Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07/21/1981
.Q E MEMO TO: Mayor Lnd Council FROM: John . Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-agenda Informational Items DATE: July 16, 1981 1 . Attached is the Goals and Objectives list from the Worksession. Please review it carefully because I plan to throw out the little notes you wrote. I will also be using the list in working with staff on the budget so let me know if I haven ' t softened the wording sufficiently. 2 . The SPUC and NSP Negotiating Committee met July 8, 1981 in a very informative session. In addition to the Committee mem- bers present there were seven industry representatives present who were able to ask questions and express their concerns at the end of the session. The primary purpose of the session was to receive and review NSP' s estimate of the cost to SPUC to acquire the system based upon how the portion of the system sold to SPUC would interface with their operation. SPUC ' s financial consultant will now review the NSP proposal . I ' ll let you know when the next session is scheduled. 3 . The Council Chamber' s door continues to be left unlocked at various times during the week. Because so many people use it (night Meetings included) staff efforts to insure it is locked have failed so we plan to install a "panic bar" . 4. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is holding a hearing at 10:00 a.m. and 7 :00 p.m. August 3 , 1981 at the Shakopee Senior High School on the "Recommendation by the MPCA Director to certify the proposed Solid Waste Disposal Sites in Scott County as Intrinsically Suitable". The notice is on file if you want more information on the six sites none of which are in Shakopee ' s city limits . 5 . In response to a citizen's question we found the City owned property in Shakopee is 380 acres of which 277 . 8 is parkland (doesn' t include County, State or Federally owned land) . 6. Judy may return part-time the week of the 20th, but she ' s not sure yet. She ' s doing well and has popped-into City Hall several times now. Julie, our temporary summer receptionist/ typist, we plan to have stay until Judy is back full time. 7 . As a follow-up on the question about the State Liquor License Bond requirement we found that the bond serves several func- tions one of which includes insuring the payment of taxes . Given the size of the bond vs taxes payable maybe we should review increasing it from $3000 to $5000. M.S . 340. 12 sets Off-sale bonds at $1000-$3000 and On-sale at $3000-$5000. Non-agenda Information Items July 16, 1981 Page 2 8. Attached is the monthly Building Inspector's report for the period ending June 30, 1981 . 9. Attached is the monthly Assessor' s report for the period end- ing June 30, 1981 (Please look at the informational section and foot notes) . 10. To date St. Louis Park, Burnsville, Savage and Eden Prairie have contributed $1500 and Inver Grove Heights has taken on the job of preparing the amicus curiae filing. Attached is a letter from Golden Valley saying they don ' t plan to con- tribute money but supported our efforts in fiscal disparaties . 11 . Attached is a letter from Rod to Charles Mensing telling him his tax petition was filed too late. 12 . Attached is a letter from Dan Johnson of Suburban informing us of a change order under 17 as required by our policy. 13 . Attached is Joe Ries ' s response to City Council ' s inquiry regarding Marge Henderson' s comments about the City HRA. Joe explained to me that his letter simply means that the County has received nothing regarding the subject from the County HRA so Marge was apparently speaking for herself. 14. Attached is a copy of a letter we received the Cable Com- mittee requested be sent to Senator Packwood. 15 . Attached is a copy of a letter we received regarding the City/ SPUC application for an Energy Loan Feasibility Study for Hydro Facilities , from Met Council . 16. Attached are copies of the specific tax filing cases that Mrs . Lebens requested Council receive. 17 . Attached are the minutes of the June 1 , 1981 SPUC meeting. 18. Attached is a copy of a letter from Wallace Bishop regard- ing purchase of the land behind public works . 19. Attached is a copy of a memo from Lou VanHout regarding the electrical demand charge for athletic fields . It appears the problem will be solved at the SPUC level . 20. Attached is the monthly revenue report as of June 30, 1981 . � r GOALS AND OBJECTIVE WORKSESSIONS June 30th and July 14th Shakopee City Council The Shakopee City Council met twice to list problem areas and concerns regarding the City' s present and future. The meet- ings were the first step in developing a formal set of goals and objectives to be used in the 1982 Budget Making process . Listed below are the items noted as grouped by Council for their first discussion of the items . The list will be used by staff to draft goals , subgoals , objectives and "action to be taken" state- ments covering the various subject areas . COUNCIL: 1) Redistricting Ward boundaries 2) Re-examine Council policiesand procedures regarding Roberts Rules of Order, City Council procedures , Agendas , City Staff (Walt ' s May 9, 1980 memo) 3) No Councilmember as voting member of another body - Liaison relationship only (Ex. Community Service Bd. , Planning Commission, SPUC) 4) Review procedures for voting to reconsider, 5) Council- member and Mayor should get themselves up to speed if they miss meetings by getting background information before the next meet- ing 6) Agreement to limit discussion at meetings to two oppor- tunities per individual per issue 7) Desire fewer Council meet- ings 8) Standardize the goal setting procedure 9) Listing of objectives to be accomplished posted in Mayor' s office 10) Be- come active instead of reactive 11) Stop to review the activi- ties of the last 6 years to determine what was positive, negative , etc. 12) Need to use the ICC properly. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS : 1) Develop and use Capital Improvement and Capital Equipment 5 year plans 2) Post list of projects initiated by Council for follow-up (cross off projects as completed) 3) Sell/Clean-up Old Sewer Treatment Plant 4) New City Hall (evaluate space available at City Hall) 5) Citywide sidewalk Completion Program (include CR 17 eastside) 6) Complete Levee Drive Lewis to Sommerville and Atwood to Scott 7) Upper Valley Drainage Plan 8) Drainage problems (Horizon Heights , 428 W. 2nd Avenue, Harold Schmidts House and 4th and Minnesota Streets) 9) Better method of selecting city vehicles (ie . poor mileage , maintenance) . CITY/SPUC: 1) Keep close coordination between City and Utilities 2) Public Works and Utilities have duplicated equipment - stop it 3) No Councilmember on SPUC 4) Acquisition of REA finalized 5) Acquisition of NSP completed by 1981 or early 82 (note if its too expensive re-evaluate alternatives to acquisition) 6) Improve fire hydrant maintenance . PUBLIC RELATIONS : 1) Problem - help staff interface with the public to better show the public that we, as a city government entity, realize that we are their servants 2) Better public re- lations effort is needed on all aspects 3) Department Heads should get out press releases on positive non-controversial items to improve public relations 4) Survey city services to deter- mine they all are being used to the optimum. 5) Follow-up on Goals and Objective Worksessions Page 2 telephone by receptionist when people are put on hold (they get stuck on hold) 6) Secretaries answering technical questions in- stead of Department Heads 7) Too many procedures (people and steps) to go, through to obtain the proper information. STAFF: 1) To City administrator - what personnel problems do you see? Let ' s talk about them. 2) Department Head personnel appraisals - show them to Council 3) Administrator should make more decisions without Council approval when covered by resolution, standard procedures , ordinances 4) Better manage- ment of Public Works 5) Administrator must insure that Council directives are followed by Department Heads 6) Staff memos should include reasons for both approval/denial when recommen- dations come to Council 7) Evaluate (review) role of City At- torney and Assistant City Attorney in terms of workload, pro- duction and cost to City. 8) After codification is completed reevaluate city code . 9) Increase the use of in-house engineers vs use of consultants 10) Move the Engineering De- partment to areas in City Hall that are currently rented to get them more space 12) In light of recent contract bids review assumptions behind engineering estimates . FINANCE : 1) Cut City operations to match means by 10-20% in 1982 2) Cut the fat from the budget to keep it equal to 1981 3) Re- trenching of City expenditures 4) Review use of charges for services and user fees 5) Review Revenue Sharing and its pur- poses , do we need to conserve it all for Capital Equipment? 6) Review Sewer Reserve Fund 7) Review Capital Equipment bud- get for Parks and Street, are we buying too many lawn mowers etc . 8) The Council Committee on Equipment Purchases needs to be appraised of all equipment purchases 9) Follow-up on the K-Mart Tax Increment Project Financing 10) Fiscal Disparaties 11) Establish a pay plan for all positions with a cap 12) Police longevity pay is it a valid concept? 13) City Council has not been fair in wage and benefits throughout departments (ex. Police and Public Works) 14) Morale problems are building in Public Works Department because of salary and benefit dis- crepencies with other departments 15) Need better communica- tions from the Finance Department to the City in general 16) Is Finance Department getting the job done? 17) It seems that there is a communications problem between the Finance Depart- ment and City Council . Finance doesn ' t understand Council and Council doesn ' t understand Finance. The problem didn ' t exist in the past 18) Data and information from Finance should be in a more understandable form. HRA/GRANTS : 1) What is the future status on HRA programs? 2) We need a shopping list of State and Federal grant programs available and a list of what other cities are doing 3) What staffing level is needed for HRA in 1982 (ex. contract with County HRA or budget part of staff salaries in General Fund) 4) HRA follow-up is not always complete (ex. loose ends in 4th and Minnesota Project and Highrise water heater) 5) Complete final program of 4th and Minnesota project 6) Complete final program for Senior Citizens Highrise 7) Will need more Council commitment on downtown redevelopment when the committee report Goals and Objective Worksessions j Page 3 becomesavailable 8) The City is not doing enough to provide all types of housing - what unique ideas does staff have 9) Declare "Roberts Pit" a blighted area and use it for TIF project for ,housing. DEVELOPMENT: 1) Hopes the new City Hall will be included in the Downtown redevelopment 2) Is the acquisition completed for the Railroad Parking Lot 3) Require a higher amount of investment by owners receiving IRB ' s 4) The City can be in- volved with some funding tools for the downtown redevelopment , but the private sector must take the lead and do it. TRAFFIC: 1) CR #18 Bridge and By-Pass needed 2) Valley Mall traffic circulation situation must be solved 3) Hospital/ County Parking Lot (BLock #57) must be developed according to timetable, but we need flexibility for private development. 4) Traffic leaving Valley Fair causes problems by trying to turn back (U-turn) before it is allowed 5) Signals at CR #83 and Highway 101 intersection needed 6) Railroad signals are needed at CR #83 Crossing. PARKS AND RECREATION: 1) Other cities are cutting back on some services , can we justify continued support of the commu- nity Services Department at the present level? 2) Hold back on park acquisition 3) Park development (improvement) should occur as money is available within the City' s built-up areas 4) More user fee participation should be required of the people participating in an activity 5) What is the status of the City ' s nursery and forestation program 6) City golf course 7) Need to restore park regulation part of the City Code . PLANNING AND ZONING: 1) Completion of Comprehensive Plan "local adoption" 2) Planning Commission should start doing its required annual reports and Capital Improvement Program for the City' s physical development 3) Zoning is not always consistent with uses in the area (ex. Brooks Superette, Car Wash on Cr #17 and County garage) . WASTE SITING: 1) Monitor development of the Shakopee Sludge Farm (spreading lime now) 2) Follow hazardous Waste Siting process and develop criteria to follow-up on Mayor' s letter. POLICE: 1) Council would like more feedback on potential problem areas through informational items so they can answer citizen questions knowledgeably (ex. house on 1st Avenue that has been dispensing drugs) 2) Keep Council up to date on traffic problems on specific streets (ie . bad intersec- tions etc. ) . FIRE: 1) Is fire lane access to major buildings adequate 2) Fire Hydrant updating and waterline looping should be con- tinued. ASSESSOR: 1) Should the assessing operation be moved to the County? 2) Do we have some problems with recent assessor ' s decisions and potential Court cases on industrial and commer- - Goals and Objective Worksessions Page 4 cial assessments? 3) Need to answer the assessment question on brick veneer. BUILDING INSPECTOR : 1) Complete property data file. .., \\,„ CITY OF SHAKOPEE 0 BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN JUNE, 1981 5366 Steve Hentges/Scherer 1001 - )1011 Bluff 4-plex $ 64, 000 ,34--7 W-� n G, /.>, T. < L .7e., k 5368 Myron Gruetzmacher 1026 Scott Garage 7,000 5369 Ray Taylor 1053 Swift Addition 9 , 600 5370 Twin City Mobile Homes 502 E. 1st Sign 50 5371 Laurent Builders, Inc . 1738 Presidential Lane House 66,000 .7,, T /7 .J( ,(. • , /1,.. ,, . [ (t/ . J ,3 5372 Douglas Fiihr 715 W. 6th Garage 5, 600 5373 Trumpy Homes 1192 Tyler House 50,000 5374 Earl Wiesner 523 E . 7th Deck 1 , 600 5375 Howe Inc. 7632 Hwy 101 Site Work 12,000 5376 Cletus Link 1993-1999 E. Shakopee Duplex 94,000 { 1 ./ i ,k J . . i 5377 Grace Poon 226 Lewis Sign 200 5378 Howe Inc . 7632 Hwy. 101 Tank Farm 205,000 5379 James Link 1001 East View Cir. Relocate House 30,000 - �, t i J k / f t _ /_.. { 5380 David Rief 1735 Presidential Lane Deck 250 5381 Goodwin Bldrs. 486 - 4$8 Minnesota Duplex 83,000 y..T 4-47 7 /3i R. . .; ,, , - /.I -t 5382 Goodwin Bldrs. 506 - 508 Minnesota Duplex 83,000 - ,7‘ t `14, 4/ ._J, r -, /i, -/ 5383 Wayne Olson 420 W. 2nd Ave. Addition 8 .000 5384 Gerald Skaja 115 E. 1st Remodel 8,000 5385 Laurent Bldrs. 1292 - 1298 Polk 4-unit Twnhse 180,000 i-- -/ / �; 1 ; .'1, l• t ', r, 5386 John Hogen 960 Apgar Storage Bldg. 500 5387 Wilfred LaTour 322 E. 6th , House 31 ,000 ..,e. T S ,q.& ii- // .I 5388 Joe Link 621 Me ke Ave. House 66,000 5389 Jerome Johnson 1186 Van Buren Enc . Deck 3, 500 5390 Harold Ring 3360 Marschall Rd. House 95 ,000 r 3I ii- . i 2 5391 Rich Logeais 1077 Legion Garage 6, 900 gi June, 1981 Continued 5392 Conklin Co. Valley Park Dr. Sign $ 400 5393 Edward Giesen 1076 Merritt St. Patio & Frplc 4, 200 5394 Laurent Builders 1224 Tyler House 75 ,000 - -r.3. n3, ; i, ''1. t , , 1 ., 5395 Gerald Ramsey 1994 Eaglewood Cir. House 65,000 fr -, ',11 f (t., . , , /.._ i 5396 ISD #720 Central School Alteration 5 , 300 TOTAL $ 1 , 250, 160 _ _..._ CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT JUNE, 1981 PERMITS ISSUED June Yr. to Date Total Previous Year 5366 - 5396 , Number Number Valuation Number Valuation ' MO . YTD . Single Fam. -Sewered 6 18 1 ,084,600 2 5 361 ,000 Single Fam. -Septic 1 2 170,000 1 1 70,000 Multiple Dwellings 5 10 1 , 104,000 1 7 2,398, 938 (Mo.Units) (YTD Units) ( 14) (28 ) (4) ( 14) Dwelling Additions 5 12 100, 950 1 13 60, 500 Other - - - 1 1 12,000 Business District - 2 240,000 0 4 1 , 534, 500 Agricultural - 1 132,000 - 1 13,000 Industrial -Sewered 1 1 205,000 - 11 18, 418, 500 industrial -Septic - 1 425,000 - 1 63, 000 Accessory/Garages 3 20 119, 500 3 13 59 , 600 Signs & Fences 3 7 15,050 1 11 3, 583 Fireplaces/Wood Stove 1 3 6, 400 - - - Grading/Foundation 1 2 59,000 - - - Remodeling (Res. ) *3 18 73, 330 6 22 41 , 730 Remodeling ( Inst . ) 1 2 5,300 1 2 152,000 Remodeling (Other) - 24 1 ,041 ,000 2 23 264, 300 TOTAL TAXABLE 31 122 4, 775, 830 18 113 23,300, 651 TOTAL INSTITUTICNAL 1 2 5, 300 1 2 152 ,000 GRAND TOTAL 32 124 4, 781 , 130 19 115 23,452 , 651 MO . YTD. MO . YTD . Variances 1 2 - 3 Conditional Use - 6 1 9 Re-Zoning 1 1 2 6 Moving 1 1 - 1 Electric Permits 23 86 11 62 Pimbg. & Htg. Permits 18 93 9 64 Razing Permits Residential - - - 1 Commercial - - - - Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date 3 , 481 ( *Includes 31 ,000 for building a structure on existing foundation that had been destroyed by fire in 1979 . ) Phyllis Knudsen fldg. Dept . Secretary -I I O. � � . O 03 N >'", 4-) . (4-c El F� O cd •,-1 b 0) O • N co a) "0 ca • - Cti — (1 •0 U) i, U) Q0. C E d• Q. 0 c • aE N O N •,-•I a) >, a) •I cr) .0 J00 >, •p > • --, U) H Q C 3 •.i U U �". J N i., N C) U CO • (Tl 4-i • >, C) C C x In a) O b w O G. a E ° < >-1 Z 7 a) C) x G. C 44 N 1-) Ca c0 >, C c -+ 3 ° o co ►a G. a) .-1 O G. ,•1 (V a) U) a) �• •r-1 C) C 1 C a y > N U >, ..3 U o CCC y a -, 4) . 1 .-c 3 a) H cH N a) .0 C a) a) 0 }� I CID 4-a c 5 00CO . .. >, o ' ) QS rH N N 0 CO C II C u '0 r, N c� 0 >, •P ri L) vim) 0 0 a ax) CC C IL. 0 O co •o < - x 0 0 .G W U) G. i) O O E' o cn y 1 C Q) a•) v, =" bfl a) a) C a a) >,U a) El a) • .-ICC CO 0 aa n c 4N Z 5-I N a) U .3 E ,-I O bO H y t 3 < W a 3 G. a) Z - U o. y > O 5 a °W Cu • QC U • a) o •.1 LA 0 +) U W • O 0 3 U) V y 0 • a) -1 C .• 0 E-+ .N < )�., 0 • a) c• a 3C L 0 CO ) 3 4.1 3 Ga 3 o Z U) H v) a ° On Ca b G) a� 0 C. O .r{ -P H y 0 E a)•.1 E a) a) (S+ 4 0 C .) .-•1 a Cl) +' '+ N a) C .,,, N E a _ .ti a 0 cc U . �' 0 C0•.1 >-- 0 0 4� w x H E 0 E 0 CCHI 0 ) y O y '3] C0 M CO G. U t Y •.-Ji CO .0 a GO. a) —) O Q a) ,r y G. G. C at a G. C H Z ^a G. (CO. •-1 aC a) co a a) ) U) C) O •O GL C)) a) 0 0 cC a) a) E-1 pO a) a) y 13 .-1 0 as OG CO a) G. i:4 y, .• J o C G. a) a) C ed C C.) vE G G. OC 3- Ca Ca a a � � `° Co G.al o bE - > 5) CIS Cs-i O rl N t •.C� " 7 0 < < <O CC r-I Q W u U) •O a II -P • a) W •.1 C II 0 a) 4-1 k > 0 --, C U)) 0 N y 0 UO t cC V .0 •,-1 • O 0 W E 7 C C) +.) - •.1 0 CC GO., b G>. C CF. C) H - .,..{ H 7 > a) 4 > a) 0 cd • ..0 c wwHw CC o co c~ E p-1 -P L a. ;-1yG O 0 Q U +) a 0 Z E~ Cl) O H 0 9 a) 0 0 O (13 12 .1-1 II 4i E Z cC D C U) a iC)) a) Cl) .i < a) O O .. t II •C) •.I •ri - -P O E 1-•1 00 E. H 0 0CC 0 ° 0 ••-, N 0 • d 0.1 +- Z G°. c • v G°, w o +' n 1--I0 in CO C) a) 1 > 11) 3 fa. Ul H �I w < z Z 0. < C..)0 Ca C 03 Cil 0 0 r I a) O E-+ H N C. • • •,--1 H 0 (l I-I o• c � I-, z ., :v c,-) v Ln Lo s o• Q o 3 C a) d 0 o 01, Z p al ', N d 0 H N H Tenuuy snoaueTTaosTw I. 7-R/ /0 RECEIVED Jul_ 10 1981 City of Golden Valley CITY OF SMAKOPEF July 9, 1981 Mayor and City Council City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mayor: The Golden Valley City Council at its July 7 meeting considered the request of the City of Shakopee to participate in a suit against enforcement of the Fiscal Disparities Act. After reviewing the matter with our City Attorney, the Council expressed concern over the likely success of such a suit. The Council therefore decided not to participate in the proposed suit. The Council expressed a strong commitment to work with the City of Shakopee and the other affected communities to try to resolve some of the inequities which were pointed out in your letter. Sincerely, -/c/l Rosemary Thorsen Mayor RT:JN Civic Center,7800 Golden Valley Rd.,Golden Valley Minnesota,55427, (612) 545-3781 Law Offices of KRASS, MEYER & KANNING Chartered Phillip R.Krass Shakopee Professional Building Barry K. Meyer 1221 Fourth Avenue East Philip T.Kenning Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612)445-5080 July 14, 1981 RECEIVED JUL 1 5 1981 Mr. & Mrs. Charles A. Mensing ClTY �F ��,�I{X-jpEE 117 Fuller Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Tax Appeal Dear Mr. & Mrs. Mensing: Our office has received a copy of your assessment tax petition which I understand was served on the 8th of July, 1981 , and filed thereafter in Scott County District Court. Our office will be handling this matter on behalf of the respondent. Please be advised that under Minnesota Statutes 278.01 , you must serve your petition and file it before June 1 . Scott County records indicate you served the petition in question on July 8 and filed it the same day as Scott County File #81-00421 . Unfortunately, the filing requirement is jurisdictional and I do not believe the court has jurisdiction over this matter due to the fact the petition was not filed within the requisite time period. I am afraid that must be the position of the respondent in this matter. Yours very truly, KRASS, MEYER & KANNING CHARTERED Phillip R. Krass PRK:smb File cc Ms. Pam McCabe Mr. John Anderson 571-6066 C-- UBURBAN 6875 Highway No. 65 N. E. , q , NGINEERING Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 i NC. Kil[11): 890-6510 Civil, Municipal & Environmental Engineering 1101 Cliff Road Land Surveying • Land Planning • Soil Testing Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 }(1. ) July 9, 1981 Ref: S78085 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn: Lou Van Hout Re : T.H. 101 Trunk Watermain Extensions Dear Mr. Van Hout: Attached herewith are six (6) copies of Change Order No. 2 for the above referenced project. The change is requested by the contractor due to unforeseen conditions as described in Article 5 of the Shakopee General Specifications . The ch€m ge is a realignment of approximately S00 feet of trunk watermain through Halls First Addition to alleviate a direct conflict with a septic tank and drain field for the recently constructed building on Lot 2. The watermain is relocated 22.5 feet west of the plan location to lie 7.5 feet within the west line of the 40 foot watermain easement. This location provides 12.5 feet from the property line for Lots 1 & 2 and the watermain therefore should provide a minimum horizontal separation of 10 feet between the watermain and any part of the septic system as required by the Health Department. The Contractor is requesting $1,290.00 extra compensation for the install- ation and removal of approximately 40 feet of watermain and a service tee presently installed. The removal is necessary to avoid the drain field north of the septic tank. The 40 feet of watermain was installed into the drain field vicinity prior to any knowledge that the septic system existed. The amount of extra compensation requested by the Contractor is less than 1% of the total contract price and therefore does not require pre-approval by the City Council . We feel the requested change is justified and compensation reasonable and therefore rerl mmend the City Council approve the change order as prepared. Respectfully, Daniel P. Johnson , , P.E. SUdURGAN ENGINEF 'TNG, INC. enc. Robert Minder,Reg.Eng. E.A.Rathbun,Reg.Suru. Wm.E.Price,Reg.Eng. Gary R.Harris,Reg.Suru. Peter J.Molinaro,Reg.Eng. Wm.E.Jensen,Reg.Eng. William J.Brezinsky,Reg.Eng. H. William Rogers,Reg.Suru. Bruce A.Paterson,Reg.Eng. Daniel P.Johnson,Reg.Eng. Kim W. Waldof,Reg.Eng. Robert Sikich,Reg.Suru. Peter J.Knaeble,Reg.Eng. OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR RECEIVED SCOTT COUNTY COURT HOUSE 110 JUL 06 1981 SHAKOPEE, MN.55379 (612)-445-7750, Ext.100 CITY OF SHAKOPEE JOSEPH F.RIES Administrator0 JAMES M.SULERUD July 7, 1981 Asst.Administrator Mr. John K. Anderson City of Shakopee Administrator 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: City/County HRA Dear Mr. Anderson: Please refer to your letter of June 17, 1981, and our telephone conversation of last Thursday on the above captioned matter. While the Scott County Housing and Redevelopment Authority is reliant on the County Board for approval of its annual levy, it is somewhat autonomous in every other respect and sets its own policies and programs. The County Board however, supports the County HRA in its general role as well as that agency's efforts to serve all local jurisdictions and to implement county—wide programs. If I can be of any further assistance in this matter, kindly advise. Since rely, , /Y O''• F. Ri s=Lf� Admi istrator JFR:bn An Equal Opportunity Employer 0 zw,,,, -4,..,,,,z , „. . . ,..,...„- CITY OF SHAKOPEE \oe ,:, INCORPORATED 1870 F `. \ 411 Viii ,•' 129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612) 445-36504 d S ' July 16, 1981 'of The The Honorable Robert Packwood U.S . Senate Washington, D.C . 20510 Re : Amendment to Senate Bill 898 Dear Senator Packwood : The Shakopee Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee has been appointed by the City Council of the City of Shakopee to serve in an advisory capacity to the City in the adoption of a cable communications franchise . It has recently come to the attention of this Committee that you have introduced an amend- ment to Senate Bill 898 which would limit municipal authority to regulate cable franchise rates and would create a new ceil- ing on franchise fees charged by municipalities . No extensive information is available to the Committee on the full details of this amendment . As such legislation is of great interest to the Committee members they want to know more about the provisions of your amendment before it is brought to a vote . To this end the Committee moved at its July 15 , 1981 , meeting to request provision for public comment, specifically a public hearing, on pending legislation related to cable com- munications . In addition I would appreciate receipt of a copy of your amendment to share with the Committee. I trust you are commited to an open legislative process and will help the Committee keep informed of legislation re- lated to its activities . Thank you for your assistance . Sincerely, ` eanne Andre Administrative Assistant cc : Senator Rudolph Boschwitz Senator David Durenberger JA/jam The Heart of Progress Valley An Equal Opportunity Employer Al' q1A RECEIVEb -.� a, JUL 1 5 1981 �► '..� �+ July 13, 1981 CIT.?QF C KQPEE ,Iiv ciT1�S�'� 300 Metro Square Building Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 John Anderson, Administrator/Clerk Telephone612/291-6359 City of Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Application for Department of Energy Loan Feasibility Study Hydroelectric Facilities Lock and Dam No. 2, Mississippi River Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 9802-1 Dear Mr . Anderson: At its meeting on July 9, 1981, the Metropolitan Council considered the above loan application. The Council has no directly related plans br policies on which to base a review of this kind of project . It is conceivable that once the details of the project are studied that the project could affect regional and local economic development plans . The Council will, therefore, reserve comment on the project until the Feasibility Study is completed and reviewed by the Council. This proposed project is located in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. The City of Hastings has prepared a comprehensive river 'corridor plan and regulations in accordance with the standards and guidelines contained in Minnesota Executive Order 79-19 and these project plans should be coordinated with the Hastings ' Critical Area Plan. Sincerely , METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Charles R. Weaver Chairman CRW:dk cc: Louis VanHout, Utilities Manager , Shakopee Public Utilities U. S. Department of Energy, Regional Office Michael E. Ament, Shive-Hattery and Associates Robert Mazanec , Metropolitan Council Staff An Agency Created to Coordinate the Planning and.Development of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Comprising: Anoka County c Carver County o Dakota County a Hennepin County o Ramsey County 0 Scott County o Washington County • 'r'- `COUN1 is,y_ COURT HOUSE - SHAKOPEE, MINN. 55379 PHONE V.;»)445.7750 -COUNTY COURT EXT.200 t)S1Ii1CT COURT 203 r Trevor Walsten • Attorney at Law - 1221 E. 4th Avenue In re: Brambilla, Shakopee, MN 55379 Brambilla Motors, O 'Connor, . Wampach & Mensing -vs- • r Jerome Wampach 524 So . Holmes City of Shakopee Shakopee, MN 55379 File No: 245$$, L 245$9, • . 24590, 245$6 p 24587 NOTICE OF ENT ENTRY OF: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER FOR JUDGMENT IT] ORDER dated June 5, 19$1 (see attached copy) . JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF AND AGAINST I I OTRER • -IN THE ABOVE ENTITLED' ACTION WAS, ON THE 10 DAY OF June 19 81 (FILED) =mamma . IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF COUNTY COURT FX1 DISTRICT COURT - SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA DATED: June 10, 1981 GREGORY M. ESS Clerk of District & County Courts cc : Charles Mensing Scott County, Minnesota Francis O 'Connor John Brambilla Brambilla Motors F;YXIGX3 / j} • /6 STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF SCOTT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT • • In re:. Objections and Defenses to special assessments levied JOHN 'ISR4MBILLA, Appellant, -vs- FILE NO. 24588 City of Shakopee, a municipal cor- poration, Douglas S. Reed, Clerk. In re: Objections and Defenses to special assessments levied BRAMBILLA MOTORS, INC. , by Art Brambilla, Appellant, -vs- FILE NO. 24589 City of Shakopee, a municipal cor- poration, Douglas S. Reed, Clerk. FINDINGS OF FACT A N D In re: Objections and Defenses to ORDER ON APPEAL special assessments levied FRANCIS P. O'CONNOR, Appellant, -vs- FILE NO.24590 City of Shakopee, a municipal cor- poration, Douglas S. Reed, Clerk. In re: Objections and Defenses to - special assessments levied EROLE F JUAN"E WAMPACH, Appellants, -vs- FILjE NO. 24586 City of Shakopee, a municipal cor- poration, Douglas S. Reed, Clerk. In re: Objections and Defenses to special assessments levied CHARLES A. MENSING, Appellant, -vs- FILE NO. 2.4587 City of Shakopee, a municipal cor- poration, Douglas S. Reed, Clerk. The above-entitled matters, all appeals from a special-assess- ment, cane on for a hearing on appeal from the undersigned Judge, sitting without a jury, on April 1st, 2nd and 3rd, 1981, at the Scott County Cotkrthouse, Shakopee, Minnesota. The parties agreed to consolidate these matters in a joint hearing. Each of the appellants named above appeared pro se, and TREVOR WALSTIN, ESQ. , appeared on behalf of the City of Shakopee. The Court, having considered the testimony of the witnesses presented by the parties as to each such appeal, and upon all the files, records, and proceedings" had herein, including the exhibits introduced, the Court now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT . 1. That Appellant John Brambilla is the owner of certain real es tate situated in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, which is a commercial property, and is more particularly described as: The east one-third of Lot 3 and all of Lot 4, ex- cept the east 39 feet of the west 58 feetof the south one-half thereof, and all of Lot 5, Block 5, Original Plat, City of Shakopee. (Parcel No. 27-001-0000-060-00) The assessment as to said parcel is $807.79. 2. That Appellant Brambilla Motors is the owner of certain real estate situated in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, a commercial property, and is more particularly described as: Lots 1, 2, and the west two-thirds of Lot 3, Block 5, Original Plat, City of Shakopee. (Parcel No. 27-001-0000-059-00) The assessment as to said parcel is $1,428.13. 3. That Appellant Francis P. O'Connor and his wife are the owners of certain real estate situated in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, a commercial property, and is more particularly des- cribed as: Lot Six (6) , Block 21, Original Plat, City of Shakopee. (Parcel No. 27-001-0000-140-00) The assessment as to said parcel is $535.55. -2- 4. That Appellant Jerome K. Wampach and his wife are the owners of certain real estate situated in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, described as: Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block Thirty-two (32) , Original Plat, City of Shakopee. (Parcel Nos. 27-001-0000-256-00 and 27-001-0000-257-00) Said lots are all commercial property, partof which are vacant and part being improved. Said appellant was assessed $1,606.65 for Lots 4, 5 and 6 and $535.55 for Lot 7. 5. That Appellant Charles A. Hensing and his wife are the owners of certain real estate situated in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, and are more particularly described as: Lot 9, except the west 36 feet of the south 75 feet thereof (Parcel No. 27-00-001-0000-156-00) And the west 36 feet of the south 75 feet of Lot 9 and all of Lot 10 (Parcel No. 27-001-0000-157-00; All in Block 22, Original Plat, City of Shakopee. Both of said parcels are improved commercial property, and said appellant was assessed $365.83 as to the first parcel and $705. 26 as to the second parcel. 6. That in 1977 the City of Shakopee, by its Council, em- barked upon the installation of certain city sanitary sewer, storm sewer, watermain, curb and gutter, and bituminous surfacing of Holmes Street in Shakopee, which project was designated as Holmes Street Reconstruction Project No. 80-3. The area encompassed by the project was frau Levee Drive on the north to Tenth Avenue on the south, and from Spencer Street on the east to Scott Street on the west. 7. After adoption of a resolution and report to consider the improve?Tient, the city engineer of Shakopee prepared a feasibility re port, and said report was received. by the Council at which tine it set a date for a public hearing. Proper notices were mailed to the affected property owners, published notice was had, and the public hearing was held to permit all concerned the opportunity to speak for or against the pro- i�o_ ,1 i,nprove:,ient. Subsequently the Council adopted a resolution ordering the i. .provement of the oroj ect, advertisement for bids was had, and after -3- /4 • receiving the same a contract was awarded and construction of the improve- ment,was connnenced in accordance with plans and specifications. 8. Subsequently the assessment procedures were commenced in accordance with Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes, setting another public hearing, and affected property owners were permitted to debate their respec- tive liability for special assessments. After said hearing, and on August 26, 1980, an assessment roll was adopted by the City Council, and each of the above parcels were assessed on a square-foot basis in the amount stated above for the storm sewer improvement only. The City determined that the other improvements in the Holmes Street Project were to. be paid from general funds. At the time of said assessment hearing and adoption of the assessment roll the City Council made no determination as to the "before" and "after" values of any of appellants' properties, nor did said Council specifically determine - the amount of special benefits as to each parcel prior to the adoption of the said assessment roll. 9. Shortly prior to the hearing on these appeals and during the months of February and March of 1981, the City employed one Michael Wiley, an independent real estate appraiser employed by Wiley Appraisal, Inc. , to appraise the before and after values of the appellants' properties, and said appraiser issued his separate reports as to each .on March 26, 1981. In each case the appraiser used comparable sales in determining his "before" values. Regarding "after" values he concluded, among other things, that the "market willingly pays an increase (in price) for an adequate storm sewer system." 10. That the assessment roll adopted by the City. Council on August 26, 1980, as to each of the above parcels, was regularly and properly adopted, except that said City Council failed to consider the market value of each of these appellants' properties before and after the installation of the storm sewer improveaaent, and thereby failed to determine the amount of special benefits as to each of said properties prior to the adoption of the assessment roll. Fro;, the foregoing, the Court now makes the following: ORDER 1. That the special assessments levied by the Shakopee City -4- r • /6 Council as to each of the above-named appellants' properties, i.e. , Parcel Nos. . 27-001-000 0 060-00, 27-001-0000-059-00, 27-001-0000-140-00, 27-001-0000- 256-00, 27-001-0000-257-00, 27-001-0000-1.56-00, and 27-001-0000-157-00 on August 26, 1980, are hereby set aside, a reassessment of said parcels is hereby Ordered in accordance with TSA, Sec. 429.071, Subd. 2, and each of said matters is hereby accordingly remanded to the City Council for such further hearings as are provided by law. 2. That the attached Memorandum is made a part of this Order. // • Judge o listric/Cc rt • by assi;� ,ent '' Dated: June d, 1981. CLERK OF COUNTY COURT SCOTT COUNTY, ?vflNN. RUC) J U N 101981 -5- /" STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF SCOTT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT FILE NO. 24591 In re Objections and Defenses t to special assessments levied Arthur Fonder, Appellant, • -vs- FINDINGS OF FACT -AND- City of Shakopee, a municipal ORDER ON APPEAL corporation, Douglas S. Reed, Clerk. • The above-entitled matter, an appeal from a • special assessment, came on for trial before the undersigned • Judge without a jury on April 2nd and =3rd,71981, at the Scott County Courthouse, Shakopee, Minnesota. The appellant, Arthur Fonder, appeared pro se, and TREVOR WALSTEN, ESQ. , appeared on behalf of the City of Shakopee. The Court, having heard and considered the testimony of the witnesses presented by the parties , and upon all the files , records, and proceedings had herein, including the exhibits introduced, the Court now makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1 . The appellant is the owner of certain real estate situated in the City of Shakopee, Scott County, Minne- sota, which is a vacant lot, and is more particularly described as : Lot Seven (7) , Block Thirty-five (35) , Original Plat , City of Shakopee. 2 . That in 1977 the City of Shakopee, by its Council , embarked upon the installation of certain city sanitary • sewer, storm sewer, watermain, curb and gutter, and bituminous lrf.acing of Holmes Street in Shakopee, which project was desig- • - nated as Holmes Street Reconstruction Project No . 80-3 . The area encompa_sed by the project was from Levee Drive on the north to COUNTY COURT HOUSE - SHAKOPEE, MINN. 55379 PHONE (612) 4z -775u COUNTY COURT EXT.200. • DISTRICT COURT 203 Arthur Fonder P .O . Box 75 Shakopee, MN 55379 In re: Fonder. )S —vs— !_ _1 City of Shakopee . r Trevor Walsten —1 Attorney at Law 1221 E. 4th Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 File No: 24591 • L. NOTICE OF ENTRY OF: FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER FOR JUDGMENT • XXI ORDER dated June 5, 19$1 (see attached copy) •• JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF • AND AGAINST • OT+TER • -IN THE ABOVE ENTITLED' ACTION WAS, ON THE 10 DAY OF June 19 $1 • (FILED) MIKETEm4 IN THE. OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF ' . n COUNTY COURT I X I DISTRICT COUItr — SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA DATED: June 10, 19$1 GREGORY M. ESS Clerk of District & County Courts Scott County, Minnesota BY: �G� .c< f'//, f Tenth Avenue on the south, and from Spencer Street on the east to Scott Street on the west. 3 . After adoption of a resolution of a report to 8onsider the improvement, the city engineer of Shakopee pre- pared a feasibility report, and said report was received by the Council at which time it set a date for a public hearing. Proper notices were mailed to the affected property owners, published notice was had, and the public hearing was held to permit all concerned the opportunity to speak for or against the proposed improvement. Subsequently the Council adopted a resolution ordering the improvement of the project , advertisement for bids , was: had, and after receiving the same a contract was awarded and construction of the improvement was commenced in accordance with plans and specifications . • 4 . Subsequently the assessment procedures were commenced in accordance with Chapter. 429 , Minnesota Statutes, setting another public hearing, and affected property owners were permitted to debate their respective liability for special assess- ments . After said hearing an assessment roll was adopted by the City Council on August 26 , 1980 , and Appellant Fonder ' s lot was specially assessed in the amount of $535. 35 for the storm sewer improvement only. 5 . Shortly prior to the hearing on this appeal , and during the month of February, 1981 , the City employed one Michael Wiley, an appraiser, to appraise the before and after value of appellant' s lot, and said appraiser issued his report on March 26 , 1981 . 6 . Said witness conceded during the trial that he based his appraisal of appellant ' s property on an erroneous assumption that city water and sanitary sewer were available to appellant ' s lot, and conceded that in the event it was not available, his appraisal was in error and the special benefits confe re upon appellant ' s lot was some $385 . 00 less than the above assessment . -2- 7 . That the assessment roll adopted by the City on • August 26 , 1980 , was regularly and properly adopted as to appellant ' s lot, except that said City Council failed to consi- . der .the market value of this appellant' s property before or after the installation of the storm sewer improvement and thereby failed to determine the amount of special benefits prior to adopting the assessment roll on said date. From the foregoing , the Court now makes the following : ORDER That the special assessment levied on Appellant * Arthur Fonder' s property herein on August 26 , 1980 is hereby . set aside, a reassessment of . said property is Ordered in ac- cordance with MSA, Section 429 . 071 , Subd. 2 , and this matter is hereby accordingly remanded for the City Council for such further hearings as are provided by law. / // Judge f Da.s, rict C rt by assignment DATED: June 6, 1981 . CLERK CF CCUT Y COURT SCOTT COUNTY, MAN. FILED JUN 10.19ai -3- 7 MEMORANDUM Minnesota Statutes, Sec. 429 . 051 , states that the cost of any local improvement may be assessed upon property benefitted by the improvement, based upon the benefits received, whether or not the property abutts on the improvement M. S .A. 429 . 061, defining the assessment procedure, requires that after the obligation for the local improvements has been in- curred n-curred the expense therefor shall be calculated under the direction of the City Council, and after a determination of the amount to be paid by the City from general funds, the Clerk with the assistance of an engineer or other qualified person, shall calculate the proper amount to he specially assessed for the improvements against "every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land, without regard to cash valuation, in accordance with the provisions of Sec. 429 . 051 . " From the evidence presented here, not only did the City Council improperly assess this appellant' s lot without having before it the proper infonuation regarding whether city water and sewer extensions were available to it, but it also failed to assign the proportionate share of this improvement based upon the benefits received. The latter is particularly true since no appraisal of the lot was secured until shortly before the hearing on this appeal . The remand is necessary • here because of the limited power granted the Court in assess- ment appeals under MSA 429 . 081 , even though counsel for the City agreed during the hearing to reduce the assessment. DALY, J. MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION (Regular Meeting) The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on June 1, 1981 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. Commissioner Bishop offered a prayer for divine guidance in the deliberations of the Commission. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Bishop, Nolting and Reinke. Also Superintendent Leaveck and Manager Van Hout. Motion by Notting, seconded Reinke that the minutes of the May 4, 1981 regular meeting be approved as kept. Motion carried. BILLS READ: City of Shakopee 20,032.00 American Casting and Mfg Corp 454.84 Associated Mechanical Contractors, Inc. 186.68 Astra Corporation 261.00 Auto Central Supply 30.42 Battery Tire and Warehouse 13.71 Bills toggery 416.00 Border State Electric Supply Co. 576.41 Burmeister Electric Co. 30.48 Burroughs Corporation 217.80 Burroughs Corporation 358.86 Chapin Publishing Co. 68.64 City of Shakopee 1,270.82 City of Shakopee 16,100.00 Clinic Opticians, Inc. 11.95 Clay's Printing Service 145.27 Dick's Service 8.00 Dyna Systems 137.72 Electrical World 10.00 Feed Rite Controls, Inc. 638.48 Goodin Company 20.19 Craybar Electric Co. , Inc. 4,032.00 H & C Electric Supply 1,792.95 Harmons Hardware Hank 28.50 Jerome Jaspers 5,853.75 Kilmartin's Tool House, Inc. 23.42 Krass Meyer and Kanning 89.17 Lanick and Liljegren 2,186.25 Layne Minnesota Company 52.02 Leef Bros. , Inc. 15.00 Lynde Company 163.50 Marshall and Stevens Incorporated 200.00 Metro Appliance Service, Inc. 201.50 Minnetonka Testing Laboratory 225.00 Minnesota Electric Supply Co. 281.79 Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories, Inc. 65.00 Motor Parts Service 170.82 Ted Nelsen 298.00 Northern States Power Co. 130,724.48 / 7 Northern States Power Co. 850.58 Northern States Power Co. 233.94 Northland Electric Supply Co. 201.08 Pfeifer andShultz, Inc. 234.46 Pitney Bowes 269.50 Schoell and Madsen, Inc. 11,453.03 Paul W. Wermerskirchen 4.00 Serco 28.00 Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Petty Cash 604.42 Shakopee Services 18.00 Southwest Suburban Publishing 193.54 Stemmer Farm and Carden Supply 20.20 Starks Cleaning Services 17.30 State Planning Agency 1,329.30 Software Consultants 810.00 Suel Business Equipment 112.90 US Interstate Supplies Inc 110.30 Uniforms Unlimited 240.80 Valley Industrial Propane 9.65 Vaughn's 60.16 Water Products 72.82 Motion by Nolting, seconded by Reinke that the bills be allowed and ordered paid with the exception of Schoell and Madson in the amount of $11,453.03. The bills for Schoell and Madson that are not directly applicable to Utility business, Co Rd. 16/83 watermain project and Co. Rd. 89 and the bill for the well this is part of the tax increment project and the bill for 183.00 charge be initialed and sent to City Hall for their consideration for payment. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Nolting to offer Resolution #229. A Resolution adopting the procedure for considering watermain feasibility reports. Ayes: Commissioners Bishop, Nolting and Reinke. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Nolting to approve the 1980 audit from Jerome Jaspers and Associates. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Nolting to authorize Schoell and Madson to supervise the job on Well #5 with a Senior inspector and a regular inspector for an estimated surveying cost of $402.00 for sandston determination, and inspection cost of $1,333.96 with coordination by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission staff. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Nolting to direct staff to submit estimated costs for inspection fees for Well #6 along with the surveying costs for the volume of sandstone removal and submit that to the City Council for approval upon the recom- mendation of the Commission to be paid out of the tax increment financing project. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Nolting to concur with the Council recommendation for the low bidder on the Highway 101 water project of Richard Knutson. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Nolting that staff be given the authority to ne- gotiate a proper agreement with Richard Wiggin and the City Staff as far as escrowing an account for defering watermain in the Minn. Valley 6th Add'n. if such action is needed. Motion carried. Superintendent Leaveck reported no loss time accidents for May, 1981. l ) The billing of Tennis Court lighting and other recreation lighting was discussed. The consensus was to not allow any special rates to be started and to bill all accounts under the standard rates. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Nolting that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried. <_� '`CCS.%] ou an Hout, Manager CITY OF SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION IfFd 1030 EAST FOURTH AVENUE 14/ SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379tf 445-1988 July 16, 1981 Mayor and Shakopee City Council RE: FORMER RAILROAD PROPERTY SOUTH OF PUBLIC WORKS DEPT STORAGE YARD. The SPUC crews will begin work shortly to move our poles to the storage area at the South and East of the Public Works Dept. storage yard as planned last year. Since the City Council has decided not to pursue the buying of the former railroad property at this location, we plan to start negotiations with the present owner to acquire that property to provide expansion for the pole yard. Sincerely yours, Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Wallace Bishop President WB:slm The Heart of Progress Valley ..9:::) ......- 4,- A, si. , CITY OF SHAKOPEE / \, , . PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION l .� 129 E. FIRST AVE. 553790,. , 'f( : July 16, 1981 ' George Muenchow Shakopee Community Services John Cole Shakopee Junior High School Mike Walsh Shakopee Senior High School RE: Electric bills for tennis court lighting, baseball field lighting, and football field lighting at Senior High School Dear Sirs: The sports lighting locations listed above are the only three that appear to be large enough to involve the application of a demand rate at this time. On July 8, 1981, George Muenchow, John Cole and Ron Ward attended a Shakopee Public Utilities Commission meeting to discuss the electric billing for the tennis courts and baseball field lights. The outcome of these and other discussions are: 1. A letter (this one) will be sent to parties involved to explain what will be done. 2. The basic philosophy is that usage should be billed at standard rates as would apply for any customer with such a load; except that usage by sports teams of high school age or younger will be exempted from the demand rate. 3. Since the High School football field is only used by School teams it will not be billed at the demand rate. 4. Since the tennis court lighting is primarily used by adults it will be left on the demand rate it is presently on. 5. Since the baseball field is used by both groups, the bills will be split in proportion to the usage of each type and billed accordingly, starting in 1982. For the balance of 1981 the rate will be left on the non-demand - rate it is presently on and a projected cost estimate for. 1982 will be sent to Community Services after the 1981 playing season is over. Sincerely yours, ii--"Pace)1r- --Ctg- Lou Van Hout, Manager SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 1 C,C, John Anderson The Heart of Progress Valley • �.n..I1.CC.0-1r}wt. .p 2 I fir - _ _ h T • /J P uU U U U O O I O J p•,U A W, • - t:4 O :114 IO WY ► W W WO • 4i."1 N N' N NW N;_ N -; 0 - p•U - W; N - O • 0 -00 Y .'w N _ • I- W Lulu(A(d IW(4(A(� • W W14 W CO W W W W CA W W W CA ,.+ * W WIW W C4144 W(A W W(ARA W WIW • W WIW W 1 -, U 01UNU •1 3 UI UI U) W WIW u u IW W W W W WIGS W W-CA r 0+1h.2-1 4..4..r,....r.r.-4..r.4..... • a C 'a ✓0.14.40.14.4 r.2 1.2.a.7 0 • s UI a W w i4.4 W N N N N10 o 0'.0 4.I W(.1 w W C414,4 W(ARA e4 r Ir r rlr •I 0 010 _a N NI..r 1n 2 M WNr •) aO 31.4 0 • aQn . Nra(Na. aap 2 Jr 44.1 aCO ro''JIawfa) 40WNr • NOlJ'r !CIO i'- la 1 N a m m m I a t n 0 N'n n a N a r n N m N n o x s -- z N m .n c,a'0 9 C o 3 n'D o r -•1 1I O V) C) IC (Cl aNr 22zoaa A 'CA00 -1 -ION o -1m• 0C -. r rrmIrlmr-COorrrmr a r1fl 2m Z'7 • rolaC)C)0sr v a ca cr a -•nca r a -•mzx n rn '1 = rnc) rnc.,fon2mo x Or az I - -/.. -+ C')m2 • r • rrr 2 Cl212--rti'a- -4 .i • m- 1`i mmnmrx -crr (') m ) AIC m n. l0 • -%. -c N z7�2m lm -1 -4 -1 m m CI r r m nm 1 01A r 2 • m -i 77 )2C0 r• 0O U N a 1n 0 o(C)C)mmr-t N "N -• m 2 m m• -cm Cl) -4' -02r.4 -44-4 m r73 r a r mo 0 -n LI Amcomn -co sm0O'0 ,lm m m z ramtr22an 7 -'Y•.-. A -im on 1 mm a 'm -•a0 Cl' '20 A0C - Omr -i A00)02 0 000 'CCC)C)1MCr nr a0A4 02 zznor2>arZ -i-10 -•-c c.ma Aa• A O 2maC = a r2NmCm.-. •% mm -c Z1m lo a-rxm2 CaA2 a • = a a• 2.-•m Z AZ a 2 T I mr a.-.r ''Cm(n -• aZn omm N'C IS . m 0m-1 c r r-•m0-• s a. z z.r -I G)z ('I 02 -•-4 mm m2rzNm mm I 117* a ('141 )1 r 2 0 ZA PAn N Z O A l A Cr '21'10 '230CImrOm2 D r0 -( r x I')m1 (4 a' i r 0 0 1-X A('12r D m N 2m A 1 0 2r (/)01-00 A trn r 0 aI'I1-lmOmn 1-G) a2• r 02 2 1 A • 0 'C M.44.40 0M1.4m r NC O71 'C A A 12 a ►oa c c-% .I 00 0 -4 3 C 'O 2-4-4M 22 N -I-q m A 2C 1') n CIQ fl - m4p0• s AC) Cl) r ' rorm .4002 rCG) .-.Drop z m I rI m r c.c., - aA 0 -1 -4 m1')-IA -• N ...cm P1x Nm O m 0171 m O • O 7100 2ap A Cl) .'7 p V) 3 N m 001- (419192 .n m'm N 2 0 C) r -4 2 a -I 22 r N m r N .4 an m Cl) -fl C n 0 -4 2 m .-..+ -1 2 n 1 -.4 -4-1 N Cl) • +IrD NN m X +1r N N 0 0 1 m Cl) -4 • • p rn is in z C mn c I ✓ N a N r r A ap 03 A O r r T W ap r r .p • • • • • • • 5 . • 4 m a aD N r O a o N N a)N (4 ap N N N -4 .I m .1%DU) Or o p W a . a ' d 0 a7 UM ap ap N Nfa)N rap UI N a 2 4. 040 aUl O N N 00 a Vra)(daN- NUla 00 - .4 n < • • • • • . . • • • • • • • • • •a• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • cow . . . • •, • Is • -(-I Q'c)a 00000 0 UI a a a aUlaaa000O0aa 0 a s.4 a s 0 a.I 42 a 00000 a o o a o C m aO a:..ca ca,p..1 C7 0 C O -,0 0 a 0 0 a 0 O a7 0 0 CO 0 0 O O O 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a' O O pa Oa I I 1 Irl 2 • 0 C • • 2 m - .CI 0 n D) m r Z - n• o no A ti C) .q 1 m CO N W r 0 0 0 r v W a r a .I W r N U) W 1- N 41 N W 0 N N .1 A+ W IUI 0%a1 N W O O N N m a)r r 0 UI 0' a W Q(0 W co W O W • . • • • • • • • I• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 'p U)-1 W c)O UI a o N W 10 a 0 0#W N p U) O O V UI 0 0'a 0 0 0.I W aJ a s a)0) N O U) Im Ca a 0 0 0.1 O O O o r y Ica•2 O 0 a p V 1 W o 000 d N O O O o O O A 0 O 0 0 0 N a O O a p 0000000/70 a a '0000a0NO 000 O 00000000000000 .( 0 V c • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • is • • Im .7 0 0 a_1 a 0 0 0 0 O 07 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 12 .70 a 0 as 0000 O c'f o O O 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 O.: O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O Ca O O O I m 1n I-• r D O .1 O CA .1 N N r r r o' 01(.• CO U) a .4 '4 r Wr r WU1 WW r r A • • I•. • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • ' Wcr.aaAIN 0 r r .1 N r rNo'o '0N(..4 0 ha-4 04 40 ha m a a a N N r c., 1- G C ' ON a U) UI W O N W•41W N a 0 N N 0)0 GA a C' 0 Dr N W0 000 -40 a-3 r 0 .1 a W dCN a 0WC7 Wo .1U10000 W w n ▪ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a • • I +40 0 a s CD O g 0 0 0 0 U) 0 0 0 0 U1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a o 0- o o r r a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 004244 C 1I (pON aa'p aaa o 0 [)00.700000 .71')O •700 a 00 UI n 0100 0 0 0 0150 0 N 000N Ia 1-0 ON D. $ W •I 0 . y r N r 0' 0' I N W a W a .1 W h)U2 W 1-N W N r m 03 U) o'r 0' N m O el ha •10 r p-r O0 UI 11P)0 0 N O N r • • SO 5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 5 5 Al! • c a1-a1-OU)UI O O N 030N4INW Na L300 0 1-W Wa(0 V WN N 00 r 0 r a JN00000 0 UI N 0000004.•0 OO U) r W a -'W N0.1a O V.1N OS W 0 W Ip W 0 W O: N n.5 N a c, a N as 4t 4)N o CD n.... 0 1-a.1 a U)0'a0 W a-•W 0 n 0 15 u 0 (A •+ • • • • • • • • • • •-• • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 • • • • • • a a O r o ap Io O J 0 Ut 0 0 0 0(f1 o CS 0<a u o n a u o N O O N O O 030 .0 0 CO 0 O 0 0 0 a' O O o o' 2 -0 (' (Ou A 0rO a.7O•) C. a:7G p C..7100.)O J .9O.D a+ 0% Cl0 U)00 W ON 1--aaC)O no0 9 OO .70 n D. \ 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ) III I Is 1 1 1 III is I 1 1 1') Cl V 1-r r ' r a N •- a0 W a0 -C 0.10 UI N N .1'p a s•a'0 1 1'' O N N UI W o'V N U1. T a c u ,p r r y N .1 0 N m 0'W o' O vt olUt ut u r r • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 . • . • • • • • • I� p'ma OW10 N r .. CO I V 0a W p- N.IIa-d al`a :.)041 A p n I M 44 r II • II I Ii VVVW,VJ3 21,z s P'P P?*Yq Y,YYYq1UYUAO11 • Y• •WN • 0WWVWWWWM W 8jt s U_•. NN! •• . U ••W.N-O •I• VpY, N 1 7' t i. r 1 U U I U W U I U O A I 0 J OIN A YI M • A l W O V 1 W W :I W W W+, W N NIN P U: A Y NIT O 010 VpiU A WiN O'O O ' a . A I W N� I 1 I1 1 1 W WIu W ulu W W u W uIw W(A W(A W W WIW W w w W W,W u(AR • W WW 11 •- • .a .J .1319 •b 9 3303 .I .4 0A :111.JI N U1 IAU1 N N I W :JI .JI 1,)1 U1 UI Ul U1 O I W N UI I N UI 13•C 0. .0 U)UI W N N 0..r ♦IW r 0'140 A 4. 44 W(40.4 U wIW N NIN N NINA r I' r n 2 30 • ur )O A oI N 0 r'r(3 (AN.-...)JI A W N r.0 -4 J414, W N 0 •p .):A A lel CD r 10 3 =,-r ,'Omr:A,-.-. aamOnmo noDm '1 - zlnn '191N2LNN2v) -0 IC In -4 ., Zmm2 nzzm n00... comm-, .J • * ,10O..ln..mZ-4.,IC- IZo I-, 2 V)N T :Crr -4-4 ACCu * ' oma Crn Z zmr (1 ,'1C) I) A +-4r -• m" n• C 's o m C m n o z r n 2..o ml0m z nln n.-.m n O C m n C -, r. 1< In znr N xi-, ? -1-,• 2 (0J0 0. mm2 • I'1 • m N IO . r n a 2.. 0 -,in 2 G!-4 (0113!m 2 n U)N 0 O '0 C1133-4 .1 1 r'I C) O A r- I- LI)m0 -)173 G)mm s 92.4 2C D '1 '0 WN TOCr11 13 O INm 71 In U D 2 < -,0 n D3 0 0 0 -4-I 3 r m 0.,., • Al s s Xl n m ,n z 1 t z .-.2• -4 3 n n 0 0 Z rO r 0 . r1 rIa o O a 0 L -4 0 r1 o S r 7 I': 01 C ri MX OJ.. Y lloCorroOMM0 A.+ZZzaAr,‹-om '1 O '-•: S z 7 oN A -4L -1C) (' :01 m l 7Cm0 V)C)NNZ D s.m n z 2/700 D o C C m2M-41 mr -*,a.-.tr) 'C)mv )Swn $ 1 mo • ZM.-. M0 1 -+r A N 003.4400 m v)• 0200 -40'11 1.'V r (I) A-, < •+ .0 -1 N 2z -4'0m 1lrn OON=mN 11V).,O .-.MM '44.10.. 0/1 tJ o woo a2 n.,r02r 1 -im-1••°•m WO z : X Mm 2C m -, mC'"1 Om S2 20 'VNND2Anr mC '0 MMI 2 m D -, Am 'D2 >m m o Zmc •,: m n 0 r -)NA r1 AN C ON., nG) 2 X N r m N M C) r 07 n m m -, 2 m3 1 In 1 m (,)Cl) a O 1 2m s (4 Cl) r • m z T N C 2-I In (d) 1 N m m m N -4, • A • In < l In z 9 n c , co ♦ r 'a O o r r r Wrr r r 9 • • • • • • • • • • m ♦ .Q V WN .ON ♦ r UI N ♦ . 1... im p ♦ .pm 4.-4 oro rGD d O o W ♦o o nz o o %a or .1.0 W rUI ♦ N Nr .Qo O n iC • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -4-1 I N r OD 0 0 0 C 0 O O 0 U W O O O r 0 o 0 0 0 n 0 N 0.O U1 0 0 0 0 0 0 C In .p 00 ' W .Q 004:4OOO ♦f}0000• 0000 OOO OO JO 0000''O 0 I Ir x z I ! o IC z m 1 -CI A O. 7a 19 I-. )f n IC m I n 2 N m r ♦ r (i) N I ,b r r ‘ON r r -4 W .a N ♦ .Q 00 0 .01". In W WI 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • ♦ .p 0 a% 0N.40 OMWN = NW N ♦ 01 U)'0NJ JO aD o 0 al 0000 0000 00.3433 0 ca‘a 01 U1 o m ✓ O O O 0 0 0 0 0000 0 001 0 0 000100 C • • • • • • • • • • • • • . . • • • • • . . • • • • . • . • . • . . m I 0 0 000000000000a0000a0oolo00000000lno z o O o 00000000 0000000000 00.700 0000 C00 cD 0 G m ♦ r n' ✓ UI r ♦ P.- . (.4 - W UI W r o sp W r r r r ♦ r Al • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 N N .O d I.O r .O N ♦r N O. til COr N N .O n M .Q .O 0-goi♦rr Ci . 0W UI UI .O O OA 42 ♦ UI Cl W ♦ T. N N -4 CO $-•1%3 I°"' .) .O W Jo 0 N N 1 N AN 90400 (.4 o Cl • • • • • • • • • • • .• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .40 0 CO C I O O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 ♦ V O O 0 .I 0 0 0 0 0 010 I V O 0300030O C 'Cl 04 r .c7 ♦r 000 71') .D .O 0000" 0000 001700 ♦O 000.70 O n I I I I r C I 0' n I.• I W • 1 ,, U V W r m Co P. W o 4-4 CA 0r r • • • I• • • • • • • • • • • < 41o V .00) 0 IV .4 CD 0Uir N r WI 0 CDN W♦NN o D d O O •-•a, OCU10 .O NODI UIN .O Oi .O r0 C) ♦0rT A :J1 N N r -4 •.-'•. W.A W r (0)O'NN --, -4 ♦i mn O) n .-) o •, • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . • • • • • • • • • n ✓ W 47 o Ul♦O u 0 J O UI N a u 0 N C)O O u 5 i 5 W .J o o'O.:)o o O O 1 I (A .Q C) :_a 41,.p 0 0.7 ')e)r r c)0 0 A 4.)'J OI O -7 J. , 0 0 ♦.7 O o O of u ) n 1 D 1 $ I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 11 I I I I I • I I 1 I Im Im r .- (A C) r ♦W .4)V C.0' W �. I ♦ ♦r(Al r IV i W r 0 I... 1..0 CO 0 0 .1 W : : Co 1,,°of W W • • • 1• • • • • • • • I • • • • • • '0 CA y la ,(,4 r u r ' .p a W A .i 0 0 CO WIN UI In -4 Inj l I I I JV:V'NJ O }0pVPPpOOP- 0UUUpUaYUUUOaVOUAWAAA uOu.W u y WW y yyvNNNN,eNW N 0 .O V.a A WN OO,•JOU. NjA._ L • ...:CE IlrClq.410,4 IJ 1' -- - S (U U lig 3_.3V-1 U •I4 J •IU ► N ► 01W W W� W W :I W W U Y N tit N N. N N N N N -' • - •'- � W. � _ O O O vO U •IY N - CLr^ l1 I l I 1 a • .014e.4. • 00004. 0 • IIN ...t...1.-.......A.4.0.0.!0.0....t...1.-.......A.4.0.0.!0.0.• I i i "I W • WNW * W'W-WWWW 1• N . NNNINNNNNNNNNINNNNNN ...t...1.-.......A....t...1.-.........t...1.-.......A.4.0.0.!0.0. D 0. . IC W • N'N N * r r r rIr r I• UAUI J1 Ola A Ala a WIW a WIN N NIN N N r • J4 UII U1...t...1.-.......A.4.0.0.!0.0..0'a W W1r O ,n Z A -0 • N0 • 000N0. -1 I• W r J O IW N r J A W IN r 431,A A W IN r 0►3 • N r 0 N r Io N O N IMO r 0 -4 n .-7-4m "4 r 3 C m D r N o N ,o r o N '0 a C n <m m o o n 1 n C)0 "0 Ccs 9 ''J m N N O N IC C) 30 0 C'1 m O z M -4 r Z C m C C 1-r n a'M 0 0 -r o 11 r O 2 D r 0 s 1111 i'I Z O m.'1 m m m >I< > 2 - -. D 2 r r-ti o 0 2>m 0 c) r 0a 0 m 0 0-r D.r 2 r.n C D 11 0-r 4')211 a -n A D 2 2 a<r m r Ir r -4 < 2 rm1 11 > m2l-rr > A rrz Icrnor a..C7rrm -r3Zmr In ;Tr1nIn0I'10a a -( P C ca .- m razz--Ir r D omz I • • i7• 9r -rsar•ar o V 2'ti•.•. as "r A 0 r z m s C) 1n r m .II n,-4 (a D o n. 1 N r 2• <.. n s 11 2 r 11 2 0 o D r r r Im 4) Io r mom N 11 'aZm( N m ozoz ooz>< V)m> 2 -1 +mer > o2 Z2 211211Nm 11 m n -42 •-42102 11 N 100 -4-i100 -4 0 -4 r-•> ONC)Cr N r .C(420N4 A(nr( IC)2 X > m 0 4-0 0411 Z7 -4 A302 -4 1022-.00 4 mlootC 1 II 11 II Wm VI 'U -r N 2 .-. 11 204{ as 1,r2 ►.oe.-i12m -42121mmr Cm to mrrm '1 t m 'T1 .4a m m r m e 2• C)2r 2-4 mr r2D.4 211.. 1 1)111 mm m 2O-rrr A CC tb D 2 0 a r 0 • n A taro-. 20-40 224x• -ar z yr A -42'71 All s 1)r r -.,r X N) 2 < ((4 ((4 P1 1') 1421-4 m r 2 1 C r 1n a. r r < 'a 4'1 I'1 > t e r r r 0 11 N r N '1111 M00 -U • 0D• a'14.01• aa•am• 441 r n.• A o 11 a C) m ma am D 1 r r D m n1omr m f') 0r"r'r -•-.4 -4 Z 11 11 A m < < a •1 2112 > 2rd•'UAS OC N m 222 r.' 2 m 4 N1 MC la >a > r 12 erne CO) V) veno -411 0 4.4 on Ar 10 -r r -4 0 • .4 A r 11 U, rp • CC 04m11 M MM MM m D m • m A D m 1304 Aa 2 (4 -4N (011 zra r '0 or U) 2n D > 11 n y 1101.'4 > a mD 22 • D s A or 22 no • r r o a -4-4 P111 N N 2 N D v -U a 0 _ -0 Xi r D -4 r A ,2 n m m X r co a' A r r.• 04 r a a N r '0. r 02 W N N a4 r Co A • • • • • • • • •- a • • • •- . . . m a UI O N 40 40 W C4 ,Ui a' 1.71 -4 a N 01 CA a r O UI r o W ar ar r 4Q!a a. m a4 40 U1 W UI 04 V N !A 07 UI .4 CA 0 a) 4000+0.4 W a 40 N a4 W MCA N 0. a pD 2 04 a MCS 4O 0-4 r M O r 14.0p--4 40 r CO a W CD P.4) UI r 40 WO O!r -4 Ct 2 • 4 • • •: • • ••• • • • '• • • • • • • • • • • •- •• • • • • • • • • • • •- • • • • • • • • -4-I ar, .4 .i .40 r 040 0001 IO 00000a N 4).0 a NrCa200 a000r A 0420.°00C"" 1". C G a O 7c.a a 0.40m0.4 cA o00oOr004a0WU1oa00010O0 N N€ 4- oa WoNr a D I I 04 2 r 1 0 -4 2 C 1 a <.1 m D A D Z) z n m m -ao n Z) -4 1 r • D r N r r O 11:1 P. r UI 07 r a W a 1.-Nr N W W a arta a4 rro 0A 0 -1 W W U1 N.00020 40 rrU104 r1M-4ra-OW NOor rtr440a W Waa NNa • • a 10 0 A . O .40 O N Ui .0 .400N0000004)-404. 00N010 r ! Uaaaa a a .4 0 Is OO 00 r NOOU0 0 0pj000000Naar000OOaW 0 aW0WW 00N1� 0 0 l00io00000 0 000000007NOO70o00000 O 00NO0 00 'r • •• • • • •• • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • . • . . . • • • • ► • • • • • • • • • • . • • • > OOOOOO 000000 O O O O Q O O 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 O O C O O 0000000000 1 1 Cs ';7 J00 ,• 000000 0 OOAO1)0p0000000 - 00000 0 00C) Q 00000 r 10 1Z-4 m (A a D a NN V r N 0 CA N r CO W 0 W .4 U1 IV lO toa o •• r NAW rW WN aiW 40r aD NO'4:.a UI"' o1ra N + • • I• • • • I• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r co W O 1p • 0.4a2 0 IO 0N1,2 .0UI Or N a UA0 a0 ao WM02002 a ON)U1 00 -40%0 .0 a UA O. .1• N a ai 00 40C' ai W (P r U4 - CO N N)N0 O N N N.4 W 040 .4 C.O ONOr - W co s-4 N r co N-4 Or r'W.4 M io 040 W 4-0000 .0 W UA a4 UANN W Oars' 40 v)Ulr .4ai 11020n • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a a • • • I-4 O O P. 40 o Ula 4 UI W UA N O Co N ON VO 0'a al 4O W UI N A N O 05.4 4p v o 4) 0O N 0420110.4 N W IC 11 r r ,w0 0 0./000 W 'O 0UAo OOrrrW C'4002 W a W 044000 ao 0 UIO W 00 N)04040 C > I r O as D I W I 1 0 r. . N W 1 4.• ` v 0 r N a4 a r N -N CO N r r W 02 40 P a2 a O 021 a4 40a002O N W ar 40N W r 0143.4 CO r r r.4 N r N UA N a N a440 -4 r UI 40 ►' • • 10 •. • •• • • • • • • • • • C ' 42 c W T 04 ONrNa 4O CIr rN4ONW ro0a2NrTW rOtWUIO r 00002UICD 42040 Ir. W A as Ui. A 0 (41.k000 r N)0' 4000IN4O -400 UI a4 4-d.4N0'aN r a'a N0 W r NO' .4 14 a2 4- ...IN 04.4 .4 0 04 N o r r 0 004...ap a 40 a 0 r'a W 40 .4a 04 0 W UI 4-) ,) 0 U1 02 N N Or r r N • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Ib a2 0 O,0 UA W UI a4 UI UA Or a 0-4 N oaa0'N000 .0 a/Ad4OWNN MOO O ar C)-40r r ON 4 -4 '2 '9 40 (A 01..)CA '.I ocmC0,4 M-4 N CIoo a' .,0.'a r4.rn) .4a4 .4aPONN N UIa-4003247rrC0 n D 1 t 11 C) m W a CAUI W NUI a W oNN N ar A N N aro W .4a N)N W A CO a a s N 040 0) N OUI r r W UI 42 N r W a NOU1 as UI a U1IO 04 N N r UI0 Cr,4O 40 co O -4 W a. -4•-r ... •. I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • "0 40 W MW A .0440 04 r a2 4Q m a s-4 02 0 W 40 .4 04 4)m 04 'N I- a 40104 0 -4 4110.44 n -4 r I. II � < •W'VJO • ••• •':::PI O U U J'U U:Y N U Y0 0 V O t Y t Q Vy 'I J•W t yNW l_kip N NN ►NNNO•O V';;•W:N-O •'•,• U1W N� _______) •) Ofl,fl IIKTIO C...K. .OI. V P PI ► Y Nu O • P V P!. ► U. N • D W O WI y W W IW Y '.11 U N N N N N' N N N NN -I - - I - UN - 00OJPP • WN - 0 • b VIP a ►IW N - � I I I v0' • 0 0000 •. •i 4(Uu Wu CA 4 W * 44 WIWW W • 1G4u IA W • WW • C ',0 Po 0° ♦ r...rrJ * 43 '0 N .1r • 40 •O I.D JJ .O * 01Oo0pa rvr v • IssT • NUI y nL wc r • .a N r -L0.p • 'O S LA 4- * T O IN r o * a U N r Cd W N r 0 • N r 0 y r a • In 0 1 r _ O a n Onnnn M 2000G n 3a rOn c MO2Mr 0aC2+"� r <M0 a VP -I C In M2 a r0000 A 040r-OO O 0004-.0 -I O'rinc pia npr Z 'marl z am A zrte ,. D -0 m 2 n v r a .-. UI a o a a z ma n M za 91 n r z a -.-.0 Cu {r_0 z - . . .a n -.r 1-+ 2M .. rn. . . ,..... H nr0 aT -I7� !*1 U) () r •-I Ironman c I-y 0. z za c - 0= .4 la-. -. v - in Cl M o n- .. • .w z M .. n n..o . a s-I m n. -4 -I r M o 2M a , a alp s z r 20 N 2 W a•a -I O M2.-. MO A a n r as .,-.0 .. r MO a M(n r !..i- r-irr 1� r-4 -.-..a n (.7 40 rn •• C MZM.-. r-. Z n(a 1 z 22 0M -1 aE -4 A I a0M O 1 O 2< 0C:0 O MayCN n N aoaa40•- -4a . Cl Q• z CO P4 O '.4 nI'�1l stn a a -Fa -4 p Mn -40r O ]Ys Wm sC 200 Pr Op a• Mr ra -4s -. O TC .c T a 000M r 712 USN w MraMrN 0-4 Mr07 n 9s n as a c-.-• M O CM N Cu, M 7 n 2-M01-4 -er 7c 2 0 O • a aM 3.2 V Mn MIn2 A 02 OM • 22 AA a -42Z1 r # CM 0 00 r» 0 N 2 0 Cl M MIn C • y a O w r •. M M.1).., \ Ma... a a OSI 'D -r1-4 c am Zr n a•<-. 0 M-4 -4c, -4 m-4r m mo z mz r C - •V-N OG 22 M MO 2 r0 -4M 2 Gln M N .-•2 0 2. 2 0 .-a 2 C O ow O a 2 NC N ... Mn N 00 r -12 a 20a C Cr US -. n• -I Cl,W Z 0 Cl) AM .Cl)C A n Or N 7 0 or r Z. n ‘0332 1 -40 2 N -. 2 PO .r S m s 0 2M 006 2 r o n Z 2 1 • n 0 r. a -a lOa C a r. s 1 • 04 0 20 CM a 7• r a r a NO a a N r N a r N 4 N a • 4 • • • • • •- • a • 0 W .aN0'N 'O Ula N UI00r a OW V ON a I Cl c O11.1.24010 a 0' a' CO GRN 4 O•'ON4 'O N.40'a NN 2 a v I r 01 0N w '0 O N W N N N a co 0 .O Ln co. a O W T I n 2 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • I . • • • • • • • -4 -. aO C O 0 0 0 4 NUN a 0 a u a aa 9 'O r O' 0 O0 c O0 o.4W O'300N a P 44-OJ00-1O 0 G 0 a' 0 Ul a p r 2 •• I 0 -. 2 C -I a c z M p a M a a 2 n Cl • M 1 'o 0 a 1 n a ti -4 s r r a W 'O 4-0 N r a N 0 4-N W I r r N 4-r a W N a .00'M a r 4-1.° W 4-r N# r 104-a Oraa .O N'OCS .0 010 03 a • • • • • • •. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • . 05 • • • • 0 Or 0 00c W N 00a r 0.1 N01N . i3Or Ui4 4004V .1 4°°W44 O USa O a 00 0 W C71a O O 000 0 0..0N0 0 !CI 000 ONO O 0 rata N N d co a 00 O 000 O O 000 UI 00000 0 ,0000 0000 O 000 UI ON 0 .-. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •. •.. • '• • • • • • • • • • • • • 5 • • • p . 00 O 00000 0 0000!0 O 00000 0 '000000000 O POO O 00 O -4 OP 0 00000 0 00000 0 a C'O a s 0 000000000 0 000 0 eV a 0 a - M s W N r .4 r a r r r N r GA 0 4 W r 0 a v Nr4 -' CD*a a 0'v W a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 4 I • •- • • Co a I a 0 0 N a N r 0. W woo .0 4-‘4,414. a V 0' a !0' a N 0 OM r 0 0 a NJ 02 ai a a a' a a NUI 4 a'O UI 0'V'0 0 a ...IW 0 i r N 0' a MN a 'a -4 Cu) a .,r N W- N a 0 a a1 r 0' O U1 0. W 000 -4 r Or* O 1000 0' a r r n • • • • •• • • • • • • • • I• • . • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • -10 0 O0 W 10 V 0c T D• 000010 .4 O OO N N W r a ti o 04-.0 UI•• .O Ir W co N 0'Na r C Cl cm N 1.UI.4 CRN a an .3,70 a ww ,30•4 a WCN00r0 VN r INl UI OI 0' N r 0 I 0v C' s I W r I (A 01 ' 4-a r 0 O' r (A r r r r n a CA r .Ir Cl) r r 4-r r 4-r 'O W ..44-4 (Ilr.Oa 'O NaCS a NN a r •. • • • • • • • • • • 4 0 • • a 4444 • • a • • • 4 C ON 0 'OCRWN O \ W00 0 OaNUIW 'O Oo0'01... 'O0' UICI (J vU10 .0 00 IW'a n 00 .D (40(40 N T 4-00 r NrNN0. 'a 4N.100T UI0NUI N.)414W O' 4 4 N Ia Ga:. 0 .10'0N N G 000 T .DC `1003 0 O'O'.v (DO Nm 0 m4-' [D OW a1 -• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • I p a0 0' 1uN'Or0. W a'cJ 000 N 0000 .4 0 mra000100a+ a ra'4 a 40 a 2 O0 m 1.30400 0 .00 ,3m0 Ii 0. G 'I Or - d' VrQ10.0.D O W a. .0 NNCR N as '0 n s I I S I Cl 0 N ... r Cl ND W4.1 .4 r W N Nr0 W O CN a CII N W a0 a 4.1 4 4 O I V v a P d 0' u Cl)a N 0)a Cl) N v W UI a N LA r 10 07 4-1 W #N OD • • I • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1• • • • • • • a O UI .l a'CO N a CA ! W ...1., '0 4 07 a a W .1 CI .0 0 c !r r OI Cl a Co 'O n 1 •♦ Cl) VVV JVP'PPP'PPPP18�•PPPPPPPPPP • .• ► ► •.►YW Y:YW WYWWiyINNN NN n-I .,I.O JIb P•WIN-O OI•J P Pi►Y N� / P►V N-(O •Ib V O U'.►W N- O•b J P P ♦U N -O O b tat'�•W N-O O P ViP P T WAN O J O 'a 1.'W U L ` _ - w.. ' Off KI ILIQUOnia INC •02 I -_. ( _ — T /t U U I U 'W NI U U •O!0 • O!Y • UIN • 0!yy Y Y I A.U • W N W+I W V OI N N UN N N N N OO V OU • Wi N OO O V. O U •I Y N - I I 1 I • i 1 •n .- I • '.O Iso '.0'.D.D .0 Is c 100 • 0003080 a J r"1 Z i0 * .•IN ran -4 (A ' Ir• O O n -•CqA ; A IG f> -4 0 b D^•r' 71 'z c' .w S ZXr11XIS -41-, -+ rl -ti r`i rl C r •-• \ •4 .'O 0-4 00ZX -4 O Z OD -• r1 L O rl O -•N2 D Nrel 11 X rl D a z (, z m O z x .-. n A(1 Vl C r1 11 co!1 .+ z 2 z Z < m a D D 0 O1 M r a "I -4 -4 O 1.4 o ii 'a o c c zo �zC ri r1 D rt A IV r CO r10 N N r1 D 11 r. . ri r) v D 0 -0 A U • 11 A .• D -4w 0 a n C 1 xi r1 •• r., x a a x r a .1 M V • • • • r1 N C) O, O P N ►• .1 N a > Z V N 0 .O Cr, I(1 z • • • • • • • • -4 -4 N W TO O 1p.1 a C 0 N (A 0000(JI O iD 1 1 r 2 •+ O -1 Z C 1 s <2 1'1 IA) IM ID a rl r1 1 r1 -V O I I-4 x .1 H 1,1:4 ✓ 4- '9 N '0 (11 b W CO .O r TJ • • • • 0 Ia a W CO ICO Ci 0] O S r r r 0 41 • • • •'. • • • • :> O 0 0 y 0 0 0 0 -4 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 •-• 0 z-6 P1 COI .. D a r r O us 0 N o'177* A • e • • N Cr, T W 1+a s-4 to - a 0 W a 0. e) 1• • • • • • • • 1-4 O O .0 r .o o oto.•aC '1 .1 C ,000O. Nn Ir. • r o O• D I P. W • -4 a' N r P. 1 Cf 0 a r1 O N o CO M ►' • • • • < CO -4 01 1..,411 1> 1q.. r r W •••,4-11 II7 W. 0+ ••W aIW I.• • • • • • • • • j> 0 '.O O o o(ANaz 17.3 W V '+• 0 O Cr,V1 0 IA I� 1 1 In W T Im w CO Cr.1 cn • • • • -o o 0 0o a A I -1 iW L ' 1 1 ' i II VP•WINVOCSpOuaYNO'O ••UOU:UN+ O •• J • > >W • • OyyOJ2uYUNyyypOV0UaYNNOOOV._ • Y,N -O •I •V O U•Y N-- --- V TENTATIVE AGENDA SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ADJ . REG. SESSION JULY 21 , 1981 Acting Mayor Reinke presiding 1 ] Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M. 2] Approval of Minutes of June 30, 1981 and July 7 , 1981 3] Communications : a] Fred Corrigan re : Renaissance Festival b] George Muenchow re : Nominee for Shakopee Community Services Advisory Council c] Link Variance Appeal d] Mary Susan Rein re : Bluff Avenue Assessment - File for Final Assessment Hearing e] League of Minnesota Cities re : All Saver Certificates and Industrial Revenue Bonds f] National League of Cities re : Pending Legislation - 1 . Resolution No. 1883 , Objecting to Congress ' Proposed Restrictions to Commercial Industrial Revenue Bonds 2. Resolution No . 1884, Objecting to the Transfer of Small City Community Development Block Grants Administered • from the Federal to the State Level and Warning Against the Creation of a New State Bureaucracy 4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 6] Old Business : a] Sale of Ambulance and Assignment of Proceeds b] Approval of St. Mary' s Association Property c ] Report on Hospital Parking Lot Detention Area d] Proposed Block 57 Agreement - Discussion Only e ] Valley Fair Inspection f] Drainage on Abondoned Chicago, Milwaukee , St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Right-of-way; North of JEJ Addition and Scenic Heights Additions g] VIP Assessment Alternatives 7 ] Planning Commission Recommendations : a] Zoning Ordinance Amendment bi Re oniiig for 1 & 44 Liquor 8] l*citine Resolutions and Ordinances : Res . NO . 182 , A Resolution of Appreciation to Phyllis Knudsen b] Res . No . 1885, A Resolution Granting Repayment of Assessments (to be provided Tuesday - Jerry Wampach repayment) c ] Res . No . 1879, A Resolution Accepting Work on the Minnesota Street Project (Fill and Grading) d] Res . No . 1878, A Resolution Accepting Work on the 80-5 Public Improvement Program (3rd Avenue Watermain) TENTATIVE AGENDA Page -2- - July 21 , 1981 e ] Res . No. 1881 , A Resolution Accepting Work on the 1 , 500,000 Gallon Elevated Tank f ] Res . No. 1859 , A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids - Bluff Avenue g ] Res . No. 1886 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1851 and Authorizing Additional Improvement Projects to be Financed by the $940,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1981 , Series A h ] Res . No. 1870, A Resolution Approving the By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association (tabled July 7th) i ] Ord. No. 69, Change in Public Hearing Requirements 9] New Business : a] Approval of the Bills b] Authorization for Payment - VIP Condemnations c] Unassessed Project Costs for 1977 d] Tax Increment Projects e ] Annual Financial Disclosure Report - Housing and Redevelopment Authority 10] Consent Business : a] Accept Resignation of Jim Raduenz from the Industrial Commercial Commission (letter to be provided Tuesday) b] Appoint Paul Wermerskirchen and John Manahan to the Industrial Commercial Commission 11 ] Other Business : 12 ] Adjourn to Tuesday, July 28, 1981 at 7 : 30 P.M. for Joint Work Session with Cable Communications Committee and 5 Year Capital Improvement and 5 Year Capital Equipment Plan John K. Anderson City Administrator • Z OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 30, 1981 Mayor Harbeck called the meeting to order at 7:30 F.M. with Cncl. Leroux, Reinke, Lebens and Hullander present. Absent was Cncl. Colligan. Also present were Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney and John K. Anderson, City Administrator. Reinke/Hullander moved to approve the minutes of June 9, 1981, June 16, 1981 and June 23, 1981 as kept. Motion carried unanimously. The City Admr. stated that this informational meeting regarding the 1981 sewer rates was called to explain the increase in rates, the change in billing procedures and the replacement of the flat rate with the winter quarter actual usage. Discussion was held regarding reductions in winter quarter usage and classification of leaks, etc. in trying to establish policy regarding sewer rates. Hullander/Harbeck moved to direct staff to replace any "winter quarter"usage due to uncontrollable leaks, extraordinary usage, etc. by the customer's average monthly usage for the prior 12 months. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander/Leroux moved to direct staff to send Mr. Deering a letter stating that the City has reviewed his letter, but does not plan to change its rate structure. Motion carried unanimously. Dick Berg and Ray Ottig, Metropolitan Waste Management Board representatives, presented figures and attempted to explain the increases in sewer service charges, stating that much of the increases are due to increased costs to them for electricity, fuel, chemi- cals and all that they have to do to comply with the stricter standards for air and water. The Mayor questioned the inequities in the districts and asked for comparable figures for Districts 3, 4, and 5, which Mr. Berg said he would send. Mr. Ottig stated the Waste Commission had recommended phasing out the Chaska Treatment Plant, but Metro Council did not want to do that as they saw an interceptor along open country as en- couraging development. The representatives told the Council that the place to be involved to hold the prices down was when water and air standards are being set, that input is needed at that time. They invited all to a meeting in Minnetonka on July 8. Reinke/Leroux moved to table the Shakopee House liquor license application until the Ass't City Attorney would be present, which was expected about 9:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Reinke moved to open the public hearing on the proposed improvement of County Rd. 16 by Sanitary Sewer and Watermain 80-4. Motion carried unanimously. The City Admr. stated that this project had been extended for more than one year, and therefore, according to law, another public hearing has to be held. The delay was in acquiring rights-of-way. The City Engineer explained that the assessment technique proposed at this time is significantly different from the originally proposed technique. The new figure does include the trunk water main assessment. The revised total project cost is $310,170. Discussion followed regarding not assessing a parcel of land north of Co. Rd. 16. Mr. Lindstrand was present and asked about change in assessment amounts.and area. Mr. Howard Schmitt said he was the only homeowner in the assessment area and asked if the project could be stopped short of his property. The Mayor asked if there were any other comments from the audience, and there were none. The City Engineer stated that Monday morning, July 13, 1981 at 10:30 P.M. bids would be opened. Hullander/Reinke moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council June 30, 1981 Page 2 Hullander/Leroux offered Resolution No. 1868, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement for County Road 16 Utilities, Project No. 80-4, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Hullander/Leroux moved to direct staff to prepare the necessary resolution for the salefor of Old Wastewater Treatment Plant property to Mr. Wallace Bakken f r $4000 plus appraisal expense of $700. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Leroux/Harbeck offered Resolution No. 1869, A Resolution Requesting That the Metro- politan Waste Control Commission Complete the Second Stage Reconveyance of Part of the Land Containing the Old Shakopee Wastewater Treatment Plant to the City of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Harbeck/Hullander moved to put the $4000 received for the Old Shakopee Wastewater Treatment Plant in the PIR fund. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. The City Assessor passed out the appraisal report prepared by Peter J. Patchin & Assoc. regarding the Kmart warehouse 1981 assessment. Mr. Peter Patchin informed Council regarding the market value of the property and how he arrived at his figures. He stated heafelt the current fair market value of the property is $17,970,000. He discussed the cost, market and income approaches to computing value. The City Assessor stated he had just received the appraisal report today and there- fore would like some more time to study it and ask questions and would like Council to read it and respond, and therefore would request that a delay be requested of the County Board of Review. Peter Patchin explained that the majority of the difference in value was attributable to a computerized conveyor system which is considered non-taxable process equipment under state law. There were also some excess costs in the building which weren't necessary for this area. Harbeck/Reinke moved to request the County Board of Review to table the Kmart assess- ment on July 6, 1981. Motion carried unanimously. Harbeck/Leroux moved to table discussion of the Kmart assessment until the July 7, 1981 Council meeting. ;lotion carried unanimously. Leroux/Hullander moved to authorize payment of $75.00 to Leonard and Edna Wangerin and $1832.50 to Certain-Teed Corp. as final agreed settlements on the VIP condemnations. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Hullander/Reinke moved to authorize appropriate City officials to request the firm of Thomsen, Nybeck, Herbst and Johnson, P.A. to deliver to Adrian E. Herbst the full and complete file of the City of Shakopee so that he may continue to provide legal representation to the City relative to the adoption of an ordinance for a cable com- munications franchise for Shakopee. Harbeck/Hullander moved to amend the motion to include that Mr. Herbst re-sign the waiver of conflict of interest now that he is changing firms. Motion to amend carried unanimously. Main motion as amended carried unanimously. Mr. Jerome Jaspers and Jim Streefland presented to the Council the annual financial report of the HRA and the City of Shakopee and highlighted various funds and balances. Cncl. Reinke asked about using excess fund balances of the HRA Tax Increment Funds for other NRA related matters, or if it is required that the bond be retired at a faster rate. , The City Admr. will research this item. Cncl. Hullander had to leave early, and therefore asked to have the discussions re- garding the Shakopee House liquor license application on the agenda at this time so he could have input before he left. Hullander/Leroux moved to take the Shakopee House liquor license application off the table. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council !/ June 30, 1981 Page 3 Discussion was held regarding the advisability and legality of issuing a liquor license to the applicant while the property taxes of the business are not paid. The Ass't City Attorney elaborated on the letter he had submitted on this subject in which he recommended a compromise on the payment of the property taxes by the property owner. He stated that the liquor license was granted last year even though the property taxes were not paid and the property owner assumed that this year the case would be the same. He pointed out that this was an over-sight by the City and it should be corrected in the future. He stated there was no authority in the ordi- nance for a waiver of the payment of the property taxes, but he recommended it as a practical matter as the owner was not able to pay all the taxes at this short notice. He said he didn't think the establishment would be able to operate without its liquor license, and then it would be longer until the City would be able to re- ceive the taxes. He also noted that the City has had no problem with this establish- ment relative to the liquor license, and this should be kept in mind relative to is- suing a liquor license. There was further discussion relative to whether the requirement of paying property taxes before the issuance of a liquor license was an ordinance or state law require- ment, and the Ass't City Attorney stated he would research that item. The City Attorney said he thought the recommendation of the Ass't City Attorney was reasonable and sympathetic, but did not think it would be possible for the Council to grant a liquor license when the property taxes are not paid as long as this ordi- nance is in effect. He said if the Council wanted to do that, it would have to re- peal the ordinance. He said it could be construed as misfeasance of office to ignore this provision of the ordinance. Further discussion was held. Hullander/Leroux moved to adopt the recommendations of the Ass't City Attorney to give Mr. Strupeck until December 31, 1981 to make the delinquent property tax payments for1979 and 1980. Leroux/Hullander moved to amend the motion that in addition Mr. Strupeck be apprised that 1981 and the first half of 1982 taxes must also be paid by May 31, 1982 prior to any issuance of a liquor license for July 1, 1982. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens and Reinke opposed. Main motion as amended Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Leroux, Harbeck Noes; Reinke, Lebens Motion carried. Discussion was held regarding calling in the bonds previously issued for the liquor license because of the delinquency of the tax payments. The Ass't City Attorney stated that from his knowledge the bonding companies will not pay the bond unless sued by the City and they pay the bonds on the day the case goes to Court, which is probably a one year process. The Mayor asked Mr. Strupeck if he or his attorney had any comments to make. Mr. John Manahan stated he was representing Mr. Strupeck in this matter and stated he cannot make the tax payments at this time and believes the establishment cannot remain oper- able without its liquor license. He believes the compromise recommended protects the City and allows the business to remain open at the same time. He stated he would be scared about the ramifications to the owner if the bonds were called in at this time. Harbeck/Leroux moved to table the motion on calling in the bonds in this matter. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander/Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an on sale liquor license to the Shakopee House with the stipulations placed on it tonight regarding payment of property taxes. Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Leroux, Harbeck Noes; Lebens, Reinke Motion carried. Hullander/Leroux moved to approve the application and grant a Sunday liquor license to the Shakopee Douse with the stipulations placed on it to night regarding payment of property taxes. Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Leroux, Harbeck Noes; Lebens, Reinke Motion carried. Shakopee City Council June 30, 1981 Page 4 Harbeck/Leroux moved for a five minute recess at 10:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Hullander asked to be excused at this time. Leroux/Harbeck moved to re-convene at 10:40 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Jim Streefland further highlighted several items in the financial reports of the HRA and the City of Shakopee. He stated he will be sending a management letter outling any recommendations he has regarding this financial report. Harbeck/Leroux moved to accept the 1980 Annual Financial Report of the City of Shakopee. Motion carried unanimously. Harbeck/Leroux moved to recess for a closed session with the City's Attorneys re- garding a lawsuit. Discussion was held with the attorneys regarding the ice arena litigation. No action was taken. Leroux/Reinke moved to re-convene at 11:35 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. A brief discussion was held with the Ass't City Attorney in which he stated that until he receives the answers to Interrogatories on the 15 property tax cases, he doesn't know much about them. He will report on each of them when further informa- tion is received. Leroux/Reinke offered Ordinance No. 68, An Ordinance Establishing Comprensive Standards, Regulations and Procedures Governing the Erection, Use and Display of Devices, Signs and Symbols Serving as Visual Communicative Media to Persons upon Public Right of Way; Prescribing Penalties for Non-compliance or Violations Hereof and Repealing all of Section 4.30 of the Shakopee City Code Entitled "Signs- Construction, Maintenance and Permits", and moved its adoption. Harbeck/Lebens moved to amend Ordinance No. 68 to change Subd. 3 "W" to read "Signs for municipal facilities shall be exempt from size restrictions." Motion on amend- ment carried with Cncl. Leroux opposed. Main motion as amended Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Cncl. Reinke informed Council that Jim hauer has bought the property behind the Public Works building from the Farmington Assoc. , and wants to know if the City is interested in purchasing it. The City Admr. was instructed to inform him about the Council's last action on that parcel. Leroux/Harbeck moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:50 P.M. John K. Anderson Acting City Clerk Diane S. Beuch Recording Secretary ?s • OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 7, 1981 Mayor Harbeck called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. with Cncl. Hullander, Leroux, Colligan, Reinke and Lebens present. Also present were Julius A. Coller, II , City Attorney; Lou VanHout, SPUC Manager; Larry Martin, City Assessor and John K. Anderson, City Admr. Hullander/Leroux moved to send a letter to the Minnesota Renaissance Festival support- ing the location of this festival ltheconributo atin tothecommunity cognizing increased organizationstrade to the merchants in the area and Motion carried unanimously. Hullander/Lebens moved to refer the letter received from the Director of Energy Pro- grams dated June 24, 1981 regarding the Minnesota Conference of Local Enery Officials to SPUC for their information. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held about two complaints regarding the sewer charges and whether they would constitute special cases for consideration. Hullander/Colligan moved that the claim of Mr. and Mrs. Timothy S. Lindgren be denied because in the Council's estimation the situation is not extraordinary. Motion carried with Cncl. Leroux opposed. Harbeck/Colligan moved to deny the claim of Al Unze for special consideration of his sewer charge. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens opposed. Cncl. Hullander initiated discussion regarding a large hole in the pavement on Hwy. 101 just east of the stoplight at Marschall Road and asked about responsibility for repair. The City Admr. stated he has discussed this problem with the SPUC Manager, who has been talking to someone relative to it. The SPUC Manager reported that he has talked to people at the State department and with Loren Habegger, developer of Halo 1st Add'n, who indicated he would have it fixed immediately. The City Atty indicated it would be proper for the City to fix the hole and charge the developer with the expense after notifying the developer that if it is not fixed within a certain time period this would be done. Al Palmquist appeared and stated that he has written a book The Minnesota Connection upon which a movie is now being made and they are looking for sites for filming seg- ments of this movie. He explained they want to film three segments in Shakopee and asked for permission from the Council. These segments would be a Courthouse scene, a chase scene and the burning of an office facade. He further explained they have an insurance binder for $1,000,000, they want to use Lewis Street for the chase scene, the Shakopee Fire Dept. would participate in the fire scene as a drill and the Police Chief indicated there would be enough volunteers for security duty and the movie com- pany would pay their wages. Hullander/Leroux moved to approve the movie production filming of"The Minnesota Con- nection" in Shakopee if the insurance coverage is deemed in order by the City Attorney, scheduled for Monday, July 13, 1981. The City Atty stated he would require the Certificate of Insurance with the City of Shakopee named as insured to check over. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Colligan reported there is a Hazardous Waste informational seminar scheduled in Jordan on Wednesday between 4:00 and 10:00 P.M. , and anyone who has questions is wel- come. Leroux/Hullander moved that the City Council support the Mayor's letter to the Metro- politan Waste Control Commission introducing the idea of the Old PCI plant site as a volunteered site for hazardous waste processing, and that Cncl. Colligan deliver it to the Commission. Motion carried. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Shakopee City Council - July 7, 1981 Page 2 • Cncl. Leroux reported on a meeting scheduled for July 15, 1981 at 7:00 p.m. regarding sludge criteria for landfilling. Shakopee keeps getting included as a landfill site, although there will be no landfill sites, just spreading in Shakopee. He suggested contacting Mr. Frechette and ask him for his representation on our behalf, because of his expertise. The Mayor directed the City Admr. to contact the County Administrator for his permission. Cncl. Leroux also mentioned that he will now be the liaison for the Planning Commission and included in its agenda for the next meeting is a public hearing for a mining and mineral extraction conditional use permit. Mr. Robert Pulscher, President of Springsted, Inc. , opened sealed bids for $940,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds of 1981, Series A. The bids were: Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood $555,845 interest rate of 9.9258 American National Bank $553,835 9.8899 Bank Northwest $551,422.50 9.8468 First Bank St. Paul $550,663 9.8332 Mr. Pulscher stated that although the market is in terrible condition and the bids are high, there is nothing to indicate it will be coming down soon, and since the bids are comparable to what is happening elsewhere he recommends accepting the low bid of First Bank St. Paul. Harbeck/Leroux moved to accept First Bank St. Paul's bid of $550,663 at the interest rate of 9.8332 for the $940,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds. Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Reinke, Leroux, Colligan, Harbeck Noes; Lebens Motion carried. Hullander/Leroux offered Resolution No. 1877, A Resolution Authorizing Issuance, Awarding Sale, Prescribing the Form and Details and Providing For the Payment of $940,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1981, Series A, and moved its adop- tion. The City Admr. summarized the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Reinke, Leroux, Colligan, Harbeck Noes; Lebens Motion carried. Mr. Pulscher stated that Shakopee's "A" rating was confirmed and he was told the reason Shakopee does not receive an "Al" rating was because of the general socio- economic conditions of all of Scott County. Mr. Pulscher would recommend going directly to New York to present a pictoral over-view of the City to try to get the rating upgraded. Discussion followed on possibilities for presentations. The Mayor requested the City Admr. to report back about how this money is to be assigned as far as what needs to be spent right away and how much can be put in interest bear- ing savings until it needs to be expended. Leroux/Hullander moved to authorize Change Order No. 1 on Water Supply Well No. 6, Contract No. 81-1 KT, which adds $3,993.04 to the total contract amount making a revised total of $78,608.04. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Discussion was held with the SPUC Manager regarding the memo from George Muenchow, Director of Community Services, re the electric charge of $1,000 per month for Riverside Park. Cncl. Hullander stated he has received many phone calls on this subject with all stating that this policy would eliminate any usage of those lights in the future. The SPUC Manager discussed the rates and justification for demand charges. The Mayor stated that Riverside Park does not belong to Shakopee, but is leased for $1 per year from the State. It was exchanged for Tahpah Park, and the lights were sup- posed to be moved there under an agreement. At one time the Jaycees explored moving the lights to Tahpah but decided they would not be satisfactory, and it would be more worthwhile to purchase new lights for Tahpah. At that time the Jaycees were willing to expend some monies for this purpose. The SPUC Manager stated he will be doing some further research on rates and procedures used in other communities, and will report back with his findings. Hullander/Leroux moved to authorize staff to purchase a rubber mat for the kitchen at the Senior Citizens Multipurpose Center at a cost not to exceed $135.00, and direct any remaining funds contributed to the Center to general operating expenses. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Shakopee City Council July 7, 1981 Page 3 Harbeck/Colligan moved to table discussion of transit services for Shakopee and to invite Ms. Kincannon, our representative , t be present at the August 4, 1981 Council meeting to discuss these services. Motion carried unanimously. The City Admr. informed Council that a first draft ordinance has been completed re cable communications and the Ad Hoc Committee has requested a joint meeting on July 28, 1981 to discuss it. The City Council agreed to the joint meeting and set a public hearing on August 11, 1981 to present the Request for Proposals and draft ordinance to the public. The Mayor asked if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to present anything to the Council that was not on the agenda. Jerry Wampach asked if it was possible for him to receive back his assessment paid for the Holmes Street improvement last September, which he pre-paid to avoid the penalty. Because the appeals have not been settled, he would like this refund now. Leroux/Lebens moved to re-imburse Jerry Wampach his pre-paid assessment if we have the concurrance of the Ass't City Attorney. Motion carried. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Harbeck/Hullander moved to set the public hearing regarding the Holmes Street assess- ment on August 25, 1981 at 8:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. The City Assessor discussed the Hauer Trail and Bluff Avenue preliminary appraisal reports to clarify the information. Discussion was also held regarding the new policy of automatically raising valuation of a property by 25% if after tagging and letters, a property owner will not allow the assessor's office to inspect the premises. Hullander/Leroux moved to recommend to the Scott County Board of Review that the 1981 market value of the K-Mart Distribution Center be placed at an assessor's market value of $16,136,500. Marty Belowitz stated he is representing Kmart and they realize they will be assessed at a higher rate because they have locked themselves into this figure, and this is acceptable to them. Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Reinke, Leroux, Colligan, Harbeck Noes; Lebens Motion carried. Harbeck/Lebens moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the Pro- fessional Services Agreement with Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. for an Infiltration/Inflow Analysis for Shakopee in the amount of $36,996. Motion carried • with Cncl. Leroux opposed. Harbeck/Hullander moved to authorize the City Admr. to issue an authorization to the consultant to proceed in the event climatic conditions are more appropriate for the cnnduct of an Infiltration/Inflow Analysis. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Hullander moved to approve the application and grant an On Sale 3.2 beer license to Stagecoach Stores, Inc. , Highway 101 and County Road 89, from July 15, 1981 to June 30, 1982. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander/Harbeck moved to specify that damages in the amount of $1,900.00, not as penalty, but as liquidated damages for 19 days be deducted from the retainage owed Richard Knutson, Inc. , 201 Travelers Trail, Burnsville, Minnesota, in contract for Eastview 1st Addition Improvement Division 1, Contract 80-2AHarbeck Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Lebens, Reinke, Colligan, Noes; None Abstain: Leroux Motion carried. Harbeck/Colligan moved to direct appropriate City officials to place the balance of $5,654.41 due Richard Knutson, Inc. (80-2 Eastview 1st Addition Improvement) in an interest-bearing escrow account until the claim by Mr. William Chard for damages as a result of delay in the contract is settled. Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Lebens, Reinke, Colligan, Harbeck Noes; None Abstain: Leroux Motion carried. 1 Shakopee City Council July 7, 1981 Page 4 • Harbeck/Hullander moved to authorize proper City officials to execute Change Order No. 2 for the Holmes Street Reconstruction Project 80-3 to increase the total by $13,750.00. Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Lebens, Leroux, Colligan, Harbeck Noes; Reinke Motion carried. Hullander/Colligan moved for a 5 minute recess at 9:45 P.M. Motion carried with Cncl. Leroux opposed. Colligan/Lebens moved to re-convene at 9:50 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held regarding policy on the administration of construction contract change orders. Harbeck/Hullander moved to establish September 15, 1981 as a date to again review the policy on change orders. Motion carried unanimously. Reinke/Colligan offered Resolution No. 1874, A Resolution Authorizing Execution of Quit Claim Deed, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Hullander offered Resolution No. 1870, A Resolution Approving the By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association, and moved its adoption. Discussion followed on a minor change pointed out by the City Admr. Hullander/Leroux moved to table Resolution No. 1870 for clarification of the change. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander/Colligan offered Resolution No. 1876, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1571 Adopting A Personnel Policy for the City of Shakopee, and moved its adoption. Reinke/Hullander moved to amend Resolution No. 1876 to add to PART 2 a No. 2 which would read "That Section 8 entitled Vacation Leave With Pay, Subdivision 1 entitled Amount be amended to read: provided the employee leave for no more than one year." Motion carried with Cncl. Colligan opposed. Reinke/Harbeck moved to amend Resolution No. 1876 to delete PART 3. Motion to amend carried unanimously. Discussion ensued regarding further limiting vacation time and pre-sceduling vacation. Main motion as amended carried unanimously. Leroux/Hullarsler offered Resolution No. 1875, A Resolution Amending the 1981 Pay Schedule, and moved its adoption. Discussion followed regarding merits and advan- tages of using a temporary employment service for temporary positions. The City Admr. was directed to look into this option. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Hullander/Leroux moved to place the letter from Darwin Hentz dated June 6, 1981 re removal of no-parking signs along service road be placed on file and direct staff to advise Raceway Park, Inc. that the "No Parking" signs will not be removed. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Reinke moved that any notice required for public hearings by Section 6.22(6) or 6.31(4) be changed to read "the City Council meeting following publication in the official newspaper." Motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney informed Council that the Code would have to be amended and Council directed him to draft the necessary ordinance. Hullander/Lebens moved to approve the proposed two year lease agreement between the City and Rick Wolfe commencing July 15, 1981 for $250.00 per month. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Harbeck/Reinke moved to recommend to the County that they adopt the Sewage ordinance under the provision of the Community Health Service's Act (Option #2). Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Hullander moved to instruct City staff to prepare necessary ordinances for Council review and action, upon adoption of the County's proposed Ordinance under the Community Health Service's Act. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander/Leroux moved to nominate John Manahan and Paul Wermerskirchen to fill the openings in the ICC. Motion carried unanimously. Hullander/Colligan moved the consent business: '" • Shakopee City Council July 7, 1981 Page 5 p� 1. Approve the application and grant temporary On Sale 3.2 beer licenses to the Shakopee Jaycees for Tahpah Park Ball Fields for the weekends of July 18 and 19 and July 25 and 26, 1981. 2. Present to the Rotary Club officials a Certificate of Commendation to the Rotary Club of Shakopee, as prepared by City Staff, in recognition of $450 contributed by the Club to equip the Shakopee Senior Multipurpose Center. Motion carried unanimously. Harbeck/Leroux moved to have the matter of the collection of the Shakopee House $3000 bond stay on the table until January 5, 1982. Roll Call : Ayes; Hullander, Leroux, Colligan, Harbeck Noes; Lebens, Reinke Motion carried. The Mayor informed Council what is contemplated by the County for redistricting to get a more even population representation and the assistance they would like from the City in splitting existing wards. Shakopee can't change wards or precincts, but it can split them. He proposes to split Ward 3 and Ward 4 to allow for logical representation. These County Commissioner boundaries would be set for 10 years and would be designed to allow for anticipated population growth by having the lessor population in those rapidly growing areas so the district would become more balanced in later years. The City Admr. briefly informed Council of a couple of informational items. Hullander/Harbeck moved to waive the building fee for the Shakopee Elementary School for library remodeling. Motion carried unanimously. Reinke/Colligan moved to adjourn to 7:30 P.M. July 14, 1981. Harbeck/Colligan moved to amend to adjourn to 7:30 P.M. on July 14, 1981 with a work session at 6:30 P.M. .Motion carried with Cncl. Leroux opposed. Main motion as amended carried with Cncl. Leroux opposed. Meeting adjourned at 11:10 P.M. John K. Anderson Acting City Clerk Diane S. Beuch Recording Secretary SpTA 3a. 0,,,NE _ �,. � .� ,�,�ce � Festi ,�../ a1. _ay, 4. fi 4l 4 (TM July 9, 1981 John K. Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 E. First Ave. Shakopee, ISM 55379 Dear John: Thank you for your letter of July 8th concerning the action of the City Council in support of the Renaissance Festival remaining in the Shakopee area. We have always enjoyed a good relationship with the City of Shakopee and its residents over the seven years the Festival has been in the area. I would like to get together with you in the near future to discuss our immed- iate plans for our Shakopee site and to address some of the concerns which have led us in search of a location elsewhere in the Twin Cities area. Primarily, we are concerned about the effect of traffic generated by the Renaissance Festi- val on the growing community of Shakopee and the road systems supporting the city. We were encouraged by the actions of the Scott County Board of Commissioners in adopting the official mapping of the proposed 169 Shakopee by-pass. The imple- mentation of that road would greatly aid our visitors in reaching our present site south of Shakopee. Again, we appreciate the actions of the City Council and I look forward to getting together with you. Sincerel ,/ .. ._ —___ e d J. Co rigann eneral anager RECEIVED FJC:lnh JUL 13 1981 cm OF SHAKOPEE Route 3 • Box 117 • Shakopee,Minnesota - 55319 - 612.445.7361 3 b 'tokupee Totnirtunitu eruires 129 Levee Drive Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Phone 445-2742 Community Education • Parks • Recreation • Adult Education July 7, 1981 Mr. John Anderson, City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Mn. 55379 SUBJECT: NOMINEE FOR SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL Dear Friend: This letter is being written to you in your capacity as top Executive Officer of Shakopee City Council If we have made an error we would appreciate you calling our office right away (445-2742) and informing us who we should be contacting. We also would like for you to pass this letter along to that person. If we have made the correct contact . . . please read on! The Shakopee Community Services Board has been in existence 27 years attempting to serve the community of Shakopee as best it can in the area of parks, recreation, and in recent years adult education. The department is jointly supported by School District #720 and the City of Shakopee. During the past eight years an Advisory Council has been in existence to give direction and support for these programs. Recently the Community Services Board Agreement (Charter) was updated and the responsibilities of the Community Services Advisory Council were re—defined. We are excited about the potential that can happen because of this. First and foremost the Advisory Council will no longer be concerned about business matters. They now have five specific objectives: 1. Identify the needs of the community. 2. Analyze these needs. 3. Provide a method to meet these needs. 4. Suggest ways that local organizations can assist in fulfilling these needs. 5. Promote Cooperation. This Advisory Council is scheduled to meet three times a year possibly on the 2nd Thursdays of October, January, and April at 6:00 p.m. The Advisory Council will consist of representative citizens of the community appointed by the Community Services Board. Your organization has been recommended to provide a nominee from your membership. Would you please seriously consider this and just as soon as possible inform our office of yourdecision. The Community Services Board would like to for— malize these appointments at its September 21st Meeting. P.S. Doug Reeder was the last Sincerely, representative of the City Council. Ain 410%lovvslov.r.' George . Muenchow, Director A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954 3(2, MEMO TO: John Anderson City Administrator FROM: Jane Wostrel Secretary - Engineering & Planning RE: Link Variance Appeal DATE: July 16, 1981 We have just received an appeal to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals decision made July 9, 1981. This appeal is being made to the 5 foot front yard setback variance off of 10th Avenue; 8 foot front yard setback variance off of County Road 17 and the 12 foot rear yard setback variance which were all granted approval by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Action Requested: City Council move to set the appeal public hearing to be heard by Council for August 4, 1981 at 8:00 PM. jiw Attachment: Letter of Appeal July 15, 1981 t- ilvFD JUL 1 6 1981 City Council cry y Shakopee, MN ,A1AKOPEE On July 9, 1981, the Planning Commission of Shakopee granted three easements on a parcel of property owned by Kermit Lindemeyer on the Northeast corner of 10th Street and Maraball Rawl. The easement permits the building of twelve Condominiums on the property by Link Builders. A number of interested neighbors attended the meeting. We feel our concerns were not considered. We were not given adequate information and our questions were not answered. We request the City Council to review this Planning Commission decision and not allow the easements. Among our concerns on this project are the following: No traffic impact study has been made. This is a very busy four- way stop corner. It is a heavy pedestrian corner serving Elementary and Junior High School students. The addition of twelve families with their automobiles, utility and service vehicles on a congested piece of property could create an unsafe condition. We feel the builder/developer wants to build more units than the size of the parcel will accommodate. The fact they are asking for approximately 5, 000 square feet of variances indicates an effort to over populate the piece. There was no mention made of public sidewalk along Marshall Road, the properties west side. No consideration had been given to a drainage and utilities easement on the east side of the parcel . The lots adjoining to the east have easements for this purpose. Because it was obvious the decision on this property was made before the public hearing began, we feel there was no consideration given to the impact of this development on the neighborhood. Our questions were never satisfactorly answered. We were told to accept this or we could end up with something less suitable - such as a high rise or rental property. We see this as intimidation. For these and other reasons, we request that this variance not be granted and that any development of this property be done without set back variances . Respectfully, Signatures for the attached letter addressed to the City Council of Shakopee NAME ADDRESS 26 i_ t , , -1_... L.' ? 5-2 jell-q..9-c_6-,,,e_. • - -t 62.1(Z4 f X0(5 t"A' W-GrikAARA / 61 D k c �k 1d 2/1_t_aa7,4zp.je 75y / i /li„,i 4„,.,,,,„„..._-, ,6 7 '4 ' i 0 9 ( 732 a - .f,- - ifir -,..,,,,,,,, ).,3 7 ,,,/ , c/i. g32 „*Yl1 ik .•► v2P91, 3c/ June 28, 1981 City Council and Mayor City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear City Council and Mayor: This letter is in response to the notice of hearing that was held on the proposed public project 81-2 on Bluff Street. My uncle, Joseph J. Kopp, deceased in March on 1981, owned Lot 1, Block 17 and Dakota Street vacated between Lot 1, Block 17 and Lot 6, Block "A". This property is now in an estate and I have been appointed by Probate Court as the Personal Represent- ative of that estate. As a result of this appointment I have a responsibility to the heirs to protect whatever assets Mr. Kopp held. This property has a very low market value now and the estimates of the project which I was given ($4,000 per lot with an additional $3,300 for hook-up) seemed very high for that property. I therefore spoke with Mr. John Anderson and have also met with Mr. Houser and Mr. Spurrier. We looked at the property mentioned above and agreed that the land north of the 30 foot setback is in the 100 year flood- way. We have also agreed that the assessment would not increase the value of the property as the lots are unbuildable. This prop- erty is, at present, also zoned multiple family dwelling and the lots no not even meet the size requirement for a sinble family dwelling. I am therefore requesting, as representative of this estate, that this assessment not be levied on this property as it will not in- crease the value of the property. I would respectfully request the city council or a representative of same to inform me as to your decision in this matter. Very truly yours, 74-1 Mary u an Rein, Personal Representative Estate of Joseph J. Kopp 1007 Pierce Street Shakopee, Mn. 55379 CC: B. Spurrier CC: J. Anderson CC: Gary Thompson, Probate Attorney 3e- - a of . ' -ED III J• ill 0i9 1981 league of minnesota cit"rFs AKo pEE July 8, 1981 TO: Mayors, Managers and Clerks FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director RE: 1. "ALL SAVER CERTIFICATES" THREATEN MUNICIPAL BOND MARKET 2. CONGRESS MAY ACT TO RESTRICT OR PROHIBIT INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS Pending Federal Legislation 1, All Savers Certificates Congress may soon pass new legislation which would effectively increase municipal bond in- terest rates. Congress may authorize savings and loan institutions (and maybe even com- mercial banks) to issue "All Savers Certificates". These certificates would pay tax-free interest at 70% of the latest one-year treasury bill rate. They would be federally insured, and thereby more secure than municipal bonds. The current interest rate on these certificates would be about 10% - nearly the same as in- terest rates on long-term municipal bonds and more than three percentage points better than average rates cities pay for short-term notes. Large numbers of individual investors would be attracted away from municipal bonds and toward "All Savers Certificates". The Public Securities Association has estimated that state and local short-term borrowing costs could be increased by as much as 40%. Long-term borrowing costs would also increase. 2. Industrial Revenue Bonds The House Ways and Means Committee will soon vote on whether to accept or reject an amendment to Pres. Reagan's tax bill which would abolish all small issue IDB (also known as Industrial Revenue Bonds) financing after 1983, All IDB projects except manufacturing facilities (de- fined narrowly) , hospitals and nursing homes would have to be located in "pockets of poverty" until 1983. According to one Congressional source, Minnesota has no "pockets of poverty" under the proposed criteria. An alternative amendment is expected to be offered by Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri . It would allow small issue IDB's for entertainment, recreation and restaurant facilities only in targeted areas. Otherwise, local governments would continue to be able to use IDB's (after public hearings and special public purpose findings) as they see fit, Other alternatives may be considered which restrict IDB's in various ways - such as the areas where IDB projects can be built or the types of projects which may be built, OVER 300 hanover building, 480 cedar street, saint pau<, Lb-123222-2861 What You Can Do 1. All Savers Certificates Call or write Representative Bill Frenzel and Senator David Durenberger, and ask them to reconsider their position on this issue. Both have already voted in favor of "All Saver Certificates" in committee. Call or write your representative (if not Frenzel ) and Senator Rudy Boschwitz. Tell them your concern that this plan would cost local Minnesota taxpayers more money. It could also halt or delay important city improvement projects due to higher borrowing costs. Ask them to search for another way to aid troubled savings and loan associations without in- creasing costs for state and local governments . You must act now. This matter may reach the Senate floor as early as July 15. The U.S. Savings and Loan League has spent millions of dollars in a public campaign to pass this legislation. It is important that local officials act to prevent this from being steam- rolled through congress. 2. Industrial Revenue Bonds Contact Rep. Frenzel , who is on the House Ways and Means Committee and tell him your views on whether industrial revenue bonds should be restricted or prohibited. Or contact other Minnesota Congressmen and ask them to talk to their colleagues on the committee. PF:DS:glb MEMO TO : Mayor and Council FROM: John K. Anderson RE: Pending Legislation DATE: July 16, 1981 Introduction The Mayor has reviewed the two attached National League of Cities Legislative Hotlines and suggested that Council send the proposed resolution. Background The first resolution relates to the item on the bottom of page two of the June 26, 1981 Hotline regarding IRB ` s . The second resolution relates to item #1 on page one on the July 10, 1981 Hotline regarding State Small City Community Development Program. Action Requested 1 . Approve Resolution No. 1883 and direct staff to send it to the appropriate officials . 2 . Approve Resolution No. 1884 and direct staff to send it to the appropraite officials . Attachments JKA/jam RESOLUTION NO. 1883 A RESOLUTION OBJECTING TO CONGRESS ' PROPOSED RESTRICTIONS TO COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, has used Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRBs) successfully for both industrial and commer- cial projects , and WHEREAS , the availability of Federal and State government programs to assist in new development are becoming more and more limited, and WHEREAS, the financing costs for new job creating business ventures are more difficult to obtain with today's high interest rates . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: . 1 . Is opposed to forthcoming recommendations from the Ways and Means Oversite Subcommittee to restrict commercial IRB projects to so-called "pockets of poverty" as defined in the UDAG program. Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day of 1981 . - — Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST : City Administrator Approved as to form this day of , 1981 . City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 1884 A RESOLUTION OBJECTING TO THE TRANSFER OF SMALL CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS ADMINISTERED FROM THE FEDERAL TO THE STATE LEVEL AND WARNING AGAINST THE CREATION OF A NEW STATE BUREAUCRACY WHEREAS , House and Senate Conferees will be meeting to re- solve differences on housing and community development legislation passed as part of the omnibus budget reconciliation bills , and WHEREAS , the Small City Community Development Block Grant Program may be altered significantly by the proposed legislation, and WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee , Minnesota, has used the Small City Community Development Block Grant Program for housing for creating needed low and moderate income housing in Shakopee . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF. SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . That the City is concerned that no safeguards are included in the proposed legislation that would prevent the administrative bureaucracy eliminated at the Federal level from being duplicated at the State level , and 2 . That the City opposes this legislation because the program has worked satisfactorily and there is no need to shift its administration to the states . Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day of 1981 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Administrator Approved as to form this day of , 1981 . City Attorney • � �/ National 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Officers: l j ue�[f�A\� League Washington,D.C. Pres;dent William H.H III of 20004 Mayor Indianapolis.Indiana Cities (202)626-3000 First Vice President Cable:NLCITIES Mayor StGLoouis.yMissouri Second Vice President Ferd Harrison Mayor,Scotland Neck.North Carolina Immediate Pest President Jessie M.Ashley Councilwoman,Newport News,Virginia Executive Director Alan Beals NLC LEGISLATIVE HOTLINE RECEIVED 202-626-3275 JUL 021981 To: (1) Mayors and Managers of Direct MemberCi't9tsSHAKOPEE (2) Executive Directors of State Municipal Leagues (3) Steering Committee Members From: George Gloss, Director, Federal Relations Subject: NLC Legislative Letter: 26 June 1981 In this Issue: Tax Legislation Congress ° tax writing committees continue to work on an omnibus tax bill containing both good and bad news for cities. On the positive side, both the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senate Finance Committee have acted to reduce the potential impact on cities of the President' s business tax incentives. The Ways and Means Committee has approved two important provisions : First, it has provided for the depreciation of new buildings over a 15-year period, rather than over 10 years, as proposed by the Administration; and Second, it has increased the existing 10 percent rehabilitation tax credit to 15 percent for 30 • - year old buildings, 20 percent for 40-year old buildings, L...-td 25 percent for historic structures. The Senate Finance Committee has approved both the increased reha- bilitation tax credit and the 15-year depreciation schedule for new buildings. The tax credit provision is idential to that in the House; the depreciation provision, however, is more liberal than the House provision. NLC strongly supports both the increased rehabilitation credit and the longer depreciation period. These changes will give cities a better chance of competing for new business investment than the original Administration business tax incentives. Past Presidents:Tom Bradley Mayor,Los Angeles.California•Henry W.Maier,Mayor,Milwaukee.Wisconsin•Torn Moody Mayor.Columbus.Ohio•John P Ruusakis,Mayor.Savannah.Georgia•Directors:Stephen C.Bauer,Executive Director.League of Oregon Cities•Arne Boyum,Executive Director,North Dakota League of Cities•Charles G.Clack,Mayor.Garland.Texas•Malcolm Clark,Council Member.Port Arthur,Texas•Thomas J.Clark,Council Member. Long Beach,California•Joanne Collins,Council Member.Kansas City,Missouri•Thomas H.Cooke,Jr.,Mayor.East Orange.New Jersey•Wlllle DMI,Councilwoman.Richmond.Virginia•Woody Etherly,Jr.Council Member.Flint. Michigan•W.Elmer George,Executive Director,Georgia Municipal Association•Anne Gresham,Council Member,Grand Prairie.Texas•Paul E.Haney Council Meo,iber.Rochester,New York•George Latimer,Mayor.St.Paul. Minnesota•Ronald P Lurie,Commissioner.Las Vegas.Nevada•Ruth W.Messinger,Council Member,New York,New York•Robert H.Miller,Executive Director.South Dakota Municipal League•Ernest N.Mortal,Mayor.New Orleans. Louisiana•Mary Neuheuser,Council Member,Iowa City Iowa•Hernen Padilla,Mayor,San Juan,Puerto Rico•Kenneth Payne,Executive Director.Rhode Island League C Cities and Towns•Donald R.Peoples,Chief Executive.Butte. Montana•Jayne H.Plank,Mayor.Kensington.Maryland•Patricia Roach,Commissioner.Dayton,Ohio•Charles Royer,Mayor,Seattle.Washington•James T Ryan.Mayor,Arlington Heights.Illinois•Arthur E.Thuiilio,Mayor,Santa Fe. New Mexico•Fred Turnage,Mayor.Rocky Mount.North Carolina•John F Watkins,Executive Director,Alabama League of Municipalities•Daniel K.Whitehurst,Mayor,Fresno.California•Don A.Zimmerman,Executive Director,Arkansas Municipal League 2 • Unfortunately, both Committees have approved, in differing form, a new tax-exempt savings certificate that could have a serious impact on the municipal bond market. The Finance Committee version would permit all lending institutions to offer one-year savings certificates, the interest on which would be tax free up to $1, 000 per individual and $2, 000 per joint returns. The interest rate on these certificates would be set at 70 percent of the Treasury bill rate; at current Treasury rates, the certifi- cates would bear interest rates of about 10 percent. The Ways and Means Committee version is substantially similar; how- ever, it permits issuance of such certificates only by mortgage lending institutions, generally savings and loans and mutual savings banks. In addition, the Committee directed its staff to develop provisions to assure that funds raised through issuance of the tax- exempt certificates would be channelled into new mortgages. Although the exact impact of these new savings certificates on the municipal bond market is difficult to determine, it seems likely that they would compete directly with that market. Long-term tax exempt bonds are now paying about 10 percent, the rate that would be paid on the certificates; short-term bonds are paying about 7 percent. NLC urged the Ways and Means Committee to delay final action on the certificates until their impact on municipal finance could be care- fully evaluated; however, the desire to help the troubled savings and loan industry convinced the Committee to approve issuance of the certificates by a 29-3 vote. /, * * * * * * * * * * * * anally, the Ways and Means Oversight Subcommittee is expected to (� recommend shortly that restrictions on the issuance of industrial revenue bonds be included in the tax bill. In drawing up its proposal, the subcommittee decided that no limits should be placed on IRB ' s when they are used for industrial projects , but that commercial projects should be restricted to so-called "pockets of poverty" as defined in the UDAG program. This definition requires 70 percent of the residence> in the pocket to have incomes below 80 percent of the community ' s median income, with at least 30 percent having incomes below the national poverty level. For cities of 50 , 000 population or more, the pocket must contain at least 10, 000 persons or 10 percent of the jurisdiction' s population, whichever is less. For smaller cities, the pocket must contain 2, 500 persons or 10 percent of the jurisdiction' s population, whichever is more. Under the subcommittee ' s proposal, no new bonds could be issued after January 1, 1984, unless reauthorized by Congress. Other provisions require sales of all bonds to be reported and public hearings to be held prior to issuance of any bond. 3 3 • NLC ' s policy on IRB' s calls for limiting the issuance of the bonds to areas of physical and economic distress, generally more broadly defined than the pocket of poverty definition, and for industrial uses to be limited as well as commercial uses. City officials should express their concern over the potential impact of the tax-exempt savings certificates to Senators and Representa- tives while they are home for the recess , June 27 - July 5. In particular, all members of the Ways and Means Committee should be contacted on 202-225-3121. Rostenkowski (1ll) Conable (NY) Gibbons (Fla) Duncan (Tenn) Pickle (Tex) Archer (Tex) Cotter (Conn) Vander Jagt (Mich) Stark (Calif) Crane (Ill) Jones (Okla) Frenzel (Minn) Jacobs (Ind) Martin (NC) Ford (Tenn) Bafalis (Fla) Holland (SC) Schulze (Pa) Brodhead (Mich Gradison (Ohio) Jenkins (Ga) Rousselot (calif) Gephardt (Mo) Moore (La) Downey (NY) Heftel (Hawaii) Fowler (Ga) Guarini (NJ) Shannon (Mass) Russo (Ill) Pease (Ohio) Hance (Tex) Matsui (Calif) Bailey (Pa) 9 -3),Z ��� National 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue N W Officers: , [s tie e� League Washington,D.C. President of 20004 William H Hudnut III Mayor.Indianapolis Indiana �\-______./.\ Cities (202)626-3000 First Vice President Cable:NLCITIES Ferd Harrison Mayor,Scotland Neck North Carolina Second Vice President Charles Royer Mayor.Seattle,Washington Immediate Past President Jessie M Rattley Councilwoman.Newport News.Virginia Alan Be lk E xecuti a DirectorCOVED NLC LEGISLATIVE HOTLINE IFtx. 202-626-3275 ,AUL 13 19%1 Cit OF *4A_Op�E To: (1) Mayors and Managers of Direct Member Cities (2) Executive Directors of State Municipal Leagues (3) Steering Committee Members From: George Gross, Director, Federal Relations Subject: NLC Legislative Letter: 10 July 81 In this issue : Housing and Community Development Legislation This week House and Senate conferees will meet to resolve differences on housing and community development legislation passed as part of the omnibus budget reconciliation bills. There are four important differences between the House and Senate bills on which NLC urges _' ty officials to contact the conferees : (1) State Small City Community Development Program. ,The House bi,I adopted the Administration' s state small city community development program (optional in FY 82 , mandatory in FY 83) under which (a) states would receive 30 percent of CDBG funds for distribution to small cities; (b) the funds would be provided to states automatically, with states being required only to file a plan (subject to public review and comment) setting forth the intended use of funds; and (c) there would be no limit on the amount of grant funds states could use for administrative expenses. Past Presidents:Tom Bradley,Mayor.Los Angeles-California•Henry W.Maier,Mayor_Milwaukee Wisconsin•Tom Moody,Mayor,Columbus.Ono•John P.Rousakis,Mayor.Savannah, Georgia•Directors:Richard Arrington,Jr.,Mayor.Birmingham Alabama•Stephen C.Bauer,Executive Director League at Oregon Cities•Arne Boyum,Executive Director.North Dakota League of Cities•Charles G.Clack,Mayor Garland Texas•Malcolm Clark,Council Member,Port Arthur Texas•Thomas J.Clark,Council Member Long Beach,California•Joanne Collins, Council Member.Kansas City,Missouri•Thomas H.Cooke,Jr.,Mayor.East Orange New Jersey•Willie Dell,Councilwoman.Richmond Virginia•Woody Etherly,Jr.,Council Member Flint, Michigan•W.Elmer George,Executive Director.Georgia Municipal Association•Anne Gresham,Council Member Grana Prairie.Texas•Paul E.Haney,Council Member.Rochester,New York• George Latimer,Mayor.St.Paul.Minnesota•Ronald P.Lurie,Commissioner.Las Vegas.Nevada•Ruth W.Messinger,Council Member New York.New York•Robert H.Miller,Executive Director. South Dakota Municipal League•Ernest N.Morial,Mayor,New Orleans Louisiana•Mary Neuhauser,Council Memi•.er Iowa City Iowa•Hernan Padilla,Mayor San Juan Puerto Rico•Kenneth Payne,Executive Director,Rhode Island League of Cities and Towns•Donald R.Peoples.Chief Executive butte Montana•Jayne H.Plank,Mayor.Kensington,Maryland•Patricia Roach, Commissioner.Dayton.Ohio•James T.Ryan,Mayor Arlington Heights,Illinois•Arthur E.Trujillo,Mayor Santa Fe New Mexico•Fred Turnage,Mayor.Rocky Mount.North Carolina•John F. Watkins,Executive Director,Alabama League of Munrapahlies•Daniel K.Whitehurst,Mayor Fresno.California•Don A.Zimmerman,Executive Director.Arkansas Municipal League 1 2 3)4 The Senate bill would authorize a similar program, but with key differences. The program would be available only to states that (a) currently carry on community development activities; (b) provide technical aid to small cities for community - development; (c) work closely with local governments to set up the new state program; and (d) put up a 10 percent cash match of HUD funds and bear all administrative costs out of their own resources . NLC strongly opposes this Administration initiative. The existing HUD small cities community development program is working satis- factorily and no need has been demonstrated to shift its adminis- tration to states. Since a version of the Administration' s pro- posal__ 5.._in.._both..House an Sena e ..mrt'5;"however, NLC urges city officials to support the Senate vesion ._." -It-is hrghly preferable to the Housev.ez_sion__because. £,, recogni.zes tie need for a-strong commitment by states to community development problems (through the current activity, cash match, 'and administrative expense requirements) and provides for close cooperation with local governments in setting up the new program. These important require- ments are not in the House bill. (2) UDAG. The House bill incorporates UDAG into the CDBG program, with an earmarking of $500 million; the Senate bill keeps UDAG as a separate program, funding it at $500 million for FY 82 . NLC supports the. Senate' s separate treatment of UDAG, which all agree has been a hi hl successful _`-4 _eon" c g � proram for" st�irrt�ilating economic development activity _in (3) Housing Assistance. The House bill provides for 162, 000 section 8 end public housing units in FY 82 ; the Senate bill for 150, 000 units. NLC strongly supports the higher House amount, which is below the Administration' s recomme nits. These units are urgently needed in all cities. (4) Rent Control. The Senate bill would prohibit section 8 assis- tance for new or substantially rehabilitated units in any community with rent control on new or vacant units; the House bill does not contain this prohibition. NLC strong opposes this Senate prg- vision, which unjustifiably interferes with the rights of localities with respect to purely local matters. *House and Senate conferees on the HUD legislation have not yet been named. However, key members will include : Senators Jake Garn (R-Utah) , Dick Lugar (R-Ind) , and William Proxmire (D-Wisc) ; and Representatives St. Germain (D-RI) , Henry Gonzales (D-Tex) , Henry Reuss (D-Wisc) , William Stanton (R-Ohio) , and Chalmers Wylie (R-Ohio) . City officials should contact these Members directly or through their own Senators and Representatives to urge adoption of NLC positions. Senators may be reached on 202-224-3121; House Members on 202-225-3121. 60.0 • MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne Andre, Administrative Assistant RE : Sale of Ambulance and Assignment of Proceeds DATE: July 13 , 1981 Introduction The City has now sold the 1970 Ambulance previously leased to St. Francis Hospital . When the lease was terminated, the hospital requested that proceeds of the sale be provided to them to contribute to the purchase price of a new ambulance. The City Council must now act on this request . Background The attached memo of December 22 , 1981 provides further back- ground on this issue . Since that memo was written the Council opted to sell the ambulance previously leased to St. Francis Hosp- ital at the Hennepin County Auction. The ambulance was sold for $1000 minus $22 . 13 of direct auction costs for a net sale of $977 .87 . From these proceeds the City is required to designate $450 (the federal portion of the proceeds) to the purchase of some other public safety equipment or training. Examples of ac- ceptable expenditures include police radar, breathalyzer, public safety training movies or EMT training. Inventory of items pur- chased with these funds are maintained by the federal government and the City is required to report to the federal government any changes in status of such equipment (eg. sale or disposal) . Alternatives The City Council has the following options in response to the request by St . Francis Hospital that they be provided the proceeds from the sale of the ambulance : 1 . Donate the full $977 . 87 proceeds to the hospital . 2 . Donate $527 . 81 (Proceeds less federal portion) to the hospital . 3 . Donate some other amount to the hospital . 4. Do not donate any funds to the hopsital . Recommended Action Donate full $977 . 81 ambulance proceeds to St . Francis Hosp- ital toward purchase of new ambulance. Direct staff to satisfy federal regulations with purchase of radar equipment for police department as proposed in the 1982 Capital Equipment List . Enclosure JA/jam MEMO TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator FROM: Jeanne Andre , Executive Director RE : Sale of Ambulance Leased to St . Francis Hospital 4 DATE : ' December 22 , 1980 Introduction The City purchased an ambulance in 1970 which has been leased to St . Francis Hospital for emergency services . The hospital now wants to terminate the lease agreement , thereby leaving the City with the question of how to best dispose of the ambu- lance . Background In 1970 the City of Shakopee purchased an ambulance for the sum of $8 ,890 .00. Half of the funds for this purchase were provided by local business and service organizations . The other half of the funds were provided under a grant from the National Highway Safety Act , administered by the Minnesota State Department of Public Safety . Terms of the grant require that the vehicle be used as an ambulance and that proper main- tenance and insurance be provided for the vehicle . The City entered a lease agreement with St . Francis Hospital that indi- cated that the hospital would operate the ambulance and provide appropriate maintenance and insurance . The City still holds the registration of the vehicle . The hospital recently purchased a new ambulance . With this new ambulance and another ambulance purchased since 1970, the hospital no longer needs the City ambulance even for back-up . Therefore the hospital is terminating the lease agreement , which places the ambulance back in the control of the City . As the City has no interest in operating its own ambulance service , the most likely course of action is sale of the ambulance . The hospital has requested that the City donate proceeds of the sale of the ambulance to help defray the cost of the new ambu- lance , which cost $38 ,000. (See attached letter) . This seems like a reasonable request since funds originally contributed by local groups and businesses were intended to go toward the provision of ambulance services . However there are certain restrictions on the use of proceeds of the grant funds . Regula- tions regarding the sale of items purchased under a grant include the following provisions : 1 ) the City can collect 10% or $100 .00 (whichever is more) for the administrative expenses involved in the sale of the vehicle ; 2) after administrative expenses are subtracted from the proceeds , 507 of the remainder would belong to the City with no restrictions (because the City was responsible for providing a 507 match, in this case provided by local business and service organizations . ) ; 3) the other 507 of the proceeds must be spent by the City for a traffic safety expenditure . As an example, if the ambulance is sold for $1 ,000, $100 would go toward administrative expenses incurred in the sale of the vehicle , $450 would go directly to the City with no restrictions , and $450 would be required to be dedicated to expenditures for traffic safety. A donation to St . Francis Hospital for purchase of a new ambulance would not satisfy this last requirement . Examples of expenditures likely to be approved include : police training, traffic safety meetings , EMT training , radar equipment . Alternatives The City Council can keep the ambulance or arrange for its sale . If the ambulance is sold , the proceeds can be kept in the capital equipment development fund or the portion that the City controls can be donated to the hospital . Recommendation The City Council authorize the staff to take steps necessary to arrange for the sale of the ambulance . The City Council authorize the City Administrator to contact St . Francis Hospital and inform the Executive Director that the ambu- lance will be sold and the City Council plans to donate funds to the hospital to help defray the cost of the new ambulance . The exact amount of the donation to be determined by the amount recap- tured from the sale of the ambulance under the grant regulations . JA/jms { 6b MEMO TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Approval of St . Mary' s Association Property DATE: July 13 , 1981 Introduction As an element of the Block #57 Parking Lot Improvement Pro- ject , it was agreed by Council motion on May 5th that the Hos- pital and City would obtain independent gpraisals of the above mentioned property so that an appropriate acquisition cost could be determined. Appraisals The appraisal for the Hospital was prepared by Martin A. Walsh, 536 E. 8th Ave . Shakopee, and the appraisal for the City was pre- pared by LeRoy Houser. Mr. Walsh' s appraised value of the property was $106,700 and Mr. Houser' s $102 ,240 or $8. 60 per sq. ft vs $8.00 per sq. ft . The summary page of each appraisal report is attached and the full appraisals are on file at City Hall should anyone wish to review them. Alternatives 1 . Select one appraisal as the most appropriate value. 2 . Split the difference between the two appraisals - $104,470. 3 . Obtain an arbitrator to arrive at the most appropriate value as per the May 5th City/Hospital Agreement. Recommendation: Sr. Agnes , Mike Sortum and I have discussed the appraisals and we believe alternative #2 above is the most appropriate. I have reviewed the alternative with LeRoy Houser, our appraiser on the project , and he too agrees with alternative #2 . Action Requested By motion establish $104,470 as the acquisition price for the St. Mary' s Association Property in the Block #57 Parking Improvement Project . JKA/jam PROPERTY INCO E;:7WALYSIS COST ANALYSIS MARKET COMPARISON ANALYSIS l$RA 1/$4, 4pra/'sa�'s Telephone 612-445-2553 536 East 8th Avenue Shakopee , Minnesota Zip Code 55379 June 15, 1981 o /6 -Si ei St Francis Hospital Shakopee, Minn. 55379 -- Subject: Appraisal of St Mary's Assoc:iatinn Property Lot 10 & rJ 3U Ft of Lot 9 block 57, Or•izi.na.l Shale/ pee Att: Sister Agnes, Chief Administrator Dear Sister: In compliance with your request, I have completed an Appraisal of the above mentioned property. • An inspection of the premises and struct,H:rus s rade as needed for the report on June 13, 1981 . All the ('actors and forces that influence value for this property have l u n (h)Lsidered. The enclosed report contains my analysis of the forces , along with the general and specific data , that is necessary to support the estimate of value. it is my considered and professional opinion that the market value of the above described property as of June 13, 1981 is $106,700.00 Please feel free to contact me if I can he of further assistance in this matter. Respectfully submit di / , C ()AMartin A. Walsh, SRA Consultant—Appraiser Member Society of Real Estate Appraisers . RECONCILIATION & FINAL ESTIMATE The following sales were recorded, considered and adjusted as deemed supportive by this appraiser. Indicated Value Hauge Sale 1 Sale price per sq . ft . $ 6. 70 Adjusted $6. `,!, Sale 2 Sale price per sq. ft. $ 9 .01 Adjusted $8. 28 Sale 3 Sale price per sq. ft . $11 .38 Adjusted $ 9. 15 Sal e .4 Sale price per sq. ft. $ 8.46 Adjusted $ 8.04 Sale 5 Sale price per sq. ft. $ 7. 90 Adjusted $ 7. 66 Based on the above sales, it is my opinion the most supportive value applicable to the subject property is $8.00 per sq.ft. or $.102, 240.00 (2 (1., MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer RE: St. Francis Hospital Parking Lot Detention Area DATE: July 17, 1981 Introduction At the request of City Council, the City staff inspected the above referenced detention area to determine whether the facility conforms to the original plans and specifications reviewed by the Engineering Department. Background The principal concern expressed by City Council was that the pond was a potential hazard to pedestrian traffic. The pond was designed in order to attenuate the flow from the parking lot and in order to do so it was necessary to contain the developed runoff and meter in into an existing storm sewer at a historic rate. In ponding that developed runoff, the storm water reached a maximum depth of approximately three feet. This occurs during the major storm. A depth of three feet is not judged to be unreasonable or a dangerous depth and therefore the facility is judged to be no hazard to pedestrian traffic since during a storm it is unlikely that pedestrian traffic would cross that facility. HRS/jms Law Offices of KRASS , MEYER & KANNING • Chartered Phillip R. Krass Shakopee Professional Building Barry K. Meyer 1221 Fourth Avenue East Philip T. Kenning Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612)445-5080 July 16, 1981 Mr. Thomas S. Hay Dorsey Office 880 West First National Bank Building St. Paul , MN 55101 Dear Tom: Enclosed please find a redrafted Assessment Agreement incorporating some of the changes that you recommended. I would ask that you take a look at this and see if it conforms more to what you had in mind with your January 23 Memorandum to the City of Shakopee relative to our Block 57 parking lot project. I also include a copy of a preliminary draft of a Redevelopment and Financing Plan. Thank you much for your assistance. Yours very truly, KRASS, MEYER & KANNING CHARTERED Phillip R. Krass PRK:smb Enclosures File cc Mr. John Anderson U/ • ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1981 , by and between The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota , a public corporation of the State of Minnesota (the Authority) , and the County of Scott and St. Francis Hospital (the Developers) ; WITNESSETH THAT, in joint and mutual exercise of their powers, and in consideration of the mutual benefits herein described, the parties hereto recite and agree as follows : Section 1 . Recitals. 1 .01 . Establishment of Project and Plans. The City Council of the City of Shakopee (the City) has established a redevelopment project in the City entitled Redevelopment Project No. (the Project) , containing the land legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the Project area) and has approved a Redevelopment Plan for the project (the Redevelopment Plan) , and has established Tax Increment Financing District No. (the District) which is coterminous with the project, and has approved a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the District (the Financing Plan) , all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 462 and 273. 1 .02. Implementation; Cooperation Agreement. For the purpose of aiding the Authority to carry out and implement the Project, the City and the Authority have entered into a Cooperation Agreement dated as of the day of , 1981 , (the Cooperation Agreement) , whereby the Authority has agreed to undertake and complete the Project and the City has agreed to issue its General Obligation Revenue Bonds of 1981 for the first phase of the Project and to issue its General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds to finance the second phase of the Project, all in order to finance the Public Redevelopment Cost of the Project as described in the Financing Plan. O, . 1 .03. Implementation; Purchase of the Property. The City Council has authorized and directed the Authority to take all actions necessary to implement and carry out the Redevelopment Plan, and for this purpose the Authority has determined that it is necessary, in order to accomplish the purposes specified in and to carry out the Redevelopment Plan, for the Authority to acquire certain real property in the Project Area described in the attached Exhibit B (the Property) in order to accomplish Phase I of the project. The Developers will file with the City a petition requesting that the City directly or through the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority prepare Block 67 original Shakopee Plat for the construction of a parking lot thereon by, (a) removal of the residences presently located thereon; (b) construction of any needed drainage control facilities; and (c) grading, stripping, and grubbing the property; and thereafter constructing a 240-stall surface parking lot thereon. The City will thereafter cause the preparation of a feasilibity report for such improvements, hold public hearings thereon (unless same is waived pursuant to law) , authorize preparation of plans and specifications and approve same, advertise for bids , receive and accept said bids and award a contract therefor, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. The Authority has further determined that it will be necessary at such time as Phase II is implemented, to sell a portion of said property to a developer who has yet to be determined, and at that time the Authority and said developer will enter into a contract for sale of land for private redevelopment in Redevelopment Project No. — (the Redevelopment Agreement) , whereby said developer will agree to purchase said property from the Authority and to construct or cause to be constructed upon the Project Area facilities described in the attached Exhibit C. Said Redevelopment Agreement will be entered into by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , Chapters 462 and 273. -2- 1 .04. Payment of Bonds for Phase I. In order to finance Phase I of the Redevelopment and Financing Plan, the Developers have agreed to an assess- ment against property owned by the Developers legally described on Exhibit B to pay the entire debt service of those general obligation revenue bonds sold by the City to finance Phase I of the Project. Said assessments shall be levied 50% against the property owned by St. Francis Hospital and 50% against the property owned by the County of Scott, all in accordance with Section 2. 1 .05. Payment of Bonds for Phase II . The debt service on the bonds sold to finance Phase II will be payable primarily from the Tax Increment derived from all the taxable property in the District, the amount of which is dependent upon the completion of the facilities described in Exhibit C by a future developer, and upon their market value for ad valorem tax purposes. The Authority Shakopee contract with said future developer to establish a minimum market value for the Project Area and the completed facilities . The Authority shall request the County Auditor of Scott County to certify to it the assessed value, as defined by law, of the District as of January 1 , 198 (the original assessed-value) . The assessed value of all property in the District as here- after determined for each year during the term of the agreement between the Authority and the future developer, less the original assessed value, shall be known as the Captured Assessed Value. The ad valorem taxes derived from all taxable property in the District, commencing in the year 198 , after applica- tion of the aggregate mill rate levied by all governmental entities having authority to levy taxes on such property to the Captured Assessed Value, shall be known as the "Tax Increment. " Under Chapter 273 the County Auditor is required to pay to the City and the Tax Increment derived from the District, with respect to such years, to be used to pay debt service on said Tax Increment Bonds to finance Phase II of the Project. The Authority expects to receive the Tax Increment, and in and by the Cooperation Agreement it will enter into with the City, will agree to transfer it to the City for payment of the debt -3- service on the Bonds when due and related incidental charges. 1 .06. Authority. The City has authority to enter into this Agreement and to take all actions required of it hereby, and has taken all actions neces- sary to authorize the execution and delivery of this Agreement. Section 2. DEVELOPERS' REPRESENTATIONS The Developers hereby represent, warrant, and covenant to the City that as of the day of this Agreement the statements as set forth in this Section are true and correct. 2 .01 . Corporate Existance. The Developer St. Francis Hospital is a corporation duly organized, validly existing, and in good standing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, with corporate powers and authority to own property and carry on the businesses now being conducted. The Developer County of Scott is a body corporate and politic organized and operating under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 2.02. Corporate Authority. The Developers have full power, authority, and legal right to enter into and perform its obligations under this Agreement, and the execution and delivery of this Agreement and any agreements necessary or convenient hereto, and the performance of their obligations thereunder, have been duly authorized by all necessary corporate or legal action on the part of the Developers, and do not require any further consent or approval . 2. 03. Execution No Violation. The execution, delivery, and performance of this Agreement and all agreements necessary or convenient hereto do not contravene any provisions of the Articles of Incorporation or By-Laws of the Developer St. Francis Hospital or the laws of the State of Minnesota as to Developer Scott County and do not and will not result in any breach of or constitute a default under any indenture, mortgage, contract, agreement, or instrument which the Developers are a party or which they or their property are bound. -4- 2.04. Litigation. There are no pending, or to the knowledge of the Developers, threatened actions or proceedings before any Court or administrative agents which will materially adversely affect the financial condition, business, or operation of the Developers or the ability of the Developers to perform their obligations under this Agreement and any agreements necessary or convenient hereto. 2.05. Compliance. The Developers will comply with and promptly perform all of their obligations under this Agreement and will enter into and duly and promptly perform all of their obligations under any agreements necessary or convenient hereto, and all related documents and instruments. Section 3. CITY'S UNDERTAKINGS 3.01 . Phase I Improvements. The City shall order the construction of Phase I improvements in accordance with law, and shall forth with enter into a contract for the construction of the improvements with the low bidder as designated in Section 1 .03, and shall cause the Improvements to be constructed in accordance with the Plans and Specifications. The City shall have the right to order-such modifications in the work and the construction contract therefor as are recommended by the Consulting Engineer and/or are deemed necessary or desirable by the City; provided that no such modification shall extend the time for completion of the work except for Unavoidable Delays in accordance with the construction contract, and no such modification shall increase the price of the work to such an extent that the total amount of special assessments to be levied on the Property with respect to the Improvements will be increased by more than 5%, unless approved in writing by the Developers, except that if the City agrees to provide moneys to pay all or a portion of such increased cost, so that such special assessments will not be increased by more than 5%, the City may order such modification without the Developers ' approval . Copies of all proposed modifica- tions in the construction contract or the work shall be furnished to the Developers prior to their consideration and approval by the City Council . -5- O ' • 3.02. Cost of Improvements. The cost of the Improvements and the various elements thereof are presently estimated to be as shown in the attached Exhibit E. The amounts shown on Exhibit E, with respect to the Improvements or any element thereof, is hereinafter referred to as the Estimated Cost thereof. 3.03. Temporary Bond Financing. The City shall be authorized if in its exclusive judgment it deems it necessary or convenient, to issue temporary improvement bonds in one or more series maturing at such time as the City deems appropriate, and in such amounts as are deemed necessary to finance the cost of Phase I Improvements. The City will deposit the net proceeds of any such temporary bonds to separate and special Phase I Improvements and Construction Fund (the Construction Fund) . The moneys on hand in the Construction Fund from time to time shall be used to pay all costs of said improvements when due, including interest coming due on the temporary bonds to their maturity, and to the extent not needed for this purpose at any time shall be invested in accordance with the law. All temporary bond proceeds and other moneys on hand in the Construction Fund which are not needed to pay costs of the improvements, shall be used to pay the principal of and interest on the temporary bonds when due. 3. 04. Permanent Financing. On or before the maturity of any temporary bonds the City shall sell and issue its general obligation and improvement bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475 and the resolution authorizing temporary bonds, in an amount sufficient, with all their moneys available and appropriated for the purpose, to pay the principal and interest due on said temporary bonds at their maturity. Should the City elect not to issue its temporary bonds, these definitive bonds shall be issued in an amount sufficient with all other moneys available and appropriated for the purpose, to pay all costs of said improvements when due, The definitive bonds shall be issued upon such terms and conditions as are determined by the City. -6- Ob 3.05. Effect on Assessments. Subject to the provisions of Section 3.07 and Section 4, the type and terms of the bonds issued by the City for the purposes specified in Sections 3.03 and 3.04 shall not affect the amounts or numbers of installments or payment dates of the special assessments levied by the City pursuant to Section 4. 3.06. Source of Payment. All bonds issued as contemplated in Sections 3.03 and 3.04, for the purpose of financing that portion of the actual or esti- mated cost of the Improvements allocable to the Project, as determined in accordance with Section 3.02 and Section 4, shall be payable primarily from the moneys received by the City pursuant to Sections 3.03 and 4.01 and the special assessments levied or to be levied by the City on the Property as pro- vided in Section 4 and the interest thereon, which shall be pledged by the City for this purpose. The collections of said moneys , special assessments and interest shall be deposited in a separate and special sinking fund of the City to be established for the payment of such bonds and, together with any interest earnings thereon, shall be used for this purpose. -3.07. Separate Bond Issues. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 3.04, the City shall when issuing bonds as specified therein, sell and issue a separate series of bonds to finance the cost of the Improvements allocable to the Project which has not then been paid by the Developers , and shall finance the cost of the Improvements allocable to property or areas outside the Project by a separate series of bonds or other means. Section 4. COST RECOVERY 4.01 . Cost of Improvements. For purposes of this Agreement and all proceedings and actions taken by the City hereunder with respect to the Phase I Improvements, the Developers and the City acknowledge and agree that the cost of the Improvements shall include those elements specified in Exhibit E. Upon completion of the work and the payment of all costs cf the Improvements, -7- the City shall compute the actual cost of the Improvements and the amount thereof allocable to the Property, and shall furnish the same to the Developers together with the calculations made by the City to arrive at such amounts. The City Administrator shall thereafter provide to the Developers all such further informa- tion and documents as are requested by it in order to verify such costs and computations. 4.02. Levy of Special Assessments; Procedure. Not less than 45 days after the City has furnished its computations to the Developers, the City may levy special assessments with respect to the Phase I Improvements on the property in the manner specified in Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061 , provided that: (1 ) the special assessments shall be made payable over a 20-year period, and 20 equal annual installments comprising principal and interest computed on an amortization basis; and (2) the interest rate payable on deferred installments of the special assessments shall be fixed by the City in an amount 1% in excess of the actual or estimated interest cost on the bonds to which they are pledged. 4.03. Pending Assessment. Prior to the actual levy of the special assessments the City shall file with the County Recorder of Scott County, a notice of pending assessment as to each lot or parcel of the Property proposed to be assessed, the amount of which shall be based upon the Estimated Cost of the Improvements and the proposed method of allocation thereof specified in this Section 4. 4.04. Special Assessments; Amount and Allocation. The amount of the special assessments levied on the Property as a whole shall be based upon the actual cost of the Improvements insofar as available, including administrative costs to the City, and on reasonable estimates of the cost insofar as actual costs are not available as reasonably determined by the City. -8- The anount of such cost to be allocated to and specially assessed against the Property as a whole shall be determined in accordance with the Feasibility Report, and the Developers and the City agree that such allocation is fair and reasonable and will result in the allocation of costs and the levy of special assessments on the Property as a whole, which are equal to or less than the special benefit accruing to the Property from the Improvements. The amount of such costs to be allocated to and specially assessed against each lot or parcel within the Project shall also be determined in accordance with the Feasibility Report, and the Developers and the City agree that such allocation is fair and reasonable and will result in the allocation of costs and the levy of special assessments on each such lot or parcel which are equal to or less than the special benefit accruing to such lot or parcel from the Improvements. SECTION 5. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 5.01 . Conflicts of Interest; Representatives Not Individually Liable. No member of the City Council , and no officer or employee of the City, shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, nor shall any such member, officer, or employee participate in any decision relating to this Agreement which affects his or her personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership, or association in which he or she is, directly or indirectly, interested. No member, officer, or employee of the City or the Developers shall be personally liable to the Developers or the City, as the case may be, in the event of any default under or breach of this Agreement by the City or the Developers , or for any amount which may become due to the Developers or the City or for any obligation issued under the terms of this Agreement. 5. 02. Unavoidable Delays. Wherever used in this Agreement, the term "Unavoidable Delays" shall mean a delay resulting from a cause over which the party required to make performance does not have control and which can not or could not have been avoided by the exercise of reasonable care, including -9- but not limited to acts of God, accidents, war, civil unrest, embargos, strikes, unavailability of raw materials or manufactured goods, litigation and the delays of the other party or its contractors, agents or employees in the performance of their duties under or incident to this Agreement. 5. 03. Recording. The Developers shall cause this Agreement to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Scott County. 5.04. Covenants. It is intended and agreed, that the covenants of the Developers in this Agreement shall be covenants running with the land binding to the fullest extent permitted by law and equity for the benefit and in favor of, and enforceable by, the City, its successors and assigns against the Developers, its successors and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, and any party in possession or occupancy of the Property or any part thereof. 5.05. Enforcement by City; Damages. The Developers acknowledge the right of the City to enforce the terms of this Agreement against the Developer, by action for specific performance or damages, or both, or by any other legally authorized means. The Developers also acknowledge that their failure to perform any or all of its obligations under this Agreement may result in substantial damages to the City; that in the event of default by the Developers the City may commence legal action to recover all damages, losses and expenses sustained by the City; and that such expenses may include but are not limited to the reasonable fees of legal counsel employed with respect to the enforcement of this Agreement. Neither the Developers nor any agent or officer or employee of the Developers shall be liable to the City for any expense or loss incurred by the City as a result of any contractor's default in the construction of Recreational Facilities in excess of the liability of the contractor to the Developers for such default. -10- 5.06. Rights Cumulative. The rights and remedies of the parties of this Agreement, whether provided by law or by this Agreement, shall be cumulative, and the exercise by either party of any one or more of such remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or different times, of any other such remedies for the same default or breach or of any of its remedies for any other default or breach of the party. No waiver made by either such party with respect to the performance or the manner or time thereof, of any obligation under this Agreement, shall be considered a waiver with respect to the particular obliga- tion of the other party or a condition to its own obligation beyond those expressly waived in writing and to the extent thereof, or a waiver in any respect in regard to any other rights of the party making the waiver of any obligations of the other party. Delay by a party hereto instituting or prosecuting any cause of action or claim hereunder shall not be deemed a waiver of any rights hereunder. Section 6. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS. 6.01 . Notices. All notices, certificates or other communications required to be given to the City and the Developers hereunder shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when delivered, or when deposited in the United States mail in registered form with postage full prepaid and addressed, as follows: If to the City: City of Shakopee City Hall 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 If to the Developers: St. Francis Hospital 325 West Fifth Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 County of Scott Scott County Administrator Scott County Courthouse Shakopee, MN 55379 The City and the Developers, by notice given hereunder, may designate different addresses to which subsequent notices, certificate, or other communications will be sent. -11- 6.02. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the City and the Developers and their respective successors and assigns. 6.03. Severability. In the event any provisions of this Agreement shall be held invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision hereof. 6.04. Amendments, Changes and Modifications. This Agreement may be amended or any of its terms modified only by written amendment authorized and executed by the City and the Developers. 6. 05. Further Assurances and Corrective Instruments . The City and the Developers agree that they will , from time to time, execute, acknowledge and deliver, or cause to be executed, acknowledged and delivered, such supplements hereto and such further instruments as may reasonably be required for correcting any inadequate or incorrect description of the Property. 6.06. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 6.07. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 6.08. City and Corporation Representatives. Whenever under the provi- sions of this Agreement the approval of City or the Developers is required to take some action at the request of the other, such approval of such action may be given for the City by a City Representative designated by it in writing, and for the Developers by a Developer Representative designated by each in writing, and any party hereto shall be authorized to rely upon any such approval or request. 6.09. Captions . The captions and the headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and in no way define, limit or describe the scope or intent of any provision or section of this Agreement. -12- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this Agreement to be executed in its corporate name by its duly authorized officers and sealed with its corporate seal ; and the Developers have caused this Agreement to be executed in its name by its duly authorized officers and sealed with its corporate seal , as of the date first above written. THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MN By: Its Chairman 13.Y: Its Secretary DEVELOPERS: ST. FRANCIS HOSPITAL BY: BY: DEVELOPERS: COUNTY OF SCOTT By: By: STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) On this day of , 198 , before me, a Notary Public within and for said County, appeared and , to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that they are respectively the Chairman and Secretary of THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, and the instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Commissioners, and they acknowledged that said instrument was the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public -13- • STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) On this day of , 1981 , before me, a Notary Public, within and for said County, appeared and , who are respectively the and of ST. FRANCIS HOSPITAL, a Corporation, and the instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors, and they acknowledged that said instrument was the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ( ss. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) On this day of , 1981 , before me, a Notary Public within and for said County did appear and , who are respectively the Chairman of the Board and the Administrator of the COUNTY OF SCOTT, and the instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors and they acknowledged that said instrument was the free act and deed of the County. Notary Public -14- EL EXHIBIT A The Project Area: • -1.5- • EXHIBIT B The Property: (This Exhibit shall contain a specific description of the method we will use to set up parking, and will specifically set out the spaces in the lot which will be controlled by signage by the developers. ) • -16- EXHIBIT C The Facilities (In the description of the facilities we shall describe a building, the utility of which will fit with the plans of the hospital and the county. While we cannot restrict the use of the building, we may restrict the type of building to be constructed as one which will serve those professions or businesses dealing with the hospital and the courthouse. ) -17- EXHIBIT D LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF HOSPITAL AND COUNTY PROPERTY TO BE ASSESSED FOR THE COST OF PHASE I _18- EXHIBIT E LIST OF PHASE I IMPROVEMENTS AND ESTIMATED COST THEREOF -19- MEMO TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Valley Fair Inspection DATE : July 16, 1981 Introduction The subject of inspections at Valley Fair has been discussed at various levels since I arrived in Shakopee . The meeting that was held June 29 , 1981 and is the subject of Rod Krass ' s memo of June 30th was the culmination of numerous memos and meetings on the subject . Background LeRoy Houser first questioned our inspection practices in a memo on Valley Fair Fees dated March 24, 1981 (attached see page 2) . He followed the letter up by securing one estimate from Van- Sickle , Allen and Associates , Inc . for the cost of annual inspec- tion by that firm. The estimate was $3000 per year for annual inspections (the estimate is on file) . The question that came up immediately was , "could the City get out of the ride inspection business?" Two memos from Rod Krass dated April 13 , 1981 and May 26, 1981 (attached) provide the answer. The City can get out of the inspection business . At about the time of the second memo, May 26, 1981, the Mayor and I were invited to the park to look at what Valley Fair offi- cials considered excessive costs due to the "over engineering" that had resulted from the City ' s inspection program. After a lengthy discussion it appeared to the Mayor and I that it was not a black and white issue and that some of their "perceived over engineering" was done before any city involvement . At any rate, I agreed to find out what other cities do for ride inspec- tion. I then contacted Six Flags in Eureka, Missouri ; Adventure Land in Des Moines , Iowa; Worlds of Fun in Kansas City, Missouri ; and Great America in Gurnee , Illinois , all major theme parks . Six Flags is inspected annually by a County Inspector at the same level we now inspect , Adventure Land is inspected annually by the State , Worlds of Fun is inspected by the City ' s contrac- tually employed "elevator inspector" once and the State has no program, and Great America ' s rides are not inspected by the City, County or State . Inspection appears to be a "mixed" bag with little City level "hands on" annual ride inspection and little new construction inspection of rides by "knowledgeable" City personnel . Where worthwhile inspections were done they included stress tests , x-rays etc. by qualified engineering firms hired by the Parks . In the cases where there was local state inspec- tion the inspectors looked over the engineering companies records . Valley Fair Inspection Page 2 I have the notes of my conversations with the four parks should anyone care to look them over. Summary Rod ' s memo, as noted in the introduction, was the culmina- tion of staff ' s efforts to find other viable alternatives to our present inspection program. Should City Council agree with the recommendations on page two then the following action is required. Action Requested Direct staff to proceed with the drafting of specific en- gineering requirements on testing and the drafting of a contract with Valley Fair requiring certification of the testing and in- house inspections of both existing and newly contracted rides . JKA/jam Attachments ``,-offw„ CITY OF SHAKOPEE • tib t�_ _ / �� ti`` ' , ft.- 1 ; 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 �-- ;%811.40S, MEMO TO: John Anderson, . City Administrator FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official SUBJECT: Valley Fair Fees DATE__ March 24, 1981 introduction: Valley Fair Fees Background : Deficit Service Cost generated by Valley Fair. As you know, 1 have attempted to arrive at a number, supporting what we all know is correct, that Valley Fair, because of the nature of their business, does require more Police services and service from my department than a normal business by far. • The formula 1 have used to attempt to tie down the "numbers" is nebulous and to say the least , extremely speculative. Al though the numbers are derived from actual budget figures and the calls and costs listed are derived from factual data. The formula used to assign or apportion patrol hours and standby costs on a per parcel has basis is in my opinion a weak link . I used a percentage of assessed value in another application and arrived at nearly the same number. I feel confi- dent the number arrived at was reasonably correct hpwever, T feel it would be dil'f'.ieul t to prove in court . I think instead of trying to use a formula as complicated and nebulous as the one I have used , I think Council should make a decision as to ,just what Councils intent is. is it the intent of Connell to : 1 . Recover our deficit costs? 2. Use Valley Fair and other amusement orientated business as a revenue generating device, in face of State and Federal cut backs in and to cities? 3. Use a license fee to Valley Fair as a revenue generating device much as the same as the liquor license is used, without justi- fication of the license fee? 4 . Use a ticket tax as a revenue generating device? John Anderson Page 2 March 24, 1981 5 . Ignore the deficit costs of Valley Fair and continue to let the rest of the taxpayers absorb the deficit costs of the Park and try to justify it by trying to measure their overall contribution to the City by virtue of just being here and the donations such Ns tickets, hockey arenas, etc . they make? As you know, the personal liability to me generated by the Park is tremendous. It appears l may become fair game to any injured patron who files suite against Valley l"air. It is my wish, Council investigates an avenue of divesting myself of this liability. The alternatives as I see them are : I . Repeal all ordinances relating to Valley Fair and require indemnification from Valley Fair in an amount legal counsel deems adequate. fl . Hire an Engineering firm to take the i nSpection. program of the Park over. A firm that has expertise in electrical , - mechanical , structural , etc . , plus have the Park- indemnify the City in an amount as deemed adequate by legal counsel . The cost of the program would he billed directly to Valley Fair. Hy doing either one or two , State law still requires they secure permits for all construction work they undertake. Council cannot repeal state law regarding this matter. Recommendations: 1 do not intend to recommend action for Council to take regarding fees ; it would depend on Councils intent , deficit cost recovery . or revenue generating. Should it be revenue generating then a ticket tax or license fees would be the answer. Regarding liab_i l i ty , I do strongly recommend Council contracts wi Lh an outside firm for inspec1. ion ;;ervice:;. HMI VaI Ic y lair for the services after deducting the VOU worth of services they are entitled to from mills levied for my department . Should Council decide deficit cost recovery be their intent , then they should decide what program they are going to use-. f-- LEH :pik aj 1 • MEMORANDUM TO: Rod FROM: Jim DATE: April 13 , 1981 SUBJECT: City of Shakopee, Duty to Inspect Valley Fair Rides The courts where confronted with the issue of inspection and liability pertaining to amusement parks and devises, have held the proprietor or owner of the property where amusements are located, to the duty of inspection and safety. The owner or proprietor of the amusement ride or devise must inspect and test the equipment both properly and frequently to ascertain whether it is safe for patrons' use. Am. Jur. 2nd Vol . 4, page 214. Further, the standard of care charged upon the prorietor is one of a high degree and the care must be commensurate with the risk involved. Case Hanson vs. Christian, 145 NW2d 868 (1968) . It is the proprietor or the property owner of the place of amusement who assumes the obligation that the premises are in a reasonably safe condition, not the local municipality, even where a license to operate has been issued. The only clearly recognized exception to the above-stated policy is where the city or municipality owns the property upon which the amusement park is located so that a landlord-tenant relationship exists. This exception is based upon landlord-tenant principals requiring inspection and proper maintenance of the owned property. This exception has been primarily applied by the courts where street carnivals or amusement rides upon city streets have been the issue at hand. The case law and statutory regulations provide that the prorietor of an amusement park or the owner of the property upon which they are located is responsible for the inspection and safety of the ride and amusement devises , not the municipality, even where a license for operation has been issued. Law Offices of • KRASS, MEYER & KANNING Chartered Phillip R. Kress Shakopee Professional Building Barry K. Meyer 1221 Fourth Avenue East Philip T. Kenning Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612)445-5080 RECEIVE® MEMORANDUM JUL. 0 2 1981 TO: The Honorable Mayor and City Council CITY OF SHAKOPEE of the City of Shakopee FROM: Phillip R. Krass DATE: June 30, 1981 SUBJECT: Valley Fair Inspections John Anderson and I met with representatives of Valley Fair on June 29th at City Hall to discuss the present Valley Fair inspection procedures , and the necessity of the City of Shakopee to be involved with annual ride inspections , or new ride construction inspections. It has been my concern for some time that the most recent five-to-four Minnesota Supreme Court decision holding cities not liable for inspections they did, will in the future be overruled and we may become liable for such inspections. We wer informed that Valley Fair does annual routine inspections including nondestructive testing of all primary (critical ) components during the winter, including x-rays, mag particle tests, and ulta-sonic tests as well as dye penatrin tests. Moreover, they conduct routine mid-year nondestructive tests in July which by necessity are not as complete as when the rides are broken down during the off-season. We are informed that all critical spare parts are tested before they go on the shelf. Apparently, the City does review the documentation of all of these tests during their annual review. The tests are done by Peabody Magnaflux Company of Chicago, Illinois, which Valley Fair contend is highly reputable. They certify that the equipment is in good shape at the time they test it. We are informed that Valley Fair's insurer, Aetna, inspects monthly during the operating season, but that inspection really doesn' t involve components or rides, but is more in the area of access and things of that nature. Valley Fair has twice daily inspections in-house in which they inspect each piece of equipment. First of all , a thorough inspection is made in the morning on all maintenance items , and in the afternoon a shorter visual inspection is made by a different inspector. There is also occasional spot checks by supervisers to make sure that two daily tests are being run correctly. There are also occasional tests of a specific nature when a malfunction of some variety would seem to warrant. Valley Fair logs and categorizes all injuries and reviews them weekly to attempt to determine potential for problems. Page 2 June 30, 1981 With respect to construction of new rides, Valley Fair is of the opinion that the City has duplicated some of their engineering efforts. Valley Fair's engineers handle all of the engineering questions relative to the footings of new rides , and ride manufacturers ' engineers handle the rest. Valley Fair feels that our hiring another engineer to review the work of the first two engineers is not only duplication of costs, but delays them from a time standpoint. The thrust of our meeting was to attempt to determine a method of protecting the public by assuring the City that Valley Fair was following correct engineering procedures for the construction of new rides and the inspection of old rides, while cutting out any duplication of costs. From my standpoint, I am also anxious to get the City of Shakopee out of the business of inspecting rides so that if and when the Supreme Court decides that municipalities will be liable for inspections they make, we will not have that problem since there is no state law requiring us to make inspections. The purpose of this Memorandum is to seek guidance from the City Council as to whether the staff may proceed in the development of a contract with Valley Fair requiring Valley Fair to do the following: 1 . With respect to present rides , we have asked Valley Fair to make a list of the specific types of testing they do on a routine basis during the winter, during July and daily and to have our City Engineer review those testing procedures to see that they are reasonable. 2. With respect to new rides, we would require from Valley Fair a certification from whatever engineer is handling the construction of the footings for that ride; that the footings comply with the manufacturer's specifications. With that certi- fication by a licensed Minnesota engineer, we would grant the building permit for the footings. Later, we would grant a building permit for the ride itself and receive after completion of the ride, a certification from a Minnesota engineer that the ride was constructed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications for tolerances, etc. Thereupon the City would issue a certificate of occupancy for that ride. 3. With respect to the testing done by Peabody for Valley Fair as a part of the routine testing and inspection procedures , the City would be given a certifi- cation from Peabody that the testing agreed to in paragraph 1 had been completed and that the rides met the standards agreed upon. The idea is to get the City out of the inspection and testing business , but yet to make certain it is done by receiving certifications from a licensed Minnesota engineer with respect to construction, and Peabody or a comparable testing company with respect to the inspections. Moreover, Valley Fair would annually certify to us that they have conscienciously completed their in-house routine inspections in accordance with the contract they would sign with us. Valley Fair would also indemnify and hold the City harmless from all claims against the City or any of its agents or employees for any damage or injury which occurs at Valley Fair. We are named on the $1 ,000,000 liability policy Valley Fair currently has, and Valley Fair is checking to make certain that there is a 10-day notice of cancellation provision in that policy so that the City receives notice prior to any cancellation or termination of that policy. b - Page 3 June 30, 1981 If you direct the staff to proceed with the drafting of specific engineering requirements on testing and the drafting of a contract requiring that testing as well as the in-house inspections and new construction certifications, we will come back to you later with a contract implementing all of the above between the City and Valley Fair. Upon implementation of that contract, the City will no longer inspect any rides at Valley Fair, new or otherwise. The City will continue its usual building permit inspections for non-ride construction which could include such things as a theater, more eating facilities, a motel connected with Valley Fair, or things such as that. Yours very truly, KRASS, MEYER & KANNING CHARTERED Phillip R. Krass PRK:ph File #1-1373-113 cc Mr. John Anderson /���y certificate_ of Insurance coo V , THIS CERTIFICATE 1S ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONL' AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES LISTED BELOW. NAM! AND ADDRESS OF AGENCY Johnson & Higgins of Ohio, Inc. COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGES /2 ' 2600 National City Center --- Cleveland, OH 44114 COMPANY , LEETER A Aetna Casualty & Surety. Company (216) 781-3000 COMPANY B • LITTER NAME AND ADDRESS Of INSURED COMPANY C LETTER Valleyfair, Inc. One Valleyfair Drive COMPANY D LETTER Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 COMPANY E LETTER This is to certify that policies of insurance listed below have been issued to the insured named above and are in force at this time. Notwithstanding any requirement,term or condition ' of any contract or other document with respect to which this certificate may be issued or may pertain,the insurance afforded by the policies described herein is subject to all the terms,exclusions and conditions of such policies. COMPANY Pot ICY Limits of Liability in Thousands(000) LETTER TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY MOAK REhPIRATION DATE EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE GENERAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY S $ ©COMPREHENSIVE FORM A E PREMISES-OPERATIONS , 5-15-82 PROPERTY DAMAGE $ $ ❑EXPLOSION AND COLLAPSE HAZARD ❑UNDERGROUND HAZARD O PRODUCTS/COMPLETED OPERATIONS HAZARD BODILY IJURYEl CONTRACTUAL INSURANCE PROPfRNY DAMAGED S l 000 Z Z,OOO, ❑ BROAD FORM PROPERTY COMBINED DAMAGE OINDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS ® PERSONAL INJURY 1, PERSONAL INJURY $ Incl AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY BODILY INJURY (EACH PERSON) $ ❑ COMPREHENSIVE FORM BODILY INJURY f El OWNED (EACH ACCIDENT) CIHIRED PROPERTY DAMAGE S iii NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE $ — - COMBINED EXCESS LIABILITY BODILY INJURY AND 1 ❑ UMBRELLA FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE $ f I ❑ OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM COMBINED l WORKERS'COMPENSATION STATUTORY and EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY S OTHER LeGi+sccloTr+n DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONSNEHICLES ,! The elected and appointed officials of the city of Shakopee, Minnesota, and The City of Shakopee, Minnesota, are included as ADDITIONAL INSUREDS as respects their interest in the Insured's operations. • Cancellation: Should any of the above described policies be cancelled before the expiration date thereof, the issuing com- pany will endeavor to mail 10 days written notice to the below named certificate holder, but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CERTIFICATE HOI DER- The Elected & Appointed Officials of the DATE ISSUED: 5-8-81 amb City of Shakopee, Minnesota and 2 The City of Shakopee, Minnesota (itAY 4 Shakopee, MInnesota 55379 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ACORD 25(1-19) MEMO TO: John Anderson City Administrator FROM: H. R. Spurrier {�i� City Engineer i�=a� Nqh RE: Drainage on Abandoned Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Right-of-way; North of JEJ Addition and Scenic Heights Additions DATE: July 14, 1981 Introduction: Since drainage problems in the above-referenced area were identified earlier this spring, the City has advised affected property owners that the problem was not a "City" problem. Now, the discovery of a previous agreement dated May 27, 1975 sheds new light on the problem. Background: Without belaboring the point, the above-mentioned agreements specified that the City must grade and maintain a drainage ditch at the City's expense along the above-referenced railroad right-of-way. The agreement further specifies that the City is liable for any damage that occurs as a result of the drainage. The agreement is very specific in regard to the City's responsibilities. There are several construction alternatives for correcting this problem. Some work must be done immediately because property owners have obliterated segments of the former channel. The City Attorney has recommended that the property owners who have obliterated or otherwise obstructed the channel be advised to make any repairs recommended by the City Engineer. In the event the property owners would fail to make these specified repairs, the City should immediately, or within a reasonable time, make the repairs and assess that cost to the abutting property owners. There are other permanent repairs and improvements which would eliminate the need of a drainage channel north of the above-referenced area. That work should be added to the Capital Improvement Program. Recommendations: It is the recommendation of City staff that: 1. City Engineer be directed to identify those areas where the former channel has been obliterated or other- wise obstructed by property owners. John Anderson July 14, 1981 ‘; e Drainage - Abandoned CMSTP & P Railroad Page -2- • 2. Identify and advise the property owners that repairs to the drainage channel must be made within 30 days. 3. Coordinate the repairs for any part of the channel not repaired as directed. 1i . Prepare a preliminary report on the permanent repairs which should be made and include that work in the Capital Improvement Program. HRS/jiw AGREEMLNT• THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this „?/ day of 1276,6,c,, , 1975, by and between the CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND' PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, a Wisconsin Corporation, hereinafter. called "Railroad" , and the CITY OF SHAKOPEE, located in Scott County, Minnesota, hereinafter called thn "City" . WITNESSETH • WHEREAS, the City desires to enter upon the right-of-way of the Railroad in the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (NW 1/4 NW 1/4) of Section 8 , Township 115 North, Range 22 West, Scott County, Minnesota, for the purpose of grading, shaping and maintaining a drainage ditch and side slopes and for constructing and maintaining two (2) storm sewer outlets and surge basins in the locations and to the extent shown on the plat dated April 30, 1973 , attached hereto and made a p.-rt hereof, WHEREAS, the Railroad is willing to grant to the City the right to grade, shape and maintain the drainage ditch and slopes and the right to install and maintain the two (2) storm sewer out- lets and surge basins, but solely upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the covenants and stipulations as hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows : 1. The Railroad hereby grants to the City the right, license and privilege to enter upon the right-of-way hereinabove described and to gra3e, shape and maintain the drainage ditch and slopes, with the north slope stabilized to the satisfaction of the Railroad, and to install and maintain said two (2) storm sewer outlets and surge basins as shown on said plat. The City shall pay the Railroad upon execution of this agreement the sum of Fifty Dollars ($50. 00) to cover the cost of preparation thereof. p 2. The City shall perform all work on said right—of—way at the City 's sole cost and expense . 3. The City hereby agrees to keep clean and maintain the two ( 2) storm sewer outlets and two (2 ) surge basins shown on said plat. 4. ?he City shall, at its sole co: t and expense , move and replace any right—of—way fences which it may be necessary to move or which may be damaged because of the work to be performed by it on said Railroad 's right—of—way. 5. The City hereby agrees that, within thirty (30) days from the date hereof, it shall obtain a drainage easement from the present outlet of Railroad culvert 0-83 to County Road 16. 6. - The City hereby agrees to and hereby does release , indemnify and save harmless the Railroad , its officers, agents and employees from and against any and all liability, loss, cost, damage , expense , actions, and claims that may arise or occur on account of the flooding, backwater and overflow of water on lands and property when it has been established such flooding is due to the increased flow and diversion of water and drainage to and through the Railroad 's culvert 0-83 and to the grading and drainage work by the City; provided, however, that the liability assumed by the City herein shall be limited to established damages caused or occasioned by the increased flow of water from the J.E. J. and Scenic Heights Additions through the two ( 2 ) storm sewer outlets as shown on said plat. 7. The City hereby agrees that in the event the Railroad determines that its culvert 0-83 is inadequate to accomodate the diversion of drainage and the increased runoff of drainage due to the grading and drainage work, that it will at its cost and expense furnish, construct and maintain an additional waterway opening under and across the Railroad 's track and embankment in the vicinity of the Railroad 's culvert 0-83, such additional waterway to meet with the approval of the Railroad and conf oriri with the specifications of the Railroad. — 2 — . �P 8 . The City hereby agrees that it will release, indemnify, defend and save harmless the Railroad, its successors and assigns, from all liability, cost and expense for loss or damage to property of whomsoever, and for injury to or death of persons, by whosoever sustained, which may be caused by, result from or grow out of exercise of the right, license and privilege to enter upon the right-of-way hereinabove described, and to grade , slope and maintain the drainage ditch and slopes and to install and maintain two (2) storm sewer outlets and surge basins as shown on said plat. Any contract between the City and its contractors or subcontractors to perform the work herein provided to .be done by the City shall require the said contractor or contractors to protect the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company and any other railroad occupying or using the Railroad' s right-of-way or lines of railroad with the permission of the Railroad party to this agreement against all loss and damage arising from the activities of the contractor, his forces or any of his subcontractors or agents; and shall further provide that the contractor shall furnish to the Railroad a Railroad Protective Liability Insurance Policy providing for protection to the Railroad in accordance with the United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration Policy and Procedure Memorandum 20-12, issued June 30, 1967 , with revisions of July 13 , 1967 , and September 29, 1967, and supplements thereto. The limits of such policy or policies shall not be less than $500, 000 . 00 for all damages arising out of bodily injuries to or death of one person and subject to that limit for each person, a total of $1, 000, 000. 00 for all damages arising out of bodily injuries to or death of two or more persons in any one occurrence; and not less than $500 , 000 . 00 for all damages arising out of injuries to or destruction of property in any one occurrence and, subject to that limit for any one occurrence, a total limit of $1 , 000, 000 . 00 for all damages arising -3- • 4, /2- out of injuries to or destruction of property during the policy period. Said _insurance shall be executed by a corporation qua to write same in the State of Minnesota and shall he deli lifted and approved delivered to by the Railroad prior to the beginning of work. 9 . The City hereby agrees that all work shall be done subject to the final approval of the Railroad, 10 . The terms and conditions of this agreement shall and be binding upon/the benefits thereof shall accrue to the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto, but the City shall not assign the same or any rights thereunder without the written consent of the Railroad having been first obtained. In the event the Railroad shall permit any other Railroad to use its said right-of-way facilities or premises, such other user or users shall have the benefit of the provisions of indemnity and release from liability inuring to the Railroad hereunder, with the same effect as if such user or users were parties hereto. . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL AND PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY • Secretary By: Vice Pr- ident-Chief En. neer ATTEST: / 1/ CITY OF SHAKOPLL Cler By: • -4- il • out of injuries to or destruction of property during the policy period. Said insurance shall be executed by a corporation qualified to write same in the State of Minnesota and shall be delivered to and approved by the Railroad prior to the beginning of work . 9. The City hereby agrees that all work shall be done subject to the final approval of the Railroad , 10. The terms and conditions of this agreement shall and be binding upon/the benefits thereof shall accrue to the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the respective parties hereto, but the City shall not assign the same or any rights thereunder without the written consent of the Railroad having been first obtained. In the event the Railroad shall permit any other Railroad to use its said right-of-way facilities or premises , such other user or users shall have the benefit of the provisions of indemnity and release from liability inuring to the Railroad hereunder, with the same effect as if such- user or users were parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement the day and year first above written. CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL ATTEST: AND PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY Secretary By: !� �� Vice Pr ' ident-Chief En neer AT- / / , 1. ..., - 4../„. // CITY OF SIiAKOPEE /, , 7:2 C er By: / , . , 1 " r®R M PROV D . -(72--e—neral Attorney C.M.BT,P.&P.R.R.00. ''." -g .ill1) ., _s.' 74ed .4/ _ , Arsr ra,-r f.,, near.inear.nt et _q_ f .' P a P.6.H.,:0. OF SHAKOPEE \O . t ' INCORPCRATEO 1870 i ;E. 129 E. FIRST AVE. 55379 4! ?' f May 29, 1975 VI. C. 1';hitham Division Engineer Chicago, Milwaukee , St. Paul & Pacific Railroad Company Aberdeen, South Dakota 57401 rir. \ hitham: Enclosed herewith please find a copy of the Agreement between the City of Shakopee and the Chicago, Milwaukee , St. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company dated Llay 27, 1975. Sincerely, Doug Gorie sky City Engineer DG/jsc Encl. 1 C C: W. E. Pular Ti, 3 Heart of nrogrois Va / Ioy • MEMO TO: John Anderson City Administrator FROM: H. R. Spurrier City Engineer RE: VIP Interceptor Sewer Project #81-1 DATE: July 17, 1981 Introduction: In a meeting July 14, 1981, City Council requested clarification of assessment methods for the VIP Interceptor so that conformance with existing policy could be established. Background: When the VIP Trunk (sic) Sanitary Sewer report was prepared April 26, 1979 four (4) alternative methods of assessing the VIP construction were preposed (see attached Appendix F from that report) . None of the alternatives were accepted, but Council indicated a preference for a single lateral rate. After analysis of the four alternatives above by City staff and following informal discussion with Council, seven (7) more alternatives were proposed in the assessment worksheet, attached. Due to right-of-way acquisition, the project was delayed and three more alternatives (see attached) were proposed in the revision to the feasibility report, bringing the total alternatives to fourteen (14). Meanwhile, staff discussed still other alternatives with City Council as evidence by the memoranda from John Anderson to the Mayor and City Council dated December 22, 1980 (attached hereto) . The fourteen alternatives were generally iterative combinations using one alternative. That alternative is where the lateral cost is held constant, regardless of its true cost and the trunk cost is the balance. The oversizing cost for trunk and interceptor can be computed as an element of the cost of the interceptor and then the difference between the interceptor and trunk cost and the total cost is the lateral cost. John Anderson July 17, 1981 VIP Interceptor Sewer Project Page -2- To proceed at this point, three policy decisions are necessary. Those are the policy decisions that relate to what diameter is lateral, what diameter is trunk and what diameter is interceptor. It is my recommendation, the policies be as follows: 1. A sanitary sewer with a nominal diameter between 8 and 10 inches, shall be considered a lateral. 2. A sanitary sewer with a nominal diameter between 12 and 15 inches shall be considered a trunk. 3. A sanitary sewer with a nominal diameter 18 inches and greater shall be considered an interceptor. The next step is preparing a defensible computation of the interceptor, trunk and lateral cost. The next policy pertains to the computation of the cost. It is my recommendation the policy be as follows: 4. Interceptor sewer cost shall be the cost of interceptor sewer materials less the cost of trunk sewer materials; plus the cost of installing an interceptor sewer less the cost of installing a trunk sewer, which installation cost shall be based on the ratio of additional earthwork to construct the interceptor sewer; and plus any appurtenances specifically required for interceptor sewer. 5. Trunk sewer cost shall be the cost of trunk sewer materials less the cost of lateral sewer materials; plus the cost of installing a trunk sewer less the cost of installing a lateral sewer, which installation cost shall be based on the ratio of additional earthwork to construct the trunk sewer; and plus any appurtenances specifically required for trunk sewer. 6. Lateral sewer cost shall be the project cost less interceptor sewer cost and less trunk sewer cost. Next, a policy decision is required to determine how technical and administrative services will be included in the cost of the project. It is my recommendation the policy be as follows: 7. The cost of technical and administrative services shall be allocated to interceptor, trunk and lateral sewer based on the ratio of interceptor, trunk and lateral sewer respectively to the total cost. Allocation of right-of-way cost is the next policy matter. Right-of-way can be considered a lateral cost in as much as there is little or no difference between right-of-way for interceptor and right-of-way for lateral. In keeping with a philosophy that a person is not assessed more than once for the same improvement, right-of-way costs would be assessed only once and that would be for the lateral sewer. Therefore, I am recommending the following: John Anderson July 17, 1981 VIP Interceptor Sewer Project Page -3- 8. Right-of-way cost shall be a lateral benefit and assessed as a part of lateral cost. Before continuing, there are some preliminary definitions which should be discussed. A lateral sanitary sewer is a sewer which generally has no other sewer dis- charging into it or receives a discharge from a relative few number of lateral sewers. A trunk sewer is a sewer which receives the discharge from one or more lateral sewers. An interceptor sewer receives the discharge from one or more trunk sewers and conducts the flow to the treatment plant or to another interceptor sewer. It is important to keep this definition in mind as the benefit is assigned to the property in a sanitary sewer assessment area. Clearly interceptor costs can be assigned to the entire basin. Inthe case of the VIP Interceptor, 610 acres of the interceptor assessment area is unknown, and therefore, the interceptor cost for that area is deferred by having the City pay the cost now so that it can be recovered later as the 610 acres of interceptor area developes. I would therefore recommend the following policy for the assessment of interceptor benefit: 9. The engineer shall determine the total area to be served or benefitted by the proposed sanitary sewer. This area shall be considered the interceptor area. Trunk and lateral sewers benefit a more particular area. In analyzing the VIP Basin and other recently developed areas in Shakopee, it appeared that trunk sewers were installed every 1600 feet. I am,therefore,recommending the following policy: 10. Trunk benefit shall be assigned to all that land within the interceptor area lying 800 feet each side of the centerline of the sanitary sewer and not previously assessed trunk benefit. Lateral benefit very clearly is assigned to that property which actually fronts the sanitary sewer. Lateral benefit is therefore, assigned on a front foot basis. However, only a limited amount of that frontage is judged to have lateral benefit. Based on the ordinary depth of lots, lateral benefit could be limited to an area 100 to 200 foot from the centerline of the proposed sanitary sewer. I am recommending the following policy: 11. Lateral benefit shall be assigned to all property not previously served fronting the sanitary sewer. Any property more than 200 feet from the centerline of the sanitary sewer shall not have lateral benefit. • John Anderson July 17, 1981 VIP Interceptor Sewer Project Page -4- V • Discussion: Policies 1, 2 and 3 provide for a correlation between interceptor, trunk and lateral cost to the actual cost of construction. Policies 4, 5, and 6 specify the method for computing those costs. Policies 7 and 8 specify how expenses will be charged to the project. Policies 9, 10 and 11 specify the area benefitted by the sanitary sewer. Proposed policy for assessing sanitary sewer contains a three-level assessment. Until the VIP was constructed, there was never a facility that could be divided into the three categories specified above. However, it is clear that the City could be faced with the same type facility if the Shakopee-Jackson Interceptor is constructed. Therefore, it is important to establish the size range of a lateral, trunk and interceptor sewer. Based on the definition of the three sewers, the size ranges specified are reasonable. These policies establish the oversizing cost when the interceptor, trunk and lateral sewer cost is determined. The method of computation is more complex than the formula for watermain oversizing, as an example. However, sanitary sewer is installed at a variable depth and is subject to significant increase in cost with increased depth, therefore, a more complex formula was proposed. Technical services have ordinarily been proportioned to both trunk and lateral cost, as specified in the recommended policies. The assessment policy resolution does not specify that distribution. In the past, the City has not purchased right-of-way for construction of sanitary sewer. In this case, that right-of-way provides area for lateral construction as well as interceptor construction. In other words, had there been no need for the interceptor, the same right-of-way would have been required for lateral construction. I could not find specific reference to the particular method that would be used in assessing right-of-way cost, other than the fact that right-of-way cost would end up being assessed back to the same people that were selling the right-of-way. The computations in the Appendix illustrate the affect of including right-of-way in lateral sewer costs or in interceptor sewer costs. Finally, the area benefitted by the improvement is specified by policy. The part that is new, but not difference, is the specification of an interceptor, trunk and lateral area. Comparing this proposed policy to past practice, the interceptor area conforms generally to what had been specified as the trunk area in the past. The trunk area is a subdivision of the interceptor area and has the affect of resulting in more equitable assessments to benefitted property because the assessment more accurately represents the relative benefit preceived by the market, and finally, the lateral benefit area is specifically defined. In the past, lateral benefit was generally assigned to frontage without specifying the depth of benefit. John Anderson July 17, 1981 VIP Interceptor Sewer Project Page -5- Alternatives: Table 1 below, illustrates several alternative methods of computing interceptor, trunk and lateral cost. Each alternate represents a new assessment policy. Except for Alternative 4+, each of the alternates conform to the understanding outlined in the John Anderson memoranda dated December 22, 1980. Each of the alternates contains a slightly different philosophy in conforming to the assess- ment procedure outlined in the above-referenced memo. Alternate 1 assesses the interceptor cost and a proportion of the right-of-way cost to the entire service area, including the 610 acres of future service. The trunk cost is assessed to the entire area adjacent to the project, excluding the post-1985 service district, as directed in Item 2 of the December 22, 1980 memo. The lateral cost is assessed only to benefitted frontage without any consideration for the nonassessable front foot cost. Alternate 2 leaves the interceptor charge unchanged from Alternate 1, but includes the nonassessable front foot cost in the trunk cost. This has the affect of reducing the lateral cost. Alternate 3 includes the nonassessable front foot cost in the interceptor cost distributing that cost over the entire basin. The trunk cost is unchanged from Alternate 1 and the lateral cost is unchanged from Alternate 2. Alternate 1 proposes a single trunk rate by combining the interceptor cost and trunk cost and distributing it over the entire basin. The lateral cost is unchanged from Alternate 1, above. Alternate 5 proposes an interceptor charge unchanged from Alternate 1 above. The trunk cost is assessed to a smaller benefitted area, only 800 feet each side of the centerline of the pipe. The lateral charge is unchanged from Alternate 1, above. Alternate 6 represents the recommendation of the City Engineer. The interceptor cost does not include any right-of-way cost. The trunk cost contains no right- of-way cost and is divided by the 800 foot trunk service area. The lateral cost includes all of the right-of-way acquisition costs. An explanation of this assessment policy is given above. Due to the number of alternative assessment equations and due to dramatic difference in the amount assessed, it is recommended that Council provide a consensus on the assessment equation to be used as information until after the public hearing. Recommendations: It is the recommendation of staff that Council adopt Policies No. 1 through 11, specified above. The staff recommends that Council adopt Assessment Alternate No. 6, above. I hereby certry that this plan, specification, or report HRS/jiw was prepared by me . under my direct supervision and that I am a di I Registered Professional Attachments Engineer u der the a' s • . • tetof Minnesota. Date ._._ ._ �_. __?� _... ••eoistration No. 13689 6 699-- PRELIMINARY REPORT ON ESTABLISHING ASSESSMENT POLICIES AND RATES FOR THE VIP TRUNK SEWER GENERAL: Theresent city y policy for assessing trunk sanitary sewer benefits is based upon the increased cost over the usual lateral sewer costs. The lateral cost is the cost of constructing an 8" sanitary sewer and is usually to be assessed to the property abutting the sewer. The trunk benefit, which is the cost of the pipe oversizing and any extra trench depth, is usually to be assessed over the area served by trunk sewer. A tabulation of costs for various segments of the project and service areas are shown in Table I . Also included are corresponding estimated equival- ent lateral costs, assessable footage with assessed rates . ALTERNATIVE ASSESSMENT METHODS: The VIP Trunk Sewer service area is such that several alternative methods of determining trunk and lateral assessment rates can be developed and the suggested alternatives are presented below. Table II is an assessment worksheet delineating the estimated costs for various segments of sewer construction and the corresponding computations of the assessments for the alternate methods of assessing the project costs. The following is a description of the suggested alternate methods for determining trunk and lateral benefits for the VIP Trunk sewer. • ALTERNATE I : To establish a uniform lateral rate of $20.00/ft.assessment for the entire project as estimated cost is determined for an 8" sewer at an average depth of 10-12 feet. The rate would be assessed to the entire project length on the basis of adjusted front footage . The balance of the project cost would be assessed at a single rate over the area within the City of Shakopee as a trunk assessment. The estimated trunk rate is $681/acre. APPENDIX F I ALTERNATE II: The estimated lateral rate used is the same as Alternate I and the trunk rate is based on the project costs to Co. Rd. 17. Accordingly, the ,A estimated trunk rate is $733/acre. Alternate II would apply only if the 41 project and intended service area did not extend beyond the proposed commer- cial area at the intersection westerly of Co. Rd. 17. ALTERNATE III: r� Two equivalent lateral costs have been estimated to reflect construction '3= costs which differ significantly, mainly due to the cost'y excavation of lime- stone ledgerock north of Co. Rd. 16. Based on the estimates, the corresponding lateral assessment rates are $26/ft. north of Co. Rd. 16 and $15/ft. in the "Upper Valley", south of Co. Rd. 16. f .. ALTERNATE IV: �w Using the same estimated lateral rates as Alternate III, the area north of Co. Rd. 16 would be assessed at a lateral rate of $26/ft. and the area in the Upper Valley a rate of $15/ft. Based on a project costs of $1 ,346,055.00 to Co. Rd. 79, a single trunk rate would be $681/Ac. ALTERNATE V: Assess the project cost of the entire service area at a single trunk rate and no lateral assessment. The overall cost to provide service to the entire area for which the sewer is designed including 530 acres in Jackson Township, is $957 per acre with no consideration for lateral benefits. The overall cost to provide service to the area of the City of Shakopee only to be served is $1 ,235/acre with no consideration for lateral benefits . h p? On the basis of total estimated lateral benefits of $626,200 and if the remaining project costs of $1 ,039,415 is assumed to be trunk sewer benefits, the estimated trunk rate is $597/acre and the lateral rate is $20/foot. <� 5 APPENDIX F br • TABLE I 2 ALTERNATE ASSESSMENT RATE COMPUTATIONS ALT. I: Cost of project from Shakopee Inter- 7 ceptor to Co. Rd. 79 Uniform Lateral Cost & Uniform Trunk Cost ($20/frt.ft.lateral rate) (31 ,310) _ $1 ,396,055 - $626,200 $626.200 1 ,130 - $681/Ac. ALT. II: Cost of project from Shakopee Inter- ceptor to Co. Rd. 17 Uniform Lateral rate & Uniform Trunk Rate ($20/frt.ft.lateral rate) (23,530) _ $1 ,189,380 - $470,600- $470,600 980 $733/Ac. ALT. III: Separate Lateral Rates using single trunk rate for project from Shakopee Interceptor to Co.Rd.17 ($26/f rt.f t.lateral rate no.of C.R.16) ($15/frt.ft.lateral rate Upper Valley) Lateral Cost No.of C.R.16 Trunk Rate $370,700 = $26/frt.ft. 14,250 $1 ,189,380-(26) (14,250)-(15) (9,280) = 695/Ac. Lateral Cost Upper Valley 980 $141 ,145 = $15.20 frt.ft. (use $15) 9,280 ILT. IV: Separate lateral rate, separate trunk rate Shakopee Interceptor to Co.Rd.79 ($26/frt.ft. lateral rate Ind. ) ($15/frt.ft. lateral rate Upper Valley) $1 ,396,055-(26)(14,250)-(15) (17,060) _ $64 Ac. 1 ,130 • APPENDIX F 3 4-1 ;`.. 6 w t_: ` iff,t v)Ln p H•� 4 W • ^ cn CO o-7 O Crl CO 01 o .o .n H a <C :, asw 1-1 w 4-1 < ro 4-4 a w • n .1.) s.1 o cn a N o O m H U •,-. ,c1 in c*1 o• d 1 TJ N O CA 0)- N W VD 44 W H H N N 'n r- rt-)O c+'1 C13 t-4 Wr-1 N H M 1 H O X O O O 0 b W We-t O • I ^ �--1 r--1 CV H r.{ W 6 <4 V H r-� U W \ \ H H «, › H .-� M t\ E-7 O H W 1'1 N N 001 o W a ,-, cn H O U ;r U CW.) a7 h ✓, H < O O 0 0 O O OH N H -, Cr) Hw d CVO H H 0 V) .0 O 0 0 H H O O O OI• O O 0 W • in o do 0 3 0 U ^ o CO is, Ln CO r`n-1 as Ca WO c0c0CO 0' 01 `n �7 01 Ni r-I 0N (D CO '� O N !a R+ v)- v} yr v> yr <1)- <i)- .0CU . • 1.1 r-I w r. • 0 0 0- v H '01 0 "0 a O I L' I �w 0 0 VI +-' 0 0 H E+ H U VI U v) U H0 Ly U 0 0 00 0 WH J �1 0 O O U rA N aa) '-I N 0 4- O c a 0 Ca a) 0 .0 0 0 O U V) U U 0 U • a1 u) H N c1 • .0 0 -K 4C t- OTHER METHODS TO RECOVER COSTS: The City may find it appropriate to consider methods other than special assessment to recover the cost of financing public improvments. The other methods may also be considered as a financial means of providing for major maintenance cost, other trunk costs or for costs related to pro- viding for trunks, i .e. , easements, special studies, etc. An example of a sewer that is now in a condit-'on that will require major repairs is the "River Interceptor" along the Minnesota River. Most of the so-called "other methods" are based on a policy of collecting a "hook-up" or connection charge at the time when the facility is to be put into use by an individual when a connection to the trunk is made. A sewer hook-up charge could provide a fund to finance needed re- construction and major repair projects , in addition to financing part of new construction. Property that is assessed for improvments and deferred under "Green Acres" provisions and the deferments may create finance problems since the assessment cannot be collected when needed by the City. Consideration might be given to using the fund created by the sewer hook-up to alleviate deferred assessment collection problems. This report does not include a study of connection- charge amounts since it would be City wide and not be confined to one project. APPENDIX F 5 •(O r • w >rt I D o •x Cl) CD rD rt w n n a o CD 7ci N'' a � 9 a •v Cr PI H rt (C) O a (D (CD I J O' (D V 0 W v) • n.) • H V H N 0 rt rt '� W V n H• -cA cn rn L • 0 w ~ H. 0 0 0 o co0 H o 00 In V> (� C1:1) 0 (D • H 0 0 x w °C' • I, • v ON rD • rt u, H 0 kC x kUi HO H v II o ri P I P1 0 0 • r N H' uU' n `D CN H• b 0 0 , w .fD • 0 rt W • H O x aA 'v H O W (D I n O0 x Cl) W co 7i £ O I rt ••Lu H• -ca H I a) W rt (D -cn (D In CL V -CA (D 1107 0 0 P as H' Q+ Vi rt F., Q, (DD • C/1 CO 0 +v m v -Cr (• 0 n o o • 0 o p O O (D to H. C> In 00 W N Na 1/40 •0 0 f. 0 O O O (D CT 1/40 C' W OA TJ H N O ii O II 00 • 0 0 O rt o hi G cA a Ln O V 0 V CD CQ. II rt Vi In vi VI rt (D Ir II C( 0 C'd N • • • n H' W U N )•-•. -co. W O O o o rt (9/> N HIn �A' 07 W • H' Cn -C./) O W (D rt i0 A> 0 In rt • C/) \1/40 P C/) tV rt 0 W (D . (D a Cr dA -ri> .U) * '��' rt O II w • (D H H W a) C., i 0 u, ri H 0� H 0 0 rt Cu 9 (D p (1) l•-• H I-. v CO H 0 '.0 1� v rt W 0 (") o 0 U' 0 H Pi 0I n • •CO 0 V 0 0 0 O C/)V 0 O o o x tri D, n n N'' t'' tri (D C Q+ rt H a wCD r' n H N t-+ `C (D H H I-, N rt I II'T 0 W V, 07 11) m j~J I-W H tom) H 2�) H -CA Ill 'v - r(' 7 - Cr W H o .f I '-0 ID H' O '` O O In o An Iv 0 00 y b A 1 • Ji o pi b II W �^ H CDD l'' r USC . �� • U) r 0 I H H+ W V r N N • (D 1/40 H C0fr`CO to CS ."•• N -I 0 O O o �f 1."H H R> Ch H+ q rt m O al W CO 7 (D cn o m y 0 CO 'r] I-. m rt (D H I-. (..nn H O o II (n o O O o 'O • x - nn 9. CD C 0 w a n . f F. rt rt rt rt w w w w rt rt rt rt (D (D 0 (o v Cr lo .P- N to 1-4 ON ~ H H ti CO CT U) (y Cl) -4 H H O b C' •O N CO W U) Cb (D G. 9 U, 0. 'd O to • In Cb ,D N Cl) In %.D • C") t' CO I •••-• • t'' (D VI to t'' Hv I--' U) H 5 OtZ rt ON HZ rt • • 0 Di Nrt O CD 0 (D - o co OD .A 0 (D c O O (D rt O' rt 0 V • ti 0 N • ri W 0 0 ri co H rt --J CD v, w H 0 II CD n U, 0 H Co O 0 H H H 0 7d '— ,-n rn ' 1-1) (D II t'h 0 N 0 �Wd `C H H 0 rt (D I•I . rt 11 11 H . rt • rt rt ti 7J (D ",V (D V (D l-- CD 0 ..• -,n N • s• V, l", n N H H Co '0 rt (D rt CO 6N O H V 0 W O Cl) O Cr, CA v H 0 (D V Cb (D U, H C7 p Cp 'd v GIN ' 0 o N) u as w o w v a • H n o ri 9 t•i ... o w n co 7c1 co cn II rt • rt .---, CL II N rt (D (o • to .® • H H v H H O H N N }C O rt ri U,- U, CT 00 V (W C H• 9 'F 7" 0 0 . (D N n v CA 0 0 ON O iv I O 'L) rt O I t, V rt rt to U, (U II (D .C-- (D N CO- rt 0 H 0 .O O O V N U) 0 0 70 tt, O M 0'1 rt (D S rt Do 0 H 0 U, C 0- W rt rt N 10 ri V.) 0o r• • co • W H (D 0 4 H O V H VI 1 rt to d H 0 0 1O G3. `-' a. W HI J I • •.I 7)-" to ---.. H 0 (n l"d C) W H V CO l0 'd r~ U) v {n v t-' f o) U, ON, ti 'd • ON '0 N O rt CD O O < P1 v Ln ri it H 0. v H < 0 II c n to H n I H CD W to �! U) W `C H W H V R, U) Lk) � ° ON 0. a m tV n rt N -Co to tt, 0 U, N N 0 O Cb ti n v 0 CCn n b rt Pi 0 ON f C c rt Cn y' Y w 0 a '1 •t H • IT7 1/44 o y cort r c r e a, -40.- ., tA VI (A "J V/ 0 L 6 6 • 1 Main Office 571.60 UBURBAN 6875 Highway No. 65 N. E. L NQINEERINO Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 South Office 890-6510 Civil, Municipal & Environmental Engineering 1101 Cliff Road Land Surveying • Land Planning • Soil Testing Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 Li REPORT a TO: City of Shakopee December 2, 1980 FROM: Suburban Engineering, Inc. SUBJECT : VIP Interceptor Sewer Preliminary Assessments An updated preliminary report for the VIP Interceptor was submitted on November 26th. That report contained no review of the preliminary assessment for the project but the. revised project costs are used as the basis for this report. This report is an analysis of three possible methods for assessing benefits for the project. They are consistent with City Policy and similar to methods sug- gested in the first report of April 26, 1979. The methods are based on a two part assessment, lateral benefit for properties abutting the improvement and Interceptor bene- fit for all areas being served by the improvement. The first method shown is based on costs and assessments for other projects completed by the City in 1980. The pre- liminary assessment rates that have been computed for these projects is about $40.00/ft. where the project includ- ed excavation of ledge rock. An allowance or reduction in cost for construction without ledge rock excavation is used in the amount of $10.00/ft. The second method is similar to the first exct-pt that the lateral assessments used is $40.00/ft. with no reduction for construction without ledge rock. The third method shown is also based on the rate of $40.00 foot for lateral benefit in areas where ledge rock excava- tion xcava- tion is performed. The difference with the first method is that the Interceptor benefit is computed on the basis of that portion of the project in the industrial area where ledge rock is a factor and is then applied to the rest of the project. The lateral benefit is computed on the basis of the remaining balance of project cosi_;. Page I of 2 Robert Minder,Reg.Eng. E.A. Rathbun,Reg.Surv. Wm. E.Price,Reg. Eng Gary R.Harris,Reg.Surv. Peter J. Molinaro,Reg.Eng. Wm. E.Jensen,Reg.Eng. William J.Brezinsky,Reg.Eng. H. William Rogers,Reg.Sure. Bruce A. Paterson,Reg.Eng. Robert E.Lund,Reg. Eng. Thomas F Donahue,Reg.Eng. 67 To: City of Shakopee Re : VIP Interceptor Sewer Preliminary Assessment December 2, 1980 Page 2 of 2 The estimated costs for both methods are shown in the attached data sheet. The results area are follows: Lateral Rate Lateral Rate Interceptor Method with rock exc. for non-rock areas Rate I $40.00/ft. $30.00/ft. $764.00/ac. II $40.00/ft. $40.00, tt. $725.00/ac. III $40.00/ft. $20.80/ft. $798.00/ac While all methods give similar results, the first method is believed to be more equitable and therefore is the one recommended for the City to follow. Respectfully submitted, William E. Price, P.E. SUBURBAN ENGINEERING, INC. WEP/lh enc. I2/2/80 J V IP Interceptor Sewer Preliminary Assessment Revisions Method I Lateral Benefit rate @ $40.00/ft. for area of rock excava- tion and $30.00/ft. for non-rock area. Total Project Cost (T.H. 101 to Co.Rd. 17) $1, 341,040.00 T.H. 101 to Co.Rd. 16 Lateral Assessment ( 13930 ft.@ $40.00/ft) $557, 200.00 Co.Rd. 16 to Co.Rd. 17 Lateral Assessment (3480 ft/ @ $30.00/ft. ) $104,400.00 Total Lateral Assessment $ 661,600.00 Interceptor Benefit (Balance of Project Cost $ 679,440.00 Interceptor Assessment Rate = $679,440.00 ÷ 890 Ac. = $764. 00 Ac. Method I I Lateral benefit assessment @ $40.00/ft. for entire project. Area benefit based on balance of cost for area east of Co. Rd. 17. Total Project Cost $1, 341, 040.00 Lateral Assessment - 17,410 @ $40.00/ft. $ 696,400.00 Interceptor Benefit (Balance of Project Cost) $ 644, 640.00 Interceptor Assessment Rate = $644, 640.00 : 890 Ac. = $725.00/Ac. Method III Latera I benefit assessment $40.00/ft. based on current projects with ledge rock excavation. Area benefit based on cost in Industrial Area only . a. T.H. 101 to Co. Rd. 16 Project cost - 1 . 1275 x 905, 755 = $1,021 , 260.00 Lateral Assessment = 13,930/f t.@ $40.00= $ 557, 200.00 Interceptor Benefit Assessment (Balance cost in Industrial Park Area $ 463,060.00 Interceptor Assessment Rate = $463, 060 ÷ 580/Ac. $798.00/ac. b. Co. Rd. 16 to Co. Rd. 17 Project Cost = 1 . 1275 x 283, 605 = $ 319, 780.0 0 Interceptor Assessment = 798 x 310 = $ 247, 380.00 Lateral Assessment $ 72,400.00 Lateral Assessment Rate = $72,400 : 3480 = $?0.80/ft. MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council FROM : John K . Anderson , City Administrator RE : VIP Sewer Project DATE : December 22 , 1980 introduction The day after the December 16 , 1980City Council meeting , 1 was talking to the City. Engineer about the V; 1' Sewer Project and he expressed some concerns about the action taken by the City Council the previous evening . Specifically , he felt that the scope of the area over which the assessments were to be spread ( including deferred assessments ) was broader than originally planned in the Engineer ' s report which would result in areas assessed that hadn ' t been notified of the formal. 429 public hearing . As a result of this concern , I suggested we meet with the Mayor and the Acting Mayor to determine ne whet her or not we had a problem . Background At a December 18 , 1980 meeting we traced the project ' s develop- ment leading up to the December 16 , 1980 public hearing . Accord- ing to the City Engineer , Resolution No . 1423 and tapes of the City Council ' s discussion ordering the project indicated that the area in Jackson Township served by the sewer should not Inc included in the assessment . The Mayor !;npI,orted this by Teta l l - ing that Jackson Township had sent a letter saying they wanted nothing to do with the VIP Sewer Project so the area was "lopped off . " At the December 16 , 1980 public hearing , Mr . Roberts ., a represen- tative of Shakopee Sand & Gravel was prer;ent and he was told that his "assessments would be deferred since he couldn ' t be served ; " and the City Engineer was instructed to insure that the people on the eastern end of the VIP didn ' t pay for inter- ceptor oversizing that served areas to the south and west that would ultimately benefit from the project - an instruction the City Engineer took to mean that these areas were to he assessed . AC the December 18 , 1980 meet in ; , niter considerable discussion , the following course of action seemed the most practical in light of the potential problems discussed above : 1 . The portion of the area served by the project from 101 to County Road #17 would be assessed . The proposed construction stops at County Road /117 . 2 . The portion of the area served by the project between County Road //17 and County Road 1179 would have a cicleered assessment for oversizing ( interceptor costs only) until sewer was - _.. _..A..t...t...w." '`"v .>. - - - y— ;)7;kit4. 0. available . . ewer wi l l he oval labll' in ti � , )8 � when thy. MhJCC . ,. increases our sewer allocation and sewer can be M 'sarily is ) extended into this area . (not neves 3 . No other areas wi I l receive a 'rte) t vpe assessment . 4 . The area west of County Road ;'79 (.in( kson 'township) and /or the area south of the proposed by-pass lying east of County Road #79 will be subject Co an avai labi l i Ly charge ( tap- in fee) similar to a WCC SAC charge for their fair share of Lhe cost of the proposed interceptor . The SAC charge would be based upon a flow computation rather than a "size of pipe computation" because the unique nature of the project requires oversized pipe to serve the eastern end ci the project with or without the western portion . 5 . In this manner all areas ultimately benefited will pay for a share of the interceptor cost and the city can proceed with the project because it is not assessing areas not notified of the 429 hearing December. 16 , 1980. This approach also provides needed flexibility because it would he difficult to define today which area (s ) would be served in the future - Jackson Township or the area south eL the proposed. by-pass . 6 . Council may well have to pass a special levy to "front end" the resulting two levels of deferred assessments - namely the one between County Road #17 and #79 deferred until 1985 and the deferred assessments that will be collected in the form of SAC charges . It was the consensus of those at the meeting that the need for the levy would be checked each year. and "special Levies" made when needed to, retire the bonds over their 10 year hie . 7 . "Special levy" dollars levied to assist the PIP fund pay for the bonds would be "reimbursed" when the delayed assessment fees are collected and if the SAC fees are collected . (There is the slight possibility that the areas in question would not develop) . Summary The above implementation strategy will allow the project to go forward and still incorporates the intent of council ' s action December 16 , 1980 to "spread the assessments over everyone who benefits . " If any Council member sees a problem wi th this method of imple- menting the VIP Sewer Project please call me on Monday so Lh,lt. the City Engineer and I can do the necessary background work before Tuesday night ' s meeting . If everyone concurs with this implementation no further action is required at this time , however , it could well mean a "special levy" in the years ahead . JKA/jms AQP-�-- s���SM� T 'EQ }KTkrc)os 1L-Tmok-TE L - j 2 C LQ - f\FC s , �C 7 c. TC - T C, -- Cp-%7' LG - LST CbsT ,N Ass ss kit Cizm-7 T.C- V–A(c,k- C– �F -kzt "Cqk.. L T--dc^-W4\ Ca'sT - \Reo- \fig Q�t \c‘ss - kok90 447,5-e1)1- II — 800 - ��jvsT v - Tom. rzKvnVE I ii_���t�ck C'rto 1 tz u r� ii -�- { ►i1 . 9Z51 (08/\c_, /69, x300485 //‘ ti 35. 7._z.o53 /r. F. 2 ! Az /c , X-387 .088'1 B2 /Ac., x -2'3. 50(0 z./ 734/F.T, � 2�z ,9z.7r8?e{ /c, 19, 33004851A c ,5 (0z-'7 -5e1-/ F iI )/90, 3 3472/l4c. a # 35,7..z05 (0 /F, F; , , ' �a ///,4Z5`/(NEVA .�(a/, 00'27Q) t7l /tc , 7$35 #"z C /F,F, ,01OO-b402?6Z/-c , e5 z.(0 ,0(0 r , ',jac, � '37.'3G886,78/,r, I �I I *44„..... . ...✓ten Mme��._. ,� .� N►Ml AkkbL1, VF ASSt 1,1-S Q To) --t-trik 10 Air ( - 1990 5tiel N7k: &LB 405-S AC-) f-UT U1?( Cto 1 i ". "7, (0(07- • -067, ?Go?, -1437, (9(0 7.5 7, fa .1 I I 41- 41 34 5 z 11 5 34 Of 7 1 'V\?,' I Ti, L_ c9 08 0� , a � 1 , 1 1 I X1 . p X . ci , 1 ,,, , / .\ \ I : ' \ , , t.) if ---1 ica/ . 111 ,4 ,... 03:14 8 0 ' C O �� Y= �r- op- _ •,� ... • / _ __ d \ - - I ' / cU .44.9 4 cip — z ofi_rx: .-- ' :1,4!:',..i.: ___, g 1, III i _ e >a I t F\ is LS IJ �I }I J1 A L10�3.dina♦ :! JJ \. Ili /15 1JIM5 , Wl\I. <` ___ ` `\ � ❑❑ A3Sw Va I i --• r, �❑ 15 A3lBIS • -.I 1 1_ I _ __ _ 33� —_ I O /• / NO!,3h r t J 15 1 MVH AV 9tl•MWf1tlN . 1 L., ,I I I O O t1;i AAP _- alvadIvim' Pc_PEA <' svloNva 'k i- 1 , t,.\_, .lciir ❑ y5 Nitw iiAlliii \‘` -losior.,s Em �I ,. ____\ 1 i II' tl3ww05 5L 0!! o ❑aLL-'1: asa L�ai ea se fir. i SIM31 i °' •mil.: its ❑ 531110N t ld I I Z k ' i'..ilivilAvYd'iletilifillfil 1111110-4000=1311111❑ •t. �ZI• _ _._- �._. O�. Z Y31 !0000°E❑ g uos _ ; o ❑) . I❑ ❑ AVMwNs1 j TiWI !I i ' ) W ys ❑ ` 3 ri .. ' o 1 I 1 / u I � ❑A'� as >tavw�lsl .. _ u rT $1 15 ® ❑ t �❑ Hs VM L aouoNl r i — ls swta - — y5 15 AONIi1Df W -_J S N V`- f ❑ J NOs 1 p .-- &5-1,471, _.-_J< a PNIS _ _ �❑ 10�I; Noswv j 1 is r M J IN / laa MOsd� Nos Dvr II- , f_ Jl- / NOaNV tF J S � a '15 F tl311�Fi rlt ^_-I� J 1 2, t— r __— I. 1s rloe l r 1 i (-1,,I 58Oa 0� \ I 1r / ‘ I.' d ,,/ \ 1 , / _ / L___ .\ i , iI/ 1.,r ` QPM / A 5, J _a_. / 2.i _._ . , , F---- .. , , 1 , , 11 / � . . jT' �� r. C � ,I 1 X ‘ :: '' . . , f 21--- 1 I 1 , , , � i � A Z , 1S _ 1 1 i(-.11tlairt 0 , 1S ZI ( , )013.i1aa �. 1 \ T/ 1 / ��� �&'15 BINS, �� I \ - 111 � �F-1A3swva \ I — r--�I LS A31815 10 I / -7- - -wail Fji..-- 1 O - —JI 1 1 t________ __ 3 r----40;1. I(�(HIVHd1 l/ I 1 AL , _1�1� U S v10NYJ ,,„,,, L d s Lr— y1053NN ls� -cJ -- r41,rd --' � els I L 113,,11wa •P [.... al AI '15 r------F11:111 15 1 �pI ^7/118.. .s®r,....IVB ir, 1.83.11105 r marl um '+d '�- *Ow r- aaa 53w10N lw it ti: i W • ais a❑aa1 o a— �__ 1 n I, 1111 WM I Y r �q�y�'` I .. ■'15 ©110011 000M1v Q ZI ,I Fes” f (L�❑ CI]W _ a 1 s a / _ 0 11005 Cn -- `1 I 1 =.� AB v O 1 1.... M �. u 15 �am ®1oSY - _.. . '' I ( . �a 1/ , ) — L as o� ��.®aaaL AVMwnNs k �Iw / i i '+ op Iani i n 01 s I §. I / I❑OWCO, 30831d Ir__ `�' l�l 4 IL' I i N � 2 2 1115 L ��Av10I1 -__ -5 a Q u , 0 a Av aa� Navw is j' u I r ' 15 L i — 5 � I Ll';:"--1-- ,.. N0110N1Hsv1. IL 15 15 swv0v 15 17NInof W ..J ' - '15 NOS ( ___ J SI MVS 0,9,\_,, \ IH 3333_-�(< • \ a ls' (�`qs a,,,, i , I , ____, 1S -/-,::11111= 30tl Now L-- ------ - I ,_ M �y3tlna WI f J w 4°44-7111111 NosNovr ii,-----) �[ JI' CC K ' I 1\ �1NosiaavNl'g - -_]�'__I _ a; / is If- N3-41-11.7 j ' t—_- � `�r — — —/ fff — -1S Ai0d 11 "s [ d - d Qv/ / \ ". \VI I , / tib as OT — -, 1 ,\ _ / / \ 1 I --1 J 6/ I II I /� WG r/ I it , z: / eP)` I '_--.moi__ I 1 --�.-.. 1 / ' - 1 `•. i y \_ /is r ` \ — oia�ylaa 1\I\ 1 k �'�� _ µ jii 10 : r't , I1�It 3I4 - I h ' u „ , 1161 ) .1. is l 331"411 �� O ---__ >/ Ls3SNVd1 \ ( I \t N01537 \ I \ r 1 I a r s is A "�s 4 cmc[Z w --....1H s 1__ t ." ' .IN 1s nvN 74'4 ��� to ovrwnvN V I \\ a FE_ It \ cr, '�'fs 14 i - 7 1 - 7 '15 I I 13lltl,w I 1 nsI '15 I L Nltlw .1.111 \ ( \ ri) "... 00E3.. , ,,n1 �1 \ 1 1 � i ��� tl3 � wwos !DI:. 6L as .G��:I J .e ©��a l i SIM 3l •ri 'L s ` 1 ME S3wlON W Ytfl I II , 0000 �1�' 15 ❑°aC-7-1/3110a_ �_ j - Y Y ' ' •. .'__s ❑❑011 000M1V Q ZI LJ 1 I Q I g - o■;❑ 0000� 1 !�%ll ®'11110�C�a�� - � � _- - _ [1-- i as o� 1v oisfr o o ,itf 1 , I �❑is ❑�0'. 33tl3Id 1 3 L i = d f I N) O a'15 —� I c �I 1' U a� 'Otl\�Mtltlw'lsl 41 LE ' mV=1;\ rF7 /1 1 G I 1L t 1ssmstlM - �'s 1 sN - is \is �J 1�— -_lu ; - I' j SI HV$ iriii ` :\ ,,--,- nOS___ T. Z® __NIQ r� .ore �J OSOr. (--c3-7,/, 1( J1- I L b3WItl wit: 1 i � , �I NosiatlrNl' ]_ a 'I / ® _ . tl3l1L ---1�I ' I "JI r J/ d 15 M1 d 1� , //1 �/ 1 I „J‘ 7? MEMO TO: John Anderson City Administrator FROM: _ Don Steger City Planner RE: Ordinance Amendment DATE: July 14+, 1981 The Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to provide for the requiring of a bond when moving a structure. The bond would insure that moved structures would be brought into compliance with the Building Code or that the site would be returned to its original condition. Attached is the staff report to the Planning Commission regarding this matter. Requested City Council Action: Direct proper City officials to prepare appropriate document which would require a bond when moving a structure. (The wording of the ordinance amendment is included in the attached staff report to the Planning Commission). DS/jiw Attachment • MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Don Steger, City Planner - RE: Ordinance Amendment DATE: June 30, 1981 At the last Planning Commission meeting, a Conditional Use Permit was granted to allow a house to be moved within the City. One of the conditions for approval was that a bond be required equal in amount to the cost necessary to bring the structure in compliance with the Building Code . Following the Planning Com- mission meeting , the staff was informed by the City Attorney that this bond could not be required because the Zoning Ordinance did not specifically list the bond as a condition for approval . With this in mind , the Planning Commission may want to con- sideramending the Zoning Ordinance and listing the bond require- ment as a condition for approval . The staff has published the necessary legal notice so that this proposed amendment could be acted on at the July 9, 1981 Planning Commission meeting. The staff is recommending the Zoning Ordinance be amended as follows (the underlined portion reflects the proposed amend- ment) : Section 11 .05 Subdivision 9 (pp. 297 and 298) D. The dwelling unit must meet all requirements of the Building Code within six (6) months after it is moved. A bond shall be required equal in amount to the cost necessary to abate deficiencies . F. Structures other than dwelling units must meet the follow- ing minimum standards : 1 . Meet all requirements of the Building code within six (6) months after it is moved. A bond shall be required equal in amount to the cost necessary to abate deficiencies . 2 . Be compatible with adjacent homes and structures . By using the wording indicated in the proposed amendment, the City Building Inspector would have the option of using the bond to bring the moved structure into compliance with the Building Code, or using the bond to remove the structure from the property and restore the land to its original condition. DS/jam apt • 7/0 MEMO TO: John Anderson City Administrator FROM: Don Steger City Planner RE: Rezoning for I & 44 Liquor (proposed new location) AKA Family Dining DATE: July 14, 1981 A public hearing was held on July 9, 1981 by the Planning Commission on the request to rezone a parcel of land along the south side of Highway 101 which would permit I & 44 Liquor to relocate. The staff report to the Planning Commission is attached. Planning Commission Recommendation: Recommended to the City Council that the rezoning be approved contingent upon the adjacent properties (indicated on the attached map) being rezoned to the B-1, Highway Business Zone next month. The Planning Commission will initiate the additional rezoning of adjoining properties. Requested City Council Action: Approve rezoning the 2.63 acre parcel of land (immediately east of Landey's Camping Center) from I-2, Heavy Industrial to B-1, Highway Business, contingent upon the adjacent properties, indicated on the attached map and described as follows, being rezoned to the B-1 Zone next month: Cretex Industrial Park 1st Addition Lots 1-3, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 3 Howe 1st Addition - Lot 1, Block 1 (pending recording of plat) Case 1st Addition - Lot 1, Block 1 Tobco, Inc. - a 5.17 acre parcel in Section 2-225-22 Landey's Camping Center - a 5.8 acre parcel in Section 3-115-22 A 6.2 acre parcel in Section 3-115-22; Fee owner: Darwin Hentz; Contract for Deed: Rosemarie Gearman DS/jiw Attachment DATE: July 9 , 1981 (( CASE: PC 81-20R ITEM: Rezoning I-2 (Heavy Industrial) to B-i (Highway Business) APPLICANT: Richard Swadden (Family Dining Inc .-DBA 1&44 Liquor) LOCATION: Highway 101 (East of Landey ' s Camping Center) LAND USE: Vacant AREA: 2 . 63 acres APPLICABLE REGULATIONS : Section 11 .03 Subd. 5 ; Section 11 .04 Subd 7 ; Section 11 . 29 FINDINGS REQUIRED : Section 11 .04 Subd. 7 I PUBLIC HEARING CASE HEARD BY PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a rezoning from the I-2 Heavy Industrial Zone to the B-1 Highway Business Zone . The applicant would like to relocate the 1 & 44 Liquor Center from its present location to the 2 . 63 acres being requested for re- zoning, immediately east of Landey ' s Camping Center. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY: Surrounding Land Uses : North-Vacant (North of Hwy. 101) South-Vacant ( Industrial land) East-Case Inc . and Raceway Park West-Landey ' s Camping Center and Mobilehome Minnesota Urban Services Availability: City sanitary sewer and water services are available to site . CONSIDERATIONS : 1 . The applicant desires to construct approximately 23 , 800 square feet of retail space on the 2 . 63 acres of land. Half of the building is proposed to house the 1 & 44 Liquor. Center, while the other half is planned for rental to an unnamed business . 2 . Adjoining land uses , both to the east and west of the proposed site , are of a general highway business type even though the current zoning is I-2 , Heavy Industrial . These land uses are those normally associated with a highway business district, i . e . large land users requiring high visibility along a high- way frontage. Because of this , no incompatibility of land uses are anticipated should the rezoning be approved. 3 . Except for the land immediately east of Valleyfair Amusement Park, it appears as though no B-1 highway business land re- mains vacant within the entire eastern portion of Shakopee . Page 2 4. Access to the proposed site is via a frontage road paralleling Highway 101 . All existing adjoining businesses receive access to the highway from this frontage road. No access problem to the site is anticipated. 5 . The I-2 Heavy Industrial Zone which currently exists in the area along Highway 101 , already allows numerous highway busi- ness land uses . These land uses are of a type which are compatible with and similar to the proposed land use. Liquor stores are often not differentiated from these common high- way businesses , however, it is not specifically listed in the I-2 Zone. Therefore, a rezoning is necessary to accommodate the proposed development . 6. The proposed site is sufficiently large to accommodate the planned building(s) , required parking, loading, etc. 7 . The rezoning request consists of one parcel of land, therefore a spot zone would result . Because such practice is undesire- able , rezoning adjoining property both to the east and west could be considered. The existing land uses (businesses) in this area would be compatible with such a rezoning to the B-1 Highway Business Zone . In addition , the City Assessor indi- cated that such a rezoning of the existing businesses should not diminish their values nor reduce the tax base . In fact, the City Assessor commented that property values may be en- hanced since the area is dominated by highway businesses which are currently zoned for heavy industry. STAFF RECOMMENDATION : Staff recommends approval of the rezoning request with the stip- ulation that adjoining property also be rezoned so as to avoid a spot zone . The rezoning of the adjoining property should only occur after agreement by the property owners and satisfaction of the legal publication requirements which could occur next month. /jam ACTION TAKEN: (Planning Commission) Recommended to City Council approval of rezoning from I-2 to B-1 contingent upon the following parcels also being rezoned from 1-2 to B-l: Cretex Industrial Park 1st Addition - Lot 1-3, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 3 (27-073-001-0; 27-073-002-0; 27-073-003-0; 27-073-006-0) . Howe 1st Addition - Lot 1 Block 1 Case 1st Addition - Lot 1, Block 1 Tobco, Inc. - a 5.17 acre parcel in Section 2-115-22 Landy's Camping Center - a 5.8 acre parcel in Section 3-115-22. A 6.2 acre parcel in Section 3-115-22; fee owner: Darwin Rentz Contract for Deed: Rosemarie Gearman property Case No. PC 81-20R 2 Page 3 After Council action on Planning Commission recommendation. Rezoning of entire section as mentioned on preceding page to come back to Planning Commission for their further recommendation to City Council on said rezoning. City Council Action of 7/21/81: Ea MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Jeanette Shaner RE: Resignation of Phyllis Knudsen DATE: July 16, 1981 On July 7 , 1981 Phyllis Knudsen submitted the attached letter of resignation to become effective July 21 , 1981 . As per the Mayor ' s request , we have drafted the attached resolution of appreciation. Action Requested 1 . Accept Phyllis Knudsen ' s resignation. 2 . Adopt Resolution No. 1882 , A Resolution of Appreciation To Phyllis Knudsen. • U July 7, 1981 To : John Anderson, City Administrator LeRoy Houser, Building Official Larry Martin, City Assessor Mayor and City Council It is with this letter I hereby submit my resignation to become effective July 21 , 1981 . The reason for my leaving is because I was offered and have accepted a position with a firm that lends future advancement both personally and financially. I would like to thank you for the experience , acquaintances and friends I have gained through my employment with the City of Shakopee . Thank you again for the kindness everyone has showr. me. I will remember you all always. Sincerely, Phyllis Knudsen RESOLUTION NO. 1882 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO PHYLLIS KNUDSEN WHEREAS, Phyllis Knudsen has served the City of Shakopee in the capacity of Assessing Clerk and Building Department Secretary for over five and one-half years ; and WHEREAS , during her employment , Phyllis Knudsen took her responsibilities very seriously and performed them in a superior manner at all times ; and WHEREAS , Phyllis Knudsen well represented the City of Shakopee in serving the general public in a most cheerful and conscientious manner; and WHEREAS, Phyllis Knudsen was always willing and ready to assist her fellow employees when they asked for her help. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Shakopee City Council does hereby extend a token of thanks and appreciation to Phyllis Knudsen for her dedication and hard work during her employment with the City of Shakopee and wishes her will in her future endeavors . Adopted in Adj . Reg. Session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this 21st day of July, 1981 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of July, 1981 . City Attorney gb RESOLUTION N0, 1885 A RESOLUTION ORDERING ABATEMENT OF ASSESSMENTS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee, did by Resolution No, levy an assessment against Lots 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 32, Original Plat, City of Shakopee, being Parcel Nos. 27-001-0000-256-00 and 27-001-0000-257-00, owned by Jerome K. Wampach et ux, said assessments being in the amounts of $1,606.65 for Lots 4, 5 and 6, and $535.55 for Lot 7; and WHEREAS, the Honorable Jerome J. Daly, Judge of Scott County District Court did by his Order dated June 5, 1981 , order said assessments set aside and reassessed at a later date; and WHEREAS, prior to filing said appeal , Jerome K. Wampach caused said assess- ments to be paid in full , together with an assessment on Parcel No. 27-001-0000-259-00 in the amount of $330.26 which amount and which assessment was apparently inadvertently omitted by Judge Daly in his Findings of Fact and Order on appeal ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee as follows: 1. That the above-described assessments totaling Two Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Two and 46/100 Dollars ($2,472.46) are hereby set aside and the amount so paid by Jerome K. Wampach shall be reimbursed to him forthwith out of the Holmes Street Reconstruction Project No. 80-3 fund. Adopted and adjourned in regular session of the Shakopee City Council this 21st day of July, 1981. Walter C. Harbeck, Mayor Judith Cox, City Clerk S)(2., • MEMO TO: John Anderson City Administrator FROM: H. R. Spurrieror ,e' _ City Engineer RE: Final Payment for Minnesota Street Project - Fill & Grading DATE: July 16, 1981 Introduction: Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. has completed the above-referenced project. Background: Work specified in the above-referenced contract was satisfactorily completed. The City of Shakopee has received lien waivers from all sub-contractors with an interest in that project. The City has made previous payments in the amount of $5,719.00. The contractor has completed and inplace work valued at $6,387.50. The difference and therefore, the final payment amounts to $668.50. Recommendations: Council offer Resolution No. 1879, A Resolution Accepting Work On The Minnesota Street Project (Fill & Grading) and move for its adoption. HRS/jiw Attachment: Resolution No. 1879 Certificate of Completion i. N't .--..1": cv ;...ii:.. 1 , ir.---. CITE OF SHA OPEE 446.. ' .. INCORPORAT[D 187O ` 1 ,' 129 E. First Ave., Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612)445-3650 4 (Cr !Vt. CERTLFICATE OF COMPLETION v CONTRACT NO. -- DATE July 7, 1981 DESCRIPTION: Minnesota Street Project -- Fil.]. & Grading CONTRACTOR Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. ADDRESS 606 So. Market Street, Shakopee, MN 55379 The work on the Contract specified above has been completed and accepted by the City . ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $ 3,000.00 AMOUNT OF CHANGE ORDER NO. ] THRU NO. $ 3,400.00 TOTAL CONTRACT COMPLETE IN PLACE $ 6,387.50 LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS $ 5,719.00 FINAL PAYMENT $ 668.50 APP aVED: -, I-t �� ik it yly 7 , ,7_,=. ,, Dat 1 Tt �, 0 I l e ,; > t 0I I r o ,i r c s s V a JJ o y An Equal Opportunity Employer • RESOLUTION NO. 1879 A Resolution Accepting Work On The Minnesota Street Project (Fill and Grading) WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City on April 28, 1981, Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. , 606 Market Street, Shakopee, Minnesota, has satisfactorily completed the fill & grading for the Minnesota Street Project (4th and Minnesota) , in accordance with such contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of $668.50, taking the contractor's receipt in full, upon receipt of lien waivers from all sub-contractors. 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 1 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer RE: Final Payment for 3rd Avenue Watermain Improvement 80-5 DATE: July 17, 1981 Introduction Parrott Construction Company has completed the above referenced project. Background The work specified on the above referenced contract was satisfactorily completed. The City of Shakopee has made previous payment in the amount of $31,694.52. The contractor has completed and inplace work valued at $33,362.65. The difference and therefore the final payment amounts to $1,668.13. Final payment is recommended and approved by Shakopee Public Utilities Commission and by the City Engineer. Recommendation Staff recommends that City Council adopt Resolution No. 1878, A Resolution Accepting The Work On The 80-5 Public Improvement Program, Third Avenue Watermain. g- RESOLUTION No. 1878 ' A Resolution Accepting Work On. The 80-5 Public Improvement Program (3rd Avenue Watermain) WHEREAS, pursuant to written contract signed with the City on September 18, 1980, Parrott Construction, Inc. , 2047 Eagle Creek Blvd. , Shakopee, MN has satisfactorily completed the construction of 3rd Avenue Webster to Harrision by watermain, in accordance with such contract; and WHEREAS, on July 9, 1981, Shakopee Public Utilities Commission did so approve the completion of said construction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of $1,668.13, taking the contractor's receipt in full, upon receipt of lien waivers from all sub-contractors. 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 CITY OF SHAKOPEE 77 t ' INCORPORATED 1B70 ® IF 129 E. First Ave., Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (612)445-3650 1(0111%e-77'(01 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION : of CONTRACT NO. 80-5 DATE July 7 , 1981 DESCRIPTION: 3rd Avenue Watermain CONTRACTOR Parrott Construction, Inc . ADDRESS 2047 Eagle Creek Blvd. , Shakopee , MN 55379 The work on the Contract specified above has been completed and accepted by the City. ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $ 32 ,443 . 60 AMOUNT OF CHANGE ORDER NO. THRU NO. $ _0_ TOTAL CONTRACT COMPLETE IN PLACE $ 33 ,362 . 65 LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS $ 31 , 694. 52 FINAL PAYMENT $ 1 , 668. 13 APPROVED: ikkRibiRldbc REVIEWED: lic i lakopee Public Utilities Commission hi LIR- rManager C _ty ng *Sr 0 Date Dat: ha Heart al P r a ,i r V a ! I a tj An Equal Opportunity Employer T 34,WILLIAM D. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON • JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSONArk- SCHOELL & MA®SON INC. JACK E. GILL THEODORE D. KEMNA ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS JOHN W. EMOND KENNETH E. ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT - R. SCOTT HARRI (612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 GERALD L BACKMAN July 8 , 1981 Shakopee Public Utilities Commission c/o Mr. Lou Van Hout, Manager 1030 East Fourth Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Subject: 1, 500 , 000 Gallon Elevated Tank Improvement Project No. 79-9 Gentlemen: • Enclosed is Pay Request No. 13 which is the final request for the subject project. This amount on this request had been withheld until all punch list items and insurance claims were resolved. These items have now been resolved except for the leak from a flanged connection in the valve pit. Final payment is being recommended with the understanding that if the leak does not seal itself within the one-year warranty period, Pittsburgh- Des Moines Steel Company will repair the leak under the warranty. Also enclosed are Withholding Tax Certification forms and A- . Waivers of Lien from Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company and their '` five subcontractors. (,/ /ft/ $l Payment to Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company, in the amount .% /� $r of $3 , 000. 00, is approved and recommended. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. KEAdolf:mkr >L1 enclosures cc: Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company INVOICE PDM Pittsburgh-Des Moines Steel Company Enoneers Fabricators 1015 TUTTLE STREET • DES MOINES, IOWA 50308 • AREA CODE 515 PHONE 243-3261 Constructors 29663-15 INVOICE NO. - ESTIMATE NO. Thirteen INVOICE DATE April 30, 1981 YOUR ORDER NO. Contract TERMS N .T UPON R . .T OF INVOICE OUR ORDER NO. 29663 Value of work completed to date on one (1) 1,500,000 Gallon Hydropillar Tank at Shakopee, Mn. CUSTOMER City of Shakopee Shakopee, Mn. PLEASE REMIT TO: PITTSBURGH-DES MOINES STEEL CO., P.O. BOX 1596, DES MOINES, IOWA 50306 ATTN.: CREDIT DEPT. To Assure Proper Credit Always Refer To Our Invoice Number Description Estimated Cost to Complete % Com- Amount com- pleted Foundations & Sitework 171,518.00 100 171,518.00 Fabricated Material Shipped 483,382.00 100 483,382.00 Fabricated Material Erected 227,330.00 100 227,330.00 Electrical 3,860.00 100 3,860.00 Field Painting 72,500.00 100 72,500.00 Asphalt 10,610.00 100 10,610.00 Fence 10,000.00 100 10,000.00 Change Order #1 7,605.00 100 7,605.00 Change Order #2 582.00 100 582.00 Change Order #3 1,110.00 100 1,110.00 Change Order #4 7,459.00 100 7,459.00 Change Order #5 -2,200.00 100 -2,200.00 CONTRACT PRICE 993,756.00 993 Valuation of work completed to date $ 756.00 Less % retained $ 0.00 993 Amount payable $ 756.00 990 Less previous estimates $ 756.00 Amount due this estimate $ 3,000.00 PDM 802-1 PARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER Contract No.. 79-9 Partial Estimate Voucher No. 13 Period Ending 4/30/81 TO: Contractor PITTSBURGH-DES MOINES CORPORATION Address P. O. Box 1596, Des Moines, Iowa 50306 1 Original Contract Amount $ 979,200.00 2 Change Order No. 1 Thru No. 5 $ 14,556.00 3. Total Funds Encumbered $ 993,756.00 4. Value of Work Completed $ 993,756.00 5. Percent Retainage $ 0,00 6. Previous Payments $ 990,756.00 7. Deductions or Charges $ 0.00 8. Total $ 990,756.00 Payment Due (Line 4 - Line 8) $ 3,000.00 CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT ( I , We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work shown herein is a fair estimate of the work completed to date. PITTSBURGH-DES MOINES CONTRACTOR: STEEL COMPANY APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. BY: 1.n J ����JJJJ BY = cC�� TITLE: Division Credit Manazer Date: -7- 8- 6/ APPROVED REVIEWED BY SHAKOPEE PUBLIC CITY CF SHAKOPEE • UTILITIES COMMISSION •I ,. c ,. j City Engineer Manager BY: ' - Mayor Date Administrator Revised; March 7, 1980 RESOLUTION NO. 1881 A RESOUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON THE 1,500,000 GALLON ELEVATED TANK WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City on November 20, 1979, Pittsburgh-Des Moines Corporation, Des Moines, Iowa, has satisfactorily completed the 1,500,000 gallon elevated tank. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TILE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are hereby directed to issue a' proper oder for the final payment on such contract in the amount of $3,000.00, taking the contractor's receipt in full, upon receipt of lien waivers from all sub-contractor . 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 • i I' __ MEMO TO: John Anderson City Administrator FROM: H. R. Spurrier City Engineer ,►, `---- RE: Improvement of Halo 2nd Additi.n No. 80-10 Improvment of Bluff Avenue No. 81-2 DATE: July 17, 1981 Introduction: The above-referenced projects have been merged into one contract. Background: The improvement of Halo 2nd Addition was order September 16, 1980, in Resolution No. 1688. Improvement of Bluff Avenue was ordered June 9, 1981 by Resolution No. 1855• The two projects have been merged into one because of their proximity. The projects will be bid in separate schedules but shall be constructed under one contract. Detailed plans and specification are on file in the Engineering Department and may be reviewed at any time. These plans were not completed in time for Utility Commission review before Monday, July 20, and therefore, SPUC approval will be subsequent to the date of this memo. Plans will not be distributed before July 24th so therefore, there is sufficient time to make any alterations in the plans prior to distributing them to contractors. Recommendations: Staff recommends that City Council adopt Resolution No. 1859, A Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications, subject to approval by Shakopee Public Utilities and Ordering Advertising for Bids. Staff recommends that Council direct staff to advertise for bids August 17, 1981 for the improvement of Bluff Avenue and Halo 2nd Addition. HRS/jiw Attachment 0 RESOLUTION NO. 1859 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids Improvement of Halo 2nd Addition - Improvement No. 80-10 and Improvement of Bluff Avenue - Improvement No. 81-2 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 1688 adopted by City Council on September 16, 1980, Henry R. Spurrier, City Engineer, has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of Halo 2nd Addition and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 1855, adopted by City Council on June 9, 1981, Henry R. Spurrier, City Engineer, has prepared plans and specifications for the improvement of Bluff Avenue and has presented such plans and specifications to Council for approval; and WHEREAS, such plans have been approved by Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which are on file and of record in the office of the City Clerk, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published for three weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk until 10:30 AM on August 17, 1981, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and City Engineer, will then be tabulated and will be considered by Council at 7:30 PM on August 18, 1981, or thereafter, in the Council Chambers and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for not less than five (5) percent of the amount of the bid. Resolution No. 1859 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 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Resolution No. 1886 DATE: July 16, 1981 The Dorsey law firm is forwarding a resolution amending Resolution No. 1851. This is necessary because of lower bids on the projects in- cluded in bond issue 1981-A creating excess proceeds. The resolution adds two projects to the issue to "use up the excess" and avert arbitrage problems. Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 1886. GV/ljw CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $940 , 000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT js BONDS OF 1981 , SERIES A Issuer: City of Shakopee , Minnesota ,Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting, held on Tuesday, July 21, 1981 , at 7: 30 o' clock P.M. , at the City Hall Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (pages) : RESOLUTION NO. 1886 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1851 AND AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO BE FINANCED BY THE $940 ,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1981 , SERIES A r I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate , certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above , have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and com- plete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this day of July , 1981. Signature Judith Cox, City Clerk Name and Title Councilmember introduced the •following resolution and moved its adoption : RESOLUTION NO. 1886 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1851 AND AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS TO BE FINANCED BY THE $940 , 000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1981 , SERIES A BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota, as follows : 1 . This Council , by a resolution adopted June 2 , 1981 (the Resolution) , authorized the issuance and sale of $940, 000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1981 , Series A, of the City (the Bonds) to finance the cost of the local improvements designated in Section 1 of the Resolution. 2 . The cost of Project 80-4 , which was one of the improvements specified in the Resolution, was estimated at $475 ,205 in the Resolution. It is now estimated that tl- e cost of Project 80-4 will be $256 , 700 . Accordingly, approximately $218 , 505 will be available from the proceeds of the Bonds to finance additional improvements . 3 . This Council has heretofore ordered the local improvements designated below to be constructed in or acquired by the City, and has contracted or will contract for the construction or acquisition of each said improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , Chapter 429 . The designation and estimated total cost of such improvements is as follows : Project Designation Estimated Cost Hauer Sewer Lateral $ 96 ,600 Bluff Avenue Sewer and Water 115 ,100 It is hereby found and determined that it is necessary and expedient for the City to include said additional improvements to those specified in the Resolution, which improvements will be financed from the proceeds of the Bonds . 4 . The Resolution is hereby amended to include the improvements specified in paragraph 3 in those authorized to be financed from the proceeds of the Bonds pursuant to Section 1 of the Resolution. Mayor Attest: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken thereon, the following members voted in favor thereof: and the following members voted against the same: whereupon said resolution .was declared duly passed and adopted. 8F) MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Bill Anderson, Relief Association President RE: Relief Association By-Laws DATE: July 8, 1981 Introduction I understand that there has been some confusion in the adoption of Resolution No . 1870 approving our By-Laws . This confusion had stemmed from the change in years of the starting of early vesting. You tabled the adoption of the resolution at the July 7 , 1981 Council meeting. Background After receiving approval from the City Council on June 16 , 1981 of the pension at the $1 ,000 per year of service level and the starting of early vesting after 10 years of service , I returned to the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association for final approval of the total By-Laws . At our special meeting held June 22 ,` 1981 all changes were adopted except the starting of early vesting at 10 years . After much discussion that section failed for lack of a 2/3 vote. It was then proposed to start at 15 years and was passed with that change . I hope that will clarify any questions you have . This only affects the start of early vesting and nothing else . Attached are the changes to Article VIII , Section 6 regarding early vesting. Recommendation Pass the By-Laws . Action Requested 1 . Remove Resolution No. 1870 from the table . 2 . Approve Resolution No. 1870. BA/jms . his death shall be paid to his named beneficiary , and if no bene- ficiary has been named , to his surviving spouse , child or children, or estate . The association shall add interest , compounded annually, at the rate actually earned on the assets of the Special Fund , but not to exceed 5% per year, to the unpaid amount of installments owed to any member who has made an installment election , or to his survivors . Section 6 . If a member shall have served for more than 15 years , but less than 20 years , as an active firefighter in the Shakopee Fire Department , he may retire from said Fire Department and be placed on the early vested pension roll . When he reaches the age of 50 years , and provided that at that time he has been a member of the association for at least 15 years , he shall upon application therefor , be paid in the following manner : (a) For active duty of more than 15 years , but less than 16 years , 80% of the amount per year of service which would have been earned, had the member served for 20 years or more ; (b) For active duty of more than 16 years , but less than 20 years , 4% of the amount per year of service which would have been earned , had the member served for 20 years or more , shall be added to all years of service for each additional year of service between 16 and 20 years . (c) During the time that any member is on the early vested pension' roll , he shall continue to pay his dues , and he will not be eligible to receive any of the benefits provided for in Article VII . Pensions payable to members on the early vested pension roll shall be based on the amount payable per year of service in effect at the time of such early retirement . ARTICLE TX AMENDMENTS Section 1 . The bylaws of this association may be amended at any regular or special meeting of the association by a favor- able vote of 2/3 of the members present and voting, provided that a quorum is present ; and provided further that notice of any proposed amendment or amendments shall be given by reading the same at a regular or special meeting not more than 31 days next preceeding the date upon which such amendment or amendments are to be acted upon , and that a notice be mailed to each member at his last known address not less than 10 days prior to such meet- ing; and provided further, that if such amendment or amendments shall change the amount of benefits or pensions , approval of the City Council of Shakopee must be obtained before such change may take effect . Pt RESOLUTION NO. 1870 A Resolution Approving the By-Laws of The Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association WHEREAS, The Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association submitted in writing proposed By-Laws of said association consisting of nine different articles, and WHEREAS, the said proposed By-Laws were not dated but given preliminary consider- ation and approval by the council on June 16, 1981, which date has been appended to the By-Laws for identification purposes. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Shakopee Common Council in meeting assembled that said Council hereby approve said By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department Relief Association consisting of nine Articles and bearing the identification date of June 16, 1981. Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held this day of June, 1981. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 29th day of June, 1981. 411, J ius A. Coller, II City Attorne MEMO TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Change in Public Hearing Requirements DATE : July 16, 1981 Introduction At the July 7 , 1981 meeting, City Council received a memo from Jack Coller regarding the above mentioned subject . In the memo Jack listed by number the hearings for which the State re- quired 10 day notice and those that were local and did not . City Council requested the local hearing notice requirements be changed as proposed in the attached Ordinance . Consideration The initial action that lead to this proposed Ordinance change had merit ; however, that situation involving the notice required for a Conditional Use Permit hearing will not be changed nor will the majority of our hearing requirements . Will we be • accomplishing the initial intent of the proposed change if we change only two minor hearing requirements? Would it be better to maintain some consistency throughout our Code by keeping the 10 day notice for all hearings? Alternatives 1 . Pass the proposed Ordinance . 2 . Drop the proposed Ordinance . Recommendation Now that we can see what will actually be accomplished by the change, not just a series of City Code numbers , I would recommend against the change . It does not , in my estimation, accomplish even a small portion of the original intent of John Leroux' s original suggestion. Action Requested 1 . Motion to drop the proposed Ordinance No. 69 . JKA/jam ORDINANCE 4/ 69 4th Series AN ORDINANCE. OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AMENDING THE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 6, ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS REGULATIONS AND LICENSES" BY REPEALING'. SUBD. 6 of S86. 6.22 ENTITLED "TAXICABS AND DRIVERS" AND BY REPEALING SURD. 4 of SEC. 6,31 ENTITLED "BILLIARDS, POOL AND OTHER GAME TABLES" AND BY PROVIDING A NEW SUED. 6 OF SECTION 6.22 AND BY PROVIDING A NEW SUBD. 4 of SEC. 6.31 AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SEC. 6.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS The City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota ordaizts: SECTION I: Repeal Subd. 6 of Sec. 6,22 of the Shakopee City Code and Subd. 4 of sec. 6.31 of the Shakopee City Code are hereby repealed. SECTION II: New Subd. 6 of Sec. 6.22 PUBLIC HEARINGS Upon the filing of an application for a taxicab license or licenses, the City Administrator shall set a time and place for a public hearing before the City Council. Notice of such hearing shall be given to the applicant and to all licensees. Due notice of the hearing shall be given by publication in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee; said hearing to be held at the first meeting following the official publication. SECTION III: New Subd. 4 of Sec. 6.31 - NOTICE No billiard, pool or game table license application, or request for transfer thereof between persons or locations, shall be acted upon by the Council until the next Council meeting following one publication of a notice of such application or request for transfer in the official newspaper of the City. SECTION IV: . Penalty Provisions Adopted The Shakopee City Code, Chapter I, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violations" and Sec. 6.99 entitled "Violation a Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION V: When in Force This ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date of such publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota this day of - , 1981. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 10th day of July, 1981 City Attorney IL °..MC.laCt.0N,4,.C. 10 1 i 4 -� . �.4 U .3 U A V J J t 3!e > u 'a - 2 -. 3 .A 'W Y .V 'a A > .a N,N J ''• 9 , 11 A a \✓ 1 V ')' A' U O • ,] A > • 9 ' J N '• N 1 N O C 9 A J ' N 0 • • r I • • I ! • r .' .'!r -•-•!!!-.r • r • ,....r r r,.'....4 ,,...1,,... .I r-,r r • r •1 r1 r ;• ''a • 01.0 1 .O .0,.D 43 JIO .1 i• .0 •i 410 O .41•13 ...1 43.0 •. 1 !.O ..0 •• ' •I CW 3' 1• C' •I TIT T T a't ,IN 0'T ON • • J.'J'T 2,J. TT • T J• I , i:T T I• iJ, • :.+I 2 :P 1 I• •I sl .) 7 I .� ."I . .7I )al I• I.3 • •I ., 3 1 .7)1. ..: Jr,,1:3 •I .)1A ..3 I• '� •I :1I r .- td • 7C•' ;JI p4 N r.)NI!) r4 r)INJ N • 'N •1 rr r., 7.ie. •1 . .- 1• ..•-• •I NI C) .3 • • w -1V T I .TIC' C^. L IT �I .' • i.? • OA 4. ,O ♦ O1O ? •1 0L .^. I• U1 I;) jI I i j I Is .1 z -3 I. I O I< 1 I I O 1 .....$1,' .A CI L.': i.1 Ci Il,C: v v Ci.'J J v v .�c. J ..7 L -.4 I ...4 VIv -. V V V V -4 I-.4 V '.V -4 V V V V V V V V 1 V V V V "1 N \ N.\\ 1 \\\ \\1\\ ',Y ••••r1r r r rl r1 j3a r a-..-• r 333...-1,-.a• 1 .JI UII U: j UI •JII UI U7 SU%.!1 Li UII JI an UI JI 'P UIIUt J1IUI• (JI IU, .if JC D ( A ,y A • I C -D:A A) :7 144'.a 7) A'JD a m .Ji UA•D CO 'D 13) D A • I r r r - I r r r r...A.+r r r r r r r r r r r•r Y r •-• I, 1 • I I I 1 • I 1 I I { 1 u I r C ...II.- I r r L-. N f N 41 r .• I • • z N N O W P CJ r r 1- "1 '01 (•W r V W NOr ♦I N F.h. .O NC N W N r UI N m.r.. V W 1.4 h. NN -0 V V 4) • 430 Or NPN♦INT V J T U)SN IT 01C 00 .O 0=3 ♦ V V .O .O • 1• • • 1• • ,• • • I• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o V• .a. 1 C. I .0 N '3 V IV 33 PC I\3 V(./.r •-•0. N0 O O N O 0 C3 C$ N 4.03 N o 0O pu .7I ‘71C3 V N CJ N W C.)G41.4 9 V Ia u u u UI o 0 o N O J o‘,.J 41 La•.0 N , I • • • * * • • • • I I I I rc I a I c.c.c. anaaaaa a aaaaaaaa aiTh. a a a r I iN 1 a a Ia -1 11-4 .-1-4-4.4 ' I(6 In.I r=1 Cl rit s'1 In P1 z'.m 2 Ia -/ -i 2 ! z z z .0003400 10 77t337773373A I3 r z. 1 c mfr Z I A C)C) Cl C)C)C) Ir AIC)n r)r7 C)C,C) O O O I� •I m >< I I• .4 I nl n n 2 ZI2 2 Z 2 Z -. 212 2 2 2 2 2 2 212 2 1C 0 CI I z 21 2 Z -1-tI-i .4.4.4..1 In i o z I Ic cI:J o A 7313 z 73 73 3 12 ZIZ Z Z Z Z 2 Z m 73 '• ;GIA X a X.lo a a'a a AID b a n a a b = I* I C1Ir1(1 r r r C r r r a I In co • I. • • • • • • 0C PI 12r lnrn VIN VI CO N • 2 • 7C CCCCCCC = 313 03 Ca 332713) 7D • -0 Vi 13 y�'17'0 :rr-- 212 2 212 2 D. 0 m r r'r r r Ir r -4 DOS 7C 7C,7C 3C 7C 7C r 0 -4 • 1 I I -11 C)-1 nCIC rl rIC)0 • •..•M •p M ••.1 nIC')1-) O r•• I c I XV(T1 73 D rlri O O.r r a bl2 D 21a 2 b 2 00 -1 Cll -/ z. I Cl ail n DSit CC2a I l VI-1<-1. .t -1 SIS2 Ii Si r c N cIrc I ..3• • .3.3rm .rm.tim.-. r.-.Ir1 Sls2 In I • s 27oZ7oz X274 • '• • Ip I t- I Ip rI>r a a1Z• •13 I72 1.2.1 1 0 r9 C)r 0 1'1 0 r I Jaim, a I r ra!>> ,r r- 12 IN CO N N 0100 • rn 1'1 I H I VI Cl I 2 S I 10 101.4 a-1 a V a-1 4 I-t <. o Z I t7 hC I C iC'V)AC C 21z O OIN W 1 01 0 0 0 y N N m .3 A -0 !2 v c r'i I . .1 7-4•-•!C c i= mil)z s z a z a r�i r�i m I• • I ." 2 I IN r'l 13 Z-0Z I I-.• • -1-1IO2 -1 -4IV.. . . ..4 223 '9 2 I IA Z•2 r1 12 3 3 2 N PI -. CO y V)rv) CIDP • • rr m r r, ti 311"31 r 13.►3 H r•mlz m z 'ii z m 2 2 O.3 2 a z 0 1-41• 0 Arl TPI1•I0 a mI-/r1-1m -1rl •I .4.3.. .0 r 2 .• N N in 273 21N H r NIN 0 010 0 0 0 2Iz 2 I.4 '1J) I• aIa rl 11I IN I ...It.: m a 33 1 33 ~ • •11to 711 I 33I13 • • - I C. NN aOI•] G` 7100 Cl 0AN UI IJI P ♦ P P 01.4 Ca Cl u b rlr►' r 3•I C) I-. I r NNr r ill rri►•r I Nt9 W TT I It• I I 1 C) 1 1 I II1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 ♦I♦API♦♦ ♦ ♦ PIaa I♦ a a P O ♦0 O PIA P ♦IP♦ a I NIN N W NI C I nA u S NjN N NIN N N TIT T T T T T T Ir u1 Z• cr W u uiu W c.. I Vi I W N U r (MI W W GAIN N ♦ NI -1 r I .;, o o NIN •-) Gji�G r NIM N 1-N r N r WIW W 1`i I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 alt.,W IW TI .' r r r Y P W T ala Co I♦ .01•a W.O.O.D .0 .O aIr(4 IT NI O F I r .O .O N NN N NIN►' N I I r r T O` Jt N rIr r 1-7!P•N IV IN r 1' I I 11 4 1. .1C i 1 1 I I OI I I I all .+ P r r r r.) W P W T a+,W IP O O D ON) '.0.O v z ,r r .0 'a W r Nair...) N NiN•►' N r r...... NI r O• N NI • rV 'a 7t '') V lj I I • r 0 'JI • 1 OD a I I I x Irn -V I W a I I I • • N C) • • I I• • I I I 11 I I I 0 r1 •I I I m t II , I. n I I In ell 1 n In I l I i1, o1)I I x x, I II N IN I 'Cl I I N NI I I 1 IN V)I I I I I I _ I _ I I I I __. _. -1- • x.10 J.•WN� 14_21 V V 1 V V ?? ••I 0.0 004,4 1.10V4 J J W .0 J J > > a N__9_99 ,94• > u W y 'i O •. •J .WN "'O Qi 1: W N-0 X0!9 40 . •W N -•O O 9 8 U • -0 • 9 V 9 4'> W > a 044 .P O n 3: n UY '41! In U •, • J p U► • Y, N • t>,:.1,' 9Y V; n p Y Y '.1.'i YO N NV ? ni N N ;N- N .' n J n U • Y., - - O O . • Y N - r • I r r It r • r . r I •- • I". ,r•-• r '• r '..r P. r .• h. /A SQ • I .0 .Olio I.o •( .0I • I 'a .a I' ,•a,0 ,0 I.a a.a .a ,01 .0 .a n .0 • T 'T T T I• 0 Ia'a' Q• O,I 0 0+I I :,x1 o3.3'.3 0 • • 1 0 j• Io =1•.1 CO • 3 3 ..:? 1 •-> 0 ..3I I1 Ir a' * .I V L1 ./ . 0 • 0 a' • LA UI N u1 I• .A W CO w W I L4 w I co) .I • N N N lr ► CO • r .-Z I• (A N N r • r a C17 S 0 .0 W I x I7 7 -4 0 • O O '1 C CO CO CJ 0 0 0 0 O CO CO • 0 CO CO 0 0 O C( b -4 -4-4 -4 V -4 d •1 .1 -4 .1 .4 0 r r••r r r r r r r r r r 4 r r r r r D U1 CJI CJ1 1r C.'1 01 UI 01 1.11 NUI UI 0 0 N S N 0 111 7C v �V\ • v. V - •' v.\ v '5 V'5 '\ v v. O .0 'D 9 .b .JD S y 31 .D a'CO 'D 0o al m 0 03 co 3 D r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r m m I s 3 CTT 0.1-• 0 0 • 00 C 0 • •ut is3 NI 0 0 O+as .4 -4 r r N N 0 CD I- -4 N Cr. N a oda, O O W W N N r r w 0 IA CD •b UI UI 44440 P.O to W W t• NCD r J1 00 O N W W 0 0 0 0 Co Co -4 V p;00 r .I -4 00 N N O .000 ..0.0 W 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 10 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 Io o•3 O CJI Ut 0 0 U1 N 0 4a til CJ1 019 r r r a a a 0 m CJ 2 10. ✓ O o c7 O .4-4 0 0 r r CO 31 r r o it e0 1 1 UI UI CJi 4).0 O O 0'03 a 0 co0 • I • * • * • • * * • • • n - 000 3 -4 3 1 S 09 'O 0 IL C. ¢ n Z L 0 A m A a 0 p Q N v/ A r . 40 H S A IS S ZZZ ,2 3 s n xo P3i -41 x °• 22 .00 -4 . -1 .r m m Im 7• D 2 Z vii A A z CA 17C. 7C •• 0 A RI 3 a rI • s Cf). . o a' a 0 << N C I• MRI • 7C 0 I. N c> c n 73 L r -� a r, n n 7• m 0 of • A =_ .r O IZ 2 Y S S A n 33 731.73 A co P11 (/)(/) '11 CO -1mm n RI m m 'imm r) f) < I, I= r)nig c 31 > • • r 1Aa o0 2 Im -1 MM �41 2 2 2 10 rn 00 m 2 2 Cm1 to O -1-I Pq • vo) r CC7 y -4 IZ 2 A A 7 0 n I a' y .r 0 P. m 77 03 O O O A -1 0 77 CI !rt a' < n-I r0 CO r 0 -4I -1 p X 2 3 0 z A M m ✓ S n S 0 0.< 0 0 2 -ZC ._• I . 0C OC'.OI m G1 3 mmm O C C O m • ►r -4 10 rl' N• A m ••1 A 1- Z 2 > 2• I2 r r • _ r I C Z 37 77 O y y r •-•Z CO I . y m o. D 77 m l N 17 m O F A A 2 r1 2 4•X r O x: n 0 0 0 N X ?. m C • Z M Z 7C -4 ' N 2 11 'CII, A 4+ I V IX ►,• w TI .2 19 • A ri .-4 - • 1 .Q i IX A 0 3 •Z•1 r • 77 2 0 C v1 0 -1 m vIyy -I vs .4 w• N w I'm �I4• p m 0 7 m rn m Cl • y m A 4• r A C A t 2 0 A 0 A. • y ri •'I m 0 :.. i i.< _ 1.77 11 7 73 PI .r •0 renin > •< RI m • ma n mmI� « 'p- UJ• H y Ul I y 11- - 0 0 0 0 a' 0 C. O 0 0 0 0 T• r 00 o `- 0 r r r r r r r n r UI r it r r I • 1 1 1 P. 1 I t 1 1 1 1 n 1 t 0 O y 0 4 14 4 444 4.4 44 44 Ul A Iv N #♦ F N CtI•W N N W W C W N N N N N N 0 I,1 r W 2 N rrr r W 0 o N W W N N O O Co r 0 0I -'I r 1 1 1 1 o W O O N O N 1 1 1 1 1 •1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C.4 as 0 W 0 CT 0 0 r r r r r ON 2 ,0 rrr- LI10 N • N N N r N N.N Co y N CJi O r •O -4 1-. G r N p4 r'r' rN 171 r • I I 1 1 1 1 1 P. rrr r r I I I 1.4 I I I t 1 1 1 1 0 r r r r N 0• •-4 40 rrr 0 N a W 0.01 `a N N N COS l.1 3 < P. .a .1 r- r N N N N •' • r >A O r V r V 1 0` •. r U O 0 A • 1 co is r 2 m a y a • • y0 m • • • •• i • • • ; / m 1 1 C1 n n n n X 7 x N C. I 7C Z •y f y 0 V1 y y� rr•y O O O J O n • Y:N O O'•V O U • Y N�� ?•n n 0 n''O 3•1 O n UIP n n n t• n n • • • • • • • •�•Y u N.O 4 Y Y N u O DiO3 O U,i u V Y • Y N �O i n V 0 U Y - O tl n JO n •u N� 0 0 0 V 0 U ♦ Y N O O? • 1 unci 1LC IO.'6.'.0 .0:r - _ .. T i 74 0N U U M YI,..1 Y • O J •1U • !Hit D >I' . W I W N .11 N F..I N N G N N N OO 9 .. O U > -• 0 O OA W NI+ O eta ,4 ] uA N O • a V 1 . N •I W N -Y _ '1 1 I I I I I I I I Y it riI I..4....r ri, rrirrrIr -rI • 1.. ........ • ....1 • r a r. 'i4 •l .a Na •I 0 i4 .a•ala .a .a 14.a.Q NO . 0 .1 4 1 • .A .n:.a .A • 41 • .y.a • 0 • 1 n .4 4% a'la' • a; - I Tia' a' a'a' a'a'a'a'la' 'ia'o a T C• (7', 7 .' • a'1 a a'a' • i a' 1 a I a) Ir • .44.. i r it r 1+j r r r jr rip..r r' r r, • I r rrr r a ..1 • .,u . ., • I .l 'r a ► c.. a W W CA W W W CA CA u(a W CA CAI • ., ',.,is C •j 01 • C 0 • i 0 • I Cl -I a ala • r J J CJ u O c_ 0 CO H,..1 V O '!D1 a aS T 1a' I LI • "3! • l N 0 • I J • I : '.2 Z -4 I 1 0 s 0 O -1 o ,,Iv u 0.0 7•J O .�o o O J o O 4 O O O �i O c.) n .( V V 4 V V W J Cl I r - 0 Ir .-rrrrr r r-'rrrr rrr r r ..... r a W 00 0000000000000 000 UI ( N NUI :fl - \ \ \ \\\ \ \ \\ \ 0 IF 17.P 17 ai -D 7D.A S A,:n o D D o D rrr r r r r r m Ir r r Cl I I 3 . co r r ...r c • • • • z a W N r .r( 01 a a' r 0 -4 000 a r ON r r ON .10 00 00 a'.0.4 77M NJ 0./7701 V.a d a r(N .0 r.0 .00.1 r ONa 00020. COM U1 C11 MOW rr • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • ,a.a N .a W apra0U19 .1000(Ace CA U)0401 00 .( 'J 0.00 1...0.. a CA1(A LALA0 a p .1 W 00 ara)WOI UIOON .700-1 00 NUI 000 NN R. • • * • • • • a • • I mrm 00C00C0C000000C00 00000 CC.CC•G n n 1 nn nI Ila AIS 2�2 Z Z Z Z Z 2 2 Z 2 z 2 f_f" N 17 p a 2* -1 rr zlzzzzzzzzzzzz rrr CC= ._ rr0 V) m I21 � 70 1111 zZ'zZ ZZZZZZZZ2 Z • I. G7G)m oom oa)a)O7a)aG) NNN D co I '2.9 I z 1 Z 010 0000000000000 1 7•as ZO .c. .p.r• 17 1 C 0 0 071, n m ZZ 0 M 'C 010 x SSSxx 00000 5 nnn a • 1 r -I-• r n c C U' oo � 00000aoaco as r., x c7 ow ' mmmmmmP. 7Cmmmmmccccs o00 0 22 o m Z Z * * We P1 1+1 1 e . . . . m m m rrr H o :3 2 0 Z Z • • • • • • • • • • • • • rrr m m n - M7D •• o 3 I•r+•• Cl .•_H N V1 1 ti ITI 33 G101mml'ImN0O)0)0 a'G) 11-11r- 3 n mo 's '" IC)., 0o mro 000m,mmmmmm ..rm m D xi ii .4 Ix zoccccnlzzzzzz . rra) 2s v ( N _n r m lei m0•• ^4•••• mmmmm F•.,> C7 "1 Z + z 3 72 0a m• 'V -o9mr0RAamm zzr I -I -'Io "I ' I' ' rrrrrrr w z m csso 1 6'7 N a> V) Cl 10 I'll'1 (NI•. h bI O n 0 V7(A(A V)V)VI m m 79 0 G C 1 p 1,1 r;r cz -+ ..Irr•rcccccc mm< m m w13 w r • Ow '0-4 2 ZIZ Z M M M M M 9 N V)'' '1 7p r C • -1 -1-•-4CCvvrvv m Cl mr- m -+ (l r . crrrrrr u) N m mm Clm .041 AI In 00•06,00mmmmmpi 3. o 70 UI A O yA 2NNN000 m r. 0 0 I 6.4 -A r r• • IC) O m m m m m .9 •• 1 Cl • b 12 13 13 V7 • • • • .n 010 r 0.1 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 (Cl 0 0 0 o O 0 UI 7► NOVa' `..+ r,. r .4 I.. .0 n 04, 1 1 1 Cl i~ 1 1 IIIIIIIIIIII 1 I ala' a a Fa a I 0 tan N N N NIN N NIN N N N N N a WI(A •0 i71 (.1 N W G :r now N(A(A(.4(.0(.4 N P.11%)N*JINNI r r r I a r U)r N 0 N r 0 r N C 11 NIN O r r 0 0 0 0(71 0 0 0 0 0 0 a' a.Ica I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I r m r Z rW a' 0•a' .O� a'Ta' N ar orb... .0-• r (nr !1-- Fit./ .0 r N N r r NIN N r N r 0 G 0.0 r r r N 'r. a-. r r NI rlr r rIN r r r r r . ;r1 1 1 I 1 I • I 1 1 1+0 a Z '(,.. aIW riWa' a'a'aa' a'a'a' aar arr"> a' r Ula r NN 0 r N N r r NIN N r N r W r a'0N 0-. G r• N • W O - a 0 W a V • O 12 I •, r 0 N • . • 01 a r (t2 20 + • • i• a a c.4 Cl • o• • • • • s • a I I 1 Cl 1I n 0 n I Cl 7CC. N I y NI N N N _ I _ I_ 1__ r L. -//��i-__._-__ I-_ -�I� - ' '•- ers e u,•a"_->L__ �� VV ,VJ aI, t :31 *Ca5-:t)-NNtl1.NYYNNYU • •.tttt •y � UYYNW3i •VOUiu.v� 000V�ON • WN -O YtWIN �O '•19 •UDW N- itWOv •Y •u N�O . Oyi Y • WN � Q •i .II. . rr { _ _ r-7 NrN N - - -rO O JIO U iW N - J Y YI j W_Yj4 g W_A • 01U • W. N ♦ O W W Wj ? 1I2 y WI W N NIN N Y' ♦ N NI- O •' Y J PI0 x .! . - O/ '. I•_ Ir Ir r.moi . r • r • ..�...r rrr r r'r r ♦ jr Ir • rlr •I r • r .- .0 I• .4) I,0 w 40 s ( -.0 • .0 •-� -0,200 .040000 r �y j.0 .I .0.0 * .0I • Cl 0 C` i• ja' j0+ 0 0 • 0 • 1.;G. • 0.0 0. 0+ 0. 0`0 0• T • 10 1a' • 00 • a' • S N • IN INN N • r * .a- • ...'..rrr r...1..11.1... • Ir r • rr • r • 1 • I O r) c.)J • Co • V •j .A'.'.➢ O Co 3t 'D 'D O Co • ..1 I-4 s -4 V • 0• • C) .0 • S O a a • .0 • 'T • • Co, N • 0 u • OD • :, CI 1 2 1--I O i< I . • O O TI ..)ac, c, o 0000 c.. 0 ,10 0 o c0 c. As -r r 1--4 d+1 -1 N -4-4-4 -4 -4-4"1-)4-4 J -• r r V "I 0 .. r 1.1,•.1•• r r rr+rrr.•r 1...1.. r r I./-• r 23) .11 0 Ut UI UI Ui N Ui UI co UI 11 S UI UI UI UI N N N N \ \\\ \ ... - N. N. 0 ,.) Ip •D Ja'A 0 DD Co Co Co Co Co Co A CO Co .0 Co Co Co a .- 'r r r r r r rrrrrrrr r r r rr r rl r1 I, I as 3 CoI o Cos r +r G • • 2 I Pr 0... ri•+ .0 U10. W 4 03o 00 4CA Co (ACo N W I)NNN 010'1 0101 0DN0• WW N L.'.:, 0 0 0.0 0.0 0. 01 04.4002000000 o a N N CO O a O 0 • f • • • • • • • • • • • •- • • • • • • • • •' • • • • • • b G.''A .0 0-4 0 0 0 • +1 d a 0.O C)C) UI 0 0 0 o N Nco JI CO 0) O r r' 1.11 n.c, Co N 0%0 00 Co Co 000.700 0000 00. as 000 -4-ri • • •• •• •• R * • • I 2 jr 221 0 0 0 m 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 rlTi MM TI m 4-1In s s 0 `0 s r "'4 r1 4 '0 000 -0 as sn a a• a•ar a•a• 0 rt 00 o j r. r r x CAN O 01 t 0001 M 2S22S SS SS ""1 -•1 I . m 71 Co • a I NNN Co y 0 wow 000 wot// r r zz •-• 2 m m -4 0 C C Sex 2222222ZZ n ...5-• Co U) 0 0 0 0 7 r1, • • n n n -0 r, •r s s Z S Co mmm ...... sola 1 NN o < l• • • n rl -1 Z m • .• -'I n rl IS 2 2 C 000000000 -$ 0 X Onns 2'222222ZZ 0 Till 0 ss 0 Co C I2 2 2 r C C N m 9 ��cx rr 0 54 • N 1 r1 Co • r, N moo 0 r1 mc.0a) 00c)a1ai -I m •01r n r o n to rlri m 0 slassssa Coa0 0 >Z S -1 • o 2 IC2z z C O72D000o -0A as C -< -4 m m o I•.•mri i7 •-• mwcflmco07W1alm c 1.4 .. rn 3 3 v 0 10720 ao 12 assasaasa m 17 210 1-1 r • 1r • CI CI 0 0 mmr • c 'U) a 0 vrr r mPmmmmrm 2 m 3 s r r j to as 000000000 xa» 0 �N 9 r .» Co ... n zmm I 'Cl 2. V)Vt!l/000 WON r1 2 •20 -i O -4 0 0 I '0 -4 0 0•0 1212V Q 4 11 2 -4 -<'t • 2 • r r r • • • . • • • • • • �. • ,T 2 i -4 4 T1 M M •.. O as • as r1 I4 PI a•. a• rl 2 a NN N - m-I a 0 21 Co NN •'i r1 m Cl 0 M Q 13 • • • • .7 O 0 0 0 O O N 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 O d N N O a r r N t) ; n 1 9-4 1 i M. t i i 1 1 1 t. 1 1 1 1 1' 1 a 1 t 1 a a I0 0 0 0 aa.. a a O a 0 N W N N N N N 4 W W W W W W W W W Ntol 172•a N 2 W .0 4NN I N 4 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 444444444 0 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 1 11. t . . . . 1 1 1. 01 1 I r rM0.0• 01aW Wr 4 a .0.0 0• a 40 4 NJ CM r N N N 0• 1,. W II...P. r J Co r N N r N N r 0 ✓ r r N a r r .4.0..m rrrrrr a J r r r • I t 1 1 1 a 1 1 I 1 I I a W 0.0.0+ C` 0• 0.0.0• •4 W1"• 4 0 V) 43 Cr. .• N 4 rNN N N Co s.N N r N N►'CO r N r or C 0' • Co 1.•, • N a o N a v N T? 1 0. •- 9- 0 0 C11 • Co at r 3 PI VI as * N 0) • • • * i r• *aCl * • • • • r • 5 Ci • • • • '1 1 1 5 rt I I• 1 I t i.-1 n n Cl � 0 V) x 10 Hx CA a V1 y N j N C I _ 1 III - I _ _ _ VY • WIN O 2110 .1..22'1 2 2 402 2 W2'2' Y 00',• J O 81 2 N tit 9711 ' YyNW t_ •_ • 42 0• I2U' W V N'2 .!.O . W.N -O •IOJ OY • N-^ ` .rr,C.IIICtM.v!U.C. •.1' - . '4 Y 4 I U U U I U U D D D W. D D W W I I W -i N 1.1:... 1 v N .1. ; N N �V O UID W NI- O •Ip J AlU D N - OO O Ip U D N WHO • O 0 U' W NI- O 1010 V pIU D WIN OI I• a Vlp U •IW N 7 I i i I I ; 1 • r+ 1• I- •1 .+1'..+04 10. I+ * r • '+.+I • r .+ 1.•1 r •; .+i • I .. I• • I JJ • .D •I .D 1.D.D'212 i0 • I • I ...1 • 1 Q. 1• I0. • • 3,10, CO IN O• v. a T • 0. 0.I • T 0• 0010, • •I 3.1 • O• • '+ • NJ I• N • NJ IN PJ N N 'IN • N s . j N Ne. • I N J N N * N • N • 11 • 0 I• ,.Y� • ti v 41.. Ias • • U Ll • ;.1:w u u • WI • r • r) .+ • a I• 10 • �Ic+' ,)l) .D • �I • o a • D •D b.>D * Lt • I r • j A C I j 2 1 O -C O O IL A 0 0 0 67 v L cJ O U 0 C7 0 L 0 �1 v _r -4 N N-4 V -4 -4 -4 -4 44 41 V-4 -4 -4 -4 y N. \ N. N. N. see N.N. \\ \ N. m S he I- .-••M.I..M. r r N r M.r ►+.. r .-• p \ \ JI U UI N JI co to Ln Ln N. N.\\\ N. \ N. N. \\ \N. \ r O 03 02 33 :D CO JO J) 31 2 O) JO 232 O)31 CO OO V P. H N r O40. r 0. 4-•r r 1 m rn n 3 I N I~ C C A a I -4• r + 2 W G. r.1.+ .4 .0 .0 WIW .O a am la N as d V 0.W N NY OWR as 0 N N 4041 r W O CD .1.G r-J o o C.-4 CO N U 0 O r.0 0 0 U U Lii • • • ;• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • C3.3 -4j ' U O O O O N 0.0. NN 33 .033 a CO ON COs c2 c2 00 a) a0 ON O. 000000 OA W Co J CO 43 a C2 0 0a a OO OO U • • 1 * * • * * * • * • H I • r !r 7Cxxxx 74 7C CC ..r. .•.. 1. ., in A70AAA o o CC 22 22 o rrn Z I-4 07036an A m 9a -i1 NN N 2 7C 1 I N N N CI)N m 5 V.30 r-r- 11 2 IA NNU) 0V) CO 2 NN • • 7'X. r m < 2 0 \\\\\ I m 22 .• 7! (1 C ''0 32 ZZS 2 V)N x2 -y1 1i to 2 .. I mmmmm a co cC P. 2. m O r v -I 91 10 77 A -1-1 N O C ). mmmmm 1. CO m m c C m m •-• A A '. 'r+ AA2 AA Ir -1 99 m Li NN 2 m n z z Im 0 N N -•1 Cl) r x Gl 11 7C 3 7C 7CI7C 1 2 <4 i 1 .r.. • r m 1ADDDID '-+ O DA mm 22 t A N I(/1 22222 r7 TD r r A 7' CI 0 7( C IC 22222 77 CC O A ti I7 22222 m r Ir 00)G)G)G) - C) 4 t .. co -4 II A Ia rrrrr m c 20 <m 00 9 < CG '4 r m mmmmm o r* .•m m0 11 m m 1 o I j2 0 0 0 0 G) !C x N 2 x C I I 2 x m 0 I 1m >,I>>>s s 11 . A m • .-• m In •+ • 2 0a r-r r r r '0 • 9 v a s - • 'n • = a 3C .. 1 2 O I �r NNHNN a r 10 13-0 f. s (+i G• Im m m m m 2 I .. x 70 A O 1. V) N 9199+7273 A 2 co 2 1. 00 Cl) 2 11 In IC 44<4< .. 1I C 1.. TI-11 1 A 1 '0 2 • '0 5 i •I• 0 • .v A '0 A AAAA 1 A 1 •m 'D C Ir mmmmm • as r Q• • HN "t w A i'. (I)N V)U)N w m II \ '-• 1 '1•I as a ii A w 7O A AA a C N m N m <4 'a m I A 77 A '0 73 .... • '0 m m • • m A r) •, N 13 '0 m m • • • co N C7 O UICJI N O OCf o 0 0 0 o M o Co a b '-4 Ir 0. 0•W 0.0. Ir- ►- r N r r 0.1•. r ►+ r) I 1 1 1 1 i i i ,1 • 1 1 1 1 11 • I r) a 1 Ia 'a a as as as a a C3 L'1 I N WIW W 04 W IN N a N N N CA W .0 N C N W WI w N W C. r r N W i CF 0 CD 0000 O N LOO N o N U d N -'t 1 1 tills 1 II 1 1 1 • 1 1 I 1 W 0 U.0.0 1-r 0. W r O• Q` a U U .0 0. 2 r .+ 0101+0.0• N '- r r N N o r r N o 0+ r. a N N N N 0. N r.4 P.V ►+v .+ 0+ i • 1 1 1 i j , t 1 I 1 i 1 1 1 1 I G O. a a 60 r!.-. 0• W .6 01 0' a a a .0 0• •'- r• f- r't+r 0.Cr, IN .+ 0+•+ N N 1+.+ I 1+ N C N .+ .0 n 4.4 r co 1 1 • N O N • 1 CO 1t r X ri -3 Ct) a • • I •I • • • • • • N G) • ♦ • • • • • • • A m • * ♦ • • • ♦I • • a l 1 I I 1 I I I I II I I m rl A A A A A AI 1 (; ri V) Cl) I i U) N N NI N N U lIII J•V OVVINVOVIAaPPpp3•:3YYVOUYMU U-Y •O ♦ OpI•WNDDyyWYiWWYU:WYyyNINNONU DWVN- ONV•V OU• YjN-O •I•VOY,•Y � i-----( • J141 HIC1p61IC1..1C. 10)1 r " i \ L`� rN p NIN yN N N ♦ • J P1N • WN • AIW W v! W U WtW N W- W O NN, j U: i N NIN N OIp ; p;N ; W; N : Ol• 3 v p N ♦1W N/ (; I ! . • r 0.) • .• * .•.+ r •1 .•I • .• '• i.. I . r •-•0 0 1• I'D • .0 40 a • 3 * 4.1 • '3 I.O .D .D • ..0 • v1 n 3• TION O • T • OIT 0 •I T I • T • aI° I 'Q• rl • II, • W W W I• CA • WW IW •• W 5 W !• � 14 CAj .-,r *• a 0 a I• a • CN W (A * a • W !• N1,"" II .+ .• zt 0' ,r, I. N • V-4 '0 • N * . • L I2 1-I :) V to O �-n U C) U O O U O t7 O J G O '4 O C> J V V V V V .4 V -4 v V V -4 -4 J .4 1/) \\\ V. \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t*1 r r S r ••r Y r r F. r p. 0.. 0. .• n N U1 U1 Ir UI N UI al UI UI U1 UI UI 1.71 UI x \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ `* N. \ \ \ O P ..)3 4. w 21 OP X u 1) x m CD ,a on .0 13 I-.rr r 0+0+ r r r -• r I+ r .. r 1,1 `7 n 3 O C Z •-•I-• C.a W -4 UI W r N N a CA .O 43 a s W W N N r♦+ N N (../t U11 Or V r WOO 01 VA WW a) ,71 as .0.0 0).b NN WW OA V V • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 C)I- ,O aD3 -4/3.O o A LA to a a o0 00 OO r.+ V r UI UI V a N I+ 0 a7 -I r 0' CZ 0 a s a s 0 0 0 0 O ca W W Ui UI' 0 0 • • • r • • • • * • • r t x x 2 2 t 2 2 r 2 2 2 2 r r 010 0 Z 01•4 .• M 73 a Is a L. 0 .4-4-•I • 2 z 2 Z 70 70 3 r rt t41 z ca30 .c z z 2 z 2 N i - A O. a . rn x732) a rim • • - 2 M c r C r 0 0 C CO a 32 M N M 3 3 '9 • 0 T. a M 3 r 0 M C -• 2 ID s•0 O N N r 2 a r - O 2 2 a '3 xiim m n n n r rn 2 N A 0 -II-4-I A 0 3 M 71 +• 00 M O A N N N O .• •+ 2 C. 2 r n CI +4 2 N 0 C •-• I 1Z 11 C -4 •• as 9 M M a .. n 3 W M n CI 2 to 973 • N x rn n Cl) -4 N 0 z M 2 - 7p • • rn 0 .• U) I 1 I'1 21 c r,0 O 2 2 0 A -+ 0 In c M m z .-• PI 0 rnrn A.4 s rn rn 2 C A rn C rn M -• 2 C Z I z • -1 i 2 2 A rl I 2 C x 2 rn • II•'•rn rn • • try N C N 0 • M 1ti H 3 I'9 70 ( AS 7A 1 rn O g •4 -4 _• n a C)O 1 2) 1 r r2) r x • I 1 C I a r r as r n Co a C n 71 ..Z N N a M N .r 2 z D I Cl') 2 2) 0 N N 2 x C a• 2 !• .-1 2 41 -1•+C C w a• c n 3 m -1 10• 0 Cl I :0 1 • 2 v 'o 1) 1.1 rn N e) • I . z rn •. -• 7 3 2 S I'O A 2 n O -4 A 13 55• r r y V 'r VI A 2 P • O ^• .1 ... 0 O .• .. M •• 11 C h .. JO P I•I 1.1 • • 1.1 Z 3 • A N on 2 O rn Cl) N Ct) Cl) ..4 M In In z 3 A • • 3 3 • • in . M 3 3 • • c30Ca -1 00 0 OO 0 0 O O 0 0o a 1. rrr r rr r r r r r ►• 0. r I+ C% 1 1 I I Si I 1 1 1 I I I I I C) A a a a a s a a a a A A a a a O N N N N W W IN .0 W W W N N s0 O C W W N N -4 V iN N CA W .D W W Al N .0 N 0 0 0 r.+ 10 0+ 0 r 0 N O a 0 -i 1 I 1 I t • I 1 1 1 1 4 • 5 5 I I a o• a a Cr,W 6• .D r I+ I. W a 4) .0 2 N N N 44 N N N r a a N ►. N I•• - .+ O Nfro r V Nr N r r r r N •• 1.+ ..... • 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I i a T a a CT W 0, .D I'• S1.4 W A- .O .O N N N N N Al N 0. A a N r N r .+ Z IC a • IPa a •t c a V .. 3 1 •- r O N • • 1 9 2 rn IA H a • r • • • • a rn I____ • • • • • • • 0 IN to N N IN I In N As ft tI I pWIN l' 9 ; :;,4 _N ♦_ _ W v • =O V pp J :4 N O • p V!A N i V N N O •p V 4 U•i'> U N ♦ Q O p W p N Y y N W iyQp 4 4 p toll O N N - 0 . 'N -O .i• J p N • W•.rt _ I a - t i f. 0 01 0 Y V 0 Yal 1 • • •i• • •. • • al U V I U U 1 U U U'. U N I PS N r . N N N - - - - I IV 0 Y • U NI-. Q V1 0 .1 01 Y • U. N - 0 0 0 0 V • y N - 0 O 0 v 0 ; U N111-. 0 01 0 V 11 V • N .. O O 0 V 0 Y •I U N l I i I ! 1 I • r • Ir •I .+1 ► 1 1-4 P-44.....r!.+ Ir.+1,41,-•r ri..0..-.i. .+ .4I0.4 *1 +I • r • r • 9 • 19 •i .D 1 • I .O .O I.O •a.G 1 9 '4).0,a1,6) (D 9 19 9,a1,0 .0 .O I.D • .411 • I r 4)sa •• sr, n i4.1 CM• * :0% GNI• I s m alas m3%m is m a' a a a m m a1 a a 010 •1 a. • mm • m x :co 4 P • la • a W C41(4 W W W i1,4 W LAIC.LA G W W Wild G LAP. • W1 • U W • G f 1 Ir • G. • I.A • 6-.1I •• 9 .3 .3.399 i-491999991799910- 01 • U1 U1 • A n • 0 • r • A •I • O] (b 9.}(D 71 V V V V V V V V V V V V • .D 1 • a A • .a 7t I n .. Z -1 O < 0 o ii 0 0 0 G it 0 0 0 G 0aa C)0 00000 .. G Q 0 0,.3 G A ✓ V V V V V V V V '4.4.4 V V V V V V V V V V V V .4 V - V) \ \ . .\\..'..\\ \\\ \ \\ \ m x ✓ r r r r r r 0......r r r r r r r a UI 41 JI U1 U1 UI Ui UI U1 N U1 UI N U1 W N JI UI Ut UI UI UI U1 U1 UI UI 7C sa \ \ NI \\ \ 13 9 (A W 31 ,'D9m9iP 9990991710:99999 9 -V 03 9 9 r r r r r r r m 19 1 a 2 W r r 0 W N N co ►. z , cm LA UI V r at ' CA h. r NN WW -4 N.r 0.0. 9rm1.04V m r sA d m A m a(A r.) A N W Gtr GNP. J J 0 0 UI(A U1UI P.NJ VNO0o UI V mo.IDAr N NsD9 NrA UI UI .° 4)-0 GIN • • • • • • • s • • • • • • • • • • • • • * 1 • • • 4. • 0 • • • N N 0IU) OO .400U%000 ,609 /70N99999000 OO 990 00 UI U1 09 00 00 ala X00 'Or aNOMr0m mcAN VN 00 0N0 00 ro v a 22.2222 z 2 z z z z a Z Z 9 Z Z z 2 13 A o Irn z = =1,r =cc ctcccccccctclC r m- 0 r IN O ZZIZZZZ 0:(((99909999.3 A 9A - m V) H r a a',n a A a m m m m m mlm m m m m m m mo o St N r I II 0 •, -41•,.4•4 • rrrrr-rrrr rrr A 1 m M j0 • • :• • • • r r r r r r r r r r r rrr 0 ' a s z z i o 01 o cc 1 o n Ir • z 212a22 z -4 "I c') O a ro v ro ro ro o co A A o rr'rrrr r = x r n n r HHcn(ntnN m Co r 2 o N Sow * A . V ., m I• 0 In ..•. N n Z .. < < 1 X Ci m min S in i 0 .I N y m I _ 7n m 1 0 V►41,0-sm►+ S <m O •• O Ir, 1 24224.2242 m m m m m m m m m m m mIm A MC V .4 C IA x r r r r r r r r r r rr!r n • x m i n m ..m.4t'lr/m mmmmmmmmmml'1 m 2 rI ro Ix 9 2929270 '999IIMZ111-0'9b rorolro .. ro A I. 47 mC)m G7 m x 2 x x x x x x x 2 s 2'2 z 2 • o A 01 N N 0000000000 O OO In 7s 'a m I '11 A A- 70-1Al ZZZZZZZZZZZZ2. A -. x 7D co D O 00 C) a) mm1'Immm1'immmmmm -t z n O r) Ia -n m -um 9 m m :r T 7a 2 I zyza2y >D �A In z • .. A1724.1 U) I 1 1 2 a• • m M ro A D m 2 m 2 m 2 A AV 73 0 r e m -4 m.4 m-1 r in e 2 A rn 1-• V)V) 0 V)N CO 13 9 r'1 I n • r' n /am m vg • N O 0 O A A N N N N 0.000000000900 0 0 0 0 A ✓ Ir r 9944440"" N r P.P. r n 1 I t a I 1 1 I n A 10 A O AO A O N i9 W a m en 01 m m W W W W W W W W W W W W W W N N W C W A r r r r l"•r r N N NI N N N N N N N N N N CO G.CM r .0 o 0 UI N rINP N r N N 0 U1 -4 t 11 a 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 , a I I 1 P".Cr, A A W W G W W A W2 `0. 4- U rPP..IO..Imo..0.r .OrNrW 6)P•0V U144Nr r 0.N) m O 1+ r r r r,r••r r W N r r • I 1 I I 1 , 1 a• m (A '043410W 0 4-PAA W W Wrrrrrr. G GA W r r r G1 (r N r W N r 9 V UI A N r I r N m 2 < • a n - V NI 1 s r O 0 a • 9 at r x ri V I N n • ► • • • • • N C1 • • • it • I 4 • D In • • • • 1 I I a a j i I m • n n n I I n i n 7[ 7R 7C 7C 1 o V1 V Pt It X N N N N VV V JV 31*41 . :p OpIp VY JYYYVIVYU ► • V ♦ ♦ • ♦ • • yyUU�UU124.1L-1---- y.�•1INNNNNN r� 1 •10VpYi►UN� / • 0• U.N-.O 0Ip p Y U N -�O W O 0 0 •U N - O O p 0 Y •U N t O I 0 4'P Y YI•i•'-';'4 Y •U �N - o O 0 J,p 0 •U!N O _ i v l4• 'al: U�4 Y U Y • ♦ ♦: ♦ ~..ti4c v: _. N r„N �, .. - - V N V U 4' • W N - O 01 0 V •'4 • W. N - O! 0 0 v! O V N - O O OI O ; • W NI- O O' ; ;'4 ♦ ,.-;, N - 0 0 0 0 U •,U I 1 I .I W I ! , I I I r N • r•+ • •-•I,. • .-.1 • r • r • I r• r • • I• I,-• r•• • .— .0N'1 •I .9 10 ••I 'AIA •I .III • 0 ► !.7 • .D • 0 1• 1A •1 .OI • .O A ,J 'T 1 Os Ias •1 0 • CA 10 ► TI * I T '.• '0 * 0! • as • 0' • 0I • as 2 A LaCOCI !' 010 • FIA • F • a * !F r 0i • F • a • F a. 0 r9 -- 0•-1 • W 103 • .O .,a • .O I * as • las • 0'I • CO '...4A I * I0 • a 1 • LA UI • .p .0 • J1 IUI • N I * r '• I.... •I r I • - • I(t •I G I • I A R '7 1 E I z • o 0 im n 0 J• C.0 C. 0 C. 0 G 0 0 V 14. .1 V. V V V V V v V -4 V V V .4 -4 'ov r r r.r r rr r b+ r r r r r n NCA 41 UI J1 N U1 111 UI U/ N CA al U7 IA \\ \i\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 0 'A A ,A IW X 0 :D 'A O' p .D •D A A 19 .•a-• ••-r r r r r r r r r I-. r m m 1 D Z 1 1,-a- 4-I-- •-Ir. a F r/.- -I OC GG GG NN V V V V Aa AA NN U1 UI r V V FG -. N UI 00 CDA 41.0 NN 4041 00 00 NN • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •o • a 0 0 N N O J N UI CJ O U1 UI UI UI .0 .0 G W COo 0 0 0 N Ln N N'o ..a u.7 00 .-3 .4O A a NN a%0T `A.0 * * • * * * • * * * , I CAN cn.0 O N N A n A A I A b V 2 Z A In n n D 2 z ri in. 0 D A o D 0 O 0 0 -• N D 4 0 C A -4 7C 0 4'.,-1 -4 ti m A Z ...4 m 1 O 0 0 -4'-4 ^-1- r 1 r 0 0 A .4 - A G v Ts r "1 r n i m m CA o n n n - N 0 CO O C r Z M m - -4 -4-• -4 CO Y IC r D I 0 .('4 -t 4 m A > ~ 2* I I A A I0 r r C C • • • • •-• C 0 jA C .r m an x n 2 2 -4 I-4 A A z CO r :,.:. C A Ial I 03'2 ASA mm 0 0 fill t 1 0 n A C 2 in C I : i 7t AA D 1a 00 N COO AA -4 al N CIC 00 A IA 71173 m m 1-4 m m A A m 'A A!A CO hl 0 -4 1m A • m 0 0 O 0 0 A m M 0 GI m N 0 -. Om mm mm r O A m m ® 0 A -4 C Z Z Z Z z 0 C D Z 2 C 2 0 m •4 rlm rim 0) -1 4 m m .4 o a a V A AIA AIA • A m A A '9 O z • D A D D D • r > D • r I 0 0 r r r r r A r r N 0 D CO VI CO CO CO 2 1 x CA CO? IP 1' P a 0 •••C C C C C V 47 A C CI. n., b 2 73 AIA A -0 D m A z - 2 n . I 4 A A 1"0 17 COO "0 r -I Z -I • 0 2 i • r r r rlr • CA r r • z -4 -4 N H 0. M M m H H 1I • -1 y 41 19 Si m C9 P• m I.1 N • a 2 N N 0 C/A N N :AA A b m v 1- -4 • • • • C. o o0 O 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o D r r -.. OD Is. r ... r r r r r •- n 1 1 a 1 I I 1 a 1 1 I 11 I 1 A I a A A a F A A a A A F F a N 0 N N N N NIN. G N G N N N G U N N N N CD La G N N C.+ 0 A z G o 0 0 0 0 r O 0 o C 0 o G I 1 1 1 I t 1 1 1 1 I / I I I I CO A r-r N•A N N N N N IN ( N 0 N N Na r • N r r r .0 r r r r r r r r N 1 I I I 1 1. 1 5 5 1 5 5 1 I 0`A r r- A r CT a G A r 1 a' C.+I P N N UI A rIA N N N N N N C-'' N t a N • G 0 G At O N F .I I •-• A 1 m • r 0 01 . Co a r 3 m v y D * * • • I N n • • • * • • • • • • D ri i * I i i i 1 i I * m 0 n A A n n A I IA n A I tN N N N N NI N IN 2 N CO _ 1 __1rJ _ _ _ _ -6 I I v-4 • ,-.1!z.1"::;' I':V 0 u ►Y M''0 0•JI4 Y Y YIN 0 0 O •V S . .— - O !$ t... g :24.11'S_d ii O N • t. V N'----1•V'•Y ♦ W!N- .•i•V 0 4'• W N� 4 ' I ` .,,.![K1gN,c'K. .011 /1.4 ,or UIU U UIY- • • .U ♦ u►i •N •- O I O W vIW} U +lU UN W-iW N N NI1N N 3 0 0 I V 0 0, ; y - O OI 0 V 3 1 13 a W i N - 0 0 Co V 1 P U ♦I W N Y�I0 ►I r *14 Il' 1r1,.. • ,.. ..,.....�r. r+*rr .rr_ir r...I-...r * Ir.4,1 1-4 r • ►+ i.+r l •I r .�� .1 .pi (•o .O 014) v3 vols .o .0Lo.0 .01.0 43 01.a .a 0 • .o 4)1,47 •I .0I a .o .01,0 .a .a iT a'.a • .a I n .0 T 10 P ' • J I 0i0, 0)0.10%0' 0. 100 T 01OI 0 a. • 1 a. moo. s•1 01 • Q• 010 Q. • I a c n IN •; cut UI I UI N or JI ...11T TT 0000 U1 N Ul 10 N Ut i Ul Ut 11 10)if :II • U1 JI I N •i Cl • 000001 N • UI m .- N1N 01 .-. ..1..r r rr-.r.-.•1...r..+r r+r r 1.•r • r r.+ • r • I u :7C)G 7 .a a .1 Cl i V • I V. . . . .. V V .41..VVV -.1VV•J • .000 • N a 9 72 0 77 5 D • UI A i 1 0 - I( • 0 O OT C.() is o..o Jo G o 47 i7 OICI o 0:) V tl p U O 0 0 6 0 V O 6 CJ C7 O C )0 VV VI .VV 1.4 V VV VVIVVVV VVVVV VVV V VVVVVV V - N \\ \ \\\ \ \ C7 I UI UI 4. 7 0000000000000000000( 000 P. (r11 N UI U1 U1 U1 N P. TD. DSD .7+ 9 A 'D9 D99S 11 9]D 99,D 7) b999 990 Co 9 ,200 .139 9 U ►.I.. p• ......1.-. r r t'1 m I a x CO a a a,21 I.. 0 r C rr NO0 0 ,0 .099`4 NNa ►•N4G G4 01 N Nr V rA U4 -1.0UI UI UIOa AN4r.00rr0rN UI V Ula 0.0% 9AGr UINO r a V.O .D.Q000000000..N.04 .0T.O ` 9 ►•.OQI 00..00 43N Oo N09N 03 ,0 • • • • I• • • • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • '.:la OO 4000000000V.O0.00NOA0N -402,0a OO 040.04 Wow, -9 0 I o I 0.7 j% O O C O O O o.a 43 N a 4 J o V .0 Q.O.9 N 0•V.O O o -4,007033 .0 0 I J I 1 1 * • * • • • opt of N N o N N N o N N N V)o NN N N o w N N N N -4 N CI N m o N (U) CICCCGCCCC « < 010 /0010 ,00 01CCCCCCCCCC0 0 a :7 n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n 000 X X X X X X x X* ;11 mmm N 000000 - 01 < rnI o I xaz rt m 13 13 r'Irlr9)n rrl `•mil z I I n1 ova m mmmmmm m 0 I as y I CCC z1 ««« t-, ZZ NIV)VI 000 r Z rrrrrr x' x ....-. z m rrrrrr m m zz o m mPImmr•rl m n oy rn -4.4-t •4 <.4 z X . Z Z Z Z Z Z 9 .4 mmmmmm m 7• CCCICCC G) I". CO)N00NN -4 N 1 rn 77 m,m m mzxxmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 00)0) 0 m •.0 1-i- r- mim m mini m m r r r r r r r r r r r r m m m -1 m m m m mIm r - 0 0 0 x x x xIx x x m m m m m m m m m m m 0 z z z x 00000 Q) o m 00 0 ..I0.r-.N1...M...nnnnnnnnnnn0 mmm m a) x o • mzz m rrrrrr 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 9 9 A A x1 m 9 A A A A >o o 0. MIX -1 00000001 1 rrrzzzzzz 1 m >A rl -4. ...--tr)r nnnnna nlnn7► t7l 000000 0 H M N Z Z Z Z I=Z=I (INV) 0 ..4n ZZ -Im lilt !m m m,- -1 -r- CCC '*1 Z A -- V) D A A 7012773 AV ' .i', it «.- 17'41 • r)nnnnn -OI .4• • . 4vx N mmmmmm • '0 nnn nnnn rrr m .41 morrow .4 ISIS 0000000 w I 1-l.41.0 A 011 a rrrrrr` rgmr•I it MII O M y-0 r] XM rrrrrrr n woo 0. cccccc m z mm . . . . . . • m n 333383 m mm ( v m v • • , . Cn 00 0 om 930799000000.300000 O+NO N 0000N0 o s r r rI 0.41 ,-, N '0.0 m 0'N r r n 1 I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n a s I O 4000 a A O NN O, .0.0444.0-.0444444444 G 4N NNN 4 4441444 N C 4 4 NI 4 4.0.0.0 4 4 V V V V.4V V V V`1.4 04 N N N r UI UI N C N I (A A re-. 01 O O O O O o 0 0 0 010 0 O c 0 0 0 O r .30.3 N .3.30.300 r - 1 I 1 I I t 1 - I 1 I. 1 1 1 1 I r.P. GI .0.Q .0,4.0 .0.0QIT 0.0� aa444rr0 000. r NNN N►•.• O) Z Co CD .- rr r rrr.NN N r N NUI Nrm m N NrN .) 1.,o.r O.ON N 0 Nr 4� N 1...N0.... 0+ (ANa 0' O.r Ni • II 1 11 1 I I rt. 41 0.0 .0 '0s0.0aaa0004440.0•0 AAS" 0. 1 0 03 P NrNNNNr3D3N rrN .0 rrr r.ON N Z z C • It a V V I • . 0 UI COI I a r x m v N 7► a a • • • n m • • • • • o 1 1 1 • 1 m n n n n n I Cn 1 CO N V) N 4 ♦ ♦ ♦ ► ♦ • ♦ ♦4_YVy.NVO_0j3.43 0 gP.OPI0YYV'13YYyUNY000VOYi•yN - Oct; WVOUy Wy W y t•y'O N N :NJIN N NN 00..0 0 •W1N +0 Oi0 V O YI•y N� _ 000 .1110.O«KS.4. 4 0 1 1 _ 1 • Y 3';',8 i U - W •, 0 J PI'a a t; :.; a O'W 0 JIP U lI U NW U•: W O NI tt N 2 a N '•'!"-' i N O • • JOAU ; Y. N = O O ♦ J 10 U a:W NI ' I .� I i ( 1 ' r ! ri rrrr,r +".i..r I• !r •I rirr rrlrrrrr rr! a r a r'+ rI �' .o I♦ H' '' .a.0 •a.o Po a .n i ,0 I• .o •! .a I.a a tia.a 1.13 4 Q ,a.a.a � .a 0 .a 0 a -a 4)1 n T 0 T • T.T T TIT T T T T Is T •i OniCn T T 010 T T1T T S T • T a -TCM 0%1 2 37 0I♦ 'Ul • UI N UI UI N UI UI UI:.'t ' I• N • Jt U1 Ln UI N Uf Uf Ul I UI o 0 0 • S • !N N CO i 1 �- 0 a IO •I W U W W W U U W U • U * Nina N N NIN N NIN N N N • •V 0 IN N N C1 N • . -3 • T T T T O.T T C` T •' r • V -1 V T TIT T T T ON L410 ► N ♦* 0 .3 ,1 >; .-, 2 -c C7 i< O m t] co O J 0 A 0 0 0•7 U ‘,0. ,. Cl 0._G 0 0 0 9c, [.. L O U D V J .4.4 .4 .4 .4.4.4 .4 .4 v .4 .4 .4 VVJVvVV J .4 V .4 .4 .4 . Vl \ \ \ \\\ \\ \ \\\ m X r r .. ....r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r D LI Ul Ul 0 1 N 0 U)UI Ul UI Ul U.UI Ul N UI us✓)UI:JI UI Ul 0 - ul Ui 'U) :.1 x N. N. . .....\N.N.N. N. N.\N. N.\ N. \ N \ O 0 CO W Oi tD S Z 00X00 0 31 W 9 D D a7 0 :P 0 70 4F. 00 p S P P 10 r r 1••r r r-rr r r r rrr r r rr r r r r im I) D Z 0 Lo O C Z 4A U r r N O a . r -4 00 G r NN VNA 1314N43(440. .a r V Orr (3, L110 0131N01-.43W 1...W 00 13142,00 a'V V UiONrr PU0 W W NW'+49 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • a Cl )• OcDN0oNU1J0O 00 LD VT A 00,4,41 •O,000 000 TT C7U1Or UI 0 0 N 4 o J -3.O GA Ut 0 0 Cl O 00'347 0-443,00040 UI UI o 0 0 0 Cl G 4 *1 • • * 0 * * • 0 GI nnnnnnC7nn N wow NNVINNNN ON N 000 S CCC Cg07 C CCCC CC -4 -/ -4.4 A 999 m mmmmm mm DAD D 2 -cj . i •t•t-4ts 7! mmm rrrrrrr cc ., 777373 I- 0 0 77 77 73 7373 z XJ[ X C 0 D 000000000 9 ADD 09009999 'S9 co 000 m -t1MMM-II-11M tl M m 121 CCCCCCC no Z cn m m m m N N N N N N N 22 r moo O ...4 i9 00000000 V1 737373 z rrr 0 •• m 1 . SI Z ' ZS2 0 .+.4 ZZZZZZZ MM n Z 0 07• 1. ••• • •••• • .. MOM m m m m m m m z z • DDD n m •f XXXXXXXXX r DAD NNNNNNN 0141 ZZZ S 73 -4 0000 000 00 0000000 • • .4.4.4 m D 9 9 13 9113 9 13 13 9 z 0 z n r)t�1mmmmmmm mmI�mmm mm 41016) X m m m m m m m m m C mC C C c c C 73 113 139.3 9'0139 I0 N -1 m 73 • O 0 2 V)0 999 C0GI m C20 0100000 mm GI COMM •+ -. 1 .lomm oommm D mom Om m-1T11T) 2Z m rrr -I N= Z..U)N22Z C S ••z C2 nI�I'11-tt GIG) Z 000 m I m (100Z4.1• mm I. • Om .ym 7377 m 000 3 • 73 ! 77 X 73 9 73 n n n n n • • z • • • • 10--r.••••o 1DD • 2 D •- Dmmmmm D O 13 9 N V1 z m m a r r s m r r ow r 1 2 2 m 1 A 73 o a.. 2 MC Z N NNN1N mm DDD I N I J 0 2004 200cc D . 2M0 ANCCCCC MM N .4.4.4 n I ,.., -ire ►+c9 -9 CC c zzzl 0• 1 on 04 • X99 13 13913 99999 Z • N2 .4.. -0 -4 .411 or I 0091 13 13 -I 9 .y 13 r r r r r n n 11 • • • 9 c,l IN zZm 04rr • E• r • rDA..• .....•l mm r -1 .-. ..mmmmm ON .-• 04 0404 .' m m �I 9 13 .r.. .•. 0 C �7a • • 73 73 m m 04 73 m 01 O N N ON N /300 Z C 0 1-4100 m Cl) N m m m .. 0 9 A 9 0 13 9 9 nn • • P1 •• Si In I 13 • • • N N • • - c I o O 0 o O 0 0 co co Cl - 0 000 0000000 N N O o.70 D r r r r r r r r r r Cr,N rr r r n I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IS , 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 IS S . IA 10 0 0 O 0 000 NN N I N I%N N N N N I W W N !N N N C * W 0 W W 4 4 W N N N N LAIN N W N r r r P.r r r N I W U 4i i r o 0 0 P E N N G N N Wcor r r •1 � - UI N O O r O O N p o co N N co 0 0 0 0 Cl Cl 0 N N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I 1 / 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 a I 0 U r 2 ✓ r r 0 W AGr a0W 0 W O W r r.a 0 4414.4414.r UIr N r 7X0 O N V N r W r U N r N r N 1.-.11-. 1... N N r N 1"Ut O Cl.O r r r 0 • W N r N r r T IT 1 I 1 I I 1 1. 1 ) 1 1 111 1 I 1 1 1 1 r • r r A U a CO P.O A W T W A W •••••••••43 4. LA I...►• Ar 0 a(.r .ti v V (¼)r U.PGNrNP N rrr U1r N PUIa •'`.a N Nr 9 2 C Cl • • L+ p • W it 0 • r an • 1 1 • r 0- N • 9 Is r 2 m 9 N D N 0 ♦ • • • • 0 I D• 1-1to • • • • * I W ��f•'{ f • * • I 1 m �jl no I r IX 7C) N N N N J N •n t I I IvIN•Va WNV="4 PPO: QP ONP:• •O V'U 1 •Y:N Y U•.• J P 2a a N13Oy • UU U YU J�O1 O 413 W O O• Ji•P a W N . . / . 1 •..O •• J• UaYN� � J ( \ _ -_ J Y 410 0 0',Y 9 ••, • • •,• •• •. M • ••�W t N W'� W N Nta N WDM N NtN N - - -•• - - -, - - "1. 0 viY Y •tW N -� 1 V • Y. • W 0 •' 0 V 0.9 • W - 0,0 9 .. 9 9 itW - 0 0 91V 0 U W Nf-• 0 O', 0 V 0'�U • la! 91 O 1 • a. a r r r rI a i r a t+ r rl••r r • Ir rI r • -•r! Ir .0 • 40 1 .0 .0 .D .D • 42 !r i•0 •I .01 .0 .0 ' .0 I• .O •1 .43 a .0.0 A 141 • 7• 1 0 0 0 0 • I 0 j• .0 •i 0 I O' a• r 0• • Cr, • 0 T X 17 0 * J• 0) 0.0• 0. • , 0 a �0 •j U) JI U1 0 0 • IU) • 0 • V1 - r' r L. • N) cU N)N) N • r i 1 P. 10 .1)•I .0I.0 o .0 a 0• * Ln • F a n C' • 0'• U: J) F a ' .0 1 a =J a .0 UIL.W N a Ir • U • N N A n , 2 V • o < • 1 O o T .] p A C C. C O C. O O C) O o o - 0 0 a V V ..1 V .i v -4 V v .1.1 .4 .1 V V V V -1 c/) .- r r r r r' r r rrr r r r r 1 a v1 U1 U) N U) UI UI UI J1 U)UI N Ui Ui UI 0 N X N7 GD Co X.Co Uo CO 0a 0 07•b D .D S .70 co 33 r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r ri II A 3 C C.A. N • C • - 2 N 1.1W N r •-•4-,r1 4.....4.44 r r.0 1.11 40 i Cr W W o V U .0 .O w W r sr i... N CO N (A LI CCD •-••-• 4 N r .1 V L1(d O C)CJ 07 CO NUS V V V J r 0 r N AA cm SCO .0 U.O • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • .0 NN -4 V 0 00 0.0 00 .0 4) rr .04 UI o NN 0707 F .0 rN F 0 CO 3) NN cJ O u AA JO 4L. NN 4 F .O,-, OO 0 0 00 ONU • * • • • • a • •r • * * x r C C C C C O < <<< < -• -1 00 F) .4 «r I 9 rcl A rn 3 A A a a A r'i O o O A i I r s s 2 N rn r rrr r r 9 n 0 o r :n rn r - 0 r rrr r r1 .. to x A .• A A 0 rn m m ri IR 0 n • r r < 1. P 9 t ttt t -4 ' 00 rn n C. I s P•a C I< 2 < 2 0 • (/) C it r 0 N .,..►+ m rn rn V) N 0 00 -4-4 A C. I X 9 222 0 Z 4 t 0 9 C V) MI it S •+ r o coo C 9 a cm)a7 3 • .-. -1 o 01 r 0 A X .• ♦ • • . 0 r rn V)N 2 2 -4 ' '0 N 2 rn m 5 r rn rn m at o ti 9 9 9 3 -. c) 77 A Al rn r V -4 2 271,77 m n 3 x 2 ( 0 0 0 0 2 X N SI a a a t A H 13 I,1 j zzz n I m 2 I m m rn 0 0 a, M N 1 m A 9 M N < rn r) 'A N 0 3 3 0 Pt O 3 • N -4 .r it 9 .• rn 0 0 0 n rn A o m O rn rn n z -4 -I A 0 2 C C 0 5 z n -1 2 C 2 m S a m O < 2 .,a .-el X 0 m S O rn .4 m n 0 < 1 • r1 N n9 •io 1 0 • Z3p • it S r) O C• r 45 rr•10 ` 1 4r N r mrnr - r 2 0m rn I II Cl 3 S 72 C 3 A X N Z O. a '9 00 co) t m U) A N - P X n .'1 9 .. n .4 .. a C r C •. C N 9 x) 9 rn 33 ..Z 2 S n . 9 Z N 9 2 9 rn n rn •-a 0 2 4 Z -4 -4 9 O 9 m 9 -i 9 . \ 0 2 13 CD y 9 -4 • • S 2 r 2 r • r 7s 2 N -I • m .-. . r �l w -4 ... .N r1 71 m •.. 2 rn • In A I') m 00 • 2 0 -4 N r N CA N r- n rn C: CJ O O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O O O 0 A ✓ r r )04 0-0 r r r r r r r r r a. 0.1.; nI I I I I I I / I I I I I I I F A F F FI A A A A AFF A F F F A 0 U G N N N N W G N WNN N N .0 (.0 LA G O W UI W(Al LI •D. 40 N 0 N N (9 N F .0 111 .G r - O o N O '3 F o o NNo 0 O O O O -. I • I I I I I I• I I 1 I I ► I 1 I I ✓ U) F N N 1.11 N r a... N N N N r r N N 0 aN N N N r1 N N- 1 1 r r r rI r r r rrr r r• r W co • I 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 s ✓ r 1 .0 WG a r• r 0 FAA A F 0vV 2 U I U 1 I N N N r N 161 r NNN N r < V I-.*0 41 0 N •- • 0` 4-. U1 .D F it O A N N -4 N V W IP.10 W 01. 1S 1 co N.0 r • r O N • I CO 19 r rn I CA a • • a Cl) C.) a • • a • I * • A rn • • r • • a • C) I i I 1 I I I I m I r)CA ti � CA 0 r CA Cl) N IN � I VVv'VV 000 YYYYYYY I• • '• • • • W yyIa SI Wy N NN •� •1•V•Yi•W N� A p Y • W N-8313300.. -'0 O• 0 Y•W N - O O• V• 4 •W N- S p O J P Y Y 4 N t a • U • �" N.1O O 0 V•Y •WIN-O 1 - I Ofl CI IIICMw,C1.C- .01 I P , ! ^ ,iY • YiYY Y g O1 • J •I• • W N - t'1U 4 VI W 4 UUU U UJ ON NIV N N • y NiN' O 0, 0 V 0,0 • WIN - O O 0 V' p U •i3 N I o u 1 a o ~o n 4) ,41 i c I �•!•• • p. IOC I Os 0• as T Q• 41 02 02 0M 02 OM T I a.10.40 14) • 02;3 • 0. * Cr 01 = a IIFrn I D Qi 9 •D .D :A atp 'S •p ADI D I O] • T!0� • co T QU I til .- C.2 33 u y a l a ♦ s1Ut •! W to .3 La D -1 0 N a 4 N W N o 0 * :n 0 * 0 • T T 7( t1 ' 2 1.4 O -C • O c3 21 u 0 J O o O o o C. C G C C. CI q _ Ci M n -41 V r r V V -4 r -4 V -4 -I rl V N -1-1 -1 -4-4 1 N 1+ W Y H.• H 1-• W 1. .+ .. W W P.N H I.• N W r L 44 co LA 0 0` 0 ` N (0 s to cn to Ufa 010 A ut 0 A D D CO (q L OI D CO D D p m A A A F Ip D D 31 'o W r r 1-•r r W W r r r r P. .+W ti I0.. W .+r fol 17 I I n N 0 0 N N W WN ;r• C 2 D a 1NUI UI N W 4 -II-1 l.. .4 W (441 NU1 -1 N UP. N 1 NN NUI 1 -1 UIV W N0'•4 ,4N 4 .0.O HO 1 N 4 A ,0 OIC P.1+ OI 0 0' 4 4 0N NN N0 0 Olin 0 0' 0' 0 0 -J J ►+W O W D 14 ',p M W 0 0 T o o • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • UI 0;7 UIN a 0 a O%0' -1-1 .+W T 0' TO' 0'0 14A0 -.-10 NaUI 44 4aN .a o -7 00 00O 44 0UI 'D Co O u 00 4/41 •.0.0 4) a 0 000 00 UI UI 0 • •1 * • • • • • • • • • . • • • n n O O h = o7 A a a n a 0 n N 04 N X X` SID' O [I r f'1 D n -0 r A !'I C C r r' ..4.4 r fol r !.Z z 2 s n 3 C 30 r -i-1 fA ca 121 PI -0A 30 rn -o A z z s A C O 3 o 0 0 - 0 0 -I -1 • -4 r z r r r r z X 71 C 30 n f1n - I n MI MI n10 111r 21 Cl n • O O O 77 I m -4 n 2 2 22 AA 0 An 2 r-r co-I 1 rr L 1 n Cl z A7JI 00 MN • AA O A n .4 IH r 2 A N C7 r) • ,2 0) 61 n ( O -4 -4 -4 XD z2 11 A 1 4 s n -i -/ A A 13- • . •• • Cl d•i n z z n I O C 1.41•• f1 IN -4 4-1 T -I 0) 0 7C • -. 2 3 rl n 0 A it 0 2 irl 10 N m A O X07 N -I 0 O O 0 CO N A0 00 rlr1 Clo 0- "4 1 Cl 1r7 77 -4 -1 -4 C r r r m -4-I 0 0 Cl 21 A -4 C = 12 = 7. = I = m o C 17 z = = C C 2 in r . Cl o C r r r N ri 41 I►/r r .4 ri .4 r • 0) 3 Z 30 {A ort A A A • A -1 A A A 17'D 30 • a rr G• a• at • • a in o no r v, v w It 30 r as A 30 1n > o I r 30 x 3 Z r C W tri) 0 IC' G. .20 0 0 O C 14 2 iV) 00 n: 0 •-• 30 :1 I) C -o "n -11 m 9 2 N C C 21 21 04 1.4 C '9 r D • I-c n r • • • N -4 -4 C 9 • • 2 z • 11 • 'o I-. N 40 0 2 N N V) f7 • A H 17 V)N -4-4 V 30 0 17 m r 2 41) Cl r PI D • b r PI r< • • r r 30 -4 30 .4 '/)r A .'A A • 0 N• A A 0.1 3• 04 C 1'1 • C C C MI C C r1 -I 0 P.1 N ►• w .4 ca ••►4 v) n 2 CI n c-) in n n r- 01 r1 PI rt ri r1 10 O O 0 0 a O o o O us O o N W O O O O O a •• W .• 7 1- W W W r 1 0' W W N N WW r W.+' n 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 / I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n 4 4 ..0 as 4 4 J. a 0 .0 .A4 44 4a 0 44 0 40 4 N 4 4 41 G Li 4 N UI N N 0 W N N N 4 0 C CO W N so 4 W r - o 4 1 .- .•IV W W 41 W N D N t N 0 0 o Ut N N •-' W I 0' '--o UI N o 0 0 4 W .4 i 1 11 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I iN W 1' .•..- W N co 4 G1 UI Jr 4 W W O'4 P W r 2 h•. N .- • r r N •-• .+ r- N o N W .O N N 4 r I O W r �/+ W r 0 O N •- W 0' P.N 0 W r r .+ W • • I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 I - I I V- 0- 4 .• P. N 4 (t1 a 4 a a 4 W W 0'a a W W .4 W N W .- P. G W 1+ W N .+ N W 41 0 N N a 0.-44 2 LC O N 0 CI W N N UI • 0 N 02 0 07 .0.1 CO X o r u d '0 0 0 4 V -1 -1 m W-4 J. 7 1 O. • W O UI • 1 Co a W 3 ' Cl 11 O n O 0 * Cl ICI • • 32 IPI O 1 * 0 0 ( I I r CI I A n X 71 71 P. `` f I N N' CA N I I 1311 y 1 I V • UN-•iO L 3 V O M'►Y N 9IO 3 0 .1 / :314!! 1'O * t O J.► W N ! O • 4 t:AWII Y U 4 y 11A J O UNI ►W N- YO O* 'I•Y • U'N -0 •,• V• Y'•U M SI • U Y U! J U N'U Y • ♦ • •' • • y :1! i W N W i • N N . N N N N N (V 0 •U y 1- O O10 V PIU 1 W N O pp J ? U \IW -' O IC O�V P Y� > W NI+ O 0 3 V 0�U • WiN + p • J V� • A •IW N -1 1 I 1 I I f I 1 I 1 �1 wI oI uI 0 ,oI o 9 o o 1. o a o o o 1_41; ',o.o i n .n T TI T T TI 0�1 T TIO, 1� T CO T 1T T IT T T T T 2 a A 00 :D 0 903 A mip 1•b •P I2 :. ICS 00 •9 CO 9 S >' '1 �' N N N N NI N N NIN I� N 1... .+ �r Ir r r N r r A .0 A V T UI A -�I N N 9 D V s cn A GN N A I'7 Z I-• • t1 0 7 L r. G G G O U IC C-� 3 -11 .J , O A O coO 7 tV a a.v G a V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V -. N IN. r r r r I-• r r r r r r r r r r r r .--r s Ui CJI UI UI CP CJI JI UIS 0 N N 0 UI UI N Ui In us 0 A D 9 D CO •D 0 .70 CO D 03 3/ A p 03 Zi CD '7i 0 OD D 7 I-. r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r m m a 2 N N 9.0 O N N V V 9 .O •'• C • • a • • • • Z .0 40 r W w w 411 A r r W w r r 00 m .0 -4 •O,0 V-/ a A O.ON CA•- CACM -.1 V ,0 so V.-1 NN N V /-*h. tot CA 0a V so.4 T ,040 I-.8-. A a TQ` NN NN 0 0 N as 4I C.+ Aa o0 SA' NN co co 0O 00 w V T • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O A A J V .0 9 UI N 0 0 0 O A w UI UI UI Ti as co O UI UI T 01 000 CO 9 0 O a s a a 0 o UI N 0,T CAN 0 o O O 01 T UI N 0 O V CAI w UI IA N N w(..‘ w Id O O o 0 a s O 0 O • • * • • • • * • • * • * • ' • • * • 2 13 m 13! -1 2 r r r r G. R A A 2 C 0 n• A n m A • s r -. o .• s ri .. o o a c m c c z o r A O O -4 D a Z 2 Z n z r r us z to N A • A A 1 0 Z 2 z m U) 2 •. 2 -I -4 -I -•-• T1 a T I 01 N 0 r o o UI a .• n C o o < A z A "II m -1 s R to a I z n O %a. 2 2 m a m a -• 2 A r r A I -i o m • as .. 2 TC 1 N. -4 2 .. . m n S 0 C C o X n -c n i m a m m Z 0 m x a o s .+ Z o 0 O r a 0 < 0 2 2 .4 7• r z a A A z coo p I•4 A 2 CO -• N V-• 2 C 17 CO 0 10 0 n 2 2 N m O 2 m m -1 0 -1 • PI N 0 2 -i n c s 70 A ei 0 0 n m -• C :'I r A A ti A - z A Oi I A C, • • ml ..4A m NI 2 0 N -• m i A • N I CI C( N O n 0 m m ClCI C O m 0 O m m co .• m m rl m A s r-4 o m o O -• -I o n c o r r -• C! 2 O C, 2 2 2 C c -. TJ o A S c 2 - 0 C 0 0 m 1,11 .4 o ml m 2 m w.. 0 •. 0 2 PI .. O -• ... 0 0 2 AI A • AI A • A 13-0 • -1 • Z A 71 O n ro r 2N a a • • r o o N m D nI V < r Y• r 2 n la N a 2 2 2 m m .. O A Ni 2 2 \ i O A 2 1 a M a c.")N s a A m x 2 2. 2 O -•I 0. z O A 11• .. 1.• .+ A < a -1 co -1I • C r.-• m . O Z N "Ii .- 2 2 2 2 A .. • -'1 • 2 '0 2 i 9 C -• 1 • 2 A o -1 -. -• .s n z A N a v -1-/ A •• • A N o • • • b m 1 • m .. r • • O 13 • m • z -'• .. • • A o 0I n n vs I m m • V O N O O o O O o O UI co O O O O O O s r ji r .O r r r r r A 1 1 1 II 1 i s 1 1 N N w NN w 0 N '0 w ►- r GIN 0 .-• w r N 0• N wO r I r r V 1 1 1 11 t 1 1 I 1 w 0 r ur r w r N r r N wCD N r o r N N Nr r r 0 1 1 I I 1 1 11 1 w A N wI r •• w •- A N 0, •. A C.1 •-•r °'• . r r r w •-- • CO CO N r co r N r r N ••• ACO ` .4i N w co us • rV r UI NI 41 UI u N V IV r a 1 A • r • 1 A Aft r 2 m A N A O 0 Is m 0 m u . U � U'N-•O CP•J• U'.YN pYYUYYYYY YY • • • • • • • •W W Way yW�W W yy1.J•IN N N N.N N N N'•J••V•Y•W N-o •V•YI•.s N� / I -IS •• V J U •W N -0 0 0 V• U�•W N +O O • V P U Y W M- O•1•V O U • u O is16 I IV 0 G1 j�• Y G G •1 • • • • • •. 1 • •.0 W U: W a it''J W W! W .- WN - O •IO JpN • W N -• OIOO 10Y uN - C • OIV pG. ► YN O . 0 O'Y • W1N -, O . 0 V: p G •IWN ` II• r rIrr .. • 14) .n .a r Lo LQ o ° oa. Q LQn 43 • .:A 77 9 co :9 2) 422A Ix x 13,• Ilx ri - A A ILA u u ',u W u W Lw u w c"1 • ,r •.] 143 .D I� T UI A IW N r _. 7C 1,r143 2 I-1 0 < • O 1 � 0� c: o o o .a In c U o C o s r - -4 V -4 V .1 V .1 -4 ./ .1 •I N • \ \ \ \ \ - \ \ \ \ \ \ m 1S r r r r r r r r r r r r Is UI UI N UI N UI UI co Ui U) UI UI 7C \ N. \ \ \ N. N. N. i\ N. N. N. 0 OI 0 x m to a co 31 LD O) .n 'D IA r Ir r r r r r r r r r Cl m a N 2 N.0r N r r UI O .1'0.1 U1 Nr N G.l r N 0.m0.0 rr PAPA C • .• • • • •• • • • • • r • • • •. • • 2 Ni©.0 L)W -4'W 40 r O` 0% .4 UI NN NN C.I W PAPA 00 - PAW. .1 OLID UI W0%0)x W.1Grm NOD UIa -4-4 WM NN NN Nk3 rr NN NN W W 00 G44,4 N N O r O D O U I a C N N O D Lb V u N N 0 0' ....... .O AIA 0 0 �/J O I 0 p 1 D' 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0' • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ;• • • • Is • • • • • • • • • • • O. G•O N y 0 0 0 0 U I •3(l Q%.p 0• -a...4 00 .0,0 N U 1 Q i a 4344 o'u J O u 0 a O 22 -4 ,1 0 r CA u 0 UI 000 O o 0 o .10♦.0 oto 0%0% NU) 00 010 OU UIl0 as a0 'o 0 00 0'0 0 * • • • • • * • • * • * • . N < C C C -I -I CA 70 N H N 2 .+ a s j2 m m S n -4 O m'� 11 1 if-n m -n -nm11 -n11 a O -1 r -i n is s I17,10 a C CCCCCCCIm -nmm CCCCCCCCC X Cl m -1 "1 X a 7t -1 ••I -I 2 2 2 Z.Z Z 2;2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 O O 7D N 0 0 0 I0 -1 m 2 < O O O 010 O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "0 0 2 -'1 -0 1.4 Cl m 2 C -i 2 < w Cl s n CO 13 2 LA 0 NIIUI UI 0140 O N N N N N r 0 m PA co 70 N) 2 m z -+ r D O .00DO' UI W N .DIONNA uNrU1r 0 a N -• .4 0 70 0 n C CI 2 C -• < 0 \ 0 A 2 .4 .4.4+4.4 -4.41+4.4.4.4. .... O Cl 0 012 72 m 2 9 • n 0 0 0 0 0 O U I0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z N • z r C -1 r 1.4 C) S -•-f-1-Ir -4.4-4 -11....... = 1 r. 'r = Cl n O Z O m D a D. as a a D a a D b b a s h • V) = m 7' O 0 0 D n r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r 0 0 .. 2 w • • .0 b X Cl< Cl N 2 0 n • 0 n 7' N 2 O 7, T -4 m • 1 • O a A N N -I • m Lb 2 a m c m m 0 O co 0 N Q) "4 i o m 0 m0 0 Cl -1 r 1 -1 Cl -1 1 ICA 2 'C S C C 2 I O S a 2 Cl m m r• r• w ..1 m m 0 m -4 m s \ a y n •0 12 33 Lb • 70 Cl 73 IXs • r • • s a o m r m r -v Q• 12 U) r n 'V) 2 2 z 73 70 C v) i s N a 2 a a CO 0 CA O 70 on n r C •-• a /'• -. C '71 -i it n C x m -0 12 r. 2 2 •O • 7D • S ro " v 1-1 2 -4 -I N C - N a -O -v r • -4 • • r m n m b r 1 -• I.I • n• 77 -4 73 O PA - 1 - rl 1.1 < 1C < m In 0 N N. .• 7D w 1G) 2 CI m n m m o .1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o CO o a r. r r r r r r r r r u r 1 n , 1 I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 a 1 1 i') IAa a O a a 41, a a a a a 013N N N N N N u N u .0 N C 14' N W u 4 W N r to r N N 2 10 O a N 0 O O UI 0 UI .0 v -t 1 it , ICA 1 1 1 I 1 (i 1 i $ A u a CA .11. o' a (A u u 'O u z CA 'N N r r r r r W r N O lr 0` 'r r FN r r N 1.. •. r r I • I I 1 'I 1 t 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 IQ' A IW Cd .W CT 40 W IW (A '0. u 1 ti ,r N N N Ir r r r r W r N Z r r u I0' N r O N CA o CT Ir •• o 0 .1 Cr. •'- 7 1 y o CII ••. 1-• • r o Vt • 1 2 I• r 2 Cl w a • • I a m • 1 1 m ff n I ,, y YV ,11 Z.:vO Y�pV p •W 3 313 G 3 31 Y J G'NY G •O• ? J \ U H • O W yW yy 3 y U W - I i N N uN N N 3 .O V'•0 • UIN 7 • O 312 yi NSU O tit J OIU ► Y' N ♦ O13 O `:113 Y YiY Y W!W ViN N NiN N N N N V - O O V IO U • W N Y� U ♦I Y N +� O O O V O U; i Y N O OI O O A U ♦ Yi N O n I a rn x 2 -+ o < r 0 o -4 L7 rn x 0 rn rn p Z i P Ul • • • 2 ,4 - W u 1 ►� ,O,o 03 41. • 0-+wu • • • • • Q% o,o -i ao + o .062 -f CCCC D 2 12 z z r 0000 rn z 03 0 -4 0. 0 w t 0 0 • -i.4 -1-1 n • 0 0 0 0 S -1-4-1-411, rn rr •r'rr rn -4 co) 1 in 4-4 • 1 rn • 0 rn H 1 H 0 z s n 0 c Z 0 N 2 a o • V I • r 0 al e 1 • • a n r •• rn y n N 0 s rn j 0 rn 4- • I ,iV�N-�O OiOVOU 1U N 1'10 3 11,c1 pYYMu l •OV ♦04Yl♦atOYOV3.JYIYy N Y O1iO1OU ♦uii"00' V00♦YN-O p�OV OUI♦YN� / N) A-cr ', i-� F . N r-. F� F• N . F• W tTi p Cn W Ci.) 11) W N) N (,) N) N) A A A l� A N) A -Os .NA H. r• F r-• N N r-., N W W N) N W W W C.) 10 N N) W )N N VI = H V In O N O O O O .- NN ' co W Co W N Ci N W 00 OOW O O H. N) I-• 0 0 Co 1'1-•Vi rW .p" r-• 00 CO 00 • • n I O V W F-. Co r, r-., F-• CO 00 CO CO 00 00 CO CO CO CO CO 00 CO CO CJ) n ro n r - 1--, r - r- r- F-• F-• F-, F-+ i-• H• i•-. . 1.1 ,...1 r-, r r' r-• N 0 W W r co co C7 H-, V W )-- r-• r-• Co 000 Oro 00 0o 00 00 co co co -a-CO 00 0) 0o Cb H r r-• r-, I-. F-• 1.-4 r r, `-• N N O O O O r-, r- F-• W N r r N r r r HA r F-• 1-, h-• r N r r 1--• r-•, r r, r--• N • r - r F F r W n • fr-• r-• -• t--. r-, rr r-• 1-- 0 O O O 0 O O C O r-, F• �-• rrrrr p-. ., �•O O O OOOOOCC0OOCOr r COCCOOOOO0O _ O O_ O O O-- O O O O C C n C) H • N N v In N W In V r� N 00 �� O 0 00 OO O r H. N ND Ln WW A D In r O OW O CU v O CO r-• VN b U0O C V N N) N W W CO Ui N �• • • ,vi O O b O T • LAO O N O O CT p W p k0 N Ln OC O 0 0 A u W O O O H CC)) rt C n ) 0n CD 0 0 O � (0 H 07 O 1-3 C1 W 0 lid td C:] O n rD (D O Ns, Fi ft. N O FS N .II H rD n 0 r• rr m w rt 0 D, O o I.--I m rn w Fn a. rt w G g a, u n r•i Ft 0 rt N rt n p) N. o rD O ro w H. C B • O o rD H. H T W ro Co) 1CD roo N fD Co 1°-' N w 0' 2, N II-- a. 11 w R, Cn I-, I-, O H O R I0 n c o Cl) t=i �i G c 1-, 0 1-h M c •0 ro R•• Cn Cn m an X H. (D Cl) W ' 70 O 0 H• •U 'V 5 n 'xi •b Cs) H• CD rt (f) 'G 5rz, • p rr G cn o n 7 H. b o b b n b p Cl) n rn N I rp 0' o I--' I-, II • co C2+ m 1%� rt m 77 I-, Ft w H• r• Fitt C t=i Cl)acn (D • N ft. b 20 (D 2, r n D• 2" a) Cv) n OH• 13 n m CO w :� Cr� rt n H. Cr b 1-1 • rD Cl) H. m ci w w H. •0 0 I. H n• to 0 •ro n G x cn x Z1z z Z x r7 n n a> n o n H. r + 0 C w n o CD w w w G H. 0 Ft a m to ~ p = n a '* f* `C td R W 1 ro " CO N Ir rt O :s n ca H• O H. • CD CA r 0 x C CD n Cl) H CC rD X' n rt Co Hi 0 0 "C r-� C) C7 H O r• Pi CD n CD .O N Cl) '.i' W z n H. rC rt o o n = n d F-• • rt G co rn rn n Ft d r• 0 r Cl) rD o c n r' H. n x o, 0• T, rD 0 Cl' rt 0 w ro Cl) co G r N II ' x b n n n GO (1) A) r� • C) w cn i-d Ca 0 £ ,° a o CD • Pi .10 Cn - oO H H. w CD K. G CD H. e b a Co11) f D a. �. � Cl) m o •, m n — N) 1/40N In ry W 1/471 CO O CT W O r-, r-• N O ~` r-• N Co n W O CO V O 00 r V O 00 Cn CO O V N N N Cr, Co to NN• • U O O ND N O O 0\ - C,•) VD N W C L' N O V V O C O 9 \O N Cn O O O O l� Co O O O H 00 CO 00 00 W OO Co 00 0 O O O O O 0 0 00 (b V V V V V V •-i -- V V V 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 CO VD n O � D - 0m 03 V CT In -P-- W N rO C0 Oo V T LI' lNDr , O 00 z 0 y i ‘ii oo 111 :) L1111:1).\" 1 (:). A 1 1 o Of � � < r r r r r r r r r r r _ r r r , r r r r W r r I—' * r „ r —' "�7 ; .L- L � � .L- 4 ... l� -N .N .L , , -C- , ., 1'^ .. .„ -N J-- A .� .� Ha) 1.O W W W W W W W W CO W W W W k-C ,,O 14) W W W W W H 1/4D 'ID W N.) Ni N) Ni Ni V V V V V V V V V N.) tv N ,4O LO r r-• r O N W N) N r N) r r r r r r r r r r O O - V In r r O O O O W r- In • CO k.0 W W L.) -L-- L.) r O, r W - O, .p--- W ,.O ,...0kO A r 1/4.0r r -F� W n 1 r r W Ui N N CO r CO r N N N Li' r r r N-.) Ni r O, O, I-' r r r r r (�rd r r , r-• r r Ni r r r r Ni V r r r r r r r N r H ,-• F-' r" r-' h—' O W '.O CO W CO W r O\ r :AQ W Cn N N.) COr CO W-• N N N In r � r FO r r '' � � W ro I--' rr r N Ni r � � r-e r r r r r--• H (.a) (DO 0000 0000000 00 00 Co Co O O NOO O Cl) CO CO CO O O r-• r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r W r r 1- r r r r r I--, r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r � r u r r r r-' O C) O O O • O_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O O r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O o O o O O O O O O o O O 0 H V CS -N N u' N.) I--, ---1r Ni W r-• --, N o, CO v� �) rn V v, N.) i N CON .NV -, V wW -iOWOOo, o v O -N o J u r rn 'c -N C) 0 Cr 0 CO 00 0 o r . r .>r . o % i � O W '.0 CO tO In Ui '.o IN � Co 0 o Ni V O V O O O O In 4 O W 0 H -_( -F-- In O O O N O W IV r W CT O t u-, O O O Ln O o 0 W C7 H % CI Zi 7J 7y C7 C7 C" CO 7 W 7J 7J 0 CD I-' rt CD (D ro GQ 1- 5 G- :Is _ _ = a) • n H. H. H. CD cn :: : Si) G n H. H• H. (D H. b : rt rt rt rt I-., rt r* o rt rt ri Gi I I I R'+ H. I 0 C-.) 1-1R'+ rd r-' rri CO rL1 CO G (n at G d C) CO CO (D CD [-xi H H ri H R rHr p COG G - = n I cn H H oCrl 0 �' G' a' C "'7 C 1-h `C x a) I-1n n n H rt C7 )-)-, cn rt n (o 7 CO CD t" '1 "H. CD 00 co C ri Cr) (n 0 H. rt rt C rd HI • n. ro (D cn • r- - _ : H _ n C7 A) 'b _ 1-tP)W d r r C) n (n O' (D : _ _ ro W H C ID O rn_ _ rt rt A) H CO I-' H. ri I--' .. G rt Ht H C) - I (D Cl) F--, CO (a. W N (D �] at at H. rt rt 0 m G CI w 0 0 H C" rt C) : CD C) HI 0 (n CO G G 1-H.h H. 1-1 =cD • r FI rD O I I � m :� o n coCn ro 1-tG cn cn (D cn i (1) : n W 0 H G G P) C n rt rt N) (-) c ri x 0 0 G (D H.rt O 0 rt :: :: C W n rt G G (D ro 0 G H. ro (T) r� ro G CO CT V C" � W Ui _ 41 N) H V In W r V W In W O, V In Ni Ni Ni - N s.0 In C) V r r f.) O O O CO O '�'• V 0) Co In r -0.-- O r Cri r ---.) O O O O, N V O ---1 O O .0 W O N LJ O 9 V -N In V � kJ) O o O In O CO ' O CO CO 0 H co Co CO co co Co co CO CO W co CO Cb CO CO Cx) n 0 O O 000000 O O Or o O O O T• N) Ni N.) N) N Ni r r r r E-' In J-' W Ni r O •CC CO V CT In •g-• W N r O 0 I R aF H CO N F� O 3' ()7 F-' r) 175 I cr CDt H `G 3 • CSD i S) CD 0 O hi N c-r N P) F, n � n H '17 S✓ (n a C) a C "t 0 c; 7 c N W N N N Vr CT p �oN (I) x • . W O V F� VI O •-•7 O O> 0� tr1 •r rri O 7) n C) z 0 i O Ui CO 00 00 00I-, r-.' F-+ to U, 00 00 CO C cI .P` -N -N -N .P '< C N▪ Ui '.0 '.O '.0 10 A A U' U' l0 ,-O k-0 t` N.) 0 N N N W '--' r' 0 0 W N N t O '.0 W 0 H H N.) H v0 ,,0 r- W 0 CO I- � H CT H O N ..01/4O k-0 %0 In In �1 ca oo s 1 H H H H H H H ch rn 1- w Cl CD 0 CD t w � NO NO NO NO NO � .- ' CD C I-IC (D (D Ni H H I-` H H I-' H Hr H HH. 0 n n CO H : i 1- i HCl I-, 0 '0 imi H 0 rt T O U, 00 co Co co --1 ',I U, U, 00 CO 00 GCS 0 0 C7 H ON H I- -' H - c c H r i--• C CD CD A' H F-' 1--' H H H O'-' r-r H i- rO_.. H r, . O 0 0 O O O O O O 0 O F-' H H H H F-' I- 1— r--, — '-. 1 Cl O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 r C r -cr, -Cr> 00 W 00 W v Ut N (J, V In U1 t./1V � � 03 In a1 H V In .L� 0' LII '"' 00 a\ N a, a. - _ 00 NO H ON I-' 00N H Ui H 00 H O W N N U, 0 CN O l n H -g, -g, .g", W CO 2 O NNHIn p � 00 0 W0 O N 0 0 0 tor-- ~ In H 03 O\ N M CD Cl C=i H H Cl CD G C] C) 0) b H Cl b I H H '< n m •0 0 C' w H• n rt rt 0 N N H Fes'• F C 0 w w H H• H H rt O' 0' H (U rt H H H H. 0' ov 0) o 0' F0' C 'd co rt rt rf , 0' • tr: •H rt a H. H. H. 0 n n H. X CCDD (~D• 0• Oro 04 0co cn E CIO kC m v 1 O H 'd H C) H Z C") t-' r- '0 0 CD Lai U1 OCn CD CD (D Cn tr' U) C rt rr H rt 0 rr m z Z • Z 0 113 w Z Z CO P1 Cl 43 0 rt 43 H. O. rt Cl H. H H 1-h H Cl 1-, H el co CD CO CD CD 0 Co CO CI F• w NCa coW Cl 0(D Cl' z b b CGD b n H. 'd -0 CD (D CD '0 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD 1 In U, Ui -I U, In I--' LP < o N 6\ -) lD G, 6\ - Co 6\ N G1 i--1 x' H Ui H CO H O r-' W � 6\ 'Q Ui CJ • In N) In O -1 CO V 6\ A CO O W O q In O O Cr, N O In I-' 00 T N) O N 0 0 O In H 0 O O O O O 0000000 x W W W W W W W W W N) N N) N oo J Cr, Ui -N W N) 1_, O '.0 co 1 6\ 'I- O 6 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Jeanette Shaner RE: Authorization for Payment - VIP Condemnations DATE: July 16 , 1981 The following is a final agreed settlement on the VIP condemnations sent to us by the City Attorney. Request approval for payment . Shakopee Sand & Gravel Co . , Raymond L. Lemmons and Jane M. Lemmons $1 , 575. 00 js 7(1, MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Unassessed Project Costs for 1977 DATE: July 15, 1981 Introduction: The City is carrying $15,777.00 of unassessed project costs on the books in the P.I.R. Fund. Background: This is listed as "amount to be provided". Resolution No. 1101 states "The City would also pay $15,776.99 which is the cost of the Market Street Storm Sewer out of the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund and will assess the benefited property at a later date as provided for in Minnesota Statutes 429.051." The attached Engineer's memo relates that he cannot find sufficient data to develop an assessment roll . I have inquired about this item on an annual basis and it is past the point that action should be taken. Alternatives: 1. Direct Engineering Department to expend more effort in trying to construct an assessment roll and if possible proceed with assessments. 2. Direct Finance Department to take the appropriate steps to delete the "amount to be provided" from the financial records. Recommendation: Alternative number 2. GV/ljw attachment MEMO TO: Gregg Voxland Finance Director FROM: H. R. Spurrier City Engineer RE: Unassessed Project Costs fir 1977 DATE: July 13, 1981 I have searched the Engineering Department records for 1977 in order to determine how the above-captioned assessment should be made. The information I have indicates that the assessment should be made to property owners on Market Street. I cannot find information detailing what the nature of the improvement was and who the improved properties were, therefore, I would recommend that you proceed with the necessary action to have this assessment deleted or otherwise wiped off City books. HRS/jiw cc: John Anderson City Administrator dr p *,1„1° �,, ,^ nn,wt :,-:',11,1:t , ,4"::;;34;.:,1,-, ,§ tiY !.v ,...71-70.6,,, p ♦+°., 4. �'y t'0 t i .r ,.pi.,* , C ''•,:%:6a e, #s i.3 ► e v j,. sf ,moi } s s�' rr'-t.+ t•. ..r 2 psi, • ' F : r ti°;! ! .',? -:` �,' 1'. +.'i,.t , / s*4:.: X�ry!4N 7,.. ' a ' f tM`+l-C"d. °'� t i tr`�i`¢i .i�'z-{•+�pi `�: ^ L RESOLUTION No. 1101 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE COST TO BE ASSESSED, ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF AND SETTING A HEARING DA'L'E ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR 1976-1 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WHEREAS, Contracts have heretofore been let for the 1976-i street improvement program covering the following streets , avenues , alleys and parts thereof as follows : o ] West Side Utilities p ] Dean ' s Lake Road Drainage rJ 12th Avenue - from the alley between Jackson & Monroe west to the alley between Tyler & Polk WHEREAS, The contract price for such improvements is418 52 $ 4.00 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in making said improvements , amount to $121 , 172 . 18 so that the total cost of the improvements would be $539, 696 . 18 and of this would pay 696 . 18 the Citya y $30, 507 .04 as its share of the costs . The City would also pay $15 , 776 . 99 which is the cost of the Market Street storm sewer out of the Permanent Improve- ment Revolving Fund and will assess the benefited property at a later date as provided for in Minnesota Statutes 429. 051 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . That the cost of such improvements to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be $493 ,412 . 15. 2 . That the City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer, shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvements against every assessable lot , piece of parcel of land within the district affected without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and they shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the office of the City Clerk for public inspection. 3 . That the City Clerk shall , upon the completion of such proposed assessment , notify the City Council thereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1 . That a hearing shall be held on the 1st day of September , • 1977 in the City Hall at 7 : 45 o 'clock P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and place all persons owning property 4 , .4arAito- - 4 - 7G, ,, ,: ,..i., lit . • affected by such improvements ` andPropo#ed assessments will be given ," y an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. b '�f 2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice. , '•' �:. . of the hearingon the � � '� proposed assessment to be published once in . 5"_';,t • '' .' ' the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at lea :. , .i ; a`. li prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice the total cost ., of the improvements. He shall also cause sailed notice o such hear - , ,, .' $ ing to be given the owner of each parcel described in the assessm*nt , •'# ' ' roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. y• ' ,i:4. . Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of - j; Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 9th day ,of August, 1977. ^4 • ' yor o a tyo a opee . ATTEST: `; • V V rCi%''[� I Approved as to form this :,y,_ day of August, • 7. li, ,!f �, ��� � k• , . / ty t rney i AN r. J ' . • • f �+ r x� d� 4.te � ,.,� lct , C)V MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Tax Increment Projects DATE: July 13, 1981 1) After reviewing the bond prospectives and consulting with Mr. Hay it appears that the Kmart bond proceeds must be used only for the improve- ments listed in the Agreement (well, watermain, tank, CR 83, rough grading and utilities, and parking lot) and the trustee must transfer unused construction funds into the sinking fund. 85% of construction funds must be spent by November 1, 1982. 2) Likewise, the Hirise funds would be handled as above but with the possibility of going through the process of amending the plan to include other improvements within the district. We are facing arbitrage provisions on these bonds if 85% of the proceeds are not spent by November 1, 1983, ($82,000 left) . Funds available Balance 12/31/80 $ 179,711 Net Interest (36,300) $ 143,411 Alternatives: (Hirise) A. Proceed with obtaining legal advice and amending the redevelop- ment plan to expend funds for other improvements within the district by 11/1/83. B. Not expend the funds which would then be placed in the sinking fund at restricted interest earnings (bond rate) and used to retire and/or recall bonds when possible. This issue does have balloon payments of $100,000 in 1991, 1992 and 1993. There is tax levies in support of the three final years of $244,262. Depending on surplus built up, these levies may be reduced. Also, the bonds may be refunded to provide financing at that time depending on various factors that may exist in 1989. GV/ljw ANNUAL FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE REPORT HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1980 The Following information is submitted pursuant to MSA 273.4 subdivision 5. There are two projects in effect, the Kmart Distribution Center and the Senior Citizen Hirise. Kmart Hirise 1) Revenue -Sale of Land $1,139,468 $ 20,000 -Bond Proceeds 362,750 -Interest Income 362,326 29,483 $1,501,794 $412,233 2) Expenditures - (site acquisition and improvement) -Housing Development $151,305 -Industrial Development $1,436,428 3) Kmart: Kmart Corporation has guaranteed up to 25% of debt services requirements for the bonds if the increment falls short. In addition there is a debt service reserve of $565,000 with the Trustee. Hirise: The Hirise bonds are backed by the City of Shakopee's full faith and credit. 4) Original assessed Value $ 123,927 $ 4,934 5) Captured Assessed Value $2,208,452 $ 20,602 6) Captured assessed Value shared with other taxing districts. NONE NONE 7) Tax increment received $ 7,510 $ THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK Or SHAKO PEE /v' - ! SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 7-1-81 Air. James O'Neill, Chairman a a I. C. C. City of Shakopee 129 East First Ave., Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Dear Jim, Per our phone conversation yesterday, please accept this short note as icy resignation from the I.C.C. committee, Frt I sincerely appreciate your understanding as to my involvement in the Shakopee Recreation program. It appears that as long as nay son desires to pursue a variety of sports and also desires his father's participation, I will attempt to continue on. At Least, until which time I can no longer be beneficial or be able to contribute to his progress and his team mates' . . , '1- ; I've enjoyed my involvement with the I.C.C. and it's fine member— ship and wish them continued success. Thank you very much, James W. Raduenz 135 West Third Ave. X` K Shakopee, Mn. 55379 .h' k4"ist" t a{ta4 � � t* • f+ .'°riT+7t {}� • t"`'�'# ;i 4 Sa ' „2 - + ar a e B r t t 5 i#i l a a e7t N;k i5 tt • f• ' �? stt;#.� + y, t;� 'ia;a a#+ s.0 ? w�q`` .3 . .. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Inspector RE: Air Conditioner, City Hall DATE: July 21 , 1981 As you know, the Compressor is out on the Air Conditioning unit on the west City Hall building. What this means is we have the air conditioning housing left of this unit . We have $4,000 left over from the budget on the east side of City Hall H.V.A/C unit installation and the boiler installation on the west side . The cost of installing a new unit on ,the west side is $5,168.00. The balance can be obtained from Revenue Sharing. Recommendation I recommend the unit be installed new, now. LH/jam Ikt /'--k ,SSOC ;/ ..TED , ,. , . 4 . 4 ,, , , ex,, - ,-... ..,.. r4c-tr-irc " ; M ECtl 29' Al rll r (If\I E7 A i 1 ' 'Is' '' 1\1.t I rii ,d, ' ,...... 1,-,, ) 1'4 I li- ,' ; 0 ( II.... 5 !„ J . , ,.. iii j22,...L_'1 iTH MARKET ' ' SHAKOFIE M 1 b53-i'3 °H01`,,:::: '4,,„.5100 Ou'iv 21, 1981 .4, A City of Shakop( e 123 E. Lt4t, Shakopee , MN 5')3-o.-.) Dear Sirs: We are pleased to quote the .**eolacement of a 10-trn condensing unit with a 10-ton Carrier Model 4367E012501 including all necessary piping, wiring,roof work , hoistirg and electrioal wirng for the sum of : five Thousand Si Hundred Eighteen and no/100 ($o , 613 .00) „ Sincerely, ins ASSOCIATED MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS, INC' 4 / ,-, fli,/(-----‘,. -et-i-,--r,„,k-i .....---- Joseph M. Sand, Tr. President •• •-- 4.‘--- • st