HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/01/1983 NCY MSN C
3\
'r$64\5, Federal Emergency Management Agency
•
�� � �,�, Region V 300 South Wacker, 24th Floor, Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 353-1500
O
February 7, 1983 `, r •
tJ
u.33•
• /-.
l\,
Mr. Bo Spurrier ,
City Engineer, City of Shakopee
129 E. 1st Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Spurrier:
We appreciate the cooperation shown and courtesy extended to
Brent C. McMahan during the Community Assistance and Program
Evaluation (CAPE) meting on November 18, 1982. We hope this meeting
was as useful and informative to participating City officials and
insurance agents and lenders as it was to our agency.
As you know, an important aspect of this meeting was the review of
local floodplain management regulations and enforcement practices.
The City of Shakopee has demonstrated an awareness of floodplain
matters and has qualified staff capable of reviewing development
proposals in flood hazard areas. Based upon our review we find the
City compliant with the floodplain management criteria of the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) at this time.
If there are any questions, please feel free to call Mr. McMahan at
(312) 886-7290.
Sincerely yours,
Grsbfi, Chief
Natural Hazards Branch
Natural & Technological Hazards Division
EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS
FIRST NATIONAL-SOD LINE CONCOURSE 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 339-6291 (AREA CODE 612)
File: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates, Inc.
Please distribute to governing body members
March 1, 1983
Newsletter
The bond market, generally, and the tax-exempt market in particular, suffers from great uncertainty
about the huge federal debt. As pointed out in a January "60-Minutes" program, we are justly con-
cerned about a $1.2 trillion federal debt, but a $7 or 8 trillion "actuarial" debt that will arise
from various entitlements is of even greater concern. Former Treasury Secretary Simon said we need
some one-term congressmen to enact some painful legislation without fear of not being reelected
(which assumes that the candidate does not disclose his or her true intent when running for the first
term).
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Tax-exempt bond yields are 90% of taxable yields because of an oversupply. Some assure us that the
narrow spread is due, rather, to reduced federal tax rates especially on "unearned income". But this
ignores a fundamental economic principle that the price of any commodity (bonds) falls (interest
rates rise) to the level necessary to dispose of, not the easiest, most affordable sale (to persons
in the highest tax bracket), but to the last, least affordable sale to persons in the lowest tax
bracket. Thus, if some bonds must be sold to taxpayers in, say, the 25% bracket the price of whole
supply falls to the level necessary to sell those bonds to those taxpayers. If, finally, some bonds
must be sold to untaxed entities the spread will become zero, not just as to those bonds, but for the
�... entire supply.
By blessing tax-exempt financing for a whole host of essentially private purposes, the states and
their subdivisions have seriously diluted their own advantage and have increased their own borrowing
costs. While those who represent businesses and underwriting interests strenuously defend their
"right" to tax-exempt financing, the advantage has largely disappeared for them too. Now watch for a
Treasury move to eliminate tax-exempt borrowings altogether.
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Attention is now focused on short-term financing by school districts, but other governments may be
faced with such borrowings if the states find themselves unable to make good on their local govern-
ment-aid promises. Tax and aid anticipation borrowing is an important tool to cover short-term fi-
nancial problems, but long-term solutions must be sought, either in legislation to permit increased
local levies, or to issue long-term funding bonds. Care must be exercised to protect short-term fi-
nancing plans with well thought out, productive, investment plans.
* * * * * * * * * * * * 1
It was so nice to see so many of you at the conventions. Spring is near!
Very truly yours,
EHL A OC pT NC.
'' r L. Ehl@rs
SUMMARY OF AREA BOND SALES
Bond
Net Buyer
Municipality Date Type of Bonds Amount Maturity Rate Index Rating
IOWA
Central Decatur CSD (Leon) 1/19/83 School Bonds, Series B 2,900M 1984-2002 9.50% 9.37% BBB+
(S&P)
MINNESOTA
ISD No. 625 (St. Paul) 12/07/82 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 20,200M 1984 6.70% 10.23% MIG-1
Eagan 12/08/83 G.O. City Hall Bonds 965M 1984-1997 8.92% 10.23% A
Eagan 10/08/82 G.O. Improvement Bonds 2,400M 1984-1997 7.94% 10.23% A
Kanabec County 12/08/82 G.O. Jail Building Bonds 590M 1984-1993 8.42% 10.23% Baa-1
Stearns County 12/09/82 Drainage Ditch Bonds 420M -1984-1994 8.28% 10.13% A
ISD No. 241 (Albert Lea) 12/14/82 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 3,350M 1984 6.75% 10.13% NR
Moorhead 12/20/82 Municipal Improvement Revenue Bonds, 700M 1984-1990 7.85% 10.05% NR
Series A
ISD No. 709 (St. Louis 1/11/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 6,800M 1984 5.87% 9.48% MIG-2
County)
ISD No. 829 (Waseca) 1/12/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 1,430M 1984 5.87% 9.48% NR
Eden Valley 1/12/83 G.O. Bonds (Grant Anticipation & Sewer 810M 1984-1992 7.37% 9.48% Baa-1
Revenues)
ISD No. 833 (South 1/13/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 4,400M 1984 5.90% 9.48% NR
Washington County)
Tower-Soudan ISD No. 708 1/17/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 620M 1984 6.60% 9.37% NR
ISD No. 535 (Rochester) 1/18/83 Certificates of Indebtedness 6,700M 1984 4.92% 9.37% MIG-1
ISD No. 281 (Robbinsdale) 1/19/83 Certificates of Indebtedness 11,000M 1984 4.96% 9.37% MIG-1
ISD No. 280 (Richfield) 1/20/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 3,600M 1984 5.17% 9.37% MIG-1
ISD No. 735 (Winthrop) 1/24/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 545M 1984 5.63% 9.48% NR
ISD No. 648 (Danube) 1/24/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 380M 1984 5.78% 9.48% NR
ISD No. 465 (Litchfield) 1/24/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 945M 1984 5.53% 9.48% NR
ISD No. 881 (Maple Lake) 1/24/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 450M 1984 5.78% 9.48% NR
ISD No. 1 (Minneapolis) 1/25/83 Certificates of Indebtedness 48,000M 1984 5.17% 9.48% MIG-1
ISD No. 77 (Mankato) 1/25/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 2,275M 1984 5.30% 9.48% NR
ISD No. 140 (Taylors Falls) 1/26/83 G.O. School Aid Anticipation Certificates 170M 1983 5.89% 9.48% NR
ISD No. 140 (Taylors Falls) 1/26/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 235M 1984 6.19% 9.48% NR
ISD No. 482 (Little Falls) 1/31/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 1,095M 1984 6.15% 9.66% NR
Olmsted County 2/01/83 G.O. Solid Waste Management Revenue Bonds 750M 1986-1990 6.68% 9.66% Aa-1
St. Paul 2/01/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 22,700M 1984 5.21% 9.66% MIG-1
St. Paul 2/01/83 G.O. Urban Renewal Bonds 505M 1984-1993 7.36% 9.66% Aa
St. Paul 2/01/83 G.O. Capital Improvement Bonds 5,370M 1984-1993 7.38% 9.66% Aa
St. Paul 2/01/83 G.O. Water Pollution Abatement Bonds 6,080M 1984-2003 8.77% 9.66% Aa
Sleepy Eye 2/01/83 G.O. Hospital Revenue and Building Bonds 725M 1984-2001 8.60% 9.66% A
ISD No. 492 (Austin) 2/02/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 2,660M 1984 5.29% 9.66% MIG-1
ISD No. 276 (Minnetonka 2/03/83 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 3,825M 1984 5.34% 9.66% MIG-1
Public Schools
NORTH DAKOTA
Wahpeton 12/08/82 Refunding Bonds 1,450M 1985-1999 9.06% 10.23% A-1
SOUTH DAKOTA
Vermillion 1/17/83 G.O. Watershed Utility Bonds 1,450M 1985-1998 8.16% 9.37% A
WISCONSIN
Washington Heights 12/21/82 G.O. Bonds 180M 1984-1989 8.36% 10.05% NR
Sanitary District
West Allis 2/01/83 G.O. Promissory Notes 1,500M 1984-1992 7.75% 9.66% A-1
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: February 24 , 1983
1 . Jeanne Andre has agreed to serve on the Local Representative
Advisory Committee of the Metropolitan Housing Fund. If you
have any questions of Jeanne or information you would like
to have her take to the Committee please contact her.
2 . Attached is a letter to Bo Spurrier from Gary Pierson, Chief
of the Natural Hazards Branch of the Natural and Technological
Hazards Division of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The letter notes that the City of Shakopee is in compliance
with the Federal floodplain management criteria of the National
Flood Insurance Program at this time .
3 . Attached is a copy of the Ehlers and Associates , Inc . newsletter
listing the interest on recent bond sales .
4 . Attached is my response to Paul Wermerskirchen regarding the
ICC tour of Fremont Industries and my individual interview with
JoAnne Pauluk, manager of Shakopee ' s Tom Thumb Market . In
addition to the comments in the letter you should be aware
that Mark Gruss of Fremont Industries is philosophically against
SPUC ' s taking over the electrical utility supplying the 10
industries in the Industrial Park, and he is philosophically
against municipal electric utilities . I have also written
a letter to JoAnne Pauluk following up on the specifics regarding
the three concerns she expressed about the City ' s handling
of the incidences listed in the attached letter.
5 . Attached are the tentative agendas for the Board of Adjustment
and Appeals and the Planning Commission meetings for March 3 ,
1983 .
6 . Attached are the minutes of the January 27 , 1983 meeting of
the Energy and Transportation Committee .
7 . Attached is the monthly calendar for March , 1983 .
8 . Bo and I have held an informal meeting with the Louisville
Township Board to bring them up to date on our discussions
with Jackson Township about a joint powers agreement for the
upper valley drainage district . This will be coming to Council
in April so we can begin to work on the joint powers agreement .
9 . Attached is a memo from Bo Spurrier regarding a county meeting
for Surface Water Management .
10 . The City of Shakopee has received the original insurance policy
for Shak-O-Valley Amateur Hockey, Inc .
11 . Attached is a copy of a letter from the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission to Conklin. I have called Conklin and offered to help
them look at alternatives . Bo ' s handwritten note on the letter
accurately reflects what Conklin told us .
may"°
r 6 ,1*
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
`w Rts
INCORPORATED 1870 L.
129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650O{tKQ
February 22 , 1983•
f
Mr. Paul Wermerskirchen
Chairman
Industrial Commercial Commission
236 Lewis
Shakopee , MN 55379
Re : ICC Tour of Fremont Industries and my Individual. Interview
with JoAnne Pauluk, Manager of Shakopee ' s Tom Thumb Market
Dear Paul :
I attended the Friday, February 18 , 1983 , ICC tour of Fremont
Industries as a representative of the Chamber of Commerce . Mark
Gruss , President of Fremont Industries , and his comptroller, Jack
Tomsich, were pleased with the ICC meeting. They did not list one
concern that related to the Chamber or the City of Shakopee. They
did enlist our support in helping to defeat a new bill in the legis-
lature H.F. 124 "Hostage Shop Bill" that requires a two year noti-
fication before an industry leaves the state. I will relay this
request on to the Chamber of Commerce . By far the greatest con-
cern expressed by Mark was what he described as the "hostile
business climate" in Minnesota that has come out of St . Paul .
What the ICC can do about this I do not know.
I am also reporting on my individual interview with JoAnne
Pauluk, owner-operator of the Shakopee Tom Thumb Market , because
it illustrates the need for an ICC program or Chamber program that
better addresses the needs of Shakopee ' s smaller businesses . I
called JoAnne and set up the meeting with her because of frustra-
tion she expressed at the February 15 , 1983 Council meeting during
Council ' s deliberations on new dram shop insurance requirements for
businesses selling 3 . 2 beer. JoAnne listed no less than 11 concerns ,
3 of which were related specifically to the handling of problems/
incidents under the control of City Hall . Those 3 incidences
included an advertising flyer that postmaster John Suel called her
about because they were placed within six feet of the homeowners
mailbox, a portable sign that the City required her to remove and
the 8 weeks it took her to receive a 3 . 2 liquor license in May of
1980 . I am following up on these three items for JoAnne . In
addition she mentioned her frustration over the poor business
climate , her inability to get the state to install stop lights at
Th Heart of Progress Valley
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Mr. Paul Wermerskirchen
Page Two
February 22 , 1983
the corner of Spencer and Highway 101 , the lack of an effort by
the Chamber or whomever to encourage Shakopee residents to shop
in Shakopee , competition in the sales of cigarettes from the
Indian Reservation which sells them at $2 . 75 less per carton,
negative publicity .over the obscene magazine issue , the fact that
she has never been invited to participate in the sidewalk sale pro-
gram sponsored by downtown merchants , and the fact that in 3 years
no one from the Chamber has contacted her regarding joining that
organization.
Paul , my question to the ICC is , "How many other JoAnne Pauluk' s
are currently running small businesses in Shakopee?" If there are
more , and I do believe there are more , what should the response of
the ICC be?
Sincerely,
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
JKA/jms
cc : Virgil Mears ,
Chamber President
City Council
Planning Commission
Y. S . JoAnne is an owner-operator living in Shakopee by choice
who has a second store in Eden Prairie with which to make
direct comparisons .
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Shakopee Planning Commission
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota March 3, 1983
Chrmn. Schmitt presiding
1) Roll Call at 8:00 P.M.
2) Approval of January 6, 1983 and February 3, 1983 Meeting Minutes.
3) 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Amendment to Shakopee City Code, Section 11.03,
Subd. 8 setting minimum standards for all new single-family detached homes.
Applicant: City of Shakopee
Action: Recommendation to City Council
4) Informational Items: a) List of Department Heads
b) City Admin. Letter to Paul Wermerskirchen
c)
d)
5) Other Business.
Don Steger
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota March 3, 1983
Chrmn. Schmitt presiding
1) Roll Call at 7:30 P.M.
2) Approval of February 3, 1983 Meeting Minutes.
3) 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for a variance from the six month
termination period for a legal non-conforming use in an I-1 Zone.
Applicant: David Yarusso, 1986 West 12th Avenue . . . for
Shannon 's Place, 188512 Eagle Creek Blvd.
Action: Variance Resolution No. 331
4) 7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for an approximate 3 foot variance from
side yard setback requirements for property located at 1017 Legion Street
(Lot 2, Block 7 , Eagle Bluff 2nd Addition).
Applicant: David Kragthorpe, 121 East 5th Avenue
Action: Variance Resolution No. 332
5) Other Business.
6) Adjournment.
Don Steger
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
(42
PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Shakopee , Minnesota
Special Session January 27 , 1983
Chairman Anderson 'called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 p.m.
in the Council Chambers at City Hall with Committee members
Dunwell , Sorenson, Toppin and Ziegler present . Committee
members Swingler, Tsui and Wolfe were absent . Also present
was Dean Colligan, Council liason, and Administrative
Assistant Jeanne Andre .
Ziegler/Toppin moved to approve the minutes of December
16 , 1982 , as presented. Motion carried.
Discussion of the transportation survey instrument was held.
The Administrative Assistant outlined certain changes rec-
ommended based on a sample survey undertaken by the CETA
personnel , including: 1 ) reordering questions 8 , 9 , 10 ,
11 , 12 , and 13 to a more natural succession; 2 ) changing
the time periods for question 17 to be noon to 3 : 00 p.m.
and 3 : 00 p .m. to 6 : 00 p.m. 3 ) including circled responses
for question 27 . The Committee members concurred with
these changes . Discussion then centered on requirements of
the Minnesota Data Practices Act and that all information
collected would be public .
Toppin/Ziegler moved to remove the telephone number from the
survey form so that all responses would be completely
anonymous . Motion carried.
Staff agreed to include statement indicating survey respon-
dents would be anonymous but information collected would
be public information. Councilman Colligan suggested
advance publicity might help to make citizens more
responsive if they are contacted. The Committee con-
curred and asked staff to contact the newspaper and
radio station. Dunwell suggested that the control list
of random persons to be called not include names , and the
Committee concurred.
It was determined that staff would prepare a sign-up sheet
for Committee members and the volunteers then recruit for
the week of February 7-11 , with carry over to the next
week if necessary. Committee members will recruit
volunteers from January 31 to February 3 . A refresh-
ment budget for coffee , pop, and donuts was judged
appropriate .
Dunwell./Sorenson moved to concur with the staff recom-
mendation not to appoint a new Committee member upon the
resignation Loren Wolfe .
Dunwell/Sorenson moved to recommend to the City Council the
discontinuation of the trial alternate MTC bus route past
the elderly highrise on Levee Drive with the possibility of a
route change once again when Levee Drive is constructed to
Scott Street . Motion carried.
Chairman Anderson recognized an observer who identified himself
as Steve Rugg of Barton Ashman (Transportation and Planning
Consultants) , and commented on the Committee survey plans .
The Committee agreed to meet at the regular February 17 , 1983 ,
meeting and discus's survey results and analysis . Staff
agreed to prepare a talley sheet to record the survey
results of each control sheet and to explore computer
applications to survey analysis .
Toppin/Ziegler moved to adjourn at 8 : 50 p.m. Motion carried.
Jeanne Andre
Recording Secretary
—
/
U1
r4
ti
K
N N I I-'
u o w O-
CC 'TJ G1 (,-) C "d
r. .. p •• ,-r
co1-1 wH• p"
O (D o o1-' I--'
`CJ �'� 'C7 rr n CJ
• (D • C!1 • N°
a -0a (D aa) u
• 7i- • ,-1 • cn
y1
N N) I-'
CO N v
v C) v (--
Crr O rt
O C O'•C H
'7 C) 'C CD
•
G aG u
n n 'y
• r'• r• K
N N F-` f-' I-'
C N lJn CO I--'
H 1-0
0 O
n r'
lii C)
o b ;.i
o t-)
1-43
. 'L7 O cn
V a
w N 1--` • 'v K o0
o w (7\ • \-O N w
1—'_
wW ( wa
m ffa r• 0 N-_3
-c - '-C '-0 Cr) H.
O • m
a n P.• rt • O
0
(-1-
t1
Y
w N o r-' K
o
O
0
ih ti
H
9 K
1-C
N 1-' 1-,
1--' V7 00 i-' y`
U1
H3
D N
MEMORANDA
TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM : H. R. Spurrier fa
City Engineers \1,4 ,'
SUBJECT: Informational Meetin0-garding
Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act, Chapter 509
DATE : February 24, 1983
Introduction
Attached is a notice that has been distributed to the townships regarding an
informational meeting on the above-captioned matter.
Background
I plan to attend the meeting since City of Shakopee will be working with several
townships in conforming to the requirements of Chapter 509.
In discussing the matter with Jon Westlake and pointing out the number of
watersheds the City shares with the townships, we concluded there may be some
value in having the City of Shakopee represented at that meeting.
Therefore, I plan to attend that meeting March 2, 1983.
HRS/jvm
Attachment
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Township Officials
FROM: Jon Westlake, Planning Director
DATE: February 17, 1983
SUBJECT: Informational Meeting regarding Metropolitan Surface Water
Management Act
Pursuant to action taken by the Scott County Board of Commissioners at their
February 1 , 1983 meeting, the Planning, Inspections and Environmental Health
Office is scheduling an informational meeting on March 2, 1983 at 8:00 p.m. in
the Civil Defense Room of the Scott County Courthouse, 428 South Holmes St . ,
Shakopee.
The reason the meeting has been scheduled is the 1982 Metropolitan Surface
Water Management Act (Chapter 509, Minnesota Session Laws, 1982) mandates
the formation of a watershed management plan for all minor watersheds in the
metropolitan area by December 31 , 1985. A watershed is defined by this Act
as "a drainage area having boundaries which are substantially coterminous with
those of an aggregation of contiguous minor watershed units possessing similiar
drainage patterns and which cross the borders of two or more local government
units".
Some of the reasons given for enacting this law are to:
1 . Improve water quality.
2. Prevent flooding and erosion from surface flows.
3. Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water
recreational facilities.
4. Reduce to the greatest practical extent the public capital
expenditures necessary to control excessive volumes and
rates of runoff.
Local units of government (townships and municipalities) will have until the
end of this year to form joint power agreements to perform some or all of the
functions specified in this Act. After December 31 , 1983, if no agreement has
been reached, Scott County and/or the Soil and Water Conservation District
(SWCD) will assume the planning responsibility.
After completion of this plan, it must be submitted for review and comment to
the SWCD, municipalities and townships, Scott County, the Metropolitan Council
and to the appropriate state agencies.
1ift1KLA-L)L11hi1
WRITE l/
CO(iTROL •
rOi`mliliOf1
A 1/'y���` February 17, 1983 , ' 'N
--,-z
',------- --____-_____-;;;:-- 7"' : `� X98J ._
,'�
Mr. Al Schafer '
a L„., I ,',..43
Plant Engineer /!
Conklin Company, Inc.
P. 0. Box 155 - -__
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Schafer:
The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has reviewed your proposal
to construct a disposal system for your non-contact cooling water
and have the following comments :
The Commission 's interceptor in this area is located approximately
3 feet above a limestone layer and is bedded in a fine-to-medium
sand. It is our understanding that you are proposing to construct
a portion of your drain field over our interceptor easement. It is
our belief that the construction of a drain field over our intercep-
tor easement may cause infiltration of your cooling water into our
interceptor and possibly the errosion of the sand bedding from
around our pipe. For this reason , the Commission must object to
this proposal and request that the drain field be moved off of our
interceptor easement.
When the temporary discharge of your cooling water is eliminated
from our system, it will be necessary for the existing service to
be sealed so as not to permit it's intermittent use.
If you have any questions , please contact Mr. Donald Bluhm of the
Commission's staff. (�
Sincerely ,
7:(.1v,__'71Q- &. kt29---
r )
, Be nard J. ringto c. c
rt:Tc;212k-16 QltLkAgit.
Director o '/Engi neem g Zt-,, \ A--t- L-Q-Q-4&,,-41. -ee..,
BJH:DSB:bIm
2. 18.83 A ` 0..T .
cc: q. Spurrier, City Engineering - �,1 q2 :5„1_ ,City of Shakopee . \ �
Doug Ful len, MWCC ,' '' • ' 14SQ.., -....
t‘
r r ,
350 METRO/CURE BLDG. 54 04.: ` di
7TH&ROBERT/TREET/ 1 ,
/AM PAUL mn 55101 ! !'
612.222.8425 ��., 4 �� '� �
n
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA MARCH 1 , 1983
Mayor Reinke presiding
1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
3] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
4] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterick are
considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by
one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items
unless a councilmember so requests, in which event the item will
be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal
sequence on the agenda. )
*5] Approval of Minutes of February 15th and 22nd, 1983
6] Communications:
a] Ray Haik, Lower Mn. River Watershed District re : Metropolitan
Surface Water Management Act
b] John M. Lane re : Repeal of Calendar Parking
7] Public Hearings: None
8] Boards and Commissions:
a] Ad Hoc Downtown Committee
*aa] Appointment to Committee
*bb] Nominations to Committee
*b] Energy and Transportation Committee r resignation
9] Reports from Staff:
*a] Application for Set Up License - Capone ' s Food Shops, Inc .
b] 7 : 30 P.M. Application for Off Sale Liquor License - Spirit
House Liquors Inc .- Minn. Valley Mall
c] Employee Group Life Insurance
d] Authorize payment of the bills $ 141 ,322.57
*e] 82-2 Valley Industrial Blvd. So. - Reduction of the Retainage
*f] 82-3 Levee Drive Extenstion - Atwood to Scott - Authorize Ad for Bid:
g] Water Management Organization - Pursuant to Chapter 509
h] 1982 Pavement Preservation Program
i] City Wide Concrete Replacement Contract - memo on table
j ] Proposed Legislation on Off-Sale Liquor License Fees
k] Proposed Legislation on: 1 ) authorizing off-sale licenses to
dispense samples of wine, and 2) changing the beneficiary of
liquor bonds from the City to the State
*1 ] Agreement with Robert McAllister
*m] Policy, Criteria and Procedures for the Review of Municipal
Industrial and Commercial Development Bond Applications
n] Purchasing Abandoned Right-of-Way in Block 52 , OSP
10] Resolutions and Ordinances:
*a] Res. No. 2120, Approving Plans For the Improvement of CSAH 21 ,
and return of present CH21 (Muhlenhardt Road)
*b] Res. No. 2115 , Apportioning Assessments as A Result of the Separate
Ownership of Lots 6 & 7, Block 51 OSP
*c] Res. No. 2116, Appointments to Shakopee Deferred Compensation Plan
for Tax Exempt Employees ' Committee
*d] Res. No. 2113 , Amending Public Improvement Assessment Policy
*e] Res. No. 2117, Establishing A Policy for Emergency Closing of
City Facilities
11] Other Business:
12] Adjourn to March 15, 1983 at 7 :00 P .M.
John K. Anderson, City Administrator
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 15, 1983
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. with Cncl. Colligan, Leroux,
Vierling and Wampach present. Cncl. Lebens was absent. Also present were John
K. Anderson, City Admr. ; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk and Rod Krass, Ass't City
Attorney.
Liaison reports were presented by Councilpersons.
Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to ad-
dress the Council on any item not on the agenda, and there was no response.
Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of February 1, 1983 and February 8,
1983 as kept.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to place on file the letter from Jock Robertson of Robertson
and Associates, Inc. , dated January 28, 1983, offering professional services regard-
ing the new water management legislation. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to place on file the letter from Al Kehr, Consultants, Inc. ,
dated February 3, 1983. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2112, A Resolution Expanding the Membership
On the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee And Amending Resolution No. 1822, and moved its
adoption. Motion carried unanimou:ay.
Leroux/Wampach moved to accept the resignation of Bill Berens from the Shakopee
Ad Hoc Downtown Committee, effective immediately.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to nominate Anthony (Bud) Berens to the Shakopee Ad Hoc
Downtown Committee.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to accept the 1982 Annual Report of the Planning Commission/
Board of Adjustments and Appeals as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach moved to table discussion of the lease with Shako-O-Valley Amateur
Hockey, Inc. until 7:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct staff to prepare an amendment to the City's criteria
clarifying our policy so that it is clear that the IRB's can be used for existing
buildings when jobs can be preserved.
Discussion followed. The City Admr. clarified that a statement of this type in
the policy would mean IRB's could be used where there is no new building and no new
equipment.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to approve the transfer of the Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor
License of the Weiss Company, from 8576 Trunk Highway 101 to 8522 East Highway 101,
effective February 17, 1983.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2114, A Resolution Amending Resolution No.
2037 Terminating Work On the Feasibility Report for Fifth Avenue - Spencer Street
to Fillmore Street, and moved its adoption. Discussion followed.
Linda Doepke, 420 East Fifth, asked for a clarification of the drainage problem. The
City Engr. responded. She then asked if that portion of Fillmore could be barri-
caded. She said it is a hazardous area, and there have been several accidents there.
The City Engineer responded that Fillmore is 16 feet that was dedicated to the
City by the Ten Eyks, and it is used for access to utility lines there and maybe
for snowplows. He could check further about using a different access down Fifth.
Shakopee City Council
February 15, 1983
Page 2
Ms. Doepke asked if that area could be blacktopped from Spencer to where it is now.
The City Engineer explained the problems of drainage and improper grade that would
have to be dealt with if it was blacktopped. The City Engineer stated this study
is confined to the area west of Fillmore on 5th Ave. , so in those constraints, it is
not feasible. He stated the property that is required to solve the problem is owned
by the TenEyks. Further discussion ensued.
Ms. Doepke asked if there was some dust-control product that could be applied if it
was not going to be blacktopped. The City Admr. stated the City will not pay for
or apply dust-control in the City. However, he stated if the homeowners in the
area want to pay for the dust-control themselves, the City will include it in a
City contract to have it applied. He stated this is a set policy, so if the home-
owners in the area agree to pay for it, they should check with the City regarding
the specifics of it.
Resolution No. 2114 carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach moved to direct the City Engineer to meet with the Superintendent
of Streets and the Chief of Police to find out what type of traffic control is
needed on Fillmore between 4th and 5th Ave. , and to come back with a recommendation
to Council within one month. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach moved to remove discussion of the lease with Shak-O-Valley Amateur
Hockey, Inc. from the table. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. John Goihl gave to the City Clerk a copy of the insurance policy for the hockey
bubble. The City Clerk stated this copy is not signed, and the agreement requires
the original insurance policy. Mr. Goihl stated he will trade the copy and give
the original to the City. He stated the delay in receiving the insurance policy
was because there was a claim made about the same time as the renewal, so the policy
was held up.
Mr. Goihl explained that the Hockey Assoc. is trying to broaden its base, and has
contacted Prior Lake and Chaska to see if they are interested in part-ownership.
Prior Lake is not interested at this time, but Chaska is. The legal and accounting
papers are now in the process of being approved, and when it is legal, Chaska will
have 50% ownership. It will be set up to have 3 board members each from Chaska and
Shakopee. Discussion followed.
The Ass't City Attorney stated it is his understanding the Hockey Assoc. is just
broadening the corporation, it is not involving another municipality. He stated
he would expect no more potential for problem with this expansion than already
exists.
Discussion ensued between Cncl. Leroux and Mr. Goihl regarding open skating time.
Cncl. Leroux stated he did not feel there was enough open skating time, and Mr.
Goihl stated it is a highly subsidized item, as during many months, it just does
not pay the expenses as sold hockey ice time does. Mr. Goihl stated the demand
for ice time for hockey is there.
(No Council action was taken. When the expansion of the corporation is completed,
Shak-O-Valley Amateur Hockey, Inc. will ask the Council for a name change in the
lease. )
Colligan/Wampach moved to remove from the table dram shop insurance coverage.
Motion carried unanimously.
Cncl. Leroux asked if the business-owners would have any problem with complying
with the requirements of reporting sales under $10,000 in 3.2 beer. Bud Berens
and JoAnn Pauluk both replied that it would be no problem.
The City Clerk explained the League of Minn. Cities suggestion of complying with
the exemption contained in the insurance coverage law. Considerable discussion
followed.
Ms. Pauluk stated she has a degree in Accounting, and wondered why she had to have
an accountant's statement to verify her sales. She also asked about the cost of
Dram Shop Insurance. She was given a copy of the City's survey of insurance costs.
The City Admr. stated she probably would not have to hire an accountant to draw
up all her records, but just sign a letter certifying to the amount of receipts '
from beer vendors.
Discussion followed regarding methods the City could employ to comply with the
monitoring requirement.
Shakopee city Council
February 15, 1983
Page 3
Ms. Pauluk asked about what Wayzata is doing, where the business gives a release
to the City. The Ass't City Attorney stated he couldn't imagine that would be
adequate protection for the City.
Leroux/Colligan offered Ordinance 114, Fourth Series, An Ordinance of the City
of Shakopee Amending Shakopee dity Code Chapter V Entitled "Liquor, Beer and Wine
Licensing and Regulations" by Requiring Proof of Financial Responsibility and by
Adding a New Provision to the Following Sections of the Shakopee City Code, namely:
Section 5.02, Subd, 1, 5.32, Subd. 6 and 5.40, Subd. 3; By Excepting Certain Es-
tablishments from the Terms Hereof; and by Adopting by Reference the City Code
Chapter 1 and 5.99 Which Among Other Things Contain Penalty Provisions, and moved
its adoption.
Cncl. Leroux stated he goes along with the exemption because the liability has
never changed, only the requirement for insurance has changed. The Ass't City Atty.
stated this is similar to the requirement to have insurance on your automobile.
Cncl. Colligan stated he did not want the City to become a part of a lawsuit. He
feels he is protecting the public and business owner by requiring them to have this
insurance. More discussion followed.
Roll Call: Ayes; Vierling, Leroux, Reinke
Noes; Colligan, Wampach Absent; Lebens
Ordinance No. 114 fails
Colligan/Leroux moved for a five minute recess at 8:28 P.M. Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to re-convene at 8:32 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
The Ass't City Attorney confirmed that the previous vote failed, because the re-
quirement for passing an Ordinance is a two-thirds majority of the whole Council,
not just of the seated Council.
Colligan/Leroux moved to re-consider Ordinance No. 114. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach moved to amend Ordinance No. 114, deleting Section II.
Discussion followed regarding the merits of checking further into what other cities
in the area are doing regarding this law, and when it has to be in place. The
Ass't City Attorney stated it will probably take about 3 years and a couple of
Court cases before the legal question will be settled. He said adopting or not
adopting the ordinance will do nothing to settle the ambiguities in the law. The
City Admr. said this amendment would make Shakopee more restrictive than the State.
Roll Call on Motion to Amend: Ayes; Wampach, Colligan
Noes; Vierling, Leroux, Reinke
Motion to amend failed.
Roll Call on Ordinance No. 114: Ayes; Vierling, Leroux, Reinke, Colligan
Noes; Wampach
Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution setting forth methods
of monitoring sales of 3.2 beer for businesses with sales under $10,000 pursuant
to Council's discussion and League of Minn. Cities advice. Motion carried with
Cncl. Wampach opposed.
The City Engineer explained his recommendation for the reduction of the sewer bill
to Valleyfair.
Leroux/Wampach moved to direct staff to reduce the total sewer billing for Septem-
ber 1982 and December 1982 by $18,897.61 to $7,689.23.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Discussion ensued regarding Halo First Addition Letter of Credit.
Colligan/Leroux moved to authorize litigation under the Developer's Agreement and
the Letter of Credit against Halo Investment Company, Inc. and Citizens State Bank
for the amount of the City's expenditure, attorneys fees and costs.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colli gan/Vierling moved that bills in the amount of $388,361.39 be allowed and
ordered paid.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Shakopee City Council
February 15, 1983
Page 4
Regarding the City's policy of charging 2% over interest on G.O. Bonds for public
improvements, the City Admr. stated the Bond Counsel advised that the front end
load alternative suggested by the ICC was not a viable alternative for General Obli-
gation Bonds, because it does not meet the test of a reasonable cost requirement.
Leroux/Colligan moved to go along with the ICC's recommendation to recluse the
interest surcharge on 429 Projects from 2% to 1%. Discussion followed.
Colligan/Wampach moved to amend the motion to change the interest surcharge to 1 .
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Roll Call on Main Motion as Amended: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Considerable discussion ensued regarding amendments to personnel policies, especially
in regard to employee reaction and response to performance evaluations. It was
discussed whether or not the employee should be required to admit agreeing or not
agreeing with the evaluation, or just state he/she has seen it. General consensus
was to have the employee sign a statement stating the evaluation has been reviewed,
and the employee does not necessarily agree or disagree with it.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2111, A Resolution Amending Resolution No.
1571 Adopting a Personnel Policy for the City of Shakopee, and moved its adoption.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2109, A Resolution Appointing Certain City
Officials and Employees to the Shakopee Deferred Compensation Plan for Tax Exempt
Employees' Committee, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2110, A Resolution Supporting Valleyfair's
Request to Allow Informational and Directional Signing on State Trunk Highways,
and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to adjourn to 4:30 P.M. February 22, 1983. Motion carried
unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:04 P.M.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 22 , 1983
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 4:38 P.M. with Cncl .Leroux,
Vierling and Wampach present. Cncl .Colligan was late and Cncl .Lebens
was absent. Also present were City Administrator John Anderson and
Department Heads: Jeanne Andre , Judy Cox, LeRoy Houser, Jim Karkanen,
George Muenchow, Bo Spurrier, Don Steger and Gregg Voxland, and City
Attorney Julius Coller.
Discussion commenced regarding the City' s foreclosure against certain
developers because of failure to pay the park dedication fees required
within the developers agreements. Cncl .Leroux refrained from discussion
and voting because of a conflict of interest .
Cncl .Colligan arrived and took his place at 4:41 P.M.
Vierling/Ward moved to authorize and direct the City Attorney to drop the
foreclosure against lots in the Eastview 1st Addition, Halo 2nd Addition,
and Wiggins 1st Addition, upon authorization from theCity Clerk, after pay-
ment of the park dedication fee or the receipt of a recordable amendment to
the developers agreement against a particular lot or lots. Motion carried
with Cncl .Leroux & Colligan abstaining.
Colligan/Wampach moved to direct staff to contact our legislators to indicate
our support of Senate File No. 219 , which offers an alternative to cities faced
with the problem of proving benefit when constructing storm drainage
facilities. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2118, Amending Resolution No. 2082
Adopting A Fee Schedule for 1983 , and moved its adoption. After discussion
the motion carried with Cncl .Colligan and Vierling opposed.
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2119, Authorizing the Mayor to Sign
A Community Development Block Grant Application for East Second Avenue,
and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion commenced among councilmembers and city staff on the City' s
1983-1984 Goals and Objectives.
Leroux/Vierling moved to adjourn at 6: 25 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Recording Secretary
rift;, Lower Minnesota River Watershed District
WARRIOR OFFICE BUILDING
yy t " BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55378
k' ' PLEASE REPLY TO :
Russell Sorenson PresidentFEB 2 2 1983 4344 IDS Center
Jens Caspersenl Vice President Minneapolis, MN 55402
r
Russell Heltne Treasurer ^� �
Cyril B.Ess Secretary yTY O SHAKOPEE February 18, 1983
William J.Jaeger,Jr.
Lawrence E.Samstad Engineer
Raymond A. Haik Attorney
Mayor and City Council
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: Our File Number 1447-001
Dear Mayor and Council:
The Board of Managers of the Lower Minnesota River
Watershed District is commencing efforts to comply with the
provisions of Laws 1982 , Chapter 509 , commonly known as the
Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act. This Act requires
an update and revision of existing watershed district plans
and requires alternate methods for planning by municipalities
and county governments.
The Managers have directed that we contact the munici-
palities of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District to
express the Managers' desire to coordinate their activities
with the municipalities. The Managers would like to obtain
background information and details regarding planning for sur-
face water management in your municipality. In that regard,
the Managers would appreciate the City naming an individual
or individuals that can be contacted by the District to ob-
tain information concerning your community' s efforts to com-
ply with this new law. The engineer for the Lower Minnesota
River Watershed District is Mr. Lawrence Samstad of the Itasca
Engineering Company in Cokato , Minnesota.
An appropriate response to this letter at your earliest
convenience would be appreciated.
V truly ours,
Ra and A. Haik, Attorney
for the Watershed District
RAH/kar
cc - Board of Managers
Mr. Lawrence E. Samstad
"` '
February 17, 1983 1 0 % vJ
CITY of .to
Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: Repeal of Calendar Parking.
Dear Mayor Reinke and Members of the City Council:
I am writing in response to the article in the Shakopee Valley News
which I received yesterday February 16, 1983 concerning the repeal of
the City Ordinance pertaining to calendar parking.
Please accept this letter as my pledge to support the repeal of this
unjust City Ordinance and its unconscionable enforcement.
I too am a victim of your policy of calendar parking. I received an
early Christmas present from our friendly neighborhood gestapo just
two days before Christmas before we had encountered so much as one snow
flake. Unlike the City of Minneapolis which extended a helping hand to
its taxpayers and residents during the severe storm on December 28,
last year, the City of Shakopee deemed it necessary to punish its residents
and tax payers under the guise of "enforcing the law" in blind adherence to
it, regardless of its intent. I felt the Shakopee Police acted not too
unlike the "Gestapo" of Nazi Germany during World War II by striking like
thieves in the night when, at 1:45 a.m. they issued a citation to me for
overtime parking in violation of this new ordinance.
I grudgingly paid my fine of $15.00 because I learned from talking with
my neighbors that notices had been placed in the local paper and signs
were posted along the highway, neither of which was I aware of. I was
not a subscriber to the local paper at that time and I resent being forced
into becoming a subscriber as a result of this incident.
I also learned from my neighbors that warning notices had been issued
during the preceeding month. However, I do not habitually park in the
street and had not done so for at least two months prior to receiving the
ticket.
Once again, please accept this letter as my pledge to support the repeal
of this unjust City Ordinance. Thank you.
Sincerely;
704Y"
JOHN M. LANE
945 So. Apgar St.
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
PeL)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
( cut)
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Appointment to Ad Hoc Downtown Committee
DATE: February •24 , 1983
Introduction
On February 15 , 1983 the Council nominated Anthony ( Bud) Berens
to the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee .
Action Requested
Appoint Anthony ( Bud) Berens to the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee .
JSC/jms
fr N
k.,/ ED
(A)) FE E3 2 8 1983
CITY cio AfWM
February 25, 1983
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Please submit the following names to the Shakopee City Council for
consideration as members of the Shakopee Ad-Hoc Downtown Committee.
Consideration as a voting member:
Steve Clay - Clay's Printing
Gary Laurent - Laurent Builders, Incorporated
Consideration for non-voting membership:
Trevor Walsten - Krass, Meyer, Kanning and Walsten
Chartered
Thank you very much.
Sincerely yours,
(7/0,4d7/2p
Daniel G. Steil, Chairman
Shakopee Ad-Hoc Downtown Committee
DGS/mr
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE: Resignation from Energy and Transportation Committee
DATE: February 24, 1983
Introduction and Background
Mr. Freeman Tsui , member of the Energy and Transportation Committee,
has submitted his resignation because he has been unable to attend
any of the Committee meetings . As the resolution calls for a mem-
bership of 7 to 10 persons and Mr. Tsui ' s resignation places the
membership at 6 , the Council should call for interested parties to
submit their names for possible appointment .
Requested Action
Accept the resignation of Mr. Freeman Tsui from the Energy and
Transportation Committee and direct staff to advertise for persons
interested in receiving consideration for appointment to that
Committee.
JA/jms
V-ei 764,„ (ilz,)
R
l ;,-,,4
ij
-bty adtd 7:tetoyezzzitiYI 49nAidie
At-e-if-ge i AA/ FE32 4 1983
CITY Or SHAKOPME
tz, „ Azlti /V .0(1 6072.1 ..6 ke
m-614-im / 70AA- leirtiK1162-t , Mm-fle-dtt_ eatt ,e-o-ev_x7-
tloye-/ 1 Ay ytizi ei- t/ ,e4e-/-06:176Z- _ I esuiae__ ,egykte _.4
j 1;6 Le't ebazi ig-la_ i'ii-e_ a‘11-e-4) er ? i_v_ev,..1 -7iiel,4
11 ff)
1 jJ 1?-atd-N
.Aadr, 7 112.011-tfete_A-zr ,
,79,,a_t j co-4_ ete? 44;flibut 6,41)11 /7 ,ifteAtze-Lei y 0,
142 ' Itfiz.1 dm-4 - tilLal'fie- tbil-,- -t'-'rFill
I10,A)6 J eLaz/ irl-7-e-
--eLe cimmLt0--e
rat ii,i24 .-t 760-e / rox-
Lc) . 1 IA,
I )
0
ne t OAllidA/ -15 (J
9d)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Application for Set Up License - Capone ' s Food Shops , Inc .
DATE: February 24 , 1983
Introduction
Mr. Gary Capone of Capone ' s Food Shops , Inc . has applied for a
set up license for his restaurant located in the Mall .
Alternatives
1 . Approve
2 . Deny
Recommendation
Approval
Action Requested
Approve the application and grant a permit to only allow consumption
and display of intoxicating liquor to Capone ' s Food Shops , Inc .
Minnesota Valley Mall .
JSC/jms
Liquor Control Division PS-9007-01
Hanover Building STATE OF MINNESOTA 9
480 Cedar Street
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO ONLY ALLOW CONSUMPTION & DISPLAY OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR
(This Application Shall Be Typewritten and Submitted Before June 1st of each Year)
In answering the following questions "APPLICANT" shall be governed as follows:
For a Partnership, one of the partners shall execute this application for all members of the partnership.
For a Corporation, one officer shall execute this application for all officers, directors, and stockholders.
For a Club, one of the club officers shall execute this application for all the members. If additional
space is required, use a separate sheet of paper, indicating by number the question answered.
(FEE FOR PERMIT — $100.00)
EVERY QUESTION MUST BE ANSWERED
1. Gary L. Capone as President
(Norm, of person making application) (Individual owner, partner, officer, club officer)
for and in behalf of Capone's Food Shops, Inc.
(Myself, names of partners, name of corporation, or name of club)
hereby apply for a permit allowing consumption and display of intoxicating liquor to be located at
Minnesota Valley Mall , Municipality of Shakopee
(Street address and/or Lot and Block number)
Post Office of , County of Scott
(Township and Section)
State of Minnesota, in accordance with the provisions of M.S. 340.14, Suhd. 3, as amended.
2. Will business be operated as a private club or public place Public Place
3. State type of business Restaurant
4. FOR A PUBLIC BUSINESS: If a partnership, state name and address of each member of partnership; if
a corporation, state name and address of officers and directors.
Gary L. Capone, President 56)40 Troy Lane, Plymouth, MN 55340
(Name) (Address)
Christine Capone, Sec/Treasurer 56+0 Troy Lane, Plymouth, MN 55340
(Name) (Address)
(Name) (Address)
5. FOR A PRIVATE CLUB: Date club was organized , is club incorporated
number of members , length of time in present location , is club building owned or
rented , what is the membership dues , what are the requirements for
membership
Does club maintain lockers to be used by members for storing intoxicating liquor . Names of all
officers and/or directors of the club:
(Name) (Address)
(Name) (Address)
(Name) (Address)
(Name) (Address)
Enclose with this application a copy of the Constitution and By-Laws of the club and current list of bona
fide members.
6. If applicant or any partner, corporation officer or director, club officer or director, is not a citizen of the
United States, list such non-citizens N/A
7. State name of person who will operate or manage business:
Gary L. Capone 5640 Troy Lane, Plymouth, MN 55340
(Name) (Address)
8. On what floor is the establishment located, or to be located Ground Floor
9. How are the premises classified under the zoning ordinance Retail Shopping Center
Approved for Violations by: DO NOT USE
Check
Cash
Rec'd.
Inspection Section Rec'd. by Cashier
•
10. State name and address of owner or owners of building wherein the business will be located:
United National Corporation 71+5 5th Avenue, New York, New York 10151
(Name) (Address)
11. Has applicant; if partnership, any partner; if corporation, any officer or director; if club, any club
officer or director, ever had a license under the Minnesota Liquor Control Act revoked or suspended or been
convicted for any violation of State Laws or local ordinances; if so, give date and details NO
12. Is applicant; if partnership, any partner; if corporation, any officer or director; if club, any club officer
or director, a member of the governing body of the municipality or county in which this permit is to be
issued; if so, in what capacity NO •
13. Has applicant; if partnership, any partner; if corporation, any officer or director; if club, any club
officer or director, any interest whatsoever, directly or indirectly, in any liquor establishment in the State
of Minnesota NO . Give name and address of such establishment
14. Furnish the name and address of at least three business references, including one bank reference:
Peoples Savings and Loan MN Valley Mall, Shakopee, MN 55379
(Name) (
Golden Valley Bank 82 5 )
00Golden Va_l l ey Rd, , Golden Valley, MN 55427
(Name) (Address)
Frederick and Rosen, Ltd. 5922 Excelsior Blvd. , Minneapolis', MN 55416
(Name) (Address)
15. Will intoxicating liquor be sold on the premises NO
16. (a) State whether application is: 1. Original X 2. Renewal 3. Transfer
(b) State whether dancing will be permitted on the premises ;In
17. Are the premises now occupied, or to be occupied, entirely separate and exclusive from any other
business establishment YES
18. State trade name to be used Capone's Chicago Style
19. State whether an "On-Sale" or "Off-Sale" Non-Intoxicating Malt Beverage License has or will be granted in
conjunction to this business and for the same premises
20. Has there been issued, or will there be issued, a $54.00 Federal Retail Liquor Dealer's Special Tax Stamp
for the sale of liquor on these premises 4f•,
21. Has your local government an ordinance regulating the consumption and display of intoxicating liquor
YES
22. If operating under zoning ordinance how is location of building classified
I hereby certify that I have read and understand every question in this application, and that the answers are true of my own knowledge. I
further understand that the giving of false information in this application, or the failure to give pertinent information constitutes cause for the
immediate revocation of this permit. IT IS FURTHER UNDERSTOOD THAT ANY PERMIT ISSUED HEREUNDER DOES NOT ALLOW THE
SALE OF INTOXICATING LIQUOR. Enclosed is payment of $400.041 ( - . - payable to the Liquor Control
Director as provided by M.S. 1967,Section 340.119. ri•
NO CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO CAPONE'S FOOD SHOPS; INC.
THIS APPLICATION UNLESS APPROVED AS (Name of Establishment)
HEREINAFTER PROVIDED:
If applicant is located in the County, the Chairman C-'
of the Board of County Commissioners or his (signor re of Authorized Applicant)
Representative shall approve both copies of the Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7 day
of
application. f 19
1
(Chairman, Board of County Commissioners or his Representative)
(Notary Public)
If applicant is located in a Municipality, the
President of the Council or his Representative shall My Commission expires •
approve both copies of this application. FA71...Et.17:13-4E
VVOSKOFF
lam. ! NOTARYIC—MINNESOTA\i HENN (N COUNTY
�•' MYx free
(President of the Council or his Representative) p Sept 14, 1989
*4y ,. ;
? IDMEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM : Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Application for Off Sale Liquor License -
Spirit House Liquors Inc . - Minnesota Valley Mall
DATE: February 24 , 1983
Introduction
Mr. John Bernstein of Spirit House Liquors Inc . has applied for
an off sale liquor license . He will be taking over Valley Liquors
currently located in the Minnesota Valley Mall .
Background
As of this writing the application is not in order, but applicant
hopes to obtain the proper bond and insurances by Tuesday night ' s
meeting.
There are no delinquent taxes against the property.
Police Department recommendation is attached.
Recommendation
1 . Table application, if not in order.
2 . Approve application, if in order.
3 . Deny application.
Action Requested
Assuming the application will be in order by Tuesday evening ; approve
the application and grant an off sale liquor license to Spirit House
Liquors , Inc . , Minnesota Valley Mall.. , upon surrender of the existing
license within three days .
JSC/jms
/r';'('4"-7"1.74;\
City of Shakopee
`� A KE• P F \ POLICE DEPARTMENT
to .e.ii,.,t„..
��, g`N N S a T f� 44i4:-.ei 44sIgliit
� p.
`4 a- 11PP„ 1�-, 476 South Gorman Street 11 .",_ pki,F xV
r Q 1� SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
s ter. 1
p O-— 1 ,
Tel. 445-6666 1,0,,, ,..,:,.
� {
3 ';
\\\
{ 55379 lIfr
I
7
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Off Sale Liquor License
DATE: February 25, 1983
INTRODUCTION
John Richard Bernstein/Spirit House Liquor, Inc. , had made
application for an Off Sale Liquor License to be located at
a currently licensed business at the Minnesota Valley Mall.
BACKGROUND
The Police Department has conducted an appropriate background
investigation relative to the information provided by the
applicant.
RECOMMENDATION
The applicant had been found to be a person of good character
and no information was developed to indicate a denial of
the license would be appropriate .
J O Sewn 20 EEct.
STATE OF MINNESOTA / PS-9136-02
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISION
APPLICATION FOR OFF SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE
This application and the bond shall be submitted in duplicate
Whoever shall knowingly and wilfully falsify the answers to the following questionnaire shall be
deemed guilty of perjury and shall be punished accordingly.
In answering the following questions "APPLICANTS" shall be governed as follows: For a Corpora-
tion one officer shall execute this application for all officers, directors and stockholders. For a partnership
one of the "APPLICANTS" shall execute this application for all members of the partnership.
EVERY QUESTION MUST BE ANSWERED.
BUSINESS _ APPLICANT'S HOME
PHONE NUMBER L. r�_ I PHONE NUMI3FR - rvrt �_-
1. 1 . , r=.,.-V as )-s•c't= 5 .
(Individual owner, officer, or partner)
for and in behalf of ...-7:-.) ,-- . ---,..7, , s-,-- „� ��
iaY =5 2.-..e-,.hereby apply for an Off Sale
Intoxicating Liquor License to be located at /92:1/.-41 i"/ A - r /117),3,y
(Street Address
/or Lot and Block Number)
Municipality of f-/ ,<•t-I\ r-- , County of 'r F •
State of Minnesota, in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 340, commencing
/41 /2/),---(--,,,,/ / , 19 6:3, and ending i •11a1:4= :r< <
19_ .
2. Give applicants' date of birth :1\77(111::0)
(J f,,-i/ /"/ / { •
_?--moi •
(Day) ( onth) (Year) —
X C
Birthdates of Partners t r'.r i 7,
(Day) (Month) (�.ti'.�s 5
(Year)
or •
_
(Day) (Month) (Year)
Officers of Corporation
(Day) (Month) (Year)
3. The residence for each of the_applicants named herein for the past five years is as follows:
1;
4. Is the applicant a citizen of the United States? \/ C-
If naturalized state date and place of naturalization
If a corporation, or artnership, state citizenship status of all officers or partners.
,.{'rte �I. w .t.'.i r�'.l �d _ . _ Z. :_ ,:
...6...?, ..L ('3"-' - 6 i-z,r"-<-1/- ...7"/7-,_; „Ai ,T ...,.. . - . -7-i e_i2t--..--v
5. T,e person who executes th 2)application shall give wife'slr husband's full name and address
;
,--„,•m-Tei--7,<IV t k._./ i• ..--z-C--::-
6. What occupat
}ions have applicant and associates in this application followed for the past five years?
;,,,�_-'.I -A. ''\ 1\> fik- `' V �c - _ /2) �f 1 , (1 r—�_I`�.e.�.� 6'.-L_., 1?:ate. _
` E
7. If a partnership, state name and address of each member of partnership ,'%,
.:...r+Y4e"u�'WrL.:�.. i= y..w:r-....—....— -... .-v .: ...r.....----.._-,...- ......... ..-._._.-,..-......., w .e. -_.._...-. .�.. _ . _ ..
If a corporation, date of i'co oratic�rt� _, state in which incorporat w
oY�1/
amount of authorized capitalization /e C f) `�� �"'
amount of paid in capital �'�:.� ,
if a subsidiary of any other corporation, so state__ jY/i �--
give purpose of corporation n«)A,' ' 'LL - ,._ F - • - , ..> ....-f--..: '.. ',hie,
name and address of all officers, directors and stockholders and the number of shares held by each
_.,-1';_),,--A/ , _gx---VS7-,``,,,'v /2-.)-S.,7c- l ,LN•V &,-). ?„,-,7,,v
P ....._%/4).. .. .4-1. 6 4/41_ " •.,eL. .Ad
l (Name) 1.0 (Addreu — number and street or lot and block) (City)
\ - t—. /t: - `- �:r4• ..` . ' Liar/e. - / .e) ..- e?" t
(Name) (Address)
(City)
(Name) (Address)
(City)
(Name) (Address)
(City)
If incorporated under the laws of another state, is corporation authorized to do business in this State?
—. Number of certificate of authority_ A .
If this application is for a new Corporation include a certified copy of Articles of Incorporation and
By-Laws. S _
If this application is for a RENEWAL of license state whether any changes have been made in the
Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws since the last issue of License_.___ ''
,&. Describe premises to which license applies; such as (first floor, second floor, basement, etc./ s'
t E�"�' �'�� � ,_�Q �r -__ •p ; or, if entire building, so state f,,,r1-k! 1r
9. [f operating under a zoning ordinance, how is the location of the building classified?f -1,11:<?. Far�:y
`> ( ��t tI L r '', �:7
10. Is establishment located near academy, state college, university? AVE, ;
state approximate distance from such establishment
11. State name and address of owner of building&r ,r}!Y i> >z-_ i<r-, (,�V:<<-,:; At;, :te ,
has owner of building any connection, directly or indirectly, with applicant? /yam,
if you do not own building, state type rental agreement/O y,c . l(`-nVf. ; submit copy of such
agreement (need only be submitted with original application for liquor license - not necessary for yearly
renewal of licens( / 6e c.%,d,1,k;3-7-c� es-4--7- �6*._
12. State whether applicant, or any of the associates in this application, have ever had an application for a
Liquor License rejected by any municipality or State authority;if so, give date and details /VT,: -
13. Has the applicant, or any of the associates in this application, during the five years immediately preced-
ing this application ever had a license under the Minnesota�� Liquor Control Act revoked for any violation of
such laws or local ordinances;if so, give date and details/r/G
14. State whether applicant, or any of the associates in this application and employees while employed by
applicant during the past five years were ever convicted of a y Liquor Law violations or any crime in this state,
or under Federal Laws, and if so, give date and details '')-
1
15. Is applicant, or any of the associates in this application, a member of the governing body of the munici-
pality in which this license is to be issued? /V' C�
. If so, in what capacity? �
If applicant for license is the spouse of a member of the governing body, or where other family relationship
exists, such member shall not vote on this application.
16. State whether any person other than applicants has any right, title or interest in the furniture, fixtures,
or equipment in the premises for which license is applied, and if so, give name and details tt L�P( ;0 A,,yr
! �� ,-7/..4 -s%- 0 , V. I- t.-t X..V. -. j._
7 ;(:
17. Have applicants any interest whatsoever, directly or indirectly, in any other liquor establishment in the
State of Minnesota? /44-'-‘, , Give name and address of such establishment
18. Furnish the name and address of at least three business references, including one b reference
�� A; e )
,. . : / /
} .\ .'7 J ,
/f
. r t 1.A;
19. Do you possess a retail-dealer's:; dentification card issued by the Liquor Control Commissioner which
will expire December 31st•of this"yeas»?.Give number of same__ / <<
20. Does applicant intend to sell intoxicating liquor to other than the consumer?_,; ,
21. State whether applicant intends to possess, operate or permit the possession or operation of, on the
licensed premises or in any room adjoining the licensed premises, any slot machine, dice, gambling device and
apparatus, or permit any gambling therein / V
22. Under what classification is the license applied for: EXCLUSIVE LIQUOR STORE, DRUG STORE,
OR GENERAL FOOD STORE? )i �� . ,_ ; dam,` t` ' r• c, _,; �;---2::: ,.L?-
23. Are the premises now occupied, or to be occupied,(,-,0 ,,,
by the applicant entirely separate-and exclusive from
any other business establishment? Yt- - ( ,1 ,,,7i.--.__2.1.4_ - V id,f4 r Nra��
24. If a drug store, state length of time the store has been in operation_1, .
25. State trade name to be used
26. State name of person that will operate store_e. ,.--Z.V rj „� :--x;V ,e --,•.-A/ /1---Vi .
27. State whether applicant has, or will be ��ct ` ' ( - /',f x ,V , r""V
PP grante a p-sale Liquor License in conjunction with this
Of-sale Liquor License and for the same premises_ 7I z -•-
27a. State whether applicant has, orr/will be granted, a Sunday On-sale Liquor License in conjunction with the regular
On-sale Liquor License __ C
28. State whether applicant has, or will be granted, an "On-sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Beverage" (3/2) Li-
cense in conjunction with this Off-sale Liquor License, and for the same premises /7 f) -
J. Each applicant forff-sale Liquor Li ase must have a Federal Retail Liquor Dealer's Tax Stamp. Enter
number of said stamp/" 00 ,t .'\ -,t
30. Do you intend to deliver liquor by vehicle?_1_�1�- - . If so, state the number of the Vehicle Permit
issued for the current year by the Liquor Control Commissioner
31. If this application is for a transfer of an Off-sale License, give name of former licensee and state
whether any consideration, money or property has been paid, or will be paid, given or exchanged by anyone,
and by whom and to whom for the purchase or transfer of the license;also state the amount of consideration
NOTE: This uestion to be completed whenev here is a change of license during the city's license year.
/1'?..2., _0,-4/.7_5,.,\F-4c..q"-----)t---,,l1 _,44..i.„4..
�.__..
I hereby verify the above statementA) , .. ,; �,i);, , 4 7,,,,7-7.,-_--:
(Signatur c er licensee)
32. Applicant, and the associates in this application, will strictly/comply with all the Laws of the State of
Minnesota governing the taxation and the sale of intoxicating liquor; rules and regulations promulgated by
the Liquor Control Director; and all ordinances of the muni ' ality; and I hereby certi that I have read the
foregoing questions and that the answers to said questions are true of ow owled
(Signature of applicant)
t�.w__ Subscribed and sworn to before me this
C r'L da f '� l�lb��r
19r, BARRY L WITTENKELLER
1 i' 9 I Imo' y NOTARY PUMA°•MINNESOTA
V
, t �-- t-44-V AAMSEY COUNTY
11/\/
( otary •ublic)
IN,00Amnlwwn Expires N .I,1928
My commission expires _
REPORT ON APPLICANT OR APPLICANTS BY POLICE DEPARTMENT
This is to certify that the applicant,and the associates,named herein have not been convicted within the past
five years for any violation of Laws of the State of Minnesota, or Municipal Ordinances relating to Intoxicating
Liquor, except as hereinafter stated
POLICE DEPARTMENT
(Name of city, village or borough)
APPROVED BY:_
TITLE
(If you have no police department, either the Marshal or
the Constable shall execute this report on the applicant.)
.___...:
"°�' �' ",r+'..!-4,..--,..P;,.aN,�,. iR r-s- °"-,.4-.4- � i�' �aw'.,v1.�nMw+ 4'i Ihi�k..�,c'' � V�.?�lL .�+n �G+«3. Sw a
e
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Follow-up on Group Life Insurance
DATE: February 25, 1983
Introduction
This is a follow-up to the memo dated 1/14/83 which was deleted from the
Council agenda for more information.
Background
The additional information sought was that any increased benefit provided to
department heads above the "standard" benefit provided to all employees is
taxable income to the department head if the City pays the premium. This is
part of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 and is effective
1/1/84 .
The dollars involved, both premium and benefit, are relatively small. The
workload imposed on the Finance staff, if the City were to pay the premium
for department heads, would be a significant burden occurring at the busiest
time of the year.
The current base benefit is $15,000. This was set in July, 1980 and has not
been upgraded with rising salaries/inflation. . The previous base benefit was
$18,000 since at least 1978 and probably prior to 1978. The decrease in the
base may not have been proper or legal.
Staff recommends instead a general updating of group life insurance. Setting
a flat benefit of $18,000 for all employees for 1983 and upgrading it to
$20,000 for 1984 would provide all employees the same benefit and would,
over two years, bring the benefit closer to the relative position (to wages)
that existed prior to 1979. The alternative of having the department heads
pay for an additional benefit. still Is requested as the insurer permits.
There are not enough department heads interested at this time for the insurer
to have that option.
An alternate method of having the benefit based on a percent of salary was
explored. There were no tax consequences when every employee has the same
percentage applied. In order to avoid cutting benefits, the percentage
would have to be very high, increasing benefits for most employees. There
is a price for this method but the most important factor is that it perpet-
uates the "subsidy" situation of lower paid employees helping pay the
premiums for the higher paid employees and therefore not considered further.
7c--
Follow-up
C--
Follow-up on Group Life Insurance Memo
Page 2
Alternatives
1 . Status Quo.
2. Raise minimum benefit to $18,000.
3. Set benefit at $18,000 with an additional insurance to total $25,000
for department heads as permitted by carrier, additional coverage paid
by City.
4. Same as 3 but increased benefit for department heads optional with
their paying the additional premium.
5. Set benefit at flat $18,000 for 1983, $20,000 for 1984.
6. Combination #4 & #5.
Recommendation
Alternative #6.
Recommended Action
Move to set the base life insurance benefit at $18,000 for 1983 and $20,000
for 1984 and the department heads may at their cost, purchase additional
insurance for a total of $25,000 as carrier permits.
GMV:mmr
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director /C,
RE: Group Life Insurance
DATE: January 14, 1983
Introduction & Background
The City has recently renewed it 's group insurance coverage. The differential
level of benefit for life insurance was recently discussed at staff meetings.
There are currently four levels of benefit; $15,000, $18,000, $25,000 & $30,000
as set by Mr. Reeder in 1980. What is happening is that the employees with
lower benefit are subsizing the cost of the higher benefits for other employees.
Staff discussed and is proposing that the benefit be set at $18,000 to equalize
the benefit for all employees and eliminate the "subsidy" of different benefit
levels. There is an established practice in business of providing higher level
employees with additional benefits. Staff is suggesting that department heads
be provided $25,000 worth of life insurance as several of them currently have.
To avoid other employees "subsidizing" the department heads additional insurance,
the department heads or the City would pay the actual cost of the additional
benefit . Staff is requesting that the City pay this cost .
The costs involved are:
1 . To raise the floor from $15,000 to $18,000 under the above plan for
everyone would benefit 12 employees and cost a total of $13.20 per month.
The City cost of the $13.20 is $6.60 per month with employee paying the
balance.
2. Setting the benefit at a flat $18,000 for all employees would cut the
total cost by $2.40. The City cost of this option is again an increase
of $6.60 per month.
3. Setting the benefit at $18,000 with $25,000 for department heads would
cost $38.20 per month. The City cost would again be the $6.60 plus the
additional for department heads of $25.00.
Note: A few employees are categorized differently due to health conditions
that will be reviewed.
Alternatives
1. Status Quo.
2 Raise minimum benefit to $18,000.
3. Set benefit at $18,000 with an additional $7,000 for department heads
as permitted by carrier, additional coverage cost paid by City.
4. Same as No. 3 with department heads additional cost.
5. Set benefit at 18,000.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 3.
Action Requested
Move to set life insurance benefit to $18,000 with the City paying for an
additional $7,000 for department heads.
GMV:mmr
Cot.
Co 00 Co CO Co 00 Co O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO CO O O H ."'td
H H H H H H H H H H R H H H H H H r H H r H H ca H
•
k.0 1/4.0 10 1/4.0 10 .O 1/4.0 1/4.0 w w w w w w w w w w w .D 10 w W In n Q'
N N N N N W N N N N N N V V V V V V V N N 1/4.0 N O n Pi
w O H V V H N a, /-, 1-, 1-, 1-, 0000000 -P-- In O O V HG
W• H O O O O O O O O O W W l, W 01 O\ H W ., H W O O ON H O ri
I I rt O O O O O O O O H W N Ul Co N Co H N 00 N O O N co O ,4
rd C) W O O O O 0 O O O H H R H N N N H H H H O O H H O
W m H • • • . • • • • . . • r-
rt 0 m O O O O O O O 0 Co Co W CN rn H w H W O O CN H O tO
K (D O O O O O O O O H W N l.n N N CO H N 00 N O O N W O CO
rt CY W
Pdws•c n
M H 70 rfi
(n tld Co Co 00 00 Co Co Co O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 CO O O H • O
• rri G H H H H H H H H H H R H H H H H H H H H H H H W art
GG . . • • • . . • • . • n
rri 0 p. H H H H H H H H H H R H H H H H H H H H H H H H n H
• p. O O O O O O O O 0000 0000000 O O O O O H k.D
O H H H H H H H H H H R H HHHHHHH H H H H H • 00
CL O O O O O o O O 0000 0000000 O O O O O Co
to rd
H w
H Co C1Q
Oo O\ ON la V ON H H m
: I
-co Co k•0 UI H N V V cr, .!` N H N N In -p- 00 -D- .A O N _y N
Co co Ul Co U) Co CO W 0 10 W H H H In W Ul U1 O V 10 N CT V O W O
H . W V W O, O O O W O N H H H -A, O N W 0' ui H V 10 O O L`
N W O` O` H 0 A O W NJ CO H H H W W 00 .' VD H N V NJ 0 0 .4---
H
W O O CP N A O O O N W ON 0 0 0 1/40 U H V U O, P- Ut lD 0 0 0
O
O 7O PJ 7d 7d rd 7d 7q H 0 7d 7v Cl) rd rd to
m (D m m (C) w (o (o m rt m (D n 0 G >
0' 5 0 0 5 `C 5 0 H H• 0 0 R' Cl) rt H
H• - H H H• H• ri H H. = _ _ (D H H H 0 rt n C)
rt rt rt rt rt 0 rt rt b -. rt rt 0 w G'
_ H 0' rt I-' 0'0w
rd rr1 Cl) 0 0 H M Cl O 1..4 r; W in (D Cl)
(t7 H H m m H w G m 0 w m
70 H H rfi r-h Cl) n O (D m H G re,
a • w a n o x o
C m Z G m n M
n n H. rt w ri 0
O O G rt t::1 m Cy t of
9 0 dd H • G rh w R5
b b m G m C'' • G
CO m C) m H• (I'
H w 1-h Cl)
I m m
rd
W
rt
0
H
H rd H An H 0 H Cl) _ _ : 7, Z C-' to 0 0 7i
Cli co O 0 Cl) m rt Z E H. o w G w
H 7d rt 0 CO n rt w G n G H Cl) '
rt a 5 rt w tail G w x c 0
G Z • H Z (D m m m H m m o <
m w H• 0 w G = = _ H Ot) ri rt rd G Cr1
rt rt 0 1-h0 rt H m H Co0 m m 0 a Z
h
• M m 1-h • ri rt, m G H• m \ C)
m H n H H rt rt L 0
1 • I
Cl) pc/ P-I CO w rt 0 0 H 'C 0 Cl
0- m O C) G' Cl) G I-h w G
A) < Cl) 0 w G a m 0 m m
-to {o x m 0 x ri m - rn rt-
.
0 0 'd 0 m m w m H
H W b G • b rt 0 N Z hi m
co W m m m n O Z a
,. m m 0
Ui O 0
Co -P 0
U Co L} Cl)
• • H
Cr, V H CO n
O H co O1 O. W V N 0' H H Z
Ui qO Ui - N V V 0' � V .L X- O N
OO Ui Ui Ui 00 00 W O 10 ON Cr, N Oc -1 0 W ,'
•
W -1 U) CT, O O W O ON -L� V '.0 O O L H
O, l0 0, H O l- O W N H W V N O O t�
0 C' N — O O O N W O` W In l0 0 0 0
C.)
H H H H H H H H H H r- r H H H .
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H
Ui Co U' Co Ui Ui Ui U, Ui Ui U' In to In Ui t)
CO V V V V V V V V -1 v Cr, O\ Q` CN 0
0 1/4.0 CO V O1 U' .L- co N H 0 '.D 00 V Li •
N
0 v 0 0 0 0 0 W''n
I--, r- 1-4 r-• r-. , r- H CD
• • • • • HU'
- ..D•• .D- .P 4 Y 1
W W In N.) N In W nG
I- - O (> i- r .-. n w
0 0 00 0 O r 0 min
-.l v ON ON i--- F-- LA)
Ni .--. Ni Ni In 1..n CS r--
r- .-- r rr r- r-•• 10
• • • • CO
. v u Co Co r r-- W Li)
Ni r-• Ni . N lun In Co
O H t-'^
.-- r-t O n O
I I rt 7O r1
Cl) C) N 0 -I 0 0 0 0 0
CD CD I--` f-• r-• r-• r r-• 1--4 p-". 9 r..
• GN . • • • n1O
(D (D r- r- 1-4 u r r-• n 0O
ri ri Cr 00 0 0 00 0 H N
N tC r. r.. r. r-• h I r-.
'xi 1-` 0 0 O 0 0 0 0
G hi -Cr) 'b
G "xi G Ni 1-- w
0. G G Ni r (.n) u-- V, (lo
G 0. .. .. .. co
0- -J 10 0 rr CS LP Ni I
W CO .....I v CS CO In yy.--
0o O '0 1/4D W Lo N O Fy
O
k.o 1- Co '0 Ni v 0 0 r
v 0 v --- .-- 01 0 0 Z
H
L> -Cn
N 1-'
Ni W 'O
.. VO VI 'd ro ' ed cn c) d
o rn (-I G I- G w n
w ......1 l../1 = 0 r1 0- •0 •71 0 ell
00 10 10 r-n 0 DO Cl N• r-h H
• • • • G• • I'' rt • C)
w rnw w H. w ::4
v .4.4 C) 4-n w (D (/)
(D (D N Cn I (D
1I N• to n
C 0 G .0 C
H• M rt G H•
H• C)
CD ted • b (D
CC I-. (r • (n
ci
oO P7i
CD
b
Crl
En cn r' 70
- hd w o' 0 0
CH' w -OO cY
C7 C1. 7. H. (D
CD 0 cn PI
• 'd rt C
CD Ch
td CD Z
Pt C) 0tot
o r.4 9 0
Co G
S
H.
ro 0)
ri rt
(D
II
-Cl>
N h-
N In ,-- In n
--1 0 r CS In Ni •
W Co v Co CO In
Oo O 10 W In 0
• • H
10 0 10 Ni --.1 0 •
v v 1--4 In O i
-1-4 r-- — r r-4 C7
r r-- 1-4 1
In In lr. In In •
Co Cr, Co Cr Cr, z
Co In .0 Ni f-• 0
MEMORANDA
TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator 1
ti
FROM : H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer i
SUBJECT: Valley Industrial Blvd. So.
DATE : February 24, 1983
Introduction
Attached is Partial Estimate Voucher No. 6, for the above-referenced project.
Background
Valley Paving, Inc. has requested a reduction in the retainage for the above-
referenced project. It is estimated that there is $2,500.00 in clean-up work
remaining, which includes approximately $1,100.00 in work remaining. Reducing
the retainage to 2.5 percent still covers the value of work remaining. Therefore,
it is the recommendation of City staff that the retainage be reduced to 2.5
percent of the contract amount and that Partial Estimate Voucher No. 6 in the
amount of $3,781.43 be paid.
Action Requested
Approve the reduction of the retainage for Valley Industrial Blvd. So. from
5 percent to 2. 5 percent and pay Valley Paving, Inc. , 12494 Wyoming Avenue South,
Savage, MN 55378, $3,781.43 in the regular bill cycle for March.
HRS/jvm
Attachment
' '-
PARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER
Contract No. 82-2 Partial Estimate Voucher No. 6 Period Ending: January 28, 1983
TO: Contractor Valley Paving, Inc.
Address 12494 Wyoming Avenue South, Savage, MN 55378
Project Description Valley Industrial Blvd. So.
1 . Original Contract Amowit $ 141 583.80
Change Order No. 1 'Vliru No. 3 10,772.42_vY
3. Total Funds Encumbered :j 152,356.22
Value of Work Completed $ 151,257.11
�.._-------------__.__._---.-- Value of Work Remaining
B. 2.5 Percent Retainage 4? _ 3,781.43 $ 1,099. 11
6. Previous Payments $ 143,694.25
Percent Complete
'(. Deductions or Charges $ -0-
99 Percent
8. Total $ 147 ,475.68
Payment Due (Line l+ - Line 8) $ 3,781.43
CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT
(I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work ::l,own herein is a fair
estimate of the work completed to dale
CONTRACTOR: %
. BY: /
TITLE:
DATE:
AP' OVED -_ ITY OF SHAKOPEE
qaOnlee
toes
Cityineer D.te
City Administrator Date
MEMORANDA
TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM : H. R. Spurrier
,1
City Engineer
SUBJECT: Levee Drive Extension
Project No. 1982-3
DATE : February 24, 1983
Introduction
Attached are specifications for Levee Drive Extension - Atwood Street to Scott
Street.
Background
This project is being rebid after the City received one bid in 1982. The City
expects to get more interest in the project this year.
Action Requested
Authorize advertising for bids for Levee Drive Extension, Project No. 1982-3.
HRS/jvm
Attachment
CONTRACT PROPOSAL
LEVEE DELVE EX'1'ENi 1_UN
Project No. 1982-3
' SIIAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee , MN 55379
DOflr
'l'lie undersigned bidder, having examined the site of the
proposed work and having full knowledge of the conditions under
which the work must be performed , hereby propose:, that he Enters
into and performs the contract set forth in the Contract
P,�,.ument , of which tiri:; proposal form:; ;a port , and will do the
con.;t,ruction therein described on the terms and conditions
therein set forth; and that he willfurnish all required labor
and materials and pay all incidental costs , all in strict
conformity with the Contract Documents, for the following prices
as payment in full :
PROPOSAL ITEMS
Item
No. Contract Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Amount
1 Excavation (Remove &
Dispose ) C . Y. 1 ,500 $ $
2 Excavation C . Y. 464 $ $
3 Granular Borrow (L.V. ) C . Y. 1, 500 $ $
4 Class V Aggregate
(3138 ) Ton 430 $ $
5 1'2 " Bituminous Base
Cour e (2331 ) S. Y. 1 ,360 $
6 111" Bituminous Wear
Course ( 2341) S. Y. 1,360 $ $
7 2341 Bituminous
Patching Ton 25 $ $
8 B-618 Curb & Gutter L. F. 960 $ $
CP-1
CONTRACT PROPOSAL
Item
No . Contract Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Amount
9 Remove Curb L.F. 75 $ $
10 Remove Storm Sewer
Pipe L. F. 25 $ $
1.1 : I " RCI' CHH,., III U/H lt. V. 570 $
12 24" CMF ( l4 ga . ) L. F. 45 $ $
13 Standard Manhole Ea . 5 $ $
14 LP Type C . B. Ea. 2 $ $
15 Random kip Rap (2511 )
w/6" Type I Filter
Blanket or
PolyPilter-X C . Y. 78 $ $
16 Grouted Rip Rap ( 2511) C . Y. 9 $ $
17 Sod S. Y. 1 , 100 $ $
18 8" DIP C1. -52 L. F. 40 $ $
19 Rock Excavation C. Y. 25 $ $
TOTAL CONTRACT BID $
The undersigned Contractor hereby acknowledges receipt of
Addendum No. thru Addendum Nd.
Contractor
Date - ~
CP-2
(7a—
MEMORANDA
TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM : H. R. Spurrier .r .
City Engineer • V
SUBJECT: Storm and Waste Water Mara• •ment
Laws of Minnesota 1982 - C' .pter 509
DATE : February 25, 1983
Introduction
The Storm and Waste Water Management Law affecting the Metropolitan area and
contained in Chapter 509, was adopted by the State Legislature in 1982. This
Act specified specific responsibilities for the State, Metropolitan, County
and Local governments in the Metropolitan area.
Background
The Act provided for, or in other words mandated, the establishment and
operation of a water, planning and management program. It required watershed
and local management plans. It established and provided for the operation
of water management organizations. It gave the water management organization
a funding mechanism and specified the review and approval process for water
management plans.
The law realizes that some watershed areas may not have the sophisticated
organization or staff to undertake this planning activity, because the law
specifies that the county should undertake the work by forming watershed
districts under Chapter 112 if the watershed areas have not formed water
management organizations by December 31 , 1983. We have proceeded to this point,
being concerned primarily with the formation of a water management organization
that would address problems in the Millpond Basin. The attached map identifies
six watersheds that affect the City of Shakopee.
1. The Lower Minnesota River Watershed
2. The Millpond Watershed
3. The Sand Creek Watershed
4. Dean' s Lake Watershed
5. Eagle Creek Watershed; and
6. Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed
John K. Anderson February 25, 1983 /J
Storm and Waste Water Management Page -2-
Two of these watershed areas have an existing water management organization;
the Lower Minnesota River Watershed and the Prior Lake - Spring Lake Watershed.
The four remaining basins must have water management organizations established
by December 31, 1983 according to the Act.
Listed below, and also •listed on the attached maps showing Shakopee Watersheds,
are the jurisdictions Shakopee must work with if we will be successful in
forming water management organizations by joint powers agreements by December 31,
1983:
1. City of Savage
2. City of Prior Lake
3. Jackson Township
4. Louisville Township
5. Sand Creek Township
6. Lower Minnesota River Watershed District
7. Prior Lake - Spring Lake Watershed District
If the City is unsuccessful in executing a Joint Power Agreement that forms a
water management organization by December 31, 1983; according to Chapter 509,
the county is obliged to step in and form watershed districts.
There is really no incentive for existing watershed districts to form joint
powers agreements because if the watershed districts do nothing, it is likely
that they would assimilate other watersheds because of there existing organization,
rather than the county forming new districts.
Therefore, if the City has no desire to be incorporated in a watershed district
or in several watershed districts, it is incumbent upon the City to begin
discussions with the jurisdictions with which the City would form water manage-
ment organizations by joint powers agreements.
The City initiated an engineering study prior to the passage of Chapter 509
amendments. Those amendments reinforce the need for the study that is being
performed now. Additionally, the amendments require the formation of a water
management organization. We have, in effect, put the "cart before the horse" ,
but that does no harm other than affect reimbursement for the engineering work
performed todate.
Since the first emphasis of the law is formation of water management organizations,
it should be the goal of the City to determine whether the seven jurisdictions
listed above are willing to enter into joint powers agreements to form water
management organizations or whether the City must pursue some other avenue in
forming water management organizations.
Alternatives discussed and suggested include the formation of a Shakopee Water-
shed that would include part of Savage, present Prior Lake - Spring Lake Water-
shed District, the Lower Minnesota Watershed District, Jackson Township and part
John K. Anderson February 25, 1983
Storm and waste Water Management Page -3-
of Louisville Township. This watershed is illustrated in a figure contained in
a brochure distributed by Metropolitan Council titled, "Supplementary Data 1982
Surface Water Management Law - Chapter 509" . A copy of this brochure will be
provided on the table if it arrives in time.
On the attached map, that would include Eagle Creek, Dean's Lake, Millpond and
the Lower Minnesota River Watershed south of the Minnesota River.
The south part of Shakopee, generally south of County Highway 14 would be included
in the Sand Creek Watershed. Parts of Shakopee tributary to the Sand Creek
Watershed have a very minor impact on that basin because of the large wetland
areas within that area.
If the City of Shakopee will determine its own destiny in water management
organizations, it must act now; therefore, the next step for Shakopee should be
taking steps that would result in the establishment of necessary water management
organizations by joint power agreements. It appears that the best course of action
to take would be, first contacting staff members of the seven jurisdictions to
determine whether these jurisdictions would be interested in establishing water
management organizations by joint powers with the City of Shakopee.
Summary
I . Chapter 509, MSA has major policy impact on local jurisdictions.
II . The Act requires the establishment of water management organizations in 90
percent of the Metropolitan area.
III . The Act requires that water management organizations by joint powers
agreements be formed by December 31, 1983 or the counties must created
watershed districts to carry out the planning requirements.
IV. Shakopee could become lead agency by working with the seven jurisdictions
in forming the two to four new water management organizations required
for Shakopee.
V. Failure to form water management organizations will result in the county
taking the position of lead agency and forming the watershed district
where no water management organization is established.
VI. Engineering work performed todate, conforms to the guidelines established
by the Act, but the work product does not meet all of the objectives of
the Act.
VII . City of Shakopee staff should meet with representatives of the seven
jurisdictions to establish the ground rules or requirements for establishing
water management organizations by Joint Power Agreement.
Action Requested
Direct City staff to meet with the seven jurisdictions which are affected by the
watershed within the City of Shakopee to establish the requirements for joint
powers agreements that would establish water management organizations for those
watersheds.
HRS/jvm
Attachment
LOWER MINNES
r
N
- 0 e!.,,;
•■6' 1+1*
_scale feet ,, /' 111' ��
./ .„---- tiobavier
i - ,d, 1 ' 'N'''',_- . , // 44A i it
'cilli' in
•
. I
`''<v. .�t. n -u I
i I z
,...= ,,,
9_ � I1 I
\ L
{
/ ,isme:‘,,,,/ MILL =
a N
D
4
SHAK6-EE
JACKSoN
. ,
5
cqLowERMI7
�
i\-'04,, ,._' -- .,,t, ,...........-- T-il,,
, b, }�
• ra'aimaramsoutemene
�� f •\v
•
S NQ CREEK — -- �-
S AKQ'EE ,:;"?._%. ‘,
>. ,. I
. --7 c, - II,.
/% H
/(
�� � -;,. PR . R I AKE
LO
S �ILLE 1
• -SAN REEf< ��
pI
�-=< O E 'I,\ MINNESOTA
,. ;
1 . "
, ,., _.,4_, � WATERSHEDu\I
•
/ _ .MGRV •
/ ))-..
1.
IF
REVISION n..«.i...I74. ..d..I.„:::,•,:;.:7;77,:' .,y �s_- +'-1:.•4',-
5.... : _=21.
a.[ w[ ,•
RUMS, N. � � �
WA1
ruF e vx tet'��. 1TY
r 4-
OTA RIVER WATERSHED
. --, „
;EXISTING) / \'-�;
.----4ribs...----I/
�Y/ `�\, ,-,,,f.ra —\ \
's'IAtio.' -----riz
I
pJE
101 c-1
i€-.1-1, eII\i _ 1 , r�
•
ill 0.„----...,i, ; kNio _
grAl
1
OTA in_ ol„ k ..r
A SHAKOPEEI L ,i — _
1_ PRIOR rKE ' 116,
�
Wiia
_
4I
PRIOR L RE – S 'RING L e
moms:AMINIFIXVilliiiiii 6 WM WI Z=X -ral.3'.Zrzw..., _ ...-..-do MIMS:Zig?II . 14.-... 71 p am t—
1 6ii,
-
1 WATERS Paillitio.
'
7-71
SHAKOP: �
�� ,'�
' VAGE
-------i(r tWER MI NE •. • A WATERSHED
� "IOR %_ SPRING L • KE
:- \ or,,,,,,r4,
} ,, T
.. .o« — �.� reg 3.: �� ��� ,,,,, A����
4141 6 - LAKE S.PRIKG. A u r-,.;C` S H E P -
gill),__14"1 a a LEFE
3.i (EXISTING)---- "I1 � � i OINIIIIIIIIN
AKOPEE S.H. 2/24/83
V- DRAWN DATE
SCALE
' CHECKED SHEET NO. + DRAW NG NO.
FERSHEDS
•F SHAKOPEE _,,g.' . `' ". 4-4... A/ r‘-‘07,-,.. ......". k._.
- I
MEMORANDA
TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM : H. R. Spurrierfh�'�
City Engineer m,6 ,,
SUBJECT: 1982 Pavement Prese'ry. ion Program
DATE : February 25, 1983
Introduction
I have had few direct comments regarding the 1982 Pavement Preservation Program
considering the condition of 10th Avenue.
Background
There is an epidemic of pavement deterioration affecting roads in the South
Metropolitan area. The jurisdictions affected by this epidemic include the
State of Minnesota, Hennepin County, Dakota County, the City of Shakopee, the
City of Bloomington and the City of Eagan. The pavement deterioration has two
common denominators; the contractor and the pavement design.
It is not surprising that my office has been contacted and has contacted some
of the jurisdictions mentioned above. Consensus is, as follows: The contractor
used a very coarse mix containing a high percentage of coarse aggregate. This
reduced the asphalt content, making the mix more competitive in the bid
process because the most expensive ingredient was reduced. The mix won the
contracts in most of the jurisdictions because of this savings.
Tests of the mix during placement and tests of the inplace material , or in some
cases the residue, have passed Mn/DOT Material Specifications.
Passing the Material Specification Test is not the only requirement for accept-
ance. The contractor is required to place a homogeneous mix at proper temperature
to a specified depth and compact the mix to specified density.
The work can be checked for temperature, depth and density. Unfortunately, the
work could be tested for homogeneousness. It appears the most important
property of this coarse mix is that the mixture be homogeneous.
The type of pavement failures experienced by all of the jurisdictions appear to
be failures caused by aggregate separation or a concentration of coarse aggregate
in pockets, where there is an absence of fine aggregate to fill the matrix and
this results in pavement failure.
eie
John K. Anderson February 25, 1983
1982 Pavement Preservation Program Page -2-
At the very least, the mixture requires much more control during mixing and place-
ment than Mn/DOT Specifications would suggest. Weather may be a factor, inas-
much as the same mix was successfully used on County Road 83 in August of the
same year.
Weather is no certain explanation, because sections placed prior to, and subsequent
to, failed sections are still in reasonably good condition.
The overlay is not a complete loss. Pavement not damaged can be salvaged. The
contractor has a lot of work to do. The areas of failure must be milled to a minimum
of 2—inch profile and then patched. After the patching, the entire surface should
be sealed with a Class A chip.
Obviously, with six jurisdictions asking for the same work, our contractor may not
be anxious to invest that amount of money. Considering the magnitude of the
contractor's problems, the City should get a definite answer from the contractor
regarding the correction of this work.
It is possible that the City may have to use litigation to resolve this matter.
Since other jurisdictions have done some preliminary legal work, and have indicated
a willingness to share that information with the City and since these communications
with the contractor will be very important, I am recommending that legal counsel
be consulted in drafting the orders which specify the manner in which this work
will be corrected.
Action Requested
Direct City staff to order the corrective work on the 1982 Pavement Preservation
Program and have those written orders reviewed by legal counsel .
HRS/jvm
(i/44
r/ �l
l
MEMORANDA
TO John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM H. R. Spurrier 41:1b
City Engineer .;
---
SUBJECT: City Wide Concrete Rpla\e'�ent Contract
DATE March 1, 1983 `
Introduction
Attached is a City wide concrete replacement contract for miscellaneous curb,
gutter, drive, aprons and sidewalk replacement in the City for 1983.
Background
It is proposed that the City receive proposals for this replacement and then
advertise the availability of the service to property owners offering to assess
those improvements over a ten year period, so long as the property owner agrees
to waive hearings and appeal of the assessment.
This program is proposed as a result of the number of complaints our department
has received regarding the difficulty of property owners in getting contractors
to perform this type of work.
Action Requested
Approve the Advertisement for Bid for the Curb and Gutter, Sidewalk and Driveway
Approach Replacement Program.
HRS/jvm
SP G s
INVITATION FOR BIDS y —
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:
The City of Shakopee , Minnesota will receive bids at City
Offices , 129 East 1st Avenue , Shakopee , Minnesota until ft:80 A.M . on
at which time they' will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of
City Hall , 129 East 1st Avenue , Shakopee , Minnesota by the City Clerk
and City Engineer ; will then be tabulated and will be considered by
Council at 8 : CO P.M. , or thereafter, ,!2---/g4—c--e__ �i /99'.5 in the
Council Chambers at the Municipal Building of such City for the
construction of the following :
Complete removal and replacement of substandard
curb and gutter , sidewalk and driveway aprons in
random locations throughout the City of Shakopee ,
Minnesota
All bids shall be accompanied by a cash deposit , cashier ' s check,
bid bond or certified check , payable to the order of the City of
Shakopee for not less than $5 , 000 .00.
City Council of the City of Shakopee reserves the right to reject
any or all bids , to waive irregularities and to award the y
ontract in the best interest of the City .
Plans , Specifications and Proposal forms may be obtained from the
City of Shakopee upon deposit of $35 .00 for each set , which will be
refunded to all bidders upon return of the Plans and Specifications in
good condition within five ( 5) days. after the opening of the bids .
Ls/ J�s. .lr,
City Clerk
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Published in the : Shakopee Valley News
on : 3/9 ` 3/46
and in the : Construction Bulletin
o n : .3/,, '. ��g
1
9.,-, ,T
Week in Review
Information in the Week In Review is organized under the same subject headings that are
used in the Summary of Major Bills.
* ACTION ALERT
OFF-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE FEES--NEED FOR CITY ACTION
Amendment to Allow Local Discretion
The Senate Public Utilities and State Regulated Industries Committee is
considering an issue of importance to cities--off.-sale liquor license fees.
Minnesota Statutes limits the amount cities may charge for off-sale liquor
licenses. The maximum fee amounts have not increased since 1949. The League
is working to remove statutory maximums and to make the decision as to
off-sale license fees a matter for local discretion.
Raising off-sale license fees is controversial. Liquor retailers and
dealers strongly oppose removal of this mandate. Some of them also oppose any
increases in fees or support only minimal increases. Unless city officials
make a special effort to argue the city viewpoint, it will be impossible to
succeed in our efforts.
WHAT YOU SHOULD DO NOW
Please call or write your senator and ask him/her to support the
amendment to S.F. 56 that would remove the statutory maximum on off-sale
liquor licenses. Senator Neil Dietericli, chair of the committee, and Senator
Allan Spear, author of the bill, support the League position. However,
Senator Doug Johnson and others do not. (Note: the bill, as the subcommittee
approved it, would raise the current maximum fees. Ask your senator to at
least support the fee increase provision now in the bill. See the end of the
Action Alert for more information.)
For legislators who say they support "local control" and oppose mandates,
this is an opportunity for them to return discretion to cities. Justifying
fee maximums for off-sale liquor licenses is difficult, especially because
cities already have the power to set fees for on-sale liquor licenses. In
addition, no social policy reasons exist to impose uniformity in this area. .
In fact, local costs involved in licensing and regulating off-sale liquor
vary. Leaving this issue up to local discretion would be more fair to cities .
and the licensees. '
The chief arguments of the off-sale liquor interests are economic.
First, they allege that many cities would take the opportunity to greatly
increase off-sale liquor license fees, and that because their businesses
depend on the city for licenses, they are less likely to lobby their economic
interests before the city council. Second, they argue that the cost of doing
business has increased due to property taxes and other factors and contend
that the extra burden of increased fees would be unreasonable and would hurt
W-2 f J^
their businesses which are already suffering from poor economic conditions.
Third, they argue that the legislature is more apt to be fair and to better
consider the economic needs of off-sale liquor operations.
Current statutory maximum off-sale liquor licensee fees and proposed fees.
M.S. 340. 11
Subd. 14 (e) S.F. 56
- Cities of the first class $1,000 $1,500
- Cities over 10,000 population $200 $1,000
- Cities between 5,000 and 10,000 population $150 $750
- Cities 5,000 or less in population $100 $500
What powers do Minnesota cities currently possess with regard to license fees,
both liquor and otherwise?
Minnesota cities currently have the authority to set fees for licensing
on-sale liquor and other activities and businesses including, for example,
auctioneers, taxicabs, auto rental agencies, dance halls, and restaurants.
The only businesses or activities for which statutory maximum license fees
currently exist are those related to off-sale liquor, on-sale wine, bottle
clubs, Sunday liquor, and clubs such as veterans or fraternal organizations.
Case law limits cities' authority to set licensee fees by preventing cities
from setting a fee so high that it is really a tax. The city must show a
reasonable relationship between the cost of regulating, supervising, and
conn,
inspecting the activity and the fee. Within these limits, cities do have much
discretion in matters related to liquor.
ALTERNATIVES :
1 . Direct staff to contact our senator and ask his support of the
amendment to S . F. 56 that would remove the statutory maximum
fee for off-sale liquor licenses ; and at least support the fee
increase provision now in the bill .
2 . Take no action.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Proposed Legislation Regarding Liquor Licenses
DATE: February 25 , 1983
Introduction
Legislation is in the making regarding :
1 . authorizing off-sale licenses to dispense samples of wine
2 . changing the bond requirements for on-sale and off-sale liquor
licenses and the beneficiary of said bonds
Background
Both the City Attorney and I believe that the adoption of these
two bills would not be in the best interest of the City of Shakopee
and recommend staff be directed to contact our legislators express-
ing the City ' s opposition.
Action Requested
Direct staff to contact our legislators asking their support in:
1 ) the defeat of any legislation authorizing off-sale licensees
to dispense samples of wine ( S .F. 201 ) and 2 ) the defeat of any
legislation changing the beneficiary of liquor bonds from the
city to the state (H. F. 223 ) .
JSC/jms
5-4 <
Authorizing off-sale licensees to dispense samples of wine. S.F. 201 (Spear,
Storm, Dieterich, Petty) (Public Utilities and State Regulated Industries
Committee) would authorize off-sale licensees to provide samples of wine, '
ji
liqueurs, and cordials which the licensee currently has in stock and offers
for sale to the gene -al public. An additional license would not be necessary,
providing that the tampl.es are free and people consume them on the licensed
premises during permitted hours of off-sale.
Bond requirements for on-sale and off-sale liquor licenses. H.F 223 (Ogren,
Skoglund, Evans, Kelly) (Taxes Committee) would provide for various changes in
state revenue collection procedures. The provision of interest to cities is
contained in section 19, which increases to $10,000 the_ amount of bond
applicants need for on-sale _and off-sale licenses. Currently, applicants for
off-sale licenses must file a sum not less than $1 ,000 and not more
than $3,000, depending on what the local governing body of the municipality
determines. Applicants for on-sale licenses must file a bond in a sum not
less than $3,000 nor more than $5,000, again depending on local discretion.
Current law requires conditioned bonds so that the licensee will pay, to the
municipality when due, all taxes, license fees, penalties, and other charges.
/This bill would provide that the state _is a _beneficiary of the bond.
Therefore, although the amount of the bond would increase, the municipality
ay lose any protection that it now has, depending on the circumstances of
. � each case. For example, the state is likelyhave
to prior rights with regard
to such obligations as payment of state taxes or license fees.
•
•
C44)„,
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Agreement with Robert McAllister
DATE: February J7 , 1983
Introduction
On February 1st the Council met with Mr. AcAllister and agreed to
revise his fee for picking up dogs from $25.00 to $35 .00 per dog.
Pursuant to your request , I have prepared the attached agreement
for Council approval . It is identical to the 1980 agreement , except
for the above increase and clarification of No. 5 , taking animals
to the University of Minnesota.
Action Requested
Authorize proper City officials to execute an agreement with Robert
McAllister for services as Pound Master for the City of Shakopee.
JSC/jms
Agreement with the Pound Master
for. the
City of Shakopee
I hereby agree to continue serving in the capacity of Pound Master
for the City of Shakopee and agree to the following terms :
1 . I shall receive no monthly retainer.
2 . I shall be paid $35 . 00 for each dog I pick up.
3 . I shall be paid $7 .00 for each dead animal I pick up.
4 . I shall be paid $10.00 for each dead skunk I pick up.
5 . I shall be paid $20.00 for each animal which I take to the
University of Minnesota for rabies testing, if the animal
dies while under quarantine.
6 . I 5Iha I I hi I I l he (: i t V once a month with a I i st of the actions
taken and a description of- each animal .
7 . 1 shall remit to the City all fine; and fees for licenses
collected .
8. This agreement shall continue until cancelled by either party.
9 . Thirty days notice of cancellation shall be given by either
party wishing to terminate the agreement .
This agreement shall become effective as of February 1 , 1983.
Pound Master City of Shakopee
Robert McAlraster____--------___--__.._._ —__-�—
Mayor
Date
Ci-ty I�dr�inistrator
City Clerk
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Policy, Criteria and Procedures for the Review of
Municipal Industrial and Commercial Development Bond
Applications
DATE: February 22 , 1983
Introduction
On February 15th Council directed staff to prepare an amendment to
the City' s criteria, policy, and procedures relating to applica-
tions for IR bonds .
The attached revised policy clarifies the current ambiguity of
whether or not the City will issue IR bonds for existing structures
when existing jobs are being maintained.
Action Requested
Approve the amendment to the City of Shakopee Policy, Criteria and
Procedures for the Review of Municipal Industrial and Commercial
Development Bond Applications dated March 1 , 1983 and filed in the
City Clerk' s official record of documents .
JSC/jms
9/5/80 . Amended
' 11/18/80 Amended Amended March 1 , 1983
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
POLICY, CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW OF
MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BOND APPLICATIONS
I . GENERAL POLICIES• - SHAKOPEE
The City of Shakopee has been granted the power to issue
revenue bonds commonly called Industrial Development Bonds
by the Minnesota Industrial Development Act , Ch . 474 , Minnesota
Statutes (the "Act") .
The Shakopee City Council , being aware ' that such financing may
be advantageous to the City of Shakopee and may help achieve
the overall development and employment goals of the City, has
expressed its support for the use of such bonds but has reserved
the right to approve or reject projects on a case basis taking
into consideration the following factors :
a . The industrial or commercial project shall be
compatible with the .overall development plans
and objectives of the City and of the neighborhood
in which the project shall lie .
b. The project shall be of a nature that the City
wishes to attract , or an existing business the
amendment City wishes to have expand or an existing business
371/83
the City wishes to remainwith+_n the City considering
potential for employment , incentive for further develop-
ment , impact on City service needs and support for
industrial or commercial operations currently located
in the City.
c . The total aggregate amount of industrial development
bonds and/or exempt mortgages outstanding at any one
50%
Amended to time shall not exceed 24% of the total assessed
50'/a 11/18/80.
(taxabl,e) valuation of the City.
d . Tax exempt mortgage financing will be allowed as an
alternative to bond financing but will be subject
to the same policy, rules , and regulations .
e . The application cannot be considered by the City
Council until. the City Council finds that the
project is in accordance with the existing
comprehensive planning, zoning, platting and
building regulations .
f . The applicants proposed facility , or expansion of
an existing one , shall provide a significant
number of new jobs within the City .
g. The applicant MAI select dual it ied financial.
consultants and/or underwriters as well as legal
counsel to prepare all necessary documents and
materials .
Amendment h. When an applica'zion is for new cons:ruction, he appli-
3/1/83
.cant must not commence any part of the cons`:ruction of
the project until there has been preliminary approval
by the Council of the application for financing.
I
, r -wt- .
.,
i . The City is to be reimbursed and held harmless,
for and from any costs related to the actual or
proposed issuance of bonds or tax exempt mortgages
Amended at the 'time of application . M , 1. submitting
3/5/80
apl)l i 'ant s will , crow with the ' ty of. ' akopee
$1000 t cove the costs of staff an consultant
considerat ' n of any proposed developmc t project .
Unexpen ed funs shall be returned to the applicant
/
when the project ' s w.ithdrawn,; denied or gra ted
approval .
f ' nal
SEE ATTACHED FEE SCHEDULE .
j . The City Council reserves the right to deny any
application for financing at any stage of the
proceedings prior to adopting the final resolution
authorizing issuance of industrial development
bonds .
II . CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS
a . Commercial Development Issues :
The following minimum criteria must be met before the
• City Council adopts the appropriate resolution approving
any proposed project :
Preliminary Resolution -
1 . The loan is to be secured by a real estate mortgage
and there is a determination that the real estate
value shall be equal co ac least 90 of the total
bond or note issued .
2 . The applicant has a firm commitment on interim
financing from a reputable lender .
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Purchasing Abandoned Right-of-Way, Block 52
DATE: February 18 , 1983
Introduction
Late in 1982 , the City learned that it owned two lots intersected
by the Milwaukee Railroad abutting 4th Avenue in Block 52 ( see
attached map) . Because the two lots were of little value without
the accompanying Milwaukee Railroad right-of-way, the City Attorney
was asked to contact the Milwaukee Railroad regarding the possibility
of our acquiring the abandoned Milwaukee right-of-way easements .
The City Attorney ' s letter and a letter from the Milwaukee Road
regarding our request are attached .
Background
The City has acquired two other pieces of abandoned Milwaukee Road
right-of-way within the central business district . The City acquired
27 ,625 square feet of railroad right-of-way at $57 ,476 or $2 .08/sq.
ft . for the right-of-way in the north 1/2 of Block 30 north of the
Huber Building. Later the City acquired 18 , 109 square feet at $10,000
or $ . 55/sq. ft . of railroad right-of-way in Block 29 adjacent to the
library.
LeRoy Houser has computed the approximate square footage of railroad
right-of-way lying within the two lots , note these are the shaded lots
on the attached map, at 9 , 594 square feet . Mr. Houser has indicated
that the value of the lots if assembled would be approximately $1 . 65
per square foot .
The railroad' s offer dated January 24, 1983 is $1 . 13 per square foot
for 17 , 730 square feet which would equal $20,000. The 17 , 730 feet
include all of the abandoned right-of-way within Block 52 . The
9 ,594 square feet lying within the City ' s two lots would total $15 ,830
at $1 . 65 per square foot , or $5 , 276 . 70 at the $ . 55 per square foot
the City paid for the abandoned railroad adjacent to the library.
Alternatives
1 . Make no attempt the acquire the abandoned right-of-way in Block
52 .
2 . Agree to pay the railroad $20 ,000 for 17 , 730 square feet of
abandoned railroad in Block 52 . This would give the City all
of the abandoned railroad right-of-way in Block 52 which
represents part of 6 separate lots within Block 52 .
3 . Make a counter offer to the railroad of $1 .65 per square foot
for the 9 ,594 square feet of abandoned railroad right-of-way
within the two lots currently owned by the City.
Purchasing Abandoned Right-of-Way, Block 52 7
Page Two
February 18 , 1983
4. Make the railroad a counter offer of $. 55 per square foot for
9 ,594 square feet of abandoned railroad right-of-way within
the City' s two lots . This is the price per square foot that
the City was able to purchase the property adjacent to the
library.
Recommendations
City staff recommends as an initial counter offer alternative No. 4
above. There appears to be no benefit to the City in acquiring the
abandoned railroad right-of-way that lies within the bounderies of
the other four lots in Block 52 .
Action Requested
Direct the City Attorney to make a written counter offer to R. J.
Gregory, Regional Manager - Property Mgt . of $5 ,276 . 70 for the
9 , 594 square feet of abandoned railroad right-of-way lying within
the City' s two lots in Block 52 .
JKA/ ims
i
JULIUS A.GOLLER, II
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 612-445-1244
1859-1940 2 1 1 WEST FIRST AVENUE
SIIAKOPEI:, MINNESo A
155:120
Memo to: Mr. JOhn K. Anderson, City Administrator. L
and
Shakopee City Council
In re: Purchasing abandoned right-of-way, Block 52
Date: January 31, 1983
Background:
Early in January 1983 I was requested to contact Milwaukee Road concerning
the possibility of acquiring the abandoned Milwaukee Right-of-way easement
in Block 52 in the City of Shakopee, which I did under date of January 12, 1983,
and on January 24th, Mr. R. J. Gregory of the Milwaukee Road wrote me a letter
which is enclosed herewith together with a map or plat therein discussed.
I will hold this matter in abayence until I hear further.
1/41.g
Julius A. Cotler, II
City Attorney
INE
MIw44c`Ef' Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul �—
ROAD and Pacific Railroad Company
516 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago. Illinois 60606
Phone 312/648-3000
Chicago — January 24, 1983
Refer to: S — MN — Shakopee
City of Shakopee
Mr. Julius A. Coller, II
City Attorney
City of Shakopee
211 West First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Coller:
This will acknowledge your letter of January 12, 1983 concerning the City's
interest in purchasing our former right of way in Block 52 in the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota.
I have indicated by red outline on the attached print the property that is
involved which contains 17,730 square feet. I believe a fair market price
for this property is $20,000 and if you desire that I call upon you to
discuss- this further, please advise.
With best personal regards and best wishes for a happy and healthful 1983.
Very truly/yours,
/
R. 'J. Cr oty. .
Regional Mgr, .—P4operty Mgt.
312/648-301$
RJG/bp/89
Attachment
- T3274.23-5.71i8 f/if R , iligi 6T/4
/474- r41-----We" I _ I E. Fi-o74/7-96 • p
732t 2
4it-.. c01- .:----6,., ___'
iNi*WAIN&E Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul . A.F
ROAD.
• and Pacific Railroad Company �.,A e,hti
ied
51 6 West Jackson Boulevard Chicago, Illinois 60606 li
4'
4/ m
,•1, PROPOSED SALE OF LAND AS INDICATED BELOW TO:
T �_�_
Hp CITY OF SHAKOPEE
IP O= SHOKOPEF., SCOTT COUNTY MINNESOTA
H SCALE; 100 ft per inch DATE: JANUARY 18,1983
•
.Y61 VAT,. SEC, ; MINN 5-B MAP:S-6 ......�� 726,
"% `.35tW o✓1s4 •/ • r'.Ct/?-ro K4=/6' V,Y•P. '
cu Ai g V/�. 1. ,'��X la T4'B,�Qv Z.410-,' /3',t. 4
ro—
n 71--/%5Y-ate Te I C° 1 or�,4 r,b ' .;0_74-7474/0 se;/2"v.'7 P..,.1
ll
•X ' A-,' I I.0iff
P.
p o �e X� • ,0 O
�� Imo• : -_
-/ t\-T,,..14 ...•
,'
l'• 0
ti v�'wnr�PJ . /.
' ti �°
CO
, (ht A.v,S41 *.... t ''
co
,V ti - • �j j, •,+(o v
4
1 'Il G -
i• 4..; (.,‘13 0 4) 41 ,
tf \ / / j
' t
' MI 724'1'4'7 T�° �' - $ 347 d'O=/4 it'Y4R
•I C_4j t I
T'?,3-r-64- ??=/4"/',t p-•-•_,,• \ 74'37'.3'z� I 1
�„ O iPkg o I I o
_i,
U
CO /,.
1 r._ -�'tt�
+r / ' 1O
tt Ei I , /
*L-d
;�� c
w ----1
, ,... ,/ ,,,, .0 -,- . , . ..,
. j .A. -4,6V -1
.n / -
t, %
.(56N
\r •,. 1eO' LL;zi__jjb
J'
/ / Q
f/1 1 I (t.Z1FILLMG��'E�
1 Tj,
::6-7a"---1
��, I rA { =.
o'er7 �v� ! �,
�� v7a5`.-
PG/ ../ I;li _ii,.
� Se
N
I 0 a.,
MEMORANDA
TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM : H. R. Spurrier 4,11-
City
,fCity Engineer
SUBJECT: County State Aid Highway . . 21
DATE : February 24, 1983
Introduction
Pursuant to State requirements, the City has been asked to approve the above-
referenced project.
Background
Attached is Resolution No. 2120, a resolution approving plans for the above-
referenced project. Those plans include the paving of County Road 21. This
should not be taken as approval of the turn-back of present County Road 21.
Therefore, I am recommending that the resolution be passed but that a letter
be drafted to the County Highway Engineer advising that office that we expect
the turn-back of County Road 21 to be made in a fashion similar to the turn-
backs made on the State highway system.
Action Requested
1. Adopt Resolution No. 2120, A Resolution Approving Plans For the Improvement
Of County State Aid Highway No. 21.
2. Direct the City Engineer to notify the County Highway Engineer that the
return of present County Highway 21 (Muhlenhardt Road) must be made in
accordance with State turn-back requirements.
HRS/jvm
Attachment
a-
jb
RESOLUTION NO. 2120
A Resolution Approving Plans For The
Improvement Of County State Aid Highway No. 21
WHEREAS, plans for Project No. 70-621-04, showing proposed aggregate
base, plant mix bituminous surface and aggregate shouldering construction for
County State Aid Highway No. 21 , within the limits of the City as a State Aid
Project, have been prepared and presented to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reviewed the plans and recommended
approval by the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that said plans be in all things approved.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of , 1983.
Mayor of the City of Shakoppee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day
of , 1983.
City Attorney
' STATE OF M:I":N17.-SOTA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS UU 6,-
CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR AGGREGATE BASE, PLANT-MIXED BITUMINOUS
SURFACE t AGGREGATE a 2ITUMINOUS SHOULDERS
COUNTY STATE AID HIGHWAY NO. 21
C.S.A.H. 42
To C.R. 89
F, ,271N.of the S.1/4 Cor.Sec.24, T. 115 N., R.22 W.
To 1365.4'N.140701W.of the S.E.Cor. Sec.13,T.115 N.,R22 W.
STATE AID PROJECT NO. 70-621-04
GROSS LENGTH 7414.5 FEET 1.404 MILES
BRIDGES LENGTH - - - FEET --- MILES
EXCEPTIONS LENGTH - -- FEET - - - MILES
1, NET LENGTH 7414.5 FEET 1.404 MILES
--',.. Alill ""-.
C
MUM 'oft Z
al
l
1
•n END SAP 70-621 -04
0 STA. 74+ 48. 15
' 16 a S
e
—` /11" 0 170
1��o` =,, F EQUATION
,,,,., 4,„.„,„. ,
STA. 26+96.9 = STA. 27+03.55
�1trmil
Prior .Lak •
� �,�
2b P„ LO.- , ► BEGIN S.A.P 70- 621-04
J STA. 0+ 27
o litralp
•ll •P1•t.C•Rlt PfOf••I ST•TT •..D tOCAI LAvrS AI.D OSD.M•.,(t3 vntt Rt CD."MO v,s TM
/M ?MT CO..TT)UCYIO.. O• TM,S PRO/tCT
DESI GN SPEED 1 MP•fRT tannin TM•T TM„ Pi At. v.•S PTt P•Reil ST ..t C» WO'S mi., D.t PCS R,,•Trv'ISIO..
AMID TMA I , u • Wt. R/01511/10 P19OPt114.O..A( T990004 ii IJ..DY Mt t•v+I o/ TT! 51 ATI
50 M.P. H.
4''--------'- .J---\---4, r--,,,,,__,____y .., ,z-f// .//7,e s
C*awITT b.G1..11■
'RESENT TRAFFIC 600 ADT (1981)
'ROJECTED TRAFFIC 1 140 ADT (2000) SCOTT 5284
i 01 L FACTOR 100 % `�"`� `�` "°
TON DES I G N 93PCz,...,,0.0.913 POO •..-•0T•1 \.
a ••G
m act t1•.t ea
-`
SPECIFICATIONS ���11D411/ A. •./.1C•,64
HE 1978 EDITION OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT t'-
;F TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS A...vo.re° t•
OR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION~SHALL GOVERN. 53.11 AIG r.cr..tit
ST ATM TZOJLLT
STA Tr AM T O.JtCT 70-621 - 04 (CS.,_H.21 ) sr+EUT I or 5 sniis
ITEM TOTAL
No ITEM UNIT EST.
QUANT.
2123 . 503 MOTOR GRADER HOUR 8
2123 . 521 PNEUMATIC TIRED ROLLER HOUR 8
2211 . 501 _ AGGREGATE BASE , CLASS 5 TON 14 150
2221 . 501 AGGREGATE SHOULDERING , CLASS 2 TON 3000
2331 . 504 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE TON 226
2331 . 510 BINDER COURSE MIXTURE (INCLUDES SHOULDERS) TON 2159
2331 . 514 BASE COURSE MIXTURE (INCLUDES SHOULDERS) TON 2 871
2341 . 504 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR MIXTURE TON 108
2341 . 508 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 1802
2341 . 504 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR SHOULDER MIXTURE TON 17
2341 . 516 SHOULDER MIXTURE TON 289
2357. 502 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT GAL. 2528
EQUIPMENT HOURS PROVIDED FOR SHAPING AND COMPACTING ROADWAY ,
APPROACHES AND ENTRANCES.
} STANDARD DETAIL PLATES
PLATE No DESCRIPTION
0003 A SPECIFICATION REFERENCE TO STANDARD PLATES
8000 H STANDARD BARRICADES
S.A.P. 70- 621 -04 C.S. A.H . 2I SHEET 2 OF 5 SHEETS
BASIS FOR ESTIMATED
QUANTITIES
AGGREGATE BASE , CLASS 5 SPEC. 2 211
COMPACTED DENSITY 140 POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT
BASE MATERIAL 13,154 TONS FOR ROADBED
996 TONS FOR ENT. a APP
14 , 1 50 TOTAL TONS
PLANT- MIXED BITUMINOUS SURFACE
SPEC. 233I a 2341
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR BASE COURSE 4.5 "/o OF BIT. MIXTURE BY WEIGHT
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR BINDER COURSE 4.5 % OF BIT. MIXTURE BY WEIGHT
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR WEARING COURSE 6.0 % OF BIT. MIXTURE BY WEIGHT
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR SHOULDER 6.0 % OF BIT. MIXTURE BY WEIGHT
BASE COURSE 110 POUNDS PER SQUARE YARD PER INCH OF DEPTH
BINDER COURSE 110 POUNDS PER SQUARE YARD PER INCH OF DEPTH
WEARING COURSE 110 POUNDS PER SQUARE YARD PER INCH OF DEPTH
SHOULDER MIXTURE 110 POUNDS PER SQUARE YARD PER INCH OF DEPTH
BASE MIXTURE 2 ,356 TONS FOR ROADBED
I 56 TONS FOR CSAH 16 APP a MUHLENHARDT RD.APP
359 TONS FOR SHOULDER
2 , 871 TOTAL TONS
BINDER MIXTURE 1 , 699 TONS FOR ROADBED
1 9 I TONS FOR ENT.,APP a M.BOX
269 TONS FOR SHOULDER
2 , 1 59 TOTAL TONS
WEARING MIXTURE I , 6 3 I TONS FOR ROADBED
171 TONS FOR ENT. , APP a M. BOX
1 ,802 TOTAL TONS
SHOULDER MIXTURE 269 TONS FOR SHOULDER
20 TONS FOR CSAH 16 APP. SHOULDER
289 TOTAL TONS
BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT 0.05 GAL. PER SQUARE YARD
AGGREGATE SHOULDERING , CLASS 2 SPEC. 2221
COMPACTED DENSITY 140 POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT
NOTE : CSAH 16 APP. , MUHLENHARDT RD. APP. , 4 FM.or HO. ENT. , 10 F. ENT. , I MAIL BOX APR
S.A.P. 70-621 -04 C.S.A.H. 21 SHEET 3 OF 5 SHEETS
TYPICAL SECTIONS
S. A. P 70 - 621 --04
STA. 0+ 27 TO 'STA. 50+ 00
1
i
----- IV2IIPLANT-MIX BIT.WEARING COURSE-2341
11/2"PLANT-MIX BIT. BINDER COURSE- 2331
-2" PLANT- MIX BIT. BASE -2331
c...., . 7" AGGREGATE BASE - CLASS 5
NOTE : APPLY TACK COAT,SPEC. 2357
BETWEEN EACH COURSE.
c-AGGREGATE SHOULDERS
SHOULDER
CLASS 2
SLOPE 0.02 PER FT. 8
3LOPE 0.04 PER FT.
1-•--- 8' —1
, ..,.;,:4,:c•-.. ,;-‘6.,47, 47,4"--‘7: - .7t ,*-Lc-.:e:-:,z!.:1,;,..--'4.;,;- :-....: ,•::•:. -:,.. .
rb`'.N--_1 e-i,e 0,-.ri--.*:V.-- 1.-.-;,r2r":!.2.-r:7-2',•-•.:,,,,,,,,rr.,,-;_rgi‘S".-4. •i- P-2-ek L. v. .; ;; •:,7-, ;en.Z,--
1,41 •
/FRt5ENT ROAD '
k 1
13.0 — 1.-r.
13.0
20.71 -----; 20.7
23.0' I I 2.01=11j 1 1
12.5'
-- 1 —
'
- 23.0'
STA. 50+ 00 TO STA. 74 + 48.15 a
C.S.A.H. 16 APPROACH - 182 °
0,----- i I/2"PLANT-M IX BIT.WEARING COURSE-2341
11/2"PLANT-M1X BIT. BINDER COURSE- 2331
2" PLANT- MIX BIT. BASE -2331
Q
- 7" AGGREGATE BASE - CLASS 5
kE NOTE : APPLY TACK COAT,S PEC. 2357
BETWEEN EACH COURSE
BIT. SHOULDERS
1ACLASS 2GG SHOULDERS
OPE 0.04 PER
SHOULDER
SLOPE 0.02 PER FT.
FT
f-i----6'---4+-21-04
-*AlitONOMMINSOMN' ' .''''''''- ' 1 •••'N. , 4, . - I I
4661:23:::"
.
. ,.._ - . . ' ,::: :, '° '` ...,_ri III il .1111111.1.11,111 " ^• . ''' . , '''''07k, •:' , ::.- .
G,
.
- 14i•Ali.:‘ ‘: 1:t.,‘‘ .,13ill 'I ...;- 0. :d ,74 AI.';.;:(.Te 11414.W71.1''ii t 'La1 i'4' T .
PRESENT ROI 2ADJURFACE
4 6' -116].1 NNNN,
18.51 18 .5
mok. ISO' --i+/--- 19.0'-
20.7' 20.7'
--23.01 -----4- 23.01
S.A.P 70-621 -04 C SA H. 21 SHEET 4 OF 5 SHEETS
SPECIA L DETA i L
s.A. P 70- 621 -04
C.S.A.H. 16 APPROACH FARM or HOME ENTRANCE
-c._ - q.. - _
i
;,-1- fP'ier'
6' I id
6 '
R/W
I sir Y1
1 i
y
' I
i ---1 —61BIT SHOULDER H2O
--4.-1
AGG. SHOULDER
1 I 1 ° . 12.5 TONS BINDER COURSE
1 ' I
I 2.5 TONS WEARING COURSE
A .
87 TONS BASE COURSE
65 TONS BINDER COURSE
45 TONS WEARING COURSE
20 TONS SHOULDER MIX
)TE : CONSTRUCT MUHLENHARDT RD. APPROACH FIELD ENTRANCE or
TO C.S.A.H. 21 AS DIRECTED MAIL BOX APP
BY THE ENGINEER .
67 TONS BASE COURSE — --- - -9__ -
45 TONS BINDER COURSE 6
45 TONS WEARING COURSE 1.?..2;W:•-:;-;,--Y ir .41g0r4r:... 0:#111"An.Y.;!-Z.,j?7.:--.7-1
H
I
t
c.
I _
27 TONS BINDER COURSE
2.7 TONS WEARING COURSE
S.A.P. 70- 621 -04 C.S.A.H. 21 SHEET 5 OF 5 SHEETS
/Ca,
RESOLUTION NO. 2120
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS FOR CSAH NO. 21
WHEREAS , plans for State Aid Project No. 70-621 -04, showing
proposed alignment , profiles , grades and structural cross-sections
for the construction and reconstruction of County State-Aid Highway
No. 21 within the City as a State Aid Project have been prepared and
presented to the City , and
WHEREAS , said plans also show the location of existing and pro-
posed driveway access to said County State-Aid Highway , and
WHEREAS , approval of the plans is not intended to be approval
of the City streets or avenues at the location of existing or pro-
posed driveways .
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCII. OF SHAKOPEE ,
MINNESOTA that said plans for SAI' No. 70-621-04 be in all things
approved .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that future street construction from or
to said County State-Aid Highway remains subject to the City of
Shakopee Design Criteria and as such must be approved by the City.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of , 1983.
Mayor of the City of-Shakopee
ATTEST
City Choa-k�_._.__----------.—.___---_.._
Approved as to form this
day of ,_i13B3.-
)oL7)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
• FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Apportioning Assessments as a Result of the Separate
Ownership of Lots 6 and 7 of Block 51 OSP
DATE: February 16 , 1983
Introduction
Lots 6 and 7 of Block 51 O. S .P. , when acquired as a result of the
abandoned railroad, were owned by one property owner and were
combined under one parcel number. When the two lots were sold
to separate property owners they each received a separate parcel
number. This makes it necessary for the City to spread the exist-
ing assessments against the two new resulting parcels .
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 2115 , A Resolution Apportioning Assessments
Among New Parcels Created as a Result of the Separate Ownership
of Lots 6 and 7 , Block 51 , Original Shakopee Plat , and move its
adoption.
JSC/jms
GI
RESOLUTION NO. 2115
A RESOLUTION APPORTIONING ASSESSMENTS AMONG NEW PARCELS CREATED AS A RESULT
OF THE SEPARATE OWNERSHIP OF LOTS 6 AND 7, BLOCK 51, ORIGINAL SHAKOPEE PLAT
WHEREAS, on August 26, 1980, Resolution No. 1670 adopted by the City Council
levied assessments against properties benefitted by the construction of the Holmes
Street Reconstruction Project No. 80-3, and
WHEREAS, a tract of land benefitted by the said improvements, known as parcel
No. 27-001-374-0, Lots 6 & 7 of Block 51 , O.S.P. , has been subdivided, and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to apportion the installments
remaining unpaid against said tract among the current parcels within the tract,
and
WHEREAS, the property owners involved have been notified of the proposed
action.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE:
1 . That the 1983 payable remaining balance of assessments to parcel 27-001374-0
is $749.77 and is hereby split as follows:
Assessment
Code Parcel No. Name/Address Legal Description Amount
51 (80-3) 27-001374-0 Charles Mensing Lot 6 Block 51 $374.89
117 Fuller Original Shakopee
51 (80-3) 27-001374-1 Robert/Bonita Bullock Lot 7 Block 51 $374.89
604 E. 8th Original Shakopee
2 . That all other parts of Resolution No. 1670 shall continue in effect.
Adopted in session of the City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota
held this day of , 1983.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day
of , 1983.
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Membership on the Shakopee Deferred Compensation Committee
DATE: February 22 , 1983
Introduction
One of the members of the City' s Deferred Compensation Plan with
IDS has recommended that a member of the Plan serve on the Shakopee
Deferred Compensation Committee. Pursuant to your direction I have
prepared the attached resolution which provides that a member of the
Plan shall be selected by the membership ;_o serve on the Committee.
Note : The other three members are set by the Plan.
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 2116 , A Resolution Appointing Certain City
Officials and Employees to the Shakopee Deferred Compensation
Plan for Tax Exempt Employees ' Committee , and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
to c
RESOLUTION NO. 2116
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING CERTAIN CITY OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES
TO THE SHAKOPEE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR TAX EXEMPT
EMPLOYEES' COMMITTEE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
that :
1 . Pursuant to the Shakopee Deferred Compensation Plan for
Tax-Emempt Employees , duly authorized by a resolution of the City
Council of the City of Shakopee adopted on March 12 , 1974 , the
following City personnel holding the named positions he , and hereby
are , appointed to serve on the Shakopee Deferred Compensation Com-
mittee until such time as they are relieved of this assignment or
said committee has been abolished, to-wit :
Mayor, Chairman
City Administrator
City Attorney
An enrollee of the Plan, selected by the membership,
annually, in January of each year (except in 1983 the
selection shall be made in March)
2 . The duties and responsibilities of this Committee shall be
those as are set forth in the Deferred Compensation Plan executed
by the City.
3 . Resolution No. 2109 is hereby repealed in its entirety .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day of
1983.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to formthis
day of , 1983 .
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Interest Rate to be Charged on Special Assessments
for Public Improvements
DATE: February 23 , 1983
Introduction
Pursuant to your request , in followup to Council action, I have
prepared the attached resolution amending the City' s Public
Improvement Assessment Policy. The amendment reduces the interest
rate the City shall charge on bonds over and above the average
interest rate of the bonds sold to finance a public improvement
project . This reduction is from 27 to 1-1/2%.
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 2113 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 1282 ,
Adopting a Public Improvement Assessment Policy, and move its
adoption.
1
.,SC/jms
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2113
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1282 , ADOPTING A PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT POLICY
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that Resolution No. 1281 be and the same is hereby
amended as follows : Section V. Assessment Policies Applicable
to All Types of Improvments ; 2 . Interest Rate :
"Interest Rate - The City of Shakopee will charge interest
on special assessments at a rate specified in the resolu-
tion. The interest rate shall be one and one-half percent
( 17) more than the average interest rate of the bonds sold
to finance the improvement project . The interest rate shall
be rounded to the nearest quarter of a percent . The interest
rate shall not exceed the maximum rate allowed by state law. "
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of
1983 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1983 .
City Attorney
T K /NJ
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox , City Clerk —
RE: Establishing a Policy for Emergency Closing of City
Facilities
DATE : February 23 , 1983
Introduction
Pursuant to your direction, I have prepared the attached resolution
which establishes a pay policy when City offices are officially
closed. The policy is taken from the Scott County policy. I have
added ; however, that future comp time can be borrowed against , which
Council concurred with at the January 4th Council meeting.
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 2117 , A Resolution Establishing A Policy for
Emergency Closing of City Facilities , and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 2117
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR EMERGENCY CLOSING OF
CITY FACILITIES
WHEREAS , it is the intent of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee to provide policy guidance in the event of circumstances
which require the closing of City facilities .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota , does hereby adopt the following policy
governing emergency closing of facilities :
EMERGENCY CLOSING OF
SHAKOPEE CITY FACILITIES
1 . Definition of Emergency - circumstances which pose a threat to
the safety of employees and public patrons
or
circumstances which prohibit the normal use of the City ' s
facilities .
2 . Authority - the City Administrator, the Mayor or the Vice Mayor,
respectively may declare an emergency and direct the official
closing of facilities .
3 . Source - for weather related emergencies , the National Weather
Service is the primary source of information and shall be moni-
tored by both the Sheriff ' s Department Communications Division
and the Office of Emergency Preparedness . For non-weather
related emergencies , the City Administrator may use any veri-
fied information pertinent to the circumstances .
4. Emergency Notice
a . City Hall intercom
b. Telephone contact with other facilities
c . WCCO , KSMM (AM Radio)
5 . Employee Time Recording
Employees released for safety related reasons or when City
facilities are closed may record the time missed as vacation,
accumulated comp time , future comp time (within the next 12 months ) ,
or they may choose to take the time without pay.
Those employees required to work by virtue of the nature of
their position shall not receive extra compensation, but shall
be compensated in accordance with existing Union contracts or
City pay plans .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this policy be dis-
seminated to all City employees .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day of ,
1983 .
J al
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Final Plat of Evergreen First Addition
DATE: March 1 , 1983
Introduction
The resolution of final approval of the plat of Evergreen First
Addition required :
1 . A written agreement between the developer of Evergreen 1st
Addition and the owner of property immediately west of the
plat , which provies that looping of the watermain be sub-
mitted to and approved by the SPUC Manager.
2 . The developer secure from the owner of the property immediately
to the west a drainage agreement recognizing that surface water
runoff from this subdivision will enter the land to the west and
that the property owner agrees to accept the additional water
runoff.
Background
A "Cooperative Water System and Drainage Agreement" was prepared
by the developer, properly executed and submitted to the City.
Staff asked for corrections to the first agreement and a second
agreement was prepared; and prior to execution of the second agree-
ment , Mr. Wiggin (property owner to west ) requested changes and
a third agreement was prepared and properly executed. Upon exami-
nation of the third agreement , the City Clerk and City Attorney
recommended changes creating a fourth document . This fourth
document is not properly executed because of Mr. Wiggin' s refusal
to sign. Mr. Laurent is caught in the middle.
What new requirements were added to the fourth draft?
1 . A legal description was contained in the 4th draft making the
agreement recordable and alerting future property owners of
the water looping requirements .
2 . The 4th draft provides that it is binding on future
property owners , clarifying that they too accept the runoff
from the plat .
How can this be resolved, not causing the developer a hardship?
After a meeting yesterday morning with Mr. Laurent , the City Attorney,
City Administrator, City Engineer and City Clerk, it was consensus
to accept the third agreement , with Council concurrence , for the
following reasons :
1 . The problem is not the developers . He has orders for homes in
this development and if he doesn' t get the plat recorded so he
Final Plat of Evergreen First Addition
Page Two
March 1 , 1983 )161
can start construction, he will not be able to meet his deadline
and lose sales . He has done his best to comply with providing
an acceptable agreement and has come to an impasse.
2 . It has been City policy to record this kind of document so that
future property owners are aware of restrictions placed on the
property ; and also, to protect the City ( if they are unrecorded
and future property owners are unaware of their existence, they
are not binding on the future property owner). Consensus is to
make an exception and accept the unrecordable document because :
a . even though the third agreement is not recordable alerting
future property owners to the fact that the runoff to the
west has been accepted by the current property owner, Mr.
Wiggin, it is anticipated that the roads and utilities will
be completed by June of 1983 so that any future property
owner would sec that there is development and thus be cog-
nizant of any runoff created from this plat .
b. when Mr. Wiggin ' s property is platted the City will then
require a watermain loop to Mr. Laurent ' s existing water-
main, in addition to the necessary easements .
Alternatives
a. Require the fourth agreement to be signed. This might take a
very long time and would cause Mr. Laurent to lose sales ;
indefinitely. But would insure the City against possible
problems in the future .
b. Accept the third unrecordable agreement . This would accommodate
Mr. Laurent ' s problem, but might cause the City problems in the
future if the runoff causes future property owners a problem and
if they wish to take the City to court .
Recommendation
Keep in mind that staff is looking out for the good of the City and
believes that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of trouble.
In this case concensus is to make an exception and accept the third
agreement as executed .
Action Requested
Accept the unrecordable "Cooperative Water System and Drainage Agree
/ 1/g3 meat" submitted by the developers of Evergreen First Addition, dated
• n October 28 , 1982 ; and authorize property City officials to execute
�.0 K ctiJn/ the plat .
JSC/jms