Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/16/1982 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: February 11 , 1982 1 . I checked with Jack Coller regarding the motion February 9 , 1982 to amend Council action February 2 , 1982 on Department Head evaluations . Jack said that radical change can be made by a substitute change or amendment . In this case a motion to amend made at the following meeting is in order. 2 . Valley Fair tax petition. Valley Fair is contesting taxes pay- able in 1981 and based upon 1980 estimated market values . We have set values of : $2 , 524 ,000 for land $3 , 369 ,000 for structures $5 ,893 ,000 Total Valley Fair claims the value to be : $1 ,635 ,000 for land $3 , 368 ,699 for structure $5 ,00T,699 Total The approximately $900 ,000 difference represents $36 ,000 in taxes for all taxing districts and $6 ,000 for the City. 3 . The City Engineer. and I have decided that the best approach to Howard Schmitt ' s sewer lateral is to include it in a 1982 con- struction project and put the cost in the overall project assess- ment . Council will see this job in a project later this year. 4 . The League of Cities' committees to which Council members have requested appointment will be meeting July through August rather than May thru June . 5 . SPUC checked Walt Harbeck ' s remote water meter and it was accurate . However, the meter was running constantly which is symptomatic of a leak or running toilet . 6 . Jack Caller has filed the necessary condemnation proceedings in district court for Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District ' s required outlet right-of-way. 7 . Harry Weinandt still has a pending application to file O'Dowd Lake to connect Weinandt Acres with an island. Right now the City and U. S . Bureau of Land Management (BLM) have challenged his title to the island in question since the BLM thought they owned it and was preparing to transfer it to the City. We will keep you posted. 8 . St . Francis Hospital has approached Shakopee and Savage regarding the renewal of our 3 year ambulance agreement . They are pro- posing to more than double the cost from $1 . 25/capita to $2 . 94 in Non-Agenda Informational Items February 11 , 1982 Page Two September and then $3 . 25/capita in 1983-84. We are in the infor- mation gathering stage . 9 . We recently received three communications from Senator Rudy Boschwitz ' s office regarding his stand in favor of Federal Revenue Sharing, Block Grants and Urban Enterprise Zones . Anyone wishing to read these can call and get a copy. 10. Attached are the Revenue and Expenditure reports for the period ending January 31 , 1982 . 11 . Attached is the Building Activity Report for the period ending January 31 , 1982 . 12 . Attached is a National League of Cities memo explaining the President ' s New Federalism Proposal . 13 . Attached is a newsletter from the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities with an article on Surface Water Management . 14 . Attached is a response to our letter from Tom Hagedorn regarding corporate mergers . 15 . Attached are copies of resumes ' from Virgil Mears and Barry Kirchmeier for the SPUC nomination. You have already received one from Mr. Brown. 16 . Attached is a copy of an article from the "CURA Reporter put out by the U. of M. on "The Cost of Regulation: Home Builders , Developers and the Maze of Government Review" . Note that Shakopee rated well ( see map on page 5 ) . I suggest you save this article . 18 . Attached are the minutes of the January 4 , 1982 and February 1 , 1982 meetings of SPUC. 19 . Attached are the minutes of the February 10 , 1982 Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee . 20 . Attached is a copy of two interesting articles from the Nation' s Cities Weekly. You each received a copy in the mail but I would like to call your attention to these articles . 21 . Attached is a memo from the League of Minnesota Cities regarding proposed OSHA requirements for municipal and industrial fire departments . Because of the deadline I have already sent a letter stating the City of Shakopee is against any further mandated programs . T '?1 Cnif eD .Sf of ez Zenaf eRECEIVED WASHINGTON, D.G. 20510 January 25, 1982 FEB 2 1982 CITY OF SHAKOPEE Hon . Walt Harbeck Mayor of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee , Minnesota 55379 Dear Mayor Harbeck : I ' ve recently received many letters and calls regarding the status of the General Revenue Sharing (GRS) funds provided to local governments . I ' d like to take this opportunity to share my thoughts and some information on GRS with you. As you may be aware, I have been a long-time supporter of the GRS program. I believe that more programs should provide "no strings attached" funding to local governments . Such programs provide localities the much needed flexibility to respond to their own needs without having to comply with costly government regulations . Revenue sharing is probably the most efficient government program and should serve as a model for the block grants which were included in the Omnibus Reconciliation legislation passed in the summer of 1981 (a copy of my article on block grants is enclosed) . The funding level for GRS in Fiscal Year 1982 is now set at S4 . 6 billion . Although the Administration requested a 12 percent reduction in this amount , Congress did not comply . In the outcome , GRS was specifically exempted from the FY82 budget cuts . I think this demonstrates the popularity of this program here on Capitol Hill , and it probably also has dampened any further efforts by the Administration to phase out the program. To the contrary , I now hear there is a strong possibility that President Reagan may actually propose an increase in GRS to compensate for cuts in other categorical programs . At this point , the amount of increase is still unclear . However , you can be relatively certain that the program will be funded at a minimum of $4 . 6 billion . One suggestion I ' ve heard is to funnel revenues from excise taxes (alcohol and tobacco, for example) into GRS . This is consistent with Reagan ' s intent of "revenue turn-back" to the states . I wholeheartedly favor this approach. I ' m also enclosing my floor statement (which includes a fact sheet ) on the Urban Enterprise Zones legislation which I have sponsored. I believe this bill can help stimulate community y January 25, 1982 Page 2 development and employment through tax incentives for both businesses and individuals. I hope you will find this information helpful . Please feel free to share any thoughts you may have with me on this or any other matters . Sin erely, 1461 /6 Rudy Boschwitz United States Senator RB/sc Enclosure SENATOR R U DY N EWS BOSCHWITZ RELEASE MINNESOTA November 4 , 1981 Contact: Tom Mason Press Secretary 202/224-8448 BLOCK GRANTS : EFFICIENT USE OF FEDERAL MONEY BY RUDY BOSCHWITZ "the block proposals would repeal landmark legis- lation, eliminate essential programs and under- mine principles of fiscal accountability and lay the groundwork for confusion, neglect, and new bureaucracy at the state level . . . many believe these proposals are the first steps in a strat- egy of abandonment of federal involvement in meeting human needs . . . " That is a statement from one of the many special interest coalitions so adamantly opposed to President Reagan' s block grant program. It represents a widespread attitude among these organizations that block grants allow the federal government to shirk its responsibility of caring for the disadvantaged and that the states, which would be implementing these grants , are unable or unwilling to respond to the needs of their citizens. That attitude was , perhaps, justified in the 1960s and early 1970s, but is no longer defensible. Such accusations have whipped up hysteria in some quarters . Opponents of these grants have tried convincing the public that block grants will wipe out the social mandates of the past two decades and will disregard millions of low-income or disadvan- taged people. That is just notthe case . Two misguided notions about block grants are largely respon- sible for the confusion. First, to assert that block grants radically alter the nature of social programs for the poor is incorrect. In fact, they provide for an orderly transfer of decision-making authority back to the states and localities with ample safeguards to assure the continuation of programs for the disadvantaged . Secondly, there have been significant changes in state and local governments over the past two decades that have substan- tially improved their ability to respond to the needs of their citizens . The federal government is no longer the only branch of government with the staff, resources and commitment to care for the disadvantaged. A close examination of the block grants as they have emerged should assuage the fears of those who have objected so strenuously to the move to replace the narrow categorical grants with the broader block grants. In fact, many proponents of the new feder- alism argue that the present block grant programs are little more than a minor consolidation of categorical programs . The block grants that were adopted in the human services area are rather narrow grants laden with "maintenance of effort" requirements, set-asides for specific levels of funding, numerous exclusions from the grants of the big-budget programs , etc . So unless you believe that state and local government are totally inept, and intentionally neglectful of the poor, it would be difficult to argue that these grants do not contain adequate safeguards for the disadvantaged. In fact, those organizations which are truly devoted to helping the needy should look favorably upon the new system. Block grants offer increased flexibility and responsiveness to local needs over categorical programs . For instance : -- Because decisions over the use of block grants funds are made at the local level (categorical grants are administered by the federal government) those people receiving the funds will have more direct input than they currently have. -- Block grants allow the governments closest to the citi- zens to decide how best to spread budget reductions (i .e . , what should continue to be fully funded and which programs should be reduced) . The categorical system forced local and state govern- ments to cut all services across the board. -- Block grants are efficient. Revenue sharing is a good example of block grant efficiency. They cost only one-tenth of one percent of the administrative costs compared to categorical program so the rest of the funds go directly to the program. They allow local governments to combine related programs in a coordinated, cohesive fashion rather than having to apply for funding under many different programs to accomplish one goal . The volume of categorical programs made it virtually impossible for local government to fully understand each program. For instance , after the energy crisis of 1973 , the federal government created 29 separate energy assistance programs administered by nine different federal agencies to deal with the situation. -- Block grants eliminate the competition for federal funds that frequently discriminates against those small communities that can' t afford specialized grantsmen. This ensures more stable funding for local governments . It saves administrative costs and distributes federal funds more equitably. There are many other advantages of block grants , as well . But before their workability is accepted, the public must believe that state governments can effectively operate them. In the 1960s and 1970s , the federal government implemented a vast array of categorical grant social programs because states were not addressing the health, education, or other social needs of their citizens . At that time , categorical grants were an effective tool for the federal government to target their assis- tance to troubled populations . In the past twenty years, how- ever, there have been significant reforms in the states that have drastically changed the nature of state government . For example : -- restrictions on the length of legislative sessions have been either reduced or eliminated entirely in most states ; -- permanent professional staff has been hired, which has substantially enhanced the ability of state governments to im- plement and administer human service programs; -- state governments have targeted a large portion of their own scarce resources to meet the needs of the disadvantaged. In Minnesota, for example, programs to meet these needs consume about 22 percent of the state ' s general fund and 30 percent of the state ' s total resources, while at the federal level they consume less than 20 percent of domestic outlays; -- it should be noted that minorities are now better 611 represented in the state legislatures than in Congress due to the redistricting of the last two decades. Overall , the nature of state government has changed signif- icantly since the early 1960s. States and municipal governments have shown a genuine commitment and sensitivity to the needs of the disadvantaged. In my view, the time has come when block grants -- with safeguards against possible abuses -- ought to be given a chance . I am not a proponent of repealing all landmark social legislation of the 1960s and 1970s, or of eliminating the essen- tial services for our needy populations. I do , however, feel it is time to begin returning the reigns of power back to state and local governments . If we only give the block grant proposals the chance they deserve, they will have the potential of improving rather than hindering the delivery of federal funds to those in our society who truly need it. -- 1 4,.....L ; 9 Y We-� 146Tangrtssionat Record ., ,,:,„„„, .. n80 United States of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 97th CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 127 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 1981 No. 83 By Mr.BOSCHWITZ (for himself, The focus of this year's urban jobs you'll be able to go into business yourself. Mr. CHAFEE, Mr. BURDICK, Mr. legislation is the same as last year's: If people are going to maximize their GORTON, Mr. HATCH. Mr. HAYA- Small business development and job efforts and abilities,there must be poten- xAWA, Mr. HUMPHREY, Mr. Jae- creation in the most distressed areas of tial for them to rise above low-skilled SLN,Mr.PERCY,Mr.TOWER,Mr, our urban centers as well as depressed minimum wage jobs—to see an opportu- QUAYLE,Mr.ARMSTRONG and Mr. rural areas.The means to reach that end nity to advance within a business, The KAsrEN): have changed somewhat, but the overall urban jobs bill offers that potential. S. 1310. A bill to amend the Internal goal is still the same: job creation. As I have previously mentioned,the fo- Revenue Code of 1954 to provide certain Those areasswhich HUD designates as cus and concept of this legislation re- community development, employment, enterprise zones based upon the severity in tins unchanged; however,we have de- and tax incentives for individuals and of their economic distress will qualify to' veloped a list of new incentives that will businesses in depressed areas; to the a package of benefits designed to Iure m ike these enterprise zones more attrac- Committee on Finance. URBAN JOBS AND ENTERPRISE ZONE ACT OF 1981 job-creating businesses into the inner tive to businesses. After consulting with city. Any business that is willing to take dozens of urban organizations, we con- Mr. BOSCHWITZ. Mr. President, on the risk of locating in one of these zones eluded that the incentives needed to be behalf of Senator CIIAFEE and myself, I and who will pledge to hire-at least 40 strengthened to overcome the drawbacks am introducing today the "Urban Jobs percent of its workers from the unem- of locating in an inner city. and Enterprise Zone Act of 1981." This ployed labor force, will qualify for a lu- The problems of crime, weak infra- legislation,which has been the subject of crative series of Federal tax incentives. structure support, city taxes, et cetera, much debate and discussion over the past By simply locating in the zone itself remain a barrier to business development year, was first introduced in the 96th business will qualify for some of the in- in these areas. Business already encoun- Congress. And today, after having con- centives, but by employing at least 40 ters the usual problems of tax burdens suited with the vast majority of the lead- percent of the workers from the unem- and a lack of startup capital and tech- ing urban organizations around the ployed labor force, additional incentives nical expertise; but when these are com- country, as well as many of our cities' will be available. And workers who take bined with the disadvantages of locating mayors and businesses, we are reintro- jobs in those zones will receive a 5 per- in a distressed area, businesses are hit ducing an amended version of this pro- cent break on their personal income taxes posal which we feel will be far more ef- up to$1,500 a year. with a double whammy,so to speak.Thus, fective in the task of creating jobs in In keeping with last year's bill, this our task is not only to make it attractive our Nation's inner cities. Simultaneously legislation is directed at small businesses. for entrepreneurs to invest in risk-talc- today, an identical bill is also being in- They create the vast majority of new ing ventures, but also to invest in new troduced in the House of Representatives jobs. In the past 10 years,nearly 20 per- businesses that are located within the by Congressmen KEMP and GARCIA. cent of new private sector employment inner cities. When this proposal was first intro- has come from businesses with 20 or We have tackled this problem by corn- duced in the 96th Congress, Mr. Presi- fewer employees and 80 percent of new bang a package of Federal and local dent, the enthusiastic response was very jobs have been created by businesses with incentives.Those cities that have UDAG gratifying. Mayors from all over the less than 100 employees. eligible areas and can also show signs of country wrote indicating support and of- The source of that is a study,Mr.Pres- high unemployment,poverty,out-rnfgra- fering their suggestions and recommen- ident,done by David Birch of the Massa- tion, or abandonment of buildings, can dations, a number of which have been chusetts Institute of Tedhnology. apply to HUD for zone designation. incorporated in this new bill that we are Another advantage of small businesses, However, to receive designation, these introducing today. Of course, not all as compared to corporations, is the in- cities will have to compete among one agreed with each and every provision of creased opportunity for rapid advance- another on the basis of the severity of the legislation, but all eagerly welcomed ment. A person working in a small bus!- their economic distress plus their "local a fresh,new,and innovative approach to ness has a one-to-one relationship with commitment." The cities, States, coun- resolving the problems of poverty and the boss, something that is not often the ties, and other municipal-type govern- joblessness in inner-city America. case in larger businesses.Too often,peo- mints are encouraged to work together After investing scores of billions of dol- ple at the lower end of the wage scale get to construct a State and local package of lays in the so-called war on poverty over lost in the shuffle of big business. How- in centives. Cities will then compete with the last two decades, we have failed to ever, from my own experience, I just do of ter cities for zone designation on the provide any meaningful opportunity for not think this is as prevalent in small bi sis of who can offer the most attrac- advancement—an opportunity to get a businesses. The employer and employee ti'e package. foot up the ladder of success,so to speak. identify more with one another. A per- So,not only must cities qualify on the While our welfare programs provide cru- son's qualities,problems,family,and am- is sis of their economic distress, but tial services, they, unfortunately, have bitions cannot escape the boss' notice, ti ere has to be a local,State and county created a system of dependency which and seldom do. is ekage of various types of incentives— has helped trap many of our poor in a Furthermore,working 1n a small busi- p,operty or income tax relief,relaxation self-perpetuating cycle of poverty. The ness is siimulating and exciting. Getting or building codes, increased infrastruc- Urban Jobs and Enterprise Zone Act at- in on the ground floor of a new business, th:e support, et cetera—to augment the tempts to break that cycle by offering a particularly a small business, allows you Federal package of tax incentives, that more lasting and rewarding alternative to see all the wheels turning at once be- elimination of capital gains taxes, a to welfare dependency—a job, and a job fere you.It offers a very effective method 50-percent reduction in income taxes, a in the private sector, which will mean for advancement and a means to learn 5-percent refundable tax credit for wages personal, economic, and societal growth. how businesses work so that eventually paid to previously unemployed workers, S 5745 et cetera.This local-Federal package ad- First of all,I know my friend is from p,,m.Sour,URHAN Joss SNTERPaIBR ZONE ACT dresses the problems that all small busi- a very rural State. It borders my State. A. AREA REQUIREMENTS nesses face, as well as the particular Much of my State is rural. We have 1.Area's population must be at least 4.000 problems of a business who has located changed this bill from last year's model, if located within Standard Metropolitan Sta- in an inner city. so to speak,to include rural areas,areas tastiest Area of at least 50.000; area popula- For the workers,there are also tax in- that have 250,0D0 population or more,so tion must be 2,500 for other areas. Indian centives. Instead of providing a break in that a county in his State or my State. reservations are exempt from the population the employee's social security taxes, this virtually any county, would qualify, requirements. year's bill provides a refundable tax Then they go to HUD and ask to be 2.Area must be UDAO (Including pockets- credit of up to$1,500 a year for all work- designated an enterprise zone. They are of-poverty) eligible. ars who are employed in the zone by a in competition with, presumably, hun- 3. Area must meet one of the following er business with at least 40 percent CETA- dreds of other counties and areas that a. unemployment' eligible employees. That is quite a hefty also want to be designated an enterprise at least I% times the national overlast 18 months was average; supplement to their annual wages and zone.The bill says that not more than 25 b. was a low-income poverty area as de- an enormous advantage to the employee will be designated in a given year. So termined by most recent census: who chooses to work in one of these bus- that community which comes with the c.70 percent of residents have income be- inesses. best package of tax benefits to be com- low 80 percent of the area median income. In closing,Mr. President, I would like bined with the Federal tax benefits when d. population decline of at least 10 per- that is chosen as an enter- cent between 1970 and 1980 and either that community to say that as a small businessman my- zone is the community that will be chronic abandonment of buildings or sub- self.I think this legislation offers a very prisestantial tax arrearages. attractive package of incentives which chosen. 4. Must submit a plan to HUD detailing will be successful in stimulating business Furthermore,if that community comes local efforts to reduce various burdens development.It has always been my con- and says, "If we are designated an en- borne by employers and employees. tribution to the formation of this bill,to terprise zone and give this tax package, S. DESIGNATION BY HUD look at it as a businessman and to decide plus the tax package that you, the Fed- 1. 10 to 25 zones per year. i what would entice me into a distressed eral Government, will give,this employ- 2. Preference will be given to areas show- area. er, that employer, a series of employers ing the greatest distress, which have the I think we have put together such a have indicated or have signed contracts greatest community support and which sub- package and I am pleased to say that it that they will locate there," that will mit the es beet givplans (includi state, ngnnec ao ic in- has gained widespread support of both certainly give great credibility and en- cal governments). the Republican and Democratic Mein- hence the strength of that particular bers in Congress. In addition, at our area to be designated an enterprise zone. C. DENErrrs AVAILABLE TO BUSINESS AND press conference today, Vernon Jordan, Mr. BURDICK.Let me ask my friend, INVESTORS IN IT president of the National Urban League, has he estimated what the tax loss might 1. 5 percent refundable tax credit for wholeheartedly endorsed this legislation be to the Federal Government and to wages paid. to CETA—eligible (Title II B or and urged that all Members of Con- the various States? D. or Title IV A or B) employees who work Mr. BOSCHWITZ. Mr. President, the in zone. gress—despite their party or ideological Senator from North Dakota asks a good 2. Elimination of the capital gains tax for commitments--rally behind this pro- all the new businesses and investors In posal and see that it is enacted in the question, as to what the tax loss them. 87th Congress. would be. s. A package of local tax benefits as de- Mr. President, I have one last point It is very hard to judge that. Most of signed by each area when they bid to get that is worthy of mention. I want to these areas are producing no taxes at Enterprise Zone designation. the present time. Most of the employees, D. ADDITIONAL BENEFITS AVAILABLE TO THOSE make clear that outside of HUD's role BUSINESSES WITH AT LEAST 40 PERCENT CbTA— as designator of the zones, the involve- at least 40 percent of the employees, ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES ment of the Federal Government in this would be unemployed and, as a result, 1. Elimination of income tax on half of legislation is rather slight. We are not would be removed from the welfare rolls au income earned from operations within creating a vast new program that is and become taxpayers instead. Because the zone or interest on loans to zone bust- going to cost the Federal Government of that, we feel that the impact on rev- nesses. billions of dollars. This is a program of enues will not be great. 2.May use cash accounting if receipts are private investment.This is a program of I might say that the Reagan adminis- lees than$2 million per year. giving tax concessions to businesses to tration has endorsed the concept and 8. Extension of loss carryover to 20 veers. come into distressed areas so that they hopes that a bill of this nature will be E. BENEFITS AVAILABLE TO EMPLOYEES will put people back to work, put them passed in this Congress. That, perhaps. If employed payroll and get them paying taxes. is an indication that there will not be 1. P yed in the zone by a busines em- This is not a new form of a welfare pro- too great a revenue loss. with at least percent CETAeligible ployees, a 5 percent refundable tax credit gram. We are simply trying to utilize Mr. BURDICK. I commend the Sen- for wages earned, up to a $1,500 credit per the great free enterprise system to put ator from Minnesota for this approach. year. people back to work and to revitalize in- It is certainly worth delving into. ner city America. Mr. BOSCHWITZ. T thank the Sena- Mr.BURDICK.Mr.President,will the tor from North Dakota. Senator yield? Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- Mr.BOSCHWTTZ.I yield to the Sena- sent that a fact sheet on the Urban Jobs tor from North Dakota. Enterprise Zone Act, be printed in the Mr. BURDICK. I would like to say to RECORD. my friend from Minnesota that he is There being no objection, the fact making a very important speech today. sheet was ordered printed in the Ree- 1 am intrigued with his idea and I will ORD, as follows: certainly review it very carefully. One question I have is,Who would ad- minister this program? Mr. BOSCHWITZ. Mr. President, in answer to the Senator's question there is no real administration. After HUD makes the choice of an area as an en- terprise job zone, there really is no ad- ministration beyond that.I suppose HUD would have some oversight and see whether or not that particular zone is attracting business. As a matter of fact, ray good friend from North Dakota asks an interesting question that I would like to answer in two parts. S 5746 v _ • U1 ► 3 N' O 019 J •Its t tv t t tit t t 'y tit t :It N � 0 O O4 O ui i W NN O ; II •I9 J ;' z I.JN ; : 610 0 ..ICS 'J IOW N t I � J4 � I I _ _ 1 I l I C I II :lilli:::1::: aaW♦# asalaaa,a# a #aa # a # ♦aias 1.1 • 11:141.:11:11 ai asAIasT rIWN1J.-y N rW rr LA Ir UNNUIa a a♦♦W GI WWWNNNINNI•NI)II- I• a aaWira �n -.. 101rOTiUla res 1• C ro#'W Nlo#W1Nr•dN#GINr boci • N••001NO lOo iNm-1 -411r'bVnism IN OI(nNl..o Nll9Cr,l<aP1NrrAllmr,GflNo M IlI 'OolON c ,C, aa1OPY-4rzc9 Ic C-•.rnim M200-•OPfro=zr'OSPIIC�1 ,01 P1;Plmsits 20 ..rrr r I-(AC11T 00 I waa('II0 s-•DN-ImmOw601-4PZa71a 2'z -rmr 1r '1:m1s1m2ry I91 ;-a -. -. z ere)or21.. a'.•rD 110 2m71i`. rn 41.:1 Dla s \ II 9-•el • -�1 m s 1-'31Z�+1 m r a N ell z 2 • • 1 a• -11r r z,a..9 D h 0 ..I r 91 ti 9 IODar w'....rzal ..r9 N 11. C IQS0loel..l:(n rz•I .... elselm 2 o,O .»I.... 'mal 10 rr(mw zz IOm7NMzpMwy m OZNZ'v10ZD <Nlms21OZIPlsr IM D 2'2 Pli2m iNm 71ell r'al0z ..9oa ... 1(/1 s'O111 sal'-4(n<I ., o alicr I (n ra1 •1wm.. 7�m r!O N *10 -M 99'2 -1 im-. n1z 00IImN(AI2G a HIy 9P1 IN si Os,wwv .-•71 Z..Z .w .•2..O,s..Xam1ID -.zlrmar CIDP 'N 71171 1I-1 -1 r.9 Z P1 7'• MI Zs 7!rTr'►.fs,wzml.. r �Tlfn 71'-• 0 ;m ...Ir rr 'Tv. 1 I w '`C�rri•'haiC�2�ii "An v1. r mr.. ;m0.....zz-i letzw•' m mr. 9 -( Taln „I r !..r 1x z I.. 9.•�m 7rr1 r11(n(n I9 I. a i. XI(nD21•p yla-• • 4.(4.-.rn 11 m �mmla rrr o-n is a z z r m a AI m m x til ••I r.DI P°I(l (•1 r 1• -NO-1 I'11t C9 a IN = ml 1 iC P11DN A 0122 -1111 'ZC m 0 '..2C:0N I NIH •.cC lA s91S F' --12� DP917 m C:C f/110 ,m 22 23 o m . a IN N •i C 1,2 r1 O 1202,10X 1!el ell•)C) N. 1..I< al • S P1 a N .r1 9 I I ♦i,C C .`•m m V)Gs.n.. rirn mete• 1 ms,m • •m asm tl... I f Iaal 21 I• a A.1-.0 I PSN(n (n 0 •'•UJ)t•"• ♦ I a r1i ! . 12 ml z Pr o • D l s CI r. 21 Z n e'f j I el ,z l r 1 r o a -r -i m m m N (4 2 N Iis ro -a 19 0 4 a s. ~' 1fir c 1 I a m 0. x r a NN d 9 ♦ I4) Mui W U1 ODI a TI I V • V 'a r .) 0 a-1 I0 U) - CO N Im 1 co# A 1.O. ♦ I►• 0' 0 I W a . '#W a' N-4 ..2 i • • • • • • a(•11 9 • • �• •'•'• N 'Co • •) I O'► UI 0 .. I N W 1.711...42%1o0 A ,2 ' • •!O • • G .,�• • • • 1• . • • • • •.: • •I• • • • •. • • • • • .• • • •- • •- • • •.r -i 0 0 00.0 01 0 0 ,a O1 0 o 0;0 0 01 a a o1./:0 °0°41...°°0 Ir 0:0 U1 ola.p 0t N O IC ,O ' 0000000 (1(3 0'0 0 0 0 0 a a O O b,0 0 0 0 0 0I0 01 . ' 0 001.)0 0'0.I '.) Oj 0.+0'.•m N,a O s ! 1 ` I Y Ir. .. 4{ I 2 I C I I I 00 I73 I + I '4029 2 m I I30 I i !F .. I IM !� I 9 I • 1 I 1 i .14 , • 1 Is r• ' O. (9 i I W. I 1 .0 9. , -• W, N I•"• i A N I I a ( I(R. U(�pp IU• IN U1 Al '0 a riW a alr a - O! 01N.y 0W S a I 1 ,) .• O 1+1 ,U) .•N N '4a N.)W.01 a .1 9 •, • • • . • • • I a • I• ., I• 1• . • 0 a .01 INJ .41u3Orl r 'N 0 .O 10 ( N V'0N .O N N r N.I0 .-0 '9 .. 0 '.O .•NUI 0' W W ' o a r 0: r O1 0 a 1 a' U1 0•T I.(W a O N a Ut 0 00000 0 i0 1 o b IC 01 :0 boo fw NUI.lits UI0u -1 ►. • • • • • • • •'1• • • • • • • • i• •I• • • '• • •'• • • • • •;• • • ,• • FI• • • • • • • • • • • • s 00000.000CII 001000Do 0 o10 co 01c:100 0000io0oo000 O 000 '0 0100000000 11 O00000000OaI00000 to ol000i000loeo000000,00000 to mooa;00000 .. i I I I 1 I i I Z< 1 I I m i I i i I ; 1 I L f i I I - 1 1N IN i 1 rI M° I 1 4. I I I• , ,•. 1• • ♦ - '.a I 4' 1 I.• ..O a ,a-1 0 U) r.a N a I (.(a a ,.) I Ia' N 'o Nr W a w .4 1 N I a 0•:U1 > 1 . t I : W .U1 r 0•IUI01 A • •I• • • • 00.a• • �• • •.• • .00 •I• • • I►. • R•,• • 0 ,• • •,• • • ,• • • • • •. • • • • • . • --• • ,.40 '0 000000 .4)400000000 a o'000100000a.4aQI000'W 0010# r 0=00'0•0 0N0 C 71 ool000000s(nao,00al00 a oi000!0ool000IO.00aaol.00oo.1 ,a 0100-o'AaNlao ro I I I 1 I ) i l r• -1 1 ! r.• I u I I I Sr I I I 4 1.• .. -S• u Iv i a N ' Ia I 'U• W ,UI IN a ,� r•IIW V W,r r m ''x. ,W .o, N.1'o W N W .) r 0 I,.. ' ' •1 • • •.• • • i • I ,N Id• N �0+ a N'0• * W O N M .o: W W'OD 0 r• • 4 0 0• • • • . • • • • • • • 4 C a 0• O .O N a. 'W .ICON .D #V r N N r N.( s P. UPS 0W.400. a W O I O 0• 0 '.o 0'0-4 .( Na m'N O.I,a U1 9 NI C •-a-r 0'- UI 0 0 J N 0 r 00.0 0 W r V I.4 w W:.[1 P. .. • •,• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • '• • • • • • .• • s O 0,00 u'0.( .(;.p 0 „•00 0-a0 P. a 00u a00100•J'N'.1 0,0 00 W 00...N .a a-O a 00 0 01.10 2 001000J0 NlU100000,00 0• 0,0 ,000400'00 0000000,040004,0 r 00 .0001.0000 el D M CI 1 - I r1j 1 I N m Of 1 r r I 0%a N U) _ w - N ! UI CO 0 CO a 0%-L a -1 CI• C °i t C I ---v � ', N-O o - c 3 a i .. n ;V ::3 , uv u 9a . ] . ) • > rr vv ; +,av w a iNv , .. , ',v )-J] ; - L _7 _.: Viia N= / n ,. . , • _ • i( ' ) ' '� L)t.lW • V W N N1W W • 0 ► •I• • WN D P18 O W P Y A W NWW, 8 • 0,N N Nit N N N N •1• V a.0 ► WN - O • • v, • a t1U N -I !• +1 • A A A A i I i ! i WWW • al CO C30 U * ro •1 r * .4 4.r'.JI o • .01% ...IA'0 .0.O .0.O omi co coca-4 V '1-7 Z CO I• 4 • N.•010 A • 010 •I •. • N1•+0.Iljm • .0 u1►.0 GGIAN►•!a a(.PrdW N �n0 N ' In n '•NAI 2.• -+ b.r a ...4 n ell n.••11 CO o 2 COI n t s1 m r-�1 n m 01 z CO zl a c 0 n iZ a Z ;Y r m m z ;A m z ml Z D D D z 3.,r- •til .-4 1--C D m10.4 C O O -,1:O.C f•1 D D Z O .r .4 Z .o 32 C ,D 9 C .91 -• 2 131 T C�y O 2 N 0 73 Z ml 0 n m Z T '111 n w 2 A .. !.. .. ...• 1 m( n D z z D -P m .• M1 N D.••r ,n PI n a A N 11 2 r1 "•• rti 1 INN x r �N /..r A -1 41.-1 t 1!to 73 m o1 m ••1.-•I fn z m m ni..•O V71• 73 I O t 1 z 0 'm f•1' i r1202',a N O.1 rI o m,z z ,0 :m fl o rn el z f D o 1z zo z' . r 1. 1 tI NI r1... c7,am mC ,mz .• Nm 71 T Z x Iti O Cl) •O C, "• 1 1 1 11 Q• m1 2 f•1j ""n 01 viiC 2«.ml A O I N n Z z `� m o.mo �•y . r,-i C D X:• C n 2 o1 4 10 A m to 0 C in 41 m Nm ;m til n. I7t Tom2-4 C; m11Nr X:D mm 3C; A 10 .+.'D S '.. to T L 1 nl s T T G t x!-+ ...• el rn!m T!Z U•rn m P..i a m •rn T b w 0.71-4r) ;nm m' I 'z El' A'i 5 nm`�f1 `2' »I z ;s -rr '74 -4 ! drat- • 'r ,a !o A • 21 m O m 2-• n x A oil- .. o i til z .•• m • -• M D 4 m m -qN xz!ar a �2C rat D AST 1z1 CI n "• -•nm11r G I Z m iN I I Cr m j uzy NI PI c m O an N o -Ix! 3'U I I l At m I co t13.1 N N r 11 2 ` I1 I r1 IN • E ! { 11* A 73 • ZC 1 I j I m 72 A ; x u I : :I f m v UI 1 UI UI A Call I N O W m I W, A AIN Dz N z • • •I • • • • • • 1• • • •I • • • u.. •.• •�, • • • • • '• • •,• • • • • • • • I.41 (.. ., a s •a a a O a ,0 O O> a- a OI a O u u c.., O OI o O vl O o to v O 010 W al 0 O0 O c., 0 a o aaolaa '0 oj0 Cif0 a 0100)010 0o aaa:o00oo01046000 ,D I 1 rs 0.4 ( f # I o -I ! ii z C I f I I! -t 2 ` S i I I It m I ! 1 •73 1 • 1i 73 1m I I { j T • I 12 O 1 1 !1 A III W ! I • I 'W U7 til !N Le :1N o o a N iN Ni 13 • • •T ' NI N ••' I 0)1 A. • ! . I • .. -J 0 .pi 0 1 O UI 40 NN N et O01 TA .O 0W W 4J ,•.• 0 u, O - .t O 0, A .0I !A UI m ml N u !0 10 01 OI 0 o a o1 ' a a cn!to of ..• • • • • • • •i• • • • • • • .• • ,• r • • • • • • • • :• • • • • • • • • • • D O O O 0 ,OO ol0 a 'O a0 0, OO 0100010 01 00000000000'00C100. 1 : 0 o d p 0 0 00 0 0 00 O; O I O 010 a 010 a1 a o as 01,...0.0 0 O'a 0 0.J o ...• I• NE I is PI it I , ( 1 I 1A ! W ( , N I i... I IN IN 0 WIW I ,D WI A A1N ,D 1 N • • • • • • s • • 1N UI O' 01 Oil.. A .n I .• • • • i •• '.• • • • • • • • •;• • • • • • • • • ,• • •!• • 10 .0 'W a G a o o O.O 0 0 0'O O. a ;0 0a a O,a (Ai 00.0 O O.0 O 0'0 00,0 W 0!00 C 11 bl o a o 0 0 a o O '0 0 •o o, a a 0 0 0 0 o'0 o. of 0 0 010 O a J O 010 W 01 0 0 i ( ! i 1 .1D"O I ,r I I D 1 I 41 f• { IN W W, r.! r N 'NN1 N r M.N..) WI N • • • •' • '• • � • • • •i c W .0 .01 O i O NIA NI n3 ' ' '►• 41, O. UI J'V A, D '.0 .0 .0• cr 'Cr 0 'O O' O% 0 N N N: UI .0 WIN .CI A ;N O UI I rb' UI ' O -O 4 0, 4.. UI U1 • 1+. rT l 0 ' .01 A A a' r { '• • • • • • I• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • '• • • • • • • • • • • • • • 7s ',P u 0 0 00010 0 a 0,0 O 0 .J c.4 O J 0.O V. 0 J 000..-i U C.O.U c....r 4+(..0O u z o V O O, f] O 0 O' 3 '1 0 'T .7, n O 1.0 0 0 ] 0. 0 0,0 0 a a a a a : _J i] (J•47 .2 Cu n D• m a m T .W "W. •,. AIN • • • • •• •• '.0 ,.O 0+ S .D,U7 n -1 N 1•'. ; ,4 v ♦;T 41 1,`.�1 �l ]V '.i'• J J J .. • : • P % > •v r .J ,N 1.11 . N V • - .---�_ O S J 0 ,f_t U N- 7 0 _ N O _: t ,t , :.• • ]f1 i . -' ,; 4 7 V .. O" v. >W •W N O {� r� n \ /u U N u U a a a a a a a. a s W W W: 1 _ _ / 1 � V a Ula 4Y N1.� O •IO V 0,U a W, N : 010 • V10 U Site N -10 O 212 O Y' 2 y NIt' O C 0 V Sia a WIN + O 0 co VSO W ,•i 4, N ' 40 tJ t•NAu wf [ •1 40 W 40 u 4040404040401 u u tt.�1I u ♦I wt./u(41 ul la wr fa W(JIu GIGA OI I f4 C,,,tt1 1sC T s N UI UI UI W N N. 114I W W W W WI 40 40 W tel W W W W W W •I .....l.r P.W r r.+l r r .+r I• 0 0 0 P.O.,/.0000 1+ ♦ 0 4 W W u W N N N N O O O g o SI 4 WI W W Wl W W WI W W WI 1+N r l••1•• * N,1 r r !I-1Z 0 N S O.0 ODI s a u ♦I O g 0 N. +I O u rvI N o.Ol OD V OSI U► •I r.d m V T U1 4 t.•N 1+O UI 4 u N.+ ,• NI a. - A O N D mm.rlst M ,� I o N TT Nn1'17N sirA090AIOSSm rl AmNrnaCZ Mra MOIzAmlmr Is -, Uf 0 C A Izzz:Osslz ^I M001-000.-10Jt'N• 0 rn - .ssi lrmlrnmrcool•♦sisAs .s .sSm z0 is m s o as O!m m 4 s C Ors si A C s s it A m m o AI o m N Z e z• 2 r rn r y n Z••• 1 si s s 1..e 1 s• rn.r uM m m Cl r A G.-1 O Q►N 0 m C! .4 NI s Z •.a+ 1 •InAnIrr c ml rl rim Amlr22rr A D�m •'rn Mai M In rn 1.O!//r A z, • m 1'Tl s m1 O r'• m OI o 0 sl m o 0 CO 0 m m'�s-� Is NI S m S, rn 11!• 1 fa01 2 .431 ;•1)z a•d►r 1.r, m I r m r'� r IMO JO ZZam •COMC1IO s Smlalo4 am! m O m! sa3a"'lll .". wtml-szz SAIm11*.-4 -Iii ,C4 rt 71 mms mr1'sso! At Z moS OlOrnM1 m0100 T 0 Mo1oA fmAa07mrv1 •-• IAr I OImC 'OZ zr a-z'msm0 i a i. 'c .1101m a• m as 4/4 z1- CI zs I r a!v,rn Q1 m.-. ! isms mm 1(0 1 A m z CAs m m s1 • a s• Z 1 A Z s z s Z0 /• S 4l m r s s r VI m m 0,r• a•t m x crams me_. ►e. ..r - . Z I m Zrstn 1 .EI s TT tf77 n zsl smis mm T+ sITI1s �..+1.r mo fn rn17r to to M M N m1 C 4 n ' N� z w m w ii s M o-.H D�1 I N r�t F VJI i fm 7D .m=I 3 H N�N C~1 frn N pl r,c7 '-4i r I p Dr1rnmolrn c1I1 r Isz•!.r .a -11 s s1 - , s•0 s111rn zz1 N ,mm zc Im zn 1 .c'.O11 -4T rn•�,. 0•• m0 N rn M m t�.•.m .-.01rn7 rtom .•ls m Im • m A71:m of Ca sof 2YA -i Iz 1 37 Zma0m 1 I m Ir cn { m!Az to I mmlNof s 1 N 2imN 2 co rn AN r_n_IIm z i torn• Z y>t,j O 1-12 ,P sill a 041 y Im ~ I 1 1rrr7�'--r-11111111 -i -1•1 V� i d 0 I meq (/11H N Irn Im • IX • m • An i l { I c I f •; ! •I • • ii. • � • IT OSI m so. O0 s I a 0 m ui o r • r Ni m a.a'la l a WO! a - .01 . .alar 01 a j.0 X01 sz O a;N i m, NS V i O W o u m N O UIIOD OD a I A C • • • • • ,• • •'�e e • •.• • • • • •I• • •I• • •. • • • • • • • ,• • • • • • • • • • • I• • I• • I C r m C.),-.0001000,-, 40. ‘201W0000 10001110 La e0o 0 a1 Y00 U1010 UP,m o Oloo 6aO a .0.00 01,=10000000 in, o m a o o 0 o O a oio a - a r a a s ola I+0 0 0 o1a a a= la alai= I�= Z 1 . 1 f z m L -• x Im s • I 0 I-5i i I I � I I I • . 1 i1 .. 1 I Irn ml N .W ✓ N. a ,N N. .1. a .4 W..N'Ui I V I V N 0.,..1 0 0.W W N! a' 000‘210.01. la= I 0%41 I a i i a a ;a NI N ;• I I I• • i •I l • u ' I4a a tsl • • 0041. 00000 WI W004,101041 m ;1•040: 441 N 00Fa000 .0 Gita a a..--a a. OI 0 'm 001000000, W. 000,a000J0 '0001 '0 t: 0 .01000 .0 O, o0t.i ,0. 43; a. m 0a000,000 .0 a01C UI01 UI0 O tram. al a a ala a 010 O a 0 o oi00010 0 "O OO C • • •I• • . . . •1. • 1 • • i . . 5 • •I• • • • • e • • • . 1. • • l• . . • . . . . •,• . • • .• • m oulaao'ooaa o! 001000'.0030oo'ooa,o of OoI000I0ool000!000!no .0 0100 z 00i0onl00gO 0i O Ol0 a OIO 0010 oo•0O 00 01 O 0,000:0a 000 ala a 010 a 10 alga Ci I ' I i { M 1I I 1 ( In. 'o. N a•I l ( I i I 1 1 `..N! r •1 I Ni IN I ly. V•. �. F+fa { of • c to .1 r { I 501 I la I• r I a• I 'a NI 1 Is o�aila m Wof a s a a I a•- m,sn 1 m 1 4 .oI s.4 In oa1u1 a�: NV: V I N1 1 WOa:um N'O NI a m m, A • •.• e . • • •'. • • •,• • • �• • •;• • • '• • •I• 5 • • • • • • • • • • • S • •l• • ,• • .• • 10 '0 O0;000000f0 Nal Oa O(JI 010 Oo10001000,0 0i 130000-'OGDul'm o010o0100 :4 a,00 C 11 1,•5'0 13 0 a a OI O T, 0 0%'O O O!0 1 O'.0 0 DI D D O,.o r! 000 Ci •1'a r all 0 010 0 710 0 'aa m,0 0 D i r D 'w I ~OI 0 N 1.Y m. N W N,W N .OI I I 1 CO I. - I w J la; Ui m 1 •• O 0UI,'ODN; a: V.4 1 III J 4 UI W 1 W N N J : I a F m ml .0 'N O O O fa as1 W a o'0 0 a; Nf a T'O s o a•u al .-O a1 w 1 UI m .D W OD .01 ul.0 u m W a r a a a' a s 1 0401 UI O Cl.o o o• UI: UI.010a 0'J UI a mom .0; O N UI.NOD 4010.0 .010 t+o 00 a. O 0% m Goa•'UI o a 0 0 0• N, N NI n r n.N 0 a ul O al a' ,o T N.�r.-•.41.0 c 0110 a0 •7:c o •-• Y. n '. • • '• • • • • • • • . • •.• • • e • • • • • • • e • • i • • • • • • • • .• • • • • • •• • • • • • > 0010000400:40 o: 0M000000,0000000 401 0000001-60:,,J0000000 U1 (J1,00 Z v o 0.a.>0000:0 al a 4,000'00 0:070-0001.3 .0, is 0,0 O 00.p 010 J 0-0 01 n 3 N N,0 D r"i D 11' 1 1 1. 1 • 1. II 1 111 1 1. 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 . ' 1 1 1 ;1 i 111 1 1:1 , 1 1 1 1 .1 1 m G1 ►' I N , N 1I..la 0' as.0i 0 W' W a.0 a rl as r+ t+ 0. • • •. • - • • • • • • • • : • • • V a a,40 u, 010 o • • .". Cr,S m o u'N co; o 9 a, f7 1 I aC -1 N _ I I 7 U' v D.! OJ' .+. ¢Oa . •40'1 b S v. }.)u u u u n J 7 ••. . a a a y o At u t 1 22" .: 9 V N-U 9 fO _ O v-O � _--,% C 0 3 0 0 J 3 3 3 .) J J - O O ,P V P Y. ♦ W N O,c1f�Orrc'nczlP Y > ... _..... ....._.I1r-.,�..��r. x Y ll Y Y U Y1 Y Y ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦:♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ y W W y W W W W W N V N N N N N NI• N N V p U ♦ W N'- O O P J p Y ♦ y N I y N - O O', O J • c. ♦ W N 0 0 0 J I• Y ♦ W N 1 I I • ((,�4 W Wlr4 W /d fd4 Wfd4(,1 W W( 44 4W/dlWld(dl 4 T r• •Do101mm JI.i QIUloomooN000loNNcnNU11oowviN .DC .0* 10 UI uilW r a•W r 0v a s OI a W W W W WI N N N N N r...... :n Z Ica • 01.. 00•. .00tl W Nr♦1 O CACI WNI-.-la WNOm.101Uta W Ci0 N O ZN:iwmHmIOntim NDIN>TiT 'OSInN2>CN olZ TtimN ,C In 1 •r•ZIgt12MI>o O.r COIt1n►►yy•.•O.-oa...•f12 •`M1'40-oC'r D Za Ir• Z I Ul(n TI a -o�f.2a C Tt(A.• SI b n x1 a C NI 2 r ci Cl1 n m N r a D r r r 1 r 30 n• ZCJ D m•rl 31.-.40O• = !n1 O O ff''11 m cD•I m flt nl O C flit n rr C-t II - r n Z n ZI Qa t > .r o Z fl1 Zan l y -il• o f•q Vf O Cl r >c M N m n n'C 2 .•1 Z C D TI'Ct N m n a -II Qa .tr 1 O to O O ,z -401 n r1 O G of-1-1 S l m 01 rr�•C 2 m m 12 ' 1 mit �N r I� 11 ' -io nPoriz,. an 2 r••1 1 no O Zl rr as r t+i r o ca y O r+11 0('I TNS :A f'1 N C Cl I vi Z mI O C I r r NI n M m o N.«Z D r..c mi a m m o D .•1 7 'C v. 7 ,n(A a..4 ftr•�1!r a I T�1f'7c'T9 24 (11(A(CA ci 2 O 1r C Pk 2 M Tin b. C N l • y 2 (n - 1 w N a 1 C ,o•►w tw1 V f V71 T r%i 4 xr` N -- l• • I I o N Cml N I nn11 �•moi az/71 -4 1 noaN .11 ff'I O Z a S o.tmin a• I try .Zom 13 C ri I ( -4 1 A ri 'a rn t y 1 0 y 2 fli<,r f'1 M x1 �. C I 0 i T I i - 14 ( rPtN al Ir CD lIm m1 no I 1t2 = ly < m (AIN I> jp ' i 1 i N r • `. 1 C i i I .. ClI I N i t i i I inu a i • a 01 n 72 I 72r 4. I I N 1 a a Urn N N a 0 0• o ra 11". >_ } • • :11. • •!• • • • • • • • • • • •f• • • • • .%1• • • • • •• • •- III.4 r r 0 000 0 ofo OIOI c' { �, ��oo,oatAOca{cac�o0;ev UI 0 i`0oe�o00;0 UI 00010.0'000100 0o0jo0 ao is Im � 1 o Ix im IM 2 I�• ( n ,o I I I In Ia I I I n N rlI 1 I r r 10 i a • NN :NN P. Ir I -4 1 O . W 100 Iid N N aI r '( a N • I0 N + O IO I V 0 I 0 (=mum- 1 0.1 WI O Ni CO a•10 '00 ;m I Ui IO OOC•I-o 0OI0O 00010 O /Jo.l 00 c 1 I • m O I O.O OI O O I 0 01 0 0 1 00010 OI 0 010 100 I C 0 u 000000.004000101 01 00000a40Ol000l° -3 z • I e •0000004as3 000l000000000l000l000leo r 1 � 1 I I , m -t 1 L r^ t i 1 i I I aOD I I r• I a I 1 I • I • I•� ' i ' OCI .• • • • • • • • .• • • • I• • • • • • • i• 5 • • • • i .40 0 N 1 r 00000 o100>of 000.0001000 0001000100010 10 .0 11 N O :O O too O 0104 Ut 0!0 o OI04 O o10 O 0 04 O 010 "a OIO O 010 Ui '> i I 1 I N 1 I ( i I i r0 0. • W II • i if. .. w W u•N NN r' •• 1 In• 1a O a W a o W o 1 N ail- to 0 1W W r N • • • • • • • • 1• •• • I• • .0 1.. a o .142N0N om WN07 dci10 r- ra'1D s10 D N r O 030001.. 0000 110 0 0'0 .11 UI 0.4 I 00 p o N 0 01 Oca'O raa 00.00 .0000 10'. WO = w0 .• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •:• • • • • • • • • • • • • • D OD W ,(300.0 W 0''.,o 0o0r.•:Ui 00:v o o:1.+00.01000 o Z y o 01 0 r0 n,0 UI 0.0 0 O.0 0 of 0 0 Cl'.0:0 o.J>O c1104 U O,O UI Cl Or. I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 l il t till I 1 .1 11 Cl le r a r IN r' N 1t1 • • OD 1.4 e' 01 .1•1•1 I• • • • • , ! v C1 r a •U' N O r n 1 .�. ,-T• ' '� ..._ _,_,.. 2_......_ 1 i 1 - q.� ^, _ 4 -.0 -1 ,“ >C. ♦ '.1N-O J !•J 7f 11 > J N .K1 V V i CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT January, 1982 PERMITS ISSUED Yr. to Date Total Previous Year 5537-5547 Nurrlber ' Number Valuation Number Valuation ' •MO . YTD. Single Fam. -Sewered - - - 1 1 52 ,000 Single Fam. -Septic 1 1 78, 500 - - - Multiple Dwellings - - - - - - (Mo.tlnits) (Y'PI) Units) - - - - - - Dwelling Additions - - - - - - Other - - Business District - - - - - Agricultural - - - - - - Industrial -Sewered - - - - - - Industrial -Septic - - - - - - Accessory/Garages - - - - - - Signs & Fences - - - 1 1 100 Fireplaces/Wood Stove 3 3 4, 155 1 1 600 Grading/Foundation 1 1 1 , 165 - - - Remodeling (Res. ) 1 1 1 ,000 - - - Remodeling ( Inst . ) - - - - - - Remodeling (Other) 5 5 633, 950 3 3 139 ,000 TOTAL TAXABLE 11 11 718, 770 6 6 191 , 700 TOTAL, I NST I TUTTCNAL - - - - - - GRANT) TOTAL 11 11 718, 770 6 6 191 , 700 MO . YTD. MO. YTD. Variances 1 1 - - Conditional Use 2 2 1 1 Re-Zoning - - - - Moving - - - - F I ectri.c Permits 4, 4 17 17 1'Imbg. & Htg. Permits 3 3 6 6 Razing Permits Residential - - - - Commercial - - - - Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date • 3, 509 • Cora Underwood Hldg. Dept . Secretary Aw.e: CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN JANUARY, 1982 5537 M.A. Mortenson Co. 4th and Atwood Demolition $ 8 , 400 5538 Moline Masonry 1008 Market St . Fireplace 2, 500 5539 Mark Sand 101 1st Ave. E . Alteration 2,500 5540 Valley Fair Alteration 7,000 5541 Valley Fair Alteration 7,000 5542 Edward Gilles 126 S. Atwood Wood Stove 600 5543 John Leroux 1041 Swift Alteration 1 ,000 5544 J .B . Swedenborg One Valley Fair D n Addition 609,050 5545 Dennis Roske 1042 Minnesota Fireplace 1 ,055 5546 Ralph Freudenberg 1400 Blue Heron Tr. House 78 , 500 `-X7 `r,- , 5547 Renden Development Tyler & 13th Ave. Grading 1 , 165 TOTAL: $718, 770 • National 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Officers: League Washington,D.C. President �� Of 20004 L Harrison Mayor. MayScotland Neck.North Carolina (202)626-3000 c•v First Vice President r�. �" ,y,_, Cable:NLCITIES Charles Royer t' S L, ^!rc a t aR Mayor.Seattle.Washngton Second Vice President ;•, George Latimer Mayor St Paul.Minnesota • Immediate Past President Witham H Hudnut.III C 17. t„J t Mayor Indianapolis,Indiana Executwe Director Alan Beals To : (1) Mayors and Managers of Direct Member Cities (2) Executive Directors of State Municipal Leagues From: George Gross, Director, Federal Relations Subject: NLC Legislative Letter: 5 February 1982 THE PRESIDENT' S FEDERALISM PROPOSAL In his state of the union address January 26, President Reagan proposed a major new initiative which, if approved by the Congress, would significantly reshape the federal system. His proposal . is likely to dominate discussion of federal-state-local relations for the forseeable future. So far the plan consists only of a general concept and a few basic elements. Details are to be worked out during February and March in consultation with state and local officials. Specific legislation is to be submitted to Congress in early April. Following is a description of the plan as it stands today. It should be noted that (1) numerous critical details have not yet been worked out and that, as they are, this description could change significantly; and (2) dollar amounts for FY 1984 assume approval of further program cuts to be proposed in the FY 1983 budget. General. The plan has two basic elements: (1) a swap involving three major programs--medicaid, aid-to-families-with-dependent-children (AFDC) , and food stamps; in FY 1984 the Federal Government would assume full financial responsibility for medicaid, states for AFDC and food stamps; and (2) a turnback of certain federal grant programs to the states, to be financed first through a federal trust fund and ultimately, if desired by the states, through new state taxes; the turnback also would begin in FY 1984 . Past Presidents:Tom Bradley,Mayor.Los Angeles.Cahtornia•Henry W.Maier,Mayor Milwaukee.Wisconsin•Tom Moody,Mayor,Columbus.Ohio•Jessie M.Rattley, Newpo^, News vrirs si•John P.Rousakis,Mayor i avannah.Georgia•Directors:Richard Arrington,Jr.,Mayor,Birmingham,Alabama•Carol Bellamy,Council President,New Yot^ •Arne Boyum,f•crra ,•fau•rtrn Noun Dakota I eaque ul Canes•Richard S.Cdlgulri,Mayor Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania•Malcolm Clark,Council Member.Port Arthur.Texas•Joanne Collins,Councn Mr•nl a• is.rn•ar9 Cr, M�:;uun•Thomas H.Cooke,Jr.,Mayr” I ast Orange.New Jersey•David Cunningham,Council Member.Los Angeles.California•W.Elmer George,f_r.....,i.r^p recta' C;eo gra Mun caat Att,socatt,,,.•Karen M.Graves,Commrsstoner Sara Kansas•Anne Gresham,Counml Member Grand Prairie.Texas•Paul E.Haney,Council Member.Rca'e,r^t New vork• Jonathan B.Howes,Maycr Pro Tent.Chapel P S North Carolina•George M.Israel,Ill,Mayor,Macon.Georgia•Myra Jones,Vice Mayor.Little Rock.Arkansas•Christopher G.Lockwood, Ex'Sue Director.Mame Municipal Association•Bob Martinez,Mayor Tampa,Florida•Robert H.Miller,Executive Director,South Dakota Municipal League•Jack Nelson,Mayor.Beavertor. Oregon•Mary Neuhauser,Council Member.Iowa City.Iowa•C.David Nuessen,Mayor,Ouu,cy ll rro,s•Heiman Padilla,Mayor.San Juan.Puerto Rico•Donald R.Peoples,Che'Executive. Butte Montana•Martin L.Peterson,Executive Director Assouarstrr 01 Idaho COws'Michael J.Quinn,Executive Drector Indiana Association of Cities and Towns•Vernon H.Ricks,Jr.,Mayor Pro Tem Takoma Park,Maryland•Arthur E.Trujillo,Mayor.Santa Fe,New Mexico•George V.Voinovich,Mayor.Cleveland.Ohio•Daniel K.Whitehurst,Mayor,Fresno.California•Don A. Zimmerman,Executive Director,Arkansas Municipal League -2- /"2-- The Swap. Federal assumption of medicaid would save states about $19 billion; state assumption of AFDC-food stamps would cost states about $17 billion; thus in FY 1984 there would be a net savings of $2 billion for states. Savings to states from this swap are expected to increase annually because of the anticipated rise in health care costs. (These amounts assume congressional approval of further cuts in food stamps and AFDC to be proposed in the FY 1983 budget these programs are estimated to cost about $21 billion in FY 1984 under existing laws. ) The plan also calls for adequate benefit levels in states and for transition requirements to "ensure that welfare recipients will not have their basic benefits reduced when the states assume responsibility for AFDC and food stamps. The latter is apparently to be accomplished through a state maintenance of effort require- ment. The Turnback. In FY 1984 about 40 federal grant programs would be turned over to states to be financed out of a trust fund. The cost of the programs would be $30 . 2 billion; the trust fund, however, would have only $28 billion, consisting of receipts from the "windfall profits tax" on oil , excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, and telephones, and two cents of the gasoline tax. (Again, the $30. 2 billion amount for FY 1984 assumes congressional approval of further cuts in discretionary programs to be proposed in the .FY 1983 budget. ) In the turnback proposal, two time periods are involved: FY' s 1984-1987 and FY ' s 1988-1991. FY ' s 1984-1987 The $28 billion trust fund monies would be distributed to states based on their FY 1979-1981 share of the turnback programs . An adjustment would be made for any gains or losses for individual states resulting from the medicaid-AFDC-food stamps swap. During this period, states could use their funds in one of two ways : (1) if they want to continue receiving some or all of the grants being turned back, they can use their trust fund money to reimburse federal agencies administering the grants (all federal conditions and rules would apply to grants being continued) ; and (2) if the states do not wish to continue some or all of the federal programs, they could receive their trust fund money directly as "super revenue sharing payments" ; these payments could be used for any purpose, but subject to three conditions : -3- (a) if states opt out of direct federal-local programs (such as UDAG or mass transit) , 100 percent of the funds attributable to the program must be passed through to local governments; (b) if states opt out of other federal programs, 15 percent of the funds attributable to the program must be passed through to local governments based on the GRS program formula; and (c ) if states opt out of programs that generally do not involve local governments (such as education programs) there would be no pass through requirement. 43 programs have been tentatively identified for the turnback. They include general revenue sharing, community development block grants, local mass transit and non-interstate highway programs, wastewater treatment grants, manpower and training, low-income fuel assistance, and certain education, social services, and health programs (the title I elementary and secondary education program would not be turned back) . FY ' s 1998-1991 During this period the $28 billion trust fund would be phased down by quarters each fiscal year, with the fund going out of existence. At the same time--in FY 1988--the 43 turnback programs will cease to exist. The states could use remaining trust fund monies in any way they wished and could replace the phased-out federal funds through new taxes. There would be no requirements with respect to pass throughs to local governments during this period.- Major Arguments for Plan. The White House fact sheet makes these basic arguments for the plan: that the growth of grant programs has made the federal system nearly impossible to manage; that, consequently, a sorting out of responsibilities is needed; and that this sorting out should be accompanied by a reasonable transition period and, as federal programs are ended, access by states to new sources of revenue. The plan achieves its objectives by (1) turning over control to states, and then terminating, 43 grant programs; (2) assuming federal responsibil- ity for health care for all poor and income maintenance and welfare for the elderly poor, and assigning to states responsibil- ity for welfare for non-elderly poor and for most education, social services, community development, and transportation; (3) providing states access to new revenue sources (repealed excise taxes in FY 1988-1991 period) ; and (4) providing for an 8-year transition period. * * * Both the overall plan concept and details to be developed during the next several weeks will be widely discussed this year. City officials should send their views on the plan to NLC ' s Office of Federal Relations, 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. , Washington, DC 20004 . State-by-State Figures for Impact of Federalism Plan The White House released the following chart showing how states states would have received under 40 existing programs being transferred. would be off ected by its federalism pockage in fiscal 1984. The figures under "Trust fund allocution" show what states would The key columns in this chart ore under the large heading "Swap get from the new trust fund. They hove been set to compensate for state Program." The first column - "Medicaid savings" - shows the state gains or losses under the welfare swap. States that would lose from the shore of Medicaid costs thot would be assumed by the federal govern- swop alone would be given odditionol trust fund money; trust fund ment.The second shows the additional costs imposed on states for Aid to payments would be reduced for those that would gain from the swop Families with Dependent Children and food stamps. alone. For each state, the svm of the "Net difference" columns for the The difference between the two columns appears as "Net differ- turnback program and swap program is zero. Thus, under the White ence." States with negative amounts would lose because of the swap House reasoning, no state would have a net gain or loss. alone; those with positive figures would gain. The column"Overall total" shows the combined total for each state The column headed "Turnback programs" shows the amount that of the programs and funds involved in the whole package. -.SWAP PROGRAM TURNBACK PROGRAM ' -� Overall Public1 total Medicaid assistance Net I Trust fund Turnback Net of both savings cost difference allocation programs difference programs Ala. S 140 S 350 S -210 S 713 S 503 S 210 $ 853 Alaska 32 53 - 22 188 166 22 220 Ariz. 0 157 - 157 463 306 157 46.s Ark. 137 174 - 37 345 308 37 482 Calif. 2,524 2,030 494 2,144 2,638 - 494 4,668 Colo. 161 134 27 331 358 - 27 492 Conn. 277 169 108 283 390 - 108 560 Del. 38 40 - 2 107 106 2 146 D.C. 141 84 57 333 390 - 57 474 Fla. 348 628 -281 1,433 1,152 281 1,7$1 Ga. 285 431 -146 819 674 146 1,104 Hawaii 94 106 - 12 145 133 12 239 Idaho 31 51 - 20 151 131 20 182 III. 857 838 18 1,547 1,565 - 18 2,403 Ind. 336 275 61 552 612 - 61 887 Iowa 166 140 26 330 3,356 - 26 496 Kon. 141 94 47 225 272 - 47 366 Ky. 186 367 -181 690 509 181 875 Lo. 309 379 - 70 634 564 70 943 Maine 81 102 - 21 240 219 21 321 Md. 342 283 59 507 566 - 59 849 Mass. 669 418 251 732 983 - 251 1,401 Mich. 914 874 39 1,147 1,186 - 39 2,061 Minn. 501 202 299 236 535 -- 299 737 Miss. 109 293 -184 563 379 184 671 Mo. - 247 296 - 48 700 652 48 947 Mont. 43 39 4 128 132 4 171 Neb. 77 60 17 185 202 - 17 262 Nev. 70 30 39 58 97 - 39 127 N.H. 57 40 16 110 126 - 16 166 N.J. 557 426 132 907 1,038 - 132 1,464 N.M. 57 120 - 64 251 188 64 308 N.Y. 4,002 1,673 2,329 789 3,118 -2,329 4,791 N.C. 277 375 - 97 820 722 97 1,097 N.D. 45 20 24 83 107 - 24 127 Ohio 744 815 - 71 1,406 1,335 71 2,150 Okla. 228 146 82 249 332 - 82 478 Ore. 128 165 - 38 393 356 38 521 Pa. 967 875 92 1,658 1,750 - 92 2,625 R.I. 95 78 17 124 141 - 17 219 S.C. 128 282 -154 553 399 154 682 S.D. 32 33 - 1 124 123 1 155 Tenn. 267 401 -135 702 567 135 969 Tex. 833 726 106 1,352 1,458 - 106 2,184 Utah 61 60 0 182 183 0 243 Vt. • 32 53 - -.21 118 97 21 150 Va. 250 288 - 39 617 579 39 867 Wash. 248 240 8 493 502 - 8 742 W.Va. 65 156 - 91 429 338 91 494 Wis. 633 296 337 235 572 - 337 868 Wyo. 17 14 2 75 77 - 2 91 TOTAL $18,976, S16,382 $2,594 $27,600 530,194 -$2,594 $46,576 .',uri.e. The White 11..11.r COPYRIGHT 1982 CONGRESSIONAL OVAR1ER55 INC. PAGE182-Jan. 30, 1982 R.poud„c ia+p.oh;eeL.e in rILole or in v»•�•p.a id"°"°I clioNs. /3 association tion of metropolitan municipalities FEBRUARY, 1982 480 CEDAR ST., ST. PAUL, MN 55101 NO. 17 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT Local Control in Danger By Vern Peterson, AMM Executive Director down" rather than starting at the of the implementing authority it is A proposed region-wide plan to local level which is closest to the seeking. The AMM's Metropolitan address flooding, soil erosion and problem and which would be the Agencies Committee, -chaired by water quality problems caused by level most responsible for the bulk Councilmember Dennis Schneider snowmelt and storm water drainage of the implementation activities. of Fridley, has reviewed these bills has recently been put before the The costs to implement the plan and the Council's proposed plan public by the Metropolitan Council. as proposed by the Council would and developed a policy which was The proposed plan was prepared by also be quite substantial. While the adopted by the AMM membership the Council's staff and approved by cost figures provided by the Council on December 30, 1981. The AMM the Council's Water Quality Ad- are just estimates and likely on the position, as a result of this policy, is visory Committee. A series of conservative side, they appear to be to oppose the Council's proposed "public meetings" were held in staggering based on the current plan and both of the legislative bills December throughout the metro- financial conditions of most units of in their current forms.We will do our politan area to explain the plan and government. According to an article best to keep you appraised with to receive public input. A formal in the November issue of Metro respect to this matter. public hearing will probably be held Monitor, initial planning would cost in early 1982. The Council expects $6,000,000 and would take two Policy Committees to ado-pt-the-plan-and issue it as a years. The Council would raise this chapter in its Metropolitan Develop- money through a region-wide mill Although the 1982 legislative ment Guide early next spring. levy on the property tax. It would session has just begun, local The plan, as proposed, would cost $43,000,000 initially to imple- officials should be thinking about essentially establish Surface Water ment the program and an additional the future. AMM policy committees Management as the fifth Metro- $10,600,000 per year for operation will begin meeting sometime in April politan System Plan and local units and maintenance based on the or early May after this session to of government would be required to Council's projections. The imple- review and redraft policy positions amend their local comprehensive menting costs would be paid by the for the 1983-1984 legislative plan to include a surface water agency, government or person biennium. The current standing management element. The local undertaking the project and the committees are Revenue and plan element would have to be "housekeeping" measures (main- Expenditures, General Legislation, approved by the Watershed District tenance and operation) would be Housing, Metropolitan Agencies, Organization or the County for paid for at the local level under the and Transportation. Committee those areas for which a Watershed Council's proposal. members appointed by the Board in District Organization does not exist. The plan as proposed by the 1981 will continue to serve in 1982, The Watershed District or county Council would require several but there is always need for new plans would have to be approved by statutory changes for full imple- members and new ideas. If any the Metropolitan Council and would mentation and there are currently official not now serving on a have to be in compliance with the two bills (S.F. 1451 - H.F. 1505 and committee would like to become Council's plan. In other words, the S.F. 1452) before the Legislature involved, please call Vern, Roger, or planning would be from the "top which would give the Council most Cindy at the AMM office (222-2861). AMM BOARD OF DIRECTORS priorities for spending public dollars for city improvements. He developed a capital allocation President of the Lake Elmo Business policy which received national Association. recognition for detailing guidelines Laura is active in DFL politics.She for capital budget decisions em- has served as precinct chair,District phasizing the use of public dollars to Associate Chair, State Central maintain existing structures and to v _iCommittee Member and as a induce private development. Rel- delegate to district and state Gently he represented the city in conventions. negotiations concerning the Battle She enjoys sailing—on the water Creek Watershed problems. Finally,iilot..4 in the summer and on the ice in the as the city's property tax specialist, winter. She is a photographer, one of his current assignments camper and traveler. She likes to includes lobbying at the State read, think and talk. Legislature on Revenue and Tax \::-7' - She believes that citizen parti- issues. cipation is important to good K government. She believes the best h.` Laura Fraser decisions are made when the process encourages well-timed � Laura Fraser was appointed to the opportunities for full participation AMM Board in July of 1981! She is a by all interested parties. n member of the Lake Elmo City `; Council and owns her own small- business consulting firm in Lake Elmo. Laura holds a Bachelors degree in nursing and a masters degree in .n� _ s social work from the Catholic i University of America in Washing- Jackie Slater ton D.C. Her work with emotionally disturbed children brought her to " w Jackie Slater was elected to the g Board of Directors of the Associ- Minnesota in 1960 to direct the child " s ation of Metropolitan Municipali- care staff at the Minnesota Child- : ties in May of 1981 and subsequent- rens' Treatment Center. Later with •ot. . ly was appointed to the Executive Catholic Charities she served as Committee. She was first elected to consultant to childrens' institutions, ,. organized a prototype family life the Minneapolis City Council in 1977. Jackie has been re-elected education program and did indivi- Greg Blees twice and began serving her third dual group counseling. She served term on January 4, 1982. She as director of social services at Greg Blees, Budget Director for currently chairs the Intergovern- Seton Residence for two years. the City of St. Paul,was appointed to mental Relations Committee of the In 1968 she became the first the Board of Directors in July of City Council and is a member of the Executive Director of a United Way 1980 and currently serves on the Energy and Environment Commit- agency called Home Services seven-member Board Executive tee and the Community Develop_ Association Inc. The new agency Committee. Greg grew up in St.Paul ment Committee. was to provide a unified Home- and attended the University of She has been an active member of maker-Home Health Aide service in Minnesota studying Public Admini- the Transportation Advisory Board the eastern Metro area. She was stration and Accounting. He has of the Metropolitan Council for the instrumental in developing the been active in several areas of St. past four years and the National agency from its initial concept to the Paul life through the Hazel Park League of Cities policy committee point where it served over 300 Hockey Boosters and Phalen Youth for Transportation and Communi- clients per month with over 100 staff Club as well as encouraging local cations. members. During this time she residents to form a Neighborhood Her main goal for her third term is served two terms on the Health Council. helping to develop a housing policy Board of the Metropolitan Council. Blees has worked for the City of for the City of Minneapolis. She In 1978 Laura started her own St. Paul for 14 years and has been in hopes to use her memberships on business. She works with both new the budget section of the Mayor's AMM and other intergovernmental and established small businesses in Office since 1974. Among his boards and committees to assist such areas as recordkeeping, taxes, achievements, Greg developed a that effort. regulatory compliance, loan pack- strategy for reducing the City's Jackie is a Roman Catholic nun ages, planning and implementation. bond debt while continuing to fund who is active in her church She is an affiliate of General needed capital improvements. He activities, too. Any spare time that Business Services Inc., a national authored the Capital Improvement accrues she enjoys taking photos small business resource organiza- Budget process which uses broad and being outdoors, particularly tion. She also serves as the citizen involvement in setting seasonal camping. 1 I 1 ANNUAL ASSOCIATION LEGISLATIVE POLICY MEETING - 1981 at St. Louis Park Rec Center f. The AMM held its annual Mem- bership Meeting to amend legisla- tive policy for the 1982 Legislative I Session at the St. Louis Park Recreation Center, Wednesday, " December 30, 1981. Approximately �� 45 local officials representing 25 . citiecities attended the meeting to adopt ' new policy and amend the AMM CS s Laws governing membership on the Board of Directors (see BY-Laws , 'change, Page 4). � Of the twenty-one policies acted upon by the members, eight were . new and the remaining thirteen ranged from minor modification to ' ` full replacement of current policy.A complete set of amended policy as adopted has been mailed to all I£ council persons and chief executive officers of each member city. Two of the policies adopted by the AMM committees, Board, and membership c cern isbue which — — will be major topics of discussion in �` the 1982 legislative session just started—they are Surface Water 's _ , Management and Levy Limits. a ;� Legislation on either or both of these issues could have a long lasting profound effect on cities in the metropolitan area in the next few • years. Surface Water Management �� is discussed as a separate article on �, � r _ �� ; page 1 of this newsletter. The new Levy Limit policy is a much stronger ' " of reiteration of the long standing • „ s. AMM policy in opposition to levy i � limits. Other new policy included � Railroad Taxation, Gravel Tax, - _ Cable Communications, Metropoli- , tan Park Funding and Impact, Taxiit Cab Regulations, and opposition to r initiative and referendum for zoning in charter cities. 4 ProposedYou may wish to take the B Laws Amended following actions. Y Environmental Notify your legislators of your More Opportunity concern with these new rules which Review Program are a direct result of a law they Provided passed (Laws 1980, Chapter 447) Rules which was intended to decentralize The Association By-Laws were and simplify the process. Ask your unanimously amended by the legislators to obtain a copy of the 51 general membership to basically New, Costly, Time pages of proposed rules and 195 provide greater opportunity for Consuming Mandates for pages of "Statement of Need and more cities to hold a Board Director Local Government Reasonableness" from the Environ- position. The major change was to mental Quality Board. Ask your decrease from three to two the legislators whether these proposed number of two-year consecutive rules are what they intended. terms for an individual on the Board. By Duke Addicks, LMC Legislative Counsel Let the Governor know your In conjunction with the reduced Major changes in the Environ- concerns. Laws 1980, Chapter 447 number of terms, the By-Laws state mental Review Program may soon was a bill supported by him. His that primary consideration for be implemented. state agency staff drafted the replacement of Directors leaving the There will be a large increase in proposed rules. The Environmental Board for any reason be given to the number of environmental Quality Board has approved the member cities that have not been assessment worksheets and en- rules for public hearing. represented on the Board during the vironmental impact statements Ask your legislators and the preceding twelve months. A third required to be prepared by local Governor to delay implementation change added one additional seat to governmental units. of these rules until a time when the the Board bringing the total number The League of Minnesota Cities financial outlook for cities has of directors and officers to nineteen. and Association of Metropolitan improved. The existing rules will In the opinion of the special By- Municipalities have had many of then remain in place and cities have Laws Committee appointed by the their suggestions incorporated into learned to cope with them. Board and chaired by Past- these proposed rules. However, the Certainly an environmental re- President Richard Asleson, these rules have many procedural diffi- view process is necessary and these three changes should allow more culties remaining in them. new rules may be the best the state member cities to participate in the The major problem in dealing with can come up with. But to force all direct governance of the AMM as well these rules will be their imple- cities to implement these rules in as giving a larger number of local mentation at the local level.The new 1982 may be a disaster and not in the officials the opportunity to be more rules are fifty-one legal sized,single best interests of environmental pro- directly involved in that governance. spaced pages long. A one hundred tection. A final By-Laws change established and ninety-five page, single spaced formally an informal practice document called a "Statement of Board Meets followed since the beginning of the Need and Reasonableness" is to be Every Month AMM in 1974 and one of its used as the standard for interpreting The Association of Metropoli- predecessor organizations the these rules. And a "Guide to the Metropolitan League established in Rules", not yet available, is to be tan Municipalities' Board of 1967. That is to have two directors used when implementing the rules. Directors meets on the first each from the two first class cities. Even if local responsibility for the Thursday of every month (except environmental document process when a holiday comes on or near makes sense, and even if the that date). Meetings start at 7:30 situations in which environmental p.m. and are held in the Slide Presentation documents must be prepared are conference room at the Associ ., "The Association of Metropolitan reasonable, this expanded program tion office, 300 Hanover Bldg., Municipalities—An Investment in comes at a time of diminishing local 480 Cedar St., St. Paul. the Future,"tape and slide presenta- finances. All city officials are welcome to tion depicts the accomplishments The revised environmental docu- attend the Board meetings, and goals of the Association and mentprocess is intended to be express their views on any subject and bring any subject to includes information on policy incorporated into a city's existing status through the 1980 session. the attention of the Board. system of land use controls. This If any member community would will cost cities money. Most of the Due to security regulations,the like this presentation made ata local cost of preparation and review of building front door must be council meeting or other civic affair environmental documents will be locked at 8:00 p.m. Anyone or knows of a non-member city that extracted from developers. This will arriving after that time, please might be interested, please notify find a phone (nearest is Capp cost them money. Most cities are the AMM office (222-2861). now operating or will soon be Towers) and call the Association Representatives from the Board operating with a reduced planning office for admittance (222-2861). and staff will appear before your staff. It may be extremely difficult to For further information or to council to show the 15-minute comply with these rules which will have a subject placed on the program and be available to outline be effective upon promulgation Agenda, please call the Associa- current activities and policies, as (perhaps as soon as March 1). tion office at 222-2861. well as respond to questions. TOM HAGEDORN / DISTRICT OFFICUt 2ND DISTRICT,MINNESOTA P.O.Box 3148 MANKATO,MINNESOTA 58001 COMMITTEES: (507)387-8226 AGRICULTURE PUBLIC WORKS AND Qongre55 of t je tiniteb irotate5 211 SOUTH NEWTON STREET TRANSPORTATION ALBERT LEA, MINNESOTA 56007 (507)377-1676 jDousSe of R epreSentatibell RONALD K.ENCS WASHINGTON OFFICE: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 2344 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING M.C.ASHINGTON,D.C. 20515a� fn gto , • 20515 (202)225-2472 + Q.. , January 26, 1982 - D • Mr. John K. Anderson F1='- . � �L City Administrator City of Shakopee CITY OF SHAKOPEE 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 Dear Mr. Anderson: Thank you very much for contacting me to express your views on the impact of corporate mergers on communities and your support for federally funded programs for economic development, which assists these communities. I agree that many corporate mergers and buy outs have a severely negative impact on some of our communities. While I strongly support a free atmosphere in which private industry can flourish, I agree with you that this should not be provided at the expense of our communities. I assure you that in my' consideration of federal legislation I will bear in mind the long-term effects that such mergers will have on our towns and cities, particularly smaller communities such as LeSueur. Although I have vigorously supported the President's economic recovery program, as Ranking Republican on the Economic Development Subcommittee of the Public Works and Transportation Committee, I , along with my committee colleagues, worked to retain some limited funding for EDA which had been scheduled by the Administration for termination. In your letter you specifically mention UDAG as being of assistance to communities experiencing the effects of employment being drawn away through corporate mergers. Despite the Administration 's intent to terminate this program in FY ' 84, it remains up to the Congress to act on this request. I , for one, am anxious to see the type of alternative proposal for economic development offered by the Administration in its Enterprise Zone Legislation. Until that legislative package is presented and I am convinced that it is a workable plan with an equitable portion of this assistance going to our rural communities and small towns, I intend to keep an open mind regarding future funding for other economic development programs. Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. Sincerely, / ' ' if 7;4/ tom Hag". n • Member 0 . Congress TH: rad " RECEVEDI JAN 13 1982 CITY Or IIHAKOPEEi • 1-12-82 Honorable Mayor Eldon Reinke Members of Shakopee City Council 129 E. 1st . Ave . Shakopee , MN. 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke : Recently I saw in the Shakopee Valley News a request for interested parties to apply for positions on city commissions . One of these was the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. I wish to make application for a seat on that Commission . It has been my privilege to serve on the Planning Commission, the Charter Commission , The Police Commission and I have long had a desire to serve on the S . P .U. C . Thank you and the Council members for any consideration this application may receive . S ' cerely , . . . 0(1414,6 Ak Vir 1 7S . Mears N/c1 . .... ._........ .......... 918 Minnesota Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 January 18 , 1982 RECEIVED Shakopee City Council c/o John Anderson Jt N 1 91987 City Administrator 129 East 1st Avenue CITY OR SHAKOPEE Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Members of the Shakopee City Council : Please consider me for appointment to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. My reasons for seeking this appointment are: As a resident of Shakopee , I have the continued desire to be involved in and to serve the commun- ity in which I live . I believe that I possess the qualifications and background to capably serve on this commission. In addition, my occupation and civic activities give me the advantage of being in touch with the citizens of this community. My academic back- round in science should also prove valuable. I have an ongoing commitment to work for the betterment of Shakopee. My attached resume and record of civic experience should support the sincerity of my reasons for seeking this office. I consider this position to be vitally important to the city of Shakopee, especially in these difficult economic times , and if appointed, I pledge to work for the common good of all citizens of Shakopee . Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours ,)� Barry Kirchmeier Attachment. Resume BARRY J. KIRCHMEIER 918 Minnesota Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Telephone 445-6208 • Personal: Married Three Children 36 Years Old Occupation: Elementary Teacher Grade Five Employer: Shakopee Public Schools (10 years) • 505 South Holmes Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Education: BA, University of Minnesota (1968) Major - Political Science Minors - History, Speech, Science Special emphasis in intercollegiate debate Saginaw Valley College: 30 semester credits in education Mankato State University: 63 graduate credits Work Experience: Elementary Teacher (14 years) Chairman of Science Curriculum Development Committee Computer Terminal Supervisor (7 years) Member of Student Evaluation, Science, Math, and Reading Committees Debate Coach (4 years) Taught Graduate Workshop in Science Education at Mankato State Univ. Teacher of Summer Enrichment Science (9 years) Owner and Operator of two small businesses Community Involvement: Member - Cable Communications Advisory Committee for Shakopee Honorary City Council Member Member - St. Francis Hospital Long Term Planning Committee Team Captain for Community Ice Arena Fund Raiser Delegate to three County Political Conventions and alternate to State Convention Assisted in six local Political Campaigns Shakopee Education Association Member 8 years President and Officer (4 years) Chairman and Spokesman for Contract Negotiations (6 years) Numerous other Committees Shakopee Jaycees Member (10 years) Officer five terms: President, State Delegate, Treasurer, Director Awards: Chapter Gold Key, State Bronze Key (2), Numerous Others Background: Raised on a farm in area of Windom, Minnesota. Enrolled as a scholarship student at the Institute of Technology, University of Minnesota. Member of University Debate Team (4 years). Taught in Michigan (4 years) References: Dr. Robert Mayer, Superintendent of Schools, 505 S. Holmes, Shakopee, Mn. Mr. Virgil Mears, Assistant Superintendent, 505 S. Holmes, Shakopee, Mn. Mrs. Donna Brown, Principal, 917 Dakota St. , Shakopee, Minnesota reorganization. Government offices, professional associations, unions, social service federations, neighbor- hood organizations, and advocacy The Costs of Regulation . Home groups are being contacted on a reg- ular basis to collect the information Builders, Developers and the being developed. Particular attention will be paid to monitoring the impacts of changes within the human services Maze of Government Review on the affected populations. • Faculty Involvement These projects are being conducted by B. Warner Shippee in consultation with selected faculty from a variety of disciplines within the University who have research inter- ests in the topic, including faculty h.' .. a from the Hubert H. Humphrey lnsti ~!µ- .i it tute of Public Affairs, the School of Social Work, and the Departments of "�� " '*pts Economics, Sociology, and Agricul- tural and Applied Economics. " -t For further information on this effort, it contact Tom Anding, Tom Peek, or Fred Smith at 376-3684. j — „,- ''.:'-:...-4.-,*, ,.,„ 4 3-----.4.-- ......-�... 'is"-.4-: .rae..'..,,.-... �w.... �, \\\\\---y - co . .e .,..w-7,,- kz. '".t '141:.,. 'tom- 1.111111.111111111111111111111111111111111111111 , ‘.,:,.,.7.1,i_.*.:111:,,,,:' , - i _ i I Warner Shippee Is a coordinator in I have made an inviolable commitment CURA's Outreach Office. He is a past to myself to never, ever build another executive director of the St. Paul Nous- home requiring governmental approval of any kind. Government intervention ing and Redevelopment Authority and has held numerous positions in public into housing causes nothing but and nonprofit agencies concerned with harassment, delays, expensive wastes A Note to Our Readers: housing and community development. of time and benefits no one. You may have noticed that we are expert- The project described here was con- A Twin City builder, 1981 menting with new colors for the CURA ducted with the aid of several graduate Despite a high and sustained need for more Reporter.We would be interested In your students: George Dyke from computer housing, comments on the colors in this issue and based largely on the current high the Phone Judith issue a science,Stefan Helgeson from architec- household formation rate, the home build- the last.her a note at 313Weir at 373-78, 1 i r7 ture, and Beverly Stadum from history. ing industry locally and nationally is in a Prop sant Street S.E.,UnaerrLibr Minne- Thomas Baerwaid, Director of the state of crisis. High interest rates, escalat- Pl a; ant Street . Minnesota 5546in Geography Department at the Science ing land costs. and a shortage of available Museum of Minnesota,served as a con- land all contribute to the problem. The suitant on the project. spreading maze of development regulation 2 / Figure 1: GOVERNMENT BODIES MOST COMMONLY INVOLVED IN REGULATION OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Local Authority Regional Authority State Authority Federal Authority Specific • Municipalities l• Metropolitan Council r •• Environmental of '" Approval or, ._. 14 � • Townships .• Metropolitan Waste Quality Board " k;jg and �s` . PermittingControl Commission. • Department of0441.41.04;01...'•'.ment Authority • Counties ; Natural Resources ..:If.,-.?/,'` ' `=ral H•,..r • N-''. • Watershed Districtz..; • Pollution Control 1 .`t', ,-tratio ` ,-- Boards r Agency : =Admmt . ° • Department of Health of E` r ,tai p � •1 'on Ag. es ii ' '" 11 ,tet Generally only # kA:I .,5 Recommending • County Soil and i • Minnesota Historical 99,411i', 1/ildlife Authority Water Conservation ` ' Society Boards r • Joint Powers ,, °� Commissions '` `' ,r $ 5 * ,3 sf,.fir .,� T�'�".- .. t.;44`,- ;,-,1 plays an important role as well. It adds to oper proposes to build single family Municipal Regulation housing costs and it requires the developer detached houses consistent with the gen- to acquire a whole new set of skills. As a eral price level in the community and in Basic land use regulation has been placed result, it has become increasingly difficult accord with existing zoning. If all of these by the state legislature in cities or, in the for new people to enter the residential conditions are not present, there will be case of townships, in the county and is development field and for experienced difficulties and delays. Some developers expressed in zoning and subdivision ordi- builders to continue. are aware of these circumstances and nances. CURA in late 1980 undertook a study of avoid land with environmental problems. Traditionally, land uses were estab- the regulation of residential development Others reject sites where there are con- lished by zoning and permits were issued and its costs in the Twin Cities metropolitan cerned neighbors. promptly for a development that was con- area.The study was made with the cooper- sistent with the provisions of the ordinance. ation and support of the Twin Cities home With the advent of planned unit develop- builders acting through the Twin Cities THE REGULATORY MAZE ment, planned residential development, Housing Council. The study included a cluster zoning, and other flexible zoning review of relevant literature; analysis of Including the municipality,six levels of gov- provisions, decisions about land use proposals for regulatory improvement and ernment are involved in land development moved from the time the zoning ordinance simplification;interviews with builders,land regulation under various legislative man- was adopted to the time the city council developers, local officials, and representa- dates:the city,the county,the Metropolitan approved a particular proposed develop- tives of state and federal regulatory agen- Council,the state,the federal government, ment. Land use, site layout, densities, and cies;as well as analysis of a questionnaire and the watershed districts(see Figure 1). amenities all became,to a greater or lesser circulated to the area's homebuilders. A particular development may not neces- extent, open to negotiations between the The CURA study was concerned with sarily involve all six levels of government, developer and the city. The resulting flexi- the time involved in threading through the but it sometimes does. The multiplicity of bility frequently leads to more effective and regulatory maze and the costs that accrued agencies and levels is in itself burdensome. efficient land use. as a result for developer, builder, and con- Each of the regulating agencies or gov- Presumably,planned unit zoning will be sumer. In some cities the subdivision pro- ernmental entities receives its mandate accompanied by performance standards cess can take as little as two or three from specific state or federal legislation, which are set forth either in the ordinance or months if no state or federal permits are some of which dates back to the nineteenth in actions of the planning commission and involved. If an Environmental Impact State- century.The controls flow from three differ- of the city council. The developer must ment is required, a zoning variance is re- ent streams of legislation. One deals with show how he will meet these standards. quested,or a number of permits from state protection of public health and safety. A Actually,the standards and their interpreta- and federal agencies are needed, it may second is concerned with land use planning tion are often in the heads of the municipal take up to two to three years. Even a few and zoning, and a third with the conserve- staff.Their specific application may appear months delay can add thousands of dollars tion of natural resources and protection of to the developer to be more a matter of to the costs of development. the environment.Relatively little delegation whim than of principle. In any event, A developer who can find a site without across departmental lines or from one level delaying the major decisions to the time of close neighbors, which is devoid of water, of government to another has been approval of the specific development cre- wetlands, hills, and wildlife, and.is in a achieved partly at least because responsi- ates an atmosphere of uncertainty. The community whose government is favorable bilities at the state and federal levels are fixed specification standards of traditional to growth, can proceed with relative dis- viewed as ministerial while those at the zoning were rigid but certain. The perfor- patch. This is particularly true if the devel- local level are seen as primarily political. mance standards of planned unit zoning 3 l6 aro flexible and may be uncertain in their State and Federal Regulations before any specific projects are consid- application. It is at the state and federal level of re ula ered, thus letting developers know where A discretionary decision making system tion that thegovernment maze becomes they stand before they propose a project makes heavy and costly informational de- and reducing costs to the developer and the mands both upon the developer and the most confusing. The multiplicity of agen consumer. municipality. Both the developer and mu- cies frequently with apparently overlapping nicipality must arm themselves with various jurisdictions has greatly complicated the kinds of professional expertise in order home building scene, particularly in con- nection with regulations about water and THE COSTS OF REGULATION to make the necessary judgements. This responsibility has greatly expanded as mu- the environment. Government regulation of residential de- nicipal officials have become more con- , WATER:Controls over water management velopment is costly to the developer and scious of the environmental impact, of and the use of sites which include or are builder and therefore also to the housing development and are called upon to access adjacent to lakes, streams, wetlands, or consumer. These costs are balanced to a environmental effects prior to the approval drainage areas exist at every level of gov- degree by increased protection of the envi- of any development. ernment.As these controls have multiplied, ronment,residential amenities,and a main- During the course of the CURA study, the possibility of consistent and rational tenance of high standards which contribute municipal planners and development offi- statewide water management has become to the quality of life. Builders and develop- cials from some thirty metropolitan munici- more illusory. Planning water use, protect- ers, however, contend that many of the palities were interviewed concerning their ing water quality, and permitting any costs of regulation are not accompanied by subdivision and planned development pro- changes have been handled by different benefits either to the residents of the devel- cedures.Each municipal process seems to bodies. However, by 1982 recent studies opment or to the community as a whole. have its own unique features. They reflect by the State Water Planning Board and the There are four kinds of costs due to regula- differing community attitudes towards Metropolitan Council may result in deci- tion:costs due to substantive provisions of growth, local institutional arrangements, sions and legislative changes that begin to codes and ordinances, costs due to low and the idiosyncracies and personalities of create an effective system for such water housing densities, costs due to municipal local staff members and officials,as well as management. fees and charges, and costs due to delays the size and complexity of the community. These studies have been critical of the and uncertainty.An additional factor,noted Municipal attitude toward growth is a numbers of bodies involved in water issues by the Metropolitan Council's Modest Cost key element. We questioned builders and and see a redesigning of responsibilities as Private Housing Committee, "is the de- developers about the forty-five municipali- the crucial issue. The Water Planning crease in competition,decrease in innova- ties in which they were active during 1980. Board determined that sixteen state agen- tion and decrease in efficiency created by a Fifteen of these communities were rated cies administer at least eighty different climate of uncertainty in the development unanimously by the builders working in water related programs and the Metropoli- process." The home buyer and the larger them as being positive toward growth (see tan Council found at least thirty-six different community suffer because the enterprise map). In comparing the cities rated as government agencies other than cities and creativity of the builders are stifled. positive toward growth with those rated playing a role in water management in the Builders and developers become cautious negative toward growth, we found that the metropolitan area.This includes the water- and stick to the tried and true. Meanwhile, builders felt these cities more likely to have shed districts and the County Soil and those who do not have the resources to face satisfactory processing speed (97 percent Water Conservation Corps. uncertainties are frustrated from the start or compared to 57 percent), to have few or ENVIRONMENT: Nationwide concern for withdraw, thus reducing competition. no excessive building requirements (64 the natural environment has resulted in percent compared to 0), and to have a new systems of control at the state and Codes and Ordinances competent staff (86 percent compared to federal levels and has invigorated older The CURA study did not directly explore the 12 percent).* ones. The National Environmental Act of cost variations in different city's substantive Most of the problems, we discovered, 1969, implemented by executive orders in requirements in their codes and ordi- develop in connection with the land Bevel- 1970 and amended in 1977, requires all nances.A recent study of the Metropolitan opment requests. Land developers were federal agencies to prepare an Environ- Council and the League of Metropolitan less likely to be satisfied with the local mental Impact Statement for any major Municipalities, however, shows a differen- regulatory process than were builders who federally assisted action "significantly af- tial of 10 percent in the cost of a house did no land development. In twenty-two fecting the quality of the human environ- between one location and another resulting municipalities in which both groups worked ment." The requirements of the National from differences in municipal substantive in 1980, 25 percent of the land developers Environmental Policy Act and its Minnesota requirements. Thus a house which costs said there were many excessive require- counterpart, the Minnesota Environmental $60,000 in one metropolitan city may cost ments as compared with 10 percent of Policy Act, were added to other state and $66,000 in another due to differences in other builders, 52 percent of land develop- federal permitting responsibilities. building and site development require- ers rated staff competence as good as The lack of coordination between the ments. compared with 80 percent of other builders, land use planning and zoning and subdivi- and 77 percent of the land developers felt sion control on the local level and environ- Housing Density they were fully informed compared with mental review at the state and federal 94 percent of other builders.Land develop- levels has been a source of frustration and Even where there are no variations in other ers were also much more likely to have costly delays for developers.The proposed substantive provisions, zoning require- dealt with state or federal permitting agen- new regulation of the state Environmental ments as to density and lot size significantly cies than were the other builders. Fifty- Quality Board by delegating more respon- affect housing costs. Raw land cost varies three percent of the land developers had sibility to municipalities will help alleviate directly with the size of the lot and land dealt with one or more federal or state the problem (while it may well create oth- development costs follow suit. In a New agency as compared with 12 percent of the ers). A further step is still needed. Munici- Jersey study the lot development cost of a builders. pal-wide or area-wide environmental as- one acre lot (43,560 square feet) was two sessment has been endorsed by a number and one half times the cost of a 7,500 'Data derived from questionnaire responses from 107 builders of local and national organizations. This square foot lot ($18,185 compared to and developers who were members of the Minneapolis and St. would move most of the environmental $7,527) while the raw land costs would Paul Homebuilders Associations and worked in the communi- ties indicated on the map. analysis into the community planning stage have been almost six times greater. Other t 44 4 ,i ' is /4 L —2—, MUNICIPALITIES RATED Oak Grove POSITIVE TOWARD GROWTH e ___ �,�.. ...... IN 1980 •X . 1 Ramsey • 1• J ! ♦! ♦•♦'♦•''...'•' --% !!�♦♦�r�.�♦�♦�! ir/ .t... i /v >/ • •••••••••►•• Lino Lakes — . �.es�L♦•♦ 7' �I /.ri .. .oioi•io0io0 !♦.o• ..�♦ •••4 74 le Pines oo. ��' V.�♦♦.io�♦♦. in Moon mile r r ( , /,I � ♦ Nath Oaks(,,111111 ' k ����+ B___Iiii i' w v-nr e r eke 0 5 10 Medina Plymouth ` .•`..j• / �_ Mi. •lauderdal l • i� ^I �.♦`t ♦ . Minneapolis Mk %.,-------,,-- BMWF 9 � i; : �+.� // ♦ata♦�.� /" � Woodbury I4 _, „, f 4 ii;•...., ' /�// .4 �' Chanhassen -1 ® ?t���`tlillria7////////' `- �'' Eder Praire 111 4m+'���+*1 ♦►1�♦ ~ I Blooming on ,aa.l.. Cheska �t Al..♦.•.,. ♦� [J r� ;a• •♦ ♦.•o♦ Q f Shakot.e ��♦ . ��•�•��♦ �� I -- $d v,n Y, Btlr'lc IP ,t Apple Valley iPiJ -5 Lakeville ❑ LJrL' ' •)r H I o 1? J ■ Municipalities studied Municipalities rated positive toward growth .•`4•♦•• ...`.♦o®. by all builders working in them riej:,. by a majority of builders working in them 5 /6 studies have made similar findings. Thus Table 1. COSTS FOR THE SAME HOUSE UNDER HIGH AND LOW COST the low density and large lot size require- ASSUMPTIONS ments of many metropolitan area munici- palities are a major factor in housing costs. Low Cost High Cost The identical house on a one acre lot will Assumptions Assumptions cost substantially more than it would on a Construction Costs $60,000 $66,000 much smaller lot. Proposals by developers Raw Land 1,376 8,000 to build higher density housing, however, Land Development 5,555 15,000 virtually always meet with determined Municipal Fees 1,000 2,400 neighborhood opposition even in cases Delay 0 1,800 where the density is permitted under the TOTAL $67,931 $93,200 zoning ordinances. , Assumptions:Essentially the same house is built in each instance.Low cost is on a 7,500 square toot lot in a municipality with lowest tees • and charges,least costly substantive requirements in the city codes and ordinances,and an expeditious process.High cost is with a one Municipal Fees and Charges acre lot,highest municipal fees,most costly substantive requirements,and a six month delay due to regulation complications. Developers and builders who work in differ- ent face widely in the metropolitan and athe moneymaylie idle while interest com- work out a few hypothetical cases which face widely varying attitudes towards the funding of city services.These attitudes are pounds, and sales opportunities may be may be fairly representative. reflected in the structure and level of munic- In one situation, a developer invests ipal fees for planning, development, build- If a developer's plans are well advanced $18,000 per acre before being faced with ing permits, and sewer charges. To look and a marketing program has been started an unanticipated delay. The holding costs more closely at the resulting costs to devel- or scheduled, delays can be very expen- alone at 20 percent per annum amount to opers and builders, data from twelve cities sive. One local development was stopped $9.86 per acre per day. Additional over- was assembled.* when it was well underway because a head,permanent mortgage expenses,and City planners, engineers, and building change in the law required an Environ- profit increase this amount by 34 percent to inspectors were asked for the cost of car mental Assessment Worksheet, which the a total of$13.21 per acre per day.At 2.5 lots fain services and processes in two hypo developer had not known about.The devel- per acre this amounts to$5.28 per lot per thetical situations within their own cities. oper estimates that his added costs day.Athreemonthdelaycausesthecostof One of these was a single family house, amounted to $100 per day per unit for a each house to increase by$475.In another modestly priced at$50,000 to be built with period of more than a month while the EAW case, a fifty-two lot development experi- certain specified amenities and equipment. was hastily prepared. As a result of the ences a number of delays and is faced with The other was an area of fifty acres to be EAW, no changes were required! If the applying for a permit from the Army Corps developed for 150 single family houses on delay had occurred earlier, costs would of Engineers. The cost of the resulting properly zoned land. have been far less. delays is $13.46 per lot per day. A ninety Cities were not consistently high or low Because of tradition and climate, the day delay raises the price of each house by in their separate charges for permits, plan- Minnesota home building and selling sea- $1,211 in constant dollars. Hing, and development fees. Composite son is fairly well defined. If the developer's If all of these direct costs of regulation figures were assembled for each city by or builder's schedule is disrupted, losses —codes and ordinances, housing density, dividing the platting and park dedication may be out of proportion to the actual time municipal fees,and delay and uncertainties fees for the subdivision,usually paid by the involved. In another unfortunate incident, —are added together, they can make a developer,by the 150 units to give a per unit an archeological study which had not been substantial difference in the cost of a house cost for these charges. This was added to anticipated by the developer, was required (see Table 1). A house on an acre lot in a the permit and sewer charges per unit, for a proposed big subdivision. The thirty municipality with high fees, a lengthy proc- usually paid by the builder. day delay might not have been as signifi- ess, and expensive substantive building The total estimated charges per hous cant in November, but it was crucial in July and site development requirements may ing unit range from under $1,100 to over and lost a large part of the selling season. cost as much as one-third more than the $2,400.Based on municipal charges alone, Developers believe that many city and same house on a 7,500 square foot lot in a a house in Lino Lakes would cost $1,400 state officials have little insight into the low cost municipality with an expeditious more than a house in Lakeville(and proba effects of delay on their operations. They process.While it is unlikely that all of these bly in Maple Grove). feel that the review of subdivisions at the cost raising elements will occur on any one municipal level and the consideration of particular project,many of them are closely Costs of Delay and Uncertainty permits at state and federal levels are given linked and occur simultaneously. no real priority. It appeared to us that Any delay in residential development is government staff people working directly 'costly if money or time has already been with development proposals, intended to NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION invested. How costly will depend on the move them efficiently through review pro- length of the delay, the stage of develop- cesses,but these processes have cumber- Escalating housing costs are directly af- ment,and the season of the year in which it some time consuming steps. fected by a rising tide of neighborhood occurs. In some cases the permitting agencies opposition to higher density housing in the The process of land subdivision and say that they do not have the staff to carry Twin Cities metropolitan area. Most build- residential construction is most efficient out their legislative mandate to prepare ers and developers,and many city planners when it can be planned in advance and plans and standards and renew applica- and municipal development officials, point each stage precisely anticipated. Unantici- tions promptly.They have been given plan- to the attitude of the present owners of pated events which interrupt the flow of ning and permitting responsibilities without single family homes in the local neighbor- work are extremely expensive; crews may adequate funding to support them. hoods as the single most important factor in have to be pulled off of a job, new wage Although delay costs money,actual fig- determining the future of residential devel- rates may come into effect, mortgage ures are hard to get.Many land developers opment. indicated that it was impossible for them to Land developers are increasingly make specific estimates; each case dif- caught between the opposing sides of a •Apple Valley,Bloomington,Brooklyn Park,coon Rapids.cot- fered and any average would be based on bitter undeclared conflict. On the one side tage Grove,Eagan,Eden Prairie,Lakeville,Lino Lakes,Maple Grove,Plymouth,and Woodbury. guess work. We were, however, able to are the Metropolitan Council objectives of C 6 I/ making housing available to a wide range of want to risk the uncertainties of organized • Coordination of environmental assess- occupants through the building of some opposition. ment with municipal comprehensive medium and higher density housing.On the Neighborhood opposition thus tends to planning will help by moving major deci- other side are the neighborhood home thwart metropolitan housing and land use sions up into the planning phase. owners, sometimes allied with environ- objectives and raises housing costs in two • Effective planning can shorten and sim- mentally concerned agencies and organi- ways.First,lower cost higher density hous- plify the regulatory process by removing zations. Any increase in density or change ing which the Metropolitan Council, many uncertainty. in housing type is seen by the neighbor- city governments, builders and developers • Land development regulation increas- hood forces as a threat to their property would like to promote in the suburbs meets ingly requires specialized talents both on values, their peace of mind, and their way the most neighborhood objection. Second, of life. jnfill sites are parcels on which the metro- latorsart of the developers and the regu- of local objections are couched politan development framework seeks to in environmental or land use terms.It is said focus development but these sites are the • The functions of land development and that the proposed development will disturb most likely to encounter opposition by homebuilding are becoming increasingly environmentally sensitive areas or will gen- neighboring residents. separated. Land development is more erate too much local traffic. Perhaps more Obviously there is no simple solution. and more frequently in the hands of significant is a prejudice against renters, Each case is different and many of them specialized, usually large, companies condominium owners, or occupants of involve two or more perspectives which are which sometimes also do home building. lower priced housing.Opposition is particu- difficult or impossible to compromise. If the Many home builders are buying their larly bitter when the builder's proposal is developer accedes to neighborhood objec lots from land developers. Some land seen as unconventional as,for example,for tions,he may come up with a solution which developers are encouraging low volume a planned residential development with is unacceptable to the Metropolitan Council builders. cluster housing. or the municipality. A good deal can be • The efforts of the Metropolitan Council The concern expressed by the present accomplished by early discussions be- and the Association of Metropolitan Mu- residents about the environment is often tween a developer and homeowners in nicipalities to improve residential regula- quite understandable and may be well adjacent neighborhoods and by citywide tion have had positive payoffs. More founded.Earlier settlers may have selected environmental impact analysis coordinated needs to be done. the area partially because of woods or open with the comprehensive plan. As it stands, • Frequently the concerned neighbor- areas close at hand.When more housing is however,neighborhood opposition contrib- hood,fearful for its life style and property proposed, the amenity provided by the utes substantially to uncertainty and delay values, is the problem. Exhortations to open space may disappear. and bolsters the high cost of housing. local officials to"be brave"are unlikely to A number of fairly spectacular cases be effective unless the consensus of the have been pointed out. In one municipality, Some Conclusions broader community is behind them and a builder was forced to reduce density to is strongly articulated. Developers about one-half that called for in the zoning In conclusion here are some of the sometimes can allay neighborhood fears ordinance in order to obtain approval for a major themes that run through this and if they talk with neighbors early. condominium development, resulting in other studies of the residential regulatory • Concern for water resources and wet- doubled per unit land cost, higher develop- process: lands is the most pervasive environ- ment costs,and consequently higher prices • The regulatory process, despite well mental factor in residential development. to the buyer. In another, the builder could meaning efforts to simplify it,tends to get Water resource management has pre- not get townhouses approved in a staged longer and more complex. sented a confused and complex picture planned unit development although they • Land use regulation at the municipal for many years.The state and the Metro- were called for by the municipally approved level and environmental regulation at politan Council have developed different plan. In this case,single family houses had other levels of government are not well water management proposals which it is been built on adjacent land in an earlier coordinated. hoped can be coordinated. stage of development and the new home- owners now opposed the townhouses. In this sort of situation,although they might be successful, developers are reluctant to seek a remedy through the courts. They wish to continue to work in the municipality and do not want to antagonize local city . \ \\ ‘ \ officials. In less developed municipalities, at the ` \,.. "f: \\ \ e fringes of the metropolitan area,the neigh- ��% ' "' V �� borhood opposition issue is often less /L ti 41 4 acute simply because there are no estab- V 1 ,. lished neighbors and the developer's pro- posal is similar to existing housing. In the — more fully developed municipalities, land DI/CV/AYR/ _ that is now being sought out and developed ACRES 11,11500 „/064) was passed over earlier. Builders and developers are becoming Ne sMAtL. naSTS reluctant to chance neighborhood opposi- \\ ALLOWED ----- "'''..--AA-- n tion. They are beginning to test the water � before spending money and time on subdi- vision plans. Some major developers have t,. y, MI 1 told us that they will not buy land if after investigation they feel there will be any opposition.They cannot afford to be known as disrupters of neighborhoods and do not 7 • In many areas there is a broad coinci- It has not been possible within the corn- / dence of interest between the Metropoli- pass of this article to report in detail on the tan Council, municipai government, the complete CURA study. Those of us who developer, the home builder, and the worked on the study would be pleased to environmentalist which should be nur- discuss our recommendations or any part Lured wherever possible. of the study with anyone who is interested. We may be reached at 612376-3684. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Region;ai Development Resource 8. Development t+andboo; Center working with the akin ('-:"ties Reusing, A Regional Development Resource Con- Council and the Asso,ation of Metroroli- tershould be established in the Metropole- tan Municipalities,the M.tefropolitan Cc in- tan Council to provide Information and cli should develop a model r rsidentivi services to municipalities, developers, development hondhcek to be need by buiiders, consultants, and the general municipalities and altered to fit their cr-vn public and to manage a collection of needs, materials and data relating to regional 9, Analysis of Reeltieetlai Subc ieielon development, Fees 2. Community Wide Environmental The Metropolitan Co eat;gourd expedite Assessment its proposed studi, et e.es'charged resi- The state'legislature; should direct each dential developers it the Twin Cities municipality in the Twin Cities metropoli- rnetropciitan ;ren. tan area to prepare a n;unicipal environ- 10. Subdivision Preeedure mental assessment report consistent with Municipalities should adopt the new stele its comprehensive municipal plan. subdivision procedures. 3. Delegation of Authority to 11. Simultaneous Review Municipalities Municipalities should incorporate erect,- The state legislature should consider fur does in their subdivision review processes they delegation of state permitting author- that encourage simultaneous review by ity to muni^ipalities while maintaining well parts of the municipal government as standard setting responsibility in the state `'`e1' as by watershed districts and s.on- agencies. and fedora. agencies. They should con - agencies. adopting the pre-application ad' s- 4. Water Resource Management ory meeting technique The state legislature should give full at- 12. Cit°zen Participation tention to the impact that water resource Municipalities should encourage wide- management proposals will have on the spread citizen participation early in the land development process. The Metro- planning process in order to raise ques- politan Council or its proposed sub- dons of density, bullring typo, end en agency,the Metropolitan Water Manage- vironmental impar piior'to a specific ment Organization, should be the major development proposal, planning and programming agency in the 13. Communication and information metropolitan area with permitting author- -The Twin Cities He Bing Council should ity placed in the municipalities under met- establish continuing working relation- ropolitan agency supervision. ships with other organizatio ne concerned 5. Historical and Archeological Sites with residential develcement, including The state legislature should provide funds the League of Minnesota,Municipalities, to expedite the inventory of significant the Association of Moe opoliter) Munic' historical and archeological sites by the paiities,the Minnesota Plarr'iir?g Assccia- Historical Society. tion, and envi onmer•,tai group;., 6. LegislatIve Concern for Processing 14. Planning Efficiency The Twin Cities Housing Coun.ii should The state legislature should direct at state become an advocete of effective planning agencies involved in reviewing and ap- at all levels of qor e rrmont. proving residential developments to give 15. Process their permitting activity high priority. The Twin Cities Housisre Council sheelo 7. Permit Guide continue to work effectively to shorten The Metropolitan Council should prepare and make more defrrnito he regulatory and keep current a Permit Guide which pr('�ess. describes each type of permit required for 16. Water Management a residential subdivision and the condi- The Twin. Cities Housing Council shoal,, tions under which it is required,identifying be concerned with cure:et proposals for where detailed information.can be water management sed be prepared to obtained. assert its opinion at puteic hearings. 8 MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION (Regular Meeting) The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on February 1, 1982. 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 and Reinke, Liason Jerry Wampach, Manager Van Hout, Superintendent Leaveck and Secretary Menden. Commissioner Nolting was out of town. Also present was Barry Kirchmeier. Commissioner Reinke introducEd Mr. Jerry Wampach as the new Liason to the Utility Commission from City Council. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop that the minutes of the January 4, 1982 regular meeting be approved as kept. Motion carried. BILLS READ: City of Shakopee 20,032.00 ABM Equipment and Supply Inc. Auto Central Supply 139.45 304 Battery and Tire Warehouse, Inc. 214. Bills To 214.3399 ggery 17.49 Burmeister Electric 325.04 Burroughs Corporation 869.59 City of Shakopee Clay's Printing Service 7,543.20 20.95 Dept of Energy, Planning and Developement 290.40 Dick's Service Station 9.00 Dyna Systems Inc. 79.70 Eiler Company 25.43 Feed-Rite Controls, Inc. 613.84 Graybar Supply Co. 1,034.74 Harris Machiner C o. 39.50 Hennens ICO Lathrop Paint Supply Co. 15.60 50.45 Leef Bros Inc. 15.30 M/A Associates 45.75 Malkerson Motors Inc. 80.00 Metro Sales Inc. 49.00 Motor Parts Service 92.89 Northern States Power Co. 330.60 Northern States Power Co. 906.13 Notthland Electric Supply Co. 27.65 Nott Company 197.70 Peat, Marwick Mitchell and Co. 9,995.00 Serco 52.00 Shakopee Hardware 125.98 Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 99.66 Shakopee Valley News 47.31 Dean Smith Trenching Inc. 520.00 Starks C leaning Services 17.30 Suel Business Equipment 28.77 Total Tool Supply Co. 63.06 Twin City Water Clinic 45.00 Uniforms Unlimited 55.35 Water Engineering and Management 23.00 Water Products Co. 1,935.61 Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. 1,200.02 Ziegler Tire Service 76.44 Associated Mechanical 69.73 Motion by Reinke, Seconded by Bishop that the bills be allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop to pay the Northern States Power Co. bill when it arrives. Motion carried. An update on the acquistion of Lock and Dam #2 was given to the Commission by Manager Van Hout. The inspection on the new pumphouse #6 was discussed. This being funded by tax increment Process, it is necessary that City Council authorize the contract on this particular job. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop that Schoell and Madson are to certify that all things are installed according to plans and specification for Pumphouse #6. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop to recommend to the City Council that all inspections for Pumphouse #6 are done by Schoell and Madson per their pro- posal dated 1-6-82, with all normal building and electrical inspections still being done by City Building Inspector as per all building permits. Motion carried. Manager Van Bout gave a progress report on Well #6. Motion by Bishop, seconded by Reinke to concur with Schoell and Madson report on the- sizing of the well motor and with their recommendations of a 100 H.P. motor. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop to offer Resolution #235 Designating an official means of publication. Ayes: Commissioners Bishop, Reinke. Nayes: None. Motion carried. Resolution passed. Motion by Bishop, seconded by Reinke to offer Resolution #236 Designating an official Bank. Ayes: Commissioners Bishop, Reinke. Nayes: None. Motion carried. Resolution passed. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop to offer Resolution #237 Designating an official depository. Ayes: Commissioners Bishop, Reinke. Nayes: None. Resoultion passed. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop to offer Resolution #234 Designating wages for 1982. Ayes: Commissioners Bishop, Reinke. Nayes: None. Resolution passed. Motion carried. Motion by Bishop, seconded by Reinke that the work rules as provided in the packet along.with the 1982 wages be adopted as official SPDC work rules. Motion carried. Motion by Reinke, seconded by Bishop to send our line people to safety classes and the expenses incurred shall be left up to the Managers discretion. Motion carried. Superintendent Leaveck reported on the fire calls attended in January, 1982. Two men attended a fire in Chaska, mutual aid for a total of 4 man hours. On January 11, 1982, total man hours spent were 1/4 hour. Total man hours spent on another call were ten, minutes, with a total for January of 4 man hours spent at fire calls. Commissioner Reinke gave the liason report. Commissioner Bishop had some questions on the water service to Howe Chemical. They have been requested to provide information. Superintendent Leaveck reported no loss time accidents for January, 1982. Motion by Bishop, seconded by Reinke that the meeting be adjourned to March 15, 1982 at 4:30 P.M. for the next regular meeting. Motion carried. There will be a special meeting on March 8, 1982 at 5:00 P.M. to approve the bills for that month. k ou Van Hout, Manager /8 MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION (Regular Meeting) The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on January 4, 1982 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, Reinke and Nolting. Also Manager Van Hout, Superintendent Leaveck and Secretary Menden. Motion by Nolting, seconded by Reinke that the minutes of the December 7, 1981 regular meeting he approved as kept. Motion carried. BILLS READ: City of Shakopee 20,032.00 American Water Works Association 43.00 Associated Mechanical Contractors, Inc. 55.47 Auto Central Supply 54.01 Bentz Construction, Inc. 240.00 Bills Toggery 484.92 Boardman, S1ihr, Curry and Field 96.05 Burmeister Electric 298.93 City of Shakopee 63.60 Chicago, Northwestern Transportation Co. 340.00 Chanhassen Lawn and Sports 3.70 Clay's Printing Service 111.90 Ditch Witch and Minn. , Inc. 3.08 Dunnings Hardware 20.47 Krass, Meyer and tanning 226.60 Lakeville Motors Express 32.23 M/A Associates, Inc. 163.96 Malkerson Motors, Inc. 80.00 Vincent Marschall 69.73 Northern States Power Co. 936.28 Chas Olson and Sons, Inc. 436.00 Power Quip, Inc. 79.46 Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 32.10 Schilz Ornamental Iron 43.75 Serco 52.00 Shakopee Post Office 3,000.00 Shakopee Public Utilities Comm. 326.62 Shakopee Services 18.00 Shakopee Valley News 93.12 Software Consultants 200.00 Starks Cleaning Services 8.65 Suel Business Equipment 32.55 Twin City Water Clinic 40.00 Uniforms Unlimited 184.50 Vikings Safety Products 26.75 Wesco 1,959.00 Northern States Power Co. 223,763.77 Hennen's Skelly 37.23 Motion by Nolting, seconded by Reinke that the bills be allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried. Manager Van Hout read a communication from Howe Chemical on their invitation to their open house on January 6, 1982. Another communication from Howe Chemical regarding projected high water with- drawals at intermittent times which could cause problems to the water system. Manager Van Hout will work with Howe on a manageable solution to the problem. A phone call from Bill Chard to the office regarding electric service to the Eastview Addition was noted. A. communication from Schoell and Madson regarding Well #6 was discussed. Motion by Nolting, seconded by Reinke to recommend to the Common Council of the City of Shakopee payment of the Schoell and Madson change order on Well #6 from $3,270.92 to $5,704.91 for cost overruns. Motion carried. Manager Van Hout reported on the hydro project. An update of the progress on acquisition of the Lock and Dam was given. Motion by Reinke seconded by Nolting to concur with a letter from Boardman, Suhr, Curry and Field dated December 18, 1981 and that the Commission will follow their approach as to obtaining Lock and Dam #2 with the Federal Regulatory Commission and to follow their recommendations to challenge Ribbings application. Motion carried. Commissioner Reinke gave the Liaison report. An agenda from the HRA was read regarding easements in the Macy Addition and was discussed. There were no new plats for December. Superintendent Leaveck read a report from the foreman on the fire calls for December. On Dec. 17, 2 men attended a fire for a total of 2 man hours. On Dec. 18, 2 men attended a fire for a total of 1 man hour. On Dec. 21, 2 men attended a fire for a total of 40 minutes and 1 false alarm fire call for a total time of 4 man hours spent during Dec. , 1981 attending fire calls. Motion by Nolting, seconded by Reinke that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried. i Lou Van Hout, Manager /7 AD HOC CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE Shakopee , Minnesota Special Session February 10, 1982 Chairman Foudray called the meeting to order at 7 : 08 p.m. in the Council Chambers of. City Hall , with Committee members present : Abeln, Davis , Gorman, and Kirchmeier. Committee member Christensen arrived at 7 : 10 p.m. Also present was Jeanne Andre, Administrative Assistant and John Anderson, City Administrator. Abeln/Gorman moved to approve the minutes of January 27 , 1982 as presented. Motion carried. Ms . Christensen arrived at 7 : 10 p.m. Discussion was held on the Committee tour of cable facilities in Worthington and St . Peter on February 5 , 1982 . Chairman Foudray recognized Gary Eastlund from the audience . Mr. Eastlund indicated he is the Chairman of the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce . He indicated that Win Borden, Spokesman for the Minnesota Association of Commerce and Industry (MACI ) , had been employed as a consultant for a Chicago-based firm seeking a cable franchise in another Minnesota community. Mr. Eastlund said that the Chamber Board of Directors has gone on record against the activities of Mr. Borden, who should be speaking in favor of Minnesota-based firms , due to his role with MACI, not in favor of out-of-state firms . Gorman/Abeln moved to recommend that the City Council establish a citizens cable advisory committee as soon as possible to research the role of citizens and the community in the cable franchise . The motion was withdrawn. Christensen/Davis moved to appoint Lillian Abeln as chairwoman of a subcommittee to draft more detailed recommendations for the estab- lishment of a citizen ' s advisory committee and/or a non-profit community access corporation for Committee review. Motion carried. Committee member Christensen presented the following questions to be forwarded to the consultant to address in the evaluation: 1 . What is the significance of Tier la in the Progress Valley Totalvision proposal and how does it fit into the tier structure? 2 . What is the cost of a converter and of what significance is the fact that one company charges for the converters while the other does not? 3 . What is the cost of the lock-out device and of what significance is the fact that one company charges for the device while the other does not? 4 . Evaluation of the rates for the alternatives . 5 . Significance of the dual feeder design offered by Progress Valley Totalvision and the benefits of such a design. Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee February 10 , 1982 Page Two Davis/Christensen moved to delay further consideration of rates , system design, construction schedule and service area until the consultant report is received. Motion carried. Abeln/Christensen moved to reconsider the motion of the January 6 , 1982 , meeting "to purchase list of audio cassettes recommended by Committee member Abeln related to the formation of non-profit community access corporation at a cost of not more than $100. Motion carried. Gorman/Kirchmeier moved to table consideration of this motion until the Committee receives a report from its subcommittee established to review this issue. Upon roll call requested by the Chairman, motion carried unanimously. Gorman/Kirchmeier moved to adjourn the meeting at 8 : 17 p.m. Motion carried. R. Gene Foudray Chairman Jeanne Andre Recording Secretary The next meeting of the Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee will be held March 24 , 1982 at 7 : 00 p.m. • • 8 { _ 6y� C tF r ' ,�« Q' cc 1/f a ° x t7 G 1, O K 13 pe ft0 r+ 1 ' ~ v E = '' O "' U�Lt v v FE O O y^ t Willi 4 Ot. r , 0t. O a gb0 to E to E aJ bb 46 t. 73 tii i .G � > F iyaa4 ^ L' d C ar 'Eget')a, «r y O 0 o . 74 * � X ei ...ItjC •E C . O ,Cw > .' . vp a . A3 ovv E, ft,••••• boo v , 1..'a x , fKt .10 - $« .. '3 �7G' '. r+ - . ,-.5 t -' `a• `L1:lq.w Ii ' I ' Pcc b p yi3 Lo 1 Eyi \G I � ; ) • sN5iIr .'-` en 0 ooflrow 9 oo v y• . z cowl •- , [ 3 a • 00E � g [ y - t-. yt v v a - - E E.,0 .0.0 d � o *- c oEFov � = ro"0 aod20 6.4 • ea O O14 it! a, 0 « K v w be; e1+baD a"O � �..� ctt;. n y °° °�' o o a e,-)vmir ea .44 .� v t.. a ., ., ::.:a.,,.. V yy .G •Q - -0 O a tl. a], 7 O M ', •1� W o .0 q ^ 0 8 M^1 t °II , a, UA� v, n 't7 ' O " E .-' ,v01 ,-- G �j E N M 00 00 r.r. w O « QO,t 3 r 7 A C m rv8. e O U 46. E . C1 2 ca p vcc 1,-, A u a v b R ® wr=- . "i'' '2!itOc^ v o v O i°0-2 ° y y , � E 0 /b + • ai` {R• ',Ix4 [ 0 [ vv ' , ^ a3cJTl >, . 44ia v •• « � LG ' yift4-// j{t t {G OSi t y . t0h ° _ w . tj A, r 00 G NMI •r I O 4„,) . pi0 QyQ ilkd i' ...,,,.. ,. •! GOX ; p • ^ h4 l .1i444.!;•"' wvas QC \ ; j toR ° ° r 4EC sC " t crd � OTl O, v V M� 42 ° 3 — " oQ ` N >, i V $ ,GGvo —� � 0\ _ 71 Nor' T il 45 1 • 6, O ar 7 Vv « 1aCC .. m ypdG al O ;14 � (y La) •Gb � OeE a., A oe: U o, .,, « ti Ora ^ , v y V, -7 f +• o • a, n .' ,D > « rrd�Z . „ .� d ; cc ' , . O E0. v W J i�E � u ! _ d Q OO; � �5 .� a > aQ o � '' wDOw, y.” r to =TJr[ C7 s6 Ti N h .. .x .� a d u - - z Q at ,ii-: - i.. r! t ,U 0, 't roOv C .� , I? a t5 .i .'Gi . 3 O S ti ~ d ti r•-,v v 0. gy O o op�h ro A O - G, u G .. o a Z �, a 14. .C7 [ q J C04. bw C O O E yAM o E r.' v ,?.ib '{. o 0. ,ivm. 00 ° y s .G q .G o G XU 3 V m � Hc3 G wiia ta,mL. v i.zo ° $ ; = o F°ooS E E y o v E E 4o L u a �' c° 4 ga b .oz E S. r E i0. a • : :5r:+�.".'a'cv v E v ,�oy > c \� cV ?,.0 C o „ 0Vp . ;' 4:::.•:44.•47:�La ® t }a ',.:: a, 0 OU u .d D ! ' p tat c ::N wv O h O 7Z rav * g0. mg Eo4 : O °' iI I a c/ 1111 1111 ---��,� league of minnesota cities January 28, 1982 TO: City Administrators , Clerks, and Managers FROM: Thomas H. Thelen, Field Representative RE: Proposed OSHA requirements for municipal and industrial fire departments . The formal hearing of the proposed Occupational Safety and Health Act standards for fire departments was conducted on Tuesday, January 26, 1982 in St. Paul . Although many elected city officials , fire chiefs, and firefighters have indicated that they have very strong feelings about another mandated set of regulations being imposed on them, few people showed up to air those feelings at the hearing. As a result, if those feelings are to be conveyed to the hearing examiner they must be made in writing and delivered by mail or in person by 4:30 p.m. , February 16, 1982 to: Mr. Richard Luis, Office of Administrative Hearings , 400 Summit Bank Building, 310 4th Avenue South , Minneapolis, MN 55415. As part of this memo I am including the summary of the training standards which are being proposed. This summary appeared in the December 10th issue of the Legislative Bulletin of the League. (Special Session Bulletin One) . While these proposed rules appear to be very general , they could be the beginning of a process that might impose some very strict, specific requirements in the future. The League has provided testimony regarding the feelings of many officials around the state, as we on the staff have observed to be the consensus , but this issue should not be decided without as many cities commenting as possible. Whatever is the feeling of your firefighters and your city council , please discuss this issue, try to arrive at a consensus opinion and send your written comments to the hearing officer. If you wish to order a complete text of the regulations , a copy of the Federal Register dated September 12, 1980 can be secured from: Ms. Patricia Lorentz, OSHA Division, 444 Lafayette Road, St. Paul , MN 55101, (612)297-3254. Time is critical . Please make the necessary number of copies of this memo and circulate them to your mayor, city council , and fire chief immediately. Thank you. Sincerely, /-X- Thomas H. Thelen Field Representative,1` „3r streetsa nt Fri i , nnes -,inotr j 551 01 C612) 222 2861 . I THT: ara Enclosure PROPOSED OSHA STANDARDS FOR FIREFIGHTERS AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS If your city has a volunteer of full-- Are these proposed training time fire department, the Minnesota Occupa- standards appropriate for your tional Safety and Health Division is propos- department? Will the imposition ing the adoption of fire protection stan- of these training standards affect dards. A copy of all of the proposed your department's ability to recruit standards may be obtained by writing to: and keep volunteers? Should train- ing standards be developed locally by Department of Labor and Industry each department instead of being Occupational Safety and Health Division mandated by the state? These are 444 Lafayette Road just some of the questions which reed St. Paul , MN 55101 to be asked. Please bring these proposed standards to the attention of your city council and firefig •:ars , especially the portion con- cerning "Training Requirements"_ (see following section) which if adopted, will apply to all volunteer and full-time depart- ments that recieve state aid (10 or more persons it the department) . PROPOSED FIRE BRIGADE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS (1910.156) 1910.156 (a) S cope application. 1910.156(b)(1) Organization 1. This section applies to fire brigades, 1. The employer must prepare and industrial fire departments, and maintain an organizational statement private or contractual type fire de- or written policy that establishes: partments, whenever established by an employer. (Note: By reference, a. the existence of the fire briga 1e; it will also apply to most city fire b. the basic organizational structure; departments with 10 or more fire c, the type, amount and frequency fighters.) of training to be provided to fire brigade members; 2. Personal protective equipment re- d. the expected number of mem- quirernents apply only to members hers of the fire brigade; of fire brigades performing interior c. the functions that the fire structural fire fighting. brigade is to perform. • • 11 -2. This statement must be available still be members of a fire brigade; for OSHA inspection and inspection i.e., assigned to training, recordkeep- by employees or their designated ing,fire prevention inspection, main- representative. tenance and fire pump operations. 3. This statement is to be used as a 6. For employees assigned to fire tool to aid employees in understand- brigades before 9/15/80, these re- ing their responsibilities as fire requirements become effective brigade members and 'to help the 9/15/90; for those assigned after compliance officer determine if the 9/15/80, these requirements are level of training is consistent with effective 12/15/80. the functions of the fire brigade. I 0 1910.156(c) Training & education 1910.156(b)(2) Personnel 1. Definitions: 1. Employees expected to do interior a. Training= the process of making structural fire fighting are to be proficient through instructions physically capable of performing and hands-on practice in the duties which may be assigned to operation of equipment that is them during emergencies. used in the performance of 2. Fire brigade members will be con- assigned duties. sidered as meeting the "physical b. Education = the process of im capability" requirements of parting knowledge or skill 1910.156 (b)(2) if they are able to through systematic instruction; perform the functions and duties education can be accomplished subject to the training specified in ' by providing employees with 1910.156(c). Physical capability can written instructional material; it also be determined by physical does not require formal class performance tests or by a physical room instruction. examination by an examining physi 2. Employers must provide training to clan who is familiar with the fire fire brigade members commensurate brigade member's duties. with the duties and functions they will be expected to perform. (The 3. Employees with heart disease, epi lepsy or emphysema cannot parti- type, amount and frequency of training will be as varied as are the cipate in fire brigade emergency purposes for the brigades' organi- activities unless they have a physi- zation.) clan's certificate. Other physical dis- orders which would impair the 3. Basic elements to be considered: ability of members to participate in emergency activities can be handled a. all fire brigade members should on a case-by-case basis with the be familiar with exit facilities, advice of a physician familiar with location and emergency escape the fire brigade member's duties. routes for handicapped workers, and the workplace "emergency 4. The final fire brigade standard does action plan;" not address the issue of an employee's right to refuse to perform fire brigade duties; OSHA's position is b. brigade members who are ex- that, given proper training and fire petted to control fires in the fighting equipment, fire brigade incipient stage shall (at a mini- duties can be performed by physi- mum) be trained in the use of cally capable employees. fire extinguishers, stand pipes, and other fire equipment that 5. Employees who do not meet the they arc assigned to use; physical capability requirements can 1 12 wf c. brigade members should also be training for the simpler fire brigade aware of first aid medical proce- duties. dures and procedures for dealing with special hazards to which 8. Fire brigade members who perform they may be exposed; interior structural firefighting shall be provided with an education ses- d. brigade members expected to sion or training at least quarterly. perform emergency rescue and Some drills or classroom instruc- interior structural fire fighting tions should be conducted as often must, at a minimum,be familiar as monthly or even weekly to main- with the proper techniques in tain proficiency. rescue and fire suppression pro- cedures. 9. Quarterly training or education may consist of hands-on training, gre • - e. training and education should fire planning exercises,classes in the include fire protection courses, use of self-contained breathing appa- classroom training, simulated fire ratus, discussion of special hazards situations including "wet dri;ls" in the workplace, etc. and, when feasible, extinguish- ment of actual mock fires. 10. Quality of training programs must be similar to those conducted by 4. Training must be provided before fire training schools. Examples of members perform fire brigade emer- schools/programs are included in gency activities. the standard. 5. Fire brigade leaders and training 11. Fire brigade members shall be in- instructors shall be provided more formed of specific hazards such as comprehensive training and educa- storage and flammable liquids and tion than general members. Sug- gases, toxic chemicals, radioactive gested publications on training are sources, and water reactive sub- from Fire Service Training Assoc., stances. NFPA-1041, and International So- ciety of Fire Service Instructors. 12. Fire brigade members must be ad- vised of changes in these special 6. Fire brigade leaders should demon- hazards. strate skills in strategy and tactics; fire suppression and prevention tech- 13. Written procedures must be made niques, leadership principles, pre- available for inspection by fire fire planning, and safety practices. brigade members regarding actions to be taken in situations involving the 7. Training must be provided at least special hazards; these shall be in- annually but some functions should cluded in the training and educa- be reviewed more often; this is an tion program. absolute minimum frequency of TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ .REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 16 , 1982 Mayor Reinke presiding 1 ] Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M. 2] Approval of Minutes of February 2nd and 9th, 1982 3] Communications : a] David Moonen re : request for vacation of part of alley in Blk 30 OSP b] R.Kathleen Morris re : Shakopee By-Pass c ] Virgil Mears re : walkway connecting 11th Ave . to Hauer Add ' n. 4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 5 ] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS : 6 ] Old Business : a ] Dedication of the right-of-way East of Viking Steel as public highway b] Remaining 18 Units at Shakopee Village Townhouses c ] Surface Water Management Legislation d ] Ord . No . 88 , Amending City Code Regarding Scavengers e ] Remove from table , action on adopting sewage and waste control rules and regulations for the Metro Disposal System; and Offer Ord . No . 89 f ] Valleyfair Ride Inspections : aa ] Ord . No . 85 , Amending Sec . 6 . 24 of City Code bb] Ord . No . 86 , Adding Sec . 6 . 26 to City Code ' - Senior Center 7 ] Planning Commission Recommendations : a] Street Standards for One-way Streets 8 ] Resolutions and Ordinances : a] Res . No . 1984, Authorizing Execution of Agreement To Receive Breath Test Units On A Loan Basis b] Ord . No . 83 and 87 Amending City Code re : Streets and Sidewalks c ] Res . No . 1983, Establishing MunicipaL State Aid Highways d] Res . No . 1981 , Amending Fee Resolution - Lot Splits 9 ] New Business : a] 8 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - Proposed roadway construction to Va1Aey Industrial Blvd. S . from CR83 to the E. line of Valley Park 2nd ( 82-2 ) b] Res . No . 1985 - Ordering Improvement and Preparation of Plans for Valley Industrial Blvd. S . ( 82-2 ) c ] Proposal for Inspections and Staking for Pumphouse for Water Supply Well No . 6 d] Change Order No . 2 for Water Supply Well No. 6 - reduction in amount of $10 ,482 .00. - e ] City Participation in Downtown Development f] Snow Plowing Ordinance g] Murphy ' s Landing Sewer Charges h] Move that the bills in the total amount of $420,084. 90 be allowed and ordered paid 10 ] Consent Business : a ] Rahr Malting industrial Discharge Permit bl Amendment to Budget - Bldg. Dep ' t . 11 ] Other Business : a] Engineering Monthly Report b] c ] 12 ] Adjourn John K. Anderson, City Administrator 2 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 2, 1982 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:38 P.M. with Cncl. Leroux, Vierling, Lebens, Wampach and •Colligan present. Also present were Jeanne Andre, Admin. A ss't; H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk and John K. Anderson, City Admr. Julius A. Colley, II, City Attorney, arrived later. Lebens/Leroux moved to approve the minutes of January 12, 1982 and January 19, 1982 as kept. The City Admr. indicated a motion that was made on January 19, 1982 that needs to be re-phrased to be correct. It was decided to make that correction later. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Lebens moved to refer the correspondence from the Shakopee Babtist Church, dated January 19, 1982 and the letter from the First United Presbyterian Church, dated January 14, 1982 concerning the showing of "R" and "X" rated materials on cable T.V. , to the commission that will be formed to advise on cable T.V. programming. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer commented on the letter received from Lawrence E. Samstad, Engineer, regarding the use of water at Shiely's Jordan Quarry. The City Engineer stated he thinks Mr. Samstad is misrepresenting the facts, and in any case, this question is not in regard to Shiely's operation in Shakopee. The City Admr. summarized a memo from SPUC regarding the water used by Shiely, stat- ing that the water that is pumped there would not be appropriate for municipal use, Leroux/Lebens moved to place this letter from Lawrence E. Samstad dated January 19, 1982 on file and an answer be sent to Lawrence Samstad of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District stating there is no realistic alternative to be explored for use of the water pumped at Shiely. Motion carried unanimously. The City Attorney arrived at this point, 7:45 P.M, Leroux/Lebens moved to correct the direction given in the January 19, 1982 Council meeting that the Savin 600 Model copier be purchased through the General Fund, using Revenue Sharing Funds, not the Capital Equipment Fund. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Liaison reports were received from Councilpersons. Leroux/Vierling moved to take a position and send a letter to the Surface Water Management Board opposing any mandated. act requiring cities to complete Surface Water Management plans by 1985. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Leroux moved to direct City staff to come up with the necessary language to work with the Surface Water Management Board to protect Shakopee 's Comprehensive Plan. Walter Harbeck stated he believed the City should just stick to the fact that its Comprehensive Plan has been approved by Met Council, and not let them make any more changes to it. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Reinke read a Proclamation proclaiming February, 1982 Heart Month. Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to address the Council on any item not on the agenda, and there was no one. The Council received paper ballots and proceeded to vote for each separate position available on the various boards and commissions. Mayor Reinke tabulated the results. Walter Harbeck warned against making the Industrial/Commercial Commission a real estate board. He said he would like to see more banking and big business represented. The first vote was for one position for Planning Commission. There was no majority, and the two top people were Dave Czaja and Beverly Koehnen. Two more votes were taken in which Czaja and Koehnen each received 3 votes . Leroux/Lebens moved that voting for the first position be suspended and voting pro- ceed for the second position for Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council February 2, 1982 Page 2 There was no majority on this vote, but Dave Czaja and Bob Ziegler received the most votes. Another vote showed a majority for Czaja. Leroux/Vierling moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Dave Czaja for Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. (Four year term ending February 1, 1986. ) Leroux/Colligan moved to vote again for the first position for Planning Commission between Czaja and Koehnen. Motion carried unanimously. There were a majority of votes for Koehnen. Leroux/Vierling moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Beverly Koehnen for Plan- ning Commission. Motion carried unanimously. (Four year term ending February 1 , 1986. ) Balloting proceeded for the full term vacancy for Community Services Board. The majority of votes were for Nancy Christensen. Colligan/Leroux moved to cast a unanimous ballot for Nancy Christensen for Community Services Board. Motion, carried unanimously. (Two year term ending February 1, 198+. ) Balloting was held for the unexpired term for Community Services Board, with Bob Ziegler receiving the majority of votes. Colligan/Leroux moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Bob Ziegler to fill the unexpired term, through February 1, 1983 to Community Services Board. Motion carried unanimously. Balloting proceeded for the first full year term for Industrial/Commercial Commission, with Paul Wermerskirchen receiving the majority of votes. Leroux/Colligan moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Paul Wermerskirchen for a 3 year term, through February 1, 1985, to the Industrial/Commercial Commission. Motion carried unanimously. Balloting proceeded for the second full term vacancy for Industrial/Commercial Com- mission, with no one receiving a majority. On the next vote Gary Eastlund received the majority of votes. Colligan/Vierling moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Gary Eastlund to Indus- trial/Commercial Commission for a 3 year term, through Feb. 1, 1985. Motion carried unanimously. Balloting continued to fill the unexpired term for Industrial/Commercial Commission, with the two top people being Laurent and DuBois. The next ballot showed a majority of votes for DuBois. Leroux/Vierling moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Jane DuBois to fill the unexpired term through Feb. 1, 1983 to Industrial/Commercial Commission. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Leroux moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for Virgil Mears for Police Civil Service Commission. Motion carried unanimously. (Three year term ending February 1, 1985). Leroux/Lebens moved to open the public hearing regarding adopting by reference the , Sewage and Waste Control Rules and Regulations for the Metropolitan Disposal System. Motion carried unanimously. The City Planner explained that the rules and regulations of Met Council are in slight conflict with the City's existing scavenger ordinance. The City Engineer stated that to adopt the rules and regulations of Met Council, the City should either institute a permit system for scavengers, which would be very costly, or abandon the scavenger system completely. He recommends prohibiting discharge of septage into Shakopee's collection system. Discussion was held regarding any obligation Shakopee had to rural residents who had paid SAC charges. Walter Harbeck stated that Shakopee is not under any obligation to those paying SAC charges, but this is a responsibility of Met Council, and it should be providing a dumping facility if needed. Mayor Reinke asked if there were any other comments from the audience, and there were none. ' Shakopee City Council February 2, 1982 Page 3 Colligan/Vierling moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Lebens directed staff to prepare an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 16, 4th Series, prohibiting the discharge or disposal of waste from septic tanks or other similar facilities into, the City of Shakopee's collection system. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Lebens moved to table action on adopting sewage aril waste control rules and regulations for the Metropolitan Disposal System. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved to place the information regarding the Regional Railroad Authori- ties Act on file. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to direct the City's Codifier to review our present gas fran- chise section of the City Code and bring it into compliance with the Mn. PUC. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Considerable discussion was held regarding proposed department head evaluations. Tom Brownell, Police Chief, stated it is the concern of the department heads that they be allowed dialog with the Council if there are any comments by Council re- garding the department head. Don Steger, City Planner, asked where provision was made for staff to respond to comments of City Council. He stated he felt this was very important to clear up any possible misconceptions. Cncl. Leroux suggested that after City Council has reviewed and commented upon the City Admr. 's evaluation of various department heads, these comments should go back to the department head, at which time either the Council or department head can request the department head meet with Council, at an executive session, to further explain or clarify issues. The City Clerk suggested if Councilmembers have any comments regarding a department head, these should be given to the City Admr. before he conducts his evaluation of the department head, so that person has an opportunity to respond to all the comments at that time. The Admin. Ass't also expressed her preference for Councilmembers to comment regarding department heads prior to the City Admr. 's evaluation. Further discussion ensued. Leroux/Colligan moved to direct the City Admr. to complete a trial department head evaluation using the forms attached to his memo dated January 26, 1982, and to pre- sent the summary of each evaluation to Council at an executive session of Council in February. Motion carried unanimously. Lebens/Colligan moved to remove discussion regarding sewer billing from the table. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion followed. Cncl. Lebens stated she can never agree to shift more of the cost to those who use less water. Let those who use it pay for it. Discussion followed. Walter Harbeck stated he brought up the increase in his sewer bill because he thought there were inequities, and he still thinks there are inequities. The problem is not that he can't pay for it, but it is just that the percentage of increase was so tremendous he thought there was an error someplace. He just can't understand how 3 people can use that much water. The City Admr. stated there is a possibility of an error in the meter, and that hasn't been checked out yet. More discussion ensued. Vierling/Leroux moved to continue to use the present sewer rate structure until another rate increase is needed, and then consider shifting more of the cost to people who consume less water. Leroux/Lebens moved to amend the motion to have it read only to continue to use the present sewer rate structure until another rate increase is needed. Motion to amend carried unanimously. Main motion as amended carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to execute a one- year lease between the City of Shakopee and Save O'Dowd Lakes Chain, Inc. , and that said lease shall be cancelled if the corporation does not keep their insurance in force and/or the City is required to pay part of the operating costs for the aerators. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council ' February 2, 1982 Page 4 Colligan/Lebens offered Ordinance No. 81, Fourth Series, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Chapter 12 of The City Code By Repealing Section 12.08 Entitled "Small Subdivisions - Lot Splits" and Adopting By Reference Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 and Sections 12.17 and 12.99, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the ordinance. The City Planner commented that the Planning Commission, after a great deal of deliberations, recommended approval of this policy unanimously. He also stated there were several builders and developers active in the discu.esions, and they also endorse this policy. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Lebens/Colligan offered Resolution No. 1977, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1921 Adopting the 1982 Budget, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Leroux/Lebens offered Resolution No. 1976, A Resolution of Appreciation to Richard. S. Hullander, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. read the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan offered Resolution No. 1978, A Resolution Accepting Work On the Kmart Landscaping and Irrigation Project, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes; Leroux, Colligan, Reinke Noes; Lebens Abstain: Wampach, Vierling Motion carried. Lebens/Vierling offered Resolution No. 1979, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling A Hearing On the Improvement Of Valley Industrial Boulevard South From County Road 83 To the East Line of Valley Park 2nd Addition, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the resolution. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Leroux/Lelens offered Resolution No. 1980, A Resolution Receiving a Report and Call- ing A Hearing On The Improvement Of Valley Industrial Boulevard South From County Road 83 To The East Line of Valley Park 2nd Addition, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the Resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Lebens/Vierling offered Ordinance No. 84, 4th Series, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending the City Code, Chapter 2 Entitled "Administration and General Government" by Changing the Time for Conducting Regular Council Meetings; and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2.99 which, Among Other Things, Contain Penalty Provisions, and move its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the ordinance. Roll Call: Ayes; Vierling, Reinke, Lebens, Wampach, Colligan Noes; Leroux Motion carried. Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 1975, A Resolution Supporting The Continued Location of the Minnesota Correctional Facility in Shakopee, and directed it be forwarded to the appropriate State Legislative committee(s), and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer initiated discussion on corner lot assessment policies, to inquire as to the consensus of Council for assessing the Valley Industrial Blvd. So. Improvement. Discussion followed. Consensus was to continue the current policy of 100 foot credit. Consensus of Council was that City staff could take further action on selection of programs for Deferred Compensation. Colligan/Lebens moved to direct the appropriate City official to execute the agree- ment with CertainTeed Corp. for furnishing electrical power to the sewage meter station. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Considerable discussion was held regarding Local Government Aid and the related proposals of Governor Quie and the Minn. Assoc. of Small Cities. Colligan/Vierling moved to support both proposals of Governor Quie and Minn. Assoc. of Small Cities with some qualifications: That Shakopee supports the Governor's proposal for LGA funding to the extent that it fulfills the Minn. League of Cities policy on the subject and support the Minn. Assoc. of Small Cities LGA formula changes, but changes the formulas weighing from 50% per capita and 50% AEMR to 75% per capita and 25% AEMR. Roll Call: Ayes; Wampach, Vierling, Colligan, Reinke Noes; Lebens, Leroux Motion carried. - Shakopee City Council February 2, 1982 Page 5 Leroux/Lebens offered Resolution No. 1974, A Resolution Appointing A Responsible Authority For the City of Shakopee To Comply With The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Lebens moved to direct the responsible authority to send a letter to the local state legislators encouraging them to support legislation simplifying the provisions of the Minn. Government Data Practices Act. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Leroux/Lebens moved that the bills in the total amount of $389,396.11 be allowed and ordered paid. Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize $312 to be paid to Probe Engineering for services rendered regarding Weindandt Acres. The City Engineer stated the bill was included in the assessment, but just hasn't been paid yet. Roll Call: Ayes; Leroux, Colligan, Reinke Noes; Wampach, Lebens Abstain: Vierling Motion carried. Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize the consent business as follows: 1. Authorize the City Attorney to take the necessary legal steps to reimburse the City for repairs to the Fire Dept. ladder truck that are the responsibility of LTI Service Corp. in the amount of $7,550.63. 2. Approve expenditures for a tour of cable facilities estimated at approximately $400, including transport and meals, to be charged to the cable operator selected for the Shakopee Cable franchise in the initial franchise fee. 3. Approve the transfer of $689.47 from the General Fund to the Utility Trust Fund. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion was held regarding bids for building maintenance contracts and their lack of specifics for comparison. Colligan/Wampach moved to table action on bids for building maintenance contracts to allow the Building Official to get more comparative bids from three companies in Shakopee. Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on various problems encountered by the City regarding snow plowing. Leroux/Lebens moved to direct staff to come before the Council with a proposal for a proper snow removal system. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Leroux requested an item be placed on a future agenda to discuss the City's policy requiring the 150% assessment payment in the Developer's Agreement. The City Admr. indicated it could possibly be scheduled for March. Lebens/Vierling moved to adjourn to February 9, 1982 at 7:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:15 P.M. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Diane S. Beuch Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Adj . Regular Session Shakopee , Minnesota February 9 , 1982 Mayor Reinke called the meeting (work session) to order at 7 : 34 P.M. with Cncl . Colligan, Leroux, Vierling and Wampach present . Cncl . Lebens was absent . Also present was John K. Anderson, City Adminis- trator. Council considered a memo from Larry Martin, former City Assessor , regarding Valley Fair ' s petition of their tax assessment and asked the City Admr. to obtain more information. Cnc . Colligan stated that he would like to reconsider Council ' s February 2 , 1982 action regarding department head evaluations . Colligan/Vierling moved to reconsider action on the department head evaluations . Motion carried unanimously . A lengthy discussion followed regarding whether or not it was necessary for Council to review the evaluations that will be done by the City Admr. Colligan/Wampach moved to amend Council ' s February 2 , 1982 action re- garding department head evaluations to keep the evaluations at the City Admr . level except when the City Admr . is seeking formal Council action. Roll Call : Ayes ; Colligan, Wampach, Vierling Noes ; Leroux, Reinke Motion carried Cncl . Leroux questioned whether a motion to amend was in order because it was contrary to the original intent of the motion being amended. He suggested that the City Attorney review the two motions to deter- mine if the amendment was proper. The City Admr. said he would follow-up on it . The City Administrator then provided additional information regarding the Valley Fair tax petition. Leroux/Wampach moved to authorize the hiring of Howard Shenshon and Associates to appraise the taxable value of Valley Fair at $5 ,600 for the report and preliminary meetings , $600 per day for court appearances and $75/hour for pre-trail meetings ( $50-$60/hour for other staff) . Motion carried unanimously. Council then discussed their 1982 goals and objectives , comments were noted to give direction for action to be taken for the various objectives and certain goals and objectives were modified or deleted as per con- sensus of Council . The revised goals and objectives list with action to be taken noted will be retyped and distributed to Council as a guide for 1982 activities of the City. Council then discussed the following miscellaneous items : 1 . The Shakopee Housing parking lot outlet on CR 17 and Mr. Link' s threat to close it . Council decided no action was necessary until legal action was started by one of the other parties . 2 . The County Mayor ' s and Administrator ' s Meeting on County issues . 3 . The upcoming National League of City' s Policy Conference. No one was free to attend the meeting so the Mayor was asked to obtain as much written information on the meeting as possible. The City Admr. then reviewed the two alternatives that City Hall staff had arrived at for relocation of City offices . He stated that staff consensus was to go with Plan Alternative No. 1 because it was the easiest to implement and made no permanent changes that would have to be redone if Plan Alternative No . 2 were pursued later. Council concurred that Plan Alternative No . 1 , relocating the building and finance departments , should be implemented. Leroux/Colligan moved to adjourn to Tuesday, February 16 , 1982 at 7 : 30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously . Meeting adjourned at 11 : 14 P.M. Judith S . Cox John K. Anderson City Clerk Recording Secretary RECE!VD 2)a- FEB 1 1382 February 10, 1982. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Mr. John Anderson. City Administrator. 129 East 1st. Shakopee, Minn. 55379. Dear Mr. Anderson; • I am the owner of property described as follows: The North fifty one (51) feet of Lots One (1) and Two (2), Block 30, City of Shakopee. This property is located on Holmes Street, across from the First National Bank Drive-In, and adjacent to the City Parking Lot. I am interested in having the City vacate the alley on the north side of my property. I was told by the City Engineer, that to do this, I would have to request you, as City Administrator, to start whatever action is needed. The building which is located on this property is in need of a new roof or repair of the old roof this spring. I have given considerable thought to the cost of doing this, and also to the cost of remodeling the building. Since the building is in the downtown area, I feel remodeling the building and placing a "front" on the north side would enhance the appearance of the building and the downtown area. I feel that any remodeling on the building or a new roof of any kind will depend upon if the alley is vacated or not (the building is less than 1 foot from the alley). I wish to point out, that from my conversation with the. City Engineer, the City owns the entire North half of the Block, and has some plans for a new city parking lot in the near future. Only 2 other property owners are serviced by this alley and both will still have access through the Eastern part of the alley and the city parking lot. If you have any questions about my request, or if this is not the proper way to ask for the vacation of the alley, please contact me. Sincerely, . 4440"-"1DAVID E. MOONEN. 236 Lewis Street. P.O. Box 300. Shakopee, Minn. 55379. (445-6246). c.c. Ad Hoc Downtown Committee. %Dan Steil. First National Bank. 129 South Holmes Street. Shakopee, Minn. 55379. R. KATHLEEN MORRIS ,S,. SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY COURT HOUSE 206 SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379 (612)-445-7750, Ext. 240 Assistants: s' Ell/Fp MIRIAM JEANNE WOLF � PAMELA McCABE PATRICIA M. BUSS KEVIN W. DALY :.,:. RICHARD S. VIRNIG February 9, 1982 Law Clerk: CITY OF SHAKOPEE R. GEHL TUCKER Mr. John Anderson Shakopee City Administrator 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Shakopee By-Pass Dear Mr. Anderson, It is my understanding after talking to Commissioner Mertz today that the City of Shakopee is going to reconsider its decision that it would not take part in the litigation involving the Shakopee By-Pass. As Commissioner Mertz indicated, the County would welcome the involvement of the City in supporting the right of the County to use the official map law for this project. I have been told that a letter is being sent to Scott County stating the City of Shakopee will take part in this litigation. I wish to thank you for your involvement and support. Two parties supporting a position are always stronger than one. Thank you. Sincerely yours, R. KATHLEEN MORRIS SCOTT COUNTY ATTORNEY / 1 --n Morris RKM:dmo cc: Commissioner Dick Mertz Mr. Julius Coller Mr. Rod Krass An Equal Opportunity Employer c DISTRICT OFFICES INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 720 505 SOUTH HOLMES MARCIA SPAGNOLO, Chairperson SCOTT COUNTY ROBERT MAYER, Ed.D. JAMES STILLMAN, Vice-Chairperson SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 Superintendent of Schools WARREN HALLGREN, D.D.S., Clerk TELEPHONE: 445-4884 JOHN GOIHL, Treasurer VIRGIL S. MEARS BECKY KELSO, Director Assistant Superintendent JOAN LYNCH, Director ROBERT MARTIN ROBERT MEADOWS, Director Business Manager RECE z+ E 2-9-82 Mr. John Anderson FEB 1 0 1982 Shakopee City Manager 129 . First Avenue CITY OF SHAKOPEE Shakopee , MN. 55379 Dear Mr . Anderson : This letter is a result of our telephone conversation on 2-9-82 concerning a walkway that would connect Eleventh Street to the Hauer Addition. It is my understanding that the easement exists and that there is fill in place . Perhaps some grading and black top treatment would be necessary to finalize this project . Recent budget cuts in school maintenance has severely depleted the money that I . S . D. #720 has with which to operate : Parallel cuts were also made in transportation funding. The Purpose of this letter , then, is to request that the City complete the walkway identified above prior to the start of the fall school term in 1982 . It follows that there would also be a need to have that walkway plowed much as are sidewalks during the winter weather. The completion of this walkway would enhance the public school ' s ability to get children to school while effecting some economics for the district . If there is a need for further information concerning this request please contact me . Thank you for your help in this matter . Sincerely, ) " r. leo Vigil S . Mears cc : Dr . Robert Mayer Mr . Robert Martin AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Dedication of the Roadway East of Viking Steel as a Public Highway DATE: February 12 , 1982 Introduction City Council , at its December 15 , 1982 meeting, considered the above subject as it related to providing access to the Dressen Oil property which the City sold to Dressen Oil . Council tabled the item and directed staff to explore a more complete solution since the simple dedication of the north/south roadway East of Viking Steel still left the Dressen property without access to public right-of-way. Complicating the issue is the fact that the Shakopee Public Utili- ties Commission ( SPUC) has a north/south power line adjacent to the north/south roadway on Viking Steel property. Ray Peterson of Viking Steel would like to see both problems resolved if a solution is going to be pursued. Alternatives Explored 1 . Maintain the status quo. Pros : This alternative does not require the taking of any property from Viking Steel , it fits SPUC' s preference ( SPUC does not own the right-of-way (R-O-W) over which its power lines run) which is to maintain the status quo until a future date when plans for the development of the area are more concrete , there is no current threat by Viking Steel to deny Dressen Oil access to their property , and the City could wait to acquire the appro- priate road R-O-W when the area is platted for develop- ment . Cons : This alternative leaves Dressen Oil ' s problem of proper access to public R-O-W unresolved, and the problem of roadway and utility lines on private property unresolved. 2 . Dedicate the 24 ' wide roadway East of Viking Steel as a public highway and ask Dressen Oil to acquire the land between their property and the roadway from Viking Steel . (The City could acquire it as well ) . Pros : This alternative enlarges Dressen Oil ' s property and provides them access to public R-O-W of the size that they apparently need for convenient loading and unload- ing of trucks ( see map) , it does not require that the City purchase any R-O-W, Mr. Peterson of Viking Steel would consider such a sale and it allows SPUC to main- tain the status quo. Cons : The alternative requires Dressen Oil to finance a per- manent solution to its access problem and requires that Mayor and City Council �f February 12 , 1982 Page Two the City take property from Viking Steel for the road- way. It does not solve the problem of the SPUC power line on Viking Steel ' s property. 3 . Dedicate the 24' wide roadway East of Viking Steel as a public highway and have the City purchase a narrow 24 '-30' wide strip of land from Viking Steel for Dressen between Dressen Oil and the roadway to create a "flag lot" that would front on public R-O-W. Pros : This alternative is the same as Alternative #2 above and recognizes the fact that the City sold a land locked piece of property and issued building permits for it . Cons : This alternative would require more expenses for the City, would require the taking of Viking Steel property, would not solve the SPUC power line on Viking Steel property, and would provide minimal access for Dressen Oil ' s vehicles . 4. Have the City attempt to obtain a private agreement with the railroad to provide access to Dressen Oil over their R-O-W ( see the map) . Pros : This alternative would probably cost very little and would be much like alternative #1 . :i Cons : This alternative has the same drawbacks for Dressen Oil as alternative #1 . 5 . Have the City trade future park dedication from land owned by Viking Steel for the property between Dressen Oil and the roadway. Pros : This alternative would resolve the matter to Dressen Oil ' s satisfaction with or without the dedication of the roadway as public highway and would have the other benefits of Alternative #1 . This alternative was suggested by Mr. Peterson. Cons : The City would be purchasing the land in question with future park dedication fees or land even though it is called a "trade" and requires no cash outlay by the City. Summary and Recommendation Earl Dressen, Dressen Oil , believes he purchased the property in question ( i .e . the property between that which he currently owns and the north/south roadway) in good faith. It was checked by lawyers who apparently only commented on the title and never looked at the access question. Without the access his belief is that the City could not have sold the parcel for the price it obtained. Mayor and City Council February 12 , 1982 Page Three Ray Peterson, Viking Steel , would like to see the total problem addressed and resolved permanently. Finally, it is probably in the City' s and SPUC' s best interest to maintain the status .quo until development pressure requires platting at which time the City and SPUC could probably obtain the needed R-O-W without buying it . This might or might not solve the pro- blem of Dressen Oil ' s land locked parcel . The City cannot issue a building permit for land lock property that does not front on public R-O-W, under our present subdivision ordinance . Therefore , the Dressen Oil property is probably worth less than when it was purchased. The question for City Council is simply, does the City have an obligation to help resolve the problem? If so, which alternative is the most appropriate? It must be remembered that the City cannot condemn the property because it will not be for a public use so this limits our alternatives . If Council decides that the City does have an obligation to help resolve the problem, then I recommend alternative #3 or #5 . Action Requested Direct staff to pursue alternative #3 or #5 . JKA/jms li ��y`` r ;',..4:,,I. ,.# v • u#¢ ?tu a>�t�k ,, „ .- �tr e 8 i.,4" ! ,, .-" nr ? '�r ` 4_ y r tom. " sn_.Mrx M y �, k n .4 Tt + r .. .%-!1‘,,.''''t'ar7f..;:r.i-1:•:;,t ** - ''' , 01 • pp� ; gt s Y r , z t.., rr r a „ i ''i ; ; ‘r ,, P; ' sr„ ,," ... s i t�r ; • oe. : , --. .... ,, . ,:....„::::: _- ..-1:::::-:-",'--,,,'„•,, r+' Lir � � t ,. ..... T..... • iir) ,'„ a 1 ..', -..k. , (1,,...i,)'.....,,!, i — r •' „,..t.to I - - - - 't. 'V irti cir,•,' +s .ww idG mr_ , I . " • i 't , r ;. . 4 x ilmil:. 1.1,, 1,` , ' ii., �. _ ipp a G j`{� ill'. , t f &' EYP__ r: +4ir ra y -'I rT _ t S +tit b , e" `4Ex -' d .�• d ' 4, a. �.L R ka -' yl`s z4y 4 ''',4",* l':i-, t'tt'.44** ,' '''''''4.: ,- ' , -.,,, ': - ,,', ,:0 ,...,s,‘,...,, „,,, - -, ' , J ,. a '. �� t r 4'. r , ,g,"'-, 41/� , 3 , ,/ ,- r .`-t. moi?" `4 ID MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Remaining 18 Units at Shakopee Village Townhouses DATE: February 2 , 1982 Introduction City Council , at its January 19 , 1982 meeting, received a verbal request from Jerry Julkowski regarding his building permit( s ) for the above mentioned 18 units . Council directed staff to meet with Mr. Julkowski and report back to Council . Request Staff met with Mr. Julkowski January 25 , 1982 to review in full his two requests : ( 1 ) to grandfather in his sewer and water con- nections so they would match the earlier installations , and ( 2 ) to obtain the maximum 407 credit on his park dedication fee because they are providing playgrounds in the project ( letter attached) . Problems Mr. Julkowski ' s first request is to "grandfather in" the sewer and water hook-ups stems from recent City policy changes requiring single family homes , whether attached or detached, to have indivi- dual sewer and water service to the City' s R-O-W. We have followed this policy with all duplexes and discussed the policy with Mr. Chard when he changed his concept for Eastview and proposed twin homes after he had stubbed-off individual water and sewer hook-up for each lot after the street improvements had been made . (Memo discussing the issue attached. ) In this case the plat was approved prior to our present policy with three stubs made for each of the three six unit structures with the building plans calling for a common sewer and water line under each structure. The six individual water and sewer lines are to tie into the common utilities which are in turn the responsibility of the homeowners association. Alternatives for Problem #1 1 . Approve the plan as originally proposed with common utility lines under the structure that are the responsibility of the association. 2 . Approve the plan with common utility lines adjacent to the struc- ture under property owned by the association and with individual service lines to each unit . 3 . Require individual service lines to the street R-O-W. Mr. Julkowski ' s second request is to be given the maximum Planned Unit Development credit for park dedication. By checking the build- b Mayor and City Council Page Two February 2 , 1982 ing permits for previous units staff was able to establish that the park dedication fees were not ( 1 ) prepaid and ( 2 ) that they increased with the rate charged at the time the building permit was issued. On July 14 , 1971 the charge was $10/unit or $60 per building, on November 9 , 1973 the charge was $25/unit or $150 per building, and for a permit taken out today the charge is $250/unit or $1500 per building. Council may, under the new Subdivision Ordinance, grant up to a 40% credit on the $1500 for parks and playgrounds included in the project by the developer. In this case the developer has already put in place some playground equip- ment and more is planned with the remaining 18 units . The City has no experience with the administration of this policy because this is the first request under the new Subdivision Ordinance . Alternatives for Problem #2 1 . Charge the full $250/unit . 2 . Grant a 407 credit . 3 . Grant something less than a 40% credit based upon some judg- ment about the need for park facilities and the ability of the facilities proposed by the developer to meet that need. Recommendation Staff recommends alternative #2 for problem #1 even though it is more expensive for the developer because of the problems of owner- ship and maintenance caused by alternative #1 which was the previous method of construction. Staff recommends alternative #3 for problem #2 and that the credit be 207 rather than 40%. This is a subjective judgment meaning that the private park amenities in this particular PUD are only one half of what we would expect were the City to give the 40% credit . JKA/jms MENDOTA HEIGHTS 11 2086 Patricia Street St. Paul, MN 55120 PROPERTU 454.8635 590PPoint OODouglas Rd. i AVE ST E nT CEnTER St. Paul, MN 55119 224-8444 REAL ESTATE • CONDOMINIUMS • TOWNHOMES • LAND DEVELOPERS Jan 28, 1982 RECEIVED City Council F 119$2 City of Shakopee Gentlemen : CITY OF SHAKOPEE Regarding the remaining 18 units of 77 at Shakopee Village Townhouses , we respectfully make the following requests : 1 - That we be "Grandfathered in" on the sewer and water connections in the remaining three blocks , namely 11, 12 and 13, so these can be done in the same way as block 14, which was built in 1977 . These sewer and water connections were installed in 1972, and we would like to use them as they were installed at that time . 2 - We also ask for the maximum 40% credit on the park dedication fee allowed for P/ U/ D/ in lieu of the regular fee for single family detached housing . We ask this since over half of the twenty acres have already been designated as common areas , and have been developed into playground and picnic areas for all 77 homeowners to enjoy. Thank you for your attention to these requests . Sincerely, 9te4/47Q116-z' `Jerry Julkowski President Property Investment Center • , . tosratir 004 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT * AREA OFFICE ilni6400 FRANCE AVENUE SOUTH ''o,a430 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435 APR 1 7 1978 REGION V 300 South Wacker Drive m iCrliknotZliin 6%916. 5 5)4 3 5 N REPLY REFER TO: FTSV:DO Mr. Gerald T. Julkowski Property Investment Center. Inc. 210 Pioneer Building St Paul, Minnesota 55101 Dear Mr. Julkowski: Subject: Subdivision No. 2969 Patricia's 1st Addition (Blks 11-14) Shakopee, Minnesota We have reexamined our position relating to utlity lines serving units in Blocks 11-14 of the above development. We have determined that we will issue commitments on these twenty-four units although they do not Culy comply with our requirements pertaining to installation of utilities. A number of the existing units built by the previous developer have received the benefits of FHA mortgage insurance. Completion of the remaining units will strengthen the Homeowner AssociatiOn, and this concern prompted the above decision. Please understand that this should not be construed as a general change of our policy or requirements as they may relate to other developments. Also please understand that this decision pertains only to FHA mortgage insurance. It will be necessary for you to contact the Veterans Administration for their decision in this regard. SinciFely ',/ , c. /..7)--Thomas T. Feeney // . Area Director cc: Veterans Administration MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Surface Water Management Legislation DATE : February 10 , 1982 Introduction City Council , at its February 2 , 1982 meeting, directed staff to draft some language that would "protect" the work the City has done on Surface Water Management (Drainage ) and has incorporated in its Metro Council approved Comprehensive Plan. Purpose of the Amendment The proposed language is designed to do the following: 1 . Protect the work already completed and approved by Met Council and the City as part of our Comprehensive Plan. 2 . Protect the City from future development , rural to urban, in other jurisdictions that would impact the City. 3 . Make it acceptable to have only a first stage study until urban development requires a more comprehensive (expensive ) second stage study. 4. Allow for the flexibility in the proposed law that permits joint powers agreements when second stage plans become necessary. Proposed Language The proposed language is an amendment to Section 10 Subdivision 3 , p. 7 of H.F. 1505 . . . .The plan, or the first stage thereof, shall be prepared and submitted for review under Subdivision 5 by December 31 , 1982 . Existing plans that have received Metropolitan Council approval as an element of a local unit ' s Comprehensive Plan for [of] a watershed management organization shall qualify as the first stage of a watershed management organization plan. [remain in force and effect until amended or superseded by plans adopted under Sections 7 to 14 ] . Said first stage plan shall remain in force and effect until amended or superseded by a second stage plan that is required as a result of�a change in land use from rural to urban development . . . . Alternatives 1 . Do not pass the approved amendment and continue to take the position that we are against any type of bill mandating Surface Water Management . 2 . Pass the proposed amendment as an alternative to the present language and safeguard should H. F. 1505 pass . Mayor and City Council Page Two February 10 , 1982 3 . Pass the proposed amendment with further changes in language . Recommendation Staff recommends alternative No. 2 for the reasons given. Action Requested Approve the proposed amendment to H.F. 1505 and its companion Senate file and direct staff to send the language to the appropriate legislative committees and our representatives . JKA/jms MEMO TO : John K., Anderson City. Administrator `- ------ FROM : H. R . Spurrier City Engineer RE : Ordinance Amending Chapter 6, Shakopee City Code Pertaining to Scavengers DATE : February 12, 1982 Introduction : Pursuant to direction of City Council February 2, 1982, an ordinance amending Chapter 6, Section 6. 43, Shakopee City Code has been prepared. Background: The proposed ordinance makes it a petty misdemeanor for any scavenger to discharge the contents of their vehicle into City of Shakopee Sanitary Sewer System. Action Requested : Adopt Ordinance No. 88, An Ordinance Amending Section 6 , 43 of Shakopee City Code Entitled, "Scavengers". (This will be on the table for you Tuesday evening) . HRS/jiw i CP ORDINANCE NO. 88 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 6 ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS REGULATIONS AND LICENSING" BY REPEALING SUBD.1 OF SEC. 6.43 ENTITLED "SCAVENGER DEFINED" AND IN LIEU THEREOF ADOPTING A NEW SUBD. 1 OF SEC. 6.43 ENTITLED "SCAVENGER DEFINED": BY ADDING AN ADDITIONAL PROHIBITION TO A OF SUBD. 2 OF SEC. 6.43; BY REPEALING E_TO SUBD. 2 OF SEC. 6.43 AND IN LIEU THEREOF PROVIDING FOR DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION HEREOF: AND BY ADOPTING BE REFERENCE THE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAINS PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: SECTION_I:�_ReQeal_ Subd. 1 of Section 6.43 and Subd. 2E of Sec. 6.43 are hereby repealed. SECTION II: Amendments to Sec. 6.43 A new Subd. 1 of Sec. 6.43 should be inserted as follows: "The term "Scavenger" means a person, partnership or corporation in the business of removing the contents or part of the contents of any privy, sink, satellite, vault, septic tank, grease and sand trap, cesspool or other similar facility." By adding the following to A of Subd 2 of Sec. 6.43: "No discharge of any of the materials or substances listed in Subd. 1 of Sec. 6.43 shall be made into the Shakopee City sewer system directly or indirectly at any time." By inserting the following new Subd. 2E to Sec. 6.43: "E. Any person, partnership or corporation violating any of the provisions hereof shall pay for any damages to the City sewer system as a result of the discharge of any of the materials above enumerated and for any of the maintenance cost in removing or flushing those materials out of the pipe and sewer sytem." SECTION III: Adopted by Reference General provsiions and definitions applicable to the entire City Code including the penalty provisions of Chapter 1 are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION IV: When in Force After the adoption, signing and attestation of this ordinance, it 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 following such publication. A Adopted in _ __ ^ session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee Minnesota held this day of _ __ 1982. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 12th day of February, 1982. / City/•ttorney __ 6-C/I ORDINANCE NO. g9 • Fourth Series AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 3, ENTTTLED " MUNICIPAL AND PUBLIC UTILITES - RULES AND REGULATIONS, FRANCHISES AND RATES"BY ADDING THERETO A NEW SECTION, 3.11 ADOPTING BY REFERENCE SEWAGE AND WASTE CONTROL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE METROPOLITAN DISPOSAL SYSTEM AS ADOPTED BY THE METROPOLITAN SEWER BOARD AND DATED DECEMBER 1, 1971 AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 1. THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I: Sewage and Waste Control Rules and Regulations for the Metropolitan_ Sewer Board Adopted Sewage and Waste Control Rules and Regulations for the Metropolitan Disposal System as adopted December 1, 1971, by the Metropolitan Sewer Board pursuant to statutory authority are hereby adopted by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION II_ Provisions of CitL Code Adopted The Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions applicable to the entire City Code including penalty provisions" is hereby adopted insofar as the same do not conflict with therules and regulations adopted by the Metropolitan Sewer Board. 4 SECTION III: When in Force This Ordinance shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and it 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 -- -- , 1982. ------ Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 18t ay of January, 1982. azu J ORDINANCE NO. 85_ NEW SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE BY REPEALING SECTION 6.24 THEREOF AND ENACTING A NEW SECTION 6.24 GOVERNING FAIRS, CARNIVALS, CIRCUSES, SHOWS AND SIMILAR ENTERPRISES. The City Council of the City of Shakopee does ordain as follows: SECTION I : REPEAL Section 6.24 of the City Code, as amended by Ordinances 2.0 and 55, is hereby repealed. SECTION II: A NEW SECTION 6.24 OF THE CITY CODE IS HEREBY ENACTED AS FOLLOWS: SUBD. 1 : Definitions A. Fair - A festival where there is entertainment and things are exhibited and sold. B . Carnival - Circus - A traveling commercial entertainment with sideshows, rides and games. C . Show - A presentation of entertainment, theatricals, concerts , displays and exhibitions. D. Amusement Devises - Any equipment or piece of equipment, appliance or combination thereof designed or intended to entertain or amuse the public at an event covered by this Section. E. Amusement Ride - Any mechanized device or combination of devices which carry passengers along the gound or over a fixed or restricted course for the purpose of giving its passengers amusement, pleasure, thrills or excitement at an event covered by this Section. F. Building Official - A principal building official of the City of Shakopee who is duly certified by the State of Minnesota. G. Booth - Any structure or enclosure located at an event covered by this Section from which amusement and/or services, souvenirs, food or other commerce items are offered to the public or displayed. H. Related Electrical Equipment - Any electrical apparatus or wiring combination thereof used at an event covered by this Section. I . Operator - A corporation, person, association of persons, or the agent of the same who either owns or controls or has the duty to control the operation of amusement device or ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment at all events covered by this Ordinance, including an agency of the State or any of its political subdivisions. SUBD. 2: General License Required A. It is unlawful for any person to present or operate within the City of Shakopee an event covered by this Section without first having obtained a license therefor from the City and paying a fee therefor as set from time to time by the City Council by Resolution. B. Condition of License - No license shall be issued until the proper application has been completed, the fee or fees paid, and, where applicable, insurance provided. A copy of all insurance policies or certificates must be deposited with the City and must contain a provision that the City will be notified in writing at least ten (10) days in advance of any cancellation or change in such coverage. SUBD. 3: Electrical Permit Required A. No amusement device or ride, concession booth or any related electrical equipment shall be operated at any event covered hereby in the City without an electric permit having been issued in addition to the general license, permitting the operation of such device or equipment. B . Application - Prior to the operation of any device covered by this Subdivision, the person required to obtain a permit shall apply to the City for a permit on a form furnished by the City, which form shall contain such information as the City may require. SUBD. 4: Inspection Required For the purpose of determining if an amusement ride, device, concession booth or any related electrical equipment covered by this Section is in safe operating condition and will provide protection to the public using the same, said equipment and ride shall be inspected by the City before it is initially placed in operation. If, after inspection, an amusement device or ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment is found to comply with the rules adopted hereby, the City shall upon payment of the fee (plus an inspection fee) permit the operation of the device. Additions or alterations that would change the structure, mechanism, classification or capacity of said amusement ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment, shall not be permitted unless approved in writing by the City. SUBD. 5: Rules A. The City may adopt and issue rules for the safe installation, repair, maintenance, use, operation and inspection of amusement devices, amusement rides, concession booths and related electrical equipment at all enterprises covered hereby. Rules shall be adopted by Resolution and shall be based upon generally accepted engineering standards and shall be concerned with, but not necessarily limited to, engineering force stresses, safety devices and preventive maintenance.. ' Whenever such standards from manufacturers are available in suitable form, they may be incorporated by reference. The rules shall provide for the reporting of accidents and injuries incurred from or as the result of the operation of amusement devices or rides, concession booth or related elctrical equipment. These rules may be modified or repealed at any time by Resolution. SUBD. 6: Cessation Order The Building Official may order in writing a temporary cessation or operation of any amusement device or ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment covered herein if it has been determined after inspection to be hazardous or unsafe. The operation of such amusement device, ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment shall not be resumed until the unsafe or hazardous conditions have been corrected to the satisfaction of the City and the cessation order lifted by written order. SUBD. 7: Insurance A. General No person, form or corporation shall be issued a license hereunder unless he first obtains an insurance policy in an amount not less than $300,000 for bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident, and, subject to the limit for one person, in the amount of not less than $500,000 for bodily injury or death of two or more persons in any one accident; and in an amount of not less than $5,000 for injury to or destruction of property of others in any one accident, insuring the operator against liability for injury or death suffered by a person attending the fair, carnival or amusement park . B. Products Liability Insurance - The applicant shall provide products liability insurance in the amounts provided in Subdivision 7(A) above if any food or drink is served upon the premises. C. All policies or insurance certificates required hereunder and hereby must be deposited with the City of Shakopee and each such policy or certificate shall contain a provision that the City will be notified in writing at least ten (10) days in advance of any cancellation or change in the coverage of the insured. SUBD. 8: Exemption The following amusement devices, rides or concession booth are exempt f om the provisions of this Section: A. Permanent amusement parks, permanent theme parks, or ski lifts. B. Non-mechanized playgound equipment including, but not limited to, swings, seesaws, stationary spring-mounted animal features, rider-propelled merry-go-rounds, climbers, slides, trampolines, swinging gates and physical fitness devices except where an admission fee is charged for usage or an admission fee is charged to areas where such equipment is located. C. A concession booth, amusement device or ride which is owned and operated by a non-profit, religious, educational or charitable institution o: association, if such booth, device or ride is located within a building subject to inspection by the State Eire Marshal or by any political subdivision of the State under its building, fire, electrical and related public safety ordinances. D. The City may exempt amusement devices from the provisions of this Section that have self-contained wiring installed by the manufacturer, that are operated manually by the use of hands or feet, that operate on less than 120 volts of electrical power, and that are fixtures within or a part of a structure subject to the building code of this State or any political subdivision of this State. E. The City may exempt playground equipment owned, maintained and operated by any political subdivision of the State. SUBD. 9: Waiver of Inspection The City may waive the requirement that an amusement device, ride or any part thereof, be inspected before being operated in the City, if any operator gives satisfactory proof to the City that the amusement device, ride, or any part thereof has passed an inspection conducted by a public or private agency whose inspection standards and requirements are at least equal to those requirements and standards established by the City under the provisions hereof, but the license fee shall be paid before the City may waive this requirement. SUBD. 10: Penalties A. Any person who operates an amusement device, ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment at any enterprise covered hereby without first having obtained a permit from the City, or who violates any provision hereof, �� is guilty of a misdemeanor. B. Each day that a person violates any of the provisions hereof shall constitute a separate offense hereunder. C. Any person who• interferes with, impedes or obstructs in any manner the City or any authorized representative of the inspection department in the performance of his duties under this Section is guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person who bribes or attempts to bribe the inspector or his designee shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. SECTION III: WHEN IN FORCE This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakpee held this day of 1982. Eldon Reinke, Mayor ATTEST: John Anderson, City Administrator Prepared and approved as to form this 29th day of January, 1982 Phillip R. Krass Assistant City Attorney / ( ) ORDINANCE NO. 86 NEW SERIES AN ORDINANCE ADDING A NEW SECTION 6.26 TO THE CITY CODE PROVIDING FOR THE REGULATION, LICENSING AND INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CERTAIN SKI LIFTS, AMUSEMENT RIDES, AND AMUSEMENT ATTRACTIONS BEFORE THEIR OPERATION WITHIN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA, AND PRESCRIBING PENALTIES FOR NON-COMPLIANCE HEREOF The City Council of the City of Shakopee does ordain as follows: SECTION I: A NEW SECTION 6.26 OF THE CITY CODE IS HEREBY ENACTED AS FOLLOWS: SUBD. 1 : Definitions A. Amusement Attraction - Any building or structure around, over or through which people may move, walk, slide, or ride without the aid of any moving device integral to the building or structure, whose principal purpose is to provide amusement, pleasure, thrills or excitement. B. Amusement Ride - Any mechanized device or combination of devices which carries passengers along, round or over a fixed or restricted course for the purpose of giving its passengers amusement. C. Amusement Park - A tract, structure, area and equipment, including electrical equipment, used principally as a location for supporting amusement rides, amusement devices and concession booths. D. Building Official - A principal inspector responsible to the City of Shakopee. E. Concession Booth - A structure or enclosure located at a fair or carnival or amusement park from which amusement and/or services, souvenirs, food or other commerce items are offered to the public. F. City - The City of Shakopee or its designee. G. Inspection Engineer - A Minnesota registered engineer or engineers retained by the operator for purposes of conducting such certifications as are required herein. H. Major Alteration - A change in the type or capacity of an amusement ride or device or a change in the structure or mechanism that materially affects its function or operation. This includes but is not limited to changing its mode of transportation from non-wheeled to a truck or flat-bed mount, and changing its mode of assembly or other operational functions from manual to mechanical or hydraulic. I. Where local regulations are more restrictive than codes, the more restrictive shall apply. J. Major Breakdown - A stoppage of operation from whatever cause 6 resulting in damage, failure or breakage of a stress bearing part of a ride or device. K. Operator - A person, who owns or controls or has the duty to control, the operation of a facility covered by this Section. L. Rated Capacity - A capacity established by the design engineer for the normal loading and operation or a ride or device, or in absence thereof, as established by the inspecting engineer after inspection and determination. M. Ride Operator - A person or persons causing a ride or amusement device to go and stop or perform its entertaining function. N. Ski Lift - Any mechanical device or combination of devices which carries passengers over a fixed course for the purpose of transporting the passengers to or from a place where some skiing may commence. SUBD. 3: License Required No person shall operate a ski lift, ride, amusement device or concession booth at any facility covered by this Section in this City which is not licensed. A. Application. On or before the first of January of each year, any person required to obtain a license by this Section shall apply to the City for a license on a form furnished by the City which form shall contain such information as the City may require. The City may waive the requirement that an application for a license must be filed on or before the first of January of each year if the applicant gives satisfactory proof to the City that he could not reasonably comply with the date requirement and if the applicant promptly applied for a permit after the need for a permit is first determined. B. Issuance of License. Licenses shall not be issued until a valid certificate of occupancy has been issued for each amusement attraction, amusement ride, or concession booth located on the premises licensed under this Section, and all such licenses shall be in addition to any permit fees, or State or local code requirements or local inspections otherwise required by law. 1 . New construction of amusement rides manufactured in the United States. The certificate of occupancy for amusement rides manufactured in the United States and constructed on the facility licensed under the terms of this Section shall be pursuant to an application on a form provided by the City which will be accompanied by signed prints (each sheet) by a Minnesota registered engineer or architect for all aspects of said ride which are not fabricated or supplied by the manufactuer. The application for said certificate of occupancy will include a certification by said inspecting engineer that the plans detailed for the ride in question have been drawn and/or reviewed by said engineer or architect and to the best of the belief and knowledge of said engineer or architect are in conformance with all existing applicable state and local codes governing said ride. The City may authorize the construction of said ride to be in stages as said applicable prints and certifications shall be submitted. Upon the completion of the construction of said ride and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for said ride, an inspecting engineer shall provide written certification of code compliance for such rides stating that the construction and direction of said ride are in compliance with the print specifications as submitted to the City and in compliance with all applicable state and local codes. In the event a reciprocal agreement does not exist between the State of Minnesota and the state which the manufacturer's engineer is registered, the operator shall supply plans signed by the manufacturer's engineer and a certificate from the manufacturer' s engineer stating that the ride has been installed according to design and in conformance to this paragraph prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The certification will specify the maximum loading capacity of the ride in terms of both people and weight. 2. New construction of non-United States manufactured rides. The certificate of occupancy for amusement rides /manufactured in the United States and constructed on the facility licensed under the terms of this Section shall be pursuant to an application on a form provided by the City which will be accompanied by signed prints (each sheet) by a Minnesota registered engineer or architect for all aspects of said ride which are not fabricated or supplied by the manufactuer. The City may authorize the construction of said ride to be in stages as said applicable prints and certifications shall be submitted. Upon installation of the ride and prior to issuance an occupancy permit, the operator shall provide to the City a statement signed by a registered Minnesota engineer or architect and/or the ride manufacturer' s engineer stating that the ride has been installed in accordance with the manufacturer's design and intent. The certification will specify the maximum loading capacity of the ride in terms of both people and weight. S ot" and agents, against liability for any injury or death of any nature occurring - on said premises. E. The operator shall agree in writing to indemnify and hold harmless the City, and the City' s elected and appointed officials/employees and agents against all claims, causes of action, litigation or expenses of any kind relating in any manner to the operation of any facility covered under this Section. F. Expiration. All licenses issued under this Ordinance shall expire on December 31st of the year issued. G. No license shall be issued until a certificate of occupancy has been issued for all facilities covered by this Section to be operated this license year. Prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy, the City Building Official will conduct an inspection of the buildings for safety, and compliance with electrical , mechanical , plumbing, building and fire codes. H. Revocation - Suspension. Licenses may be revoked, suspended, or summarily suspended in accordance with Minnesota law for violation of this Section. SUBD. 3. Cessation Order The Building Official may order in writing a temporary cessation or operation of any amusement device or ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment covered herein if it has been determined after inspection to be hazardous or unsafe. The operation of such amusement device, ride, concession booth or related electrical equipment shall not be resumed until the unsafe or hazardous conditions have been corrected to the satisfaction of the City and the cessation order lifted by written order. SUBD. 5. Penalties A. Any operator or ride operator who operates an amusemeJt ride, ski lift, or concession booth or related electrical equipment at any facility covered in this Section without first having obtained a license from the City, or who violates any provision hereof is guilty of a misdemeanor. B. Each day that a person violates any of the provisions hereof shall constitute a separate offense hereunder. C. Any person who interferes with, impedes or '`fie-ts in any manner the City or any authorized representative of the City in the performance of their duties under this Section is guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person who bribes or attempts to bribe the Building Official or his designee shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. / 3. Construction of used rides. r The certificate of occupancy for amusement rides manufactured in the United States and constructed on the facility licensed under the terms of this Section shall be pursuant to an application on a form provided by the City which will be accompanied by signed prints (each sheet) by a Minnesota registered engineer or architect for all aspects of said ride which are not fabricated or supplied by the manufactuer. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the operator shall provide to the City a certification by A registered Minnesota engineer or architect/that the ride hasrbeen installed in accordance with the manufacturer's design and intent and in conformance with all State and local codes governing the same. The operator shall also provide a statement certifying that all primary component parts of the ride have been tested and passed said testing. The operator will further provide documentation as to the maximum loading capacity for said ride and if such documentation is unavailable, the operator shall perform necessary stress analysis in order to specify and define the maximum loading capacity of said ride in terms of people and weight. The certification will specify the maximum loading capacity of the ride in terms of both people and weight. 4. Alterations and Reconstruction. A certificate of occupancy shall be required prior to the operation of any rides which have undergone major alteration or reconstruction after major breakdown, which certificate of occupancy shall not ssue�ntil the operator provides the City with a certification by a Minnesota registered engineer or architect or manufacturer' s engineer that said alteration or reconstruction is in accordance with the manufacturer's design and intent and in accordance with all applicable State and local codes. 5. The requirements of this paragraph B do not preempt the City's right of entry or the obligations imposed under the electrical , plumbing, mechanical , building code or fire code requirements, or the obligations to pay all applicable permit fees. C. Fees. Application and license fees shall be established by Resolution of the City Council . D. Insurance. No operator shall be issued a license under this Section unless he first obtains an insurance policy in an amount to be established by the City Council , but not less than $1 ,000,000 combined single limit insuring the operator, the City, the City' s elected and appointed officials, employees SECTION II: WHEN IN FORCE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee held this day of , 1982. Eldon Reinke, Mayor -� ATTEST: John Anderson, City Administrator Prepared and approved as to form this 29th day of January, 1982 Phillip R. Krass Assistant City Attorney >CL.J MEMO TO : John K. Anderson City Administrator FROM: Don Steger City Planner RE: Street Standards for One-way Streets DATE: February 9 , 1982 At the February 4 , 1982 meeting, the Planning Commission approved and referred to the City Council, street standards for one-way streets . In order to consider using one-way streets within the City or within a specific development , standards for such streets must be included in the Subdivision Regulations . The staff report to the Planning Commission is attached. Requested Action: Request the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance which would amend Section 12 . 07 of the Subdivision Regulations by adding the following one-way street standards : One-way Streets : Pavement Width Right-of-way Local 24 feet 45 feet Collector 24 feet 55 feet Arterial 24 feet 60 feet DS/j iw Attachments Adid o MEMO TO: Planning Commission FROM : Don Steger RE : Street Standards for One-Way Streets DATE: January 29 , 1982 It was noticed that design standards for one-way streets are not included in the Subdivision Ordinance . The following memo from the City Engineer indicates the recommended standards for local , collector and arterial one-way streets . Requested Action Adopt and refer to the City Council the following standards for one-way streets : One-Way Streets : pavement width right-of-way Local 24 feet 45 feet Collector 24 feet 55 feet Arterial 24 feet 60 feet DS/jms Qe— MEMO TO : Don Steger City Planner _ FROM : H . R. Spurrier � ____- City Engineer C- � RE : Standard Specifications fo�T'Construction and Reconstruction of Roadways DATE : January 29, 1982 Introduction : City staff has been asked to investigate the feasibility of creating a standard for one-way streets. At the present time, one-way streets are not incorpor- ated in the City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications. Background : Geometrically, the one-way street consumes significantly less right-of-way than two-way streets for obvious reasons. One-way streets seem appropriate in multi-family areas, in PUD's, along Parkways and in Industrial areas. Structurally, the pavement section would be controlled by both zoning and functional class of roadway and the structure specified in the present standard would control for the one-way street. The geometrics of one-.way streets would be controlled by functional class. Whether a one-way street is permitted and whether there are special setbacks requirements that should apply in multi-family areas, in PUD's, along Parkways or in Industrial areas, are matters of policy that should be established by the Planning Commission and City Council. Typical sections of one-way streets proposed herein are attached. HRS/jiw Attachment - LOCAL , 7: .-\\/,// 2KI NG Ql�pI o oA� .- 21I ---- I -______ } C.OLLSC O Z , ; IO ‘, Zt I AZTE RA AL City of Shakopee 9 ,„„,` ti /r•5 H A K O p e F • POLICE DEPARTMENT rit1:611 .. TINE 5pT31,)j )" a \`�� 'ii , 476 South Gorman Street ,'ftp 0 - SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 ,k1(01' Tel.Tel. 445.6666 ;ta t v" 5 5 3 7 9 TO: Mayor , Council Members FROM: Tom Brownell SUBJECT: Alert Portable Breath Testing Unit DATE: February 8 , 1982 BACKGROUND The Minnesota Department of Public Safety, having obtained federal funding, has made available to local law enforcement agencies a portable breath testing unit. The unit is used by the officer on patrol as a preliminary breath test to determine if an individual is under the influence . Should an individual fail the test, addi- tional tests are offered including the breathalyzer at the nearest department having the equipment. The advantages of the unit are the identification of drivers who through probable cause are under the influence. Persons passing the test are not tested further at a department which requires a minimum of one hour of the officer ' s time . The unit is on loan to the department. Cost to the department will be for supplies to operate the unit. ACTION REQUESTED Pass resolution. go SSETVE Jo �ZOEECE b AGREEMENT: USE OF ALERT J3A PORTABLE BREATH TEST UNITS THIS AGREEMENT, MADE ANp ENTERED INTO this 2 day of February ,19 p2 , BY AND BETWEEN the State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety, (hereinafter referred to as "DPS") , and Shakopee Police Department (hereinafter referred to as "Recipient") , WITNESSETH: WHEREAS the DPS has received federal moneys through Section 402 of the Highway Safety Act of 1966 for the purchase of ALERT J3A portable breath test units; and WHEREAS the DPS desires to provide a mechanism through which local law enforcement agencies may use these ALERT J3A portable breath test units to assist them in detecting drivers who are in violation of Minnesota laws relating to traffic and highway safety, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN the parties hereto as follows: I. DPS' Responsibilities. A. The DPS shall make 1 ALERT J3A unit(s) available to Recipient. Recipient shall use and have possession of the unit(s) , but the DPS shall retain title and legal ownership of the unit(s) . B. Any and all repairs shall be made by or at the direction of DPS. The cost of repair or replacement will be borne by DPS, at the discretion of the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Laboratory after consideration of the reason for such repair or replacement and the availability of DPS funds. C. The DPS will train at least one person designated by Recipient in the handling and use of the unit. The DPS will bear the expense of this training. D. The DPS will maintain all necessary state and federal inventory control records on the unit(s) . The DPS will maintain the J3A ALERT inventory by instrument serial number and state asset number. II. Recipient's Responsibilities. A. Recipient shall receive 1 ALERT J3A unit(s) and use the unit(s) for assisting in enforcing the Minnesota laws relating to traffic and highway safety. B. Recipient shall keep and maintain the unit(s) in proper operating condition. Recipient shall supply all disposable components for the unit(s) at Recipient's expense. C. Recipient shall return to the DPS any unit which is obsolete, inoperable, mal- functioning or no longer in use. The unit shall be delivered or shipped to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Laboratory postage and handling charges prepaid. D. Recipient shall be responsible for the cost of repairing or replacing a unit at the discretion of the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Laboratory after consideration of the reason for such repair and the availability of DPS funds. 1af3 cr E. Recipient shall designate at least one person to be trained by the DPS in the proper handling and use of the unit. Recipient shall bear the cost of any travel expenses incurred by any person attending such training. F. Recipient shall make the unit(s) available to authorized personnel when required for inventory or inspection purposes. III. Term of Acrreement. This Agreement shall be in effect for one (1) year from the 2 day of FPhruary , 19 82 , unless terminated by either party in accordance with the provisions set for in this Agreement. This Agreement shall be deemed renewed on a year-to-year basis unless it is terminated by either party in accordance with the pro- visions set forth in this Agreement. IV. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either the DPS or Recipient at any time with or without cause, upon ten (10) days' written notice to the other party. In the event of such termination, Recipient shall return the unit(s) to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Laboratory five (5) days after the termination of this Agreement. If Recipient fails to return the unit(s) within this time period, Recipient may be assessed the cost of the unit(s) . V. Assignment. Recipient shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the DPS. VI. Liability. Recipient agrees to indemnify and save and hold the State of Minnesota, its agents and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action arising from the use of ALERT J3A unit(s) or from the performance of this Agreement by Recipient or Recipient's agents or employees. VII. Relationship of Parties. Neither Recipient nor Recipient's agents or employees are to be considered to be agents of the DPS or to be engaged in any joint venture or enterprise with the DPS, and nothing herein shall be construed to create such a relationship. 2 of 3 • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, intending to be bound hereby, have caused this agreement to be duly executed the day and year first above mentioned. ZECIPIENT: City OF Shakopee As to form and execution by the 3y: ATTORNEY GENERAL: 'itle: By: )ate: COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION: 3y: By: Authorized Signature title: Date: )ate: Approved TATE OF MINNESOTA )EPARI ENNT OF PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE: 3UREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION LABORATORY: By: recommended for Approval Date: 'itle: ate: ;TATE OF MINNESOTA EPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY: 'itle: ate: certified copy of the resolution must be attached authorizing the to enter into this Agreement and authorizing the and to execute :he Agreement. 3 of 3 a • . Ql/ RESOLUTION NO. 1984 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY OFFICIALS TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY TO RECEIVE BREATH TEST UNITS ON A LOAN BASIS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota that the Mayor, City Administrator, and City Clerk be and they hereby are authorized to execute an agreement with the State of Minnesota , Department of Public Safety for the following purpose , to-wit : To provide authority for the City to receive from the State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety, ALERT J3A portable breath test unit or units on a loan basis . The unit or units are to be used by City law enforcement officers to assist them in the detection of motorists who may be in violation of Minnesota Statutes Section 169 . 121 . Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of 1982 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1982 . City Attorney MEMO TO : John K . Anderson City Administrator FROM : H . R. Spurrier City Engineer -- RE : Amendment to Shakopee City Code Chapter 7 Entitled, "Streets and Sidewalks Generally" DATE : February 10, 1982 Introduction : City Council directed staff to prepare an ordinance amending Chapter 7 so that Chapter 7 specified that the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications were adopted and amended by resolution. While reviewing Chapter 7 and the newly codified code, it was discovered that certain other parts of Chapter 7 should be repealed. Background: Ordinance No. 83, amends Chapter 7 by specifying that the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications are adopted and amended by resolution from time to time. This is pursuant to the request of City Council. Ordinance No. 87 is an ordinance which deletes subdivisions of Section 7. 07 due to a scrivener's error, as a result of an accumulation of ordinances that pertain to this subdivision. By deleting Subdivision 5, 6 and 7, the intent of that section is preserved. This section is a section that was recently amended to cover street cut permits. Action Requested: Adopt Ordinance No. 83 and Ordinance No. 87, ordinances amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 7, Entitled "Streets and Sidewalks Generally". HRS/jiw Attachments ORDINANCE NO. 83 Fourth Series AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AMENDING SHAKOPEE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 7, ENTITLED, "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS GENERALLY" BY REPEALING SECTION 7.06, SUBDIVISION 4 THEREOF, AND BY ADOPTING A NEW SECTION 7.06, SUBDIVISION 4,ENTITLED,"DESIGN CRITERIA AND STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS" AND PROVIDING PENALTIES IN THE EVENT OF A VIOLATION HEREOF. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I: SHakopee City Codei__Chanter _7, _Entitled_, "Streets-and_sidewalks Generally' is Hereby amended as follows: Subd 1 Present Section 7.06, Subdivision 4 of said Chapter is hereby repealed. Subd 2 A new Section, Sec 7.06, Subd 4, entitled "Design Criteria and Standard Specifications" is hereby adopted as follows : All construction of road,et s, including sidew.ilk and curb and gutter improve- ments and curb cuts shall be strictly in accordance with the Design Criteria at, Standard Specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer and open to public inspection during regular office hours. Such Design Criteria and Standard Snecifictions may be adopted and amende0 by resolution from time to time by the City and shall be uniformly enforced. SECTION II: Penalty Provisions Adopted Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City (:ode including Penalty for Violations" and Sect:, 7.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor of Pett Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION III: WHEN IN FORCE This Ordinance shall l,t, ,,ublished once in the official newspaper of the Cite 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, in session of the Council heats this day of , 1982. Mayor of the City of Shakopee -- ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this filth day of January, 191'12.. r City Attorney AirX ,a ,.,......:.. J .:• tt,wt. x4i4gxt�1,gr'. , ray 4b kato, ki4fl: . - �_:. ORDINANCE NO. 87 Fourth Series AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AMENDING SHAKOPEE CITY CODE, CHAPTER 7, ENTITLED, "STREETS AND SIDEWALKS GENERALLY" BY REPEALING SUBDIVISIONS 5, 6 and 7 OF SECTION 7.07. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY or SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I: Shakopee City Code, Chapter 7, entitled "Streets and Sidewalks Generally" is Hereby am ?Aided as follows: Subdivisions 5, 6 and 7 of Section 7.07 of Chapter 7 of the Shakopee City Code are hereby repealed. SECTION II: When in Force This Ordinance shallbe 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 said publica- tion. Adopted by the City C,uncil of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, in session of the City Council 'field this day of � . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as farm this 1st. day of February, 196::. __- r, City Attorney _ww.._.. . IF • • „--1(//7// i MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson , City Administrator RE : Request from Bill Chard Developer .of Eastview to Attach "Wyes” to the In Plate Sanitary Sewers DATE : March 13 , 1981 Introduction The City has received the attached letter from Bill Chard regarding the above request . Mr. Chard is making this request because he wishes to build twin homes which would require cutting the street for the additional sewer line under our "current practice" of requiring an individual line for each home . Background Current City practice is to require , as noted above , individual connections . We have required new duplexes , twin homes or double bungalows to put in individual sewer laterals in nearly all cases (The Building Inspector says we allowed "wyes" for Dick Wiggin ' s • town houses on Polk Street . ) Council should consider the following in reviewing Mr. Chard ' s request : 1 . It would save the developer the expense of cutting the street for the additional lateral. 2 . It would require joint ownership and maintenance responsibility for the lateral from the "wye" to the main . 3 . The joint ownership, even when noted in the deed, could become another area for a dispute between owners that the City will be drawn into . 4 . The Public Works Director does not believe that we would have additional maintenance problems , but that the developer should be required to put in a clean-out at the "wye" to eliminate some of the potential problems mentioned in #3 above . 5 . Our Building Inspector and Ray Southworth of FHA indicate that the practice is permitted as long as the jointly owned line is in the City Boulevard. 6 . Coon Rapids and Bloomington both permit "wyes" (only Metro cities checked) for existing streets but encourage the indivi- dual lateral whenever they know there will be twin home con- struction . 410 • . Request from Bill Chard Page Two March 13 , 1981 7 . Ray Southworth of FHA recommends , and Mr . Chard has concurred, that the party wall agreement should include a phrase regarding the joint ownership and maintenance of the lateral from the "wye" to the main. Alternatives 1 . Continue with the current policy . 2 . Permit "wyes" . 3 . Permit "wyes" only when the street is already in place . Recommendation It is staff ' s recommendation that alternative #3 be approved . 411 JKA/jms CITY OF SHAKOPEE r . s ". ;a 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 ,J((eYJI10- MEMO ev,„31 TO:' John K. Anderson, City Administrator( J FROM: LeRoy Houser SUBJECT: "Wyes" in East View Addn. DATE: March 19, 1981 Our discussion regarding "wye: " wa;; addressing sewer lines only. Should they expect to "wye" off of the 3/4" water line stubbed into the property my approval will not be forth comming. The problems presented by wyeing the 3/4" water line is as follows: 1 . Reduced pressure to both units at peak use time within the units. (unregulated shower and bath water should both units be bathing at s<arrie time, or one unit bathing and the other watering lawns etc . ) • 2. Should one unit contaminate its water supply by direct connections, both units have contaminated water supply systems. The question you are going to pose is; the same principle applys to contamination of apartment units. My answer is this is correct; However, apartment tennents do not own their units in "fee simple" which legally provides protection against encroachment of services delivered by the City. I have told you before, there is not a code against what is pro- f • posed andou have Y permitted, and there is not a code saying they cannot "wye" off the water line. However, it is my opinion and recommendation that if this is permitted then we must adopt a policy requiring a double check vacuum breaker, commonly known as a backflow preventer on the main supply line before the meter. LFH:plk •• MEMO TO : John K . Anderson City Administrator FROM : H . R. Spurrier (it",) City Engineer r - RE : Municipal State Aid StreetSystem DATE: February 9, 1982 Introduction : The City of Shakopee must designate State Aid highway mileage pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Annotated Chapter 162. Background : As Shakopee grows and as roadways are improved within the city limits, the City is entitled to designate more State Aid highways. Designating this mileage is important because the designated mileage is used to compute the annual State Aid allotment. The streets so designated should be streets that have a functional class of collector or higher. The streets could even be county roads, not already designated County State Aid or Municipal County State Aid. Ordinarily the highways are so designated because the roadways require additional pavement structure or additional pavement width because of traffic count or traffic character. The map of existing Municipal State Aid Highways (MSAH) , County State Aid Highways (CSAH) and Municipal County State Aid Highways (MCSAH) , in Shakopee is attached. That map also has numbered alternative segments together with the mileage of each segment for potential MSAH or MCSAH designations. In reviewing these alternative alignments, staff recommends Segment 1, Segment 4, and Segment 5. Total mileage of these segments is 2. 4 miles. Segment 1 is selected because that segment has a potential funding problem in as much as the segment fronts a great deal of City park property and has other non-assessable areas that are marginally benefitted by a roadway. Segment 4 and 5 are selected because these segments bisect the VIP Sanitary Sewer district and have the potential for development in the very near future. Recommendation : it is the recommendation of City staff that Council adopt Resolution No. 1983, A Resolution Establishing Municipal State Aid Highways. John K . Anderson February 9, 1982 Municipal State Aid Streets System Page -2- Action Requested : Direct the appropriate City staff to prepare a resolution designating Alternate Segment 1, Alternate Segment 4 and Alternate Segment 5 on the attached map, Municipal State Aid Highways. • HRS/jiw Attachment RESOLUTION NO. 1983 A Resolution Establishing Municipal State Aid Highways WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota that the streets hereinafter described should be designated Municipal State Aid Streets, under the provisions of Minnesota laws of 1967, Chapter 162; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the roads described as follows, to-wit: 1 . Beginning at the intersection of Trunk Highway 169, the North line of the Southwest quarter of Section 11, Town- ship 115 North, Range 23 West; thence Southeast to 13th Avenue as platted in Minnesota Valley 3rd Addition, on record in the office of the Recorder of Scott County, Minnesota, thence along the alignment of 13th Avenue East to County State Aid Highway No. 15 and there terminating. Said road to be numbered and known as Municipal State Aid Street No. 104. 2. Beginning at the intersection of MSAH 108 and the center of Section 5, Township 115 North, Range 22 West; thence South to the South line of said Section 5; thence East to the Southeast corner of said Section 5; thence South along the East line of Section 8, Township 115 North, Range 22 West to County State Aid Highway No. 16 and there term- inating. Said road to be numbered and known as Municipal State Aid Street No. 106. be, and hereby are established, located and designated Municipal State Aid Streets of said City, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Highways of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Highways for his consideration and that upon his approval of the designation of said roads, or a portion thereof, the same be constructed, improved and maintained as Municipal State Aid Streets of the City of Shakopee, to be numbered and known as Municipal State Aid Streets as noted above. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of 1982. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST : Approved as to form this day of City Clerk ___. _ --- �_._,_____ , 1982. City Attorney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson City Administrator FROM: Don Steger City Planner RE: Lot Split Application Fee DATE: February 11, 1982 Introduction : It was noticed that the fee for processing lot splits has not been changed to complement the new lot split policy . Background : With the implementation of the City ' s new lot split policy whereby lot splits are simply reviewed by the staff, it was noticed that the City ' s fee schedule contains a $50 fee for lot splits . This fee was based on therevious lot split A p policy which was more complex. The $50 fee does not seem appropriate for the new policy which is more abbreviated. Because the new lot split policy requires review by department heads , the fee should not be eliminated entirely. A fee of $25 appears reasonable in order to cover the review costs. Alternatives : 1. Keep the present lot split fee of $50 : Pros : a) Raises revenue for the City. Cons : a) May be perceived as excessively high by citizens . 2 . Raise the lot split fee : Pros : a) Raises additional revenue for the City. Cons : a) May be perceived as excessively high by citizens . 3 . Reduce the lot split fee to $25 or other amount : Pros : a) Appears to cover cost of staff review. b ) Appears more equitable to citizens . Cons : a) Reduces potential revenue. John K. Anderson February 11, 1982 Lot Split Application Fee Page —2— 4 . Eliminate the lot split fee : Pros : a) Would be welcomed by citizens . Cons : a) No revenue to cover staff review costs . Recommendation: Staff recommends the reducing of lot split fees from $50 to $25 . Action Requested : Adopt Resolution No . 1981, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1943 A Resolution Setting Fees For City Licenses , Permits , Services and Documents. DS/jiw Attachment RESOLUTION NO. 1981 A Resolution Amending Resolution No . 1943 A Resolution Setting Fees For City Licenses , remits, Services and Documents WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1943 , adopted by the Shakopee City Council on December 1, 1981, established fees for staff review <a.rid processing of lot split applications at $50. 00; and WHEREAS, the lot split review process has been simplified pursuant to Ordinance No. 81, Fourth Series, adopted by the Shakopee City Council on February 2 , 1982. NOW, THEREFORE, LET IT BE RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that Resolution No. 1943 is hereby amended by changing the fee for Lot Split applications from $50 . 00 to $25 . 00 , effective upon adoption of this resolution. Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of , 1982. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1982 . Bonded and Insured VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PARK `����' f Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 `iVAkpH J J.l; STORAGE - DRAYAGE POOL CAR DISTRIBUTION FilFt1 612-445-4520 t _ 61G32 February 12, 1982 OFiIOPEE City of Shakopee 129 East First Ave . Shakopee, Mn. 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke & City Council: This is in reference to Project No. 1982-2 road improvement for Valley Industrial Blvd . So. , Shakopee, Mn. Since I will not be able to attend the February 16th meeting; I wish to state my position on the proposal as follows: I. Present road needs some minor repairs which I presently pay more than my share in Real Estate taxes . 2 . Proposed costs of improvement would not reflect added value to present property. 3. Economics condition does not warrant any additional expense by my firm. S incere ly-, / • • R. A. Doran, President RAD/b lb kp MEMO TO : John Anderson City Administrator ' FROM : H . R . Spurrier V �� City Engineer RE : Valley Industrial Boulevar South County Road 83 to the east line of Valley Park 2nd Addition DATE : February 12, 1982 Introduction : City staff has met with property owners along Valley Industrial Boulevard South collectively and individually and has distributed copies of the Feasibility Report to all parcels affected by the improvement. Background : On February 10, 1982 City staff met with all of the property owners benefitted by the proposed improvement, except Mr. Theordore Pouliot,. Mr. Richard Durand, Valley Warehouse, Inc. and Mr. Robert Baird, District Manager of Ashland Oil, Inc. Mr. Pouliot and Mr. Baird were unable to attend the meeting February 10th and requested a copy of the Feasibility Report which was forwarded to them. Mr. Durand met separately with City staff. He will be out of town February 16, 1982 for the hearing and wanted to make the following concerns known to City Council : 1 . Conceding that the improvement of the road improves the access to the Valley Warehouse parcel, Mr. Durand held the opinion that such improvement may not amount to the approximate $4, 000 per acre but something less. 2. Because of long-term leases, Mr. Durand will be unable to start recovering these expenses for at least five years and felt that the full assessment would result in a hardship. 3. Mr. Durand has previously paid for his frontage when he paid for the full cost of extending Valley Industrial Boulevard South east from County Road 83 to his property. The cost, therefore, would not show up as a previous assessment. John Anderson February 12, 1982 /J Valley Ind. Blvd. So. Page -2- The City has also received a letter from Don Miller, District Manager of Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. Mr. Miller, in speaking for Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. , has stated that it is their opinion that there is no benefit whatsoever, as a result of the proposed improvements. The principal reason ,City staff has recommended holding a public hearing on the proposed improvement prior to awarding the contract is so that any formal objections to the assessments may be considered by Council prior to awarding any contract for the work. It is the recommendation of City staff that City Council proceed with this project by ordering the project and receiving bids on the proposed improve- ment, then holding an assessment hearing prior to awarding the contract for the proposed work. Then in the event there are no appeals, or in the event potential losses as a result of any possible appeals are acceptable, Council can award a contract. Action Requested : Adopt Resolution No. 1985, A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And Preparation Of Plans And Specifications For The Improvement Of Valley Industrial Boulevard South County Road 83 To The East Line Of Valley Park 2nd Addition, Improvement No. 1982-2. HRS/jiw Attachment C7Ifit Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. INDUSTRIAL GAS DIVISION Box 176, Shakopee, MN 55379 (61?) 445-4610 February 11 , 1982. The City Council City of Shakopee Shakopee , MN 55379 Reference: Project 1982-2 Improvement of Valley Industrial Boulevard South from County Road 83 Gentlemen: Air Products and Chemicals , Inc, strongly opposes the proposed improve- ment of Valley Industrial Boulevard South from County Road 83 to the east line of Walley Park 2nd Addition, and the assessment of our pro- perty to pay for this improvement, for the following reasons : 1 . Our land, at the N.E. corner of County Road 83 in Valley Industrial Boulevard South, will not benefit by this road improvnt. Our only street access is now to County Road 83 and ric h to Highway 101 . We never use the Valley Indus- trail 1m. ,drd South, which is a dead end street. 2. We have no plans to ever have a driveway connection onto Valley Industrial Boulevard South. 3. We have no customers on this dead end section of Valley Industrial Boulevard South, which is a further reason we do not use this street. 4. This road improvement will only benefit the companies who presently use Valley Industrial Boulevard South as the sole access, so they should pay the entire cost. Under Minnesota law, parties who do not benefit from a road improvement are not required to pay assessments for the costs of such improvements . Very truly yours, AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS, INC. /C,l/,`-); !C,L-" Don Miller District Mananer DM/gh RESOLUTION NO. 1985 '!J� A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And Preparation Of Plans And Specifications For The Improvement Of Valley Industrial Boulevard South County Road 83 To The East Line of • Valley Park 2nd Addition Improvement No. 1982-2 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 1980 of the City Council adopted the 2nd day of February 1982 fixed a date for a Council hearing on the propose- improvement of Valley Industrial Boulevard South from County Road 83 to the east line of Valley Park 2nd Addition, by roadway; and WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and was held thereon the 16th day of February 1982 at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA : 1. Such improvement is hereby order as proposed in Council Resolution No. 1980 adopted February 2, 1982. 2. Henry R. Spurrier, City Engineer, is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall have Plans and Specifications for such improvements prepared. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of , 1982. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST : City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1982. . TO: John Anderson FROM: Lou VanHout Re: Pumphouse inspection costs Date: 2-2-82 Introduction: Request for authorization of Schoell and Madsen Inc. to perform inspection and staking services for Pumphouse construction. Proposal dated 1-6-82 attached. Background: The construction of the Pumphouse for Well #6 is a part of the K-Mart tax increment project. The Utilities Commission is administering this job and payments for construction costs are authorized by City Council acting on behalf of HRA. In view of the specialized work involved with the equipment at the pumphouse it is advisable to have inspections made by a firm such as Schoell & Madsen. Recommendation: The Utilities Commission considered the proposal contained in the January 6, 1982 letter and voted to foreward it to City Council with the recommendation for approval per the estimated amount of $5,392.48 for inspection and staking' of the Pumphouse for Well #6 by Schoell and Madsen. WILLIAM 0. SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T. VOSLER JAMES R ORR 111 HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L. HANSON _ SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. JACK E. GILL THEODORE D. KEMNA ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, PLANNERS JOHN W EMOND AND SOIL TESTING KENNETH E. ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT R. SCOTT HARRI (612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 GERALD L. BACKMAN R MARK KOEGLER January 6 , 1982 Shakopee Public Utilities Commission c/o Mr. Lou Van Hout , Manager 1030 East Fourth Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Subject : Pumphouse for Water Supply Well No. 6 Contract No. 81-2 KT Gentlemen : As requested, enclosed is our proposal for inspection and staking on the subject project and a list of the services which are included. Our estimated costs for these services are as follows : Inspector 172 Hrs. @ $22 . 34/Hr. $3, 842 . 48 Senior Inspector 26 Hrs. @ $39. 00/Hr. 1, 014. 00 Survey Crew (3-Man) 8 Hrs. @ $67. 00/Hr. 536. 00 Total Estimated Cost $5, 392 .48 The above costs are based on estimates of the time which will be required. Actual time required is dependent on the Contractor' s construction schedule and the extent to which inspection is required to insure compliance with the specification. We would be happy to discuss this proposal if you have any questions. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON,,INC. KEAdolf :mkr G=/��" /j enclosure c) , er!.11 PROPOSED INSPECTION AND STAKING SERVICES CITY OF SHAKOPEE PUMPHOUSE FOR WATER SUPPLY WELL NO. 6 CONTRACT NO. 81-2 KT 1. Inspect excavation for proper material under and around footings and correlation to soil borings. 2 . Insure quality control on concrete for footings. 3. Observe proper backfill and compaction of material under floor slab area. 4. Insure Engineer ' s approved Shop Drawings are used and approved equipment installed. 5. Random inspection of all materials used during construction to insure specification compliance. 6. Block wall and brick veneer and composite walls constructed per details and specifications. 7. Insure reinforcing bars , bearing walls and bearing plates installed correctly. 8 . Inspect bond beam and precast concrete slab roof. 9. Insure proper construction of built-up roof . 10. Proper installation of insulation and correct material in walls, roof and doors. 11. Insure correct installation of exhaust fans, chemical equip- ment and chemical room proper. 12. Inspect mechanical equipment to conform to approved shop drawings. 13 . Inspect electrical and control functions for proper operation and interfacing with existing system. 14 . Observe exterior piping and connections and run pressure and breakage tests. 15. Insure proper installation of all interior piping , bracing , ties and disinfection. 16. Insure compliance with Health Department requirements. 17. Coordinate and interface with local building and electrical inspectors. .1 I q G 18. Schedule with City , Contractor, Engineer and suppliers all personnel necessary for start-up services and operating instructions. 19. Insure Contractor maintains reasonably clean construction site. 20. Inspect and approve all site restoration and clean-up. 21. Provide Owner with up-to-date information and progress reports. 22 . Provide Owner with complete file of operating and maintenance instructions of all equipment provided under this contract. 23 . Keep as-built records. 24. Check pay estimates for proper partial payment . 25 . Stake building location and elevation. 26 . Stake underground piping location . 27. Stake driveway location and elevation. WILLIAM D SCHOELL CARLISLE MADSON JACK T, VOSLER JAMES R. ORR HAROLD E. DAHLIN LARRY L HANSON SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. JACK E. GILL THEODORE 0 KEMNA ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, PLANNERS -1111 JOHN W EMOND AND SOIL TESTING KENNETH E.ADOLF WILLIAM R. ENGELHARDT R. SCOTT HARRI (612) 938-7601 • 50 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH • HOPKINS, MINNESOTA 55343 GERALD L. BACKMAN R. MARK KOEGLER February 2, 1982 Shakopee Public Utilities Commission c/o Mr. Lou Van Hout - 1030 East Fourth Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 CITY OF SHAKCWs Subject : Water Supply Well No. 6 Contract No. 81-1 KT Gentlemen : Enclosed please find eight (8) copies of Change Order No. 2 for the subject project . This change order adds grading of a drainage ditch and deletes the temporary discharge pump and piping. The test pumping portion of the well construction requires that large quantities of water be pumped to waste. The topography adjacent to the well site does not provide drainage away from the site and the test pumping would have resulted in flooding the adjacent cropland. As we had originally anticipated the well construction to occur during the spring and summer, the temporary discharge pump and piping was included in the project to pump the water beyond the cropland. The well construction, however, did not start until late summer and the test pumping was delayed until the crops were harvested and the fall plowing completed. The cropland could then be flooded. A drainage ditch was constructed to prevent excessive flooding. This procedure allowed the deletion of the temporary discharge pump and piping. The change order also reduces the well pump motor size and the length of the column pipe and line shaft . These changes resulted from the actual elevation of the water in the well during pumping being higher than estimated. Unit costs for both of these changes were provided in the proposal and both changes result in reduction in cost . The change order also extends the completion date to allow installation of well pump and motor after the pumphouse structure has been substantially completed thus providing protection from weather and vandalism. • SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. Shakopee Public Utilities Commission c/o Mr. Lou Van Hout Page Two February 2, 1982 The net effect of Change Order No. 2 is reducing the contract amount by $10,482. 00 to yield a revised amount of $68, 126. 04. Approval is recommended. Very truly yours, SCHOELL & MADSON, INC. KEAdo1 f :mkr /4: 4.414.0-4 44W enclosures CHANGE ORDER Change Order No: 2 Project Name: Water Supply Well No. 6 Date: January 29, 1982 Contract No: 81-1 KT Original Contract Amount: $ 74,615.00 Change Order(s) No. 1 thru No. $ 3,993.04 Total Funds Encumbered Prior to Change Order $ 78,608.04 Description of Work to be Added: Addition: Grading for Drainage Ditch 16 Hrs. @ $63.00/Hr. $ 1,008.00 Deletions: Furnish, Install and Remove Temporary Discharge Pump and Piping Lump Sum $10,000.00 Column Pipe and Shaft 30 L.F. @ $33.00/L.F. $ 990.00 Furnish 100 H.P. Motor in Place of 125 H.P. Motor, Deduct Lump Sum $ 500.00 TOTAL DELETIONS $11,490.00 Net Decrease in Contr::ct Amount Resulting From Change Order No. 2 $10,482.00 The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above, under the same conditions specified in the original Contract as amended unless otherwise specified,herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance with the Standard Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. The amount of the Contract shall be decreased by $ 10,482.00 • The number of calendar days for completion shall be (increased/deereesed) by 151 Original Contract Amount $ 74,615.00 Change Order No. 1 thru 2 . $ - 6,488. 96 —_ Total Funds Encumbered $ 68126.04 Completion Date: May 31, 1982 The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perform the work specified in this Change Order in accordance with the Specifications, conditions and prices specified herein. APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED: Contractor: E. H. Renner & Sons, Inc. Schoell & Madson, Inc. c. B y: -� L_ BY:.- BY: 7>T 1„.r Y1 [�/���1 i Kenneth Adolf Title: / President Date: /-,..2c? -6) 1 Date: 2/1/a2 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 °L- Water Supply Well No. 6. Page Two January 29, 1982 APPROVED: City of Shakopee APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED: Shakopee Public Utilities Commission By: _ / Mayor Date By: • r /f_� Utility Manager Date City Administrator Date Approved as to form this day of , 19 City Clerk Date City Attorney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson City Administrator FROM: Don Steger City ' Planner RE: City Participation in Downtown Development DATE: February 11, 1982 Introduction: At the January 27 , 1982 meeting, the Downtown Committee decided to contact developers and attempt to spark their interest in Shakopee ' s concept plan. Background : The Committee felt that it is important to more agressively pursue development potentials, rather than wait for the economy to improve . I will compile a list of developers who will receive a short mailing which will discuss Shakopee ' s downtown effort . The Downtown Committee felt that it would be important to include within this mailing an indication as to whether or not the City Council is willing to consider using Tax Increment Financing (TIF) , Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRB' s) or other measures to assist possible development . Such a statement would provide a developer with an indication of the local situation. Alternatives : 1. Consider using Tax Increment Financing, Industrial Revenue Bonds and other public assistance activities for any proposed downtown development project . Pros : a) Developers will perceive City interest in the downtown project . b) Public assistance may improve the economic viability of a development proposal . Cons : a) Staff will have to spend more time on a develop- ment proposal . b) City Council will have to spend more time on a development proposal. c ) More paperwork will result . d) City ' s roll in providing subsidies will increase . John K. Anderson February 11, 1982 Downtown Development Page -2- 2 . Do not consider using Tax Increment Financing, Industrial Revenue Bonds and other public assistance activities for any proposed downtown development project . Pros : a) Less time involvement on a development proposal . b) Less• paperwork will result . c ) Enables the free market system to direct development . Cons : a) Developers may perceive the City as unwilling to lend support to the downtown project . b ) Potential developments may be lost without public assistance. Recommendation: The Downtown Committee recommends that the City Council consider using Tax Increment Financing, Industrial. Revenue Bonds and other public assistance activities for downtown development projects. Requested Action: 1. Determine if Tax Increment Financing, Industrial Revenue Bonds and other public assistance activities will be considered for downtown development projects . 2 . If the City Council decides to be willing to consider such activities , request that the staff include such a statement in the mailing to developers . DS/j iw • ci MEMO TO: John K. Anderson/City Administrator FROM: Jim Karkanen/Superintendent of Public Works RE: Plowing Ordinance DATE : February 11 , .1982 Introduction The metropolitan area has just recently been subjected to several abnormal snowfalls which point out the inadequacies in our current ordinance relating to weather emergencies and parking restrictions . Background The original ordinance , adopted in 1964, was "watered down" from the original proposal to council . After much debate, the ordinance allowed calendar parking when a weather emergency was declared on the local radio station. This ordinance proved to be very ineffective as written. The current ordinance , Sec . 9 . 50, Subd. 4-B, uses virtually the same language and is very difficult to understand or enforce , thus making it practically ineffective . The Police Department , through the years , has been very cooperative in removing "snowbirds" , but can only use the 48 hour abandoned vehicle portion of the ordinance . This snowbird policy does not help the snowplows at the time of snowfalls . During normal ( 2"-5" ) snowfalls , the Public Works Dept . can normally conduct efficient plow operation working around the parked cars , realizing that they will have to return the next dayto clean up. The cleanup operation is considered a routine normal operation because the trucks will also apply more sand/salt mixture where needed concurrently with the snowbird cleanup operation. When a vehicle has not been removed after 48 hours , the Police Dept . then enforces the 48 hour abandoned vehicle portion of the ordinance by tagging and towing the vehicle. It is common practice with many vehicle owners to deliberately park their vehicle in front of their neighbor' s property, or park their vehicle in front of their driveway so the plow won' t leave a windrow across their driveway to be shoveled. These problem vehicles are eventually moved, and the plows have to return for the cleanup operation. It must be noted that most property owners and vehicle owners are very cooperative and usually understand the "necessary evils" of a snow plow operation. There will always be , however, the exceptions to good neigh- borhood courtesies and understanding. Some of the larger apartment complexes compel their tenants to park their vehicles on the street while they clean their own parking lots . This problem can be dealt with on an individual basis with the apartment complex managers . Such as : 1 ) doing only one half of their lots on one day, then move the cars and plow the remainder of the lot later; 2 ) allow the tenants to move on the street only after permission has been granted after the street has been plowed completely; 3) or permit N44;.> . Anderson/Karkanen Page -2- "on street" parking on only one side of the street . This, however creates a problem for the neighborhood, as well as creating further driving hazards . Alternatives 1 . Calendar Parking - (even addressed parking allowed on even calendar days only) (odd addressed parking allowed on odd calendar days only) Allow calendar parking for the winter season - (Nov. 15 to April 1 ) this should be enforced daily to encourage vehicles to be parked off the street . It should be suggested that the calendar parking day should begin at 8 : 00 a.m. daily. This restriction would be more practical if it was in effect only between midnight and 8 : 00 a .m. This would allow daytime parking on either side of the street . There will be some negative reaction to daily enforcement . Disadvantages A. Some vehicles will need tank heaters plugged in nightly - this would prove to be very difficult if the vehicle is parked across the street . B. Some streets may not allow parking across the street because of physical obstructions or situations . C. The vehicles will still be parked on both sides of the street during the day. This problem can be rechoned with knowing that the vehicle will be eventually moved. Advantages to calendar parking enforced during the winter season - Nov. 15 to April 1 A. If the populace knows that the parking restriction is to be enforced daily, provisions will certainly be made for "storing" vehicles that are not used daily. The vehicle owner will find "off street" parking somehow, or realize that the vehicle must be moved daily. B. This method of parking will be enforced between midnight and 8 : 00 a .m. , the Police Dept . will issue tags , thus generating some source of revenue for their efforts . Towing should only be enforced during emergencies . This decision can be con- sidered a departmental policy decision. 2 . Allow calendar parking as currently written and currently enforced. It must be noted that we have been able to tolerate these conditions under "normal" snowfalls , but the public won' t respond to calendar parking when it ' s "declared" in effect . 3 . Enforce calendar parking all year. This does not help the sweeping operation because we normally sweep during daytime hours . This will help keep derelict cars off the street , but so will abandoned vehicle enforcement . Anderson/Karkanen Page -3- 4. A. Enforce calendar parking 24 hours per day. This would create many inconveniences during the day. (Virtually unenforceable ) . B. Allow original calendar parking ordinance to remain in effect , however, change the 48 hour abandoned vehicle policy to 24 hours . If a vehicle is considered abandoned after 24 hours , the Police Dept . could get it moved more quickly. 5. Plow east-west and north-south streets on separate days . This would mandate a two day plow schedule , making it not very practical , because we can plow the entire community in one working shift . Also , this plowing operation would require a public "declaration" by the local media. 6 . Prohibit all residential parking: A. during the winter season (Nov. 15 to April 1 ) B. upon declaration of City officials C . only when snow depth necessitates a plow operation D. prohibit residential parking on the street all year E. emergencies only, again by official declaration 7 . Allow on street parking on one side only for entire winter season. Recommendation Allow calendar parking for the winter season (Nov. 15 to April 1 ) enforceable from midnight to 8 : 00 a .m. The calendar dayshould begin at 8 : 00 a.m. There will be some exceptions , I 'm sure , because of unforeseen cir- cumstances that may have to be dealt on an individual basis . This method , however, is not advisable unless absolutely necessary. Reduce the 48 hour abandoned vehicle restriction to 24 hours . This will create a quicker turnover of abandoned and derelict vehicles off the street and will move these vehicles sooner. It will also generate some revenue for the Police Dept . Comments The Public Works Dept . has somewhat resigned itself to the fact that parked cars and snowbirds are an occupational stigma that we have to contend with. The Police Dept . realizes that the current calendar parking is virtually unenforceable because the populace is never officially informed when the parking ban is in effect . It must be very clear to the public that a parking ban can be enforced without exceptions whenever in effect . If the public realizes that they can ' t park on the street for extended periods of time , they will make arrange- ments for off street parking. The Public Works Dept . does have a snowplow system in effect which is virtually unchanged for each snow removal operation. Most homeowners have a general idea when the plows normally will clean their street . Most arterial streets are plowed with priority, while the outlying additions are generally done last . The priority system is somewhat Anderson/Karkanen• �? Page -4- related to vehicle usage and emergency access as well as ADTC (average daily traffic count ) . The plows routes are assigned to the vehicles with a minimizing of driving from one location to the next route. It must be mentioned that all snow emergencies are somewhat different , depending on timing, duration of snowfall , density, depth and wind direction, also which day of the week - weekends , of course, are the most difficult . The actual wording in the current City Code Sec . 9 . 50, Subd. 4-B is very confusing since recodification. The calendar parking wording can be made easier to understand by telling the public when they can park, rather when they cannot park on the street . I feel that we can live with our current ordinance , for the duration of this season, hoping that we will experience only normal snowfalls . The new ordinance would be in effect for the 1982-1983 snow season. z ,u i„ .G .. k--Y�. . ,. ,r..t',+�da„#a,. .;:,, � a ,a•y>;#44xr.;4 $'.0,1*r. ,r4--q," 1 y� November 25, 1981/Shakopee Valley News/Section 1/Page 3 SNOW REMOVAL NOTICE CITY OF SHAKOPEE Pursuant to Shakopee City Code, Chapter 9: The City asks that residents comply with these simple regulations during snow removal operations. e 1) Alternate Parking: (When snow fall is sufficient to Irequire snow removal operations). During snow removal operations, parking is permitted 2 on any even-numbered day of the month, on that side of the street adjacent to buildings bearing even-numbered street addresses; and on any odd-numbered day of the month, on that side of the street adjacent to buildings bearing odd-numbered street addresses; and said day shall commence at 8:01 A.M. and shall extend for a period of twenty-four (24) hours. ' 2) Snow Hauling: (When posted) 4 f When the City Engineer or his designee, has sign- s posted any street or public parking lot by 5:00 o'clock 1 P.M. no vehicle shall be parked therein or thereon between the hours of 2:00 o'clock A.M. and 8:00 o'clock A.M. on the day next following. 3) Maximum Parking: No vehicles shall be parked on any street or alley for more than 48 consecutive hours. 4) Removal of Snow for Private Property: No snow shall be removed from private property and r subsequently deposited on City streets or alleys. Thank You, CITY OF SHAKOPEE SEC. 9. 50. PARKING DURING STREET MAINTENANCE OR A WEATHER EMERGENCY. Subd. 1 . Definition. For purposes of this Section , the term "emergency" means a condition created on City streets because of the presence of , snow, freezing rain , sleet, ice or snow drifts thereon , or other ,natural phenomenon which create or are likely to create hazardous road conditions or impede or likely to impede the free movement of fire , health , police , emergency or other vehicular traffic when the same have been duly declared by the City Adminis- trator , or in his absence , the Chief of Police. Subd. 2 . Street or Public Parking Lot Maintenance. When the City Engineer has sign-posted any street or public parking lot by 5 : 00 o'clock P.M. no vehicle shall be parked therein or thereon between the hours of 2 : 00 o'clock A.M. and 8 : 00 o'clock A.M. on the day next following . Subd . 3 . Declaration of a Weather Emergency. Whenever in the discretion of the City Administrator , or his designated agent , a weather emergency exists , he may declare the same and cause the announcement thereof to be made by at least one radio station having a normal operating range covering the City. Two hours after notice to such radio station , the weather emergency shall be in effect and shall last for a period of no more than three ( 3) days after each snowfall, except that such weather emer- ~ gency shall be deemed to have terminated on those streets which have been cleared . Subd . 4 . Unlawful Acts. A. It is unlawful to park or leave standing any ve- hicle upon any street or public parking lot on which parking has been restricted for maintenance, between the hours of 2 : 00 o'clock A.M. and 8 : 00 o'clock A.M. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-78 B . It is unlawful for any person , except principals servicing emergencies , to park or leave standing any vehicle on any street during a weather emergency , as herein defined , on any odd- numbered day of the month on that side of any street bearing even- numbered U.S . Post Office addresses , and on any even-numbered day of the month on that side of the street bearing odd-numbered U .S . Post Office addresses. Source : Ordinance No. 62 , 4th Series Effective Date: 6-18-81 (Sections 9 . 51 through 9 . 98 , inclusive , reserved for future expansion . ) (12-1-81 ) -214- 7 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Murphy ' s Landing Sewer Charges DATE : February 5 , 1982 Introduction Since its inception, Murphy ' s Landing has benefited by having City sewer, but has not been receiving sewer bills . Situation Today there are approximately 9 sewer hook-ups at Murphy ' s Landing and with no municipal water, they would either have to be charged the average flat rate or have a "running time meter" or an "event counter" installed depending upon which is appropriate. The question is do we want to continue to provide the service without charging for it or should we begin charging them? If the City decides not to charge them as a method of assisting Murphy ' s Landing financially, then it should be determined if the financial assistance is best provided through free sewer hook-ups or some clearer and more direct decision to provide such assistance . Alternatives 1 . Keep the status quo . 2 . Require that a flat rate charge or appropriate meter be installed ( the meters would be an additional expense to Murphy' s Landing) . 3 . Alternative No . 2 with Council action to provide financial assistance directly with an appropriation from the General Fund. 4 . Notify Murphy ' s Landing that Council is going to continue alter- native No. 1 to a specified time when alternative No. 2 or 3 would be implemented. This would give their Board time to pre- pare for the change . Recommendation Alternative No. 2 with it being implemented July 1 , 1982 . Action Requested Direct staff to contact Murphy ' s Landing informing them that beginning July 1 , 1982 they will be charged for sanitary sewer usage . JKA/jms MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Additional Bills for Approval DATE: February 16, 1982 Request Council approve the following additional bills for payment: Long Lake Ford Park Department Scraper blade and fertilizer spreader $ 1,715.00 Scott County Treasurer Unallocated Taxes - (1971 Shop/SPUC property) $ 273.44 Assessments (City property) 193.24 Suel Business Equipment Engineering Supplies $ 179.00 GV/ljw • • • • • • • a • - • a • a • • e • a et • • • • r • r • Cl • • 00 • 601010601,060W6.1° A m 4 • N • N • N • N • I• fT • n • CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I.1 .- • • .V • -.I • 0' • 4 • • • N • U • •,1 • N N N N N N N N V n • • -1 • C • r • N • - • UI • u • Cl, • 000000000 J[ n 2 -4 • 0 +1 I I C .. ,f_.•.1. /L.2 N Ni N M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r N \ , r1 I b ..UUuUUu t.,I. W A A A V •I) J) A A A 11 10 Oa,17A W C0.0 A U N NJ NJ N NJ NJ N IJ NJ N N N N N N N N N r 1 N I •• 2 0 NN C .0.0 M N .0 A Cl Y •-'r O N N N r 00 1+r -U-I 4u as 4NNN0.04rN01 o A UI UI 0.0 00 NN IA 4 (A(A 00 u 4 ",,,A00070,20 C a 4 10 0 a 0 1r UI A 0 Nr 0.0.0 a f'4 ••. A A a 0 s .•t4 u u O A `0 0 .,u r ClIV A A .0 -1-•d IAT 0 1 1 • 0 • • • * • • • • A r 11 71 •� r1 0 n i C 1) A U ,s a S 2 C C C C C C C C C VI Cl A P1 Z N 1 a Cl (n S 1 n Cl 1 000000000 rl V. N Z n I S X a C r- (`I o ► A n n n n n n n n n 19 r' 2 Z A Z C CO r1r1 rt('lmn rlrlm z 1'1 CO V S I' ZZZ ZZZ Z2 Z 0 r t • 0 r 11 2 f•I Vt X U 0 7U 7U .01 A 3)70 P N.Z) 01 A . n 0) I n 0 rrrrrrrrr I 7 2 A rl 1 A n r IA IA IA fA(A(A IA IA IA n n 2 A CCCCCCCCC X 19 7 a n V O O O O O V O V OV V V V V O V V V A c u r r r r r r r r r Pi ,n a N r 1'I D /•1 r c n o < o A <rl N r1<MCMC A C) (•I I', n r I' A r1 0 0 0 r o r1 o r1 1 a O CT 2 T] 'r -r -r 0 2c rcmc:.act 1 < A I.1 • 9 .1 + r1 I.1 r -4 A A • O V V V V A ✓ o S C- 2 2• • • 2• 2• 0 0 c (1) n r V a A N n 0 0 r r1 r1M1 A A rl n 2 2 2 n 2•r 1 VI x V A 2 u o It o A Za a aZaZ n0 f) O • < y TI 1) 1 TI C 1•• H1.1 C A rl •-• • O • • • •• • ZZZ• Z• 21) z Al n • n -1.4-4 1 -4V V IA I'I I P, N P V) rl P• • • P• P• r 1 19 z ,I r1 r) 1'1 W •'• •'• -4 A 0 p A A A P P P A P A P 1.1 0 A 1.1 C < I•) < VI r1 rl N z r V -a 010 .01000) 010 • V n • n . I.)I9 I•I• r1• rI • r1 19 V V V O V VI N • • • • • L. Ut C. , , ,. U n 17 1 C) I I n C. N. • I 1 II I 1 I1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n a a a a a a a a Ni to u u u N r N IA u f4 N N M N M N U Iv C 4 lAI 4 4 4 U 4 IV A C. a •, NJ N 0 N 0 U N N N N N N N I1 IT 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I I IA MI 4 4 U. a u • a a a 4 4 4 N 0,a 2 • l d M Cl r Cl N N • N N N N N N N N N 0 V' Na N r 4 Cl Cl . • I I I 1 I / 1 I •I 4 M• • 4 4 4 a 4 a a •4 4 4..O•a w ♦ in .• .. Clr N n) N N N N N I.) a N N 2 C r • V r • N --SD • • •0 a N S m v N A • ♦ • • • • • • • n I.1 • • : • • • 0 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 rl n n n n n n n n n • ).J•).) . . I • n I) •. ) • '♦ • ) . • , ) ) • •• • A A A a .s • 0 • 0 0 ✓••• •r r • 0 • r • • r • or .-.r •• S 0 III In 01 In UI UI In(n • In In IA • 0(n • 0 a • IA • .A • 4 lA • Cl •- .••••..•I• •P . C • • -J- .L • 0 • Jr 0 5 n • T, D D • In 1n • N • .0 • :P • a • .3 • 0.0` • A 0 2 -• 0 < • U • 0 r _.• . • _ II I. a N fJ N N 1J N N N t tJ NJ fi N 0 N N N N N N -I VI \ \- -5 \ \ \ \ \\ rI I 1 X. 01 ID (.D a. D D.0 S D A .0 0) .3 2 9 •.D U III Na 1i 13 N IJ fJ Iv N ti to N fJ N I N N IJ N N in r 1 a 2 0 4..r C 2 'l••�• 4 10 t I NN a s •A 0-4 aN4 -•l-••D r tJ 4 10 N N 00 NN 0t0 NN 0.UI ..0.7 U1 Ul'.D IJ 1U.• CJ 4 N a 0 N 4 a a b9 I-•. 00 U1 N ,-.I a • • • :L r y1 N 0 )) J.0 0 4.0 . d 4 •A 4 4 4 01 1.1 - ' 0 c 4 N.-• ,.•:•A aN.•NN .N .0 r as N •••IA UI U1 00 1)0 0•• o0 4/I. • • • • • • • • U N VIN N N V)0 to N Al 141(A N N Ti Z A 2 2 1)11 OT)U T)T)T) z Z ZZ 2 Cl 0 I•I 0 .00 r-CCCCCCC bas ► a ► 0 Ir I.1 0 -•-1 nn 000000 XX x JCA x -I '1 L I.1 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 A n A A A < T)T)v T)L T) I -4 I'1 19/9 t9 17m Cl 0 0 T)T) z 11 t9 m to in Cl o c n 2 a s 0 CU n 0 9 0 < c c r r II o • -.-8 N OD a a r r 0 -• r N IA 0 r r r 22 A < r z rr r 9m o 2 06 PI P1 Cl 19 11 Cl n 0 Cl <.4< A A C • A U rI Z 7 2 A A 1'1 Pi PI t r L L L 0 0 NH V) A N -I I'1 A rI S O S 0)Z 77 0 r r r 0 0 C 0) N C O c`) .-. rt r'Cl 14 Cl I.1 A 2 Cl Cl -4 noz00000 t1 G)G) z T In •' N 0 1•I 0 0 0 0 CI n a Y • 1'1 • L r r X • Z 2 • • v• • • • • r r r A A r • A A) n 0 = 0 0 o 02021022 ZZZ rr a z -I VI 17 nr In I'1 n A n a re n a 0 0 0 06 0' 0 < A N 41 O -1.• -1 -, N 00 N 0 2 N I) <L -n z e C W 2 •-a•.•-• C C 0 r -1 - C5 r.:• n T)T n n ) • in • T) . n• • • • . . I9191'I SI A A L 2 T) D Cl (4 N N N r r IS f•I C In in r VI P CI r i•P.•••w •A.-• T) A 2 (1 .w •' A T)T).0 I'1 1'1 A A 0 0A 0 1't 0 Ac AAAA A CCC VI01 Cl 0 I c (' (4 2 111••Cl('I 19 19 PI m 6.0 T) • a 2 T) 'V n ') U V U U • • • • V) -• n • Cl• • • • • n • CI In (2 0 N N I7 .n C.n 0 V/N•.7 .l(7 C) .. rJV . C.CI I. 4 4. N.• ID N ' • • -.•..•• . •-•I- (1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 I / f 1 I ) a a a a s a a A a a a s 0 4 N(A N N to N N 4 4 4 ro I, N 0 N N 4 N N C ••4••4 4'/ VI UI u is,' .• 0 ry i N r UI•-I-•r•• CI Cl C. N .0 U1 NJ 0 -4 1 • 1 1 1 1 •• 1'' 1 1 a L. a 0' 4 UI W-I 01 Os P a U. .I U..•N a 4 • 0• UI Y~0 N r•a•Y 4 0.••• N I,• Y a N 4• .-• N Y 1 1 1 1 1 00 . • 1 / 1 11 1 •Y a .D-4 00'0 a o 0 r.• A U CA 0' a 4 A Cr, .•a .'•-••'N N•. a.• 1'•O N NN 4 a Ul N 0' NN 2 < .0 4 0 •• a a I.' L v N u Q. •0 • 1 X IQ N A L N a N C) n• , • 5 • • • • • • •• Cl I 1 1 I • 1 I i 15 r1 I, n n 0 n n n n 0 X x x x A x A A A 0 0 V) V) N N N N Vt 0 r a 1 ws • • ci N 1 -1 11 4.• • I • I • 4 4 • ,1 ) J • .• J • ,J .l 4.1•l,'> 1 • O • • O • • F w • • O • 0 .00 • 00 • F ♦0 0 0 0 O n W •• r • • .1• • „ 2 a t W 2 (0 'A • 0 • 'n • to • III In In • In U1 • UI U1 In LAO U101 (1 r • .J • L. N N'J • n.fV • •• I•r r 0 ,.•.;: O co IU •• • ,71 • al • 0 • .(J J • In,n • II V V V V V V JC 0 7 1 J < • rr La J N N N NN N N f J N N /,I N 14 N N N N N N 1 N p - \ \ \ \ \ \ \ .\N. \\ \ r. 2 ({({({ J G••N U, ., , X Tx \ •• \ \• \ \ , \\"\ \\ , 1) W ,L D 0 AlA u P J. (L W W (A.A nD(A S A A T[ IJ IJ 1J Na N Ni N (0 N IJ(a IJ N N N I-I N N N N N;J fI f1 1 1 I a f N C 04 rN • •'W• C 2 44.4 U 0 CD r I, lA lA •• r•> _• u CO 0,In 0, 4 1 0,0, •• 44 T J, if VI -4..4 444 .L3 4-1 r x•0 .0 NN X W V W .1 O, :. 44 (9U 03,A Un I..1- NN .0 V•+ -4-44, 00 V(A V ON IAN •� ,. .•J ... ..• .0.0 J,N '' N N P W 1'40 1 J1�. ,yid re-. c. J •IU UIUI u•J es<_, -0(0 ,l•J 4.0.0 Ul .o.>..1; IAN .0000000 . 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • I a Z Z 0 0 x < 0 N N N N N N 000000 A Co rl rl o w A C CCC C C O 1 V 13 O 13 1 T a l_ A n r 7 n T T mm • C C C C C C -1 T S 1.1 N O r o Mr1 VI C C nn nnnn O 2 N El X ,l a AAA A A n < 2 n 1 x .t K 2 . 00. M T A rl Z Y \ n n 2 2 2 AA a 2 • N Ip C C O r1 r1 1,1 rl z Z 2 0 2 1'1 ,-• A 2 IA-•�Ai A rf O ' J 1 A 2 1 O Z r1 I,I A c 7 x 0 • • In n n n x2 N n N : C TI 2 o a a a :0 x m 1 • r1 a n 1 •+ iyy ri An Z A n O n =, 2 V' 0 a N R A N 1 L r H • ✓ \ a ?° 2 Z 1 l a T_ r N 1 i A E( O m o A o u 2 0 < 00 MM o r 2norlr ~ 1 rI r 1 a 1 TI n -1 rIr1.1 ZZ 1 rlMO1ZZ '1 2 o T n x T ,A 2 T 2 2 00 T 0-4Z200 r1 .l VI 1 M • V 1'I • rl I'I AA 1,1 N 0 Z r1:: 2 ,. r A A A TI A A A A Prl A ion O 1 r• x 1 1.1 9 0 T 1 a r r N N 1 O\1 L N N m t a A A A C C .L MMA 2r N AIMM N f N l.> 1 U 1'1 O ZOO AA O 49 44.1\OAA n rc A '^ MID ✓ n nn o °°• V nn n r N z N A N a•r r 11 rl N C 430 rl r1 •1 • a I,i 1 I.1 rl 1.1 .•r N U) r1 rl r N N „• I'1 A a A Z A Amp. A o A O N A G r C -1 < I•I N N •G-1 C Z . VI r a L •-• W1 • n cI r n • n m 71 0 0 to 1 f1 N N N N 4 N ., I> r UI , r, rI •:lac. ITUI (, Smn VUN a L r r r a .. r •I• r r r 0, r uu ur'AU, Cl 1 I I 1 4 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I n a a a a a a O O ••• as O O N N O •♦ O Iv fJ u (n U (.. N u N N N Y l/NADA.T N 11 (9 .0 O •4 1A 4 C U I 4 N I I'. O N N N O o O N N N .• 1 `I 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I I I • Q. a W U a l.. u•u VI UI r W CJ O•UI WI Z �` 1Y •NJ N I(a NJ N r PA 1.• N c1 -CC>4O n 0 tot U t r r N0-.1, 417, 4 V u 0 W• • ,���1''''1111 CCC C I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I .5- 0, N a .0 u e (.+ 404 0 0u, .T. -.1.,.•°„:".--t r Z >. N f.• c.... I'J r r N 11 r r r r I• - n N I Y o •▪ 1 CD a N 2 no '0 N • . • • N 00 • • • p • • • • i • o I I I Cl n n0 Cl Cl n �,.. X X >I X x X 0 0 0 0 0 u • - 1 L. .'7 t]r •• O O O O O O n JI • • H Y r•• I •0 • i0 2 0: CO CO,D "1 •• • u n • .n CC - IT 1II Lit A n z -4 • U O T E. n 1.1 N Ni N NJ N -1 N - \ \ \\ 1.1 Z 1I A ,Y .O C S D 9 V N N N N N CJ rI rl 0 3 LA 0 -I •-•41 r(.11 f‘.1 IA C 2 1• O •O 2•?JI N/D CO I-'1T u t• ••1-• a a -• O D •.O.0 J7-I 1.11 0 U -. D Ul /1 0 0 N N 0 1.•ut •• u'D N-1.O O U.O N N n r u u N N O 0 at Ul O Cl O •-• • • ▪ 'F 1•"'• r UI�•0D VI• r w 0 S I' N U1 O 0.1 O Cr(2)0 I•.0 41 J J 0 u A n 0 0 0 L•0 VI In N N rl rl -4 1 C C n r r o T T T T T T T T T T T T c -n S n O n -• CCCC CCCCCC CC 1,1 -• -+ 00 a ZZZLZZZ2Z ZZ2 r n 2 Z •C: ✓ o u o 0 0 it o 0 0 0 O 3 r � 0 r ,1 O r n D Al 2 CD'.D r0.01 U1 N(Si N••r '• t O 7 rl rl J O U••'l Cu 0 O U N III u•• L n n O0 z c .e 4 U 0. t7. 7 n O O O u 0 0 0 0 O O O U o ,n .0 C ('L I q 2 rl Z (1 n C•1 V' -4 n • n I-r r r r r r r r r r r It) N o A C 10 -4 r1 N ti in 37 2 3) O D O H I. 0 C rl C Tn -4 • 0 vi C V1 0 1 N Z 0 cl w 0 w r o a a - Ni in N to 0. N N 0 C r cw n IP n S 0 A 31 3 N O N n I L n • n 0 L •0 2 A A 2 -I 0 r .0 T In 0• 0 .-.T • . r1 -• -• 70 1 2 N • 2 • -4 • I. ., , D • 1 i i e n n O O O U O O O u Li u r u u C w 4 lIJ.1 air r N C Cl y 1 I 1 I 1 e N U Z 00 .a r CS r r o • N • 1 1 1 1 1 e 1 606 •. r� IL r r 6-6 .O r �� • - 7 C • a t N 0 • 5 E N -C rte r 1n D or N Cl • D • C' I PI n 7R O l • P• • a s • a • 00 • a a a a a a a a a a a ! • 000000 • O • N n W .. • ,,,•••••••••••••••••••••• ' • ••••r+N N • U S P ' t.'' • I,] .1 0 0 Cl La 41 Il p.n 31.') • -).]7 n n u U • 01 N C • SUI • a • .A•w • N IV N N N IV IV ho IJ IV NJ 1... 1'4•••'•• • :U 0 .. • N n.l • • C'•0' • a A.0•t1'P•C.IT C'A.0'0'3. • 000000 . a • N 0 '1 7 < i J 1 1.1 .I N I') N IJ1 (V N N C,N I..(.1 LI,N IJ IV N Iv N N IV N N IV 1 - V- \ \\ \ -' \ \ ,\\\ \ \ r I C .. .� ... ,. t. .. _ x \\ -. \ \0- \ .1.."Y .lI .m.42 ',!10.D W.0 U.L t..Y:D.Y S .G.L(11.D D S. W D V JI ...IV N N N iv N N N N NN I•I N N N N N N N N NW N N 1,1 O a r-•J.. a LN 0.n 00 C C Z LA.-.10 a (4N Ca mm 1 • a r• IV N N•'N U U U 0 I a 0.a .0.0.I•`'IA 0 C ••I+ N N P tY N 1' (A(A UI W 0• 00 00.61000L4-4000N 0,0..1+1 UI.7 +dal •• 6 di• -1.1.�• ,oa 'a-1r J -4 r.I•t..t- •.T IV V N u-.1 'CI 00000041 `•'• • SM ' N C1 J ,a45 aC)a UI UI .-..00000.-.0,,,,..... a s('..I C a.) .,v y J 1 • • • • • • • • .0 17 D a L C C. 0 0 a_. P00 C 7.7 ('I CCCCCC C C CCC 223 3 2 • Cl X, -4-4 -• It P1 0 r.0 in vi 0 C .1 1-1 O 22 2 0000000000 0 •l/A 7)AAA Z I`1 C 0 0 I'1 n 11Il n n I t n n n n n n n n n n 0 .D A 't _. ''1 .l -4-4 _ • • In 1'1•n In 1'1 1'1:n 1'1 I'1 In In a n a P P P Z Z In 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 L 2 2 2 222222 M 2 0 LI C I. a D. 2 2 N '.'1 0 r + .t V Y A:u A:t,T'A A W D A 2..2222 -• •, n N N to 0 O 0 P P P P P P a P Y P P 0 P 0 a 0 a n (_ MM MM 1'1 r r r r r r r r r 1'r n I y V A • . • • • • O 1'1 T In I.1 In In(n IA.n In In IA(A PA In 2 n • 2 2 0G) C C C C C C C C C C C 0.v17 (X) . nn 2 2 ll V V V lt V V V V V V A . • V V V V V V V t)V V V Z 2 Z Z 2 Z Cl A rrrrrrrrrrr xxxxxA r n oO O ,n 1'l 3 N-1 1 II('I Cl 1'l r CI P P1 1 0 C) U.-. V V 1'-•S O • rt .. 00 lI n0 70 00000 CG OOIl1'l P2 A a 20 -4 0 1 CC -• 20 0 C CCCC CC C 12 '! t 1..t-1.+ 2 C Cl 0 0•C C •+0 1'1 11 .CI z•+1'1 2 rl 2 �A, DU A UP' P1 02-120-011.00 -02).X 2}3(20(1 31 V Y • • rr r . . . . . . . . P 0 0PI0 C1 • Cl ✓ n N Itr r a O (n-0 'Y Cl 2 2 C Q. w 122212220 A 3 (1 VI 00 1.1 IP 0177003. P P I'1 N VI 0 r0 r a a 11 C r Vl N •.r C C 1'l V PI V 11 .. A 1) 22 N OC C 222 Z222 ZO V V 2a021. 0 • 2 •• G y-1 00 2 -4 V r • • 20 N . . . . . . . . rr 2 t 2-4 N • A Xm m mm 11(1 2 11 1.1 2 Cl T a • N N 0.....0 4) vim r'S 1'I to S 1'I A a o Cl -• -1 N VI ('I 1:1'1 1 2 C 2 .0 0 • • -.1.000000M ON-ION-4 7 A I'I I•I I'1('I I'I 1'l 1'1 I'I('I 1'l N N n M.0 VMMTIMMVM P1 -0 • • • • • • • • • • N • .. . 4 . , 0-13],111, 1'l.. .. 0u.Ula00 I, ' a I /..• I•I-• N 1•11' ••r r.•• •.1' N ON V' I- I+ n 1 II I 41 1 1 1 1 1 1 l I 1 1 1 1 1 , 0 a 00 a a s a 000000 a a o N N N LA A W N N N N N N N N N N`1 Y Y Y O•Y N C LAU. N .1• N (A(A(.I U U UI U LNC' u •� NN N C I N N N N IU N N 041 O NN Cl C' N -6 I 1 1 I 011 1 1N ( ( 1 IV 1 N••1 1 1 1 1 1 1I I j .- 00 N N•a a 0 a to I,.I••a a U W W W W W W U a Z ta, N•- •• •'NW P.)KM,A•'H U I-'-ANN•• ,.........0.,4-4 r r 0 • ••r N ". •• N H N N N•'• r--N C'.•N I 1 I 1 11 I I 00 a *•. r (n as aauuhaau .04)04300 u a 1.11 N• •' ••N .0 N/.I•'• C.U 1'V N N r-• I r r-'I.1'N S N 2 C N I0 • L. (" •„ Cl a a N U O • I I y R N 3 U 0) N a • • • • • N 0 • 7 a CI • 0 • • 1 1 / I I I 1 "1 .l n n n Cl n 0 x x 31 x x x x N N N N N N V • u n - • p • ♦ p 0 ♦ • t- ♦ • 1 a • 1 • ♦ p 1 ♦ ♦1 ♦ • ♦ • 0 .7 0•)r • ') • .J. 1J. 0 42 0 • 11 N • •-• • .. (U .0 41.J • C)S • -• • V -I v 0 V V j • 0+ • Il • O. • •) •• • •T :)1 In 0I1 • V-4 • 0' • 1w(w N41.1 . 1.)N) • 2 • S n 7 -4 I 0 0 1 IJ IV 4.. 1.' IU N.1)• 1.4 10 N 4.)N 1V IV N N N 10 K 4., 33 33 33 -' 33 33 33 3333 33 33 33-'0 333333 33 11 Z . ... . ' .0 ' N N 33 33 N N. N. N 33- S.N. N N. . S 0 .a .0.1...X. ID.V .0 10 CO 1.11 10 S.0:L S .0 IJ N NJ Iv N 1V 1.) N)N N 10 IV NJ IJ NJ N IV N 10 • A I S V • J0' C • •.• 2 • V'V r•• N NJ O)I•N 1 r•4)r• IV N 1.• N N 1 : •• N N V J 0.0 U'14) W 0• t4 1/N 11 IV 0 •-•V CS 1l r VI UI W 11 a a Al U N C.10♦ 40 U• .O.) 0'VI 0'(r 0' a S U u V V a • ••)•)• .• • • . • • • , • -•• • ' N••• N 0 W U N D J1 10 4.1 .0 H J J ..3 l ' 0 y. 1'. ,p.•N 4 •'•).) UI.Jl ♦ •04.0 IT •y J) 0 V•1 .' i • • • • • • • • • • • I C n A Cl 49 n 0) r)4, A 110 D 0)09 00 0 1 c J r r r r 0 0 CCCC H.•H I r m 2 r: A A A 0 T H 1-1 1 A A A fl < C 1 K KK -r rrrr 22 ' .0 C A 'l N 111(0 L I1•1 11 11 11 I'1 1'I A G VI "1 i I T 7 A-0 S A 0 m 0 N N V) 2 A r 11 a 0.„o X. n n S V V V V GI 0 Z A A A A • (0 • .0 6 C 2 i-2 J U U T 11 D T. C.C. CI • 41 1 11-4 A II 011111 m mm .0 n C- •-• A AAA CCC 0 5 C a0 2 22 0)00 c 1'1 r• s r)In t:'f T T.T 2 0 1.1 n (1) Z 4,1 x :0 • A -4 r '11 r a m H -4 K N •I D O Cl 0 11 V'00 n v 0 0000 000 'r 4-3 1 1.1 1') O A A 1'1 A A 1 11 1.1 rim -I-•1 S "1 2 2 2 C •-•2 'H S 222.2 T S T A m Pt m rt 2 2 m 2 m mm� m mm rl c 0 A. 14 A V 1 ti A 1-1 A AAAA AAA 1.1 A A • •r•-•A L••• A A A A r O 'V r r 2 z r r z V rrrr 17 y V T 1 S 2 0C, 1 C) S ASA a N ..) V) N A (n .1 a VI N 1n N 0 0 Cl (1 '•i C C •' a a C 014 '41 C C C C f'T 0 '0 V 0 V • • • • 'V 0 •C0-4 1]V V • ••V • V V O U) V I'. r rr. • CCJ0 V© I1 rrrr VI V) M H r' w r rr r r r• 11 m S 11 1.1 a • • 1'1 • S ('I r•rl 1'1 A S S N J G N N N G VI fA VIN C c G : z .4•-•H OI')AI n n 0 C. rl V 11 m m m In • N N V)V) r •_. )r. I) 0) r•0. 4 A r• r r r a r r• L1) r•- .• 0 1 I I •1• 11••••1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 n p p a 1 • 1 1 •• N • 1 • • •1 1 1 0 l) 144 40 N N 0 N 0 0 4 N NJ N N Y�� U C U N LII r U N 2 , I• 1 r1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •1) 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 • U <' •W V! W IV 11 ••V)•••.• -•r U 2 r .- •• U P••• N P• u Y•-•1 N 11' p 11 )' I•-• N N 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ♦ U ♦ •4 0 r'0 ` 1 U r.• 1"V•• r H U. •• N n' N•-•.• N•• N•'Cr 10 '0 .- 2 G 0) U N N V)0 0 00 43 0. 0)0' C' r•• .0.0'o w (.. 0. *0•0 NI N N N . U .J • 1 V•0 r J, N U1 ,. • 1 . CO a I.) 0 r' v V) A • v1 C) • A I'1 • . 0 1 1 1 •1 1 1 1 1 I1 Cl n rl rl 0 n rl n x l( x l[ x x V1V) V) VI 0 0 41 0 N I' • •5 • I , 1-7 • 1 J • • .)J .7.1 • 1 .. a •• 4. • •• t.. • O O • a a ! • D •a • G • aa .. a•r- • ' •• -4 rr+ - • Y20 It • ..,+ • ,.r...�.r.,.r. r •. • ,. ,.P. r.r. r...J: .0 • J.O.l: GGJ,6. • u • I♦uAa *4WW +uuW • ,• i• RO • 1111 • . •.•+ ,. • , •• • 7 • < J . Yi •\\ 1`1 .. f..I`I 1`.n..I•.IJ N IJ N Al Al N N fV r,N N N n.1 IV N N(J IJ .01 f .. ., .. . .. , .., •. T LCD. .O Y Y.».v y,L.1, L .D W Y D'O.D Y V y 'l 1J NN Al IJ IJ I.,•J V,W t .V IJ 1.IJ�J IJ IV IJ N;V IV IV fJ:J N IV fV N IV .•1 • 1 • P i A, ..., 2 t .4 •�, C C 2 • r 2 U N01 u~1-• UI N N N N U N J`f71 W'. (..a N .401 .-. n N uu "•W UI N a W.A N UI u 01 01 N J v Il) .0 Jl a•-•0 a V u V u a N Jl N CO S • r b •. ..- J J• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • f -d ,400,,,,....,.-, 1 , u'.D UI'. ( 1.. .'..•4 u u W UI r 0 J J,N J N N 1 i J1•1•O 0 0:,. ..l.J. . 0 0 0'., C.., Ji 2.'u N..Y 0 J W w O.. J.4 �.. • • • • • • • I 00 00 nm 0(.11.7 TTN PI 00 000 0000[700 0 v �'J C C C C C C C C C C C C r 2 2 On .�N P P Q•fP 111 313131 A 2 7. 2 7 2 2 2 Z 2 Z 1 pp Z L 71 A 2222222 -c-•-1 000 r •-..••.-••-...Z.,•.. p. ,2i.• N G A N 2 7 7 2,2 2 7 7 2 7 7 s (9 ¢¢ N000000 2>2 0 p 01.1 O p p 0 C100O 0 2 2 _ = 00 1 1/1 P ►/ P s 0 N N N L l I A N N N N N N N C.l 0 77,!7A..2". 2 ...4-1, A 8t JO s L .. • 1'I 2. 1 .012. 11 .012. 2. 1 44 r 0 L ~1 1 0 0000000004.)00 r1 .4 1,1 1. PPP 1• P P s 1400 N C C L C L C C L L C C C Y• I • • -4-1-, rl 1'1r11111 m ri mmmI'1 ml'1 r1 L c,O O O • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • In 21 22 0 0 0 A 7_ 2 C11, C 2222222 11171) 2 AA< AX CCC A m r r r CI N -I A 014 I' 3 C C CC CC C X).-.T) 2 mmI.1R'41 p0c per0p P PIP. 00 -. ZZ I.2 A O C C C 0 7 7 2 7 2 2 m m C m 1.11.1 ,C.C. • r r -‹.-s•-•mx J C C-.0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 C m .Y A v r r r r r r f' 7.14 2 J .. p m.19 rl rl rl m. 2 Z A.. A 01)1). AAAA SFA A L P P H-1�1H'1'71 Cl 1'Iw 1-1- T ..• N V T x r r r r r r r r 0 20 rlr mmmrlrl •-i•.1 (1W 1.1 C 22 Z.P. 2 N CC ..r NNIn vI In U/In p r Mr..... ccccccNn II r ply r 2C CC CC3+ • V T o 4lpppp mo z3. 1) o 222-/T-om mm m T T .. r r H< P ~ V 17 I7 V • A A A A A A A • r r r r r r r r 1•,r', 22222722 T 2 N N Q• P P 1 P P/1 rl 2 rl 4•42.4a, 1.1 ri I'1 I'1 m 1'1 1.1 1.1 w 0 0000000 M-42 9 N N N N 0 N N N 2 A m m r l m r l r l r l 00-0 D A A C I A L/ rl rt 1•I Y 1'1 505. v 'l C:.J,"1 C.r (n Ut N C 0 0 f'+ C` P •+•-••-,•••••,- l c a I• .. •+••Cl••.•..•••• CI •I •I I I1 1 1 'I SI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ♦1•1•1• 1 C) ca. a 0 000 a a 0 n,N N n, (A 1..(.,4 4(A u Or Y.W N N N N N N N N N NNNN N C Cl011, NN C)'' J 1..r,C.U N I.•C. N N N N•.0 c O O IJ Cl CI 0 N .y II II 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 III I I I CPO P u J O a(,1 4 N r W IU W a 0'a 4.'01 0'a a 4•'P.' a 2 WN N.-. N N N N N W Q• •-••'•. N N•'N W N N N...•(L S J N 0r. I I 1 1 I I I I •4 I 00 .Pk.. V 0 a W W P'p• ,04:141 n I N , a C ♦4.'01 0'a a Y I'.•r P •. - N)NNN.•Q W r N N.-n1 IZ N N y r M T J N 2 G (.4 J a t 4, N V 1 • I. 0 CO at N 2 M v • • • U) • • IA 0 • •• • • C m I I I I Cl I I I fl P/ A 'jSgv NA .0 7[ A 7C A In N N In N W I • • • • • •0 • o • i i • • a i r P o • e ► i • i i • i• n . • .. • • rr•r -r•-• • • t U • II • 14 • N • NN • N N.rN N N) • N)N rJ • N • fa • Nm. r1 I I • ., 0. • a 3.Cl • -4 V V v 0'Cr u • n • •II • (.1 • 4 • V V • •. ' • V V V • • • .1 • r•1• A 'l 5 7 1 0 Ni I (J Iv N IJ N I3 Iv Iv N.Iv N N NJ IV 10 1 Vl 1 \ \ \ ,\ \ S.\\\ S.\\ \ \ \\ r I 1 •. • - • , r r A S. S. ._ .. - S.S. S. S. 5 5 \ L .11 11 V1).L(U 0 U 3I 0 )' .0 O U Iv IJ I•I Cu IJ r), IJ IJ IV I`) IJ ')Iv N IJ Ni N I'I I n t J N N N t. C Z AU, (AI) 1 9_D . IJN 0U• UN1. J.O wN 00 rr r r m y 00 x)11 tlNr .0.0 ',0000 IJPur .0.0 iso 00M ,N0 IT O N) �•UI -4 N UI J..0 3)•0 aa (:.•' •'• • 4' ) l 01 N 5 T 0% .).1.. .• ,)UI•'U1 .0.0 N N V:)' • • • • • • • • • • I. A r ' r r r ; x AAA A x A 1 2 )• H 0 0.n A )2322/A 0 11- 1 z r.I'I 1 2 Z U) Z2 1') . rn 1I'1rn s ZZ D A 00 2 VI V)NVI XXI N r Z Z V1 1'1 VI N N N 2 Z n 1')I'1 < 1) 11 r1 A \\\\ 1.11.111 ➢ 7 Z r1 A 0 0 2 2 3 2 L Z Z I I/I V) Z CC a) x1111111 NNN 11 > 0 it 2 .4 V << < < 0 A •-'•+ o ' 1 MU a) 1'I 1.1.I I') v1 V)VI C C 0(1 0 Z 2 AA Al 3., 111rl 0 n x1 I1 Z \\\\ n V to v IA $ I 22 0 AAAA ZZZ • 1 II I , 1 J A u Y 1• n n 0 1'1 n Z Z G • n V A A I 2 2 7 2 MMCMI U 0 V A 1 Z21 Z '1 l 1 0.0 IA 1 k L Itt 1 f 1 V A I'1('1 1'I 0 O C L) rl L 7 I'1 1'1 r1 rl r• Y 1) 4'1 00 0 -1-•-1-• 0 O r1 0 0 0O 1 s M 2 C C C 1111 C 1 Z C C CC r1 i < Z 1 P,rl('I I'I .-40M 2 1'I 1 V V O 1) A X).V A) V A A V O 0 1) rr • • l• • • • C 1 2 IA U A V U 11 r 11iI is 0 \ 2 2 t AA:VA ZC 2 2 Z 2 V' VI S. 0 5 O l3 U 0 V O N Y V 1' 0 11 V) it. U 11 1)'ll 11 r r C A C Z Z 2 • • • • 2 N 2 Z L Z X L 1.1 -. 1 A .4 .4 -1-I -0 V) CC • • • 1,1 V1 1/1,1 VI V) • r • • • N • P T II• A17,11170 P II IN P l P• 0 1 < C <C N Z • A A A Y A A my PIM 1.I 000,1 I.1 rl I'I A t C 1111 111'1 t) -0 C T T • • • N 0 V)VI • - 0 0 0 NUI. ')to h. D r r•r 0'0'r ••r•• r n .. •• • I 1 I t 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I r1 •1 I I n • a • ♦0 a •••• O♦a a a a s 0 ' u 01 u N N N 0000 N N N N Ni IN N C n A 0) VI u U •"•••r'•.' (.01,1r u u la u Z <. 10 N N N 0000 N N 0 N N N N 1 , 1 1 1 • • • 1 • 1 1 • • 1 1 I 1 I 0'7 5 00,•• u u Iw a a 7u Z Y ^• •-•Nu N N 111,00 r r r u N N r O r W r U.a N 191010 N r rt./. 11 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 • r •. 0.01 O ♦I -•• u u u a a 7 u N r N N N N rr•00` r r r N N N r 1 < 1 . N u • C• 0' r C' t4 a I 00 r N t O I • A I.2 11 T N D • • •• • • • • 0 ±,, 1• •1 • 1 • • 1 1 1 r) +j n n n n n n n n rl t.. x x A A x A A x x V) V) N N N N N V) V) a a- I i • • • •a • • 1 • 1 a O I O `♦1 a a 0 • • I • ) • _) J 0 • n • • C • • • .--.N Y• • • • •- 0 .0 • • .•••. u . •.+ • • • • • 2 .0 •• • • • • 4 to t4(4(A IA 4 U 4 4 U 4 Lq 4 • • • IA 0 (A 4(I U • (A • U 1.1 'J J • N • CO A W O.W a,.D T h'1'. .Ii ). D a, • 0 • Y • 0000 0 • • • 0 • ...1.4•4,1....1-4 rrVd .1Vd.I • C • 41 • L1.11.P O• • W • N A n 7 • • l)✓ ..t t . D Tl • N f.INN NI.) . ... N. I • n \ \ N N N N N 1.)IV N N 14 N N N N N to N 0 .. . ..% .... •• n \\ \ 0 o D o \ tO J'.•D O.1)Ll:a a W A V.O S'S J .O .O D D 1J N N IJ N N N IV N N f..N N 1V I.. 1. kJ:V NJ N 10 N � a 2 (0 y C .J7 L.•1 (A u 4 .•t• 4 .J N O. d P 01 0' WW,-.A4)1.4 ..1,-. U JI W 0' •. AM ...• NW 4 d • • • • • • • • u LD P 0.4 4 11•v P.O U rJ IV ))t, -.4 UI••lA 4 U u U • • ' 4 u .•.)NI IJ W .1 P r'..0 I.VI�)• • r.LI W a .. , • • . • 01.D WA •.. W-4-400.4 &A..4-44 ,..4,0 •)•• .4 k..3 0 LII•0•I • a • •• • • • • • • a Z 2 2 7 2:C 7 7 2 7. 7 2 7 7 2 S A 2 0 1 2 2 2 • '1 O 0 0 0 0 .41 2 A 1 T .-0-.1-1-4 2 Z J .Da M WU)9(D.D3)T W LDma] A I.1 0000 2 14 r !9 1'1 rl 1'1 ll Il I•11'I ii I'1 I9 1l 11 I9 Vl Al ;O A.71 Al I'1 < •• O rrrrrrrrrrrrrr 1 N W rrrrrrrrrrrrrr .. L L A A 0 '1 2 O n C 2 a s a n 1 2 O L V. 1 n DADA a rl O I.1 N 'J 4 111-1 T 0 VI U r0000 1 .+ n I- A -1 2 1 '+ a r1 N n a n c -1 1 N A IN r1 O N A Al Z A • I'1 .l N < A A 1 1" A rl 1.1-I'119 r1 4-1-4 -1 I.1 O 0 f9 3)2 I•, A ... Z r119 I.1 r1 1•l l•I I9 19 rl O 1 O O O O C 1'1 a r r r r r r + •'• c (•1 19 f9 1.1 PI 1'1 I•I IT 1.1 MIN r1 19 r! C ri •C,.Ci 1 .C• .2i X a r1 t-0 v A V T V a L l/ a t U A I l O 3 r r. D A •'010041 -• .... 2 S t I Z 2 t 2 2 2 2 2 S 2 I O V 0 0 0 o O O o O O O 7 0 0.3 V T n r1 •• 22222222222222 2 A 2 2 3C 2 a N O 19 rl r1 19 rl rl(9 19 rt ri r1 1.1 1.1 rl Y U a n n 19 y 2 fl () Lnn ..r n A C 14 .... • D 2 2 2 o 2 1.1 2 N 1 -4-4-4 1 A '0 I.1 • V) • • • • •y 1 y1 1'I 1.1 1 Y• A P Y•A p ( O t A • q A A A A H I.1 0 I'I 1.1 I'1 I'I r1 '0 al) '0 • 3') . . • • NI-,00,,0 -1000,,,,,c. n 7 c, .000 C, CO •" -. N tn1.•-.r r•..Y•9N•..+1+•• •- .• ,.+I....0-•,.+I....0-• I.+ I I r. M. n O a I 1 1 1 1 I• n a • 4, 001 • a o 4 u LA I.1.4 u 444(.I u(4 1.4 u u u N u N N N N N .0 C J• U N N N N N N N N N)N N N N N u •• u U 4 N •I N 2 Cl N n 1 p r NNNN Ni P -y •• •4 4 4 0),,,............ a 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IY r J ).O N N.U N H 4.0.0 M 131 IV N N u P•u(A • J) 0 P .P- •N-.• NNr+ N N N •O • I N P r / I 1 1 / 1 . I 1 ' + 1.+0.•• 0444N0-•.•.•4.•.•1.-4 I. 4 P •U4 • 4) N N .1).0NN UA-r4.O.O v0NN N P NNNN N N 2 J) c • 4 • 1.... u 1..... • a 4.) P N LA 'V I 0• 1 • CA i N • 2 M T • • • N 0 • I N O • • • • • • • • a 9 1 I I 1 .1. i 1 1 m n n n IN n n n n A AA A A A N N (4 N N N N (A U1 • ) .. ) .. - . •• 0 • • • • ••• D • • Sr ♦ ••0 • • 0 • t • p • y. n y • 1II • (n(n • IR(A UI'(I f•UI 1A(11 UI 111I I) . • _ _ _ UI ♦ 0 •• V • 0 • D 0 ) • w • o CI • In(II(n.A . MI • r• V1 V* • -) • .,• ' u n wwu(Aw u' • w • r A n n7 -r < • `. I:: .. . . 1: N P. N 1..N IU Al N N N I) 1.1 N 10 N NJ N N V V. -. -.\ \\\\ •. \ \ \\ \ \ \ 1'. 2 4 • (•• \\ \C- \\ \ C -00.D 0•0.Y.Y .0.0:0.D.L n [P :D W ID ,0 .D I) N IJ 10 44 N Iv N Ni N'.0"J N no iv N I.1 N N 1J 1'1 • •a 2 oC 2 10 10 ill U r P. V V V 21 r V N N 1•LU 40 0' 4. IA N N N 14 IJ (A U V V •A N L9 N V N O y V 1 U La N .5.0 r N LO..) 0 r . 4., N f J r r .D CD • • • • • • A 4J U V V•1 UI V 0 •- V 1'•)•-♦ U :D. ''•' 4-. .4 • U L •A A •• •.... A D -1.•.• .4 N J1 .0 J.0 0 K'A 4•V P.) .''I •) •J Ir JI ) 1'10 1/1 IA ••• • • • • • • • • • - • N OW 4d,(11 N N N N N N N N N N VI O A V S C SS i t 3) 2111 S S nn Y 1'1 A C) a s a a 0 a 1.• • • ••• 0 0 O C K 2 A A A A A A A A A A < A A V V 2 - D' 00 00 00 00 0 00 0 0 V V .7 G) -4 C r V V V V 0 V V 0 V V 1) 1) V r In 11 1'1 In 1119 In In ('11'1 19 r1(n ('I 1n n 0 A O A 2 N 1.1 II 1.1 1.1 19 4n In 4n 09 r1 r In VI V V a V1 N 0 K V, CC rrrr •• O n 2 0 0 S t '1 A c C In z• a ► CC CC JO17O0 U ( rl I 12 r r 2 2 2 Z VI C C in c A A -1-1 -4 r A S 2 r r 2/210000 O fn A CA rn 0.1 n1 Pt r t • • • • • A << A A A:U O a n 2 2 n A vo In N V. 44. C) 11 • 2 de l V C C V 2 n 19 19 -1 A A 1 :'1 N N A a N A 4" 0 V (D0)A 0 01.12 0 GI 1" V V V C Gl 19 ov .3 C 71 r r r-rl O 0 r VI('I Cl 0 A A r1 19 C ..1 s C 4n•• 0 0 0 7 rC0 T_2 (' N 1.1 0.4 7 Z C In VI 2 '.9 1 0 01r 1l('11'1 V Z 2 ('1 1.1 S V ti . • . A U •-(5 .453)3) U a -•- 1 1 TI d•= a • • • • • 0 0 • 1 ...• n • 0 22 Sr Srr In 22 r r r 1n 2 N C( a s a Z S a 2 GI G') 2 N 1• C •+N n a P.N N Y 'N N n 41 OOP 222C ••^•L C C P. P Y. C C •. A Z N V V V V V V .02-4.0.0 Y V V Y V n V • • • U .y V• 0 V -1 V V V '0 -1 .0 • A C r • • r r • C C r r • -• . � R-.X PP•• 4....r .D W i P V• 4'1 P P 1'1 1.1 P • • 1'1 I'( P 0 -I A A A N A N N .n N 2 N • 111'((•I A A 11 A A 19 U 0 Y x11'1 0 19 1,1 • V • • . V 0• V V . .1.J • .(-(. O,• _ p • • r• .). (A .)•• . .r.•.r ,• •' •• , • • n 1' • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I • I • I 1 1 n • ♦♦ ♦• •• a a a o a a a O N IA 1... N N N•N) N N 10 N N N U Is w N N N C LA 0 UI U(A U•• IA LA(A H N u N LA U1 • w N r r. u(0•)O N N•J 0 C) N C N' Cl O N ...11 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • ••r W PrP o •r0•♦ a to U1• ♦ ♦ .P G 0 N N r N CO N N N CO N N N N N 1/1 • N N O r r r r N NI r LP r N r r r 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 11 I. 1 I • r1-• .00.r 0 ♦•r P• • 4 4,..... • • 0' ♦ NN ..N(0 Al NN Us N N N N ••U1 • • N 10 .0 K 1D u V • •11 4 g V N V V 1 • • 11 4 N 2 VI '0 N a • • N • • • n • 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I r1 n n n n n n n n A A A R A A A A 0 0 0 N N N 0 0 Cl' • • t • O • F a P♦ C O Y t 0 F F 2 P P •-' �,� J ) • J :1 ).) • In • UI • UI • 'JI to In UI rn fn In fn • ,.r r.•,. • r M ?i Y • I.. . 4 UI fn,J N In • ' 1.000001/1000,0M I fn , 0 N •. � • �,NNNNn,r.,IJ • r.INwruN --- V • • • N J• 7,0'IT,In 0'C' • ...l. , . • 5,, V V V V V V V..... 0 X n • 0 .I \I N nI I.11..n�fJ n1.)0.).) r \V V.. r .. , a ,<• r.. a I,fJNIV I. N I'JNNrJ f)NNNNN NN .I \ I" 'CD a U Il'.0 .Y 0 L U S.Y.p.0 ` L J r 1 N ran,N,J IJ I J N .D 0300 on 0:0 0'D p (L W VN IU IV rJ IJ N N N N N N IV N IJ rJ N I'J N I.1 f'I a, .t (...0 (...•• C .-•.. I_' . . • • C 44 t:•0 -- 2 N N :4 .D.D -N 0 iV I' P IV .0 r .•4 .00 0`0 O N V..NUI N N 4 4 -4 P—Pr PN JJ 0.0 -4 CO-.I OA CSQ` Oa .+U haN:P-• v.p.-o ♦I D 0 0.0 N I a 0 W a • J— .N . r J a, r,.4 11 4 a -'T N N.D VI V r N U - ♦ .+u'JD NU W 0.p O-4 • • • 1 Co ✓I N NVINNNN NN NNNN1n N r t• r CCCCCCCC N 10 N N N N N N N N'0 N 1'1 V a m'• MPI •1111,7 YPPYY • CCCCCC CCCCC . X rrrr -'-rr M3MX , n00000000000 o a A A A A A A A A A A A A p r- 7C>t Jt Jc CO M MOfaAX D to0000 a K 1 o 'I CCCCCCCC p m 5,1n 2 I Z j ' 00000000 A A A A A 2 O 0 .......4 Cl 1 C y m m m m m m m n ➢n a n i. N ' r 00000000 Z Z Z Z Z A 1 L N 00000000 = 1 I 2.22172 I.1 , MMOM I.1 mmm n 0 0 n 0 0 0 n 0 Y,0,0`, ' � ACCCCCCCC A y VDy n u v v ~ m • • r •-• i • • • • • • r N 1 .0 :p O f•1 Vl 0M000000 • -1 C m 1.1 C PIMP,In mm CLT SA Ir 0 AC C C C C C C C C C C t C 2 Z C 7 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 I- 2 '1 • A v m 1.1.•mf•11'ImmM 00000 m .S•r rr r = toy A2 JI p34A • t rrrrrrr y a n• t•0.DLA a A r' r r r r r r r 2 2 2 2 2 y 1 0M M M O a 2 0.0. 0.0.0 A O M M M M M M M M m V I 00000000 X m m m m m m m m m m m N :1 .-. C C C C C C C C C 0 Z N N• N N N N N N N N N n 2 2 2 2 2 : A Mr.321 y V U-V -1-4-1-4-1 MIOMMMM1OMMMMM .4 y;9yly y y • ...... rrrrrrrrrr yN • H r. N Amo1rmmmmmmmI A P I9 M w w r R K I.1 U A A A A A A A A A A A N 1•I R m 1.1 I•I I.1 1'1 1'I D M A M VI V1 N N N V1 /3130.03 < :• • • • • • 0 A I'1 V IV y pry (1 • • • • • 2 r P1 '0 N S• • . • • • m N rc, 5) - Y+ '. N a)Co.)"'.-Y C CJ 0 n G ,I a.)C).J t_`O U n l")O.i L. a 1 1 1 ( 1 1 1 1 1 .•.+.• 1 I ..- 0 I 1 I • O a 1 1 1 1 1 0 r N r $.01....,,,•,...mNN n1 NN NN + C 4 N N N N N W a0 4 4 W 4 4 4 W 4 W 4 4 C O N O ONOC.000 C, 044 C•4 r L.4,-4-4-.4 0 M V CIM /C 1 0 2 I 1 I 1 ;'1'•1 ; O 000000 00 O U O y N. N 0-.0.11..".011-6,..1'-6N.N-.r ♦40'-r W IV )0C'NP0a4'.W 0101,1.-0 2 N .O 4 N- N-Q I(D(L r N N N-N N V I N-(00 0 N N x 4 4 4 0'--- 0 -N N M .11.1.4.,s+0+ N N N a04 N-4 V N- Nrlr 601 0'f OI0,Qa 003 4440- -• • -N N t n M —M M I c •V V } a N V 1 i 0 ., • 1 73 a N 2 M -0 N a ♦ N 0 • • • • •• I.1 • A l I I 1 I 01 m n x A A A A N N N N (/I LA 0 r • • I. •• .ae• c e i o • i • r r • o 0i • i • 000 .0 • 0 n ,O.A C.'+ 3' 0 II • T • 0.0, • P.II`0' • P • (0.n 1n IA • IA m '3 r• I • 141 Ur • 1'4 14 0 • , • 1)W 4) .) so V 0 ,. 0 P 1.4 I.) • I • III • I.1 l• • r a P • • • 4 I.4 Co • V It .l 7 -• J < C. 1 IJ IJ I.. A+ 11 I, N N N IJ N Iv IJ N IJ N N N -1 L. \ \ \ \ \ \ %\ \-''. \ \\-' N. \ m 1 • .. I ..r• . •) . A . S 'S"S S. S o A .0 it .Y .D .0 ,D 01 3r 0 T 01 W CD 3+ 0 Cr b I• IJ IJ N PA IJ IJ 0 •J 10 IJ F.)iv 10 N N IJ 0 iJ a 3 C Z 0 I 44 0 1.• -I L. -•44 0.0• Os fl. .0 V 44 •• L/1•-• • A N O'O' 4.0 0 NN 4t •A 'D A A .0 A A 1D .A LA 0.4 o. N N 0 Ci CO ;0 N N N V V A N O N N N T US •.I IJ r •0�0 10 P N14 1.)JI-4 -. .1 . V N N IJ IT••lA at D ,- O u,N .)1 N N I t'1 ,0•0 N N •.t•)•:t s N N N .D 0 UI-1 0(C) O'O. 1 + � • • • • • • • • . • • • I1 O 0 n m 0 0 NI Cr C C 0 CCC i C. A PI I') PI A 3 1.119 - D 0Al CO a a a • 0. L • 0 m n 0 2 I T I'i r r r r V1 10 DA -1 r) • 0 rrr 0 rrr r Cl ri In C 01 N r t 3 Cl In 11 r rl Cr I'I 11 at Cl 111 T n P.K o• -4.4-4 < V m 11 .4 'A n 'V A 0 0 < 0 2 0 0 11 • A • • Cr C C 0 n4 04 n4 m 01 O Al as n (l \ O D D • * 222 0 -1 0 19 '4 K a 71 n o L S S I 1- 0 0 0 C 2 :u 2 2 C Cl rrr a • • • a n , .A N N 11 a Cr n • 2 V N I , In t-4 2 T_ 1-• -4 O V A A 2 -4 r• 0 VI N a r 0 TO A V m .1 n I n -•-) O O0 2 A 7C C IA I'1 m V'0 V -I r) 2 2 2 0 0 0 A I NN 0 2 22 n 1I 0 r,m 11 o J •N 1 ,1 z I^ 0 0 0 r• O 11 r, 0 0 Ps rt m ti A l G) r1 V rl 1'I r: C C O O r)PI C 0 o A rl o r, o o '-1 C- 22 2 c r, c C 22 CCC CO 2-12 C to PC ('1 II I1 Nm m c -4 0 rl 1 2 U )OA AI o - L AA L V L r) a AA V 0 • • 0 0 L . a. • • a s • . . r r a • G1 O r r r r r to L r m 11 • 2 2 co 3 2 2 2 2 0 \C 2 V O N Vt V) D C a CO co N a n a <1'1 N 0 n C C C Cr CC co VIrc •• A 2 L L U 2 0 2 Z V L 2 2 2 C SNL Z •• -1 V V 3 -1 Cl -4 -1 V V 1-•1 V S 14 V M V • r r r • A • • r r • • • co n r • 1 r 14 II. 19 PI ••1 P 0 p p r1 r1 11•p i. to rl F. P o N N V1 •-1 -o(A -I VI CA 2 A A • A A A A A • A 1'I I•I I.1 1.1 PI I.1 r 1'1 C -0 V L -0 V L A ,1 1 ' Cl0 0 0 c3 0 0 r) 0 .J D • •.• •. r •• 1..•• F•. • .•..• r r N•. •.• n I I 1 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 • $ 1 1 n • r 0 P O 0 • O • O a a• a 0 0 0 a O 0 Iv N IV N N 1•. Al N N IV N N N 4 4 N N N 4 C 0. 4 U 4 4 4 CO N•-• 4 (0 2 N O C. 0 No N N o u N N N o 0 N V N 4'. •• I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I 11 I 1 I I 1 1 1 • O'• 4 O O O 0 0 •4 N • a a O' 4 2 CO N N N N N O N 0'N N 4 N N N N O 4 1-'IP t•- I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 4 0' • 4 a r a a • a •4 r•' • a • 0 a •+ N N N .• N • N N t C4 P. •'-N U) N N N N r 2 • < L• UI ' V -i ,A 4 • 0. Cl P C• lA '0 V V N O • 1 3) 3 N I r1 11 0 D N Cl • • • • CO i • • 0 I I 1 1 1 rl 0 n n n n n )< x 7 x 3 3 NIA No N ( • p y n' n, rn f0 • •- ..- - - r♦+ •r n D ,, r ; 1'J IJ Al JJ CO Q.JD.D ,1) CL 0 D ~ I .D .. . .. ID 1`J 111 1U N N 1.1 n.C. f J 1wr ,D .A 11 Cl •o n V Ci AG 7 a• a a a a \ \ N IU N N n: f` n. N N N r. 2 �. a \\\a \ a N N N 1. r.. •• a a a a �, 1D .0 aa a a a Iy ` ` \ ` x N ,'D'D.D 10 V iJy fU Iv Iv 1J Iv IU N N N A nil N0 03 N IL F `.' LI N i,1 IC J 'l,U, N IU r•••• N N 1. C V • • rr 1• Ind N N ••4 N N C J.p. 1•� 4 4 -4 -4 • •• •♦ C •A.p U W • ., •N• • N N • C ♦ In UI :)N t/l to JI UI u P P n 1.c �p 1. N P NIU 1.. C'.I> !n UI •7 t.. • .V N 4..0� n D -' J•`I •.. U �_l c. NUIn.,N SUI .'> , ,p A L 11 Z y 2 . 1)Ix rt.i :a e H y C I^ C Y \\ \\ ~ s L .i n -n • N 2 p -• p a m 7 t 11 'A -1 n n PI r1 rl 1.1 1'I Al D• N A 1 1 1 Y • x 1 ti H M-• Cl y C `• 2 O R f1 x 0 O • in(1 111 17 r A p .. 1'1 n vl .1 a 11 (0(0.0.0 = W L ,y y 2 •Cr r-• '1 1 Ca p y v •- 1" N • 221,22)•.•n• Al I V 7 2 A n O r 4 l 1=j • o C )' N V1 N rN 2 C A 2 PI V n A A y • 1n rl r1 19 ` C rl P n 2 , • 1n • O N N(A In m C n 2 D N 0 A = r1 A A •0 : N li C N N Cu j N 1 CI 17 01 -1 A -. Al A C A C C C• r1 rl I4 19 19 C a J r1 11 C c19 C'r rl 3- Clrn N 3 1 in 2 N C N N ri *C•C M l" In r•, _ _ 19 n o = m 2 L r ,A ZO W W Y D A V• A N A A 0' C7' 0 0 4 A 2 \ D W '� O ClW D r o G'1 N N y ==2= r V D r 1n T N q N W In 71) Xl C I C C N in D b D D N C 0 O C a., F A A t-) A N (4 L 2222 C S TI • ' Q` r W fl rl U • H rV-rl C A fl A .•. • '0 n n N n •A. A N w Al72 r r A N N r 2 J .. • ~ -4 N 1•W W W N '0 A A fn • r-r n A A A A • 2 C C N • r.• 1) 2 01 19191'11,1 n r1 N A 11 L A Irl rl N N 5 1 1 1 ♦•1+1-•• F• C r• CO CO 4 to UI ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦♦ ♦ ♦ C 1 1 •1 1 I n G .0 C 4 .n W r CO 4 CO CO r 4 4 C.1 d t • • 0 1 N fN .. G. F hr ♦4 4 L. N 1 r- II I Co4 ✓ N N 2 tp r r C 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ ♦ •4" 1-J ci 0. 0 r4- r4. c •• 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I ~ r- u 1-• N U n ♦4 1-*1•r 4 14• IV 01 r! 1 1 • N 4 N NNP 2 4 to N �.. n. 4 ` •2• Cr, r 2 ♦ P m '< CI ID N D I o • 1 co s N 2 • '0 (n A N C) D r1 C3 ri U) C I. r - • I 0 T J: • D .0 !+1 hl • Cod Iw C) • : IN R i Z -4 J -t • • J U • N N .• y1 \ I•I Z .D r V 10 N ... 2 11 •. '.r7 d C iV N r r�I•)3.31 • LnL11 1 UI Ul r' IT O•-J n O1 N 10 UI Ui • U �O V u•+ 1.-•.r•.Of N •d.d•. UI�'1 a • •'D•• 0 4) •U'J'- m V .I C • J y • • G1 • 1 O 11 11 T 11 11 C 11 C 11 11 11 11 FCCCCCCCCCCCCC r1 A Y Z Z Z 2 2 2 2 Z Z Z 0 2 r OOOOOuuooOOOO 2 y m A ID CD•.1 T UIUI♦N.••rO C C O •U•r J P•1 I-•UI N UI U r 111 .. O O • al n J O{J O...l O O J O O O 0 O 71 f 1 Z A L f'I rrrrrrrrrrrrr i N .'O rI CI vl A D N O 0 ✓ r O \ N i 1 Il A y () (1 z o ro z 1 Z T I • p r p 2 n n • i n + + o u u C n n z o c -• • I • + Z N O • 1 I A F N • A O N v• • o a N 2 rI N n • 1.1/ • n 13 • C) 1 n in In N 0 W C:1 aJ W Cr1 G CO 7C W H C I-. I H EN D 9 In In C7 0 N r W rt G 9 A A z r O d H < a C./) N cx Co w • z • d O o ra r• r. 9 w O O C, ri n H I A W ! w N H O PD 1/4.O N re O O o O O O ' O k.0 N v O 00 00 H triO W H n (D '1 Cr) & H C 1 .b Ho C m 5 CD cn rt CD b x I-1 o o Ph o• r-h C 5 C w to GQ o r 5 o w n w rn rn r- O D N V o O O 0 O O r °o COz 0 ran= , O CO OD CO OO CO 0 v V V V O V 1 H-' !"'' I 00 v 0 N F-' •-' F-' r r r r r r r C7 •. I-' F-' H--i � . � N A A W W W W -0 N M. • I I ! W 1/40 'D C.) Cn In In In C.) .0-. Dr/ (-1/4) F O VD N Lo W '-' H 0- ci CD H ;! W INJ N O FW- O p . 0 �D '.D '.0 O 0 0 0 0 N L0 a r • n E G H O n O ri ri r F- h F F-+ F- r O O O O r 0 Hi a) Cl) •P" v0 LID 'C 1/40 Cr, O O O O N '.0 r I-' 't I-. I-"' 1-' I-' I--, I-' I--, In 0 0 0 0 Lo r H r H C 1-.1 .f 'I cLG c 0Gn 0• "t t, rt 0 r C Hi W Co 00 00 00 O V V V V I-' I--' I--' F-' N r r r r 1--, 1-, r n • I""' F-' N F-' F' F-' '"' r-• r r r-. r-• r-• o O 0 0 0 0 CD O 0 0 0 0 0 I-. F-' F-' I-' F-' I-+ r r r r r r > O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O CC)) -. -CO- -CO- H ac r O\ Hi A O1/4 A In OT 00 In In N V r-' V V ON V W V Hi V V N V NJ N y• V O\ V W V W 10 10 I-' W W L' N r V O\ r Hi W0 CO I-' O O A CO 0 0 0 0 N N O CO 0 OO In NJ 0 OO O 0 N 00 0 0 r N In ON 0 - ln 0 In O O In 1 f O\ 0 0 l..) '.0 A CO 0 In 0-3 W Cl) :c! PO :C1 '-d Cn :d 70 :d :V H n y N N (D (D W C) CD CD CD lD ri G n 0 5 5 5 ' G' M M M M R) rt O H• H. H. H. 't 0 G G G G C rt O rt rt rt rt O 0 G G G G CD CD u) 10''d C/) 'r1 F-' Cn I a I C1 F' rt rri • Cl) Cn Cn C/) Cri PCI a' •M I-4 • C Q", E E £ £ d CI tr, CI n H • 00H CD t-1 n rn 0 0 n, b H, CD C) m W cn n Ern CD Cn G") r-+ 'd n F-' I-- H cn 9 a x L. Z 0cdn l.1 0 cn (n '"1 'd 5 F-' W CD CD rt 0 rt rt (D n G C O p rt C H N•. O Q) w H W N (D M 0 (D M rt rt O (D H. 7.� cm '� \ \ -t) co G G cn ((7 CD Cr) Cn ' Cn A. C3. rt 7d •n G CD (n CD w w a °n° a fD "1 C x x 0 Cr CD H. N v0 '00 N. G (D (C 0 Cl 'd ch - En v, NJ V r V V I-' V V N --Si A N NJ n V A W l0 '.O I-' W W In NJ r V O\ r-• Pq I-' 0 0 CO 0 0 0 O N N 0 CO .P- 00 O O N 00 •P, O I-` -L..". In ON O A 4 In O O In In a% o O W 1/4.0 l- 0o O In • 'D VD 1/4.0 qD 10 VD VD 1/40 1/40 CO W N I--' O �p CO V 00 DD CO Z O MEMO TO : John K . Anderson City Administrator FROM : H. R. Spurrier City Engineer RE : Industrial Discharge Permit or Rahr Malting Company Facility Located at 800 West 1st Avenue in Shakopee, MN 55379 DATE : February 9, 1982 Introduction : I have reviewed the above-captioned permit, pursuant to a request of Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. Background : There are no special conditions or objections that should be attached to the draft permit from the City of Shakopee. Recommendations: Place the draft Industrial Waste Discharge Permit on file. HRS /jiw ;.�:. ED „ \\ ... 8 1', February 5, 1982 2 CITY OF SHAKOPEE City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn: John K. Anderson RE: Industrial [) charge Permit for the Rahr Malting Co. Facility located at 800 West 1st Avenue in Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Sirs: • Enclosed is a copy of the Draft Permit for the facility indicated above for the discharge of Industrial Waste into the Metropolitan • Disposal System. If you• have any objections to the issuance .ef such a Permit, please notify the Commission in writing within fifteen days . If no obkctions are received from you or the company, the Permit will be issued. Please direct any cgrrespordence to Tom Marcotte. . Sincerely, '1)/1%.APt Donald R . Madore Deputy Director, Quality Control DRM:jl . Enclosure • 150(TIETROJOURRE BLDG. 7TH G.ROBERTITREETI IRIf1T PRUL mn 55101 612 222.8423 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION Permit No 0036 Spill Location Code BL-00-00-SH DRAFT INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 473 as amended and the Waste Discharge Rules for the Metropolitan Disposal System 6 MCAR -S 6.010-6.019, permission is hereby granted to Rahr Malting Company at 800 West 1st Avenue inhak� �P - MN �5 i.79 for the discharge of Industrial Waste into the Metropolitan Disposal System through the community of Shakopee to the Commission's Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant. This Permit is granted in accordance with the application filed on Nov. 12 , 19 81 , Permit fees of $ 180 , and in conformity with plans, specifications, and data as contained in the application as approved, all of which are filed with and considered as part of this Permit. Effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, general Permit conditions, and other specific conditions are hereinafter set forth in this Permit. , Effective Date: day of , 19 Expiration Date: day of , 19 . Issued by METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION Chief Administrator or duly autho zed representative Date Page 1 of 5 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION /DcL, Permit No 0036 Spill Location CodeBL-00-00-SH A. Effluent Limitations Parameters MWCC Local Limitations on Total Discharge (mg/1 or other specified units) Cadmium (Cd) 2.0 Chromium-total (Cr) 8.0 Copper (Cu) 6.0 Cyanide-total (CN) 4.0 Lead (Pb) 1.0 Mercury (Hg) 0. 1 Nickel (Ni ) 6.0 Zinc (Zn) 8.0 pH-max. (units) 10.0 pH-min. (units) 5.0 MWCC local limitations for metals are the maximum for any operating day. pH limitations are instantaneous values. Page 2 of 5 • 0.- METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION r� Permit No 0036 Spill Location Code BL-00-00-SF B. Self Monitoring Schedule 1. Following are the specific sampling, sample compositing, and volume determination methods required by this Industrial Waste Discharge Permit. Representative samples shall be collected at each monitoring point by the Permittee in accordance with the guidelines listed in Appendix B of the Waste Discharge Rules for the Metropolitan Disposal System. These samples shall be collected once each reporting period on normal operating days. The sampling day wastewater volume for each monitoring point shall be determined as stated and shall be used to obtain a representative sample of the Permittee's total waste discharge by flow proportional compositing. a) i ) Monitoring Point: Process wastewater shall be monitored at the sampling manhole located north of the facility as indicated in the Permit Application. ii ) Sample Collection Method: Representative process samples shall be cpllectec at least hourly over a 24 hour period. iii ) Volume Determination: Process wastewater volume shall be determined by outgoing process water meter totalizer readings. iv) Sample Compositing Method: Representative wastewater samples collected as indicated above shall be composited flow proportionally. Domestic waste may be tactored in mathematically using thg_assumption _that each employee generates ZU gallons of domestic waste daily. Concentrations of Chemical Oxygen Demand and Total Suspended Solids for domestic waste is assumed to be 600 mg/1 and 280 mg/1 respectively. Page 3 of 5 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION Permit No 0036 Spill Location Code BL-00-00-SH /z 2. Parameters Chemical analysis for the previously specified sample representing the total waste discharge shall be performed for the following parameters: pH, Total Suspended Solids, and Chemical Oxygen Demand For EPA Categorical Pretreatment Industries, the parameters to be analyzed shall be in accordance with applicable EPA Regulations . 3. Reporting Frequency For the duration of this Permit the Industrial Waste Discharge Report shall be submitted quarterly to the Commission on or before April 15th, July 15th, October 15th, and January 15th. C. Compliance Schedule The Permittee shall complete 'additional pretreatment and/or operation and maintenance to comply with EPA Pretreatment Standards and/or MWCC Local Limitations in accordance with the schedule set forth in Attachment N.A. . D. General Conditions 1. Industrial Waste discharges from a Permittee shall be in accordance with applicable provisions of the Waste Discharge Rules and this Permit. 2. The Permittee shall not knowingly make any false statement, representation or certification in any record, report, or plan required to be submitted to the Commission under the Waste Discharge Rules. 3. This Permit shall not release the Permittee from any liability, duty or penalty imposed by Minnesota or Federal statutes or regulations or local ordinances. Page 4 of 5 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION /a Permit No 0036 Spill Location Code BL-00-00-SH 4. The Permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize all accidental discharges including slugs, spills, and bypasses. Plans for the preven- tion and control of accidental discharges shall be submitted to the Com- mission for approval within a specified period of time when requested by the Chief Administrator. In the event of any accidental discharges, spills , or bypasses whose quantity and nature might be reasonably judged to constitute a hazard to the Commission's personnel and treatment faci- lities or the environment, the Permittee shall IMMEDIATELY notify the Industrial Waste Section of the Commission at 771-8845 (office hours) or 454-7860 during non-office hours and report the Spill Location Code along with other pertinent information. 5. Any change in the volume or characteristics of Industrial Waste intro- duced into the Metropolitan Disposal System which the Permittee knows or has reason to believe will have either singly or by interaction with other wastes, a negative impact on the treatment process shall be im- mediately reported to the Industrial Waste Section of the Commission. The Permit shall then be subject to modification or reissuance in ac- cordance with 6 MCAR § 6.012 D. 6. The Permittee shall pay applicable strength charges assessed by the Com- mission. 7. The Permittee shall install , operate, and maintain sampling and monitoring devices in proper working order at the Permittee's expense. 8. The Permittee shall allow the Chief Administrator to enter upon the Permittee 's premises to inspect the monitoring point and to determine compliance with the Waste Discharge Rules for the Metropolitan Disposal System and the Industrial Discharge Permit in accordance with 6 MCAR 6.012 H2. Page 5 of 5 41,4 CITY OF SHAKOPEE `'dj-r 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee. Minnesota 55379 (' 0 MEMO TO: John Anderson FROM: LeRoy Houser SUBJECT: Budget Amendment DATE: December 14, 1981 Introduction: I am due in March to take an International Conference of Building Officials certification test. It is held in Des Moines, Iowa. Background : I am required to be certified 'and recertified every so often to demonstrate I am keeping pace with code changes, etc . I have a I .C .B.O . certification test due in March in Des Moines, Iowa; the test cost is $45.00. I estimate one nights lodging, gas and meals to be $75 .00. This was not budgeted and I informed the codes divi- sion that I am not funded for this item. They informed me that our surcharge refund was in excess of $7,000.00 and sent a copy of the letter that was sent with the refund which I have included with this memo. They indicate they hope you choose to use these funds for this type of activity . Alternatives : 1 . Amend budget to provide an additional $120.00 for the test. 2. Don' t amend the budget for the testing cost. --� Recommendation: Authorize the Building Inspector to take the International Conference of Building Officials certification test at a cost of $120.00 and direct that the general fund budget be so amended. LH:cu Attachment of 1114'4 (.1X\ t' ,e f 5 f I ' 0..:45g0_v Oft / ,41:0 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION SAINT PAUL 55155 O„Ift Or THE • COMMISSIONER TEL. NO. 27ff 6-4627 September 10, 1981 City Clerk, County Auditor, or Township Clerk Minnesota Statutes 1978, Chapter 16.866 states: "By September 1 of each odd numbered year beginning in 1979, the Commissioner shall rebate to municipalities any money received pursuant to this section and section 16.851 in the previous biennium in excess of the cost to the Building Code Division in that biennium of carrying out their duties under sections 16.83 to 16.867. The rebate to each municipality shall be in proportion to the amount of the surcharges collected by that municipality and remitted to the state.” The Department of ministration transmits herewith your rebate for the period July 1, 1980, to June 30, 1981. Minnesota Statutes 16.866 does not identify specific use of the rebated funds. It is our hope, however, that your governing body chooses to use these funds for continuing education of your building officials and inspectors in building codes and standards, materials, and construction technology. If you have specific questions concerningrebates r' , please feel free to call Norman Oste State Building Inspector. His telephone number is 612/296-4627. We appreciate the cooperation we have received frau you this past war. Sincerely, f4 James J. Hiniker' Jr. Commissioner JJI1/cj This is recyclea paper AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER y 1 * '- %sn '- Ott '-n (Fund tz1 Co Co OD rn a a * * * * * m co ---.1 rn \ .p- W N H 'Priority c+ CD VII \.rt vt VI \_n vt vi vt a N o w N rn P r o g r and Number H coBt.i tri C t J 'Ti t=1 x t1 b7 tmi x C.1 C t] U7 N Cl) pt Cl) P) Cl) O Cl) Sn m H Cl) rD Cl) H U) (D pt c+ m W '110' P N W W W 0 Pt (Cl cf c+ c+ H• c+ 0 c+ ' c+ H c+ c+ c+ GL H D C) (D a (DF-' YCD w ( a Cl)(a (D (ClD 0 a Y P P., 1-' a H 1C 0 0 H• 0 CD (D (-) 0 0 0 0 0 P C) G CD H 0 (Cl 0 (D o CD o Cl) o +i z o PO (Cl O 0 'd o :s Cl) c' U) c+ mom Cl) H. Cl) Cl) b M c+ Ut 0- e+ c+ Fi c+ c+ c+ c+ -I c+ p) c+ 0 cf .. H .. P. .. En 1 .. .. c+ p ci H 0 0 ,b a �� Description ftr o - bd -Eft CD c � fi>• 0 P) � co -ter t 11 Cl) N C . (Cl H H 0 H W c+ • O H H W 0 '1 N (....i CD 0\ 0 N Co O (D vi • VI OD 0 0 U.) 'Z 0 �1/i y V1 . Cl (/1 C'+ '. NI-+ .. -.1 0 c+ 0 CO 0 c+ 0 0 Cn 0 0 0 .. o U) 0 0 0 '"S 0 0 0 CR 0 CO 0 0 0 • 0 CD 0 0 0 (1) 0 CD 0 0 (D O t; Cr) c+ C h1 • . C 11 Co vtu' easibilit;y • co • 0) • CO •• CO Report :. N : N •• N . N •• • co• •: co •: co : N°D ISPUC Appr•oval • tY ° op • Public co• • co: N • co: Nro Hearing - FJ • i• \ •• • — •. — Plans and ,. I • • • rro • CO .• NW Specifications •• U • • Bight-of-Way H : •NN • • . Acquisition =-'w .. F Ni) • H • 5- • : Bid : :.N : :• COw !Date o • r- • • • : Assessment :. co• • op:. N •.• W •. ro . W(Hearing Eri Cl O • U) •• a\ • ' • ko • o\ •• rn . o\ : ON : op 'Completion• H • co • ODD • ODD • CD : OODD • OODD • \OD : `rn 'lUate •• N w •. N .. N .. CO .. ro .. W X n to X C) tri : n W Z C7 W 7 0 bJ ow .s n w :-.)ti Q H 11 HH H N W 1 1'�ngineer OO . - I-' H W 00 0 NN CD www NNO NN\n 00--1 C* -tea rn \O H H H N v [ en1c1an H i P 0 0 o o .p- O O p> O\O\O\ .F-' -P'O N N O N N ON 0 0 7 OD N W w W W W H NTechnician ii N' 0 0 _.1 o 0 . 0 0 Ho .F-� .F- -n .F-.F-o \o 0 H 0 o 00 I n s p e c t��) [ 1 + H. C3' Technician 1 E; 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 000 000 000 000 000 iEl:Tector I Oo P Hi N W HH H H • N .secretary En N 00 -3 00 H 00 H 00 " 00M -F" F`0 NN0 N HN vt W H N W VtH H N W co H H N N kO O\ 6\H H H-.IO\ CT\\O CO 'tot al N 0 0 ' H H w 0 0 -`l 0 N N 0 � �N HHN -EA- --I H - N --I N H N U.) H H CT CO O O w W W O O O O\0\ "0 \o `0 vi N N -3 N N N w I ngltleerlll I I IN W W Co CO-l: VVI OD CO -.--0 v~iv~iON H H Dept. Fee ;. tb LA.) c '?Fund PI * * * P 'Priority ID r, s � H H H H f riorit (D Vi F- .F" \-11 vt \J1 VI v, Po~o w Hw li'ro�;rarr Dumber H co tri '-d t=i I--4 tri 0 tr.! H M N tri tri 0 t=i NU) H m tb w p m 0 U) p m W m o to 'i c+ H• c+ c c+ M c+ • c+ 1'y c+ 0- c+ go . ci- Pt m m * H --4 W ' C+ m CO m sn m W c+ P) P m x c P 0' m •• P 0 H z7 ct m c+ 0 c+ 11 c+ • c+ m (D c+ c+ • c+ ON N• CD L a c+ ID P3 (D m c + 0 m 'ti m tri m \0 Uc P, CO a w aH a 0 w w 0' 0' trI F,• w cn m 11 cn 0 cF 0 o c 0 0 0 Oc+ a x 0c+ o o Y 0 W 0 0 0 o • 0 0 C 0 U) C U7 H to '- U) P• to P) Cl) U1 O c+ to 0 c+ m c+ 0 c+ H c+ p, cF c+ cF cF N c+ - H• c+ K .. 0 .. P3 .. M .. 0 .. o m .. N .. H - L1eGcript,ion (U N• H N. 'Z 11 O c+ O <fl {fy 0 40 0E0 0 •EA co R. to -M • P• ft? i-i HCl)Ii 0 0i u CO N w L 0 N m - a - • w ed o 0 m 0 0 w m v1 Cl) 0 0 H 0 o o 0 < . 0°C' 0 * 0 -4 Cl 0 o 0 0 m 0 CD 0 m 0 m 0 P, o o 0 P. O 0 0 (i 0 0 0 to H . . 0 . H • 1 • • . • •. •. Ni''ea.ibi]_if,y •• cn .. oD Deport •• -1 • • z • •1 . •• • • 1:-.1PUC • cr} • ;D • a . �. . co • r,� • • •. .. N .. pproval • co • Z • ti • ' • co r`- • co • • : : co • Public •.• N .. •. N • Hear ng •. til r, • 1--, . z • z • w • H • .r • cb • • : co : c • • flans and :, L'' •• N • N : : Specifications 0 t,i • z • .� • • : co Y • 9 •• • (lii ht-or-wily �., • u' . • : woo Acquisition '� , � • • Co .. •. a •.• Co ••. Co .. .. (Bid • w • N • w : : Date o • 4- • z • z • 1 • r, :•. I\' •:. : w Hearing m 0 w • Ol • • ON • VD • \O • : ON • (Completion • co • co •• Co • � • \ . . opo • Date CO • CO • Co • .. N .. N .. N .. w .. .. N .. X 0 bl X 0 W (--) t):1 X 0 t i ."�• 0 W 3 C] bi z o W D bo — H 0 co N -4 '0 co w o Engineer 0 0 -1 O O - 0 0 0 - 1 - 1-J 0 0-1 0 0U1 0 0 -�1 0 0 0 rn N NE. 00v~, 00\0 -,1 .- 0 Iv N. 00 000 co F-' 1--, 0 00 Technician. III 0 H . .-y J \O fi- N H Technician II ' 0 0 (Do H .�-- H 0\ c\-4 o o 4 000 CD ND IN) v0i 0 0 co Inspector I I c' 1'i h 4• o' rTechnician I (' r• 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 0 00 Inspector I o Po x •i co 00 ' 00N 00km HF-Ho 00-4 o0 '. 000 0 •0`„ Secretary �' N W vl 'L' ga \CD N F-, H w v, violo co v, v, co ND.p- Total N (D 0 0 0 0 0 �+ N F-' d\MCx) 0 0 w o O 0 co OD .a- 0 0 co I N N I 1 I I \O H 1-1\0I 10 I i 1-, H 1r o\ En ineerin'7 000 0 0 NN 'p NNN 0 00-, Oow H H 0 I I u F- I I w w H CO 0D-4 I I 0 I I co v, v, • 0 0 rn Dept. Fee O co 0 0 0 F-' t-,N H Vt 0 0 0 I 10 H VD H o (Fund * * * * * * 1` N N N N H H (1D 4:- W Co H 0 VD Co N (Priority c+ \J7 Vl Vl \J7 \J7 Vl VI U, P, iv rn o rnJProgramNuiTlber H \.c til c trit.1 N tt .< L+1 `v tzi r t.1 N t.1 cn co m by m m O m p m Fi N (D m O m H• N c+ `r:i c+ t=i N c+ N N c+ E-' c+ N• c+ fn 4 0 H. c+ a �• • Po rn 0 n P a (D PS N ti-1. P c+ < cc+ M tri cc+ c4+ c�+ cc+ t- cc+ t i d cc+ O cP+ N (D P (D (D C - C N N In D P 'i N G (D Wa N a ti c+ a N a p a N-' a m P. p, c+ p, F-' E O (D i m cf- P c7 0 (D C] (D C) • c+ 0 '-' 0 CD (D 0 OG C) 0 O `- O O (D 0 0 0 0 O O 0 N 0 G W m c+ 0 m c+ Fx] (n Ci In < m F m (n m c+ t) c+ p c+ O (D c+ `i cf (D c+ (D 0 mi 0 c+ P CO c-+ H P P .. Cl m cm+ W l'e ;crintion 1-'' c+ O' N I-'• H a n G -Eft 'I -EA-c+ o' ) P 0 N• 0 - �> c+ H P (D R. :r' I-• (Jq in M F-' I-'• tc+ CoH (D Nil c+ CO cc+ N W � coH c} co D O CO 0.' O N cC 0 N W * 0 CO V • V V 0 O 0 0 Cl) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o ( p • a r- • r N w ' --1 f•'eacibi.lity o' co • co ; Report N - N :. N ..:. n' N • • N S['UC • • • w ' co ppr•oval • • • • t • • W : -- Public l i c • , , ,, 4: • • CO . '• CO • HHeariIng :- N N • Cr' . C= • : • • . W :• : --.1 . W : Plans and - • • . o a) Co Specifications c .. .. f`.) .. N •. N C) pi • • . .: W . (-�' ,'i • Right-of-Way ,L . : co • Co :Acquisition .• •. OD .. .1-• N . `3 \ • IB i d �. • « Date C • •• i-= x . Assessment • • • ' .T. • . ou co 'a ) Hearing R - - - •. N •. •• W •. N C7 • • F-' u • o I w • rn colon co ' co • ate - - - •. . . W : W . : N N . X C; to X ('''') co x i7 td c) to X c) w x a tb x C') td -. N N H O \n�~„ H 000 H 0 0 Imo-+ 0 0\0 -..--P-0 0 0 H 1-11-. -P-- 000 Engineer C--' 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 H 0 0-A 0 0 0 N N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 Technician [I I C EN) W H 0\ H N ‘..n r: P - t, 0 o C CO -a N N H W Inspector II q c � � 0 00 CO 0 0"0 0 0 H 000 00 Co 00 O\ 0 OF-' H• Cr G ' Technician I 000 o 0 o 000 000 000 0 0 o 0 0 o 000 Inspector I o p N 'I �i 000 00W 0000 00 NF-' 0 00W HHN O.O(J SeCT'etary • N) F 7 W ! H -i n) ,.0 Total co (D NN N V1 Nil Co CSS 0 H H H' O\ N .F- ..- 0 O O 0 0 0 H O 0 ..r.-- V1 \n O N N N N N N 0 0 .ti .64 H N N 'D N NO\ 1 1 H I 1 1 I ' O\ co O 10 IOCo Engitieerin`� rn- 000 000 , 000 HH0 ---.P-a) � -4oN 1 1 n Dept. Fee rn 0\0 O\ O 4 �- 0 •P-H Vl V1 0 \O. O N v1 * H c`' 0\ N 'Fund w * * *N N * W la o VD Co .� Iv (Priority (D vi VI Vi N VI VI ul m o' • k.o `N„ rn ‘..iiN (Program Number a N N co 4 F3 m t) H. m c+ c+ a cP+ c-+ cC+ (~D c• C+ ro p CF H cc+ p C (D c P C (D O (Ti (D R. H. (D (D (Ti (D c- 4 (D Cl) at� a �v0 a H ca, (D P' cF CD a c+ o • P' C to 0 R o (A 0 4 o w o 0 o 0 CA i 0 H• 0 b P 0 Ci (D 0 H. 0 o tri 0 (D c+.1 c+ CF m K mo m m m m m m p m c+ .. C) .. (Ti ct 0 c 0 c+ O• c+ H• c+ I.,,m c+ `f w Description o 0 6, 6, � 6, 0 Esr . 6 y w 6- 0 H H CD N ci (Ti a 4 m p c+ N VI W '- 0 VI Ci CDD CO N (CD D 4. W 0 (GD (0) 0 O O 000 Cr‘ o CD (D 0 O 0 'i O O �" 0 O O . •• K n : Feasibility •• :. °. •• co • ((D • • • (Report (Ti " •• a •• •• .. C . c+ `y H • w • a., SPUC CO• • p, • . • m • pproval p .• ,ty •. .. • o al I , W • (n •• • • Public •. : (mn • • o • • . (Hearing H W C, W P. . a• 4 P1ans and • cm (D • :, • N H • • . Specifications n 0 hi Si • • „ 0 (D �J • ; Right-of-Way - � P P .N • r\D°o cquisition ` 1-'- •• •• •• •• rte; co • r (D • --3 .. .• . itiid • ciI. Asses:;nu'nt. •. .• • :• : • (Hearing r.1 0 • H oN • • CD ••• o •• •• �O completion :. • : •• n) • CO • • ate X0ell Xotri X0td mow :4nbd 30tr, Zntd 3 :---) tri H N --I W w rn --I N 0 Engineer 0 0 0 H'HO vi VI O 00 N 0 0 0 000 O O H 00 --1 U. - VD H H N Technician [II P 000 000 000 0 007 000 O 0 cm 0 0 N 0 0 U1 .-7 Technician 11 N CY\ Co co v, -I N 00 Inspector II �,, 000 000 000 00\p 0 0 0 O C Co 0 0 H 0 0\O c` Technician I F* c, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tnspeCtor I O P N . - ON • 'O Secretary rn N v 000 000 H H , 00\.O 000 00Co 001) 0.0‘,0O • vl H `i1 N w \o w H v, co o yr Total N°o D v 0 0 0 H Ho rn 0 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I t'--- I 61, H F-' N - -J En I 1 ~ O O W O O110 1103 11 11,„ O o O O, O O„ g 0 0 I I I I .� I I `„ 11 o I t o Dept. Fee O LO W 0 -I o fes-' o 0 0 a (Fund a m 'Priority m R 'Program Number co to N Description . t o as i b i i i[.y • .. •:. [ eport : [sf'UC pproval . rr 'Public 4: Hearing H' r4'! }'lans and S}'eeii'.iCat iOn:; CJ r1 : • Eight-of-Way L N :. .: cquisition y • id c .. .. [13)ate 0 Completion .. :.• :•: .: . :. :. Datee 6E, a QW :zC) W � o � ? C) tx cyto XoW ) w gTO N HP c+ po v, Engineer H co CO N rn o H' r I-1 m o oJTechnician CA ITT Q'. N N o 1H H W o AI N n N N ---L, �- r- t- 70 rt !Technician ! I 1)' c) 0 N N �+ca, v, v, winspector Li 0 N N N • ,. c 7 z Technician t N N 0 0 o inspector I o \,(3 \,o o j 0 u'Orn ` , N Secretary o H N .., Co H P o 'd -P--P"VD Total co m (D -P'- N N n 1-1 N Nut ) oD0� w m I kit \.n VI c f-+ LoLoki' � m -o o w oal �n•,. Engineering 0 0 0 0 H Dept. Fee m 1-y rnrn0\ Ct VD 000 0 0 0 0 � 0 T OgraTfl v, r N 'Program (-] Cl) H C) 'ti Hct- c+ H. 0 (D1-1 H. (D f~., N '.i7 Cf C 0° 0 co co a o ro o f 'Ci m CDCD o C IJ• 0 H OC U) ri 0 0 Cf H• I 0 0 R' P :114 Ili • • . lD - Co• , • ~. •• •• U• H 0 `-3 CD 1:, X CD t zi CD t z i X 0 t l i 0 W o W X CD r.W , :) w 0 o v, v, v, CO -P- `~l' N N) N a\ CO Engineer NN0 WliJ0 00 ° P H O 000 0\ 0\ 0 C L.A.) H N .-- H F..,‘..i) Technician [ [I a• 00vii 00 � NN" 000 00" 000 COCO° N N\-r1 n Technician I I �). o, —I N w P- .P- VI Inspector II ,1 c' LA) w0 0 00 \i1VI\-71 000 0 00 vlv, 0 0 00 0 co VI N• c' a' 0 Technician I c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 .Inspector I O s✓ x1-1 --IN N • Secretary u' N 0 0 0 o Ovl 000 000 0 0\ft O O O N N 0 O. Den vi P N W N H N H `Total Co CD ^I 07 N O vt N N H H 0\ H W W 0 vi v1 CO \O 0 W W 0 0 0 0 0\0\0 0 0 0 co CO 0 I v, H ON Vi N w w .--- Engineering �,, v,N H �-i N N N -�I 0 0 0 -� - - N N c- .�- VD Dept. Fee � -J H ul ON 0 0 � `O '-0\O I I 17 Co Co N 0 0 - a\O\M v1 V1 v'I \O '-00 0 CO coo O O O N N VI H H H /-..� F. . N o W H H H I Program Lk) -P- v, 1--, Number 0 b a> t I Cl) Cr) Fri 0 p. c P. mu(Di p, H d b N• (") x �+ m r- J 0 H.f0) K hd K r7 I-- F,. 0 N cn 'A (D N N N• c+ c+ N '1 K g 0 C 'd --• K b D P. f3 rd (D pi N n H• H ~•0 coc' a) o KH op o H. p I-'• H• CD (o s-H. w lbo PI ( C (1)H 0 1) clN rn c+ H ri P. f,• H N. .1 N to . •. ,;_ti CA . . • CD 'C 0 l3 .. • o F. ' .. .. N Z .. '-0 o • • X c to i :- C) W x C) W x C) t3J :: 0 W QW X 0 W % :--) w N Engineer 0 0 I 00 I 00 I 0000 W W 0 H H 0 0\ 0 co co 0 C W N echnic ian ITI 0 0 I 0 0 I 0 0 1 0 0 0 W Co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VD H N 0 0 K Technician IT �' fi-- N)) Co Inspector II .+ G 0 0 1 O O 1 N) N) I -P'-F'O 0 0 0 0 O V7 O O P H H Vri 1-t7'' c. I I � S✓ ' Technician I & 00 1 Oo1 001 000 000 000 o o 0 o o 0 Inspector I P) 0 K 1 H F, N H v, 0' Secretary K - -1 0001 - - 1 1 000 oov, oov, oo ", ' Fo N \n h7 H -) 07 CO Vp ‘p 1 F' NO H HN N N p Total J P N H O 0\�Vt N N\n Co N I fR N) -P" H N N N o Engineering - 1 rnrni NNI rnrno 011.np wwv�i co a) '0�s Dept. Fee • H H F- rrogram N r H Number CD H H o 0 (D • 0-7J H H• I-cf 1 1-4 0i oM aoa b Fi K R. ''S RV r• 0 ( N (D °C (D `G (D 0 c+ M ^(DD /� I M (DHD M c) VY P W 0 (D (D F--' (D `"CD r• cf. `" cf. 1 U) illCD H v •• •• •' •• .. `iI •• •• Ps- •• .. by rn Iv r,. . c+ r, • • P3 r.1 • H '1.' • :• z • x H • • (D H \O .. ,• u) OD .. .. d t=; N O • d C H t. H• x `h C' 0.: .. ., .. .. .. •• •• ., '1 C W X (: tTI X C) Li/ X 0 W X (-) LI/ '._?.: (-) 0J 3 c-) bd (-] trW _.: .--) a1 LA) I 1 1 Engineer 00 1 00l 00 I vp \„ 0 0 1 0 0 1 00 1 Iechniciar. III cr o H II, U' N N w o 0o 0 0 i oo i Inspector Ii ' 000 H. d Technician I c+- O 0 0 1 0 0� I 00 � 0 Ci 0 0 inspector I w Iv N N ~~ I N N 1 HH, 1 Secretary N \r, �O r I CO I-' I-' N N 1-'F-' Total P� O\ a\ co (D {f} 1 co 1 ON ON w \O ‘..0 1 N N 1 1-'1--' 1 Engineering H H \p N N i 1 NN I Dept. Fee ...„1 ..-.,1 0 OF THE. V .1J RECEW%ft:D STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ALBERT H. QUIE FEB 1 6 10'. ' GOVERNOR ST. PAUL 55155 CITY OF SHAKE • February 12, 1982 Dear Mayor: The State of Minnesota will hold its 17th annual Conference on Natural Disasters on Friday, March 5, 1982 at the Ramada Inn, 1870 Old Hudson Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55119, as a part of the State's Preparedness Program. Please consider this an invitation to you, members of your City Council, and your City Civil Defense Director to attend. The winter of 1981 - 1982 has been very severe with record snow- fall over parts of the State. This snow fell on some areas that already had extremely high soil moisture content from fall rains. Historically, in Minnesota, heavy precipitation occurs in the latter part of February and March which can affect the spring flood potential in sections of the State. Mr. John Graff, Meteorologist in Charge of the National Weather Service Forecast Office of Minneapolis, will present this spring's weather outlook at the Conference. Other speakers at the conference will focus on various governmental levels of disaster preparedness and response. If your schedule will permit, I encourage you to attend. The information that will be provided at this Conference will be most important to you. With best personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, if ALBERT H. QUIE GOVERNOR AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER action alert III �� IIIIIic E league of minnesota cities FEB b 13A` February 11 , 1982 CITY OF SHAL TO: Mayors, Managers, Administrators, Clerks FF;OM: Duke Addicks, Legislative Counsel RE: MOBILE/MANUFACTURED HOUSING H.F. 1738 (authors: Voss, Rees, D. Peterson) and its companion S.F. 1677 (authors: Solon, Humphrey) is presently being considered by the legislature. The bill amends the municipal planning act to provide that a city may not prohibit manufactured homes (until last year, known as "mobile homes") , which otherwise comply with city zoning ordinances from being placed on residential lots. A copy of this brief, yet major, bill is enclosed. New language is underlined, existing language is stricken. This bill is inconsistent with the League's legislative policy and we have testified against it. Please contact your legislators immediately and let them know any concerns you may have with this proposal . Although many cities now permit the placement of manufactured (mobile) homes on certain residential lots , this bill may essentially force every city to do so. Please also let the chairs of the two committees presently hearing the bill know about your concerns. Their names are: Representative Richard J. Kostohryz Senator Hubert H. Humphrey, III Chairman, House General Legislation Committee Chairman, Senate Energy and Housing 336 State Office Building Committee St. Paul , MN 55155 Room 301 State Capitol St. Paul , MN 55155 (Note: Senator Humphrey is also a co-author of the bill ) . DA:ara 300 hanover building, 480 cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 C612) 222-2861 rg Ido Ficahrs (i4c1 rti f4.4 #1.1pin'ee# A.A c'.7, flee: f o 1,719+`y� 144:14 +64 /73840 fit-17'940 YS 0 _ Re OS .9* e4"1414 6 VC-444 rt 011W CaArpti era A bill for an act m elating to municipal planning and zoning; prohibiting exclusion of manufactured homes and other types .of 'single family dwellings; amending Minnesota Statute 19o0, Section 462 . 357, Subdivision 1. Z IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 3 Section 1 . Minnesota Statutes 1980, Section 462. 57; Subdivision 1, is amended to read: LO Subdivision 1 . (AUTHORITY FOR ZONING. ) For the purposc o 11 promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate the location, height, L3 bulk, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, 14 the percentage of lot which maybe occupied, the size o P � P yards en.1 other open S lces, the (density anr4 population, the uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residences ".9 recreation, agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water 20 supply conservation, conservation of shorelands, as defined in 2i section 105.485, access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems as defined in section 116H.02, flood control or other 23 purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating 24 such No regulation or single family housing zoning ? ordinance may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined (OWER) rVI SOt ] HMW/RK 82-3730 7. in section 116H. 02, subdivision 3, manufactured homes as defined in Section 327 . 31., subdivision 6, or any other single family ellings that eor lies comply with all other zoning ordinances oo n gated pursuant to this section. The regulations may ade the municipality into districts or zones of suitable umbers, shape and area. The regulations shall he uniform for u a class or kind of buildings, structures or land and for each ass or kind of use throughout such district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other ..0 districts. The ordinance embodying these regulations shall be %-nciwn as the zoning ordinance and shall consist of text and 2.2 maps. A city may by ordinance extend the application of its __ Loning regulations to unincorporated territory located within ;- o miles of its limits in any direction, but not in a„county or ..s which has adopted zoning regulations; provided that where . o or more noncontiguous municipalities have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the zoning ..3 of land on its side of a line equidistant between the two _.:a noncontiguous municipalities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning regulations. Any city may +, thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same e.ftent as if such property were situated within its corporate limits, until the county or town board adopts a comprehensive oo zoning 'regulation which includes the area. ■ action alert league of minnesota cities 4-7 FEB 61982 February 11, 1982 CITY OF Sti W .x E TO: Mayors, Managers and Clerks • FROM: Peggy Flicker, Legislative Counsel RE: H.F. 1904 - League Special Service District Bill Please urge your legislators to support H.F. 1904 (Brandi , Schreiber, Novak, Dempsey) , which would allow cities to establish special service districts and finance municipal services and improvements within those districts. (The Senate companion does not yet have a file number. You may refer to it as the "League special services district bill , chief authored by Senator Linda Berglin. ") In special districts, cities would be able to provide the kinds of services they are already authorized to provide and finance them in whole or in part through special ad valorem taxes , service charges, and/or local option special sales taxes . This bill is especially important in this day of service and revenue cutbacks . Cities need a variety of ways to finance services that their citizens may want. The special service district concept allows more flexibility in matching "who pays" with "who benefits from the service, " Cities now have the statutory authority to construct, operate and maintain a wide variety of municipal improvements and to use special assessments to finance them, under Chapter 429 of the Minnesota Statutes. However, the use of special assessments has several major drawbacks. First, Minnesota court decisions have been very restrictive in interpreting the requirement that the amount of the special assessment may not exceed the benefit to the property. The city must be able to show an actual increase in the market value of the property as a result of the improvement, and the assessment may not exceed that value increase. Second, the service charge provisions now in Chapter 429 do not adequately allow for financing of maintenance and operating types of costs . There are problems with both the scope of the statute and the meeting of the strict special benefit test. Third, certain kinds of municipal services, such as parking lots, are not currently authorized to be done under Chapter 429 (even assuming the special benefit test could be met) , (OVER) 300 hanover building, 480 cedar street, saint paul, minnesota 55101 C6123222-2861 -2- Key Points to Know About the Bill 1. What are "special services"? Special services are defined broadly as a) maintenance, operation or construction of improvements cities already have the power to do under M.S. 429.021 ; b) parking services; and 3) any other service the city is authorized to provide. However, if a service is ordinarily provided by the city from general fund revenues it may not be considered a "special service" unless it is an increased level of service (e.g. , a commercial area may have twice as many street lights - the extra lights could be considered a "special service" to be paid for separately by people in a specified area) . 2. How is the district established? The city would adopt an ordinance, after notice and hearing. Notice would have to be mailed to every property owner in the district. The bill specifies various information that must be included in the notice. 3. What type of taxes or service charges could be imposed in the district? The property in the district could be subject to an ad valorem tax (e.g. , .25 mill ) or a service charge. In addition, a tax could be imposed on sales of liquor, restaurants (which serve liquor) , hotels , motels , parking, admissions or amusements . Individual notice would have to be given to all property owners in the district before a tax could be imposed. The maximum rate of the tax or service charge would have to be specified as well as the nature of the special services to be rendered. 4. Could bonds be sold for special services? If a special service involves the construction of an improvement, the city may issue bonds to be payable primarily out of the proceeds of any ad valorem or sales taxes imposed in the special district. The obligations would be issued in accordance with M.S. Chapter 475 except that an election would not be required and net debt limits would not apply. (Note - this is accepted procedure for bonds which have as their security revenues generated from something other than the general tax base. ) 5. In what ways might my city use a special service district? A. "Main Street" or downtown parking. A city may decide to build a municipal parking lot with free parking for downtown shoppers , or to subsidize parking by allowing free parking at meters during certain times . A special service district could be created in the downtown area, and either an ad valorem tax or a service charge could be paid by property owners within the district. B. Special Police Protection A particular residential or commercial area or neighborhood may have been plagued by unusually high levels of vandalism or crime and may wish to have police patrol the area much more intensively than is customary throughout the city. The city could establish a special district and the special police service be financed through an ad valorem tax or service charges . C. Mall Improvements A street might be made into a mall with special sidewalks, lighting, street furniture and other amenities. Extraordinary maintenance costs would also be incurred. The -3- mall would benefit adjacent property owners directly, and also would indirectly benefit a wider area. The flexibility of a special service district would allow a city to distribute the costs in a way that equitably reflects both direct and indirect benefits. A portion of the mall 's capital and operating costs (40%, for example) could be specially assessed against adjacent property to reflect direct benefits. To reflect indirect benefits , the entire downtown could be designated as a special service district and an ad valorem tax levied on property within that district to finance the remaining 60% of the costs . As an alternative to an ad valorem tax within the special service district, property owners or businesses could be billed directly in the form of a service charge. Although service charges can be more complex to administer, they offer flexibility in how the charge is determined. For example, a service charge could be based on floor area and adjusted for type of activity (e.g. , office space vs. retail commer- cial ) rather than being based simply on property values. WHAT YOU SHOULD DO 1. Call or write your legislators and ask them to support H.F. 1904, or the "League of Cities Special Service District Bill . " Explain briefly how your city might use a special service district, It is especially important to do this if your legislator serves on the House Local and Urban Affairs Committee or either the House or Senate Tax Committees. 2. Attend the hearing on H.F. 1904 scheduled for noon, Tuesday, February 16, in Room 83 of the State Office Building in St. Paul . It is the Government Structures Subcommittee of the House Local and Urban Affairs Committee. 3, Contact Peggy Flicker at the League office if you have any special interest in the bill and would like to testify in support of it at a legislative hearing or talk to key legislators about what it means to your city. PF:rmm