Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/27/1983 Pei TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 27, 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 September 9th and 13th, 1983 6] Communications: None 7] Public Hearings: a] 7 :00 P.M. - 1983 Diseased Tree Removal Program Res. No. 2159 Adopting Assessments b] 7 :05 P .M. - 82-5 Timber Trails Drainage Res. No. 2164 Adopting Assessments c] 7 : 15 P.M. - 82-4 Alley Improvements to Block 50 - Adjacent to Cavanaugh/McNearney Funeral Home Res. No. 2163 Adopting Assessments 8] Boards & Commissions: No reports 9] Reports from Staff: a] 7 :30 P.M. - Main Street Program - Movie and discussion Bring item 9b from September 6th agenda b] Mortgage Revenue Bonds *c] Eagle Creek Townhall Lease Agreement *d] Developers Deposit for JEJ 2nd Addition e] Consultants for Organizational Analysis 10] Resolutions and Ordinances: *a] Res. No. 2162 , Appreciation to Don Steger b] Ord. No. 134, Establishing A Public Works Reserve Fund - tbld 9/20 c] Res. No. 2161 , Calling A Special Election 11] Final Budget Worksession: a] General Fund - bring budget b] Six Year Capital Equipment List - bring June 17th copy c] Six Year Capital Improvement Plan - bring July 7th draft 12] Other Business: a] li.o. b] c] 13] Adjourn. John K. Anderson, City Administrator OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 9, 1983 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. with Cncl. Lebens, Wampach, Colligan and Vierling present. Cncl. Leroux arrived at 5:27 p.m. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator, H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer, and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Wampach/Colligan moved to approve the application and grant a temporary 3.2 beer license to St. Francis Health Care Foundation in the lunchroom, adjoining hall and auditorium of St. Marks School for September 10, 1983. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer explained that an engineering firm would like to hire one of the City's technicians for three months and since the work load in the Engineering Department is down he thought such an arrangement could be mutually beneficial. Consensus of Council was to permit a City engineering technician to work for the firm if the workers compensation liability and payment of benefits during this period could be ironed out. The City Engineer explained that the City's application for a permit to work in public waterway has been approved by the Department of Natural Resources. He asked Council's permission for Public Works personnel to start clearing out the channel, as time permits, to prepare the way to construct the pedestrian bridge in Memorial Park. Councilmembers concurred. The City Administrator advised the Council of improvements made to Richard's Pub which will discourage patrons from trespassing on abutting residential property. Cncl. Leroux arrived at 5:27 p.m. There was a brief discussion on the sidewalk and parking lot improvements between the hospital and the courthouse and the lack of access for the handicapped. Colligan/Vierling moved to adjourn at 5:31 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 13, 1983 WORKSESSION Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Leroux, Vierling, Colligan, Wampach and Lebens present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator, Gregg Voxland, Finance Director, and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Discussion ensued on the proposed 1984 budget. Consensus of Council was to budget $760 to $830 in 1984 for an employee assistance program and evaluate the program at the end of 1984. Consensus was to leave the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission contribution to the general fund at $240,384.00. Mayor Reinke left the meeting at 7:33 p.m. to meet with the Fire Department. Consensus was not to fill the vacant position in the Park Department as a result of the resignation of Jerry Neisen. Professional services for•codifiers was added to the budget in the amount of $1,600.00. Council concurred with the City Engineer's recommendation to raise engineering fees by 6%, rather than reduce a technician to 3/4 time. Dues for Suburban Bate Authority was added in amount of $500.00. Discussion ensued on staffing the Police Department. Consensus was not to decrease the personnel in the Police Department for 1984, but to consider hiring a con- sultant to evaluate staffing needs for 1985. Regarding replacing the heat lost when shop doors are open, consensus was to install recirculating, ceiling hung fans with sock. Discussing ensued on whether or not to budget for a lobbyist, if needed, and for a consultant to do an analysis and prepare a report which will provide a firm argument for the By-Pass. Mayor Reinke returned at 9:59 p.m. Discussion ensued on a replacement for the City's electrical inspector who is retiring. Consensus was to increase the electrical fees to be consistent with the state fees. Mayor Reinke suggested looking at sharing an electrical inspector with.-neighboring communities. In order to budget for a lobbyist, consultant for the By-Pass, and not decrease personnel in the Police Department, consensus was to increase the estimated mil levy by approximately one mil. Staff was directed to bring back an itemization of what an approximate one mil increase over 1983 would be used for. Colligan/Leroux moved to adjourn to Tuesday, September 20, 1983 at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:54 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Recording Secretary 7'v MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk RE: Assessments for _1983 Diseased Tree Removal Program DATE: September 22 , 1983 Introduction The attached resolution adopts assessments for the removal of diseased trees in 1983 . Background Legal notice has been published and mailed to affected property owners , pursuant to law. Each party involved had only one tree removed so the assessments are spread over one year (which is pursuant to our policy) . After holding a public hearing, it is in order to adopt the proper assessments . Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 2159 , A Resolution Adopting Assessments 1983 Diseased Tree Removal Program, and move its adoption. JSC/ jms RESOLUTION NO. 2159 1 G� A RESOLUTION ADOPTING ASSESSMENTS 1983 DISEASED TREE REMOVAL PROGRAM WHEREAS , pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of the following described property : Original Shakopee Plat : Lot 7 Block 21 ; Lot 6 Block 53 ; Lots 11 and 12 Block 166 ; Lot 8 , Block 98 ; Lot 8 and east 1/2 of 9 Block 33 ; and 0. 20 A. tract lying in SW 1/4 SW 1/4 beginning on southerly line east 8th Avenue 61 ' east of east line Main Street , south 144. 2 ' , east 61 ' , north 144. 2 ' , west 61 ' to beg. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . That such proposed assessments together with any amend- ments thereof is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein and each tract therein included is hereby found to he benefited by the proposed improve- ments in the amount of the assessments levied against it . 2 . Such assessments listed below shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of one ( 1 ) year, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1984 and shall bear interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment drom the date of this resolution until December 31 , 1984 and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments . Parcel No. Legal Description Name/Address Principal 27-906-064-0 6 115 22 . 20 Janet Leverson $100 . 00 P/0 SW 1/4 SW 1 /4 Beg. 612 East 8th Avenue on S. Line E. 8th St . Shakopee , MN 55379 61 E of E Line Main St . S. 144 . 2 , E. 61 , N. 144. 2 , W. 61 to Beg. 27-001-141-0 L 7 , B 21 , City of Daniel R. Feldmann 250. 00 Shakopee 214 West 1st Avenue Shakopee , MN 55379 27-001-390-1 L 6 , B 53 , City of James P. Wooldrik 370.00 Shakopee 440 East 4th Avenue Shakopee , MN 55379 27-001-832-0 L 11-12 , B 166 , City of Eugene G. Netzbandt 92 .00 Shakopee 518 East 3rd Avenue Shakopee , MN 55379 27-001-730-0 L 8 , B 98, City of Doniver Bjorklund 89 .00 Shakopee 220 West 7th Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 27-001-266-0 L 8 & E. 1/2 of 9 , Mrs . John A. Thul 285 .00 B 33 , City of Shakopee 320 West 2nd Avenue Shakopee , MN 55379 3 . The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor , pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the "date of payment , to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty ( 30) days from the adoption of this resolution; he may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list , and he may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. Resolution No. 2159 Page Two 4. The clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in his office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before October 10th of each year the total amount of installments and interest which are to become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in the assessment roll. . Adopted in session by the City Council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of , 1983 . -- Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approvedasas to torm this day of , 1�$ , City Attorney w /I MEMORANDUM TO John K. Anderson City Administrator FROM H. R. Spurrier City Engineer SUBJECT: Improvement of Block 2, ber Trails, by Storm Sewer Lateral DATE September 23, 1983 Introduction: Attached is Resolution No. 2164, A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Public Improvement No. 1982-5, Improvement Of Block 2, Timber Trails By Storm Sewer Lateral . Background: On September 6, 1983 City Council adopted Resoultion No. 2154, A Resolution Declaring Cost To Be Assessed And Ordering Preparation Of Proposed Assessment And Calling For A Hearing On The Proposed Assessment Of Public Improvement No. 1982-5, Improvement Of Block 2, Timber Trails By Storm Sewer Lateral . The hearing is set for September 27th and City Council should hold the hearing to receive testimony as to whether the property values of property benefitted by this improvement increase an amount equal to the assessment. At the time this project was ordered, two properties were faced with the potential condemnation of their on-site disposal system because ponding water was submerging the drainfield. The proposed project eliminated that problem and now those systems function properly. There is no question that the property values increased an amount equal to the proposed assessment, therefore, it is recommended that City Council adopt Resolution No. 2164, A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Public Improvement No. 1982-5, Improvement Of Block 2, Timber Trails By Storm Sewer Lateral . Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 2164, A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Public Improve- ment No. 1982-5, Improvement Of Block 2, Timber Trails By Storm Sewer Lateral . HRS/jvm Attachment RESOLUTION 2164 A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Public Improvement Program No. 1982-5 Improvement Of Block 2, Timber Trails By Storm Sewer Lateral WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of: Block 2, Timber Trails by Storm Sewer Lateral NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improve- ments in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 1984, and shall bear interest at the rate of 10 percent (10%) per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31 , 1984 and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution; he may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list, and he may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in his office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before 9f Resolution No. 2164 -2� October 10th of each year the total amount of installments and interest which are to become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in the assessment roll . 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 V) •-• Z N -, < pc.nV) V) — ---f V) -` n hdN ' w 70CO pi w n n7 ® Di (D (D 'S (D (D (D ,.I rt, °� (D fD (D QDi p (D V) C - o CD DC7 = _ •N�+ � Zn zn o N Zn zD- T� 7- < -1 CO r+ (D tri -I < U7y U, (, -z U7 , _ w d W fl7 Q rt W oi W a V = V = z ' rn •- = V O c0 c0 CD t0 ! U7 — Z • Ui D m - n NJ . V CO NJ Cl)n V m Cl)n V 0 m O n T N N NJ NJ NJ N NJ p N 0 0 70 H W 'V 70 ril n NJ NJ NJ N N NJ NJ NJ - VH — V V V V V V V V d I I I I I I 70 O 0 0 0 0 O O O C) 0 D r al cr.) Ql cn Ql a) al C7> CD Z H 0 I I I 0 0 0 0 - o O o Z H W 4 > U7 .0 V 0l W NJ _. V • CT r `.< 70 (.n tn 0 H O < 7) m m m y N W N W N N N N V r, m CD O CO O l0 = W W -P 70 IF t0 > =. --, cc, o en o co r- CI CO N 0 (J1 .* 01 CD co Ql . `> > CA M '"4 70 70 _._____ `e._. _ > ,r r O„ 0w -4 O CO 0-2j N tT (.11 1-+ al JP. CT CT on A Cn -0 W l0 W Ni O 4.0 CO V -S (.0 Ni W l0 01 CT W CO (.0 -P Ni CO O CO O DJ CT CO 07> - - Ni CO N CD Q I -4 N -64 01 no CC) CSl -P Ni -P Cal NJ N C71 W CO CT CO -...1 0 CI7 c0 Ni W IV CO l0 CP CO O r al CO 0 CO r+ l. TIMBER TRAILS Assessment Calculations Total to be assessed $ 5,455.29 Assessment is apportioned to each lot on a square foot basis. Total square footage in Block 2, plus park = 259,432 square feet. Breakdown is as follows: Park 74,806 - 259,432 x $5,455.29 = $ 1,573.01 Lot 1 23,059 ; 259,432 x $5,455.29 = 484.88 Lot 2 23,589 4 259,432 x $5,455.29 = 496.02 Lot 3 24,056 : 259,432 x $5,455.29 = 505.84 Lot 4 23,444 : 259,432 x $5,455.29 = 429.98 Lot 5 30,429 : 259,432 x $5,455.29 = 639.86 Lot 6 29,924 : 259,432 x $5,455.29 = 629.24 Lot 7 30,125 = 259,432 x $5,455.29 = 633.46 Total 259,432 $ 5,455.29 A simple ratio of lot area to total area times total assessment gives individual lot assessments. 7 MEMORANDUM TO John K. Anderson City Administrator FROM H. R. Spurrier ( ,�� City Engineer SUBJECT: Improvement of Alley inBlo k 50, Shakopee City by Paving DATE September 23, 1983 Introduction: Attached is Resolution No. 2163, a resolution adopting assessments for public improvement No. 1982-4, alley in Block 50, Shakopee City. Background: On September 6, 1983 City Council adopted Resolution No. 2155, A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And Ordering Preparation Of Proposed Assessment And Calling For A Hearing On The Proposed Assessments. City Council should hold the public hearing on the proposed assessment, hearing testimony as to whether the property values increase an amount equal to the proposed assessment. As the Feasibility Report specified, it is difficult to demonstrate if property values have increased an amount equal to the proposed assessment. The proposed improvement does enhance adjacent property, controls dust and noise, has reduced City maintenance cost and stabilized the vertical profile of the alley. These benefits are difficult to quantify, but in my view, they are worth the amount proposed to be assessed against these properties. Therefore, it is the recommendation that City Council adopt Resolution No. 2163, A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Public Improvement No. 1982-4, Improvement of Block 50, Shakopee City, By Paving. Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 2163, A Resolution Adopting ASsessments For Public Improvement No. 1982-4, Improvement of Block 50, Shakopee City, By Paving. HRS/jvm Attachment 7 / '- RESOLUTION NO. 2163 A Resolution Adopting Assessments For Public Improvement No. 1982-4 Improvement Of Alley In Block 50, Shakopee City By Paving WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of the City of Shakopee met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of: Improvement of the Alley in Block 50, Shakopee City, by paving NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1. That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included in hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it. 2. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of ten (10) years, the first installment to be payable on or before the first Monday in January 1984, and shall bear interest at the rate of 10 percent (10%) per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution. To the first installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until December 31, 1984 and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution; he may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the current tax list and he may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City Treasurer. 4. The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in her office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before C— Resolution No. 2163 7 _2_ October 10th of each year the total amount of installments and interest which are to become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in the assessment roll . 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 • 7C 4 r 0 p.. z t W M NN..-I r-( O ^O N. CO W CD .--i l0 O CD Q00 CO OOi CD CD COCD CD V) CV) 4091 1 d W N 1.0 oo CT 04 '-i 2 0CD CD CD CD CD CD O Ii o .--4 t-4CV VO LO LO (.0N V I.Y F- 4 C.1Z W ¢ Ile 4 C m 1 i W E1 W L) > W 4-, CJ O/ C / J d a) �i. O Y am L1 V) Y 0 UCU Cp •rCC ® n V >) Q armil o (/'^ 0111 O C.? V C ) i'•••��•• d tii U H �OMSY a)a) OCU N v ® (I)116 C1 C1 C1 r- W CO u Y ^ V) 0 0 0 m N r- CD t.C) r0 r6 ,AA NIt C//el. Z ® COtb O N N N O in W N Y ^ ^ o2S .J.I CD 025 CO Y• in � 01 Q O .--i Or— COCD • CD • p —I • CD 4-, U. O V" ,-.4 4....) N •zt CV) �. Y it) _. 1 i Y � J Q LO 0 LID o25 (D U) LO CO LO CO LC) LO CO LO M J M M M M M M M - Z O4 QOM ( +) I ^ i ^ r-t .-+ " r-1 C\.1 C W CD 0 CD 1A CD 0 CD LO CD N. CD CD C70 O O) 11 +- CD J O O CD CD CD I I i-, 1 +) 1 1 +) 1 • W W N �ry N- 0 N. \N n 0 N. 0 N. N. 0 n 0 E ® N Z N J N Z N J N .-J C V N J N V) a 11 wco , 1 V CI), Q M CO V0 ag i W Z a) r a) •r 0 CJ) a) 0) Cr) b O) S- a) C) S- s0-. CT n O n C N. a) +-) n L M C Mr S.- Cr) N M a) a) C Cr) i in M a1 in a) in •al a) u) W LC) 'p .0 a) Lf) o2S L O Y it) = in i ) 0) > Lf) i-) U Lf) i) a) N > I) 0 .0 N C Cl) U') ts •r' C Q N C 0- 0 4 v) .a 4-) p /C •r CD Ca a) Z � Z • CLZ O -CZ ( 10Z a) � if) CO a) Z > JM S- +-) ML r7 V) M Y a) z Ucc S- g •r- .CN OJT .-i /C a) ct U V) CO f U U r a) .0 n S_ r -1-.)-C ^ . ^ r >1 ^ • ) ..0 ^ /1.- -N a) > a) 4-) 4--) a) r7 C) a) • r— 4) a) a) a) N Z • 4 a) 0 N 0 a) N a) •I) O a) •r a) Q r- N a) S- O co m Z = a) a) 0 d +) Ca L2 a) 0 G1 Cl- d ICS CL 0 W 0 0. .-I rV) 0 S- W O •r V) 0 CZ. 0 ra COW O CS- V) O S- Y a) Y S.- Y ^ a) 1� Y r Y 0 u) O a) Y a) rO '"I b -0 r•'( orj S.- N (O N O cr •r CD CO (Cf a) > LO Y 4) LC) CO C) SNL 0CV £ rCinL OOs /0 \(V .0 -C (CMr- 1 UMN CL' NN SOO V) rj -4U) JC� N V) I— CD 'D W C_ M V) d 7 c, ALLEY IN BLOCK 50, SHAKOPEE CITY Assessment Calculations Total to be assessed $ 3,900.66 Assessment is apportioned to each lot on a front foot basis. Total front footage to be assessed = 600 front feet Breakdown is as follows: Parcel No. Front Feet 27-001361-0 120 - 600 x $3,900.66 = $ 780. 13 27-001362-0 120 - 600 x $3,900.66 = 780.13 27-001363-0 60 600 x $3,900.66 = 390.07 27-001364-0 60 600 x $3,900.66 = 390.07 27-001365-0 60 600 x $3,900.66 = 390.07 27-001366-0 60 600 x $3,900.66 = 390.07 27-001366-1 27-001368-0 120 600 x $3,900.66 = 780.13 600 $ 3,900.67 A simple ratio of front feet to total front feet times total assessment gives individual lot assessments. 'r September 26 , 1983 C.., Robert F. Vierlirig 221 E.4th Ave . Shakopee , Minnesota Shakopee City Council 55379 City of Shakopee Re: Alley improvements 129 E. 1st Ave . in block-50 . Shakopee , Minnesota - 55379 Shakopee City Council: In answer to the letter of September 2, 1983, City of Shakopee , I am filing this written reply on the "forced assessment" on the paving of the alley in block-50, refer to my letter of August 2 , 1983, for the full history. First, the City Council should not use the words "propsed assessment: this should be changed to"forced assessment"by the Bureaucracy of the City of Shakopee . In plain english, "a few brown nosing, tax sucking, sanctimonious hypocrites" ! When we do get one or two good conscious Council-persons and a good level headed Mayor, instead of a Mayor that is a liar and a back-stabber, then we get the other council-person who are "non-compos mentis" ! Those that this "shoe" fits, wear it! I have no intension of paying for paving the alley in block-50, because the City of Shakopee refused to let me build a garage by the alleyway on my property, there-by denying me proper use of the alley in block-50 . I am certainly not going to pay for the extra wide paved opening and the extra wide paving done on the lots on the West end of the alleyway in block-50 . Only one half (2) of the lots facing the alley have an access or can possibily use the alley in block-50 . Why didn ' t the City just pave the West end of the alley? Do not tell me the City doesn't pave half an alley, because the City pave less then half of the alley for Minnesota Federal Savings and Loan! The paving in the alley of block- 50 is shaped like a wedge . Naturally the wedged side is on my sideof the alley and there is a gutter on my side of the alley that cars got stuck-in all winter long. Is this wedge shaped alley what our City manager calls "line-of-sight" surveying as he told me they do here in Shakopee? I can see what "line-of-sight" surveying does when I look down the crooked alleys in Shakopee , but then that matches alot of other things in Shakopee also! Why don 't the people on the Council have alleys and all nice and paved to set a good example for the rest of Shakopee? The City Manager also told me that if we wanted a light in the alley, we would have to have a petition for it. In my letter of Aufust 2, 1982, I explained that there was a light in the alley, but it was put on the West end of the alley. on a new pole , benefiting only the two people on the West end of the alley. The very large barn that was condemned over 50 years ago and the new double garage and shop on the other side stop the light from lighting up the rest of the alley. (2. ) Speaking of petitions , I would like the City of Shakopee 's con- ception and definition of a legal petition. We had a petition against the illegal "spot zoning" of a lot in block-50 with 26 names on it, only two people on the West end of the block were for the illegal "spot zoning" , but still the Council passed it. I went to go in court to fight it for myself and the other 25 people who were against it. I personally served the court papers on City attorney Coller, but he did not come to court against me , he hide behind two (2) judges and let them do his "dirty work" for him. So just what good is a petition in Shakopee? Another good example is the Senior Citizens high-raise , that should have been put on 'Wampack 's property. The Senior Citizens and petitions were all against putting it were it is, and I have a tape recording of ex-Mayor Harbrck lying to the Senior Citizens telling them he would do all that he could to help them stop it from being put where it is now. When it came to voting on it three (3) Council persons and the ex-Mayor were the only ones for it. Bor-Son Construction Company, who has had many lawsuits on building that they have built got the job of building it, and that building sire looks like it. All these things most certainly should tell you something! In 1961, I had bew wiring put in the house , at that time I ask that the City put in new in coming wires, but it was not done . For over 20 years my lights would go off and on during a wind or strom. Many times I would have to go out with a notched 2" X 4" so I could part the old lines. In the summer of 1981 I lost 32 days of work waiting for the City to fix my electric lines . This would not have happen if the City had put in the proper electrical service in to my property. When I wrote Mr. Van Hout about this matter, he told me that those electric&l lines were "good enough" for me . Last year, after trying for over 20 years, The City put in the new electricl service. Fun thing is that now with that new electrical service, my lights do not go off and on during a wind or strom, and I do not need my notched 2" X 4" now. Guess who was right? Whatabout the 3z days of work that I lost due to the City's falure to provide proper electrical service to my property? The City Manager also told me that I did not know what I was talking about when I told him that the West side of the street on sommerville between 3rd and 4th Ave. was already too low! Years back we wanted curb and gutter put there and when the City tryed to put it there they found out that they hit the strom drain and Bell telephone 's tile, so that that it was"too low" to put in curb and gutter. I would certainly say that it is "too low" already! As for the 35% majority (the Council should look up a dictionary to find the true definition of the word "majority" ) the Council doesn't stick with that either, look at the variations from one lot to another in the same block. Explain that to me. I want your answer back to me in writing only. • T c- (3 . ) This letter to the Shakopee City Council is to be read aloud in front of the City Council, in its entirety, on the 27th of September 1983, in public. Sincerely, iii7:9/""()---"(-e. Robert F . Vierling rIt;MAI nlk �- � � P;1•16317-i-: r E •. ; ir'uJ CITY Or-� SF AKO EE b MEMO TO: Shakopee City Council FROM: Jeanne Andre/HRA Director RE : Mortgage Revenue Bonds DATE: September 22 , 1983 Introduction: City staff has been approached by builders who have participated in the Savage Mortgage Revenue Bond Program to see if Shakopee could develop a similar program. Before undertaking a large amount of staff time to review this opportunity, some support and ideas from the City Council would be useful . Background : A summary of how City issued mortgage revenue bonds work was distributed as item 3 . 04 in the "Housing Program" guide dis- tributed to HRA Commissioners with the April 5, 1983 agenda and discussed at a special session April 26th. This summary will be updated if Council wants to take on this project . The program basically provides lower interest rates through the issuance of tax-free revenue bonds and buy downs with local contributions . The builders who approached City staff are Rich Logeais and Jim Allen. Bonds to implement the program were just sold in Savage and the builders are excited about the program. They have pro- vided the attached analysis of the economic impact of housing on a City which was prepared by Larry Laukka for the City of Savage when it was considering the program. If Shakopee wants to apply for bonding authority in 1984, the initial steps must be taken immediately. However, since many issues need to be considered related to Shakopee participation, staff judged that a preliminary discussion with City Council should be undertaken. Some important issues are : 1 . There are few buildable lots in Shakopee right now so participation would necessitate the creation of new lots , which is both a problem and opportunity. 2 . There are few areas immediately suitable for subdivision, and the land available could involve significant develop- ment issues . Specifically, land owned by Roberts , Lemmons and Hauer to the south of Southview, Eagle Bluff Second, JEJ and Hauer' s Additions have drainage and perhaps sewer alloca- tion problems which need to be addressed . a) The City Engineer has indicated that drainage in the vicinity of the Upper Valley Drainageway could be handled by detention areas prior to the execution of a joint powers agreement with the townships which would clear the way for the creation of the drainageway. w Shakopee City Council (' Mortgage Revenue Bonds Page -2- b) The Metro Council has suggested it would consider, with a ten day response time, a request to trade existing sewer allocation to land in Robert ' s pit . This land is currently to be held back from sanitary sewer improvements until after 1985 . c ) Robert ' s pit is blighted from the graveloperations previously operated there and may need special develop- ment assistance to be feasible . Tax-increment funds for site improvement would be a possibility. 3 . In order to submit a competitive allocation, the City must provide for a significant local contribution. In Savage most of the local contribution came from developer commitments and write-downs . However, the City did allocate tax-incre- ment funds consisting of 50. of the taxes over a five year period and tied to equity participation of the City in the properties . The City needs to find an alternate source or a way to use tax-increment within its current policy eg. for Robert ' s pit area since it is a blighted area in need of redevelopment . 4. If the City decides to participate it must hold a public hearing with 30 days notice , after which it adopts a housing plan incorporating the proposal . The plan is then submitted to the Met Council which has 45 days for review. All of this must happen before the January 1 , 1984, application deadline . Therefore , to enable continued consideration of the proposal a public hearing should be advertised by October 5, 1983 . Requested Action: Discuss whether the staff should continue consideration of this program and if so, direct advertisement of a public hearing to present the proposed housing plan on November 15, 1983. JA: cau • LAUKKA &lASSOCIATES, pINC. ReAlrn1 a geecilr/er3 �evv ope#. 7101 YORK AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOUS, MINNESOTA 55435 (612) 831-8433 February 14, 1983 Mayor Hopp City of Savage 12305 Quentin Ave. So. Savage, Mn. 55378 Dear Mayor Hopp: Our recent discussions about financing programs, zoning codes and related housing standards prompted me to pass on to you some statistics. I serve on the National Association of Homebuilders Board of Directors and this organizations Economics Department just completed an analysis of what home ownership and house building does for the economics of a community, state and nation. The attachment describes in part, the economic impact caused by the production of 166 homes. I have assumed that; 1) we are successful in using the $10,000,000 Mortage Revenue Bond Program 2) adopt the new R-2 zoning guidelines being proposed 3)' and that the $10,000,000 produces 166, $70,000 homes which each carry a $60,000 mortgage. The analysis does not project the economics produced by the 166 households as they pursue homeownership and life after construction. It would be interesting and probably not to difficult to project the local impact of 166 households, earning say $25,000 per year per household ($4,000,000+ annually) . They buy cars, gas, food, clothing, liquor, rakes, shovels, haircuts, pay taxes, go to church, school., etc. , etc. The economic impact of people who own homes is enormous, they do use services that cost i.e. fire, police, street maintenance and the likes but they always more than pay. Sincerely, Larry Laukka LkL/bam Economic Impact of 166 New Single Family Units Average Value Per Home - $70,000 Average Mortgage - $60,000 Employment Impact. Wages/Home Wages/Gross Construction: On Site Labor $8,269 $1,372,654 Off Site Labor 1,474 244,684 TOTAL -, 3 1,617,338 Other Industries: Manufacturing, Wholesale and Transportation 7,855 1,303,930 Land Development 3,597 597,102 TOTAL ALL INDUSIRIES 23,482 3,898,012 Tax impact Per Home Gross Federal Taxes $2,956 $ 490,696 Corporate Taxes 3,065 508,790 Social Security Taxes 3,129 519,414 TOTAL $9,150 $1,518,900 State and Personal Income Tax 194,900 Real Estate Taxes(1985/86) 129,978 TOTAL TAX IMPACT $1,843,778 TOTAL ECONOMIC IMPACT* $22,244,000 * The housing economic multiplier is considered to be a factor of 2. That is you take the value of a home less the raw land component, multiply by 2 and you produce the additional economic activity that housing generates ($70,000 - 3,000 x 2 = $134,000) This relates to the paragraph in my letter which suggests that the real impact of the first addition to GNP is great. It goes on of course because goods and services need be continually generated to serve the household through their economic and social life. C 1c MEMO TO: John K. Anderson/City Administrator FROM: LeRoy Houser/Building Official RE: Eagle Creek Townhall Lease Agreement DATE: September 22 , 1983 Introduction: Per your request , attached is a copy of the new lease agreement for Eagle Creek Townhall . The necessary changes have been incorporated in this lease . Meeting: Monday, September 26th at 9 : 00 a .m. , Scott-Carver' s Economic Director, Rod Krass and I will be going over the lease agree- ment for their approval and signature . I believe the new lease agreement includes everything both parties are interested in . Alternatives : 1 . Have Council approve the new agreement . 2 . Do nothing. Recommendation: Have Council approve the new lease agreement . Action Requested: Have Council approve the new lease agreement and authorize the proper City officials to execute the agreement with Scott-Carver Economic Council . LH:cau Attachment F � LEASE This lease entered into this day of 1985, by and between the City of Sha„opee, a body politic and corporate, with its principal offices at lea Euet iiret Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as "City") ; ani Scott-Carter Econemi e Co'wci.l, Inc. , a corporation organized under the 0,3 of tee =�'t *, e of :Ri:.nes eta, wri. th i t:3 pricici pal offi:a at _____�___ ____•_ (hereinafter referred to as "Council ") . WHEREAS, the City is the owner of a certain facility known as the Eagle Creek Town Hall, located at the intersection of County Road 83 and County Road 16; and WHEREAS, the Council has been, for some time, utilizing said building and desires to continue to utilize and lease said building; and WHEREAS, the Council has requested that the City construct an addition to said building for the Council's use; and WHEREAS, the City is agreeable to constructing said addition pro viding that the Council pays the cost thereof in the form of lease payments over a period of five years, in equal monthly payments including an amount of 7 1/2 percent interest on the unpaid lease payments; NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. The City shall lease to the Council, and the Council shall rent from the City, the t;ag1e Creek Town Hall for a period of five years commencing the first day of the month after which the above-described addition is • completed, at a monthly rent equal to a monthly payment which would be paid on the total cost to the City of the above-described addition amortized over five years at 7 1/2 percent interest. Said monthly payment:; shall be made on the first day of each and every month. 2. Should the Council, at any time during said five-year lease, vacate the leased promises, then all remaining amounts of rent due hereunder shall be accelerated and due and payable immediately. 3. The Council alknowledge,a that the City utilizes the leased premises for primary and general elections held pursuant to law each September and November of every even-numbered year, as well as for municipal elections held in November of each odd-numbered year. The Council agrees that the City shall have the use of the leased premises on each such election day. 4. Although the City bee els present public need for uee of the leased promisee except Us hereinbefore sot forth, should the City Council of the City of Shakopee determine that the leased premises are necessary for public u3e, the City may give the Ceunci.l 60 days' written notice of the City's intent to utilize said facility for public purposes; and at the conclusion of said 60-day period, this lease shall be termisnted, Under such circumstances, the Council shall have no further obligation, at the conclusion of said 60-day period, to make any further lease payments. 5. The City does hereby grant to the Council an option to lease the leased premises for one additional five-year period commencing at the conclusion of the initial five-year lease period. The rent to be charged by the City to the Council for said option period shall be $1.00. :should the Council desire to exorcise its option rights under this paragraph, the Council shall give the City 60 days' written notice prior to the expiration of the original lease. 6. The Council shall have the obligation to repair and maintain the leased premises, including the parking areas and land areas surrounding the building located on the leased premises. The City will, however, assume all maintenance and repair costa to the facility which exceed $200.00 per individual case, provided said maintenance and repairs are not caused by the negligence of the Council, its agents, employees, or .invitees. The Council shall maintain the entirety of the leased premises in an orderly and neat manner. The Council shall further pay all utilities, i.neluding telephone, gas, electric, refuse removal, sewer and water charges, and shall pay for all security service, 7. The Council shall carry liability insurance coverage on the leased premises, nu:ni.n; the City, its officers, agents, and employees as additional i.nsu_ede, in a eunta approved by the City Attorney. The Council shall further reimburse the City for the cost of general building and fire insurance that the City maintains on the leased premises. nt 8. The City will provide snow removal and grading of road and lot at its exclusive cost. 9. This lease shall be construed under the laws of the State of Ainnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this lease to be executed on the day and year firut written above by their authorized representatives. CIT1 OF SHAKOPE SCOTT-CAriVER. ECOUOxIC COUNCIL, INC. By: _._._ ___ By: Its ,Iayor �_� its Executive Director Dy:_ Its City Clerk. Its Its Board Chairman 13y: --its City Administrator 9C1- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson/City Administrator FROM: LeRoy Houser/Building Official RE: Eagle Creek Townhall Lease Agreement DATE: September 26 , 1983 Introduction: Today, Mary Sullivan, Rod Krass and I reviewed the lease agree- ment on Eagle Creek Townhall . It is Mary Sullivan' s opinion that the 71/2% interest charge you put in the contract will make the expansion program fatally defective . Alternatives : 1 . Redraft the agreement omitting the 71/2% interest charge . 2 . Leave the agreement as presently drawn up. Recommendation: Redraft the agreement omitting the 71/2% interest charge . Action Requested: Authorize the proper personnel to redraft the lease agreement for the Eagle Creek Townhall omitting the 71/2% interest charge . (1Cr5e/2 9d Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Developers Deposit for JEJ 2nd Date: September 22, 1983 Introduction & Backround There is a developers agreement for JEJ 2nd that calls for special assessment payoffs at the rate of 150%. The 50% on deposit with the City now exceeds the balance of assessments due because of recent payoffs. The excess needs to be refunded to Raymond & Jane Lemmons. Action Requested Move to authorize staff to refund excess developers deposit monies for JEJ 2nd in the amount of $12, 138. 74 including interest to the residual corporate officer's, Raymond L. and Jane M. Lemmons. ge, MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Organizational Analysis DATE: September 23 , 1983 Introduction The City Council , at its September 13 , 1983 budget worksession, decided to continue with the current level of staffing in the Police Department and to explore the hiring of a management consultant to evaluation staffing levels . Council also discussed alternatives to the hiring of a new auditor that including an alternative which would bring in a consultant to give us a one time opinion on our financial management and internal controls in the Finance Department . Findings There are a number of consulting firms that do the type of work the City is interested in having done ; however, most of those firms are in larger cities like Chicago and Washington, DC. I have been able to identify at least two firms to date that do this type of work in the Metropolitan area . They are Arthur Young & Company and Watson & Associates . The preliminary estimate from Arthur Young is attached and the preliminary estimate from Watson & Associates will be available Tuesday night . By telephone I have learned that Tom Watson' s preliminary proposal will be in the neighborhood of $15 ,000. Hiring a financial and/or management analyst can be beneficial to the City in two ways . First , the consultant might identify areas in which changes could be made to obtain significant savings for the City. Secondly, the consultant may find few changes that would result in any significant savings to the City, but this would provide a positive message to City Council and staff that we are on the right track. The City' s current General Fund budget is $2 .4 million and a consultant hired at $20,000 represents an investment of . 8% of that $2 .4 million. As noted in Jim Fox' s letter the normal results of a management analysis leads to a savings from 10-15% over current costs and Tom Watson says that it has been their experience that for every dollar invested in the analysis there experience is that the city experiences $3.00 in savings . Of course , two obtain the savings Council will undoubtedly have policy decisions to make. Alternatives 1 . Authorize staff to seek proposals from management consulting firms for an operational analysis of City departments . 2 . Authorize staff to contact these same firms for operational analysis of the Police Department and the Finance Department only. Organizational Analysis • Page Two September 23 , 1983 3 . Drop the idea of hiring a management analyst to do an operational analysis of City departments . 4. Other combinations of 1 through 3 above . Recommendations I recommend strongly that Council pursue alternative No. 1 with the bulk of the work by the consultant to be completed by December 31 , 1983 so that the expense can be charged to the 1983 budget . This operational analysis would answer questions for Council both in the near term and long term so that Council can make staffing decisions based upon the recommendations of a knowledgeable third party . Action Requested Direct the appropriate City staff to contact two or more management consulting firms to obtain firm proposals for an operational analysis of the Police Department , Public Works Department , financial opera- tions and general governmental departments . JKA/jms MEMO TO : Mayor and City Council FROM; John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE : What a Management Analyst Looks For DATE : September 23 , 1983 Tom Watson of Watson & Associates briefly explained what he does in a way I felt was reasonably clear. Work Distribution Analysis - Analysis of how people are assigned to do certain tasks - Reveals people performing duplicative tasks , unnecessary tasks , poor scheduling by supervisor, etc . Work Flow Analysis - Analysis of work ( task) as it flows from one person to the next - Reveals for example how many people sign off on a time sheet , building permit , plat , etc . before it is approved to streamline the process and make it more efficient Organizational Analysis - Analysis of work between department to determine if each is performing an overlaping or like task such as a personnel function that could be done in one department JKA/jms • g Ln1 �XLfl f©flJJEJ© ARTHUR YOUNG & COMPANY 1000 PILLSBURY CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 (612) 343-1000 prririvF September 22 , 1983 °- y SEP 2 1S33 Mr. John Anderson City Manager City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson : I enjoyed our meeting the other day to discuss your possible need for an outside review of the City' s operations. You clarified a number of initial questions I had , and I hope that you now have a better idea of what you might expect from a review. To briefly summarize , you have two major objectives. One is to obtain a review of the financial management and internal controls of the City. You have had the same auditor for about 20 years , and though you have no major complaints or reservations about their work, you would like to have a review of the financial area to verify that everything is in order. The other concern is to identify appropriate work force levels in all City areas, with emphasis on the largest departments of police and public works . You are faced with a few staff-level decisions now and need support for staff cuts or staff increases. However , you would also like to have this work force analysis to help guide future staff decisions so you will have a rational plan for adding or reducing staff in the future as changes in the City occur. To evaluate the financial management area, we would need to review your internal controls , cash management , investment accounting treatment practices, cash flow, and bank agreements. This review would include an examination of your document flow, policies and procedures , duty assignments, and related areas. On the basis of these reviews we would provide you with an opinion of your current practices and an identification of areas where improvements could be made. If applicable, our recommendations will identify where increased "cash" may be available to the City based on a change in cash management practices. Our past experience in cities the size of Shakopee • zt% rALLNUN mum Mr. John Anderson September 20 , 1983 Page 2 indicates that these reviews can identify sufficient "cash" to pay your salary each year. What needs to be done to address the second objective is an analysis of work force activities to identify the number of different work tasks, their duration and frequency. This would identify what is done , and how much time it normally takes to do the work. Then , by calculating how many hours are currently available from the existing work force in a year, we can identify the number of employees needed in each department under current conditions. Based on the differences between these two numbers , we will be in a position to identify how the work might be organized differently to achieve economies , and to identify policy alternatives available to the Council which would achieve the same objective. Normally, a work force analysis of this nature can identify a savings of up to 10 to 15 percent over current costs. These are obtained within 12 to 18 months of implementing the recommenda- tions. In the work force analysis, many of the savings available involve making decisions which affect the level of City services, and therefore are of a policy nature. While we can identify the policy alternatives available based on the evidence , ultimately the decision rests with the Council . For your planning , I have provided some rough fee estimates to perform the services outlined above. We would need to spend more time to identify a more accurate figure , but I believe these are reasonably accurate: Analysis Area Estimated Fee Financial Management Review $ 5 ,000 - $ 7 ,000 Work Force Analysis Police Department 6 ,000 - 9 ,000 Public Works 5 ,000 - 8 ,000 City Hall 4 ,000 - 7 ,000 Total Estimated Fee $20 ,000 - $31 ,000 Normally projects of this nature can be completed within three to four months' time. Mr. John Anderson September 20 , 1983 Page 3 John, this is a preliminary letter , and I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. Please let me know how the Council would like to proceed. Very truly yours, (7/4; James C. Fox / 0 c11 MEMO T0: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ';fryLy 1/J FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk RE: , Resolution of Appreciation to Don Steger DATE : September 23 , 1983 Introduction The attached resolution expresses thanks to Don Steger for his work as the City Planner. Action Recommended Offer Resolution No. 2162 , A Resolution Of Appreciation To Don Steger, and move its adoption. JSC/jms RESOLUTION NO. 2162 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO DON STEGER WHEREAS , Don Steger has served the City of Shakopee as the City Planner from March of 1981 through September of 1983 ; and WHEREAS , during his tenure with the City of Shakopee , Don has always performed his responsibilities in a professional and pleasant manner. NOW , THEREFORE , BE I `I' RESOLVED, that the Shakopee City Council does hereby extend a token of thanks and appreciation to Don Steger for his dedication and hard work during his employ with the City of Shakopee and wishes him well in his future endeavors . Adopted in Adj . Regular Session of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this 27th day of September , 1983. Mayor of the City of hakc—opee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of_ . , 19$3 City Attorney . /0 b MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Creation of New Capital Improvement Fund and Elimination of the Existing PIR Fund DATE: September 23 , 1983 Introduction At Council ' s regular September 16 , 1983 meeting, I asked that Council table action on Resolution No. 2161 and Ordinance No. 134 so that I could review them with the Finance Director, City Attorney and City Clerk. Meeting I reviewed Council ' s initial request with the Finance Director and asked him if he had any specific information that would clearly show the financial management guidelines that address the creation of municipal funds . Attached is an excerpt from the "Principals of Governmental Accounting and Financial Reporting" addressing that request . Please note the bracketed paragraph headed Number of Funds . This clearly establishes the guide- lines for the establishment of municipal funds . It also explains why municipalities should not create a large number of funds each with its own set of rules and regulations . I also asked the Finance Director to research our records to determine how the Capital Equipment Revolving Fund was created. That particular fund was created by simple Council motion on April 3 , 1979 , indicating that the creation of municipal funds need not be an overly formal process . The City Attorney, City Clerk and I have met and reviewed the original two resolutions and the changes we propose are incorporated in the attached resolution and ordinance. Alternatives 1 . Approve Resolution No. 2161 and Ordinance No. 134 . 2 . Take no action on either Resolution No. 2161 or Ordinance No. 134 and maintain the status quo. 3 . Provide staff with some other directives . Recommendation Staff recommends alternative No. 1 for the reasons outlined in the excerpt from the "Principals of Governmental Accounting and Financial Reporting" . Action Requested 1 . Approve Ordinance No. 134. 2 . Approve Resolution No. 2161 . JKA/jms WI r i ii • PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING•9 < 1 • governments should,prepare basic financial statements in Proprietary Funds conformity with GAAP and also present such supporting schedules, in addition to the GAAP-based basic financial (6) Enterprise Funds—to account for operations (a) ''` statements, as may be necessary to clearly report upon their that are financed and operated in a manner similar to !' legal compliance responsibilities and accountabilities. private business enterprises—where the intent of the ° governing body is that the costs (expenses, including Fund Accounting depreciation) of providing goods or services to the �'k general public on a continuing basis be financed or As previously noted, governmental accounting and GAAP recovered primarily through user charges; or(b) where '' financial reporting are intended to provide assurances that the governing body has decided that periodic governmental "available spendable resources" are controlled determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and spent in accordance with externally influenced and/or net income is appropriate for capital i '„. organizational spending and service delivery decisions and a maintenance, public policy, management control, variety of finance-related legal and contractual provisions. accountability, or other purposes. This is accomplished, inpart, through thegovernmental ° �, ��� (7) Internal Service Funds—to account for the fi- practice of fund accounting. nancing of goods or services provided by one depart- Government resources are allocated to and .accounte'd for rent or agency to other departments or agencies of the in separates subentities, called funds, based upon the purposes governmental unit, or to other governmental units, on a y; for which they are to be spent and the means by which cost-reimbursement basis. spending activities are controlled. Governmental GAAP financial statements emphasize reporting by fund and hind Fiduciary Funds type rather than consolidated,reporting aur the government its (8) '!`rust and Agency funds—to account for assets , a whole. The second, third, and fourth of Statement 1's 12 held by a governmental unit in a trustee capacity or as and to both proprietary fund types on the other. They are: an agent for individuals, private organizations, other 1 FUND ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS governmental units, and/or other funds. These include (a) Expendable Trust Funds, (b) Nonexpendable Trust 1, _ 2. Governmental accounting systems should be or- Funds, (c) Pension Trust Funds, and (d) Agency ganized and operated on a fund basis. A fund is Funds. defined as a fiscal and accounting entity with a self- NUMBER OF FUNDS balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities 4. Governmental units should establish an and residual equities or balances, and changes therein, maintain those funds required by law and sound which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on financial administration. Only the minimum number of specific acitivities or attaining certain objectives in funds consistent with legal and operating requirements accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or should be established, however, since unnecessary. limitations. funds result in inflexibility, undue complexity, ci t TYPFS OF FUNDS inefficient financial administration. y{ 3. 'The following,types of funds should be used by As previously noted, the NCGA in Statement 1 grouped state and local governments: 1968 GAAFR's eight generic fund types into three broad E Y, Governmental Funds categories—governmental, proprietary, and fiduciary. It then ,”. simplified and coordinated the GAAP accounting and "7 (1) The General Fund—to account for all financial reporting treatments required for all five governmental fund resources except those to he accounted for in another types on the one hand, and for both proprietary fund types on fund, the other. ;' (2) Special Revenue Funds—to account for thero- General and Special pecial Revenue Funds are used to account . . ceeds of specific revenue sources (other than special for most of the current operating expenditures of a assessments, expendable trusts, or for major capital government, certain capital outlays, and certain debt service projects) that are legally restricted to expenditure for amounts. 'Their spending is controlled primarily through the specified purposes. annual operating budget(s). Under Statement 1, the use of -'_i (3) Capital Projects Funds—to account for financial Special Revenue Funds is not required unless they are legally resources to be used for the acquisition or construction mandated. General and Special Revenue Funds are discussed of major capital facilities (other than those financed by in Chapter 4. proprietary funds, Special Assessment Funds, and Debt Service Funds are used to account for the Trust Funds). accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general (4) Debt Service Funds—to account for the long-term debt principal and interest. Their spending is accumulation of resources for, and the payment of controlled primarily through bond indenture provisions. Under general long-term debt principal and interest. Statement 1, Debt Service Funds are required only if they are (5) Special Assessment Funds—to account for the legally mandated and/or if financial resources are being financing of public improvements or services deemed to accumulated for principal and interest payments maturing in benefit the properties against which special assessments future years. Debt Service Funds are discussed in Chapter 5. 3 are levied. Capital Projects Funds are used to account for the I (5 t ORDINANCE NO. 134 Fourth Series AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AMENDING SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 2 ENTITLED "ADMINISTRATION AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT" BY ENACTING A NEW SECTION 2 . 82 ENTITLED "CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND" AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 2. 99 WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS CONTAINS PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS : SECTION 2 .82 : Capital Improvement Fund Established Subd. 1 : A Public Works Reserve Fund to be known as the Capital Improve- ment Fund is hereby established pursuant to the authority granted by MSA 471. 57 with authority to levy taxes annually within the existing limits for the support of such fund and into which fund may be paid any other revenues or monies not required by statute to be paid into some other fund or used for purposes other than those provided for by this section for the use of the Capital Improvement Fund. Subd. 2 : Purpose of Fund This Capital Improvement Fund shall be used only to finance local capital improvements of a type for which the City is autho- rized to issue bonds and including, but not limited to, sanitary and drainage sewers , watermains and appurtenances , buildings , streets , street lighting and street signaling. Whenever the Capital Improvement Fund balance falls below $75 ,000 the City Treasurer must immediately advise the Council and the Council shall take steps by resolution to replenish the fund, with or without interest . Subd. 3 : Penalty Provisions Adopted Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the entire City Code Including Penalty Provisions" and Section 2 . 99 entitled "Violations a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though stated verbatim herein. Subd. 4: When in Force This ordinance shall be published in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date of such publication. Adopted in session of the City Council , City of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this day of 1983 . RESOLUTION NO. 2161 A RESOLUTIOIN CALLING A SPECIAL ELECTION TO SUBMIT TO THE VOTERS OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE THE QUESTION OF TERMINATING AND LIQUIDATING THE PRESENT PIR FUND BY TRANSFERRING THE PRESENT BALANCE THEREFROM TO A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND •fe-- .E ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY COUNCIL PURSUANT TO MSA 471 . 57 WHEREAS , the Common Council of the City of Shakopee created a Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund in October of 1948 , and said fund has been in operation since said date and has accumu- lated funds in excess of the original proposed PIR Fund, and WHEREAS , since the establishment of said fund circumstances have changed and rather than continue to increase the present fund it could well be more beneficial to the City of Shakopee to be able to use the funds for any capital improvements not just the sewer and water capital improvements now possible under the pre- sent PIR Fund, and WHEREAS , the question of terminating and liquidating the present PIR Fund must , before action is taken by the Council of the City of Shakopee, be submitted to the voters of Shakopee and such proposition must be approved by a majority of the votes cast at such election, and WHEREAS , the City Council of the City of Shakopee by the adoption hereof deems that it would be to the best interests of the City and its inhabitants to terminate and liquidate the pre- sent PIR Fund by transferring the present balance therefrom into a new Capital Improvement Fund established by Ordinance No. 134. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Shakopee to hold a special election concurrent with the regular City election to be held on the 8th day of November, 1983. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that at such special election the following propositions shall be submitted: Shall the City Council of the City of Shakopee be authorized to terminate and liquidate the present PIR Fund by trans- ferring the present balance therefrom into a new Capital Improvement Fund established by Ordinance No. 134 pursuant to MSA 471 . 57? BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the proper City officials be and hereby are authorized and directed to do all things necessary to carry out the terms and purposes of this Resolution. Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council , Shakopee, Minnesota this day of , 1983 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee 1 171a0, Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Budget Information Date: September 23, 1983 1. Hiring freeze for Public Works (Park Dept.) . The letter previously received from the Union makes it unclear whether the Union representative understood the City's position regarding a hiring freeze. At this time it is not clear if the Union will go along with the City and they may contest the freeze. If the Union does not go along with the City, eligibility for the CETA and other employment programs will be lost for one year. Council should consider appropriating $20,000 for part- time (seasonal) help in the Park Dept. to carry us through the one year. 2. Restoration of full funding of Local Government Aid. State revenues are running ahead of projections. Because of this, Governor Perpich, Senator Schmitt, Chairman of the Local and Urban Affairs Committee, Senator Johnson, Chairman of the Senate Tax Committee, and Representative Tommlinson, Chairman of the House Tax Committee, have pledged to support full funding of local government aid for 1984. The legislator will probably act on this matter in March of 1984. What this means for Shakopee is that we would be one of 318 cities receiving additional money when full funding is restored. Proposed or estimated in the 1984 budget is $383,779 for LGA. If full funding is restored the City would receive an additional $54, 199 for a total of $437,978. 3. Disposition of approximate one mill increase. 1 Police Officer $33,640 Part-Time Salaries-Park (1 above) 20,000 Net Increase from list of 9/6 Approved at 9/13 Work Session 7,740 Allow for Uncollectable 2,800 Contingency 5,820 $70,000 4. Does Council want to count on the $54,000 from #2 to reduce the one mill tax increase? MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John Anderson City Administrator SUBJECT: Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track in Shakopee DATE: September 26 , 1983 Introduction: On December 21 , 1982 City Council unanimously approved a resolution expressing the City of Shakopee ' s support for a Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track in Shakopee . Background : At the time the resolution was adopted , there were several Shakopee sites that were suitable for a Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track . Only one of the sites is In the process of applying for the Class A License for a Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track . The application for this site is enhanced by specific site approval by the local jurisdiction . Therefore , it is the recommendation of City staff that City Council amend Resolution No. 2095 by giving specific site approval to the only Shakopee site in the process of applying for a Class A License for a Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track . Alternatives : 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2165 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2095 , giving specific support to the one Shakopee site in the process of applying for a Class A License for a Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track . 2 . Do not adopt Resolution No. 2165 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2095 . Action Requested : Adopt Resolution No. 2165 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2095 , giving specific support to the only Shakopee site in the process of applying for a Class A License for a Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track . HRS/jvm Attachment RESOLUTION NO. 2165 A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2095 A Resolution Expressing The City of Shakopee' s Support For A Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track In Shakopee WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota unanimously adopted Resolution No. 2095 on December 21, 1982 , A Resolution Expressing The City of Shakopee ' s Support For A Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track In Shakopee ; and WHEREAS , the site described in Exhibit "A" and Exhibit "B" , attached hereto, is the only Shakopee site in the process of applying for the Class A License for a Parimutuel Betting Horse- racing Track ; and WHEREAS, this site was a site supported by Resolution No. 2095 . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the City Council expresses its support for a Parimutuel Betting Horseracing Track located in the City of Shakopee on property legally described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and as shown on the concept map attached hereto as Exhibit "B" . Adopted in session of the Shakopee 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 Exhibit A The Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota excepting therefrom: The West 150.00 feet of the north 333.00 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 5 , Township 115 , Range 22 . The South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota. The Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 4, Township 115 , Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota. That part of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 115, Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the centerline of County Road No. 16. The Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 115, Range 22 , Scott County, Minnesota excepting therefrom: The south 400 feet of the west 100 feet of the South Half of the Northwest Quarter. l�� t co a .c co v c fici ,- \ . �- o _ — c° Q /N CC m \\ J J / 1 Q Vi c / 1 —Amu x ° _ o g o LLI ° g I LLI 1 CO �/ Q m < /fF' i Air — W U.4 _ U LL CO `I - - CC ,i . . � /Ill W . ril / 0. lirO 1 W I v/ c i Q 2 1 r (O W o o. ......... Z O -J C] ° W UJ Q %` j 4J O 3 00 .° 0 Z« '� • Z w _ 1