioners may pay less than the time cost to the City
and some more.
John Anderson -3- February 25, 1981 b
Recommendation:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 3, increase the flat application fee to
more accurately reflect the true cost of processing requests.
This alternative is more cost-effective to administer than Alternative No. 2
and more equitable than Alternative No. 1, since those parties that make
requests are not so subsidized by the general revenue fund.
The fee schedule proposed was computed to bring the fees more in line with
the true cost to the City. In most all cases, the cost of the service provided
exceeds the revenue collected in fees. There is still a subsidy of planning
services by the general revenue, but not to the extent as with the previous
fee schedule.
TK/j iw
Attachments
Attachment "A"
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Proposed Planning Application Fees
APPLICATION FEES:
Conditional Use Permit -
Home Occupations $ 50.00
All Others 100.00
Renewal 10.00
Variances -
Single Family Residential S 50.00
All Others 100.00
Plats, Divisions -
Preliminary Plat S.200.00 + $5/lot minimum,
100.00 + S20/acre, whichever greater
Final Plat 50.00
Lot Split 50.00
Registered Land Survey 50.00
Lot Consolidation 50.00
Rezoning -
1 Acre or less $ 150.00
Over 1 Acre 150.00 + $10/acre
Planned Unit Development -
Concept Plan $ 100.00
Preliminary Plan 200.00 + $15/acre
Final Plan 100.00
Fill & Mining Permit -
1 - 1000 yards S 25.00
1000 - 20,000 yards 100.00 (C.U.P. Fee)
Over 20,000 yards 100.00 (C.U.P. Fee) +
All consultant fees +
2500.00 Cash deposit required
Signs -
Permanent S 20.00 + .25/sq. ft.
Temporary 5.00
Maps -
Zoning (22" x 34+") S 2.00
(8i"' x 11") .25
Special Printed Maps .25/sq. ft.
Topography Maps 50.00 + $5/acre
Flood Plain Maps .00 (something, presently is free)
Attachment "A"
Page Two
Miscellaneous -
Land Use Regulations $ 5.00
Subdivision Regulations) To be determined, will reflect cost
Developers Package ) of reproduction
✓d '5 f."-'..
a)
r1
H
U
U1 -p
W H W O
O1 O
-1-) H Ln
M +H
U)
A Fd -69-LC\ - a 0
cd LnO
a) P+
0
cd F-1 0 - -69- N U) H cdE rd
cd 0
+3 0+3 F=-. N • j Ff} x +
;-1cn ,0 0 cn 0 In 0 Ln 0 0 m 0 0 Lnn
o 0 in Ln L
0 u1 0 0 N
in rn Ha) O H N LC M L- CV
P4 0 -69 P'y Z -69- {f} -Ff} -ff3 -(f} (Y Z •H -63 ? } C) C)
ra
O
1
I 0
U
>C • cd
N 0 .-0 0
•H U N
--
Cl) • Ln Ln -C)-
a) 0 C') -£fl- +
+
Pa 0 0 1 -P O o
zn cd o 0 H H o C) 0 0 oN -
" -is} Z Z Z t-A -C)- `zi 'zi Z Cl) O - - -C)-
+ P-i 0 a)
0 a)
Long Q o cd
Hl M O o x \
-cam F-I 0 0
_z1 N
a) a) U1 -C)- H -63-
• F-I
0 u) 0 Cd WU + +
O a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 0 0 0 0 0 0
cd
N F-1 H H Lr\ Ln 0 0 0 0 0 0 O is., Lf\ 0 L1\ O
u) U V ^ H N N H H IS Lf1 H 0 H H ..y CO H H
a) - {{} -FF} CO C/) -)- -Cf} -C)- -EA- H -C)- -C)- -63 U) -69- -C)-
•`i ;~ 0
•H O H H
•00 +P H CO
0 U) 0
rd rd d rd H 0 d O F~
0 0 0 C) d a) \ + 0 0 0 O cd
0 s U) r: O H 3 N H H '� N H
W H H H H C �+ -P Ai HPi
C7 0 ..--1a + H H H v 0 ^ H + U 0 0 H + 0
cd cd d +) 0 cd cd H U cd -1-3
O • •HO 0 \ -p \ >4 0 o •rl
Ln -I-) +P -1 Pi CO H +p O o 0 o a) +p in o U) Ln o
-p o -64- OHMHH - � Ci
+ +'" 0 6- - v)
a o cf)
P-1 F 0
in o
O M
o- +
O Ln 0
N 11 ^ a)
FH b0 a) w
Cn •H I 4-i
In IN-
CI) CC] -ea- -__t- O 0 -d} Cl) -69-
-H
H
4-i
0
0o Pa
0 H di
\ Q �
A-,
E -� Ln o -cam O O
Z:10 d + -69- H H
▪ \ \
Ll1 + U Lf1 0 Ln 0 Ln Ln
a -C)- � H -A- -cam -A-
rd
a)
O r0
rd 0 H
U 0 C) 0
Ln Ln W 0 Cd 0 Fi
-69- M 0 Q Fi FT--1 Pi H
Lf1 0 0 0
•� Cn U) H Ln a) U
a) 0 '» ff} +, H a) �+
pl
+
0 0 + H cd \ Pi
Cl:) 0 cd cd 0 Ln \ •H 0 \
+) 0 O Ln 0 0 0 0 0 II LC 0 0 0 Lf\
O N rV H Ln N in N CO H N cd N Ln Lr\ H -
H N \ -ccr co -rte ) co -y- rte- -CO -cv9- co '-G9- -69-
0
0
m
(1)
0 Fi
cd •H 0 (I) 00 U) 0 Pa
O 60 cd ,O FH a) 0 rd PH H r0 cd a)
•H 0 F-i -p C7 •H o m 0 cd •r -P . 0
O 0 H H P-H 0 - a) 0 40 !4 0 PA
s 0 (1) 0 0a) •H cd Cl) 0 a) 0
H
O 0 0 a) �, Pi 0 cd Pi 0 -P 0 F+ Pi cd
0 0 H rd H cd H ca 0 0 0 0 H Pi
0 Pa M w PH ca P4 0 0 w ata
O
O N
a) -Ef}
4-i
• y O
•rrii rd -H $-� 0 -} •
C,. N Off} N 1 0
H 4O d-1 Cl) O 0 Cd
-ES- P I a; f!} H a) 01 0
• rd 4O N 4- • rd O 40 H
H H -HI H H Cd H
P co • •ri -to- H rd \-(A• Si 0 P
O\ -P P O O Cd rd O a) O Cd
P H 41 �� •• N d� H N I -P
a) 010 O P \ rd .0 O \O
Cd ol Cu cid cd m40
Si -EA- + Cd •H O . (\i )
— -P E 4-i cd to-. ,0 H-09- ^ 0
C.)
• a) 0 CO \ 0 0 0 0 Z u\ + - u\ -69- CO
+' 40,0 H u1 N.4-\0 H - -69- I -09-
+) cd (I) 4) • .. N a) . . . -to- a) 0 i
a f1 0-( (`') EF} a) (0\O\O • P N + ul • I tI.\
CHd O 0 Cl) N -P-P c--i + CHd •• u\ o 4• 4-i d v)
• •• H -P • 4-i O O O\O CO m
•
P O Cd H P-1 01 41 +., P-EA- O O O - Cr' •
-
bO O E---I H u) 01 CO u) ca bO 0 N u) O 01
•rJ cd P u) • u) H H H O N • +) (0 H u)
C) H •• •ri 01 P Cd u) _• •-•-69- + 4 t H
-69- - - u) H 0 •ri O H P - P
P + (O H O - +) P O� I I • cd rd cd.
O 1 O -GO- rd P O+F? I H H 01
0 Ord O ++ cd -P N
U) rdOO O P OO d P •H P rd OO
P a) 00 bOP ++ H 0 Cd Q) I H 0 0 0 Ln r0 u) 1
hO ED • ^ P cd I • Pi In (n O ^ ^ H u) O u)
•ri cd H H cd Pi H cd 4) H cd H u\ H N • O cd O H
to pa-69.-69- cz + \o w fl -69- �_- --69-- -Eft -car a w a H
-P
u) + u)
•H 01 H -P VI
r0 Pi+) • O Q O O t) cd > H O O
O u) n O N Si O u) O —PA Si SC
cid PZ O + 0 cd H • cd
CQ H O O -P N 0 ± $-1 4) CO P P
• a cd O N a) cd P co O pi,0 .1-1 u\ •H
U rd Pi O-69- 4H H fl bO O H Pi+3 + I~
cd m a) • N a O a) P a) cd +' a)
W H I -C + 40 a +P •ri 4-i 4-i O O u) S-1
u) -H O O P • cd P • O O .-1 O S-1 O - .
O E + rd Si • + O •H H (1) O O +' u) ,0 O H •H cd u\
.,-1 q •H •H a H (1) P (3) Cd t N cd a) -P +, cd-( 4H \
-P D H O u) P O O 4H 0 Si ,0 U G H CO ' \ u\ 4-1
.-. •H a O u\ P 4-i P u\ O N a Pa 4-i O O to (A O
+3• 0 P1 - 0 tto � M E01 - O " � �
P A
0
OO
LJ
(l) Si
W O
W .P
w -P
O
O
ZCd H 0 H •�
Z f� a -P
0
H1-q cd O 4-i H
a N P O Cd O
H H -P t(\ tI\
P
CO
-P -P 0
• 0 0 H
o H H
to - + -P \ O •
W tI\ •ri LC\ -P H P
- -p In -cam 0 •rd=3- •H
• + + H P1 + O H
O +
PO W • SC O P >C O H rd O C -t} O O .
•H +p • P cd S- •H cd Si -f3- Si-(4')- Si H
o cd + 0 •ri ', U E E O O 0 + 0-69.
•H H • u) 0 Cd Cd + O cd
H P. O 0 W H O \ 0 0 \ P L\ O
a) L(\ w - O u\ O u\ O O t(\ to O •H O O O
a H 0 W O O CO LIN N LIN N L(\ LIN CJ H H N H CO
P H u\ co{A-Cf) C) -99--( -( -.-} -69- -69- -69- -63
H O + -EA H
cd U -G9-
aa)) O cd + +
P O P O
O a) co •ri u\ a) 0 PI
u\ a w-( (1) U) O
Cr) CH W q
• I O •
1 P u, 40 • O O
H i 0 Cl)S-69- P C' -to- -69-
cd
1}Cd $.i 0 O P +
o PO- O + +
HO P A-) P
Pa a) '+ a •r3 <z O 0 O O � 0 u1 O
C) U) 0 O S4 H u\ N in H in N H
z W co co -69- to -C U) -69- -69.
Si O
u) cd P -H O
•0-I Ski -H a 0 co
0 O O P a)
0
O OO SOi H rd H Cd ,H
cd
P H H
cd
C) as W W a Cl) as
•
g�
W H
c
++ CDH
4EHc0
ccdda) .-1 40
H
-p N
eH
a)
• a) a) -P
01 U 0 cd
rn cd cd -p
\ 4-1 H 09
0
Lr\ 0 0 <
• 40 40 M
U) + U) U) a)
�; \ \ H
•rl N H N c`Qd
Cr) * -eta- -6,9- - EH
0
0
N
O-c9-
0
•
cd �} cd U)
RI O O •• H
aa)i q •H" 0 r0 P,w 0
•H0 •r1 + LI\ a) • • 0
-P Ra H N 0 0 0 H 0 U) Lf\
•r1 a) 0- 0 LI\ 0 a) 0 Lf\
$,-1 Lf\--•-• N .--7' 0 --1 Cr) N 01- 4-i
-P 0 44 -69- -69- ff} 0 w -69- -E9- U) 0 0
o - oN m
0 O O U)
0 O 4-i a)
Cl) O k
W a) rri cr) a)
w -P O U
O rRi
m X
H Z• 0� H 0 P--1k d 01
• w a) •rl
PA 0
a •P � 0 H u 0
H
G, Z -69- -
01 O H
C/) U) Lf\ -
rd
O H rd
Lf\ - cd
rd
H rd
+3 - cd U
O H S+ + 0 rd r. a)
H O H cd o (1)
cd N 0CV cal•
• F-1 +) al ,� N 4- I
O -E9- -69- a) s~ 0 O -Et- u
•rl rd •H R3 H cd Lf\ a) • -I-
E
E -N + + ?~ \ - + a)fr+ a) O
•ri cd + LIl O \ 4i 4-i a)
H H 0 0 O H H O O Ln + O a)
a) P1 H H N M C H H a) O m
4, 1 -0)- -ea- ti4 -69- en -V9- + fna�)• 4i�} •
O 0
a) + cp
a) • M 0
4+ 4 i Oo+ m
• 0 + U)-
0
q-, m • - +
0 O-Ef- 01 LI\
0 O cd m N •
Lc r-1 N � -69- + - in cn
of
cd - cf) a) + 010 -
a) •• + P m H O0
1 0 U) ,P O \ 1.11O LIf\ co
¢ a) 0 H d
U] U) LC\ a) H C- N - 0) -09- •H 0
-69- 4i 0 -69- U7 -f.4 -69- O0 O 0 H
H H •• di
\ff} H
Lf\ cd a)
Cl) +3 a) rd
m 0 d
H ri-i a) 0 Ri
Q3 O a) cd
124 w 0
d I
a)
U) a)
a)
a) o
PA rn o U) a) 0
a) rd a) H
•H C`) •r1 H H a)
•H bD N •H 0 � Cl
R H0
-Po PaCO 0
O 0 0 N H <4 �
F1
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE : Request for Reduction of Assessments for Lot 1 ,
Block 1 Halo 2nd Addition (Wally Bakken, fee owner)
DATE : February 27 , 1981
Introduction
Improvements have been made to Lot 1 , Block 1 of Halo 2nd Addition
which will reduce the scope of the proposed Halo 2nd Improvement
Project (80-10) and the developer of said lot is requesting that
the assessments on said lot be reduced .
Background
The City Engineer has been provided information by the developer
on the amount of work done and Mr. Spurrier has determined that
the scope of the proposed improvement has been reduced by $9 ,687 .47 .
See memo attached.
The Assistant City Attorney has explained that a reassessment hear-
ing should be held at which time the Council could reduce the assess-
ments . However, to expedite the matter, Mr . Bakken would like to
waive his right to a public hearing and notice thereof in order
that the Council my consider reducing the assessment on March 3 ,
1981 rather than April 7 , 1981 .
It is expected that the full assessment on the said lot will have
been paid at the time Council considers this request and thus the
resolution amending the assessments for Lot 1 , Block 1 should
include authorizing a refund of the reduced assessment .
Alternatives
1 . Apply the reduction of assessments to all four lots of Halo
2nd Addition.
2 . Apply the reduction of assessments to Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo
2nd Addition.
3 . Delay approving the request until the project is completed .
Recommendation
It is the recommendation of both the City Engineer and the City
Clerk that the reduction of assessment be applied to Lot 1 ,
Block 1 , Halo 2nd Addition because the reduction of the scope of
the original proposed public improvement was due to construction
performed by the developer of Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo 2nd Addition .
Recommend Action
Offer Resolution No. 1797 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No . 1797
Adopting Assessments on the 1980-2 Public Improvement Program (Halo
2nd Addition) , and move its adoption .
J SC/jms
- 1111111r
r 4--
MEMO TO: Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
FROM: H. R. Spurrier ill
r
City Engineer ''
RE: Developer's Agreement for Halo 2nd Addition
DATE: February 25, 1981
Introduction:
In a meeting with City staff the developers of Lot 1, Block 1, Halo 2nd
Addition requested that the City abate a part of the special assessment
for said Lot 1, as credit for facilities installed by the developer.
Background:
In order to provide water and sewer service to a motel on Lot 1, Block 1, 1
it was necessary to construct a part of the facilities specified in the 1
Developer's Agreement for Halo 2nd Addition. These facilities will now
not be required and, therefore, it is appropriate to reduce the amount of
the assessment for Lot 1, in an amount equal to the value of the facilities
installed.
The amount of the reduction is $9,687.47. That amount represents a
reduction in the estimated cost used in establishing the assessment for
the subdivision. That amount is tabulated below:
Item
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Total {
1 Extra Strength CISP 190 L.F. $ 17.00 $3,230.00 I
2 Cut in 6" wye & Bend 2 Ea. 120.00 240.00
3 Rock Blasting 66 C.Y. 25.00 1,650.00 i
4 Sand Bedding 46 C.Y. 3.75 172.50
5 Class V, Aggregate 216 C.Y. 4.50 972.00
6 Bituminous Material 30 Tons 29.63 888.90
7 Remove Curb 15 L.F. 1.50 22.50
Subtotal $7,175.90
Tech. Services
35 percent 22511.57
TOTAL $9,687.47
Judith S. Cox -2- February 25, 1981
The developer of Halo 2nd Addition has indicated that the Developer's
expenses for this work amounted to $13,453.05. The developer has been
advised that the basis for abating the assessment was the original estimate
prepared by the developer's engineer and that the City would be unable to
reimburse an amount that exceeded that estimated cost.
It is standard practice of the City to require a sworn construction statement
and lien waivers from all of those listed in the construction statement.
In my judgement, the work performed reduces the scope of the Halo 2nd
Addition work an amount in excess of $9,687.47 and that the value of the
work remaining is less than $118,612.53 and further that that amount repre-
sents sufficient funds to construct the balance of improvements in Halo 2nd
Addition.
Recommendation:
It is the recommendation of the City Engineer that $9,687.47 of the original
principal amount of $32,075.00 be abated and that the revised amount of the
assessment be $22,387.53 and further that the developer be directed to
supply the City with a sworn construction statement and that lien waivers be
furnished for all those listed on the sworn construction statement.
HRS/j iw
4
RESOLUTION NO . 1797
1111!!!'rA RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO . 1671 ADOPTING
ASSESSMENTS ON THE 1980-1O PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
(Halo 2nd Addition)
WHEREAS , the City Council has ordered the improvement of Halo
2nd Addition by utilities and roadway construction ; and
WHEREAS , the assessments have been adopted for the said improve-
ments ; and
WHEREAS , a contract has not yet been awarded for the said improve-
ments ; and
WHEREAS , the current fee owner of Lot 1 , Block 1 of Halo 2nd
Addition has made improvements which will reduce the estimated cost
of the improvements to be performed by the City and is requesting
the City Council to amend the assessment roll previously adopted
reducing the assessments to $22 ,387 . 53 ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council has received a waiver of the right
to and notice of a public hearing from Wallace D . and Joanne E .
Bakken , fee owners ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council has received a waiver of the right
to appeal the amended assessment for Lot 1 , Block 1 , Halo 2nd
Addition from Wallace D. and Joanne E . Bakken ; and
WHEREAS , the City Council agrees with the request by Wallace D.
and Joanne E . Bakken to amend the assessments for Lot 1 , Block 1 ,
Halo 2nd Addition .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA ; that Resolution No . 1726 is hereby amended
by reducing the assessment on Lot 1 , Block 1 Halo 2nd Addition to
$22 , 387 . 53 .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that appropriate City officials are
hereby authorized and directed to refund to Wallace D. and Joanne E.
Bakken any money already paid to the City in excess of the assessed
$22 ,387 . 53 , upon receipt of lien waivers for all those listed on a
sworn construction statement provided by Wallace D. and Joanne E .
Bakken, fee owners .
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee , Minnesota held this day of
1981 .
Approved as to form this
day of , 1981 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Attorney City Clerk
MEMO TO: John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R. Spurrier ,(„,1
i 7
City Engineer
RE: County Road 16 - County oad 83 Trunk Watermain
Contract No. 80-10KT
DATE: February 25, 1981
Introduction:
Attached is Change Order No. 1 providing for the alteration of material
and prices for the above-referenced contract.
Background:
After plans were approved for the above-referenced contract, Ken Adolph,
Schoell & Madson, called my attention to the fact that the manhole ring
and covers, the blow-off assembly and air and vacumn valves and butterfly
valve did not have insulated covers and that it was his recommendation
that the manhole ring and covers be insulated.
Mr. Adolph also noted that air and vacumn valves specified on the plans
could be deleted.
Attached Change Order No. 1 for the above-referenced contract provides for
insulated ring and covers and provides for the deletion of the necessary
air and vacumn valve assemblies.
In addition to making those alterations, the Change Order re-establishes the
unit prices for the items affected by these changes.
The net contract change is a decrease in the amount of $1,510.95. The
revised contract amount is now $262,378.35.
Shakopee Public Utility Commission has approved this Change Order.
Recommendations:
Staff recommends that Council approve Change Order No. 1 for County Road 16 -
County Road 83 Trunk Watermain, Contract No. 80-10KT and directs the Mayor,
City Administrator and City Clerk to execute the Change Order and forward
copies to the contractor, Brown & Cris, Inc. and Shakopee Public Utility
Commission.
HRS/jiw
Attachment
CHANGE ORDER
Trunk
Change Order No. : 1 Project Name: Co. Rd. 16—Co. Rd. 83 Watermain
Date: January 6, 1981 Contract No. : 80-10KT
Original Contract Amount $ 263,889. 30
Change Order(s) No. thru No. $ 0. 00
Total Funds Encumbered Prior to Change Order $ 263,8 89. 30
Description of Work to be (Added/Deleted):
SEE ATTACHED
The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above,
under the same conditions specified in the original Contract as amended unless
otherwise specified herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance
with the Standard Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota.
The amount of the Contract shall be (itr XXXdd/decreased) by $ 1,510 . 95
The number of calendar days for completion shall be (increased/decreased) by 0 .
Original Contract Amount $ 263 ,889. 30
Change Order(X) No. 1 thru $ 1,510. 95
Total Funds Encumbered $ 262, 378 . 35
Completion Date: No Change
The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perform
the work specified in this Change Order in accordance
with the specifications, conditions and prices
specified herein.
Contractor: Brown & Cris , Inc .
By: ISAA4
1i e4,, Reviewed by :
Title: U, , Utility
ShakopeePublicCommission
Date: %)/vd. 8, /MGz.`-7,�' -f'" ? 9-6/
til ty Manager (Date)
£ •r VED AND RECOMMENDED:
/0 4!► t
City En.]. eer tate
APPROVED: City of Shakopee
By:
Mayor Date
Approved as to form this day of
City Administrator Date --- 19
City Clerk Date —
City Attorney
ATTACHMENT TO CHANGE ORDER NO. 1
County Road 16 - County Road 83 Trunk Watermain
1. Air & Vacuum Valves shall be deleted from all of the
16" and 18" Butterfly valves except as noted in Item
No. 3 below.
2. The manhole rings and covers for the 6" Blowoff Assembly ,
the Air and Vacuum Valve Assembly, the 16" Butterfly Valve
and Vault and the 18" Butterfly Valve and Vault shall be
Neenah R-1758-C Frost-proof frames , solid lids and inner
lids.
3. An Air & Vacuum Valve shall be installed on the north
side of the 16" Butterfly Valve and Vault on the south
side of County Road 16 at Station 9 + 75 WEST and an
Air and an Vacuum Valve shall be installed on the 18"
Butterfly Valve and Vault at Station 0 + 70 EAST.
4 . Item No. 6 thru Item No . 10 on the Proposal shall be
replaced with the following:
Item Description Quantity Unit Price Total
6 6" Blowoff Assembly 3 Ea. $ 2,573. 00 $ 7 , 719 . 00
7 Air & Vacuum Valve
Assembly 1 Ea. 1,553. 00 1 ,553 . 00
8 12" Gate Valve 3 Ea. 620 . 00 1 ,860 . 00
9 16" Butterfly Valve &
Vault 1 Ea. 3, 603 . 00 3 ,603 . 00
9a 16" Butterfly Valve &
Vault Without Air &
Vacuum Valve 3 Ea. 3, 103 . 00 9, 309 . 00
10 18" Butterfly Valve &
Vault 1 Ea. 4 , 153. 00 4 , 153 . 00
l0a 18" Butterfly Valve &
Vault Without Air &
Vacuum Valve 4 Ea. 3,653 . 00 14 , 612 . 00
MEMO TO: John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer /
Al
RE : Eastview 1st Addition
DATE. February 27 , 1981
Introduction:
Attached is Partial Estimate Voucher No. 3 for the above-
referenced subdivision.
Background :
Ordinarily Partial Estimate Vouchers are submitted and paid in
accordance with the notice attached hereto. All of the work
specified for this contract has been completed and accepted by
the City. Final payment has not been made because some patching
is required.
This is the project where watermain was constructed with only 6
foot of cover and did not have proper clearance from the sanitary
sewer. This contractor has been extremely responsive to City
requests that pertain to correction of the defective work. The
contractor has been that responsive not only on this project but
other projects as well.
The amount due the contractor is accepted and approved by the
Engineering Department . In the ordinary bill cycle , this voucher
would have been paid January 23rd. If special payment is not
made, this disbursement would not be made until March 20th.
Recommendation:
It is the recommendation of City staff that City Council approve
Partial Estimate Voucher No. 3 to Richard Knutson, Inc . , in the
amount of $4 ,293. 77.
HRS/j iw
Attachments
CITY OF SHAKOPEE 44cc*S
INCORPORATED 1870 *
129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445-3650 AAK •4
i
December 3 I , 11980 '.f "4
RE: Payment Request;, t.(; the Cit., Ot' ;;1;', ol ee
TO CONSULTANTS, c;UNTI;AC'I t>1;S /1h11 'J1•;i;i:(i;i:; .
The followiri;- table lists the date:, and deadlines for payment •
requests and nl;!•Joi' purchase i)I'(i‘•f•:'. paid i !I
l'aymehl, iie(lue;;t. & Payment Request
Payment Request Purchase 0edevs to Purchase Order:
Completed Finan( c 17t_, t•trnent_ Approved by Council
January 5th Ju nu: vy Ct1 January 20th
February 2nd February 5th February 17th
March 2nd March 5th March 17th
April 6th April 9th April 21st
May 4th May 7th May 19th
June 1st Juno filth June 16th
July 6th .Iii I ;,,. 91,11 July 2lst
'August 3rd Atat•:.us.t 6th August 18th
August 31st September 3rd September 15th
October 5th Octobur• 8th October 20th
November 2nd November 5th November 17th
November 30th De(!(•mher• .,1•(1 becember 1 Sth
Checks to the consultants , contractors and vendors are
prepared the Wednesday following Council approval and mailed Out
on Friday . If sonic' other payment arrangement is necessary , those
arrangement:, must he made when the p,; yniuiiL request is made .
'1.'i)atlk you t'(ir• your cooperntion .
' n P ] yam
H. H. 5p rricr
City J?i1 roer
1I1{S/,j .i.w
1~ lr i I i cart 0 f Progress V c7 / !I a 1/
An Equal Opportunity Employer
MEMO TO : Lou VanHout
Utility Manager
FROM: H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
RE : Eastview 1st Addition
DATE: January 6 , 1981
I am returning Partial Estimate Voucher No . 3 . This voucher
is submitted to Shakopee Public Utility Commission pursuant
to an agreement between the City and the Utility Commission.
The voucher is prepared by the Engineering Department but has
not been approved by the City nor the Engineering Department .
Such approval shall not be made until the Partial Estimate
Voucher has been reviewed by Shakopee Public Utility Commission.
My understanding of the agreement between the City and SPUC
is that SPUC reviews the work performed and determines it to
be acceptable or not acceptable and so notes . I did not under-
stand that review to include any agreements the City has with
the Contractor.
HRS/j iw
Attachments
cc : John Anderson
City Administrator 7 G_g
ro : /30 — i///s sv,IA C i°/ -o,J y # °fX' CD4 Y. X'4risie) TWAN
Co/0-7NN 6 rrs/e. 4 n a 'e ..e yer/ ^/G e .l •K
1-/6 NDN G 'Rpi vift.u.."c. 7-4/e_ 1, a c e,e , / o�e�"✓��
I/€ eve,i'1' /1c y;qe wires 74's /S-rt/c- /4- EPA/^/.
X ic
RA s-C A Co,-C, T Yea A GA/A/ al HA 7- 1- N'4
rha A070Nob /JvY.0/?it" 7-7/4 r Q7,tii/PS ( n# n4/Sf/0,✓
gA4 s PReci ee me . 'c j- .ri 6 N ,/ , 6,0i)4 49'
,ri0/11 t J li,41pNi S C/N?'iL eve /94 s/e s'- i{•14 PA/7-
1-10 PAla/Neck rf/A ?" Tie fa,8 ,/A s 27ceV
DoNe Pjl49,9e,Pcr,
0 c,f Eff4qp, CITY OF SHAKOPEE
<5> •,:;:,
129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
t:•,,,7.1',?' ,-;I.',;
ve4r4...—04,
MEMO ,1 •
qi.., JAN 5, 1981
LL'
u ,_
Lou VanHout
zf43-.--- Sllir' - -
Jane Wostrel ..,
--6't'Lll:L ..
_). 1171ZONI: - ---- --
SUBJECT: Partial Estimate Voucher - Eastview Addition
DATE: January 2 , 1981 61C
LICA P )
Lou -- Please review and return! !
jari ti
• ..„4!
- /,--,--,
_ ,)
(,"C, iiii
,j,, • , 1 ,./..) ....„..„...7 ., 4/(-.../...7.,:ecA.4.0,......14.„..,,
/ , i ,/ 2
__.,(i,/,..", ,A../...7,z- /-37•:.) X /e,....' i 7/--e.aj ...... (,,;7,--if ----(-21(-'1..1'"(11(/1/ 47(4/
•
0111.. Prii–• .;:iti;itili.eifili.jitiiiftliii: itii'.fSili**t4.8*.iii,+;tt3;itji4,ii. i:liiiitO::t!:t'Otit:i4:4fiiittiii"I;::::ji4O,ij.:14A'. 1,
: -.:•.'i:i:;:ii:,:*-i:::!A ,*::::: !:,:•1,,,,:.:,i1,,,:i;: .!•:..:::: - :: -,:,7 .. .i:::i.!.!:,, :-.. ,i,, ,,,,!.,:*!••:-;..:• ::.,:•••• i;,!::;., ....;i*, , : - '.: :-.% •,•:t;;:::::::7::::-:::-.- ..!.•:-••••-7-.t! -,:•!-:'-' 2
• ':-.: -.''':'•ii:!'—'•; :-::'- . .,:: 'iiliii::::..i .ii7:4:1-::: :!,1:::'::•i:::.i':iti :.i.i.;;;:i• •i.riiiitiii! ItTti^j-,!*•" ''•' -H' . :,'' :' - . , _,• i. : , •'''. 1"11.14511111"114114., ".. . ,: .:. i ,,-- -,:-. ..74411111"11.0:.:
. !-.i.:•!!,r$ :;i'.';:7,t4 ,':::-!'': ;.::;::::::-: :::•!..;•;:::;:-,-::*-: : :;:;:,::;;;!..!...:.1-"•114::.- 1; .; ., ..: . , ..!.. .;..., ., ..,,. :: , ,:.: :.;,, :l...,:;,, :,.,:130.10..,4,,i,
$: ::Iiiiii'illil:IiIi13ii!i.:-itliiii*iits i!ii!"42,,;1!;;',:;!ti,iiitiit'!'' 4!!:::_iii 'i.'. .''';' :-; :i: ''''' . '77.i ::'.'' :; ,:t*:. :.•' ''' ., .7 :„:!::....::i::::•:i
iiigWiiitt::"142044HS:liiliiillifthl"iiiltitiiii4iliiiiil' tiiiiifr#44., H!11:ii!!!!_t4.1!' ' ' .7. i!;:ii.: ' 7 ' 7-7:I.." ii!i:71:':2:7i 4 14411+1 ' ' I.:.Wiliii
-,-1/4:„.... •-•
S' k
•
PAliTiAl, 1.: TIMAT;: yrAJaEli
80-2 3 December 31, 1980
Contract
Part;jai i•:.;LI ma ,:tVouche:. :',.,. I r•if, 1 1.; dim:
No.
Richard NnuL:;on, I
TO: Contractor
Address 201 Travel er.:; T t.;) i.1 , Po trn:lv i -11 c' , iiIN 55337
. __
Project Description 1.!:astvi ew Ad(1.11, 1.on
.
1. Original Contract Amount
:, 172 , 365 . 25
____
2. Chance Order No. 'ilirk.2 I:,,.
____
3. Total Funds Encumbered ...
172 , 365 . 25
h. Value of Work Complete.i * AW1r) I ,088 . 25
._ . -. . . _ .
5. 5 Percent Retain:Air... ' 7 , 554 • 41 _i_p__
------------- - —---- -- -•
6. Fre V I ous Payments $ 1P,9, n0 . 07
..._..
,,
7. Deductions or Charges -U-
3.
Total $ 1.1641.24,248 _
r
Payment Due (Line 4 - Line 8)
4 293 . 77
IFICATI.: (q.. mv:INrr
(1 , ye) hereby agree Lh:tt. Lhe quanLiLy and v:LIn ,.1. woi !.ii(Jun iwr(:in i:: fajr
estimate of the work completed Lo date.
CONTRACTOR: P 1 (._ A ii f tif_k.,/ , C. 1.1_,--At /-,..., t liEV I EWE!) By :AIAKOPEE PUBLIC
UTII, I T I ES COMMISSION
TITLE:
APP:i0V" C " OF SHAKOPE
•
2(02 7 —81
.__. . .
1116b.
___.
i tkl...ngineel:— 1 - • —
---
City Administrator
Finance Director
_ir --
. • -s•-•-v-p-r c"-1.-•••,-, • t..,•••4.1 •....-,..),-/-c-C...r
PROPOSAL SCHEDULE
,CC- ,c't
- PROJECT NAME :2 `....., ..._/,: wl-.- 7.-,... __.. oE It e----__1_/
... :-/
TYPE OF WORK (-77/'4 7/l C '.› PROJ. NO.
SHEET OF
ITEM CONTRACT ITEM UNIT UNIT CONI AC T ------
NO. PRICE. QUANTITY AMOUNT
;7-
,0,
' •;--•44-•?•-•0--
.1. /:'.
(.1:5 •,--_; '. -.`:)(f.L.A.) c--- (C.)-e:-) (...._ c .1.),. G c., --1 -3 c-J 3q71-70.0c, 77 S-- (oct7c.0,-
L.. I. • t 0•r;C L;)-7(L) i c\ l .\S'.(:)c //4..->, Cat(°c).'Sc
c• r. t I . 2 `-; F.,( a 5(,)lc 0 c) ee,p, 35,0,0c
I-- -1 2..'L
e .r t -: „,,
... ,
( ‘..• )
( .1-
6I (-A
- • ' • C.:) - )
Li i 17).4-7, 1...... • • ,
._• -_, t 4 7 2.i---:;0 -------* 0
'-- i I(.-, c..C)
. ., 7;4, --1(-- 0.C..16 "'"--- C)
•._:-.....1 IZ OC k..... E y: c_ ,,\\-;
•\i . 1- Ill:-)C) 1:-.)550.6c. .„ ‘-:;C.) i(ot430 .c:k,
:(-(D. t'-'k(.. .--. L-, cN\ 4>
4
'CC) • \
Al,
- • • (414,.c c _.,,,t ...,
; .;• -1 -3,-.r.--k): c c-- P t ••_ t .(:' -1
• •........._,•
. ' '`' i,\ -:t ' i u‘,--..e,„ 1 .pc.:3' (43(.0 4-.0
A. KA. U( . .
1. 1 :v.,(.).e..,,,,
I -4c- ..4) 6 I
-- ,
.k.) ( c
1:-...,-.4 --10.c6 -11_ %4,c-',C).ex) 4-"2- llo V70.oc
- '. ..")Qc. . .)
i=. .,-.1 . ..,*().Ce-. .,r, .a./-;c:). cx)
, i irek v• LJ t c. il• t- ,--_•_.:4 <st : 1.,c)
TUN.%
-
C"....:,.., , k,..,_10.\,1 ----\:_c"' ..7,1 L',.,• .\ 1 \ (..)I., ( i I ( (• . 1-1(\0 .C)(..)
pi\. w c A ,;, ,,61 c -6-, 76.734: 2`;
-
•
L .. -
PROPOSAL_ SCHEDULE 0
PROJECT NAME _ 741/i!/i c'!c' / s t 73,1:77 — --
-
TYPE OF WORK _____C_-/_. ft / ' fi
iliie
— — — — — --._ PROJ. NO. __[ — -- -
_ SHEET C
ii u CON T itnc rLE utJlT uNii ( ONTRAC 1- l — -----
N0. f t11c : QUANtlir AMOUNT —•
/!. ,— I /� — 6c 7lr /.-,
I L /). /. P. 7•/ . =' 7`= �l(:-c /) c0c�. r 2_75-
=z- ZI94
/_ /�'• /. G c, ,-lc'r.- 2
=' /' � Lam_ / � 1/.z /t/ c:. 6- 6e1 06 / 3 75 �37�
i_--",. C. 70,c,-
L.II
�, >c (, .. cc/e_ / 2-4/N
/ / I � ` Vic;:�; �i� ----- G
L., // l/ . �.' v�C/v C �/s ('d 1. !/2
I Y E"- ���,,,,.c,c
�OGo.c,c ---2 OC
•
1.L
7/4 -°✓f°--! ~ F /2.c1 a -! Z
�r .
ii.,
:....
, zo,/,oc 6 7/'"‘1.-- / A i>
.1:l(. /lc1 U.C !.-
r
�' 74, .�I4 °I) c - II(/r' �UGG.Gc c'. �c7f�0
(.(/,,t. 7/ 1 ✓/1j ek h
f ' <. !) `/ �' 1 ,i T:r_ - ._ j-.v.e6 .4 7 '23';U
"3/4 G v t f'e 5 t V- v ,(---� L..E. 4, . -e) ,LS-3 6 e ,-;-. c;a ZG,5 7 9Z54a.
,ii: .- N.,
�C G`L l hC` -Coy-.
los \ -1 .1' 1--7 i c.: (1 -
,: i`�A ►s,� �A� u`-, •• .)t l: ,c,--,---
Au c-'t�
t-i :1_
tl c k,C_ T t ()c,tLd4. 2r, -ii- 1�I5UC,
;iii
114
'
i
{"I
I.
1),„.....„ •....
e 11-
7 .PROF:OSAL_SCHEDULE
PROJECT NAME . 1/1//(1. -f-/ / :3 -/:-/- OwNER TYPE OF wO R K <-/ 1 // _ pROJ. NO. SRE ET .OF -----`
IT Em CONTRACT ;Tim out T IINIT I C.(I riliiAC T
1.10.
I'li I CI QUA N I I TY AMOR/T __
,-,, :."Jezziel--
( (..-, - ;. •. ) 4 ii • -'12.e_.,..; 4 4,
t:r- 2 7. c. ..- / .,,.•4 -1..."--)C.. .c
_.:2) :),c::, ( - • t:'-2-6 j . C ! v t( 75
- O.-
I
C: C\- 2-2.(_J.(...:,- 4 ,'7._-.),1-:: (.).
- . ) _, ,e
--- '--zi ()C ts.' CL , L . - ::'4.e_i_, ....' ,
(., :) :.,.06 24
,5) r:-)0, 1,_ ( . (_„,_, --k ; ,.„..
- •Y• k-I. o( , l U <_, (-10.0•6() /33
--1-C.:2_ 1
1• (.7)es.
I L'ik.-4-ct- 8.1.,.-:.:, m 1 I
I",,,,,,c LQ1
E 6. —7 2o ( 0 I ---1 c• I -720.00
-. A.•c,,i I Tki r c (.1.,.--z__-1- --<,
i--___•,) . .i-(3,'-,A^ 5.,2(-kJ el' f'l LL ,
\1 (c c t-..-_-_,-.. ---1 -), ,,, ( -7 2 O.C6 l -720•c) C2
. E . s L )( 6 e, I ., : 2.c (.1
T V
1--
Ci i, . 7 3 C.et) 1
'730.C.)0
. L Q -:",'''J
7 --;
,.
-Z.4 E. E . . L.) ) (•_,x,\ v .,,, , ..--cl ,_
( 4_--,-7 c. C./0 ( 6-10.0 0
'
i ,_ ,
2.
''-1--- (- ( l_....% (— 0 VA I V" 4.) ( Dc L.) .c-c-- C. A - ..--)4(,C%•Ci.)
I., ( -I ev (... li,, i--,1 c '-'
. . - - 4 L-T,(_;.c,e .5"-c3 ZOC* °C)
•
.-.7:2...) C-,t ,....,,,..) I 4...1,./ P) ar: ,.k ..,- ; .,(-( 1-,.._. .---, (.:c . c.,
544---
1 c_,-, /--\ 1'i,(- -k C 2.1) i t 4.6
IIIA ‘ l V-e-k.) .5ej ritw (_ct.-ffrc.
Lb: 2-j-c.... Cc. ( '14:-,: i... t (-) .. i a. .2-`=30•4:"
i
r..-----_,
1,2c3 i-22")4---,cc
1
..---------
6)(4,4-LI 'lb e,_t 4(S t POE',.7-4-
City of Shakopee r CI EL -`` POLICE DEPARTMENT
C f
50 •
476 South Gorman Street
— !i SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
Tel. 445-6666
\\; 55379 r)
TO: City Council
FROM: Thomas Brownell
SBJ: Propane Conversion
DATE: February 25, 1981
INTRODUCTION
On April 16 , 1980 , the Police and Public Works Departments initi-
ated a program to determine the feasibility of converting City
owned vehicles from gasoline to propane fuel. During the past
ten months, we have monitored operator ' s comments, fuel con-
sumption, maintenance, and performance . We have also consulted
with other Cities to determine the results of their programs so
that the various manufacturers' equipment could be evaluated.
PROGRAM INFORMATION
1. Fuel Consumption - Patrol vehicles are experiencing two
(2) miles per gallon less mileage, although improvement
is expected with a different carburetion unit and the re-
moval of pollution control equipment which is within
Federal guidelines.
2 . Operator ' s Comments - Minimal negative coitunents, which is
unusual when change occurs. Negative comments related to
problems which resulted from the installation of the
equipment which will be changed with a new configuration.
3 . Equipment Maintenance - It is difficult to evaluate main-
tenance, as the vehicle ' s mileage was 38 , 000 miles when
the equipment was installed. However , we did not ex-
perience an increase and a decrease is anticipated when
the new units are in service .
4. Performance - The engines ran cooler and the vehicle re-
sponded in a much more positive manner when accelerating.
go cSEwE zoEECE
Propane Conversion
Page -2-
5. Cold Weather Operation - Initially, we had problems starting
the vehicle with the manual primer due to lack of experience
with the equipment, however , this problem has been solved by
installing a tank heater which preheats the fuel and the
recommended carburetion has an automatic primer.
6 . Carburetion - A change in carburetion is recommended as the
existing carburetor has required monthly adjustment. Also,
the carburetor doors have not been opening properly, which
has affected transmission performance.
7. Fuel Costs:
Propane Cost:
April, 1980 - . 54 . 5 plus 11 tax = 65. 5 per gallon
February, 1981 - . 63 . 0 plus 114 tax = 74 .00 per gallon
8 . 5 increase
Unleaded Cost:
April, 1980 - . 95 per gallon
February, 1981 - 1.27 per gallon . 32 increase
CONCLUSION
The program is cost effective with minimal negative aspects which
should be resolved with an equipment and installation change.
BIDS RECEIVED POLICE VEHICLES
Company Cost
Auto Energy, Inc. $1, 394. 35
Eden Prairie, Minnesota
Propane Carb & Turbo, Inc. $1, 065. 00
Shakopee, Minnesota
BUDGETARY INFORMATION
The current budget authorizes a capitol improvement expenditure
of $4, 000 .00 for the purchase and installation of propane units
in four (4) police vehicles.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION POLICE VEHICLES
Jim Karkanen and myself recommend accepting the Auto Energy, Inc.
bid of $1, 394.35 per unit for the conversion of three primary
patrol police vehicles for a total cost of $4, 183 .05, for the
Propane Conversion
Page -3-
following reasons :
1. The propane tanks will be installed outside of the trunk
compartment which will increase the safety factor and
allow for the installation of radio components in the trunk,
which is a critical consideration.
2 . Trunk space will be available for medical and safety equip-
ment.
3. The installation conforms to all existing safety standards.
We do not recommend installing propane in the fourth vehicle, a
Jeep Cherokee, until we can develop a tank installation outside
of the passenger compartment. This unit is not in daily use.
City of Shakopee r '
POLICE DEPARTMENT
476 South Gorman Street
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
Tel. 445-6666
l
" t C i_ j
I
•
L.P. Gas Vehicle Straight Conversion
Quotation and Agreement
Vehicle - Three (3) 1980 Chevrolet Malibu' s, 350 cu. engine,
four door, sedan
The installation of the Propane Carburation Fuel System and the
propane tank shall be in accordance with NFPA Pamphlet 58 and
any applicable Federal, State, and local codes and regulations.
All carburation equipment must be manufactured by IMPCO Carbure-
tor Company.
Conversion equipment - IMPCO 300-50
ASME Tank - Propane (21 . 84) P-1041
Remote dash gauge - 90 ohm.
Adapter - AA3-86 plus flange
Tank Installation:
1. Tank (s) must have Brown Valve.
2. Installation of tank (s) in the trunk area shall be shielded
to conform with NFPA Pamphlet 58 to allow for the installa-
tion of mobile radio equipment in the trunk.
3. In the event the tank (s) are installed by removing the
existing gas tank, ground clearance of the propane con-
tainer shall be equal toorbetter than ground clearance
of original gasoline tank and a heat shield shall be in-
stalled between propane container and exhaust system.
4. Vehicle shall be fueled using existing GM style fueling out-
let with appropriate modification.
Warranty information shall be included with the quotation.
Thomas G. Brownell
goC�LZVG Jo J"40ELCt
d
c • g 7404 WASHINGTON AVE. SO. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN. 55344
(612) 941-5952 O MN. WATTS 800-862-6054 •
E f
02,)1 j.•
February 2, 1981
City of Shakopee
Shakopee, MN
The installation of the Propane
Carburation
h nAFuel
System
58anddtthe
propane tank must be in accordance
any applicable Federal, State and Local Codes and regulations.
All carburation equipment must be manufactured by Impco Carb-
urator Company.
TANK INSTALLATION
Tanks must have Brown valve.
Remove existing gasoline tank from vehicle.
Extensive modification to the trunk of the vehicle will be neces-
sary to install and fasten propane container.
Install propane container in original gasoline tank cavity.
(See diagram. )
Ground clearance of propane container
shall b
equal
of originalto or bet-
ter than ground clearance gasoline tank.
A heat shield must be installed between propane container and ex-
haust system.
SPECIALIZING IN PROPANE CONVERSIONS FOR CARS & TRUCKS
4gg
8 -
� )2____
-�► i4u4 WASHINGTON AVE. SO. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN. 55344
Q).'221Z7
,l (612) 941-5952 o MN. WATTS 800-862-6054
_ :Oil R
L. P. GAS VEHICLE CONVERSION
"QUOTE AND AGREEMENT"
Name of Company C I ly/ Ol J f/�f�rOO c Date / - g-G -U
1
P. 0. No.
Name of Customer
Address
City Phone
TYPE OF SYSTEM
VEHICLE: Year )910 (-3) DUAL FUEL (make)
Make 0 E ), Engine: Cubic inches 3.5-0
Model 1/49 ii.Z0 L-( Cylinder: 4( ) 6( ) 8(A)
Mileage D Air 'Horn: (size)
Wheel Base Carburetor: 1B( ) 2B( ))/ 4B(X)
Manufacturer: XOe-�IS/.ER
PICKUP TRUCK: ( ) With cover
STRAIGHT L.P. GAS 90 -77.,,,a(-77.,,,a(e)
( ) Without cover make)
(Intake) Flange Pattern
VAN: ( ) Internal Mount
( ) External Mount
MISCELLANEOUS ACCESSORIES:
TANK: (Trunk Mount
Remote Fill 67"7-?. 57(//e,
( ) Bed Mount
Dash Propane Gauge WI' With
( ) Underbody Mount ( ) Without
( ) Frame Mount
Area
SPECIALIZING IN PROPANE CONVERSIONS FOR CARS & TRUCKS
e -e-
OUOTE: TYPE PRICE
Conversion Equipment wit000 303'R)h
Software Kit `��
f f _ •i's
ASME Tank (Model) 7 a '/C��'` r !;
�t6w,u 0A/0 de.
ASME Tank Serial No. _
00
Adapter 4/93 '86) 3L
mtekf
Remote Gauge 9QOlf
Remote Fill -w-( ,,4/%4c QVafvc'
Subtotal
�a -4644 13�'� 39d °°
Labor Hours .6'1lt�uPS Q�� 9 ��/10 /c_ 3V.= OW(
Total 7 �^'
t' G 6. c .,:pc'e�1i
Deposit, 20% $
Customer Signature
Date
AUTO ENERGY has the right to request a pre-installation diagnostic check to determine
suitability for a propane conversion. This test will be at owner's expense and is not
included in this quote and agreement. Based on results either party has the right to
cancel this quote and agreement.
84-47404 WASHINGTON AVE. SO. EDEN PRAIRIE, MN. 55344
(612) 941-5952 O MN. WATTS 800-862-6054
QiolE ERGr C
y.
r
I I
\ CII
SPECIALIZING IN PROPANE CONVERSIONS FOR CARS & TRUCKS
•
pUTQ ,ive 9y jN5/01L1401/aA)
cam,.
•
•
r.1
111110.01115 "'
A
a g
•
Ch ;ka
of uitL:e
PROPANE €%RB. & q[71{1;(1 SEJ ICL, J C.
' � � IM. BON 74 DALEI%'ES'I'AU
` .«, ', PRESIDENT ..
ST. PETER
MN. 560S2 (612)4 45-3910
February 16, 1981
City of Shakopee
Police Department
476 South Gorman St.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Brownell:
I am in receipt of your letter which calls for bids on converting three
1980 Chevrolet Malibus with 350 cu. in. engines to straight propane.
We will convert your vehicles for $1065.00 each. This includes installa-
tion, an Impco or Century carburetor, an appropriate tank, remote sender, and
remote fill valve. This tank will be installed in the trunk with an approved
shield around all the valves.
Please see attached for our waiianty specifications.
Thank you for considering us in this matter.
Sincerely,
David E. Leivestad
1 ;L/del
U . 1-
..... .F32op19A/ srA/57,,zzifilvAitio j a 10 RAI a
, .[ ' .. - . .-. ,, ., . ... .
r , .._...‘
ii
., 4, .....1:111171/1711 < 1
e...'..
cf
4/in„,,,. CITY ® F SHAKOPEE
':i 4: to 55379 ; /�
.,"',! ^ 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minneso
'IN!
MEMO
•
?: City Council
zOM: Public Works Dept.
ABJECT: Propane Conversion
Feb. 25, 1981
PROGRAM INFORMATION
1. Fuel Consumption: A loss of approx. 1 mile per gallon has been
noted, but a larger carburetor has been recently installed.
. Consequently, we are just accumulating newer data on the vehicle,
however, the results in consumption should be about the same.
2 . Operator ' s Comments: There have been no adverse comments to suggest
that the propane conversion on our vehicles have been a waste of
time and money. However, a little more effort is needed by the
drivers to refuel these vehicles because of the valving needed.
3. Equipment maintenance: Some maintenance was required on the
carburetor of the 21 ton truck, but a newer and larger carburetor
has since been installed to minimize the any maintenance of the
carburetors. No maintenance has been required on the Ford pickup
conversion. Vehicles using propane fuel have cleaner engines,
cleaner oil, and double the sparkplug life. We haven' t touched the
plugs or ignition system on either of these engines since they
have been converted to propane.
4 . Performance: Vehicle #110 - 1979 Ford F250 pickup (351 engine)
has consistently outperformed its ' sister pickup (gasoline) since
the propane conversion last April. It has superior pickup, performance,
accelerator response as well as a cleaner engine. This vehicle has
been parked outside all winter, and no cold weather starting
. problems have been noted as long as the tank heater has been •
plugged in overnight. •
Vehicle #108 - 1978 Chev. 21 ton dump truck (427 engine)
was a little sluggish with the initial conversion. This
carburetor has since been replaced with a larger, updated carburetor
that has provided us with the. power needed for top performance in
our daily functions with the truck. . Only a slight loss of power
can be detected at present, and it has been determined that this
slight power loss is not detrimental toward the efficiency of
this truck.
Propane Conversion Page 2.
BIDS RECEIVED
Vehicle # 1 - 1979 Ford F250 Pickup (351 engine)
Propane Carb and Turbo Co. Shakopee, Mn.
(Century or Impco carb. - 62 gallon tank) $800. 00
Auto Energy Co. Eden Prairie, Mn.
(Impco carb. 62 gallon tank) $960 . 40
Vehicle # 2 - 1980 Ford F900 dump truck tandem (554 engine)
Propane Carb and Turbo Co. Shakopee, MN.
(Century carb. - 84 gallon tank) $855. 00
Auto Energy Co. Eden Prairie, Mn.
(Impco carb.- 84 gallon tank) $1043 . 00
We have budgeted $3000 for 3 conversions for 1981.
The City mechanic will perform these installations.
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend accepting the proposal of Propane Carb and Turbo, Co.
for the purchase of equipment to convert the following vehicles:
Vehicle #1 1979 Ford F250 pickup $ 800 . 00
Vehicle #2 1980 Ford F900 tandem $ 855. 00
This vendor recommends that the Century carburetor be used in any
engine larger than 400 cu. in. disp.
It is our intent to utilize the current converted squad #106 as a
replacement to our staff car when it is made available to us in
approx. 2 months. This car is using a leased propane carburetor
at present, and we are requesting authorization to exercise
the purchase option in our agreement with Valley Industrial Propane
Company of Shakopee, by deducting 22 . 00 (as per agreement) per
month of lease time from the original installation price of $800 .
The City should be able to pruchase this equipment for approx. $550.
However, some minor modifications must be made to this conversion
unit for an added cost of $150, thus making the purchase price
of the conversion unit at $700. 00 .
PAI
JULIUS A.GOLLER, II
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 612-445-1244
1859-1940
2 1 1 WEST FIRST AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
55329
February 25, 1981
Memo to:
The Honorable Walter C. Harbeck
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
John Anderson,
City Administrator
Member of the Shakopee City Council
In re: City of Shakopee vs James J. Hauer and
State Surety Company
I am sure you are all aware of the back ground of the above Matter and
pursuant to instructions from the Council suit was instituted against
James J. Hauer and against the State Surety Company on the bond that he
filed with the City.
The City has received two answers. One from the Surety Company denying
all liability and entering a cross claim against Mr. Hauer for any amount
that the Surety Company might have to pay as a result of the above pro-
ceedings.
Mr. Hauer in his answer also filed a general denial, which is customary,
and as further defense alleges and states that the City's action is
barred by the doctrine of estoppel. That means that we are stopped from
entering any claim against Mr. Hauer but the pleadiAg does not setforth
the grounds of disclaimer. Mr. Hauer also has a counterclaim in his
answer against the City of Shakopee wherein he claims that the City
unreasonably and capriciously revoked a builidng permit previously granted
to Mr. Hauer and that upon his re-application for a new building permit
the City capriciously, arbitrarily and unreasonably rejected his application
and refused to grant a new permit. Mr. Hauer also claims that as a result
of the actions of the City the premises have been rendered unsalable and
claims $50,000 together with costs and disbursements. The City will immediately
have to file a reply to the counterclaims.
Resperrfully submitted,
r
Juliu A. Coller, IIs
City Att
JAC/nh
MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Easement for Sandlewood 1st Addition
DATE: February 27 , 1981
INTRODUCTION :
Sometime ago the preliminary plat of Sandlewood 1st Addition was
approved with the condition that the developer obtain an easement for
a road connecting the plat to a road in Prior Lake .
BACKGROUND:
Attached is a proposed easement agreement for the property needed
to connect the road in Sandlewood to the road in Prior Lake . By prior
verbal. agreement , Dave McGuire , Developer of Sandlewood 1st . , stated that
he would pay the cost cf acquiring the easement to the City. I have
talked with both Mr. McGuire and the City Attorney about this and we
all concur that the most effective way to handle the matter is for Mr.
McGuire to provide the City with an $860. 00 two party check, payable
to the City of Shakopee and Mr. Lindenann (owner of property upon which
the easement is located) .
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve easement agreement and authorize execution thereof , upon
receipt of a check from Mr. Lindemann in the amount of $860. 00.
NOTE:
There is one additional easement agreement which needs to be
acquired in this fashion.
JKA/ jsc
EAS EMENT
THIS EASEMENT made this day of -:, by
Wallace W. Lindemann and Mary D. Lindemann, husband and wite
Parties of the First Part, to the CITY OF SIIAKOPEN, a municipal corporation
situated in Scott County, State of Minnesota, Party of the Second Part.
1.
In consideration of Lijsht lundred Sixty and no%J00 Dollars
and other valuable considerations in hand paid by the Party of the Second
Part , the receipt and sufficiency of which the Parties of the First Part do
hereby acknowledge, the Parties of the First fart hereby grant, convey and
sell to the Party of the Second Part, its successors and assigns, the easement
described in Exhibit "A" hereto attached and made a part hereof, over
and across the land described in said Exhibit "A" together with the right
to construct,, install , maintain, r•c l,ni1', rr:;L, enl:r.rg , modify and :;er•vice
said installation for the purpose therein described.
The Parties of the First Part hereby certifies that it is the owner
of said property and is impowered to grant said easement.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the Parties of the First Part have hereinto set
their hands the day and year first above written.
PARTIES 01'' THE FIRST PART
Wallace W. Lindemann
Mary D. Lindemann
State of Minnesota)
ss
County of
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before this this day
of , 19 81 , by _Wallace W_ Lindemann
(Name of Property Owner)
and by Mary D. Lindemann _
(Name of Property Owner)
Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgement
This instrument was drafted by:
H. H. Spurrier
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
I
EXHIBIT A
The easement granted hereby is described as follows:
That part of the West 90 feet of the North Half of the Northwest Quarter of
Section 24, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota, lying South
of the following described line: Beginning at the Southeast corner of Lot
17, Block 1, Titus 1st Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof;
thence East at right angles to the East line of said Lot 17 a distance of
90 feet to the East line of said West 90 feet and there terminating -
As a further consideration for the granting of this easement, it is agreed
that the cost of constructing Sandalewood Road will not be assessed against the
abutting property described as parcel #27-924-5240-002-01 at the time of the
initial construction. This does not preclude future assessments of this
parcel for other utility or roadway improvements -which may have to be made
at a future time.
The City of Shakopee loll cooperate with the parties of the first part in
locating the road when it is built so that it disturbs the balance of their
property as little as practicable.
VI)
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Reconveyance of Part of the Land Containing the Old
Shakopee Treatment Plant
DATE : February 26 , 1981
Introduction
The City has been pursuing the possibility of reacquiring much of
the Old Sewage Treatment Plan for some time . On January 22 , 1981
we received the attached letter and map from Wayne E . Sweet ,
Staff Engineer from MWCC .
Background
The City was previously involved in this matter during the pro-
cessing of the Halo 2nd Addition plat . The portion that MWCC
is currently proposing to turn over to the City is outlined on
the attached map . The portion that would be covered by the
dike easement is noted "MWCC DIKE EASEMENT" .
If the City is interested in reacquiring the property the follow-
ing questions should be discussed :
1 . Do we want more flexibility than would be available if we
provide MWCC with the dike easement? Are there alternatives
to protecting the lift station they are retaining?
2 . Why do we want to reacquire the property? Do we plan to
sell or lease parts of it to other interested parties
(there are apparently two or three interested in parts
of the property) ? Is this sufficient reason to take on
the maintenance responsibility for the portion we reacquire?
3 . What will our maintenance obligations be?
Recommendation
If Council is interested in reacquiring the property, Council
should authorize the City Administrator to write a letter to
George W. Lusher asking that the City be deeded the 0.579 acres ,
list any conditions the City wants to include , and instruct
staff to include the appropriate descriptions for the property
and adjacent easement .
JKA/jms
i
. .:1e,
g �
- \\I
January 21, 1981
JAN 2 193(
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Attention: Tim Keane, Engineering Department
Re: Reconveyance of Part of the Land Containing
the Old Shakopee Treatment Plant
Dear Tim:
Per our conversation on this date I am attaching the following
documents:
(1) The large map (surveyors certificate) of the Wallace Bakken
property on which I have super-imposed the 0.579 acre (2nd stage)
fee property that MWCC could Quit Claim Deed to the City by retaining
the Dike Easement area (1.088 acres) as shown.
(2) A 8-1/2" x 11" sketch showing location of digester buildings and
* sludge drying beds ("Greenhouse") .
"',,
(3) A copy of a letter dated 5/7/80 from a Mr. Jim Bush of Red Wing
4� • asking that he be allowed to pay $1.00 and remove the "Greenhouse"
7I for his use on solar energy studies. If we consummate a Quit Claim
Deed transfer to the City of Shakopee this spring the City perhaps could
:\, ' make some arrangement to accommodate this request.
s
kIn order to get the stage 2 land transfer in motion we will require a
;—�., letter request to our Chief Administrator, George W. Lusher asking that
` 1 `' the City be deeded the 0.579 acres and the appropriate descriptions for
the fee property and the adjacent easement should be attached.
Either myself or Ken Bombach will be available to review the details of
-:4-C1
the access road, fencing removal and parking area restoration at L.S. No.
16 (the 0.41 acre site) at your convenience.
1,47' Very truly yours,
7/ _
Wayne E. Sweet
Staff Engineer
WES:hw
Enclosures
cc: Bernard Harrington
350 ETR0fOURRE BLDG. Ken Bombach
7TH PAUL mn55101 Robert Lindall , Attorney
612 222.8423
( ' ''
i
.
N 8� 75' 03" ' 365 00
,. i 0 1.,� ,j„ �+ EI...l 1... I 5 .I 1
1\
/ VO!
, ,. r , ..Co - LINK • NCE;, �j• �.. sit \,/,/,,.,
/, W
x V'. t
•
l v �iA:h(-- �' P POLE
1 i` WI7/N GUY -O
�r P
(Jl
-' ';, ISP '/isl
1 1 , i _s• \ , 0
4i C..� i .
l/ y. / O
//\-'t e,-e..- 4,
- .', 4fituY PA 1,', , , /
�,QT Dff..' , ot t .„.-) , _k •
- dlc / / .0 / /
/.. -,,p� C1-7:es2�. / tTl l
-9— <iN 1 1,-/ -I c _&Yah / / /
- �/ NI Yca� / /
w
6. � �� } OF 55.25 � {
PA
,, \,_ _ .._ —
• -,.- . 2\ ,., i
o4- ��.43
CDR. fT____ ,_, _._--�
N E ► ----rte ”" --, 6 0,0 0
/ CNUE N o F(RI oN— ��o — :71:-----,,-;:t\I 79z3a� E \\ II.I
9
1 / <Th
\, \
\/ /
/\ y o
/ ✓ i \,..„)
.-
7Th
Th m
I r
\o z W
Z
(n c, \ m —
rn
\' i \
n r,\ \'11 1- •
) 1 1 1 r- \ \_r?)
r A -{
545 0 r
O �';\ ?
\ 3> .
\t- \ :171 \ ' . .
LITH LINE OF GOV'T LOT 5 \ -----
___-----i_ .--
— -----------___\ \I \
_ _ 2-70.19 -_ -- — —
p
Law Offices of j 74
KRASS, MEYER & KANNING
Chartered Phillip R. Kress
Shakopee Professional Building Barry K. Meyer
1221 Fourth Avenue East { _~ r Philip T. Kenning
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Trevor R. Walsten
(612)445-5080
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Walter C. Harbeck, the Honorable
Members of the Shakopee City Council and
John K. Anderson, Shakopee City Administrator
FROM: Trevor R, Walsten
SUBJECT: Fiscal disparities Judgment and
Recommended Course of Action
DATE: February 20, 1981
The Honorable Earl B. Gustafsonisthe Judge of the Minnesota Tax
Court before whom certain petitioners (including the City of Shakopee)
challenged the constitutionality of Chapter 24, Minnesota Extra Session Laws,
1971 (Chapter 473F Minnesota Statutes 1980) , commonly known as the Fiscal
Disparities Act. Such trial commenced on the 15th day of April , 1980, and
the Findings, of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order for Judgment resulting
therefrom were entered on the 12th day of February, 1981, such being stayed
for a period of 15 days by order of the Court.
Among other things therein, the Honorable Earl B. Gustafson found
as fact that the Fiscal Disparities Act bears a reasonable relation to per-
mitted legislative purposes, and further, that the Fiscal Disparities Act as
applied to petitioners does not result in hostile or oppressive discrimination.
Thereupon, the Tax Court concluded as a matter of law that the Fiscal Disparities
Act does not violate either the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution
nor Article 10, Section 1 of the Minnesota Constitution. Hence, Judgment was had
in accordance therewith.
More important, perhaps, than the legal basis upon which the Tax Court
Judgment was based, is the larger context within which this decision was rendered.
Specifically, the trial of this matter was had subsequent to the case of Burnsville
vs. Onischuk, 301 Minn. 137, 222 NW2d 523 (1974) , App. Dis. , 420 U.S. 916 (1975) ,
in which the Minnesota Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court ruled upon
and upheld the constitutional validity of the Fiscal Disparities Act. That being
so, in a technical sense, and as the Tax Court Judge indicated in his Memorandum,
the sole issue that remained open and the sole issue that was litigated in the
action brought by petitioners (including the City of Shakopee) is whether the Act,
in its application to the petitioners, constitutes hostile and oppressive discrimina-
tion. In other words, the Tax Court Judge distinguished between the rulings of the
Minnesota Supreme Court and of the United States Supreme Court in the Burnsville case
based upon the constitutionality of the Fiscal Disparities Act as determined from the
face of the Act, as distinguished from the action brought by petitioners (including
the City of Shakopee) wherein the Court determined the constitutionality of the
Fiscal Disparities Act based upon the actual application of the Act and practical
consequences thereof.
F
Page 2
February 20, 1981
It is the opinion of this office that the Tax Court Judge in ruling
upon the action brought by petitioners (including the City of Shakopee) was, as
a practical matter, not predisposed to overrule the prior decisions of the
Minnesota Supreme Court and of the United States Supreme Court in the Burnsville
case even on the technically distinguishable grounds now before the Tax Court.
Such a predisposition was not unanticipated, and in fact, it was expected by this
office.
The present utility of pursuing an appeal of the Minnesota Tax Court's
decision, however, must not be unduly diminished by reason of the Tax Court
Judge' s compliance with the previous holdings in the Burnsville case even on the
technically distinguishable grounds now before the Court. In fact, weighing
heavily in favor of pursuing such an appeal is the fact that the Minnesota Supreme
Court in the Burnsville case rendered that decision in a split judgment. In fact,
the descent in that case was very strong, indeed, and may well enjoy the opportunity
to have before the Court again the same Fiscal Disparities Act which they had
previously found to be unconstitutional on its face.
Notwithstanding the fact that an appeal of the Minnesota Tax Court
decision will technically be based upon the constitutionality of the Fiscal
Disparities Act as applied, it is the opinion of this office that such an appeal
will afford those justices who previously descented in the Burnsville decision
to form a majority with the new argument that the Act is unconstitutional as
applied, and may even vindicate their original position that the Act is unconsti-
tutional on its face given this opportunity.
Should the petitioners (including the City of Shakopee) decide to appeal
the Tax Court Judge' s determination, the right of review by the Supreme Court may
be had by securing issuance of a Writ of Certiorari within 60 days after the party
applying for such Writ shall have received written notice of the decision sought
to be reviewed. Minn. Rule Civil Appellant Procedure, 115.01. Hence, because the
Petition and a proposed Writ of Certiorari need be presented to the Clerk of the
Supreme Court within this 60-day period to obtain review by that Court, I would
advise that the decision to appeal not be unjustifiably delayed.
Finally, it must be stated that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari must
definitely and briefly state the errors which the petitioners (including the City of
Shakopee) claim. Thereupon, the Minnesota Supreme Court shall determine whether it
will allow the appeal to be brought. The Petition and proposed Writ of Certiorari ,
then, is merely a preliminary hurdle through which the petitioners (including the
City of Shakopee) must jump through in order that the appeal , in its entirety, may
be heard and considered by the Minnesota Supreme Court. Delay in the submission of
such Petition and proposed Writ of Certiorari , however, would cause the balance of
the appeal to be denied by reason of untimeliness. Therefore, this office eagerly
awaits your decision in this matter.
Very truly yours,
KRASS; MEYER & KANNING CHARTERED
t i
/44, /
Trevor R. Walsten
TRW:ph
9 Clc/
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Revisions to the Shakopee Community Services Agreement
DATE : February 27 , 1981
Introduction
The attached memo from George Muenchow provides the backdrop for
the proposed changes in the agreement . Please note that the
Community Services Board approved the agreement January 19 , 1981 .
Action Needed
1 . Council review the proposed agreement and note where it
differs from our current ordinance .
2 . After the review, Council should follow Mr . Muenchow ' s
recommendation to adopt the changes .
3 . Council should then direct legal staff to draft the
necessary resolution authorizing execution of the agree-
ment and draft the necessary changes to Ordinance No . 129
so that it will not be in conflict with the agreement .
JKA/jms
SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY SERVICES
AGREEMENT REVISION Recommendation approved 1/19/81
Community Services Board Meeting
A, Introduction
This proposed Community Services Board Agreement Revision was prepared by
the Community Services Board approximately one year ago.
It was reviewed by City Attorney Julius Coller, and approved for forwarding
to the City Council and the School Board.
B. Background
Since that time it has been determined that from a legal standpoint the
the function of the Community Services Advisory Council can be downgraded.
State Law under the State Community Education Act requires that School
Districts that levy for Community Education must also provide Advisory
Councils. It now has been determined that Shakopee's Community Services
Board legally is fulfilling that function. It is important that the
agreement be changed to convey this fact. The Community Services
Advisory Council will continue to operate, but will primarily exist
to encourage cooperation and look for problems and needs within the
community.
C. Alternatives
1 . Leave present agreement alone.
2. T1ake minor changes.
3. Approve attached changes.
D. Summary
Staff recommends that the recommended changes be made so that this
instrument is truly a legal document that provides a smooth operation.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
and
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 720
CONCERNING THE OPERATION OF A JOINTLY SPONSORED
COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND RECREATION PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Independent School District No. 720 is organized for
the purpose of providing public school education, including at its
discretion, public evening school, adult and continuing education programs
and associated recreation programs within its geographical boundaries;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee is authorized to, and does, in coopera-
tion with the said School District, provide recreation and civic programs
for citizens within its geographical boundaries; and,
WHEREAS, on December 31, 1978 an agreement was entered into between
Independent School District No. 720 and the City of Shakopee providing
for the establishment and operation of a jointly sponsored Community
Education and Recreation Program, which agreement has worked well, but
does have some shortcomings; and,
WHEREAS, it is the mutual desire of the parties to update and revise
the said agreement.
March 2
THEREFORE, this agreement is made and entered into as of .
1981
by and between Independent School District No. 720, hereinafter
referred to as the School District, and the City of Shakopee, hereinafter
referred to as City, pursuant to authority contained in Minnesota Statutes
471.59.
Parties hereto agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
The Sponsors shall severally, jointly, and cooperatively pursuant
to the broad authority contained in Section 471.59 inclusive, of Minnesota
Statutes and other applicable statutes and their respective and implied
powers, establish and operate a Community Services Programa
a) The term Community Services Program is defined as follows:
The Community Services Program will include adult education
and recreation and leisure time activities in the broadest
sense. School District and City facilities will be utilized,
as well as private resources when available, to carry out the
Community Services Program. The Community Services Program
will serve residents of all ages and socio-economic status with-
in the boundaries of the sponsors.
b) The responsibility for the operation of the Community Services
Program shall rest with the sponsors through the Community
Services Board. Recommendations from the Community Services
Advisory Council shall be received periodically by the Com-
munity Services Board.
U _
2. COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD
voting
The Community Services Board shall consist of seven members: the
Mayor of the City, a member of the City Council, a member of the School
Board, four citizen members, two of whom shall be appointed by the City
Council and two by the School Board. The citizen members shall serve
for two years.
Their terms of office will cont ude in if ering years.
e} The four citizens
serving on the predecessor Shakopee Recreation Board shall continue
functioning in the same capacity on the new Community Services Board with
the same term of office. All appointees shall serve until successors are
appointed.
A vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired term of office by the
appropriate appointing body. This Board shall at the beginning of each
fiscal year select a Chairperson, a Vice-Chairperson, and a Secretary.
A majority shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.
The Board shall meet monthly.
j. COMMUNITY SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL
The Community Services Advisory Council shall consist of at least
seven citizens of the community that are appointed
Community Services
by the They shall be representative of the community at
large. Their term of office shall be for two years or until their
successor is appointed.
•
- 3 -
r . g �
This Council shall elect a Chairperson, a Vice-Chairperson, and a
voting
Secretary. The Secretary may be a non6member of the Council. They shall
three
meet at least times a year.
The Community Services Advisory Council shall perform an advisory-
liason-coordination function. It shall help promote an understanding of
the program and suggest needs of the community. It shall consider
quality activities which will further the growth of the community and
plan ways to meet these needs. It shall have as a major responsibility
the promotion of cooperation.
anatt+N'.oK;c. _ .....161.`1...a4 . :; ... .
.q rvw°,i L x-,..•, i +i — a Ld
.�__ . -- .
ys� 4i4av i 8 t .. . - - - -
_ _ a
:...: tie-441 tcv e :u . .
is i tt -- a d fkch a .
rt-t • - _ . - . .
4•111 FINANCE
a) The Sponsors shall make financial contributions to the Community
Services Board to fund the operation of the Community. Services
Program exclusive of fees collected for various activities.
The governing body of each of the sponsors will approve the
amount of the contribution to be made by that body.
- 4 -
Financial support of the Community Services Program shall be
shared on the basis agreed to by the sponsors.
The Annual Community Services Budget, as recommended by the
Community Services Board, shall be submitted to each sponsor
for action on approval on or before August 25 of each year.
The budget shall set forth the proposed program of activities
in the ensueing year
to be provided on a School District wide basis, and within each
of the participating municipalities. Additional contributions
may be made by either or both Sponsors, within their taxing author-
ity and budget, as determined at the discretion of each governing
body. Contributions from other individuals, groups and agencies can
also be accepted.
b) All personnel hired to establish and operate the Community
Services Program shall be paid from the Community Service
Board fund. The City of Shakopee will act as the fiscal agent.
c) Each Sponsor shall endeavor to make application for all County,
State and Federal grants and funds, and private and foundation
, resources that may be available to it if the requirements or
conditions necessary to obtain such grants and programs are
acceptable to it.
d) It is understood and agreed that the Community Service Board
shall endeavor to purchase equipment and supplies for the
Community Services Program through purchasing procedures which
will be most beneficial to the program. Contracts let and
purchases made under this agreement shall conform to the require-
ments applicable to contracts and purchases of the fiscal agent.
e) At the end of each calendar year the Community Services Board
shall cause an audit tole performed of funds expended in the
previous year. A copy of the annual audit shall be submitted to
each Sponsor of this agreement.
Board
f) At the end of each year the Community Services 111111111Shall
prepare a report of activities ININNIONMINconducted ` #43..
Sponsors.
and submit this report to the ariairairsismitaafariair
_ 5 _
The annual report shall be in a form such that it
can be compared to the proposed program on which the annual
budget has been prepared.
5.111 CONTRIBUTION OF PROGRAMS AND FACILITIES BY SPONSORS
a) Each Sponsor shall, after receiving the recommendations of the
Community Services Board, determine which of its lands, buildings,
equipment and programs, (hereinafter called "Public Resources" )
will be made available to the Community Services Program.
b) The costs of maintenance, upkeep and utilities for the Public
Resources made available by the Sponsors will be borne generally
by the respective owning Sponsor. The Community Services Director
shall bring to the attention of the appropriate municipal or
school official items in need of repair or maintenance.
c) Each Sponsor shall maintain public liability insurance coverage
upon its Public Resources made available for the Community Services
Program.
6. 4UPERVISION OF PROGRAM
All activities of the Community Services Program will be under the
direct supervision of the Community Services Board. The Community
Services Director shall carry out the objectives and goals of the program
as approved by the Community Services Board.
BUD (Covered under 4. Finance a. )
_. _ ,s _.,*, -_�
-&g-44€- +" i�+ i•i r - ,.y^.«f'
+ f.
1.-44e-6--22{+:p444-41.4.-
�-
71 PERSONNEL
a) The Community Services Board shall establish standards and
qualifications for (1) the Director and (2) any additional
I
I .
- 6
personnel deemed to benecessary to be hired for the Community
Services Program.
b) The Community Services Board shall establish the salaries of all
personnel to be hired for the Community Services Program.
Board
c) Employees of the Community Servicesrshall be under the
direct supervision of the Community Services Director.
8.111,k LENGTH OF AGREEMENT
This agreement shall remain in effect and shall govern the jointly
sponsored Community Services Program of the City and the School District,
subject, however, to the right of either party to terminate this Agreement
on December 31 of any year. Written notice of termination must be given
to the other party at least one year prior to the date of proposed
termination.
In the event of a termination of this agreement, all surplus funds
will be distributed to the Sponsors in proportion to the amount contri-
buted over the life-time of the agreement. Property purchased under this
agreement will be distributed to the Sponsors in the same way.
Each of the Sponsors hereto shall be individually liable for its
equal share of all debts and liabilities incurred by the Community Services
Program.
9 NONDISCRIMINATION
a) Admission and access to, full utilization of and benefit from
the Community Services Program shall be available to all residents
of the Community without regard to race, color, creed, religion,
national origin, and without regard to sex except as may be
necessary as a bona fide requirement of a specific course or
service of said program.
b) No applicant for employment or employee hired pursuant to this
Agreement shall be discriminated against with respect to that
person' s hire, tenure, compensation, terms, upgrading, conditions,
facilities, or privileges of employment by reason of race,
color, creed, religion, national origin, or sex except as may
be based upon bona fide occupational qualifications.
1
v -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE parties hereto have caused this Agreement toth
executed by their respective duly authorized officers pursuant to the
authority granted by the attached resolutions adopted by the Shakopee
City Council and Independent School District No.720.
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 720 SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Chairperson Mayor
Clerk City Administrator
Date Date
l
.r , r ?,. .
.., .
e
Ordinance No. 129
. .
April 21 , 1954
• UItl)I AN(E U. 121 sEETIoVa, SPECIFIC POWERS.
In order toe:i'ry tin the recreation
\N ultl,lN.\Nl'E 1:5'1'.\1:1.IFllilxt: program provided herein, the board
A ,In iiNT I;l?C1tl:A'1'i(nN lin rx it 1) shall have power to.
AND I,I:FINING 1'I'S PO\\'ERS AND a) Adopt rules for its meetings
t,li'I'INS. and the transaction of its business
;old rules guveruiag the use by the
The Common Council of the Cis) public of the recreation facilities
of -i ukopee do ordain as follows• under it:: control:
S1:C'IYI/% It TIlI. ES'1'AIILISll-
)IE\'t' AND COMPOSITION of h) Employ and fix the compen-
Ilo.l.tl). saliou of a superintendent or super-
visor of recreation, instructors.
There is hereby created a recrs- leaders. administrative guardians.
Mimi board for the City of Shalt,- ;,end custodial personnel. and to car
pee, pursuant to the authority gi:- ry the workmen's compensation in-
ce by Chapter 233. Laws of 19:7. sur:utc•e and provide for surety
under which the power of the city hinds for any such officers and
and the school board to operate a employees provided all officers and
Program of recreation may be deli,- employees shall be selected on a
gated to such a board. The board basis of merit aunt fitness and in-
shall consist of seven members. sti•uctors and directors shall be ap-
coaiposed as follows: Pointed in compliance with the
The mayor of the city, a mem- m ninnunt qualifications established
her of the city council, a mem- by the Minnesota Department of
bcr of the school board, all three Education: make purchases of ma-
acting ex officio; four citizen terials, supplies, equipnnent, and
members. two of whom shall be services. but such purchases of nth-
appointed by the city council and c•r than personal services shall be
two by the school board. of thin cotupe:ii ive and in orders involy-
citizens members appointed. on'' tug more than five-hundred dol-
appointed by the council and on•r lairs shall be selected after public
appointed by the s,hool board advertising: and opening of written
shall serve for the term ending bids:
April 31. 1955 and the other two ,,) 'xl'I- enuti--I far comple-
shall be appointed for a term tion iyithiii a current fiscal year:
• ending April 31, 1956. Thereafter di Lease read or personal prop
the citizen members shall be :IP-
Prop-
pointed for terms of two years. erty for public recreational use for
Both original and successive ap- periods nut longer than one Year:
pointees shall serge until their e) Accept gifts of real and per-
successors are appointed and sonatl Property for public recrea-
oualified. Citizen members aha Ii tional purposes, sub let to the pro-
hold no other office except that visions of Section 2:
of notary Public. f) Maintain and care for public
A vacancy shall be filled for the property which it has acquirt•d or
unexpired 'portion of the term 1 ) has had assigned to it for public
the aopropriale nppnlnting body. reercationnl purposes including the
Members of the board shall verse earning of any insurance cover-
without compensation and shall not age it deems necessary;
be personally interested in any coil- g) Perform whatever other acts
tracts of the board. They' shall at are reasonable and necessary and •
the beginning of each fiscal''veut proper to carry on a recreational
select a ,hairman and a secretary program under this ordinance.
from their own number With ninth's SECTION 4. I'IttP'AHATION OF
in addition to board membership ini- Pltotilt 1,31
plied by by these titles. A ma.loriiv
shall coast:Otte a quorum for the The board shall each year prior
transaction of business. to September 1. Prep.tre a compre-
SE("TION ::: ( LCNI:RAI. POWER. pensive progr.on for public recre-
ation :ten ivities for the ensuing
The recreation board shall have y,•ar, with reconnmeuded divisions
power to operate a progr:un of pal.- of respignsibllity as between private
lie recreation and itniygrounds as agencies. Other paid c agencies ad'
j joint :hent of the city and school niiuistiring recreation activities
If district. if any Part of the public directly, and the board itself. The
re(-rection program of the common- board's own program small be de-
ity is administered directly by any scribed in terms of activities, as
public or private agency other than well as finances. The 'budget of Ti-
the board, the board shall have n:owes shall be substantially bal-
power to make cooperative agree- arced and shall show:
meats with any such Public or pr - A) l-stinut;ed revenues, divided
vate agency for the Purpose of as follows: •
ordinations all the activites and fa- 1) eoutribution from city coun-
cilities included in such public rec- c•il.
mention program. The program dir- 3) contribution from school
ectly administered by the board . hoard.
may make use of public property 3). contribution from Shakopee
assigned to, or of private property l'ubl:o 1't:lities Conon.
lensed or otherwise made available 41 ,ontrlbutions from private
for, publi ' recreational use. The so ices:
city council shall determine what 51 earnings from rtdmissions
land is to be acquired by it for rec- - and other charges made for use
teat ionat purposes. What land it of facilities:
r+hull bo permitted to use In carry- Ci miscellaneous reVennes: and
unit n n Its t'ccr'ntinnnl program. Ill Et:liumied expel dltures. ,llvld-
in el iv hull I'm ilituue or other per- not ;is folios,
en ion inn it ii p, n„ in 1. , Ii..i, 1 nisi,.s Fri" 11•
I • ,•. ,.,i ... .t . , in Ir
,it ,iii sii.,li o ii., min ;on ,t,', 1 ,
with respect to its land. :and the 31 , . 1 ,lint pa)I di:
constru,lion of buildings or other 4) su' plies:
permanent structures upon it. The 5) minting.:
board shall advise the city council s) postage. express, freight. ut-
and the school board upon such ility charges:
maters and shall operate facilities 7) repairs:
made available to it for recreational sl rents:
purposes: but it shall have no auth- 9) ,•nnlpnnent:
oritY to acquire land In its own lel real estate and Improve'
name or without the consent of the !omits:
.' governmental unit in whose nanne 11) miscellaneous expenditures
_ such land is to he acquired. and It Such budget shall he submitted
shall have no authority to construct not later than May 1st to the city
buildings or other permanent struc- council, the school board. and any
tures upon any land without the nuttier Public body from which con-
consent of the owners of such land: trihutions are requested. The final
and In no event shall such buildings decisions as to these contributions
or structures be constructed by the shrill he reported back to the hoard.
board upon privately owned land. which shall adjust the budget, if
6/IP . .
Ordinance No. 129
• Continued
necessary. The expenditure allow- sldCTION G. FINANCIAL IiEI'ORT
aures, as finally approved by. the The hoard shall as soon as ties-
board. shall control the years sille after the curl of each fiscal
spending program, except that ex- year. prepare and present to the
rosy revenues received may be city courted. school hoard, and all
spent upon the a;proval of six other public and private, particinat-
umentbers of the board. The board fug agencies, a comprehensive an-
shall not itself levy taxes or bor- nual report of its activities and fi-
r•o t' money: and it shall not approve na n
any claims or incur any obligations Si.('I'ItrN ;, DEDICATION
for expenditure. unless there is Thi;, 1 rdnt:utcc is respectfully
unencumbered cash in the treasury dedicated as fellows
to the credit of the beard. with I'1'1•.\I I '1'e all those civic-rnind-
tvhich to pay the sane. ed nen and wetnen of Shakopee.
SI':('TI01% tt. FINANCE!. OF TILE who ha ve premuted, established or
ItO.tlltl) larli,ep:tted in, the many splendid
Fel- the Purpose of fii tncing the fields e1 endeavor in public recre-
public recreation program author- '%tion - whither in sports or hob-
Iced by this ordinance. there shall hies. in musi'• or literature. in
be established in the city accounts Scouting. in -I-II work, or in any
and treasury a special fund to U,• other and whose continued and
called the Recreation Fund. Into unselfish efteris have enriched and
this fund shall be placed the var- inspired or citizenry. and Whose
ions recreation expenditures as en- high ideals have contributed irn-
uuterated in Sectlon9. All receipts measurably toward building a bet-
belonging- to the board shall lie de- ter t'einmunity.
posited intact in a bank account to 1.1'kM II 1't. the memory of a
the credit of the fund and no die- feurih,geieratiou son of several
Uurseutent shall be made from this prominent pioneer families, an out-
bank account except by check nor standing local-athlete whose ideals
unless a verified claim fir services of sportsmanship have Leeome a
and conunedities actually rendered part of our Best tradition. and who
or delivered has first been submit- placed the name of Shakopee upon
ted to and approved for payment the scroll of the immortal "Golden
by the board. as authenticated by Gophers" "Boots iiirscher,"
signature of the president uand clerk. %vilest. untimely death was a deep
The accounting of the fund and the loss to the cause of civic recrea-
custody of the cash and the bank t sECTi/1N s. EFFECTIVE DATE.
checking account shall be in the This ordinance shall take effect
hands of the accounting officer and front and after the date of passage
the treasurer, respectively. of the of a eun'espendinc resolution by
city. '1'hese officers shall make re- the s,•Iool board after the consent
ports to the board at reasonable of the voters has been given there-
' intervals as determined by 'the to by a majority vote cast at an
board. For purposes of budgeting, annual school election, such reso-
accounting. and reporting, the fis- lution autherizinc the participation
i cal year of the hoard and the fund of the school district in a .hint
I shall he March 31. An audit of the program of recrentiin through the
funds shall be made annually. Such re, rea'o,n heard established herein
audit may he made independently Passed in Ad i. f:igular Session
of or in conjunction with any audit of the t'omtln,n ('ouncil of the City
which may be made of the funds of of Shakopee held this 20th day of
the city. The board shall be auth- April. Lull:
prized to establish charges or fees FRANK L. BLENKL'SH
for the restricted use of any facill- -President
ties or to make any phase of the ATTEST:
recreation program wholly or par- E. A. l,tR('I:S.
tinily self-sustaining. Any cnnees- Cite Ite•-order -
stens or privileges may be sold af- approved this 21st day of April.
ter public advertising and competi- Wee
live bidding. Any employees of the (;1?ttll(:E A. I'1IILIf'I'
board who hurdle cash in the pro- Mayor of the City
vers of collection shall be bonded. of Shakepce.
s.
1
WI)}
MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council
FROM : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE : Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District
Request for Help in Acquiring Outlet Easements
DATE : February 23 , 1981
Introduction
City Council , at its February 3 , 1981 meeting, listened to a presenta-
tion from the City Engineer and representatives from the Prior Lake
Spring Lake Watershed District (District) regarding their need for an
outlet through Shakopee for their District . After raising several
questions with regard to the District ' s impact on Shakopee , City
Council asked staff to draft a "list of concerns" and present them
to Council . This memo lists and discusses those concerns starting
with a clear statement of what the District wants from Shakopee . The
information which follows is the result of a lengthly meeting with
the District Engineer, their attorney, the City Engineer and myself
on February 19 , 1981 .
What The District Wants From Shakopee
The District wants (needs) the City of Shakopee ' s consent to run
their drainage system through Shakopee . More specifically, the
District wants our assistance in securing easements (not acquiring
R/W) by : ( 1 ) Our consent to negotiate with the property owners
involved and (2) Our assistance in condemnation if the easements
cannot be purchased . The District will accept our assistance in one
form or another to accomplish one and two above . The City of Prior
Lake has agreed to help the District acquire easements in their
jurisdiction.
District Timetable and DNR Permit
It is the goal of the District to complete the project this year
and to this end they have discussed the Deans Lake Route with
the DNR and the DNR did not raise any environmental concerns
that would require changes to the project; and, the District
does not anticipate that any new environmental concerns will
be raised . Plans and specifications for the project are nearly
ready for bids and all appraisals have been made .
Role of Scott County
Scott County was the petitioner to the District for the outlet .
The impetuous for the petition came from a small group on Prior
Lake and the Scott County action was in lieu of a petition from
private individuals action that would have required a significant
bond to insure that front end expenditures would be paid . To date
Mayor and City Council /4
February 23 , 1981
Page Two
the County has set up a "preliminary fund" and advanced money for
engineering , etc . totaling approximately $120 ,000.
Technicially the County could do the project itself , however, County
policy is to do ditches for agricultural purposes only - not for urban
projects . If the County did do the project they would assess the
abutting property that drained into the project resulting in both
Shakopee and Prior Lake residents paying for the project and Spring
Lake would be left out of it all together . Politically this would
be difficult to do because of the expense to Prior Lake vs . the expense
carried by the District as a whole , which includes Spring Lake , if the
Watershed District approach is used .
The County has severalother reasons for encouraging the District
approach vs . the County Ditch approach. If the County ignored
existing policy and did this urban project would it create a precedence
for future ubran projects pushed by small interest groups . There
appears to be no agricultural interests (benefits ) at all to the
project . The County might well have to start from scratch if it ''took
back" the project from the District .
In summary, the County has a vested interest in the District ' s project
(money invested to date) , but it is not behind the project whole
heartedly enough to be the lead agency for what is an urban project
with few if any agricultural benefits .
The Joint Power Approach
The City of Shakopee and the District have the legal authority to
enter into a joint powers agreement and could be jointed by : the
City of Prior Lake , Scott County and the Lower Minnesota Watershed
District . The question is , why would any of these potential partici-
pants enter into a joint powers agreement? To answer this question
the pros and cons for each potential participant have been listed
below (the list primarily focuses on the pros and cons of the ditch
but includes comments that would relate to the joint powers concept) .
City of Prior Lake
Pros Cons
1 . To insure unrestricted flow of 1 . Approximately 737 of the pre-
outlet . sent cost structure is loaded
on Lake residents with roughly
2 . To insure outlet maintenance so 914 of 4200 residences paying.
it works when needed.
2 . The project is funded by the
3 . To insure the outlet is under Watershed and Prior Lake resi-
the control of the District dents but it serves many out-
so the outlet can function siders too .
without hassels from other
agencies (governments) . 3 . A joint powers agreement might
draw the City of Prior Lake
4 . Whenever the Lake reaches 906 ' into a more visible role than
there is roughly $100 ,000 in they currently play which could
Mayor and City Council
February 23 , 1981
Page Three
Pros Cons
private plus public drainage . have long term implications
The sewer lift station is regarding the regulation of
knocked out . the outlet (ie . the City
might be in a position through an
5 . With the flood plain at 909 ' agreement to keep the outlet
(910. 2 ' with freeboard) many closed when residents want it
lots are unbuildable and non- open) .
conforming uses can ' t be rebuilt
(2 units so far have this prob-
lem) . An outlet would reduce
the flood plan to 907 ' opening
up land , etc .
6 . Tremendous private interest
benefits .
City of Shakopee
1 . A start on a drainage system 1 . Based upon Shakopee ' s plans
for V. I .P . if routed through the development could be
Deans Lake and along an agreed premature leading to early
upon alignment (property line expenditures of time and money .
of Kawasaki and Scottland) .
2 . Concerns by Shakopee citizens
2 . Improved channelization and over the maximum flow in the
culverts . channel . Flow should only come
from the lake every 5 years ,
3 . Fits well with the Comp Plan ' s but the City Engineer will
outline for Deans Lake Outlet have to evaluate their data .
Basin #4 scheduled for 1982
construction. 3 . Placing an inconvenience , etc .
on 10-15 Shakopee property
4 . Uniform, regulated flow to owners where none existed .
Deans Lake through regulation
of the gate diverting the 4. The appearance of doing something
water from the present public to Shakopee property owners for
water outlet route to the lake . another City.
5 . "Potential" flow from upper 5 . Of the 10-15 property owners
areas to Deans Lake . involved only 4-5 may benefit .
6 . Easements could exist for 6 . The psychology of it - "We
present and future uses (eg. don ' t want Prior Lake ' s prob-
water, sewer , roads , electric lem to be our problem" .
and drainage) .
7 . The potential of new long term
7 . Private interests can be bene- commitments and problems with
fited in the V . I .P . default .
8 . Maintenance - the City may find
itself hasseling the District
to keep it adequately maintained .
Mayor and City Council ,tom
February 23 , 1981 (/
Page Four
Scott County
Pros Cons
1 . The project does solve some 1 . The District Bonds will be issued
major multi-jurisdictional through the County and will add
problems of Prior Lake and to its indebtedness .
Shakopee and takes the adminis-
tration and politcal pressure
off the County .
* See the other pros and cons listed on
Page 1 under the heading "Role of Scott
County" .
The Lower Minnesota Watershed District (LMWD)
1 . Some benefits to Shakopee benefit 1 . An increase in flow, ie . a
the LMWD - it solves some drain- change , in one area of the
age problems (this assumes the LMWD.
LMWD recognizes the problems
and would do something about
them) .
Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District
1 . Solves a potential flood problem 1 . A joint Power Agreement would
on Prior Lake . diminish the District ' s control
over the project .
2 . It is one phase of the District ' s
overall water management plan 2 . The District , through a joint
designed to improve the water powers agreement , may have to
quality of both lakes . make commitments to maintenance
beyond what it would normally
3 . It is the primary reason for have done .
the District ' s creation .
3 . Long term commitments to other
4 . Many of the pros for Prior jurisdictions .
Lake apply to the District .
4. A Joint Powers Agreement would
5 . It solves the long term problem encumber the administration and
in the District of new buildings operation of the project .
contributing to the raising
of the lake level over the long 5 . Operations could actually be
term. restricted by other jurisdiction
through a Joint Powers Agreement .
6 . Five above has the effect of
benefiting more than the 84
houses around the lake because
others will be able to sell
off their property for urban
development .
Mayor and City Council D
February 23 , 1981
Page Five
Control of the Outlet Without Joint Powers
Without any joint powers agreement , can the City of Shakopee regulate
what the District puts into public/regulated waters? The City would
have a legal interest because the City would have a legalliability ;
therefore , the City could regulatewhat ' s put into the outlet when
health and safety come into play according to the District ' s Attorney.
In addition to the City of Shakopee , the DNR will have control over
the outlet , in fact , they will have the final say ! This could work
for or against Shakopee depending upon whether or not the City ' s
interest coincide with the technically broader DNR interests when
problems arise .
One other critical point needs to be made regarding the control of
the outlet . At the present time nature and the terrain control the
outlet . Once the project is completed there will be two gates and
one or more agencies controlling the outlet . Since opening and
closing the manmade gates will become discretionary the political
pressure on those making the decisions will rise with the water
level !
Is it in Shakopee ' s best interest to be one of the agencies trying
to make those decisions? Should the City of Prior Lake be involved?
Would it be useful to formerly cast someone in third party arbitrators
role such as the DNR, County or whomever?
Use of Easements
From the City of Shakopee ' s viewpoint , it would seem that any ease-
ments acquired should be multipurpose and large enough to fit future
plans of the City . The District can acquire the easements for
"drainage and utility" purposes and should be encouraged (or required)
to do so if the project is approved by Shakopee . Thus it could be
that the easement should be thought of as a drainage and utility
corridor - sewer and electric utilities are already in the proposed
alignment .
From the property owners view point , those who are currently obligated to
deal with an existing somewhat unstable water course , a new stablized
water course could be a benefit . The key variable here is the align-
ment of the outlet .
Alignment of the Outlet
The District naturally wants to follow the natural watershed route
wherever possible . This is in conflict with the choice of routes of
both Scottland and Kawasaki . The alignment should be acceptable to
the private interests involved and to the City of Shakopee (future
utility corridor and future drainage way) . According to District
representatives at the meeting this can be accomplished unless it
significantly increases their costs .
. Mayor and City Council
5
February 23 , 1981
Page Six
Contacts with All Shakopee Property Involved
The District still hadn ' t contacted the 10-15 property owners involved
in the City of Shakopee as of February 19 , 1981 . The City should out-
line just how and when these property owners should be involved if the
City participates in the project (eg. do we want the District to follow
the City ' s present R/W acquisition policies) .
The only other group in Shakopee that might be effected are the people
just north of Pike Lake . Both the District Engineer and the City
Engineer felt that most of the improvements in that area would be
improvements to the existing drainageway , and that the improvements
would be welcomed by area residents .
The City ' s Tax Base
The District will be acquiring easements and will not be purchasing
R/W. The land will still be privately held with the easement having
the effect of a legal encumberance . With the construction of the
project , the use and value of the land should not change unless there
is a benefit to Scottland and Kawasaki because the outlet is realigned
to suit their needs . The outlet could stabilize the natural water-
course and by so doing have some benefit to the area .
Maintenance of the Outlet
It should be noted at the outset that the area that has historically
used the natural drainageway will have the use of the improved drainage-
way . Beyond that , future maintenance will now fall under the District
which will be responsible for its maintenance - their exists no such
maintenance mechanism (agency) at the present . What maintenance will
be required of the District?
The District must make sure the outlet is clear before it opens the
gates and must restore it after the flow has resided . The District
will also be responsible for stablizing any ditches or slopes that
are constructed well after the initial year ' s construction (could be
five years) . The City Engineer could annually review the project
to make sure areas where work was done have been in fact stabilized.
If the City of Shakopee channels additional flow into the outlet in
the future the City would also become responsible for maintenance .
We have no maintenance of this sort at the present time .
Summary and Recommendations
The first question Council must answer is , does Shakopee want to
accomodate the District? If the answer is yes , then what legal and
financial conditions , if any, does the City wish to attach to its
cooperation?
Mayor and City Council
February 23 , 1981
Page Seven
Alternatives
1 . The City could decide to withhold its cooperation . This would
be a real setback for the District which would have to turn to
the LMWD which has power of eminent domain or Scott County
which already has a large financial investment in the project .
Other less plausible alternatives including their going to Met
Council or the Legislature .
2 . The City could decide to cooperate without any conditions . In
this case the City can direct Staff to draft a resolution authori-
zing the District to proceed with easement acquisition through
negotiations . If this failed , the District would have to come
back to ask for a second resolution initiating condemnation
proceedings .
3 . The City could decide to cooperate with conditions . In this
case the Council must list the specific concerns (those included
in this memo and others that may come up through discussion) ,
and then ask the District to draft a Joint Powers Agreement that
would address the specific concerns . As a further step , Council
should decide if it wants any other agencies (governments) involved
in the draft agreement . Finally , Council may wish to recoup
Staff time expenses .
It is Staff ' s conclusion that there is sufficient reason ( self-
interest) to warrant recommending alternative number three . Rod
concurs in all recommendations .
JKA/jms
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Filling the Planners Position
DATE : February 27 , 1981
Introduction
Tim Keane resigned effective February 19 , 1981 as the City ' s full
time Planner. We advertised immediately to fill the position be-
cause we knew we were approaching the busy season, and we have
received 35 applications .
Position and Salary Requirement
The position was listed on Doug Reeder' s final position and salary
range memo (table) with a salary range of from $15 ,250 to $25 ,350.
Tim Keane was being paid $18 , 800 in 1981 . In discussing the salary
range to be used in the ad, staff determined that $15 ,000-$20,000
would be a logical range if our goal was to hire an experienced
planner who wouldn ' t have to be trained on the job for the first
year. Comments I have received from individual Planning Commission
members , members of the ICC and developers strongly indicated that
it would be a mistake for the City to hire an inexperienced Planner.
I concur completely with this recommendation after attending three
months of Planning Commission meetings and watching the staff in
the plat review process .
Budget
The 1981 pay resolution set the Planner ' s salary at $18,800 but
there was approximately $18 ,100 allocated for the position when
the 1981 budget was approved in October. Several of the better
candidates have four or more years of solid planning and zoning
experience . If the most qualified of the 35 applicants would
need a salary of $20,000 to come to Shakopee , $1 ,200 over Tim' s
salary and $1 ,900 over the budget , would Council accept this?
We have $1 ,500 budgeted for conferences and schools that would
be available to cover the bulk of the $1 ,900 short fall if the
new Planner didn ' t go to any of them in 1981 . This , along with
any savings from not having a full time Planner for two or three
pay periods should allow us to make any needed budget adjustment
within the Planning Division budget .
A second budgetary concern expressed by Council has been our over-
all financial position. Gregg and I have not yet completed the
requested analysis , however I do not feel that this particular
position can be held open as a contingency should the numbers
look bleak. The position is critical to the City' s ability to
expeditiously process plats , variances , zoning changes , etc . for
this growing City ' s builders and developers . If we do determine
Mayor and City Council
Re : Filling the Planner Position
February 27 , 1981
Page Two
we have a financial problem, cutting back on the Planner ' s position
would not be one of my recommendations - the staff and I would find
other areas to cut .
Summary and Recommendation
Our present schedule calls for the interviewing of finalists on
Monday, March 2 , 1981 . On Tuesday I may have the name of the
top candidate for the position and the salary required to hire
him/her. I recommend that Council :
1 . Authorize a salary range up to $20,000.
2 . Authorize the hiring of a City Planner provided that a candi-
date can be recommended Tuesday night (copies of the candidates
resume would be made available at the meeting for Council
review and questions) .
JKA/jms
r�/ a_ /
,JULIus A.GOI.LER, 11
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 612-445-1244
1859-1940
2 1 1 W E b T FIRST AVENLJC.
's11.1iO1'1.1,, iITNN1.ti()1.1
55329
February 25, 1981
Memo to: The Honorable Walter C. Harbeck
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
John Anderson
City Administrator
Members of the Shakopee City Council
In re: Clearing transfer of title to part
of the library property
As you may recall the City negotiated withDavid W. Fladhammer and Jane E.
Fladhammer, through the Library Committee, for the purchase of Lot 3, in
Block 29 and the deed running to the City was given the Committee on or
about June 1, 1978. The deed however did not get to me until sometime late
last fall or early winter. I then checked the deed with the record title
and found that Mr. Fladhammer was only a Contract for Deed purchaser of the
property. The fee owner was Dr. Joseph Huber and wife Lorraine. So demand
was made on Mr. and Mrs. Fladhammer to furnish good title to the City. They
absolutely refused to respond and as you recall suit against them was author-
ized, papers were drawn and 2aere in the hands of the Sheriff for service when
the missing deed was finally given to the City and when recorded will complete
the transfer of Lot 3, Block 29, except the railroad right-of-way.
It is my understanding that the City or rather Library Committee had committed
the City to pay the State Transfer tax on the conveyance which totals $33.00.
If the City will issue a check for that amount payable to the Treasurer of
Scott County and deliver the same to me the deeds can be recorded.
Respectfully submitted,
'`� -fig,�
_ GNB"n�,.-1Gf�
Julius A. Coller, II
.
City Attorney ,
JAC/nh
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE : Purchase Fire Equipment
DATE : February 20, 1981
Introduction
The Fire Department is requesting to purchase air paks at this
time .
Background
The Fire Department has $2 ,500.00 budgeted for the purchase of
4 Scott Air Paks . They have received quotations as follows :
Elvin Safety Supply
Scott Pressur Pak II $602 .00
Carrying Case 45 .00
Total for 4 $2 ,588 .00
Mid Central Fire Inc .
Scott Air Pak II-Pressure Demand $619 .00
Carrying Case 56 .00
Total for 4 $2 , 700.00
Recommendation
Recommend Council authorize purchase of four Scott Air Pak II ' s
and cases from Elvin Safety Supply in the amount of $2 ,588 .00.
GV/jms
•
; City of Shakopee Ct
POLICE DEPARTMENT
• ye'`µ K•�� A„ .
�' + P, 476 South Gorman Street
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
TeL 445-6666
\ 5 5 3 7 9
/
TO: City Council
FROM: Thomas Brownell
SBJ: Video Equipment
DATE: February 24, 1981
INTRODUCTION
The City Council approved a capital expenditure in the current
budget of $4, 000 for video equipment to be permanently mounted
in the Police Department for the purpose of video taping intoxi-
cated persons.
BIDS RECEIVED
Century Camera Company $3, 546. 27
Blumberg Photo Sound Company $3 , 777.00
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
I recommend the purchase of video equipment to include installa-
tion from Century Camera Company for $3, 546. 27, the low bidder.
Tr7 U „Sewe EJO JJ40IEC/
Cfc.1
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE : End of Probation - Jeanette Shaner
DATE : February 25 , 1981
Introdution
Jeanette Shaner, Receptionist , will have completed her six month
probationary period on March 2 , 1981 .
Background
Jeanette has worked hard, conscientiously and pleasantly representing
the City in the capacity of receptionist for the City offices and
also as girl Friday in a clerical role for Jeanne and myslef in addi-
tion to typing for other departments when there was time or when
they were in a bind. She has demonstrated good clerical skills .
I believe she is a good City employee and will continue to improve
her knowledge of the City and thus be more valuable to the City of
Shakopee .
Pursuant to the 1981 Clerical Ranges which the Council received on
September 23 , 1980, she is worthy of a salary increase to $787 per
month. See attached salary range assignment sheet for clerical
personnel .
Recommended Action
Approve the completion of the probationary period for Jeanette
Shaner and authorize a salary increase to $787 .00 per month.
JSC/jms
PROPOSED 1981 CLERICAL RANGES
Start
Step
Steps2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Ste
Yr 2 Yrs— 3 Yrs_ 5 Yrs p 7
10 yrs
Range 1 618 650 682
716 752
790 830
Range 2 750 787 826
867 910 955 1003
Range 3 800 840 882
926 972 1020 1071
Range 4 890 934 980
1029 1080 1134 1190
Job Classifications
Range 1
Public Works Clerk
Assessing Clerk
Range 2
Receptionist
Range 3
Police Clerk
Finance Clerk
Range 4
Police Office Manager
Building/Assessing Secretary
Engineering Secretary
Senior Accounting Clerk
•
9/23/80
1
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE : Advertisement in the Minneapolis Star and Tribune
,DATE : February 18 , 1981
tr,
Introduction
The City currently has advertisements and notices published in the
Minneapolis Satr for positions of employment and legal notice of
I .R. Bond applications .
Background
It has been brought to my attention that the City could enter into
a contract with the Minneapolis Star agreeing to advertise not less
than 500 lines in a given contract year . , thus being entitled to a
cheaper rate .
1000 Line 500 Line Current Charges
Minimum Contract Minimum Contract Transient Advertiser
Sunday $1 . 97/line $2 .02/line $3 . 50/line
Insertion
Weekday or $1 . 87/1ine $1 . 92/1ine $2 . 90/1ine
Saturday
Insertion
Consecutive $1 . 72/line $1 . 77/line $2 .30/line
Insertions
Without doing any research on the number of lines we published last
year, I suspect that we may be approaching the 500 line minimum.
Keep in mind that we have no idea how much advertising we may do
next year .
I believe it is to our advantage to enter into a contract for the
minimum 500 line contract .
If we fall short at the end of the contract year, they will actually
charge us the transient rate by computing what we should have paid ,
subtract what we did pay and bill us the difference . Conversely ,
should we advertise 1000 lines , they would calculate the charges
for 1000 lines , subtract what we paid , and refund us the difference .
1 . The contract shall be renewed automatically from year to year
until either party shall give written notice to the other party
at least thirty (30) days prior to expiration of any contract
zyear that such party desires to terminate the contract .
2 . As rates are increased , our rates would also go up within the
new rate structure .
John K. Anderson .‘X"
Page Two
February 18 , 1981
Alternatives
1 . Go with the status quo and do not enter into a contract .
2 . Enter into a contract for the 500 minimum line contract .
Recommendation
Move to authorize and direct the appropriate City officials to
enter into a contract with the Minneapolis Star and Tribune Co .
for a minimum 500 line contract .
JSC/jms
J (2)
MEMO TO: John Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
RE: VIP Sanitary Sewer Interceptor
Special Improvement District 81-1
DATE: February 26, 1981
Introduction:
On February 6th, the City of Shakopee received bids for the above-
referenced work. Arcon Construction Co. , Inc. was the lowest responsible ff
bidders submitting a proposal.
Background:
Arcon Construction Co. , Inc. , has successfully completed work within the
City of Shakopee and City staff is familiar with this contractor and
can recommend the award of the VIP Interceptor Contract to this company.
The total estimated cost to be assessed is $933,305.66. Those costs are
itemized in Table I:
TABLE I
PROJECT COSTS
Project Cost Bid $617,823.65
*10% Construction Contingency 61,782.35
Subtotal $679,606.00
*Right-of-way Acquisition 85,167.00
Technical Services 41,826.66
*Inspection 34,000.00
*Capitalized Interest 84,300.00
*Administration 8406.00
Total Project Cost $933,305.66
*Amounts are estimated.
It is proposed that the entire cost of the VIP Interceptor be assessed. Some
of that cost will be deferred indtefinitely. Some of the costs will be deferred
until 1985. The balance will be assessed in 1981, payable in 1982. Table II
details those amounts:
John K. Anderson -2- February 26, 1981 /� Q/
TABLE II
ASSESSMENT DATA1
Interceptor Assessment Amount
Deferred Indefinitely $ 21+,579.562
Interceptor Assessment Amount
Deferred until 1985 138,577.313
Interceptor Assessment Amount
Not Deferred 339,31+0.793
Lateral Assessment Amount
Not Deferred 430,808.004
TOTAL $933,305.66
1The amounts shown in this table are based on Table I.
2This amount represents oversizing costs for additional size provided to
serve an estimated 610 acres. The estimated Interceptor assessment rate
for that district would be $1+0.291+1+ per acre, provided the downstream users
do not exceed projected use. Should "wet" industries or higher residential
use consume that capacity, this amount becomes a "system" or City cost.
3This amount is based on the estimated Interceptor assessment rate of $1+09.9860
per acre computed in accordance with the procedure specified in the feasibility
report.
This amount is based on an estimated lateral assessment rate of $28.00 per
front foot. This amount is computed as a proportional reduction of the front
foot cost specified in the feasibility report.
The VIP Interceptor will be funded by the 1980 bond sale. According to the
Director of Finance (see attached memo), funds are available for construction of
this project.
Recommendations:
It is the recommendation of the City Engineer that City Council adopt Resolution
No. 1792 A Resolution Accepting Bid On 1981-1 VIP Sanitary Sewer Interceptor,
and awarding the contract to Arcon Construction Co. , Inc. , 903 East Forest
Avenue, Mora, MN 55051, in the amount of $617,823.65.
HRS/jiw
Attachments I hereby certify that this plan,specification,or retort
v.q.:s prepared by ma or under my direct supervision
and th I . duly Registered Professional
Engi e-r unde t e -ws of t - State of Minnesota.
%Lae.. AMP°
Date ( Registration No. 13689
/ 61
MEMO TO: H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
FROM: Gregg Voxland
Finance Director
RE: VIP Funding
DATE: February 26, 1981
You have requested a statement as to funding for the VIP project.
Based on estimates and data supplied by you, a review of the improve-
ment fund shows sufficient funds to cover total construction costs
of $933,305.66.
GV/j iw
RESOLUTION NO. 1792
A Resolution Accepting Bid On
1981-1 VIP Sanitary Sewer Interceptor
1
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the
improvement of the :
VIP Sanitary Sewer Interceptor - beginning at
a section of the existing Shakopee interceptor
lying between County Road 83 and County Road 17 ,
thence proceeding southerly to County Road 16,
thence westerly to Marschall Road and there
terminating
bids were received , opened and tabulated according to law, and
the following bids were received complying with the advertisement ,
Arcon Construction Co . , Inc . $ 617 ,823. 65
Brown & Cris , Inc . 642 ,705. 05
Barbarossa & Sons 643, 186 . 50
Winona Plumbing Co . , Inc . 687 ,028 . 20
Orfei & Sons , Inc . 693, 119. 30
Richard Knutson , Inc . 7?-1 , 327 . 05
Northdale Const . , Co. , Inc . 739 ,652 . 85
Austin P. Keller 782, 955 . 50
Lametti & Sons , Inc . 788 ,914 . 00
North Central Underground , Inc . 816 ,472 . 00
G . L. Contracting, Inc . 862, 856 . 00
Centennial Contractors 864, 003. 40
W. & W Construction 873, 172 . 00
Progressive Contractors , Inc . 1, 041 ,922 . 25
Nodland Associates , Inc . 1 ,072, 371. 00
Don Parrott Construction 1,093, 447 . 45
AND WHEREAS , it appears that Arcon Construction Co . , Inc . ,
903 East Forest Avenue , Mora , MN 55051 , is the lowest
responsible bidder .
NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA:
1) The Mayor, City Administrator and City Clerk are hereby
authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Arcon
Construction Co. , Inc . in the name of the City of Shakopee for
the improvement of VIP Sanitary Sewer Interceptor - beginning at
a section of the existing Shakopee interceptor lying between
County Road 83 and County Road 17 , thence proceedings southerly
to County Road 16 , thence westerly to Marschall Road and there
terminating, according to the plans and specifications therefor
approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the
City Engineer.
Resolution No . 1792 Page Two
2) The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids ,
except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next
lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , held this day of
1981 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of — , 1981 .
City Attorney
)D icl
Scott-Qwtvek 2eooe CouCL , 0-1(1e.
Corporate Officers. Sixth and Oak
Wallace Ess- Chairperson CARVER, MINN. 55315 CA P
Chaska
Margaret Brown-Vice Chairperson Phone 448-2302
Chaska
Sheila Hyde- Secretary/Treasurer
COMMUNITY
New Prague ACTION
PROGRAM
Mr Judson L. Kenyon
Executive Director
February 24, 1981
John Anderson
Shakopee City Administrator
City Hall
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
It is the intent of this letter to share with you the outcome of the meetings
with those involved with the establishment of the Thrift Shop at Eagle Creek
Hall.
Needless to say, having to endure the second disasterous fire has diminished
the enthusiasm that once existed at the Shop. However, after meeting with
Jolene Schricker, Volunteer Coordinator, the volunteers, and SCEC staff and
administration, it appears that all those involved in the operation and
administration of the Shop are willing to try again.
There are concerns that must be addressed before we can request authorization
from the City to reopen.
1. Continue present lease agreement.
2. Installation of a security system against robbery, etc.
SCEC will have to take immediate steps to either activate or terminate
operations at the Thrift Shop. Therefore, we will be anxiously waiting
the decision of the Shakopee City Officials as to whether they feel it is
feasible to reopen the Thrift Shop.
Sincerely,
Mary Sul Ivan—
Assistant Director
An f quIl llll,I,rtu• ily 1 r , ,
`,,,ofENq,.I• CITY OF S AKOPEE
`'J ?. (c' M 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
_)
MEMO
•TO:
John Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Inspector
SUBJECT: Eagle Creek Town Hall
DAM: February 2 , 1981
Introduction :
As per our conversation regarding the most recent fire at
Eagle Creek Town Hall of January 31 , 1981 , it appears damage
is in the area of $15 , 000 to $18, 000. The fire was set just
for the fun of it as no attempt was made to fain entrance to
the building.
The only way to secure this build:irlg is to block up the windows
with concrete blocks and install a motion and heat sensor tied
into a security system. However, the roof' is still combustible
and could be set on fire .
I am extremely concerned the insurance carrier will remove this
building from our insured list or raise the premiums to a pro-
hibitive dollar amount .
RECOMMENDATION :
I strongly recommend ____ . _
1 . We block up the windows at an estimated cost of
$1 , 000 which will not be covered by insurance.
2 . Install the security system at an estimated cost
of $1 , 000 plus $25 .00 per month .
3. Have the building completely repaired .
4. Remove the so-called solar ::,stem from the site
and block up the supply hole in the wall as it
jeopardizes the buildings security .
5 . Have the Scott Carver Economic Council pay the
cost over and above our insured amount and assess
• them the security service monthly payment of $25 .00.
LFH :plk
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Continue present lease agreement with Scott County Economic Council
Inc. with the following conditions :
1 ] They remove the solar system from the site and block up the
supply hole
2] They pay all repair costs over and above our insured amount
3] They pay for the installation of a security service and -the
monthly payments therefore
t