HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/05/1985 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE : February 28 , 1985
1 . The Scott/Carver Economic Council is having its own kick-off
for the March Minnesota Food Share Drive on Saturday, March
2 , 1985 from 9 : 30 to 10 : 30 a.m. at Perkins. The kick-off
will be carried live on George Muenchow ' s radio show and
there will be a hot air balloon launched between 9 : 30 and
10:30. The street will be blocked off, and that has been
OK' ed by Tom Brownell. � ��;�; U .claan�� Z&
2. The City has received a mediation petition and meeting notice
for a mediation session on Wednesday , March 27 , 1985 with
Teamsters Union Local No. 320-Police.
3 . The delmar shade has been ordered to cover the aerial photo
behind the Council table during Council meetings . This
should improve the visual cablecasting of the Council meetings.
It is expected to be installed by the March 19th meeting .
Staff is also working with Mr . Lepley from Zylstra-United
to improve the audio portion of the cablecast.
4 . Attached is a note from James Gencauski , General Manager,
Waste Management, regarding a change in our garbage collection
schedule.
5 . Attached is a note from Judy Cox regarding the State Charitable
Gambling Control Laws.
6 . Council had directed staff to formally notify residents
of the Maras Addition, now formally named Boiling Springs
Lane , of the final assessment for that road improvement.
There was no change in the assessment and each resident
received a letter like the one attached . This will not
come back before Council unless someone has a question about
the project.
7 . Attached is a excerpt from the League of Minnesota Cities
Legislative Bulletin regarding new legislation effecting
elected officials participation in PERA.
8 . Attached is a note from Judy Cox regarding the minutes of
the Industrial Commercial Commission meetings.
9 . Attached is a letter I sent to Murphy' s Landing regarding
the City' s efforts to assist Murphy ' s Landing with their
financial record keeping . Since this letter was written
Jeanne Andre has indicated that we may have a problem with
our contributions to the Shakopee Cable Access Corporation.
Therefore , we are continuing to investigate just what the
restrictions on the City might be with regard to providing
mo
pey or services- to not-for-profit corporations.�,�n,; � ___
10 . Attached is a letter I sent to Lou VanHout regarding the
City Code that defines "banners and pennants" . We are making
a concerted effort to eliminate wooden banners strung across
Holmes Street to avoid possible liability exposure should
such a wooden banner fall on a vehicle or pedestrian. The
problem this creates is that a normal banner cannot be placed
in this same location because it would , more than the wooden
banner, jerk the power pole the cable is attached to causing
the power lines to bounce and possibly short out. If anyone
has any good suggestions please give me a call .
11 . Attached is a mailing that the State of Minnesota Water
Resources Board requested we distribute to all City Council-
members. Presently the City Engineer and I have been following
meetings by the township officials which were held last
week and hopefully will end with a meeting at 8 : 00 p.m. on
March 4th. Township officials had sought to extend the
July 1st deadline again and/or modify the No. 509 Metropolitan
Surface Water Management Act. They were told by their attorney
and by Connie Levy , who authored the initial bill , that
the legislature would not consider changes this year. Based
on this information we anticiapte having a willing set of
township officials to deal with after their March 4th meeting
when we renew attempts to put together a joint powers agreement
for surface water management. I have asked the Mayor to
attend the meeting on March 4th.
12. Attached is a letter to Chuck Kartak regarding cleaning
up the old Riverside . Ballpark.
13 . Attached is the agenda for the March 6 , 1985 meeting of
the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee meeting.
14 . Attached are the agendas for the March 7 , 1985 meetings
of the Board of Adjust and Appeals and Planning Commission.
15 . Attached are the minutes of the February 6 , 1985 meeting
of the Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission.
16 . Attached are the minutes of the February 11 and 25 , 1985
meeting of the Shakopee Baseball Lighting Committee.
17. Attached are the minutes of the February 13 , 1985 meeting
of the Industrial Commercial Commission.
18 . Attached are the minutes of the January 29 , 1985 meeting
of the City Hall Siting Committee.
19 . Attached are the minutes of the February 13 , 1985 meeting
of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee.
20. Attached are the minutes of the February 20 , 1985 meeting
of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee.
21 . Attached are the minutes of the January 28, 1985 meeting
of the Cable Communications Advisory Commission.
22 . Attached are the minutes of the January 24, 1985 meeting
of the Planning Commission.
23 . Attached are the minutes of the February 7 , 1985 meeting
of the Board of Adjust and Appeals.
24. Attached are the minutes of the February 7 , 1985 meeting
of the Planning Commission.
25 . Attached is the monthly calendar for March.
26 . I have now completed the City Administrator ' s performance
evaluations of all department heads. We do hope to implement
the first round of employee evaluations this spring.
27 . Please review the attached letter of application for the
10 cents admission tax. It has been reviewed by Bruce Malkerson
and all department heads and will go the Racing Commission' s
staff for review before it is formally submitted . If you
have questions, concerns or suggestions call me by Wednesday
morning. I plan to mail it to the Commission staff on Wednesday,
March 6th.
JKA/jms
Waste Management—Sava e 14
12448 Pennsylvania Avenue South /
Savage, Minnesota 55378
612/890-11o0 R A Waste Management Company
N4V
Z L
February 18, 1985
Mr. John Anderson
City of Shakopee
129 1st Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear John:
Per our conversation, we will be changing the day of pick up for
several hundred residential customers in Shakopee effective March 2, 1985.
We will be sending notifications to all affected customers the week
of February 17th; I've enclosed a copy for your file.
We will be changing prior stops from Tuesday to Monday, Thursday,
or Friday per the attached map.
Please call me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
L�
James Gencauski, General Manager
Waste Management-Savage
A Division of G &H Sanitation, Inc.
0 1\ 1
r �G�
9 ?-
�
Blue: Thursday route;
CO RD 69
everything south of
2 \ �a F 4th from Dakota St tc
Lewis
St up to 7th St
Red: Friday route;
everything on Dakota
St. and west of it.
en: Monday route;
1P ' everything between
.� Spencer St and Shaw-
TYLER
mut St. Everything r gT, `
L/
ARRISON south of 2nd and nort'' =
of 4th.
/
JACKSON � 1
4
"0
/ YAOISON =' Sl
T ST.DSO D `
® FFF
SON EJ
ST O
ROAMS 51. S
FI►S"'GI ION
e 1 / WEB FR ST.
ASS ST w '
C) ST.MARK ❑RD AT❑ g
-I PLAT a g1
IIFRPE
/ D
I STD Ln
CO RD 77 sNurwM ❑ _
.j n o PGAR= ST
N DD51 D .
D
ZcnSCOTT m�DDO 0
ST
I� O �erwoo0 ���❑0 ❑
ST.
FULLER
_ TT7 ST
(T1N
HOLAIES
DDD �D
� LEwI$k' St•
79 - m PS 1=1 ILLE T.
$IFNCE STD �J
00 ST'
I MAIN � ST. U
I YrpKET
ST SL a
I NNESOTA�� 1- ST'
D
I
DAKOTA ST.
I O
I PAI E
■ HWM EAG T. O O�
1 HAW T� Z
I
L) m
o
y DVH►WNEE I
TRAIL
I $IBIET ST
II PALISET ST.
SWIFT $T t '
-- MILLER ST \
Y RRIFIEL�,
Z —T /
0 AE RIT�'
2
rn 'a
00 CTI
c`
5
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. City Clerk
RE: State Charitable Gambling Control Laws
DATE: February 27, 1985
There is legislation being considered which would extend the effective date
from March lst to June lst for implementation of the state charitable gambling control
laws. This law rggg ires the state to be the licensing authority beginning March lst.
Should such legislation be adopted both the V.F.W. and American Legion would be
without a City license from March lst until such time as Council would be able
to meet and extend their existing licenses to June lst.
After talking with the League and the City Attorney, it appears that the
whole situation is a mess. It is recommended by Mr. Coller to take no action
until and if the extenion is approved. Action by the City would thely be to extend
the existing licenses until June 1, 1985.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 11370 '
129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
April 5 , 1984
Mr. James Thomason
9130 Boiling Springs Lane E.
Shakopee , MN 55379
Re : Assessments for City Project No. 1982-6
Dear Mr. Thomason:
This letter is to inform you of the final cost of the
roadway project in your area.
Final total cost of this project is $117 ,422 . 16 . The
estimated total was $108 ,689 . 65 .
No additional assessments will be made to make up this
difference .
If you have any questions , do not hesitate to call .
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Ray Ruuska
Engineering Coordinator
RR: cah
The ll c a r I cl hro (7ress
7 S-5
PENSIONS
%Retirement savings plan. S.F. 489 (Moe, Wegscheid, Renneke, Knaak, Spear)
4/ (Governmental Operations) would change the current unclassified employees
retirement program in the state retirement system to the Minnesota Savings
Retirement Plan within the Minnesota state retirement system. All newly
elected officers of cities, counties, and townships with annual salaries in
excess of. $2,400 who elect to be covered by retirement would now be in this
plan instead of the PERA program. The new plan would also apply to newly
elected or appointed county attorneys and deputy county attorneys, employees
of the League of Minnesota Cities, the Association of Minnesota Counties, the
Metropolitan Inter-County Association, the Minnesota Municipal Utilities
Association, the World Trade Center Board, the Supreme Court, Court of
Appeals, District Court Administrators, Metropolitan Council, and a number of
metro-wide boards and commissions, as well as to all new employees who would
under current law be covered by the state unclassified plan. The bill would
create a defined contribution plan and after an initial opportunity for
present employees under the state unclassified plan to elect into the regular
retirement program, would remove that election option. An employee or elected
official now in PERA and covered by the bill would have the option of electing
coverage in the retirement savings plan and transferring accumulated employee
and matching employer contributions together with interest into the retirement
savings plan. Such an election would be irrevocable. The contribution rate
would be six percent employer, four percent employee.
Pre-'73 Retirees. S.F. 408 (C. Peterson, Frederickson, Spear) (Governmental
Operations) would grant lump sum increases to people with a pension from PERA,
MERF, or other statewide plans who began drawing prior to 1973 when the high
five year formula took effect. The amount would be $18 in 1985 and $19 in
�--- 1986 for each full year of service credit.
j
�1
I
I I
I
h
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Industrial Commercial Commission Minutes
DATE: February 25, 1985
It has been brought to my attention that Council has not been receiving copies
of the ICC minutes since Jeanette Shaner began her maternity leave in December,
1983. I apologize for the oversight on my part.
Council did receive copies of the January 1985 minutes. If any Councilmember
desires copies of previous meetings, please let me know.
You should know, John, that Mr. Wermerskirchen, Chairman, has asked Jeanne Andre
if the Council has been following issues of concern to the ICC. Mr. Wermerskirchen
has been advised that Council has not received copies of recent minutes.
JSC/jms
I.
L
CITY OF SHAKOPEE }
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 fr
t
February 22 , 1985
f
Ms. Janice Obst, Director
Murphy' s Landing
2187 East Highway 101
Shakopee , MN 55379
Re : The City of Shakopee ' s Offer to Assist Murphy ' s Landing
with Financial Record Keeping
Dear Janice :
The Finance Director had pretty well completed his research
- ming the ways we might help Murphy' s Landing in their financial
administration , when we run across a road block. Because of
an unrelated issue , the City learned that we are not authorized
under State law to provide money or services to a not-for-profit
corporation which is not a governmental agency . The enclosed
memo notes the specific ruling from the Attorney General ' s Office .
It seems that our efforts to find a way to help Murphy ' s
Landing with financial services must come to an end . The only
mechanism we have to assist Murphy ' s Landing is contributions
through the County Historical Society or through grounds maintenance
work since the property is owned by the Historical Society.
The relevation of the Attorney General ' s opinion means
that we will have to alter our dealings with one or two other
not-for-profit civil organizations in town as well . If you
or John Lynch have any questions about this legal opinion please
contact me.
Sincerely ,
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
JKA/jms
enclosure
cc : Eldon Reinke , Mayor
The Heart of Progress Valley
enr cnrrpr Done-. . _ r,r_.
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Murphy's Landing
Date: February 19, 1985
I have asked the City Attorney to review the Articles of Incorporation
of Minnesota Valley Restoration, Inc. (Murphy's Landing) and he has related
to me that they are a not-for-profit corporation but are not a public
corporation. What this means is that, according to Mr. Coller and Attorney
General Opinion No. 99, the City can not provide money or services to
Murhpy's Landing.
The donation last year was to the County Historical Society which is
permissable as would be grounds maintenance activity since the County
owns the land (per Mr. Coller) . However, the provision of financial
services as I have been researching is not allowed.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870
129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 f�
A.
February 21 , 1985
Lou VanHout
Shakopee Public Utilities
1030 E Fourth Ave .
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379
Re : Street Banners
Dear Lou:
As we discussed over the phone this morning, the City
of Shakopee is making an effort to enforce Section 4. 30 signs-
construction, maintenance and permits of the City Code as
it applies to banners and pennants . The City is trying to
make civic organizations aware of the existing code and the
liability problems the City is exposed to with the heavy
pressed wood banners currently used by civic organizations .
We are seeking your Department ' s assistance in getting
the word out regarding this section of the City code. The
specificciauses that would be of importance to you when approached
by organizations wishing to install a temporary banner are :
Section 4. 30 subdivision 2 No. 5 under definitions which
reads : "Banners and pennants" - any attention-getting
devices which resemble flags and are of a non-permanent
paper, cloth or plastic like material .
Subdivision 3 Paragraph K which reads temporary banners
and pennants employed for grand openings of business
establishments , special events and holidays shall be
permitted upon issuance of a temporary sign permit for
fourteen ( 14) days after erection.
I know that there are numerous organizations that contact
your office to have banners installed in the usual location on
Holmes Street . Please see that these requests are run through
City Hall first for compliance with City Codes .
The Hca rI of Pro oross Q / / 0 1/
r, --.11-1 ---_ -
Mr . Lou VanHout
Page Two
February 21 , 1985
I believe that we should try to locate another place for
organizations to erect banners and pennants so any suggestions
you might have would be appreciated.
Sincerely,
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
JKA/jms
cc : Judy Simac ,
City Planner
L'; flY Cox,
City Clerk
J/
/ rt
STATE OF MINNESOTA
WATER RESOURCES BOARD
161 2) 296-2840 500 Lafayette Road
First Floor
St. Paul, Minnesota
55146
January 31 , 1985
TO: Fersons Interested in Metropolitan Surface Water Management
Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act - Informational Mailing # 2
A question that continues to be raised about the Metropolitan Surface
Water Management Act is: "Why is it necessary?"
It is being asked mainly by communities in unorganized watersheds
who don't see the need for spending public money to prepare watershed
management plans in their areas.
Is Watershed Planning Needed?
The need for stronger local water management was debated at length
when the proposal was brought before the Legislature in 1982. The main
arguments supporting the bill were that serious surface water problems were
occurring throughout the metro area that demanded local government action to
correct, and that proper planning and management practices could prevent these
problems at less cost than corrective measures. There certainly was no intent
to require planning that would not be cost effective in the long run. The
requirement that plans initially be prepared on a watershed basis was included
because runoff doesn't obey political boundaries. A downstream community has
little control over the quantity and quality of runoff originating from communities
upstream, unless an organization with watershed-wide authority is established.
Metro communities have been confronted with varied surface water
problems including:
Flooding -
Bassett Creek Lake Jane
Big Marine-Big Carnelian Lakes Priebe Lake
Chaska Creek Oneka Lake
Prior Lake Coon Creek
Lake Marion Minnehaha Creek
Round Lake
,r
Informational Mailing # 2 January 31, 1985
Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act Page Two
Lake Degradation -
Long Lake Golden Lake
Lake Como Lake Riley
McCarron's Lake Twin Lakes
Spring Lake Lake Rebecca
Silver Lake Gleason Lake
Erosion/Sedimentation -
Elm Creek Mill Pond Battle Creek
Etter Creek Pleasure Creek
If local water management efforts are not strengthened, there is no doubt
that surface water problems will increase as more development takes place in
the metro area.
The Metropolitan Council's projected population growth rate for the
metropolitan area from 1980-2000 is 11.4 %. This figure is deceptive,
because significant development can occur with little or no increase in
population. The Council's 1984 report Twin Cities Recent Growth Trends
and Prospects stated that:
"What this means in terms of growth is that despite very
modest population increases, we still experienced con-
siderable development - new homes built and new jobs
created. Although population only grew by six percent
in the 1970's in the metropolitan area, the number of
households went up 26 percent, and jobs grew by 25
percent. Such growth was necessary to house and
employ the growing numbers of baby boomers reaching
adulthood."
The attached maps show those communities projected to have population
increases between the years 1980 and 2000 of 40 - 50% and over 50%; and
communities projected to grow in population by over 4,000 residents
between 1980 and 2000.
Watersheds containing these fast-growing communities have the greatest
immediate need for surface water planning. They will also need to do more
detailed planning than the urbanized and the rural watersheds.
A well-done watershed plan will give communities a good understanding
of the effects projected development and land use will have on surface water
systems. In formulating water management strategies, local officials will
lr
Informational Mailing # 2 January 31, 1985
Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act Page Three
have to weigh the costs of controls needed to prevent problems versus the
costs of correcting problems after-the-fact. Communities that have dealt
with serious surface water problems have found corrective projects to be
extremely expensive.
Enactment of the Metropolitan Surface Water Management Act reflected
a strong concern over proper water management and legislative confidence
that local officials would do a good job in implementing the Act with minimal
oversight. If communities do not make a good faith effort to accomplish the
purposes of the Act, it is possible that the Legislature will be asked to
expand the role of regional or state government in land use zoning,
regulation of development, and water management in general.
Attach.
C�
1 ST FRANCIS
I
u� one I
Cities With Projected I LSI nHLL
Population Gains Greater
® Population
4,000 From I p� ------�
1980 - 2000
MAMLAKE I 10 ST LAKE % I •.E 11 At, iA
-d-
AN KA LINO LAKES MARIN
H=sSAN DAYTON
ERS
CMAM TE RVILLI
ls' I
I MUCO
HANOVER CIRCLE PINES W HIN_ON_CO.
,
G REENfICL CORCORAN pMDUN VIEW NORTH 2) 22 STILLWATER
12 OAKS W TE tCAP
0 RD f LET KE v
I HENNEP BR00 LYN ME. ""' I GR-NT
CEM A 2 /'"
IBRIGMTON 24
OLORETT C STAI 3 ARDEN 25 2 [)2
STILL TER
I rW I NMS
I
DEPENDENCE DIN 10 51 LITTLE 30
0 ROSE LLE CANADA $1O•lA 29
PLE PLAIN 'f L BAY WIN
GOLDEN 1 2< APLEWOOD LE LAKE
ILMn -
I
ONG LAK VALLEY 9 %-SI WE
ORONO
wAi X WAY AT - RAMSE CO. L°MEL NO
I MI ETRISTA ST LOUIS INT PAUL L ELAND
7 PARK I E OLIS 3-
MINS ST.CROIK BE CM
n {� Jel 19 WEST �/( d
TBONIFACIUS , Q N
_ EDI STAT
1 - PAUL
1B SOUTH
NE GERMAXY M YEN /�' -- NICHFI AIR'RT' UM, AUL NEW1
ENDOTA
/ / YICiORI MNAS SEN EIGHTS L
—DEN I ..CO'!1.S LAKETOWV ST.
•ACOMIA ARI
' I EHASK DENMARK
CARVER C
I I CHASKA
UNG
A RICA
NOR. ARV'
COLO 'HIGREN I
__•A AMERICA I i - ROSEMOUNT Nl%l .,EP
• MAS i1NG5
Duls+l LE 1
LHAMBURG - - - - _--- --
OR r 1
I S=N I CIS 0
I HAN_GGN 1 YERMILL'G•.
SAND CRE I SPP•hGL NE I CREDIT EMPIPE I D I RS AN I I
II�JtL--, I RIVER I VERMILLION
FARNINGTDN
ST.LAWRENCEI JORDAN I I I I
----T----I — I --- I.
BELLE PLAIME I I D
I MARM11
t 1 I (HAM,TO
BLAKELEY i 3ELLE PLAINE I HELENA .SCARI E I I N MARKET EUREKA CASTLE ROCK MIESViIIE
I I HAMPTON I DOUGLAS
ME.PPRAGUEI KO I
----�----- 1— - —1----- -----�--
RaNDOLPy
I -I---I RANDOLPN
I I
MILES 5 10 15 20 25 I GREVALE IWATERFCP
I I I SGIGTA
J
TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA
Political Boundaries, 1984
I SIRING PARK 9 MOUND 17 FALCON HEIGHTS 25 GEM LAKE
2 0RONO 10 ROB11,11 I[ .MENDOTA 26 BIRCHWOOD ANOVA Count Boundary
3 AlI ANETDMKA BEACH 11 SIRING LAKE PARK L9 LILYDALE 27 WHITE BEAR Y rY
4 YORK BAY 12 U S.GOVT. 20 GREY CLOUD 28 BAYPORT ORONO Municipal Boundary
5 EXCELSIOR 13 HILLTOP 21 LANDFALL 29 WILL[RNIE n
6 GRE[NROOD 14 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 22 DELLWOOD 30 OAK PARK HEIGHTS CAMDEN -Township Boundary
WOODLAND IS ST.AMT MONY 23 PIML SI tIMGf 31 lAK[LA XD SNORES Y Y
8 ME DICIM[LAKE 16 LAUDERDALE 24 MAMTOM[DI 32 ST.MARY'S POINT
_sties and I owns With
.......... Projected Population
Gains Between 40 - 500/0/
From 1980 - 2000
EAST ETHfL
Cities and Towns With 1 A
Projected Population
Gains Greater Than
50% From 1980 - 2000 CHOAM LAKE FO� IT LAKE '•E!I At. I,
AN KA MARIN
DAYTON x MII 11
CHAM
I IN,
...... ......
........... ......
.......... ........
.......... .........
HANOI IN ON Co.
GA ENFIEL BMOUN
VIEW MORSN 22 ............... A
12 OAKS
0 RD LET SRANT ...
0 YN • 24
AN R BRIGHTON
L E 02 SI ILL TEA
OLORETT M M HILLS TTLE 30
L'T
DIN, IO 10 51 LA
NAOA MO 21
ILI'LAI. ROSE E ST' A 7 .11 WN
APLEWOOD
GOA VALLEY AKDAL E LAKE
"NO
AK E
WAY AT ...... RAMSE CO. LAKELNO
AT N ORONO INI. ETONK I Si.LOUIS INT PAUL 1 2 L ELAND
WATEQT %I tT*ISTA 9 PARK 3,1
P"EN KINS ST.C10I K BE CH
4 19 WEST
IT A F
T IRONIFACIUS RFwnn
IB SOUTH
TER --- ST.
... ..... RICHFI AIRPORT
NEWP
ME GERMANYEMDOiA UN ISM PAUL
E
3EN W.170-11.S LANE TONN I ST. UL
.......
OACONIA AN'
O.INGTON
IINVER GROVE
CARVER C
CHASK ..... HEIGHTS COTTAGE GRO�C DEN-ARK
) 20
....... ....
............
CHA .......... A CO.
UNG
A RICA
Iff
VILLE
COLO -LGREIN
.... ......
AMERICA ...•
.... NI%'%GE P
.1ST..G1
L.A.
_RG11 OA --
-F
..........
. .................
SIN FRA CIS 0
................
I
H:h:✓.K ..................... VERMILLIO
...........
............
EMPIRE E] --RS.4AN
SAND CRE I SI'R L KE I CREDIT ...............
TILL J17 I RIVER FARMINGTOIN VERMILLION
ST.LAWRENCE JORDAN
.... ........
..............
..........
........ ..........
BELLE PLAINE I
'IR
I I MARKET A. P
CASTLE ROZK
BLAKELEY ..... ...... MIESVILLF
BELLE PLAINE -ED-A L E
A.111T
'LAS
t.':•:':':•.....
PRAGUE KO .......... ...........
JR.. X47:55
";LES 5 10 is 20- 25 GkE VALE I.ATERICP
SCICTA
TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA
Political Boundaries, 1984
1SPR14G PARK 9 MOUND 17 FALCON HEIGHTS 25 GIN LAKE
2 ORONO 10 .008INI.ALI 18 MENDOTA 26 BIRCH WOOD ANOtiA—County Boundary
3 N1 hhfTOXXA BEACH 11 SPRING LAKE PARK 19 LILYVALE 27 WHITE BEAR
4 TOMK-BAY 12 U S GOVT. 20 GREY CLOUD 28 BAYPORT ORONO Municipal Boundary
5 EXCELSIOR 13 HILLTOP 21 L WALL 29 WILLERNIE
6 G "'*OOD 14 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 22 DELLW ODD 30 OAK PARK HEIGHTS Township Boundary
7 WOODLAND 15 ST.AAITM 0 MY 23 PI:1 SPRINGS 31 LAKELANO,SHORES
8 HE VICI%1 LAKE 16 LAUDE
RDA LE 24 IN HION 01 32 ST. ANY' POI NT
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870 e'
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
February 28, 1985
Mr. Chuck Kartak, Manager
Minnesota Valley Trail
19825 Park Boulevard
Jordan, MN 55352
Re: Clean-up, Grading and Seeding at Shakopee's Old Riverside Ballpark Site
in Section 1 T 115 N, R 23 W
Dear Chuck:
Thank you for your letter requesting the permit to remove and bury the
remaining structures at the old ballpark site. I have reviewed your request
with the City Engineer, the Street Superintendent and George Muenchow and we
have no problems with your plans. The Shakopee Cub Scouts, which are using
one of the remaining buildings as a storage building, will move from the site
in 1985 so none of the buildings will be in use on June 30, 1985. We will
also be removing the Ag Lime from the baseball infield prior to your deadline
of June 30, 1985.
I would like to point out that the City has negotiated an agreement with
Jon Parker of the Fish and Wildlife Division of the DNR regarding the possible
reuse of some of the ball diamond for bridge and roadway alignment improvements
as part of Shakopee's downtown redevelopment. We do not know if any of our
plans will be completed, nor do we know whether the alternative selected would
affect areas on the north side of the river in the area of the ballpark. What-
ever alternative we finally select and is approved by the Minnesota Department
of Transportation (Mn/DOT) will be crucial in our ability_ to accomodate the
DNR's proposed trail, Mn/DOT's desire to improve traffic flow through Shakopee,
and the City's desire to achieve the revitalization of its downtown.
If you have any questions regarding this information please contact me.
Sincerely,
K. Anderson
City Administrator
JKA/j ms
cc: Jon Parker, DNR
Gary Morke
Jim Karkanen
George Muenchow
Bo Spurrier
The Heart of Progress Valley
_..--
STATE OF
�I HH[S2; 7Q
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
+ONE: X50219
File No.
John Anderson, Adrrini-�trater
City Of Shakopee ^-
129 East First Avenue
Shakcpee, I'M 5{379
Dear John:
The Department of Natural Resources at the N_innesota Valley Trail
is seeking a perrat to demolish and bu the remaining s
�' g o t'-"uc„ures at the
old Shakopee ballpark site located in Section 1 T 115 N, R 23 - My
prelitrinary bid specifications are to demolish the remaining buildings
and structures and bury them on site. The
bid would specifythat final
grading of the buriel site cannot exceed a height of 12^` above the present
ground level. In additior., the contract would call for a minimum of 6"
Of topsoil covering the Structure material so that the soil can be disced
or tilled in preparation for seeding. The topscy;l will be taken from the
immediate area.
Following the removal of the structures wjP.will be seeding the area .
down with a r;,ixture of grasses suitable for nesting cover for wildlife.
If you desire any additional inforr;atio a you can contact me at 192-61,D0.
Please advise as to the disposition of this request.
Sincerely,
Chuck Kartak, Manager
I,iinnesota Valley Trail
'_9S25 Park Blvd.
Jordan, ISSN 55352
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Downtown Ad Hoc Committee
March 6 , 1985
7 :30 A.M.
Chrmn . Laurent presiding
1 . Call to Order at 7 : 30 A.M.
2 . Approval of minutes of February 20 , 1985 meeting.
3 . Discussion of Downtown Bridge and Highway Options.
a . Review of Goals and Objectives .
b. Discussion of Options.
4 . Other Business
5 . Adjourn at 9 : 00 A.M. to March 13 , 1985 at 7 : 00 A.M.
Jeanne Andre
Community Develoment Director
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING,
PLEASE CALL JEANNE OR TONI TO LET THEM KNOW.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Board of Adjustment and Appeals
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota March 7 , 1985
Chairman Czaja Presiding :
1 . Roll Call at 7 : 30 P. M.
2. Approval of February 7 , 1985 Meeting Minutes
3 . 7 : 30 P. M. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING • To consider
the decision that said appellant may not increase the number
of dwelling units of a non-conforming multiple dwelling
located in the R-2 District.
Appellant: Wayne W. Stockman , 3407 Red Oak Circle N.
Burnsville , MN 55337
Action: Appeal Resolution No. 389
4 . 7 : 45 P. M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a variance from
the sign ordinance in order to erect a temporary free standing
advertising sign .
Applicant: Minnesota Racetrack Inc.
Action: Variance Resolution No . 393
5 . Other Business
6 . Adjournment
Judi Simac
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
�y
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota March 7 , 1985
Chairman Czaja Presiding
1 . Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M.
2 . Approval of January 24th and February 7 , 1985 Meeting Minutes.
3 . 8 : 00 P.M. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING : Request for
a conditional use permit to remove sand and gravel aggregate
upon property lcoated at SE 1/4 of NE 1/4 of Sec . 17 , NE
1 /4 of NW 1 /4 of Sec . 16 , W 1/2 of NW 1/4 of Sec . 16 , CR
83 , legal description on file .
Applicant : Scott County Lumber Co . and Bert Noterman ,
312 West 6th Street, Shakopee .
Action: Recommendation to City Council for Mining Permit
Conditional Use Permit #376 .
4 . Reconsideration of the Preliminary Plat of Della ' s First
Addn . lying in the NW 1/4 of Section 8 , East of 11th and
Shakopee Avenue intersection , legal description on file .
Applicant: Cecil P. Clay , 2135 Park Ridge Dr, Shakopee
Action: Recommendation to City Council
5 . 8 : 15 P. M. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING: Request for
a conditional use permit to establish a Bed and Breakfast
facility at 134 4th Avenue ; Block 56 , Lots 6 and 7 .
Applicant: J . Lynch , J. McNearney , M. Spagnolo , Shakopee
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 390
6 . 8 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for conditional use
permit to assemble and store transportation equipment at
2888 E. 4th Ave.
Applicant: Walter Thomas
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 394
7 . Discussion: Final Plat of South Parkview 1st Addn .
Applicant: Clete Link
Action: Recommendation to City Council
8 . 8 : 45 P. M P U To consider an amendment to
the Shoreland Ordinance and Zoning Map which removes the
Shakopee Mill Pond , M:;nnesota River , Blue , Fischer and
Rice Lakes from the Shoreland District.
Action: Recommendation to City Council .
9 . Discussion: Final Plat of Fox Run 1st Addn.
10 . Information: a) Recommendation on meeting procedures
b) Downtown Design Standards
c) Hall Conditional Use Permit
d ) Annual C . U. P. review: Strehlow
e) Council Action on Shiely Mining Permit
f)
11. Other Business
12. Adjournment
Judi Simac
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 6 , 1985
4 : 05 P .M. FES 19 1935
Membersp resent : Commissioner Virgil Mears, Commissioner
John Roepke , Commissioner Dan Steil
Members absent: None
Other Individuals : Police Chief Tom Brownell
1 . Police Chief Tom Brownell discussed the recommendation
of amending Section IV of the Civil Service rules per-
taining to the publishing of employment examinations
with the Committee and stated that the advantages of the
amendment would be so that we can contract with the
placement firm and would not be locked into certain time
frames. He felt that all individuals applying for the
position would have to work within the system anyway. A
motion was made by John Roepke, seconded by Virgil Mears
that Section IV of the Civil Service rules be amended as
previously discussed and the motion was passed.
2 . Police Chief Tom Brownell felt that there should be at
least 25 applications received and the selection com-
mittee would reduce it possibly to 10 or 15 . The oral
selection board will consist of the police chief, 3
employees in the police department and one member of the
Commission . John Roepke was recommended and approved by
the Commission to serve on the board .
3 . The election of officers was held before the Shakopee
Police Commission for the term from February 1985 to
February 1986 . Dan Steil was nominated for the position
of Chairman by Virgil Mears and John Roepke was nomi-
nated as Secretary by Dan Steil . Both positions were
unanimously approved and both individuals will serve one
year terms at those respective positions.
A motion to adjourn was made at 4 : 26 P .M.
John Roepke
02/15/85
SHAKOPEE BASEBALL LIGHTING COMMITTEE / /
MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 25, 1985 /K/��
The meeting was called to order at 6: 10 PM by Chairman Joe Schleper in the Shakopee
Community Services Office.
Members present: Ray Siebenaler, Todd Schwartz, Jim O'Neill, Jim Stillman, Kevin
O'Brien, Don Bisek, Bill Schleper, Joe Schleper, John Goihl, and
George Muenchow.
Chairman Schleper reviewed what had transpired since last meeting. Met Stadium Salvage
Contractor will sell the following to us for $9,000.00:
a. 500 assembled seats plus 100 disassembled seats
b. Precast plank as needed
C. Structural steel as needed
d. Necessary handrails
e. Materials to be loaded on our trucks
Motion by Bisek, seconded by Siebenaler, to accept the offer of $9,000.00 from the
Met Stadium Salvage Contractor and that Joe Schleper and Kevin O'Brien be authorized
to represent this committee in this transaction with the power to negotiate an equitable
payment schedule. Carried.
It was pointed out that the salvage company is anxious to move this week with activity
to take place by the weekend if this arrangement is to be consummated.
George Muenchow is to review City's Liability concerns if material is to be stored
at Tahpah Park.
It was pointed out that the Salvage Company is willing to negotiate a payment
arrangement.
George Muenchow re-iterated the City' s appreciation for the efforts of this
committee. He futher reminded the group that with this upgrading of Tahpah Park
that it will be more important than ever that all parties work closely with Shakopee
Community Services in scheduling activities in the park to minimize congestion as
much as possible. He also is concerned that the football field facility will get
constructed as soon as possible by someone to facilitate this special interest
activity.
The next meeting will be Monday, March 4, at 6:00 PM at the C.S. Office for the
primary purpose of making fund raising plans for paying for these newly determined
costs.
The meeting adjourned at 7: 15 PM.
Res ctfully submitted,
,,A/
_.V q,
George 'F. Muenchow, Secty.
SHAKOPEE BASEBALL LIGHTING COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES - FEBRUARY 11, 1985
The meeting was called to order in the Shakopee Community Services Board Meeting
Room by Chairman Joe Schleper at 6:00 PM.
Members Present: Joe Schleper Sr, Bill Schleper, Tim Riffe, Don Bisek, Bert
Noterman, John Goihl, Jim Stillman, Jim O'Neill, Ray
Siebenaler, Kevin O'Brien (arrived later) , and George Muenchow.
Minutes of the December 20, 1984 Meeting were reviewed.
Chairman Schleper reported on the investigative meetings that he and Kevin O'Brien
have had regarding negotiations with representatives of Met Stadium Salvage Company.
The price quote for individual .seats to be sold on a bulk basis now is $15.00/seat.
To construct a stadium with all new concrete etc. would be $30,000.00. Seating
from Met Stadium would be an additional $6,000.00 following that kind of plan.
Pre-cast concrete slabs with bolts for attaching seats are also available.
Chairman Schleper suggested offering selling seats for $60.00. Noterman suggested
selling seats in recognition of former and current Twins players. Samples of seats
were shown.
Kevin O'Brien arrived and offered the following:
a. Estimated cost of moving slabs with seats would be $20,000.00.
b. Discussed comparison value of new and used materials showing substantial
savings using used materials from Met Center.
C. Estimated cost breakdowns were presented as attached.
Motion by Noterman, seconded by Stillman, to offer $6,000.00 to the Met Stadium
Salvage Company with the following criteria:
a. 600 seats assembled
b. 1225 lineal feet of precast plank
C. Structual steel to support planks
d. Necessary handrails
e. All materials loaded on our trucks , ,
f. All materials to meet Shakopee Building Inspector' s approval
Motion carried.
The meeting was adjourned at 7: 15 PM.
reisrlpJ,ectfully submitted,
George Muenchow,Secty.
/ 7
M�TES
INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL COMMISSION
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 13, 1985
MEMBERS PRESENT : Bud Berens , Shakopee Development Corporation
Jane DuBois
Al Furrie
John Manahan
Jim O ' Neill
Paul Wermerskirchen , Chairman
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bob Blenkush , Chamber of Commerce Liaison
Tim Keane
Terry Link , Downtown Ad-Hoc Committee Liaison
GUESTS PRESENT: Jeanne Andre , Community Development Director
Chairman Wermerskirchen called the meeting to order at 5 : 08 p . m.
in the City Council Chambers at City Hall . Roll call was taken .
MINUTES
On a motion by John Manahan, seconded by Al Furrie , the minutes
of January 9 , 1985 , were approved.
REPORT FROM DOWNTOWN AD-HOC COMMITTEE
The Community Development Director reported that the recent Downtown
Ad-Hoc Committee meeting focused on the construction of Highway 169
and the new bridge alignment . She reviewed what has transpired to
date in discussions between MnDot and the City Council in this
regard . She also noted that the Downtown Ad-Hoc Committee established
a tentative time frame for completion of the downtown redevelopment
project and plans to have the overall design criteria ready for
this Commission to review at its March meeting .
Discussion followed on some of the design options for a new bridge
and its impact on the current redevelopment plan . The Commission
concensus was that bridge placement and design of the road are
major factors in the redevelopment plan and requested to review
any new plans because rerouting of traffic could change the whole
concept of the downtown redevelopment plan .
INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL DAY PLANS
Chairman Wermerskirchen informed the Commissioners that on
January 17, 1985 , Commissioners DuBois , Furrie , Keane , and
Industrial Commercial Commission
February 13 , 1985
Page 2
Wermerskirchen held a subcommittee meeting to discuss the details
of Industrial Commercial Day .
Gary Laurent and Paul Wermerskirchen are in charge of invita-
tions and the invitee list . Work is currently being done in
this area.
Shannon Riley , Public Relations Director at the race track , was
also at the meeting . Shannon and Tim Keane will be sure the
facilities at the race track are ready, that acoustics will be
good for the speakers , and that the group will be separated from
the crowd but will occupy an area that will overlook the race
track .
Jeanne Andre has agreed to chair the Brochures subcommittee . She
will call a meeting in the near future with the Chamber of Commerce ,
Scottland , League of Women Voters , and Downtown Ad-Hoc Committee
in an effort to develop a multi-purpose brochure to incorporate
the local brochures currently in circulation in Shakopee .
Al Furrie will set up and coordinate the speakers for the presenta-
tion segment . He will also work with Tim Keane on the program
plan . A tentative program schedule was discussed which included
registration at 1 : 30 p .m. ( for 30 minutes ) followed by approximately
45 minutes of presentations , a 30 minute race track tour , an
optional city tour , and social hour prior to the 4 :00 p . m. start
of the races .
Jim O ' Neill will create a map exhibit which would consist of a
color coded map highlighting the City ' s vacant land and identifying
available parcels and buildings . The Commissioners agreed that
exhibits of products manufactured in Shakopee were not appropriate
at this years Industrial Commercial Day .
Shannon Riley will lead the tours at the race track . John
Manahan will develop an optional tour of the City of Shakopee
utilizing the Dial-A-Ride vans for a shuttle bus tour .
Jane DuBois is heading the Promotions subcommittee and will
coordinate press releases , advertisements , radio spots , etc .
Chairman Wermerskirchen noted that more subcommittee meetings
will be necessary to discuss further details . He suggested a
breakfast meeting in the near future . Concensus was that a noon
luncheon would be more favorable .
Industrial Commercial Commission
rebruary 13 , 1985
Page 3 l7
There was a review of the original Industrial Commercial
Commission ' s intent to improve responsiveness to inquiries
regarding land use and availability in Shakopee.
Jane DuBois informed the Commission of the difficulties in
attracting residential developers to Shakopee because of the
sewer allocation restrictions . The Community Development Director
discussed with the Commissioners which areas of the City have
sewer restrictions . The Commissioners requested that John
. Anderson , the City Administrator , and Bo Spurrier, the City
Engineer , be present at the March meeting to discuss the sewer
restriction problems .
The Commissioners agreed that the City needs a healthy balance
of commercial and residential development , but no residential
development can occur until the sewer restriction problems are
resolved.
John Manahan voiced his concern that the Commission has no full
time staff person to guide the group and follow-up on problems .
He suggested the Commission develop a method of establishing its
priorities and monitoring them. Everyone agreed that City staff
is spread too thin already and would not have the time to devote
to the Commission.
The Commissioners concurred that during the next month they should
identify what must be done to promote the City and think about how
to follow-up on these concerns and goals of the Commission .
The motion was made by Jim O ' Neill and seconded by Jane DuBois
to adjourn the meeting at 7 :00 p . m. Motion carried unanimously .
Respectfully submitted,
udy ughe
Recording Secretary Pro Tem
r
CITY HALL SITING COMMITTEE
Tuesday , January 29 , 1985
6 : 30 p .m
City Hall
The Vice-Chair , Gloria Vierling , called the meeting to order
at 6 : 35 p.m. on January 29 , 1985 . Members present were Gloria
Vierling , Dolores Lebens , Dave Czaja and Dave Rockne . John
Leroux arrived a few minutes after the meeting started . John
Anderson , City Administrator , was also present and there were
no other citizens or staff present.
M/S/P Lebens/ Rockne to approve the minutes of the December 8 ,
19814 meeting.
The Committee then discussed the City Hall traffic surveys with
the membership drawing different implications from the numbers
generated by the survey . The Committee decided to rerun the
survey again in the month of March and sometime during the
summer . The Committee suggested adding one question to the
survey, "do you use downtown merchants?" .
Gloria Vierling asked if the City Attorney should not be located
in City Hall . It was decided that the City Administrator should
"ontact Jack Coller for his reaction.
The Committee also discussed asking on the survey how frequently
people visit City Hall . This could be done with a forced choice
question stated as , "once per month or more frequently, or less
than once per month?"
The Committee then went into a discussion of their reaction
to the six city hall sites visited on December 8th. Gloria
Vierling rated the Plymouth City Hall as the best , with Eagan
and Minnetonka in second and third place . She explained that
Plymouth had an excellant location . Dolores Lebens rated the
Plymouth site as the best and emphasized the two story brick
structure with dual levels as an ideal that Shakopee might copy.
She also felt that Eagan had an excellent site . Dave Czaja
also rated Plymouth as the top site . Dave Rockne said he didn ' t
focus on the buildings but noticed the siting and the fact that
all the parcels were large parcels without apparent considerations
for other city issues. He liked the dual level entry with an
upper and lower level and he felt that access should be kept
simple. John Leroux said he tried to take each city hall out
of the site although he felt the Plymouth City Hall was the
best. He said he like the West St. Paul City Hall in relation
to the downtown but didn ' t care for the traffic flow from Robert
Street to City Hall and didn ' t care for the aesthetics of the
public works building which made for a poor visual impact .
He liked the ease with which a citizen could find the Eagan
City Hall.
The Committee ' s consensus was that the cities surveyed didn ' t
reflect Shakopee with its older downtown and three commercial
shopping areas namely the Mall , Downtown and County Road 17 .
The Committee then discussed physical considerations for siting
a city hall building. They agreed on the following considerations :
1 . The building should be designed as a new city hull building
and we should not reise an existing building.
2 . The City should try to find a site that would allow for
the dual level building access .
3 • The by-pass in Shakopee might have implications for access
and convenience for a city hall building .
4 . Convenience and the ability to locate the city hall from
the streets approaching it was of key importance.
5 . The site should not be located away from the center of Shakopee ' s
urban population and thus be inconvenient to the bulk of
Shakopee citizens.
The Committee then discussed some specific sites previously
considered by each individually. Dolores Lebens said that she
had considered the Wampach site as her first choice , but after
viewing theother six city halls and the space required felt that
four lots would not provide sufficient space for a desirable
city hall meeting the five criteria listed above . She then
looked towards Eagle Geek Town Hall which was the only other
site she had been contemplating. It was agreed that the site
had some initially desirable assets , but after discussing the
lack of municipal water and sewer and the site ' s location south
of the proposed by-pass interchange with County Road 16 everyone
agreed that this one acre site would probably be inconvenient
for a lot of people . Dolores said that after dropping these
two sites perhaps the best location would be adjacent to the
current Public Works Building which would put all municipal
offices in the same area .
The Committee then discussed other possible site including the
northwest corner of the intersection of 4th Avenue and County
Road 17 , the area east of Gorman Street across from the Public
Works Building or across from the Shakopee Public Utilities
Building , the area on 4th Avenue between the Shakopee Public
Utilities Building and Citizens State Bank, the northeast corner
of the intersection of County Road 16 and County Road 17 across
from Tom Thumb , the Ler, zmeier farm location , the block that
includes the present Municipal Library (note this concept includes
3/4 of the block and calls for leveling of all structures except
the Northwestern Bell building ) , and the block west of St . Marks
School .
The City Administrator then listed the sites suggested by department
heads : the Huber Park area , redevelopment of the present City
Hall block ( adding commercial retail shops ) , rehabilitation
II
Of Cactus Jacks , a location in the institutional area near the
Courthouse, near the present City Public Works Building , Eagle
Creek Town Hall site , the fourth floor of the County Courthouse
building , air rights over the County/Hospital parking lot , the
Minnegasco building , the County Road 17 area , the half block
immedidately west of the present Senior Citizens Highrise (Mrs. Pass '
home is now available) , block 5 and 2 along the proposed route
of the relocated Highway 101 , the southwest corner of Shakopee
Avenue and County Road 17 , existing City park lands , and the
old prison site.
The Committee then discussed future meetings and possible time
lines. It was decided that the City Administrator should draft
a matrix to evaluate each of the suggested sites for the next
inseting to be held on February 26 , 1985 at 6 :30 p.m. Committee
members asked that the matrix be mailed to the members as soon
as possible so that they might review the sites. The Committee
also discussed the possibility of a public meeting on April
9 , 1985 to review the proposed site analysis with citizens to
get their general impression and suggestions.
M/S/P Vierling/Czaja to adjourn . Meeting adjourned at 7 : 30
P.in.
John K. Anderson
i C(
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
February 13 , 1985
Secretary Steve Clay called the meeting to order at
the following voting members 7 :35 A.M. with
Link , Mike Sortum, Dan Steil , pJimeStillmanrandry WTerpry Forborry
Absent : Bill Wermerskirchen Jr. rd.
Joe Topic and Dick Stoks . Also present were :' Gary Laurent , Don Martin ,
Community Development Director, John K. Anderson , CityJAdministrateanne e'
and Judi Simac , City Planner. or
Stillman/Wampach moved to nominate a slate of Gary Laurent
Chairman , Don Martin for Vice-Chairman and Steve Clay for Secretary
Of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee for 1985 . Motion carried
for
unan-
imously. y
rried Link/Stillman moved to close the nominations and cast a white
ballot for the slate of candidates. Motion carried unanimously.
The Comm. Dev. Dir, then reviewed her memo regarding , Proceedi
with TH 101/169 Junction (Bridge ) Improvement Project . ng
explained that a number of issues related to the improvement
project had been clarified at the City Council meeting with
Officials from Mn DOT. The City must now determine whether
it wishes to pursue this partnership, and at what pace .
The Comm. Dev . Dir. suggested that these three alternatives
be considered ; 1) to proceed now to
in 1987 , 2) to wait until the end of March bwhen ly tFederal art sarpoval
for funding is there, because of less risk to the City or expe 3)
wait until the City selects its engineering consultant andPProv )
this to be one of the projects this firm would do. Jeanne recommendct
s
alternative one , to proceed forward and keep the momentum going.
Judi Simac arrived at 7: 53 A. M.
Discussion followed with the committee requesting staff
back the designs discussed to bring
r
Comm. Dev . Dir . recommendedthat sly
f om itt ee note zero in The
one design , because there are so many factors to be considered
in terms of cost , time and traffic control during construction.
Mr. Wampach also added the importance of finding out what the
People in Shakopee want.
Mel Lebens stated he was present mainly because of his concern
to keep the assessments down on his
Property
Avenue and secondly to try and save thelocated on Second
requested a recess to discuss certain find ngslOff the record then
Page two
Downtown Minutes
Link/Forbord moved- to recess at 8 : 02 A.M. Motion carried .
Secretary Clay called the meeting back to order at 8 : 26 A.M.
Link/Stillman moved to direct City staff to develop a brief
schematic of bridge replacement alternatives to be brought t
the committee for review. Motion carried . °
The Comm. Dev . Dir , noted that there are
that Mr. Lebens is bringing up. One bein
two separate issues
confidence in the way Ken Anderson has a
� g he has a lack of
and two, do we hire a consultant at all , pproached the project
Forbord/Steil moved to request that the consultants and
the
Mn DOT staff in question, be brought in so the committee c
decide whether to retain them or hire a new consultant. tUld
carried , with Terry Link voting nay, M
Motion
The Comm. Dev . Dir , reviewed a draft schedule of activities
concerning the Downtown Committee. ties
that the Downtown Committee will be Tmeeting �wing will February 20 dates
March 13 , 20 & 27, April 10 & 24 , May 8 & 22 and June 17th.
7 ,
Judi Simac , City Planner reviewed the Proposed Downtown De
Standards. She explained the design standards will
a guide for the developer in his site design and/or rehabilitation
of a structure and also ensure compatibilityserve as
of the character of the downtown . However, the Downtown tion
and preservation
should realize that there are some disadvantages to having specific
design standards . Committee
regulating taste, and weallknow go the City in the g p iflc
Secondly, good taste can not be legislatedsition •
Y, some architects and/or developers may resent the expression
Of control over their creativit
be careful not to be exlusioy.
nar Lastly, our regulations must
standard , which in turn creates high� developmentthus crtincosts uch a high
The following are the major points of the Design Standards C
1 • The design standards are a ode:
neal
allows for flexibility for bothr theg developer uidelinhand
Planning Commission.
2. The rehabilitation or new construction is required
to relate to and be compatible with existing buildings
and streets.
Page three
Downtown Minutes
3 • Landscaping and site treatment is required
or enhance existing conditions. to
and Plantings improve
are to be used to enhance the architectural features
Of the building and provide visual amenities for both
the pedestrian and automobile passenger.
4 • Buildings are required to be designed to
surroundings. Buildingg relate to
mate
and of good rials
quality . Acceptable shall be harmonious brick, stone, stucco and wood. materials will be
5 • Signs shall be an integral architectural element
of
the building to be reviewed at the time of site design
review. Only wall or projecting signs shall be permitted ,
which eliminates freestanding and portable signs.
6 • Miscellaneous structures suchas canopies
benches and barber totems will be considered winn
overall design ; as opposed to being specificallyaddresthe
he
as permitted or not.
sed
7 . Maintenance of structure and materials will be consider
at time of design review , ed
will also
City to somewhat enforce continual mainte anceallow the
8. The Planning Commission will use the evaluation guide
for the review of each a lines
them in determining if the application which will assist
and give them a basis for requiring plg additional plantinon meets the gs
or screenings , etc . The evaluation g
nes also
give the developer an idea of what the Planning Commission
will be looking for in the design .
The Comm. Dev . Dir, added that the City Planner has do
most to keep design .standards ne the
very important. Some discussion followed and flexible which is
Dan Steil left at 9 : 04 A.M.
The Comm. Dev . Dir , suggested that the committee attend
Public hearing to be held in March on the Downtown Zonin the
g and
Design Standards , to endorse their approval .
Link/Stillman moved to adjourn at 9 :10 A.M. Motion carried.
Toni Warhol
Recording Secretary
�l
PROCCEDINGS OF THE
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
February 20, 1985
Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 07 P . M. with
the following voting members present: Steve Clay, Terry Forbord ,
Don Martin , Dan Steil , Jim Stillman , Jerry Wampach, and Bill
Wermerskirchen Jr. Absent : Terry Link, Mike Sortum, Dick Stoks
and Joe Topic. Also present were Jeanne Andre, Community Development
Director and John K. Anderson, City Administrator.
Steil/Wermerskirchen moved to approve the minutes of January
30 , 1985 as presented. Motion carried.
Joe Niznik of the University of Minnesota Center for Community
Studies started a presentation of the preliminary design concepts
he and his cohorts developed for the Shakopee downtown. He
outlined the three major goals and objectives for each goal
that the students had developed from the Committee comments
at the previous meeting as follows :
1 . Create an Image for Downtown
-unify building facades
-provide pedestrian amenities
-retain historical image
-coordinate signage
-beautify riverfront
2. Restructure Downtown Functions
-consolidate parking
-link downtown with the riverfront
-reroute traffic around First Avenue
-tie downtown to the institutions
-provide for pedestrian safety
3 • Address Recreation/Open Space Concerns
-bring DNR trail system to downtown
-attract tourists
address flooding problem
-concentrate on riverfront
Mr Niznik noted that circulation is a major issue which needs
to be addressed .
John Kulhanek then summarized the assessment of the environment
used in developing the concept plan as follows:
Page two
Downtown Minutes 2/20/85
Visual Assessment
River is an important asset which should be center
of activites.
First Avenue is a dividing force
No sense of arrival (poor initial image)
Institutional area is separated from downtown - Should
be linked.
Circulation Assessment
Conflict exists where T. H. 101 and 169 meet
Need improved pedestrian movement across highway
Railroad is a barrier but has potential as a linear
green space
Land Use
Highway business
Central business district - has lineal potential,
needs definition of entry and aesthetic improvements
Scattered Retail
has high vacancy , deteriorated facades
Isolated Residential
senior citizen highrise should be brought into downtown
Institutional Support Offices
Transitional Zone - could link institutions to downtown ,
provide parking and green space for downtown .
The students went on to present three downtown concept plans
all of which had the following similar elements:
1. Uses a two-way Levee Drive as highway by-pass which
includes the elderly highrise in the downtown and
locates bridge at Holmes.
2. Suggest relocating railroad depot more centrally in
the downtown, perhaps promoting rail link to racetrack.
Concept 1 - Brad Pontius
1. Uses Holmes Street as pedestrian greenway , places
parking away from the greenway .
2. Maintains buildings at road
3. Takes service vehicles to rear of building
Page three
z �
Downtown Minutes 2/20/85
14 . Uses two lane roadways with parallel parking and 18
foot pedestrian walkways
Concept 2 - John Kulhanek
1. Has significant green space north of First Avenue
with parking relocated and pedestrian overpasses linking
downtown to the DNR trail .
2. Restores natural vegetation to floodplain area.
3 . Develops First Avenue similar to Third Ave. in Duluth,
with three lanes of traffic and parking on one side
only.
4. Has plantings and streetscape elements along major
blocks .
5 . Has gateway (eg. lattice arch at St. Paul Trade Center)
to create sense of arrival on First Avenue at Atwood
and Sommerville.
Concept 3 - Joe Niznik
1. Creates auto mall which reduces traffic to two lanes
and creates more parking along downtown streets
2 . Reduces parking north of First Ave. and creates more
green space.
3 . Uses Alley for service vehicles but also visually
improves rear of buildings .
4 . Creates green space through bank parking lot which
carries through to pedestrian/snowmobile bridge across
the river at Lewis.
Committee members discussed the concept plans and brought up
the following ideas:
-Need to catch traffic to keep the downtown business vital ,
should divert all traffic , or only one-way?
Where should diversion reenter First Avenue?
How does highway location affect point of arrival , compact
retail core , and construction costs?
Could intersection be moved north of river?
-Need parking near to businesses more than green space.
-Railroad won ' t approve pedestrian crossing.
Page four
Downtown Minutes 2/20/85
-Would highway close to highrise create noise and deterioration
problem or could barriers alleviate the problem?
-Support expressed for archways , trail links.
Mr. Niznik summarized the Committee ' s comments.
The Committee and students agreed to meet March 13 , 1985 , at
7 : 00 A.M. for the student ' s final report.
Steve Clay circulated recommendations on possible ways to optimize
{ time use at committee meetings and the Committee agreed to discuss
his suggestions at its next meeting .
Martin/Wampach moved to adjourn at 9 : 24 p.m. Motion carried.
Jeanne Andre
Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 28, 1985
Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. with Commissioners
Abeln and Harrison present, Commissioner Williams excused, and Commissioner
Davis absent. Barry Stock, Administrative Intern, was also present.
Harrison/Abeln moved to approve the minutes of the December 19, 1984, meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. John Suryani, the new manager of Zylstra—United (ZU) Cable Systems, was
introduced to the Commissioners. He indicated he is looking forward to working
with the Commission to correct past problems.
REPORTS TO BE RECEIVED FROM ZYLSTRA-UNITED
On November 26, 1984, the Cable Commission moved to notify ZU that the City
was expecting by January 31, 1985, to receive several reports from the Company
as specified in the Franchise Ordinance. In response to the City's request, ZU
manager John Suryani replied that he plans to forward the reports requested as
the information is available to him. He further suggested that City officials
and ZU management establish a month-to-month reporting procedure of information
and material that is useful and comprehensible. The Commissioners agreed a
separate meeting should be held to decide which reports would be needed.
Harrison/Abeln moved to accept the reports submitted by Zylstra-United at this
time, recognizing that they are making an effort to comply with the City's
request. In addition, a meeting should be held with Zylstra-United management
in an effort to devise a reporting schedule of the information that will be
useful to the City. Motion carried unanimously.
1985 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
In connection with the goals and objectives, Commissioner Harrison asked Mr.
Suryani about the status of the character generator. Mr. Suryani stated that
he has reviewed the file which was left by Mr. Jim Abbott, former ZU manager,
and has been in contact with the people in Utah. The Commissioners and Mr.
Suryani discussed what equipment is available, what equipment is necessary, and
who would best utilize it. Mr. Suryani will continue to work on this project
and 'keep the Commissioners updated on his progress.
Commissioner Harrison also asked in connection with the Channel 3 remote
modulator, if there could be a modulator tuned into Channel 3 with a system which
would be on a timer to click off the studio and turn on the remote modulator at
the same time to shoot live on location. Mr. Suryani and his chief technician,
Mr. Dan Schaefer agreed that although it was very technical, it could be done.
Discussion on this subject ensued.
The Commissioners reviewed a draft copy of the 1985 goals and objectives which
staff had developed. Several changes were suggested.
Shakopee Cable Commission
January 28, 1985
Page 2
Harrison/Abeln moved to adopt the Goals and Objectives as listed in Attachment
#2 of Barry Stock's January 21, 1985, memorandum to the Commission with the
changes as written, as the activities and actions to be accomplished by the
Cable Commission in 1985. Motion carried unanimously.
1984 CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT
Barry Stock noted that an annual report describing the activities and actions
of the Commission in 1984 must be submitted to the City Council. Therefore, he
presented a draft cover letter and annual report for the Commission's review.
Harrison/Abeln moved to accept the cover letter and 1984 annual report as
corrected and submit it to City Council for their approval. Motion carried
unanimously.
MARL' PARKER CABLE COMPLAINT
Barry Stock recalled that on Wednesday, December 19, 1984, the Commission held
a public hearing in regard to the cable complaint of Ms. Mary Parker. At that
meeting, the Commission passed a motion that 1) the Commission inspect the
present grounding system at the site with the Staff and City Electrical Inspector
and 2) request that Mr. Roy Baker also grant an opinion if he feels qualified as
to the standard operating methods that ZU is using to ground the cable system
On January 4, 1985, Barry Stock and City Electrical Inspector Roy Baker accompanied
ZU Cable Manager John Suryani and ZU Technician Dan Schaefer to inspect the cable
grounding system at the residence of Ms. Mary Parker. Following the investiga-
tion, Roy Baker stated he did not feel qualified to comment on ZU's grounding
procedure. However, based on his interpretation of the code and the information
provided by ZU, he felt the Company had followed the code and in fact exceeded
it by installing a four foot grounding rod in the pedestal. Mr. Baker furnished
the Commissioners with a letter dated January 28, 1985, stating this opinion.
Staff also believes that the Company has followed the code in grounding Ms.
Parker's cable.
ZU Cable Manager John Suryani showed the Commissioners how the cable to Ms.
Parker's home had been grounded. He stated that the cable system was grounded
at the first, tenth, and end pole of the system and at every active piece of
equipment with an eight foot grounding rod. He further stated that in accordance
with Section 820-7 of the National Electrical code, the outer conductive shield
of their coaxial cable is grounded on the overhead line because at that point
there is a potential of over 300 volts. In accordance with Section 820-7(b),
they contend that the underground service drop to Ms. Parker's home. does not
have to be grounded because there is no potential for over 300 volts. The
pedestal in which the underground service drop is stored does, however, contain
a four foot grounding rod.
Ms. Parker was not present to give a rebuttal.
Shakcpee Cable Commission
January 28, 1985
Page 3
Abeln/Harrison moved that based on staff's analysis of the case, the Cable
Company was not negligent in grounding Ms. Parker's residence. Motion carried
unanimously.
Barry Stock presented several informational items. First, he reviewed the
December Public Access Report submitted by William Lepley, Shakopee Studio
Manager. Second, the Commissioners received the Cable Television Monthly
Reports for October, November, and December, 1984.
At this point (9:35 p.m. ), Ms. Mary Parker arrived at the meeting. Chairman
Anderson informed her of the outcome of .the complaint hearing. The Commissioners
also stated the basis for their decision. Ms. Parker objected that the
Commissioners held the hearing without her presence. Chairman Anderson stated
that the Commission had moved the hearing to the end of the agenda for her
and reminded her that at the Commission's December 19, 1984, meeting she was
informed of the date and time of this meeting. Ms. Parker was told that she
could appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council. Mr. Stock will
assist her in the appeal process if she so desires.
Chairman Anderson continued the meeting by reviewing the minutes of the Shakopee
Community Access Corporation for the months of October and November, 1984.
The next meeting date is February 25, 1985, at 7:30 p.m.
Abeln/Harrison moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:42 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Barry Stock Judy Hughes
Administrative Intern Recording Secretary
Arch`t+nS° is
ko. of Vrs.:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 24, 1985
Chrm. Stoltzman called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. with Comm. Czaja,
Koehnen, VanMaldeghem, Schmitt, Lane and Rockne present. Also present were
Judi Simac, City Planner and Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director.
PUBLIC HEARING (CONT.) - DELLA'S FIRST ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT
Czaja/Lane moved to re-open the public hearing on the request for preliminary
plat approval of Della's lst Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner went over the considerations involved. She summarized by
stating that the biggest concerns were the placement of Austin Street and
the screening issue because of creating double frontage lots. She went over
the alternatives and the staff recommendation of an approval of the prelimi-
nary plat without a variance with the request that the necessary revisions
to Austin Circle be made in the final plat.
Comm. Schmitt inquired about the initial concern with the slope of a parti-
cular lot in the plat. The City Planner stated that the City Engineer was
satisfied with the suitability of the slope for development based on a verbal
report, but a written answer has not been received. If the house in question
was moved back 20 feet, it would cost more to build it, but it could be done.
Mr. Clay explained the slope relationship on a drawing by his engineer, in
which a 4 foot retaining wall would be required to maintain the level of the
land. He said if the house had to be moved back, it would be so steep that
it wouldn't be able to hook up to sewer.
Discussion followed regarding the issue of privacy for the rear of the lots
existing in JEJ addition, because of Austin Circle going in and creating
double frontage for those lots. Comm. Schmitt commented that if the developer
was able to work out a mutual agreement with those property owners whereby
. they waived the requirement of 20 feet of screening between the properties,
he would be agreeable. Without that agreement, the privacy of those lots
has to be protected.
Mr. Clay stated that those existing lots are receiving a benefit by having an
access to the rear of their lots, and he would think screening would block
out the view of the valley. He didn't think he would have any problem secur-
ing an agreement from those properties to waive that 20 foot screening require-
ment.
The City Planner clarified that the surrounding property owners were notified,
and none are present at this hearing.
Comm. Czaja felt it might not be right to grant this variance based on an
agreement with others, as that should be the exclusive right and responsibil-
ity of the Planning Commission. The City Planner pointed out that the 20
foot requirement is in the code and if an exception is made, it has to have
a reason which is allowed as is stated in the findings. Comm. Schmitt stated
his belief that if an agreement is made with the neighbors, that would prove
that the variance is not detrimental or injurious to other properties, which is
an approved reason for the granting of a variance.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 24, 1985
Page 2
Mr. Clay clarified that a sump pump could be used in the basement of the
house if it was put 20 feet back, although he said the person who drew his
plans didn't think the lot was large enough to accomodate the house if it
had to be set back 20 feet. He said it is costing him a lot of money to
put in the street, because he only has houses on one side and the lots are
going to be expensive, so he definitely needs 4 lots. Discussion followed.
The City Planner stated the City Engineer has received the drainage plans.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to continue this hearing to February 7, 1985, pending
a resolution between the developer and adjoining property owners of the 20
foot screening area so that Austin Circle will have to be realigned or an
agreement waiving the 20 foot screening area be obtained. Motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - SHIELY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
VanMaldeghem/Czaja moved to re-open the public hearing regarding the request
by the J. L. Shiely Co. for a conditional use permit to enlarge a mining
extraction facility. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner went over the questions and issues that needed to be ad-
dressed from the discussions of the last meeting. She said she has made
inquiries of the DNR relative to their periodic review of the dewatering
data, but she has not yet received an answer. She also suggested using the
operating agreement Shiely submits to Cottage Grove as a model for the mining
and reclamation plan the City could require and approve. She went over the
negotiating alternatives and recommended the mining permit be re-applied for
every 3 years with an annual Planning Commission review.
Mr. Getz, representing Shiely, addressed the concern of the slope. He said
the vertical portions are nearly vertical, but it is terraced. He pointed
out that the City Attorney has approved the Hold Harmless agreement which
eliminates the City's liability for the slope ratio. Discussion followed.
Comm. Koehnen and Czaja spoke for requiring an annual review of the mining
permit at the beginning, with the possibility of lengthening the review period
once the procedure is in place. The City Planner suggested that with regard
to the annual conditional use permit review, information should be submitted
by November 30 with review to take place in January, to take effect February
lst. She would suggest asking the applicant for future land use plans in
increments of 5 or 10 years.
Discussion continued regarding mitigating the 3:1 slope and making it more
specific, a possible biological report on the possibility of the support of
vegetation and wildlife in an end-use lake, the relationship of the de-watering
to the water table in the area and the lack of awareness of the possible con-
sequences of the de-watering by the general public. Comm. Czaja expressed
his desire to have the data which is collected reviewed on an annual basis to
see if there is any connection between the de-watering and the lowering of the
water table in the area. Mr. Sunday further commented on the DNR's review and
collection of water table data in the past. Discussion continued regarding
possible effects on Dean' s Lake and looking at the entire basin area with
regard to any development proposed.
Todd Bekken asked for further information from Jerry Sunday.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 24, 1985
>> 3
Mr. Getz protested the continuance of further debates on the extraordinarily
complicated hydrological issues. He stated that he has met repeatedly with
r_aff and the Planning Commission and each time have come to an understanding
that the information submitted would be sufficient to satisfy the City's re-
quirements. He said it is very frustrating to come to meeting after meeting.
He said the applicant does have some rights, and it is time for action. He
reminded the Commissioners that Shiely has determined, and the City Attorney
has agreed, that the City has no right to impose conditions upon the operation
which is grandfathered in. Despite that they have worked with the City and
are willing to provide any information that is reasonable. However, if the
City imposes conditions that they feel are too burdensome or onerous, they
will be forced to litigate, and if successful the City will have no control
whatsoever. He suggests the Commission proceed as the City Planner has out-
lined, approve the permit and form a reclamation committee which can take some
time to really understand the issues. He added the fact that they are here
at all and have furnished information is a tangible sign of their intent to
cooperate.
Chrm. Stoltzman asked for comments from the audience.
Todd Bekken stated he believes the Planning Commission should consider the
hydrological concepts which involve more than the immediate area. He doesn't
think it would take too long for a hydrologist like Mr. Sunday to go over the
concepts of superficial and arterial water supplies in the area and how Shiely
is affecting them. He also thinks the overburden on the property should be
considered when talking about terracing the walls of the pit. He agrees that
it probably makes no sense to continue to deny the permit when Shiely is going
to continue to operate, but he believes the Planning Commission could get more
information.
Comm. Koehnen expressed her concern with the protection of ground water. She
said she would have no problem voting for the permit contingent upon the
successful creation of a biological plan.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to close the public hearing.
Comm. Lane commented that it seems clear to him from the City Attorney's opinion
that the City has no right to require anything and therefore the permits should
be issued with the provision of an annual review.
Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved favorable approval of the Shiely application for a con-
ditional use permit and mining permit subject to conditions as follows:
1. The mining permit be renewed every 3 years in accordance with
the ordinance with an annual Planning Commission review of the
permit.
2. Applicant prepare and record an agreement between themselves
and the City which holds the City harmless for any damages which
may result from the end use of the property.
3. The conditional use permit and mining permit apply only to exist-
ing quarry and its expansion.
Shakopee Pianning Commission
January 24, 1985
Page 4
4. A variance from the reclamation requirement which requires banks
to be sloped by no more than 3:1 ratio is granted, based on the
Hold Harmless agreement, and is limited to that portion which
is limestone in nature.
5. End Use Plan Map C as submitted by applicant shall be regarded
as a concept plan subject to further review.
6. Applicant shall control dust on site and the access road.
7. Noise emissions shall not exceed the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency and Mine Safety Health Administration standards.
8. All mining operations shall be conducted between the hours of
7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
9. The mining operation shall maintain the following minimum set-
backs: 100 feet from the property line, 500 feet from any com-
mercial structures, and 30 feet from any road right-of-way.
10. Adjacent commercial properties shall be screened from the mining
operation by natural vegetation and trees.
11. No truck traffic from the mining operation be routed through the
urban section of Shakopee.
12. Safety fencing at least four feet in height shall be installed
around the perimeter of the operation.
13. If the applicant increasesthe pumping rate of the dewatering
pump, the applicant shall submit a drainage report to the City
Engineer which will show that downstream facilities have the
capacity for the dewatering pump.
14. Use of explosives must not damage the natural watercourse through
the center of the quarry. Explosives shall not be stored on site.
15. Mining operations shall be subject to compliance with all City
codes.
16. The Shakopee Planning Commission shall serve as a long range
Reclamation Planning Committee to meet annually with the applicant
for the purpose of reviewal and to serve as a Reclamation Committee
to deal with site treatment and planning.
17. Applicant and Reclamation Committee will work towards a preliminary
reclamation plan to be completed at the end of the first two years,
at which time either or both a biological plan or Environmental
Assessment Worksheet shall be looked at regarding a landscaping
plan for the end use.
18. Recommend the continuation of the collection of dewatering data
and request a formal annual review by DNR.
19. The applicant shall prepare, in report form, their plan for opera-
tion. If approved, this plan for operation can be adopted as the
Mining Permit.
20. Annual review be conducted on or about February 1, and any infor-
mation to be used in that review should be made available through
staff on or about December 1st.
Discussion ensued regarding the procedure for the review and the input of the
City and the applicant.
Motion carried unanimously.
Czaja/Schmitt moved for a five minute recess at 10:33 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chrm. Stoltzman called the meeting back to order at 10:40 p.m.
5nakopee Planning commission
January 24, 1985
Page 5
DISCUSSION - UPDATE ON DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS
The City Planner reviewed the zoning changes, performance standards and other
amendments made in 1984.
The Comm. Develop. Dir, informed the Commissioners of the latest information
from the Downtown Committee, City Council and Mn/DOT regarding the 169/101
junction and its affects on downtown development. She also related informa-
tion relative to the Fiwy. 101 by-pass and the CR18 bridge.
Comm. Schmitt suggested re-designating as Hwy. 169 from the truck stop at the
west end of town, through CR18 to #100 as Hwy. 169, in order to get funding
for the by-pass.
The City Planner pointed out various sites about which she has received in-
quiries and she thinks development may be imminent. She said she has had some
inquiries about re-zoning.
Schmitt/Lane moved to direct the City Planner to strongly discourage any
re-zoning activities which seek to change the commercial zoning along CR17
and the by-pass, as it will be the important interchange for the City.
Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion followed regarding some of the proposed zoning and projects.
Mr. Tim Keane, representing Scottland, said that Scottland and the racetrack
are in the process of re-thinking the entire land scheme in the industrial
park, and will be keeping in close contact with the City staff.
Comm. Koehnen announced that tonight is her last meeting as a Commissioner,
and she will be submitting her resignation formally.
VanMaldeghem/Czaja moved to adjourn at 10:37 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Judi Simac
City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
tr r'^nrt�s
P Arc ho n:
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 7, 1985
Chrm. Stoltzman called the meeting to order at 7: 35 p.m. with Comm. Czaja,
Lane, VanMaldeghem, Schmitt and Rockne present. Also present were Judi
Simac, City Planner; John K. Anderson, City Admr. and Cncl. Lebens.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to defer the election of officers until later
in the evening. Motion carried unanimously.
Czaja/Lane moved to approve the minutes of January 10, 1985 as kept.
Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNER'S DECISION RE STORAGE AREA
Schmitt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing regarding the consideration
of the Planner's decision that Les Koehnen cannot use property at 981 Bluff
Avenue as a storage area for impounded vehicles. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner went over the considerations for her decision. She has
interpreted the proposed use as an intensification of a non-conforming use,
which is specifically prohibited in the code.
The City Planner noted a letter from William Butler, a property owner on
the east side of the body shop in opposition to the intensification of the
use.
The City Planner further explained that this storage is intended to be
used for the storage of impounded vehicles which must be retained a mini-
mum of 30 days, within a fenced-in area. Since there are seldom any cars
within this fenced in area now, a towing contract with the City would in-
crease the number of cars stored there, which intensifies the use.
Mr. Koehnen stated that the place needed a lot of cleaning up, which he
has done by hauling out some of the junkers, but there is still some work
to be done. He commented that Mr. Butler didn't own the property next door.
Mr. Koehnen said he does own this property for which he is applying for
storage.
The City Planner said the file contains previous photographs which show
the fenced in area practically deserted. She would appreciate any sugges-
tions for a determination of how many vehicles were customarily stored.
Comm. Rockne commented that he remembers the area being pretty full. Dis-
cussion followed regarding the type of fencing, number of cars to be ex-
pected for storage, length of time to be stored and size of the lot.
Chrm. Stoltzman asked if there were any comments from the audience, and
there was no response.
BOAA
February 7, 1985
Page 2
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schmitt/Czaja offered Appeal Resolution No. 388 affirming the decision of
the City Planner that said appeallant may not use the property at 981
Bluff Avenue as a storage area for impounded vehicles. Motion carried
unanimausly.
Comm. Schmitt explained there is a 7 day appeal period, and said the de-
cision was based on the intensification of the use. He suggested if the
applicant could prove he would only store 6 or so vehicles which would not
be more than was stored previously, that could change the determination
of the intensification of the use. The City Admr. added that the City
Council meets next on February 19, 1985, and the applicant could make a
presentation at that time on the issues raised.
PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNER'S DECISION REGARDING INCREASE IN DWELLING UNITS
VanMaldeghem/Czaja moved to open the public hearing regarding the City
Planner's decision that appellant, Wayne Stockman, cannot increase the
number of dwelling units of a non-conforming multiple dwelling located
in the R-2 district. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner explained her interpretation that this building is a
non-conforming use and therefore is not allowed to increase the number
of dwelling units or bulk of the building. She said the appellant's con-
tractor applied for a building permit, but then started construction with-
out a permit being issued.
Mr. Stockman responded that because of the presence of three buildings in
the immediate area, a reasonable person would conclude the area was zoned
higher than R-2. He has contacted a lot of the neighbors, who thought it
was zoned higher. He mentioned the construction that was allowed in that
zone to increase the multiple dwellings. He said he acted in good faith
when he said all permits would be obtained. He said that 8 of his 11 units
have only one person in them, so the density is not high. He has never
had any children or pets, and has owned the property for 12 years. He said
the neighbors support it. He said with the cost of taxes, he cannot afford
to have unused space, which is why he is converting this space into an
efficiency apartment. He stated he rents only to adults and he has a wait-
ing list of people wanting to get in there. To his knowledge there is no
one objecting to the building, and he does not feel he is distracting from
the neighborhood.
Discussion followed regarding the building permit process and approvals
required. Leroy Houser, Building Official, stated he did a site inspec-
tion and there was an electrical inspector out there.
The contractor said he has worked in a lot of communities for 8 years, but
has not applied for a permit in Shakopee before. He said there was an
electrical inspection. He was under the impression that the permit was
approved.
BOAA
February 7, 1985
Page 3 2, 3
The Building Official responded that when the building permit is applied
for the contractor receives a document which specifically states the se-
parate permits that are required. The contractor signed that document,
but no permit has been issued. The situation is that the contractor started
the project before he got the permit. He only went out on a pre-inspec-
tion to inform the contractor on what is necessary to get started. The
contractor replied that the permit was stamped approved right in front of
him and signed and he was told to call in for the necessary inspections,
which he did. The Building Official asked how he could assume he had a
permit when he hadn't paid for it.
Mr. Stockman interjected that he isn't here to assign blame, but to do what
is necessary to make it right. He believes his apartment complex is a
benefit for the city and he can't see why the permit should not be issued.
Discussion followed regarding the specific language of the code regarding
intensification of use for non-conforming uses, and the fact that the code
does not permit a use variance. Comm. Schmitt added that he lives in the
neighborhood of this building and the property is well maintained and not
a nuisance.
Mr. Stockman stated it seems inconsistent for the City to stick by the code
now, when three times in the past it has issued permits for construction
of multiple dwellings in that zone. Comm. Schmitt replied that the only
issue before the Board is whether or not they can allow the expansion of
a non-conforming use. The applicant's request should be for re-zoning,
which is the only alternative. Mr. Stockman replied that they are 50%
complete and have damages.
Chrm. Stoltzman asked for comments from the audience, and there was no
response.
Czaja/VanMaldeghem moved to close the hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Czaja/Lane offered Appeal Resolution No. 389 affirming the decision of
the City Planner that said appellant may not increase the number of dwell-
ing units of a non-conforming multiple dwelling located in the R-2 district.
Motion carried unanimously.
Chrm. Stoltzman informed the appellant of the 7 day appeal period to City
Council.
OTHER BUSINESS
The City Planner informed the Board that the representative of Pizza Huts
was told he could address the Board tonight, but he is not present. She
said Pizza Huts has submitted a building permit application which shows an
expansion of the building which meets the 50 foot setback, but still does
not meet the parking requirements.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to adjourn to 10:00 p.m. tonight or the close of the
Planning Commission meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 8:34 p.m.
February 7, 1985 `
Page 4
Schmitt/Rockne moved to re-convene for the purpose of the election of offi-
cers at 11:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
VanMaldeghem/Rockne moved to cast a unanimous ballot for Comm. Czaja for
Chairman of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion carried unanimously.
VanMaldeghem moved to cast a unanimous ballot for Comm. Stoltzman for Vice-
Chair of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to adjourn at 11:47 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Judi Simac
City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
S
PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 7, 1985
Chrm. Stoltzman called the meeting to order at 8:40 p.m. with Comm. Czaja,
VanMaldeghem, Schmitt, Rockne and Lane present. Also present were Judi
Simac, City Planner; John K. Anderson, City Admr. ; and Cncl. Lebens.
PUBLIC HEARING - SCOTT CO. LUMBER & NOTERMAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Czaja/Schmitt moved to re-open the public hearing regarding the applica-
tion by Scott County Lumber Co. and Bert Noterman for a conditional use
permit to remove sand and gravel aggregate. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said she is requesting the continuance of this public
hearing because the EAW has not been prepared because the applicant doesn't
have all his materials submitted.
Schmitt/Lane moved to continue the public hearing to March 7, 1985. Motion
carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - DELLA'S FIRST ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to re-open the public hearing regarding the
preliminary plat of Della's First Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said she just tonight received a letter from the developer
requesting to withdraw Outlot A and Lot 1 from the preliminary plat applica-
tion, stating it will be platted at a later date. Outlot A is unbuildable
and Lot 1 already has an existing home on it. She said the Engineering
Dept. hasn't reviewed this, but she wouldn't expect any problem with the
request. She recommended approval with conditions.
Chrm. Stoltzman asked for comments from the audience, and there were none.
Lane/Czaja moved to recommend to City Council approval of the Preliminary
Plat of Della's First Addition, with the following conditions:
1. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
2. A variance is hereby granted from the requirement to
provide twenty feet of screening where Austin Circle
abuts Lots 16 , 17 , Block 5 JEJ Addition for the reason
that the variance shall not be detrimental to the public
safety, health or welfare or injurious to other property
in the neighborhood.
3 . Execution of a Developer ' s Agreement for the construction
of the required improvements :
a. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with
the requirements of the SPUC Utilities Manager.
b. Water system to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPDC Utilities Manager.
rlanning Commission
February 7, 1985
Page 2
C. Sanitary sewer and storm water system to be installed in
accordance with the requirements of the City Design Criteria
and Standard Specifications.
d. Streets and street signs shall be constructed in accordance
with the requirements of the City Design Criteria and Standard
Specifications.
e. The developer shall agree to the City Engineer's method of
apportioning the installments remaining unpaid against the
plat and that the developer waives his right to appeal the
apportionment.
f. Outlot B shall be dedicated park land for use as a walkway.
4. The developer shall provide all street signs.
5. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating that not
more than one lot shall be developed for a twin home.
6. The City Engineer must receive and approve final plans and specifi-
cations for all public facilities, including but not limited to,
roads, sanitary sewer system, storm sewer, drainage, grading, etc.
7. Construction plans approved and filed with the City Engineer prior
to recording the plat.
8. No parking allowed on either side of Austin Circle.
9. Retaining walls shall be used where necessary to maintain the slope
of the lot in conformance with slope requirements as defined by
ordinance.
10. Lot 1 and Outlot A be removed from the plat as requested by the
developer.
11. This approval be returned to the Planning Commission if review by
the City Engineer finds the removal of Lot 1 and Outlot A affect
the overall drainage of the parcel.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner clarified for the developer the difference between the
preliminary and final plats, and stated the final plat will have to come
back to Planning Commission and City Council.
Comm. Lane noted that Outlot B should be designated as Outlot A in the final.
PUBLIC HEARING - B-3 DISTRICT CODE AMENDMENT
Schmitt/Czaja moved to re-open the public hearing regarding the proposed
amendment to the City Code, Section 11.22 and 11.29 which will change the
boundaries of the B-3 zone and amend the text of the B-3 district in order
to further implement the Downtown Revitalization Project. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Planner requested the closing of this public hearing because the
proposed ordinance is not yet ready for final consideration. She explained
the process for review with special public hearings to be held later.
VanMaldeghem/Czaja moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Schmitt/Lane moved to recommend to the City Council that the proposed B-3
amendment should be considered wholly, with individual notices sent to
affected landowners, with a special public hearing reset at staff discretion
when the ordinance is adequately prepared. Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
February 7, 1985
Page 3 �C`
PUBLIC HEARING - BED AND BREAKFAST INNS AS CONDITIONAL USE
Czaja/VanMaldeghem moved to 0
amendment to classify Bed andpBreakfasten the bInnslic hasranconditional use in
R-2, g regarding the proposed
R-3, R-4, B-1 and B-3 Districts. Motion carried unanimously. the
The City Planner went over the criteria she suggests
be
ordinance amendment, along with the conditional use app ov included in the
al. Sheno other city in Minnesota specifically addresses Bed and BreakfastsInns,that
but these are guidelines based on other ordinances across the country.
Discussion followed about whether a requirement that a house be a certain
age or have historical significance was necessary
about requiring a certain amount of space between.each 1Inn ssoothatsa ensued
cular neighborhood is not inundated by Inns, to protect the residentiapa
lrti-
quality of the area. 500 feet or 350 feet was su
was not more than one to a block. Discussion contd
inuedregardinguthetcri-
teria of how many guests, what type
f
the Inns should be allowed in alltheproposedszoningudistricts.ts she and if
Chrm. Stoltzman asked if there were any comments from the audience.
Bob Vierling asked about the zoning at 5th and Sommerville where a cement
business is located and also an area in his block which is spot zoned. He
said this proposed use is much better than those others which are allowed.
Some of the aspects of home occupations were explained to Mr. Vierling,
and the City Planner said she would check the location of 5th and Sommerville
for possible violation of zoning. Mr. Vierling said the town is growing and
it is growing south, so allowance should be made for that growth.
Jack Coller said he is present as a private citizen and interested taxpa er
partly in reference to this hearing and partly the next scheduled y
hearing of the actual application for a public
He stated the R-2 is the largestresidentialtclassification ined andetheaCity,
which
covers a lot of territory and a wide variety of homes, valuations and density.
He thinks that by opening up the entire R-2 to a commercial use is under-
mining the protection of this zone and taking away the -security against com-
mercial intrusion. He believes that once there is a break-through, it will
be expanded. There will come a time when a lot of R-2 and R-3 will be com-
mercial, but that is a question of orderly growth, not spot zoning. He
thinks the R-2 should be eliminated from this proposed change in the zoning
ordinance.
Bob Vierling responded that Block 50 was spot zoning
Mr. Colle
helped to open that up. Mr. Coller replied that hedid nnotedohinks that re-zoning•
Further discussion followed regarding the advisability of Bed and Breakfast
Inns in the R-2 zone. Julie McNearney said the criteria of an Inn being of
historical significance limits the number of homes suitable. Cncl. Lebens
added that some of the Councilpersons don't feel the Inns are appropriate
in the R-2 zoning.
Schmitt/Czaja moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
February 7, 1985
Page 4
Schmitt/Lane moved to recommend to City Council that the zoning ordinance
be amended to allow Bed and Breakfast Inns as a conditional use in the R-2,
R-3, R-4, B-1 and B-3 zoning districts, subject to the following criteria:
1. In the R-2, R-3 and R-4 District the owner or operator shall
reside upon the property or shall submit a Management Plan for
approval by the Planning Commission, for the operation of the
facility.
2. The establishment must comply with State Health and Building
Code requirements.
3. Only guests shall be served.
4. The facility shall be limited to five guest rooms or a maximum
guest capacity of 10
5. The building must be at least 75 years old.
6. Guest stay shall be limited to thirty (30) days.
7. Off street parking shall be provided in accordance with the
parking requirements of the zoning ordinance . A minimum of one
space per guest room and one space for the operator shall be
required.
8. Signage shall be in accordance with the sign ordinance.
9. In the R-2 zone, a minumum spacing of 350 feet radius between
Inns shall be required.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner stated this recommendation will be heard by City Council
on February 19, 1985.
PUBLIC HEARING - LYNCH, MCNEARNEY, SPAGNOLO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
VanMaldeghem/Rockne moved to open the public hearing regarding the applica-
tion by J. Lynch, J. McNearney and M. Spagnolo for a conditional use permit
to establish a Bed and Breakfast facility at 134 4th Avenue. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Planner noted there is a letter from Robert Vierling in support of
the permit application. She said the applicants have submitted a Management
Plan for the facility. The City Engineer has reviewed the parcel and did
not require a drainage plan. She stated the City has no guidelines for the
Management Plan, and the Commissioners may want to request more information.
She said the intent of the Management Plan is to provide some assurance that
the facility will be adequately maintained and operated, since it is not
owner-resident. Chrm. Stoltzman mentioned that he visited two Bed and Break-
fast Inns in Stillwater, neither of which were owner-resident. The City Admr.
added the City has in the past required management plans to address concerns.
J. Lynch stated that one of the owners or a designated person will be sleeping
at the facility each night, and they have a back-up call schedule in case
of emergencies.
Discussion followed regarding screening around the parking area to protect
the neighbor to the south, with the possibility of moving the drive-way to
accomplish this. Ms. Spagnolo responded that there could be some screening
along the alley as there is plenty of room for a fence or shrubbery Ms.
McNearney added that Lewis between 4th and 5th is filled with cars.
Chrm. Stoltzman asked for comments from the audience.
Shakopee Planning Commission
February 7, 1985
Page 5
Jack Coller stated that his presentation made in opposition of the request
for re-zoning to allow this Bed and Breakfast Inn could be repeated in
Opposition to this conditional use permit for a Bed and Breakfast Inn.
He stated this action tonight involves re-zoning procedures and includes
granting variances for special or non-conforming use. He said the power of
the City to regulate is a statutory power given by the State of Minnesota,
and those procedures outlined must be followed. He stated the most compre-
hensive review of the statutory provision is in a case about 3 years ago;
to wit, Hahn vs. City of Coon Rapids, a Supreme Court case. He said the
standard of review of re-zoning matters is whether the classification is
reasonably related to the promotion of public health, safety, morals and
general welfare. He doesn't believe any of those things have been addressed
tonight. He said the original classification of a property when made in a
zoning ordinance is presumed to be well planned and intended to be more or
less permanent and the burden is on the party seeking to re-zone for some
other purpose to show either there was some mistake in the original zoning
or that the character of the neighborhood has changed to such an extent
since the property was zoned that no reasonable use can be made to the pro-
perty in the current zoning classification. Therefore, the burden is on the
applicant to show that the house in question could not be reasonably used
for anything else in its present circumstances, as a single dwelling or a
duplex, and that it has to be entirely different. He feels the showing made
here is merely that it is something that the applicants want to do, and may
or may not help the general welfare. He summarized that if the Planning
Commission recommends to City Council that they proceed and modify the zoning
ordinance and grant this special use at the present time and on the present
showing, they are sending an invitation to the City Council to violate the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
Discussion followed regarding whether this argument should be against this
application for a conditional use or the previous hearing which recommended
establishing this use as a valid use. Mr. Coller said the attack is against
both actions.
The City Admr. suggested directing staff to seek a legal opinion from the
Assistant City Attorney regarding Mr. Coller's argument against the previous
action of recommending a change in the zoning ordinance, and a decision can
still be made on this public hearing. Further discussion ensued.
Ms. Spagnolo asked Mr. Coller about his statement after the City Council
discussion that he was not in opposition now that it won't be re-zoned, and
he has no problem with a conditional use. She said when Mr. Coller requested
them to move the garage and they refused, then he was op
osed Mr. Coller responded that he suggested they meet to talk about ttheiro itaplans,
but basically he was still opposed to it.
Mr. Vierling asked about the spot zoning of Dr. Miles property. Comm. Schmitt
replied that generally hospitals and clinics are permitted uses in R-3 zones.
Chrm. Stoltzman asked if there were any more comments from the audience, and
there was no response.
Shakopee Planning Commission
February 7, 1985
Page 6
Schmitt/Rockne moved to table this public hearing for a period of ten minutes
or until such time as they are able to act on the previous agenda item.
Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Lane moved to direct staff to seek advise from legal counsel rela-
tive to whether or not the City has satisfied the conditions necessary to
add a conditional use to zoning districts. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to re-open the public hearing on the application for
a Bed and Breakfast Inn at 134 4th Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
Chrm. Stoltzman asked for any discussion, and there was no response.
Schmitt/Lane moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 390 subject to
the following conditions:
1. That it is an approved conditional use based on the City Council's
adoption of a proposed change in the ordinance.
2. Compliance with all applicable building and health codes.
3. Submittal of a Management Plan to be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission prior to opening of the facility.
4. The parking area shall be paved and natural screening, not less
than 3.5 feet in height, shall be provided on the south side of
the parking area.
5. Outdoor lighting shall be directed away from residences and
street right-of-way.
6. Refuse storage shall be contained within a structure or screened
from adjacent residential uses.
7. An owner or designee shall be on the site whenever guests are
present.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner said this will be heard by City Council February 19, 1985.
Chrm. Stoltzman temporarily left the room, and passed the gavel to Vice-
Chair Czaja.
PUBLIC HEARING - SHIELY CO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Rockne/VanMaldeghem moved to open the public hearing regarding the request
by J. L. Shiely Co. for a conditional use permit to construct a mill build-
ing of which a portion will exceed the 45 foot height limit by 45 feet.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner went over the background and considerations of the request
and stated that staff recommends approval with a condition regarding drainage.
Chrm. Stoltzman took back the gavel.
Comm. Czaja asked about top lighting for aircraft warning. Mr. Stark, of
Shiely Co. , didn't know if it was required, but stated they would be glad
to add a light if it is required. He added they would have no problem with
a requirement that they remove the structure when its use is exhausted, as
they frequently do that in other communities.
..unuulssion
February 7, 1985
Page 7 L
� T
Chrm. Stoltzman asked for comments from the audience, and there was no res onse
P
VanMaldeghem/Czaja moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Czaja/VanMaldeghem moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution No.
391 to approve a 45 foot increase over the 45 foot maximum height limit,
subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant submits a drainage report, prepared in accordance
with the City standards, if additional impervious cover occurs.
2. Minimum safety lighting at the top of the structure due to the
presence of aircraft in the area.
3. Removal of the structure when the need for it is exhausted or
the mining operation has ceased, whichever occurs first.
Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - HAUER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
VanMaldeghem/Czaja moved to open the public hearing regarding the request
by James J. Hauer for a conditional use permit to move in a single family
home at 400 block of 2nd Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner showed pictures of the existing home on the lot, the home
which will be moved in and the garage. She went over the considerations
and recommended approval with conditions.
Linda Good, 409 Second Avenue, said that area is historic, and 3 of the
homes across the street are on the National Historic Record. She is con-
cerned that the house being moved in is compatible with the area, and just
want to go on record as preservationists.
Comm. Schmitt suggested the bond required be equal to the amount necessary
to bring the house up to code. Mr. Hauser said if all goes well, he could
be setting the foundation in 30 days.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
VanMaldeghem/Lane offered Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 392, allow-
ing a house to be moved onto Lot 8, Block 27, Shakopee plat, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall show proof of ownership of the lot prior
to issuance of a Building Permit and moving of the structure.
2. The dwelling unit must meet all of the requirements of the
Building Code within six months after it is moved.
3. The accessory building must meet all of the requirements of
the Building Code within three months after it is moved.
4. A performance Bond shall be required in an amount set by the
Building Official, equal to the amount required to bring the
house up to code.
5. All setback requirements of the R-3 Zone must be met.
6. Sanitary sewer connection must be made to a public facility.
Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - PROPOSED AUTO BODY SHOP IN I-1
The City Planner went over the background of this inquiry from Mr. Thomas
to relocate his auto repair shop to a facility zoned I-l. She disagrees
Shakopee Planning Commission
February 7, 1985
Page 8
with Mr. Thomas' interpretation that his facility is wholesale, as she was
told they would do some retail work.
Mr. Thomas showed a list of the accounts they do business with, and said
commercial accounts are 75%-80%, with 10%-15% from insurance and the remain-
ing small amount from personal referrals. He said they would not be doing
any advertising for retail business. He said this move would be an enlarge-
ment for him, from 10 stalls to probably 24.
Comm. Schmitt commented that the only place where an auto repair service
is a permitted use is in B-1, which is where Mr. Thomas is presently located.
Further discussion followed regarding the exact nature of Mr. Thomas'
business and if there is a difference between reconditioning and repair,
because auto repair, whether wholesale or retail, is only permitted in the
B-1. He suggested he and his attorney continue working with staff to come
up with a definition that supports something other than repair work to try
to get around that provision in the ordinance.
Cncl. Lebens left at 11:23 p.m.
Czaja/VanMaldeghem moved to refer back to staff the discussion of moving
an auto repair facility out of a B-1 zone, to respond to the applicant's
further attempts for a definition that is allowed in another zone. Motion
carried unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL
The City Planner said Shiely is preparing an application for a Mining Permit
in a booklet form to be submitted to City Council on February 19, 1985.
ELECTIONS
The City Planner took the gavel and called for nominations for the Chair
of Planning Commission.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to nominate Comm. Czaja for Chairman of Planning Com-
mission.
Lane/Stoltzman moved to nominate Comm. Schmitt for Chairman.
Czaja/Schmitt moved to close nominations. Motion carried unanimously.
Comm. Czaja was elected Chairman of Planning Commission by a vote of 3 to
2, with Comm. Rockne, VanMaldeghem and Schmitt in favor of Czaja and Lane
ans Stoltzman in favor of Comm. Schmitt.
The gavel was passed to Chrm. Czaja, who called for nominations for Vice-Chair.
VanMaldeghem/Rockne moved to nominate Comm. Stoltzman as Vice-Chair.
Rockne/VanMaldeghem moved that nominations be closed. Motion carried
unanimously.
Comm. Stoltzman was elected unanimously as Vice-Chair.
Shakopee Planning Commission
February 7, 1985
Page 9 �
OTHER BUSINESS
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to approve the minutes of January 10, 1985 as
kept. Motion carried with Comm. Czaja abstaining because he left early.
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to direct staff to send a letter to Beverly
Koehnen expressing appreciation for her service. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to adopt the 1984 Annual Report and forward it to the
City Council. Motion carried with Comm. VanMaldeghem and Lane abstaining.
Chrm. Czaja said he is interested in getting a status report from the
racetrack so he can answer people's questions about its progress.
Lane/Stoltzman moved to direct staff to request from the racetrack an up-
dated status report. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Admr. said the construction is on schedule and they plan to open
June 29, 1985.
Discussion followed regarding the seating arrangement of Commissioners in
view of the smokers and non-smokers.
Schmitt/Stoltzman moved to adjourn at 11:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Judi Simac
City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
MARCH 1985 5
MIDAY fIONDAY TUESDAY 'NEDUESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY
1 2
3 Public 4 City Downtown 6 Planning
Utilities Council/HRA 7:30 a.m. Cormnission
4:30 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 1:30 p.m.
10 11 12 Downtown 13 14 15 16
7:00 a.m.
Police 4:00 p.m.
ICC 5:00 p.m.
17 Community 18 City 19 20 Energy & 21 22 23
Services Council Transportation
7:30 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 7:30 p.m.
Fire Dept.
8:00 p.m.
24 Cable 25 26 27 29 30
Advisory
7:30 p.m.
31
� 7
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379.1376 (612) 445-3650
fr
March 6 , 1985
Mr. Ray Eliot , Chairman
Minnesota Racing Commission
312 Central Avenue
Suite 400
Minneapolis , MN 55414
Re : Canterbury Downs - Admission Tax Application
Dear Chairman Eliot:
As you may know M. S. 240 . 15 Subd. 1 ( b) provides for a local
admissions tax at licensed race tracks. We informed your staff
several months ago that the City would be seeking approval of
a 10 cents admission tax . We have received notice from Richard
Evans , the Executive Secretary of the Racing Commission , that
he would like to have our application filed before April 8 ,
1985 .
Our initial analysis of the impact of the Racetrack on
municipal services began in 1983 when the City was evaluating
its role in promoting the successful Shakopee application now
known as Canterbury Downs. That initial investigation included
calls to racetrack communities around the Country by me and
our Chief of Police. We learned at that time that there would
be a definate impact on police and traffic related municipal
services . We also learned , that because of Shakopee ' s size
which is approximately 11 , 000 population , we would be unique
among racing communities in the Country since nearly all of
them were much larger or were communities that contracted for
police services from larger county agencies. The Shakopee Police
Department has fourteen licensed officers .
The list of municipal services provided below reflects
Shakopee ' s forecast of service needs for the Racetrack_ that
cannot be attributed to a typical new business or industry.
We have prepared the list with the assumption that the typical
service needs of a new business or industry are roughly comparable
in expense to the revenues generated by the new business ' s property
tax contribution , and that what the Commission will be looking
for , and the law M. S . 240 . 15 Subd . 1 ( b ) requires , are those
service costs that can be defined as extraordinary and sometimes
referred to as municipal overburden.
The Heart of Progress Valley
1511-1A I n-011 ,•m 11-
Mr. Ray Eliot
Page Two
March 6 , 1985
Shakopee has met the service requirements of other major
regional recreational facilities like Valleyfair extremely well .
Part of our ability to meet their service demands is reflected
in a separate contract with Valleyfair to help finance municipal
overburden. When Shakopee wholeheartedly endorsed the Canterbury
Downs site, we fully expected to duplicate this supplemental
revenue source for municipal overburden through the 10 cents
admission tax as is provided in the Statutes.
In keeping with Minnesota Statute 420 . 15 , Subd . 1 ( b) , ( 1984) ,
the City has outlined below the specific expenses we expect
to incur in providing municipal services for Canterbury Downs:
Police Services
Increase the Department by 2 full time licensed officers at
a cost of $60 , 000 per year. Shakopee ' s Chief of Police has
requested two additional officers for the past four years .
Due to the two economic recessions in our State and the State
of Minnesota ' s cutback in local government aid those requests
were not honored . With the advent of the Racetrack we feel
it is necessary to fill these positions to provide two man coverage
24 hours a day. Therefore , the City increased its budget by
one officer when passing the 1985 budget last fall and the City
has now initiated the hiring of the one officer through the
Minnesota Police Recruitment Program. One additional officer
will be hired in 1986 .
While the Commission may correctly observe that these two
employees might not be spending all of their shift covering
the Racetrack, other Police Department employees will be refocusing
a major part of their time on the Racetrack in training Racetrack
employees as reserve traffic officers and dealing with increased
case reports flowing out of the Racetrack. Finally we expect
that these investigations will be more time consuming and will
require significant interaction with the BCA.
Public Works Services
The City plans to fill one vacant Public Works slot which was
vacated through attrition and held vacant during the last two
years because of the reasons mentioned above. The position ' s
cost will be $20 ,000 per year. Again , as stated above , this
one individual would not be assigned solely to the Racetrack
but will be scheduled with our normal crews to provide regular
street maintenance services such as street sweeping, traffic
sign maintenance , shoulder maintenance on rural sections , ditch
maintenance such as mowing , and seal coating every five years.
� 7
Mr. Ray Eliot
Page Three
March 6 , 1985
In addition , we anticipate a much higher level of road side
litter maintenance simply because of the desires of the State ,
Canterbury Downs and the City to keep the major entrances to
the Racetrack looking nice. We believe it will take two part
time summer people to keep the roadways in and around the track
litter free. We estimate this cost at $6 , 000 for two students
for three months .
Engineering Services
We anticipate ongoing drainage system monitoring and maintenance
will cost us $2 , 000 per year because of their unique surface
water management plan that must function to meet the condition
of the E. I. S. and Indirect Source Permit. That road reconstruction
costs based on a ten year overlay cycle and a twenty year recon-
struction cycle will cost $10 , 000 per year for 1 . 9 miles of
new roadway . We anticipate that railroad crossing and traffic
intersection signalization maintenance will cost us $1 , 000 per
year.
Inspection Services
We expect that building , plumbing , electrical and sprinkler
system inspection services will cost $3 ,000 to $5 , 000 per year
for renewal of certificate of occupancy permits . This does
not include any inspection services expense for proposed expansion
which should be covered by the normal building permit fees .
Community Development/Land Use Planning Services
The City has established an annual review process for the Conditional
Use Permits issued to the Racetrack . This annual review is
estimated to cost $100.00 per year. Other miscellaneous community
development and planning costs are estimated at $ 100 . 00 per
year.
Transit Services
The City estimates that the local transit subsidy required to
service intra-city transit trips will be $5 ,000. This is based
on an average dial-a-ride transit subsidy of $5.00 per passenger
times 1 ,000 passenger trips per year. The City estimates that
the inter-city transit expenses will be minimized with Canterbury
Downs promoted subscription service , charter bus service and
possibility special MTC express service similar to that serving
the Metro Dome and the Zoo. Shakopee estimates that its inter-city
van pool service will serve 20 , 000 passenger trips per year
at a subsidy of $1 .00 per passenger trip. This is 50 employees
times 2 work trips times 200 working days . At a subsidy of
.50 per trip (the present MTC subsidy is approximately $1 . 50
per trip) this will be a cost of $10 , 000 per year. These inter-city
van pool trips serve employees and not the admission paying
Mr. Ray Eliot
Page Four
March 6 , 1985
public coming to the races via the other transportation alternatives
mentioned above. These transit services will serve employees
from Minneapolis and St. Paul who cannot afford automobiles.
Recreational Services
The City has had a difficult time estimating the impact on recrea-
tional services. It is clear that some of our facilities like
Memorial Park lying on Highway 101 with superb picnic and restroom
facilities will be heavily used by those attending the Racetrack.
Much of this use should be covered under Public Works services
mentioned above. The impact on recreational services and adult
educational services is best estimated by taking a per capita
cost and projecting it. The current per capita cost for the
City of Shakopee is $38 , 855 or $3 . 53 per capita . Presuming
an employment increase of 1500 people (note we understand that
all these people will not live in Shakopee but that is balanced
by the spin-off business created, a portion of those employees
will live in Shakopee) is $5 ,295 per year.
Municipal Enterprise Services ( Elec .ricial , -Sewer, Water and
Street Ligh ina
All of these enterprise funds are well established and are designed
to pay for themselves. The one expection is street lighting
and the City estimates that the Racetrack will require a light
every 200 feet on approximately two miles of roadways leading
into the Racetrack. This is 26 poles times $1 , 500 per pole
and $500 per fixture or $52 ,000 for installation. Based upon
20 years straight line depreciation this is $2, 600 per year.
The annual operating costs are estimated at 26 fixtures or 29 ,0140
killowatt hours at 05 per killowatt hour for a annual energy
operating expense of $1 ,1452.00 per year.
Fire Department Services
The City plans to upgrade one 1 ,500 gallon pumper at a cost
of $220 , 000 . If this vehicle is depreciated on a simple 20
year straight line depreciation schedule it will cost us $11 ,000
per year. Other than this upgrading of one pumper , the City
does not anticipate upgrading or modifying any other Fire Department
equipment based on the impact of the Racetrack.
Chamber of Commerce/Administration ( General ener^1 Informational Inquiries)
The City currently subsidizes the Chamber of Commerce through
the provision of free rental space and free utilities. In addition
the City employs the same secretary staff used by the Chamber
one day per week so that the Chamber can attract more capable
staff by having a full time secretarial position. We anticipate
that this individual and the secretary handling incoming calls
at City Hall will see a significant increase in Racetrack related
� 7
Mr. Ray Eliot
Page Five
March 6 , 1985
informational calls . We feel that these administrative costs
represent approximately $1 ,000 per year in additional services .
The total cost of the items listed above represents $140 ,547
per year. This local tabulation of expected costs is supported
by statistical facts provided in the "fiscal impact analysis"
manuals provided at the Public Affairs Library at the U of M.
On page the publication indicates that a racetrack with
an attendance of 1 ,000 ,000 patrons per year will cost the host
municipality $ per year in additional services.
If you have any questions regarding the City' s application
for 10 cents admission tax please contact me. The City is interested
in making its presentation of the formal application at your
March 15 , 1985 meeting. Please let me know when our application
is formally scheduled so that I can insure that the proper City
officials are present.
Attached is a letter of support from Canterbury Downs.
Sincerely,
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
JKA/jms
cc: Richard Evans ,
Executive Secretary
Bruce Malkerson ,
Canterbury Downs
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA MARCH 5 , 1985
Mayor Reinke presiding
1] Roll Call at 7 :00 P.M.
2] Res. No. 2374, A Resolution Approving First Addendum_ to the Second
Amended Contract for Private Development with Mn.. Racetrack, Inc .
3] Recess for HRA Meeting
41 Reconvene
51 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
6] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
71 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. )
#8] Approval of the Minutes of February 19, 1985
9] Communications:
a] James J . Bellus, City of Saint Paul Dep ' t. of Planning and
Economic Development re : Reagan Admr. proposed budget cuts
b] Robert F. Vierling re : alley improvements in Block 50, OSP
c] Robert F. Vierling re : actions of the City Attorney
d] Gary Laurent re : moving of foundation footing forms
e] Beverly J . Koehnen re : resignation from Planning Commission
101 Public Hearings: None
111 Boards and Commissions: None
121 Reports from Staff:
a] Application for $2 ,000,000 Commercial Development Revenue Bonds
For A Super 8 Motel Project (Res. Nos. 2376 & 2377)
mob] Amendment to Shakopee Community Access Corporation By-Laws
c] Gambling License Application by Nat ' l MS - Society, Mn. North
Star Chapter
d] Clerk Typist Resignation from Police Dept . (Res. No. 2379)
e] Advertise to Fill Public Works Position
f] Accounting Clerk Resignation
g] 1985 Council Worksession Goals and Objectives
h] 8 :00 P.M. - Amendment to Liquor, Beer and Wine License Ordinance
Ord. No. 160
i] Authorize Payment of the Bills in Amount of $198, 954. 47
TENTATIVE AGENDA
March 5 , 1985
Page -2-
12] Reports from Staff continued:
*j] Farm Lease for Southerly Bypass Property
k] Consulting Services for Downtown Bridge/Junction Improvements
*1] Purchase of Used Vehicle
*m] Richard' s Pub Violation
n] Appointment to Downtown Committee
o] Appointment to Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory Commission
p] Nominations to Fill Vacancy on Planning Commission
q] Discussion on Holmes Street Basin Laterals continued from
February 19th (bring item 9d)
13] Resolutions and Ordinances :
*a] Res. No . 2375 , Providing for the Recognition of Many
b] Res. No. 2380, Authorizing A Loan Application & Purchase of
Property in Accordance With MSA Chapter 473 (TH101 Bypass Propert
c] Res. No . 2381 , Requesting A Variance for 4th Avenue - on table
d] Res. No . 2382 , Establishing Mn. State Aid Highways
*e] Res. No. 2383 , Providing for The Destruction of Bonds & Coupons
*f] Res. No. 2378, Confirming Committment of Funds for Downtown Grant
14] Other Business:
a] We have been contacted by John Jackson of the Cannon Valley
Girl Scouts. They have accepted our $500 offer. We will now
have the title cleared for Lots 3 & 4, Block 52 , Shakopee City
b] Request by the Mayor to assist the City of Edina in their
nomination of C . Wayne Courtney, Mayor of Edina, for the C .C .
Ludwig Award ` n
c] P", , ) " U-OLL
d]
e]
15] Adjourn to Tuesday, March 19 , 1985 at 7 :00 P .M.
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Housing Authority in and for the City of Shakopee ,
Minnesota
Special Session March 5 , 19$5
Chairperson Vierling presiding
1 . Roll call at 7 : 00 P.M.
2 . Accept Special Meeting Call
3 . Approval of minutes of January 8th and February 5th, 1985 .
4 . Adopt Resolution No. 85-20 , A Resolution Approving a First
Addendum to the Second Amended Contract for Private Development
with Minnesota Racetrack, Inc .
5 . Adopt Resolution No . 85-21 , A Resolution of the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee ,
Scott County , Minnesota , Authorizing the Issuance of $14 , 200 , 000
Aggregate Principal Amount Tax increment Revenue Bonds
( Canterbury Downs Project) Dated as of March 1 , 1985 , and
Approving the Form and Authorizing the Execution of Necessary
Documents.
6 . Other Business
7 . Adjourn
Jeanne Andre
Executive Director
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ANNUAL MEETING SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 8, 1985
Chrm. Colligan called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. with Comm. Wampach,
Lebens, Leroux and Vierling present. Also present were HRA Director, Jeanne
Andre and City Admr. John K. Anderson.
Leroux/Lebens moved to accept the special call of the Chairman. Motion
carried unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the minutes of December 4, 1984 as kept and
acknowledge the notation that the December 11, 1984 meeting was not held due
to lack of business. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved to nominate Comm. Vierling for Chair of the HRA for 1985.
Leroux/Lebens moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be
cast for Comm. Vierling for Chair of HRA for 1985. Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Vierling moved to nominate Comm. Wampach for Vice-Chair of the HRA
for 1985.
Leroux/Colligan moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be
cast for Comm. Wampach for Vice-Chair of HRA for 1985. Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to nominate Comm. Lebens for Secretary of the HRA for
1985.
Vierling/Leroux moved that nominations be closed and a unanimous ballot be
cast for Comm. Lebens for Secretary of the HRA for 1985. Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved to place on file the Statements of Real Estate Interests
of each of the HRA Commissioners which are attached hereto and made a part
of these minutes. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting ad-
journed at 7:08 p.m.
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
interest in the following real
estate located within the corporate limits of the City of Shakopee :
Parcel No. 27-001256-0
Lots 4 , 5, 6 , Block 32
City of Shakopee
Parcel No. 27-001257-0
Lot 7 , Block 32
City of Shakopee
Parcel No. 27-001259-0
West 22 ' of 9 and East 15 ' of 10, Block 32
City of Shakopee
Parcel No. 27-001560-0
North 60 ' of Lots 4 and 5 , Block 73
City of Shakopee
Date: Signature:
-3
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 5, 1985
Chrm. Vierling called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. with Comm. Wampach,
Lebens, Colligan and Leroux present. Also present were John K. Anderson,
City Admr. ; Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney and Mayor Reinke.
Lebens/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of January 8, 1985 as kept.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Admr. requested if anyone was interested in attending the National
NAHRO workshop in San Antonio, Texas, they should contact the HRA Director.
The City Admr, said if a meeting is needed for the closing of the racetrack
bonds, a special meeting will be called.
Colligan/Wampach moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting ad-
journed at 7:06 p.m.
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
Tog Free Minnesota(800)862-6002
Tog Free Other States(apo)328.6122
Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
Northwestem Financial Center,7900 Xerxes Avenue South,Minneapolis,Minnesota 55431 • (612)831-1500
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor, City Council Members, City Administrator, HRA Director and
Finance Director - City of Shakopee
FROM: James R. Casserly
RE: $300,000 Additional Proceeds to M.R.I.
.DATE: February 13, 1985
Because of declining interest rates, M.R.I. has asked the City of Shakopee
to assist it by extending to M.R.I. an additional $300,000. Originally the
City was going to loan M.R.I. $3,000,000, but with the issuance of the
Series B Industrial Development Revenue Bonds, M.R.I. had projected earning
more than $3,000,000 in interest. The theory was good, of course, in
October of 1984; the reality is that declining interest rates and
placement fees have resulted in a net earnings profit to M.R.I. from the
Series bonds of under $2.5 million.
M.R.I. then asked if the City would increase the size of its Tax Increment
Revenue Bond so it could receive $3,300,000 instead of the previously
agreed $3,000,000. In exchange for the increased amount, M.R.I. would pay
administrative fees of the Series A Bonds, and, if necessary, on the Series
B Bonds.
For the City to assist M.R.I. with its request, four questions had to be
answered:
1. Is charging an administrative fee legal? The City's bond counsel has
concluded that the City may charge an administrative fee on both the
Series A and Series B Bonds with the following reservations: that the
maximum amount charged cannot exceed one eighth of one percent (1/8 of
1%) any year and the previously paid fee of $75,000 must be accounted
for. Furthermore, the fee can only be collected through 1994 since
starting in 1995 on the Series A Bonds, the City is entitled to the
one eighth of one percent (1/8 of 1%) by a previous agreement with
M.R.I.
2. Is there enough tax increment revenues to pay for an increased bond
issue? Our analysis demonstrates that there is more than enough tax
increment revenues. The revenues are now projected to be
approximately two and one-half times more than the debt service
Headquarters:Minneapolis,Minnesota
Branch Offices:Downtown Minneapolis•Solana Beach.Califomia•Santa Monica,California•Northbrook Illinois-St.Paul,Minnesota•Naples.Florida•Tallahassee,Pkinda•Carson City,Nevada
Page Two
coverage on an annual basis. Because the interest rate has declined
since November of 1984, and because we have now saved three months of
capitalized interest, the actual bond size will increase only $200,000
(from $4,000,000 to $4,200,000) and the City will be able to provide
an additional $300,000 (from $3,000,000 to $3,300,000) .
3. Will the already agreed upon security devices apply to the additional
amount? The guarantees apply to 25% of the total debt service and the
Letter of Credit covers one year's debt service. Both security
devices are applicable regardless of the size of the bond issue.
4. Can a repayment schedule be structured to cover the cost of issuance
and capitalized interest and yet stay within the legal requirements
for administrative fees? Attached you will find a repayment schedule.
The principal amount being repaid is $420,000 or 10% of the total bond
issue. The interest rate is 10% which will approximate the net
interest cost on the Tax Increment bonds. Payments are semi-annual
commencing 6-30-86 and terminating 12-31-94. The City will receive
administrative fees totalling $646,729 and will bond for $200,000 more
than it had originally anticipated.
We have structured the City's bond issue based on providing M.R.I. with
$3,300,000. We plan on marketing the bonds the Week of March 4, presenting
a final resolution to the Council on March 5, and closing the issue on
March 7. If there are any questions, please give me a call; if for any
reason I am not available, please contact Dick Graves or Pat Wooldridge.
cc: Wood Kidner
Rod Krass
Jim Lockhart
John Utley
Robert Pulscher
City of ShakoDee, Minnesota
Series-A Series-B Loan Payment
Admin. Fee Admin. Fee $3822,000
Date Revenue Revenue @ 10.253%
6/30/87 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/87 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
6/30/88 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/82 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
5/30/89 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/89 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
6/30/90 28.175@.@@ 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/90 28,750.0@ 6,815.18 35,565.18
6/3x/91 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/9' 28,750,0Q 6,815.18 35,565.18
6/30/92 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/92 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
6/.30/93 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/93 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
6/30/94 28,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
12/31/94 26,750.00 6,815.18 35,565.18
Totals 460,000.0x 109,042.88 569,042.88
Notes-,
t1) Annual Administrative Fee Revenue
Series-A : $46,000,000 @ .125% = $57,500.00
Series-B : $44,@N.,000 @ .125% = $55,000.00
(2) :oar Payment Assumotions
$382,00'x" ?rineiDaI Amount
10.253% Interest Rate (N.I.C. on Bonds)
_b iW amortization Periods
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
Series-A Series-B Loan Payment
Admin. Fee Admin. Fee $420, 000
Date Revenue Revenue @ 10. 00 %
6/30/86 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
12/31/86 26, 750. 00 --7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/87 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35 929. 41
12/31/87 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/88 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
12/31/88 28, 750. 00 71179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/89 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35 929. 41
i2/31/89 28, 730. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/90 26, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
12/31/90 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/91 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
12/31/91 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/92 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
12/31/92 28, 750. 00 79179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/93 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
12/31/93 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
6/30/94 28, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
12/31/94 26, 750. 00 7, 179. 41 35, 929. 41
---------- ------------- -------------
517, 500. 00
------------
517, 500. 00 129, 229. 38 646, 729. 38
Notes:
(1 ) Annual Administrative Fee Revenue
Series-A : $469000, 000 @ . 125% = $57, 500. 00
Ser i es-B : $44, 000, 00o Cr . 125% = $55, 000. 00
(2) The Administrative Fee Revenue from the Series-B
Issue necessary to meet the loan repayment amounts
to approximately 26. 10% of the total revenue
available.
f
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
COUNTY OF SCOTT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 85-20
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FIRST ADDENDUM TO THE
SECOND AMENDED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOP-
MENT WITH MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Commissioners (the "Commis-
sioners" ) of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority ( the
"Authority" ) in and for the City of Shakopee ( the "City" ) ,
as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1. 01. The Authority, the City and Minnesota Racetrack,
Inc. ( "MRI" ) have entered into a Second Amended Contract for
Private Development, dated as of November 20 , 1984 ( the
"Development Contract" ) , with respect to the acquisition and
construction within the City by MRI of a thoroughbred horse-
racing facility (the "Project") .
1. 02. As a result of revisions to the financing plan
for the Project, a First Addendum to the Development Con-
tract ( the "First Addendum" ) , revising certain provisions
thereof, has been proposed in the form attached hereto as
Exhibit A.
1. 03. The Commissioners have received and reviewed the
proposed First Addendum and are of the opinion that execu-
tion of the First Addendum will facilitate financing and
construction of the Project and is in the best interests of
the City and the Authority.
Section 2. Approval of First Addendum to Development
Contract.
-2. 01. The Authority hereby approves the execution of
the First Addendum in substantially the form attached
hereto, and directs the Chairman and the Executive Director
of the Authority to execute the First Addendum and such
other documents as shall be deemed necessary to effect the
intent of the First Addendum together with such necessary
and appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as
permitted or required or as the Chairman, in his discretion,
shall determine, and the execution thereof by the Chairman
shall be conclusive evidence of such determination.
ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE AUTHORITY ON MARCH
5, 1985 .
Chairman
ATTEST:
Executive Director
Approved as to form this
day of , 1985 .
City Attorney
2
41
{
FIRST ADDENDUM TO SECOND AMENDED
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
THIS ADDENDUM, made as of the 5th day of March, 1985, by
and among the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City" ) , the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota ( the "Authority") and Minnesota Race-
track, Inc. (the "Company" ) , and amending that certain
Second Amended Contract for Private Development, dated as of
November 20, 1984 ( the "Development Contract" ) , by and among
the City, the Authority and the Company;
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City, the Authority and the Company have
executed the Development Contract to provide, among other
things, for the acquisition of the Development Property (as
defined in the Development Contract) by the Authority and
reconveyance thereof by the Authority to the Company for a
reduced price as an inducement to the construction of a
horseracing facility by the Company on the Development Prop-
erty (all as further provided in the Development Contract) ;
and
WHEREAS, the City has also issued its . $90, 000,000 City
of Shakopee, Minnesota Sports Facility Revenue Bonds (Shako-
pee Racetrack Project) (the "Industrial .Development Bonds" )
to finance the acquisition, construction, expansion and
installation of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Development Contract provides for purchase
of the Development Property by the Authority pursuant to
Article III thereof for the sum of $3,000,000 ( the "Purchase
Price" ) upon fulfillment of certain conditions precedent by
the Company; and
WHEREAS, said Purchase Price was determined as appropri-
ate by the parties hereto based, in part, upon certain as-
sumptions concerning probable investment earnings on the
proceeds of the Industrial Development Bonds which have
proven to be incorrect ; and
WHEREAS, it is and has been the intention of the City
and the Authority throughout the negotiations with the Com-
pany as to the Development Contract ( including the first and
second amendments thereof) to provide to the Company tax
increment assistance adequate to provide the Company, in
conjunction with all other sources of construction financ-
ing, funds equal to the projected construction budget for
the first phase of the Project , and whereas it now appears
that construction financing available to the Company from
all sources will be at least $300 , 000 less than the pro-
jected construction budget ;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the
mutual obligations of the parties hereto and the covenants
of the parties made in the Development Contract , the parties
hereto agree as follows :
1 . Definitions . All capitalized terms used in this
Addendum and not defined herein shall have the meanings
given to such terms in Article I of the Development Con-
tract .
2 . Section 3 . 3( c) of the Development Contract shall be
and is hereby amended to provide as follows :
( c) Purchase Price. The Authority shall purchase
the Development Property from the Company for immedi-
ately available funds in the amount of the Purchase
Price in consideration of the covenants of the Company
to develop the Develcpment Property in accordance with
the provisions of this Agreement and the Redevelopment
Plan, and as an inducement to the Company to construct
the Minimum Improvements . The purchase and reconveyance
of the Development Property is intended to reduce the
cost of acquisition and improvement of the Development
Property to the Company. The Purchase Price shall be
payable in full by the Authority at closing . The Pur-
chase Price shall be calculated as follows. The Pur-
chase Price shall be the total of the costs of the
requisite Qualifying Improvements as certified in the
Certificate of Qualifying Improvements , up to a maximum
of $3 , 300 ,000 . In no event shall the Purchase Price to
be paid by the Authority exceed $3 , 300 , 000 . Therefore ,
if the certified cost of the Qualifying Improvements
shall be less than $3 , 300 , 000 , the Purchase Price shall
be such cost ; if the certified cost of the Qualifying
Improvements shall be equal to or greater than
$3, 300 , 000, the Purchase Price shall be the sum of
$3 , 3001000 .
3 . Section 2 . 3 (m) of the Development Contract shall be
and is hereby amended to provide as follows :
(m) The Company will pay to the City a one time
fee of $75 , 000 for issuance of the Series A Bonds and
the Series B Bonds , allocable $50 , 000 to the Series A
Bonds and $75 , 000 to ---he Series B Bonds .
2 -
4'
Additionally, prior to December 31 , 1994 , the Com-
pany will pay to the City administrative fees with re-
spect to the Series A Bonds and Series B Bonds at the
following times in the following amounts:
Date Series A Fee Series B Fee
6/30/86 $ 28,750. 00 $ 7,179.41
12/31/86 28,750 . 00 7 ,179.41
6/30/87 28,750 . 00 7,179 .41
12/31/87 28,750. 00 7 ,179 .41
6/30/88 28,750 . 00 7 ,179.41
12/31/88 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
6/30/89 28,750 . 00 7,179.41
12/31/89 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
6/30/90 28,750 . 00 7,179.41
12/31/90 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
6/30/91 28,750 . 00 7,179 .41
12/31/91 28,750. 00 7 ,179.41
6/30/92 28,750 .00 7,179 .41
12/31/92 28,750. 00 7,179.41
6/30/93 28,750 . 00 7,179 .41
12/31/93 28,750. 00 7,179.41
6/30/94 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
12/31/94 28,750 .00 7,179.41
provided, however, that ( i) if the Series A Bonds and/or
the Series B Bonds shall be redeemed in art but not in
whole prior to December 31, 1994, whether by optional or
mandatory redemption or otherwise, the administrative
fees payable on the dates provided above shall not ex-
ceed an amount equal to 1/16 of 1 percent of the princi-
pal balance of the Series A Bonds and/or Series B Bonds,
as the case may be then Outstanding (as defined in the
Supplemental Indentures of Trust executed between the
City and First Trust Company of Saint Paul, St Paul,
Minnesota with respect to the Series A Bonds and Series
B Bonds) unless the Authority shall provide the Company
a written opinion of counsel experienced in matters of
municipal finance and industrial development bond fi-
nancing that administrative fees in excess of such
amount up to and including the amounts provided above
will not adversely affect the exemption of interest on
the Series A Bonds and .-Series B Bonds from federal and
state income taxation and ( ii ) if the Series A Bonds
and/or the Series B Bonds are redeemed in whole prior to,---
December 31, 1994 , whether by acceleration, or redemp-
tion
edem -tion prior to maturity or otherwise, that all unpaid
administrative fees payable with respect to such issue
on or prior to December 31, 1994 shall become immedi-
ately due and payable in their entirety to the City by
the Company on the first day immediately subsequent to
3 -
the date of payment in full of the Series A Bonds and/or
the Series B Bonds , jis the case may be , provided that
such fees shall be discounted back to present value as
of the date of payment at a discount rate of ten ( 10 )
percent .
Subsequent to December 31 , 1994 , the Company will also
pay to the City an annual fee of 1/8 of one percent of
the principal balance of the Series A Bonds then Out-
standing (as defined in the Supplemental Indentures of
Trust , dated as of October 18, 1984 , executed between
the City and First Trust with respect to the Series A
Bonds) , said fee to commence January 1 , 1995 and to
thereafter be payable January 1 of each year so long as
there shall be any Series A Bonds Outstanding .
The Company further agrees to pay all consultant ' s fees
and attorney ' s fees incurred by the City and the Author-
ity with respect to the Series A Bonds and the Series B
Bonds and the amendment to this Agreement .
Dated as of this 5th clay of March, 1985 .
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
By
Chairman
Executive Director
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
By
Mayor
City Administrator
MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC.
By
Vice President
4 -
1
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985, by Dean Colligan and Jeanne Andre,
the Chairman and Executive Director , respectively, of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, a policial subdivision of the State of
Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority.
(SEAL) Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985, by , the Vice
President of Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. , a corporation orga-
nized under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corpora-
tion.
( SEAL) Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985, by Eldon Reinke and John Anderson,
the Mayor and City Administrator , respectively, of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and politi-
cal subdivision organized and existing under the Constitu-
tion and laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the
City.
( SEAL) Notary Public
5 _
�S
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
OF THE
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
Resolution No. 85-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, SCOTT
COUNTY, MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
$4 , 200 , 000 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT TAX INCREMENT
REVENUE BONDS (CANTERBURY DOWNS PROJECT) DATED AS
OF MARCH 1, 1985, AND APPROVING THE FORM AND AUTHO-
RIZING THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS
RECITALS:
The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the
City - of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "Authority" ) , has by reso-
lution adopted its Modified Housing and Redevelopment Plan
for Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project
No. 1 , as amended ( the "Redevelopment Plan" ) establishing
Minnesota Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Re-
development Project" ) as a "redevelopment project" and a
"housing project" pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 462 ( the "Redevelopment Act" ) .
The County Auditor of Scott County has certified the
assessed value of all taxable real property in the Redevel-
opment Project (as it existed as of November 1, 1979 ) as of
January 2, 1979 to be $128,041. The area included within
the Redevelopment Project, as constituted as of November 1,
1979 now constitutes Tax Increment District No. 1 of the
Redevelopment Project; the Redevelopment Project has been
expanded and renamed pursuant to Resolution of the Author-
ity, dated February 28, 1984
There has been prepared and approved by the Authority
and given approval by the City, pursuant to Minnesota Stat-
utes , Section 273 . 74 , a Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax
Increment District No. 4 of the Redevelopment Project , pro-
viding for the use of tax increment financing in connection
with the Redevelopment Project and the County Auditor has
certified the assessed value of all taxable property in Tax
Increment District No. 4 as of December 20 , 1984 to be
$99 , 085.
The acquisition and the subsequent sale or lease of the
potential development property within the Redevelopment
Project to private developers for commercial development is
an objective of the Redevelopment Plan.
In order to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment
Plan and particularly to make the land in the project area
available for development by private enterprise in conform-
ance with the Redevelopment Plan, the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota ( the "City" ) , the Authority and Minnesota
Racetrack, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation ( the "Company" )
have executed a Second Amended Contract for Private Develop-
ment for the Project, dated as of November 20 , 1984, in-
cluding a First Addendum thereto, dated as of the date
hereof , providing , inter alfa, for the purchase of certain
real property by the Authority and the reconveyance of the
property to the Company as an inducement to the construction
of a horseracing facility by the Company on the property.
The Authority is authorized by the Redevelopment Act and
by Minnesota Statutes , Sections 273 . 71 through 273 . 78, as
amended ( the "Tax Increment Act" ) to sell and issue its
special obligation bonds payable primarily from tax incre-
ment to be derived from the tax increment districts esta-
blished within the Redevelopment Project to finance a por-
tion of the public development cost of the Redevelopment
Project. The Authority has determined that it is necessary
and advisable to borrow money to finance the cost of acqui-
sition of certain property and to that end has authorized
the creation of an issue of its Tax Increment Revenue Bonds
(Canterbury Downs Project) dated March 1, 1985 ( the
"Bonds" ) , upon the terms -and conditions herein specified.
The Authority proposes to enter into an Indenture of
Trust, dated as of March 1 , 1985 ( the "Indenture" ) , with
First Trust Company of Saint Paul, Saint Paul , Minnesota
( the "Trustee" ) , to provide , among other things, for the
issuance of the Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of
$4 , 200 ,000 .
The Bonds issued undE,r the Indenture will be secured by
a pledge of a portion of the tax increment derived from Tax
- 2 -
Increment District No. 4 , a portion of the tax increment
derived from Tax Increment District No. 1, a portion of the
proceeds of the Bonds and investment earnings thereon, and
the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds
shall be payable solely from the revenues pledged therefor,
and the Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the Authority
or the City of Shakopee ( the "City" ) within the meaning of
any constitutional or statutory limitation nor shall consti-
tute or give rise to a pecuniary liability of the Authority
or the City or a charge against the Authority's or City' s
general credit or taxing powers and shall not constitute a
charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any
property of the Authority other than its interest in said
tax increment .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COMMIS-
SIONERS OF THE AUTHORITY, THAT:
Section 1 . For the purpose of acquiring certain prop-
erty for the construction of a horseracing facility by the
Company, there is hereby authorized the issuance of the
$4 , 200,000 aggregate principal amount Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota,
Tax Increment Revenue Bonds (Canterbury Downs Project) ,
dated as of March 1, 1985. The Bonds shall be issued in
fully registered form, shall be in such denominations, shall
bear interest, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall
mature, shall be in such form and shall have such other
details and provisions as are prescribed by the Indenture.
Section 2 . The Bonds shall be special obligations of
the Authority, payable solely from the Pledged Increment (as
defined in the Indenture) , Bond proceeds, and the investment
earnings thereon, and other revenues received by the Trustee
under the Indenture. As security for the payment of the
principal of and interest on the Bonds, pro rata and without
preference of any one Bond over any other Bond, the Board of
Commissioners of the Authority hereby authorizes and directs
the Chairman and Executive Director to execute the Indenture
and to deliver to the Trustee the Indenture and does hereby
authorize and direct the execution of the Bonds by the fac-
simile signatures of the Chairman and Executive Director and
does hereby provide that the Indenture shall provide the
terms and conditions, covenants , rights, obligations, duties
and agreements of the holders of the Bonds, the Authority
and the Trustee as set forth therein.
All of the provisions of the Indenture, when executed
and delivered as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a
part of this Resolution as fully and to the same extent as
if 'incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force
and effect from the date of execution and delivery
3 -
thereof. The Indenture shall be substantially in the form
on file in the office of the Secretary of the Authority with
such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and
insertions as permitted or required or as the Chairman, in
his discretion, shall determine, and the execution thereof
by the Chairman shall be conclusive evidence of such deter-
mination.
Section 3. The Chairman and the Executive Director are
hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the
Letter Agreement, dated as of March 1, 1985 (the "Letter
Agreement" ) , between the Authority and the Company. All of
the provisions of the Letter Agreement , when executed and
delivered as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part
of this Resolution as fully and to the same extent as if
incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and
effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The
Letter Agreement shall be substantially in the form on file
in the office of the Secretary of the Authority with such
necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and inser-
tions as permitted or required or as the Chairman, in his
discretion, shall determine, and the execution thereof by
the Chairman shall be conclusive evidence of such determina-
tion.
Section 4 . The Chairman and the Executive Director are
hereby authorized and directed to accept and confirm the
Bond Purchase Agreement, dated March 5, 1985 (the "Bond
Purchase Agreement" ) , from Miller & Schroeder Municipals,
Inc. ( the "Underwriter" ) , and accepted by the Authority, and
the award of the Bonds to the Underwriter at the price set
out in the Bond Purchase Agreement is hereby approved. All
of the provisions of the Bond Purchase Agreement, when
accepted and confirmed as authorized herein, shall be deemed
to be a part of this Resolution as fully and to the same
extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in
full force and effect from the date of execution and de-
livery thereof. The Bond Purchase Agreement shall be in the
form on file in the office of the Secretary of the Authority
with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions
and insertions as permitted or required or as the Chairman,
in his discretion shall determine, and the execution thereof
by the Chairman shall be conclusive evidence of such deter-
mination.
Section 5. All covenants, stipulations, obligations and
agreements of the Authority contained in this Resolution- and -
contained in the Indenture, the Letter Agreement and the
Bond Purchase Agreement, shall be deemed to be the cove-
nants, stipulations, obligations and agreements of the
Authority to the full extent authorized or permitted by law,
and all such covenants, stipulations, obligations and agree-
- 4 -
ments shall be binding upon the Authority. Except as other-
wise provided in this Resolution, all rights, powers and
privileges conferred and duties and liabilities imposed upon
the Authority or the Board of Commissioners thereof by the
provisions of this Resolution or the Indenture, the Letter
Agreement or the Bond Purchase Agreement, shall be exercised
or performed by the Authority or by such members of the
Board of Commissioners or by such officers, board, body or
agency thereof as may be required by law to exercise such
powers and to perform such duties. No covenant, stipula-
tion, obligation or agreement herein contained or contained
in the Indenture or the Letter Agreement, shall be deemed to _
be a covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement of any
member of the Board of Commissioners or any officer , agent
or employee of the Authority in that person's individual
capacity, and neither the Board of Commissioners of the
Authority nor any officer executing the Bonds shall be lia-
ble personally on the Bonds or be subject to any personal
liability or accountability by reason of the issuance
thereof .
Section 6. Except as herein otherwise expressly pro-
vided, nothing in this Resolution or in the Indenture, ex-
press or implied, is intended or shall be construed to con-
fer upon any person or firm or corporation other than the
Authority, the holders of the Bonds issued under the provi-
sions of this Resolution and the Indenture and the Trustee
any right, remedy or claim, legal or equitable, under and by
reason of this Resolution or any provision hereof or of the
Indenture or any provision thereof; this Resolution, the
Indenture and all of their provisions being intended to be
and being for the sole and exclusive benefit of the Author-
ity and the holders from time to time of the Bonds issued
under the provisions of this Resolution and the Indenture.
Section 7 . In case any one or more of the provisions of
this Resolution, the Indenture, the Letter Agreement, the
Bond Purchase Agreement or any of the Bonds issued hereunder
shall for any reason be held to be illegal or invalid, such
illegality or invalidity shall not affect any other provi-
sion of this Resolution, the Indenture, the Letter Agree-
ment, the Bond Purchase Agreement or the Bonds, but this
Resolution, the Indenture, the Letter Agreement, the Bond
Purchase Agreement and the Bonds shall be construed and en-
dorsed as if such illegal or invalid provision had not been
contained therein.
Section 8. The Bonds shall contain a recital that the
Bonds are issued pursuant to the Tax Increment Act, and such
recital shall be conclusive evidence of the validity of the
Bonds and the regularity of the issuance thereof , and that
all acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution
5 _
and the laws of the State relating to the adoption of this
Resolution, to the issuance of the Bonds and to the execu-
tion of the Indenture , the Letter Agreement , and the Bond
Purchase Agreement to happen, to exist and to be performed
precedent to and in the enactment of this Resolution and
precedent to the issuance of the Bonds and precedent to the
execution of the Indenture, the Letter Agreement and the
Bond Purchase Agreement have happened, do exist and have
been performed as so requi::ed by law.
Section 9 . The office::s of the Authority, attorneys and
other agents or employees Of the Authority are hereby autho-
rized to do all acts and things required of them by or in
connection with this Resolution, the Indenture, the Letter
Agreement and the Bond'. Purchase Agreement., for the full ,
punctual and complete performance of all the terms , cove-
nants and agreements contained in the Bonds, the Indenture,
the Letter Agreement and the Bond Purchase Agreement and
this Resolution.
Section 10 . The Authority hereby approves the form of
the preliminary Official Statement , dated February , 1985 ,
on file in the office of the Secretary, and hereby ratifies
and confirms its use and d:_stribution by the Underwriter , in
connection with the sale of the Bonds and hereby approves
the form of the final Official Statement , and consents to
the distribution of the ficial Official Statement to prospec-
tive purchasers of the Bonds .
Section 11 . The Trustee is hereby appointed as Paying
Agent for the Bonds pursuant to Paragraph 1 (d) of the Bond
Purchase Agreement.
Section 12 . This Resolution shall be in full force and
effect from and after its passage.
Adopted by the Board of Commissioners on March 5, 1985.
Chairman
ATTEST:
Executive Director
Approved as to form this; _
day of 1985 .
City Attorney
Commissioner moved the adoption of the fore-
going resolution, the reading of which was dispensed with by
unanimous consent , which motion was seconded by Commissioner
and upon vote being taken thereon, the "Ayes, "
"Abstains" and "Nays" were as follows:
AYES ABSTAINS NAYS
The Chairman thereupon declared said motion carried and
adopted.
NEW ISSUE
In the opinion of O'Connor & Hannan, Minneapolis, Minnesota, bond counsel, under existing
statutes,court decisions,and rulings,interest on the Bonds is exempt from federal income taxes,and
under present Minnesota laws interest on the Bonds is not includable in gross income for State of
Minnesota income tax purposes, except Minnesota corporate and bank excise taxes measured by
income.
$4,200,000
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE BONDS
(CANTERBURY DOWNS PROJECT)
Dated: March 1, 1985 Due: As Shown Below
The Bonds are special obligations of the Authority payable solely from tax increment and certain
other revenues expressly pledged to payment of the Bonds under the terms of the Indenture of Trust,
dated as of March 1, 1985,between the Authority and First Trust Company of Saint Paul,as Trustee.
The Bonds are not general obligations of the Authority and do not constitute a charge against the
general credit or taxing power of the Authority. The Bonds are not a debt of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota,the State of Minnesota,or any political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (other than
the Authority).
Interest on the Bonds is payable semiannually on February 1 and August 1, commencing on
February 1,1986.Interest will be paid by check or draft of the Trustee mailed to the registered holders
of the Bonds at the addresses of such holders as they appear on the bond register maintained by
Trustee. Principal of the Bonds is payable when due at the principal corporate trust office of the
Trustee in Saint Paul, Minnesota.
The Ront&s willhejs rrfnlliy-fegitcerelfrorm;wYlnodu couposns;r� kn�mmrmum'uerfornnrdLfoi�
of$5,000 or in any integral multiple thereof.
The Authority has provided certain information concerning the Bonds to the Depository Trust
II Company, New York, New York, and expects the Bonds will be eligible for the deposit, book entry,
j withdrawal, and other services of the Depository Trust Company as of the date of closing.
MATURITY SCHEDULE
Due Principal Interest Due Principal Interest
August 1 Amount Rate August 1 Amount Rate
1987 $380,000 8.50% 1991 $535,000 9.50%
1988 410,000 8.75% 1992 585,000 10.00%
1989 450,000 9.00% 1993 640,000 10.25%
1990 490,000 9.25% 1994 710,000 10.25%
(Plus Accrued Interest From March 1, 1985)
(Price: 100%)
The Bonds are subject to redemption prior to maturity as more fully described herein.
The Bonds are being offered, when, as and if issued by the Authority, and accepted by Miller &
Schroeder Municipals, Inc.,as Underwriter,subject to an opinion as to validity and tax exemption of
O'Connor&Hannan,bond counsel,and certain other conditions. Certain legal matters will be passed
upon for the Underwriter by its counsel, Holmes & Graven, Chartered. Certain legal matters will be
passed upon for the Authority by its counsel, Krass, Meyer, Kanning & Walsten. It is expected that
delivery of the Bonds will be made on or about March 7, 1985, in Minneapolis, Minnesota, against
payment therefor. Subject to prevailing market conditions, the Underwriter intends, but is not obli-
gated to,effect secondary market transactions.Although the Underwriter intends to engage in second-
ary market transactions, there can be no assurance that a secondary market will develop. For
information with respect to the Underwriter, see "UNDERWRITING" herein.
isMiller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc.
The date of this Official Statement is March 4, 1985
No person has been authorized to give any information or to make any representations other than those
contained in this Official Statement in connection with the offers made hereby, and if given or made, such
information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the Authority or the
Underwriter. Neither the delivery of this Official Statement nor any sale hereunder shall under any circum-
stances create any implication that there has been no change in the affairs of the Authority, Minnesota
Racetrack, Inc., Santa Anita Operating Company, North American Life and Casualty Company, Scottland,
Inc.,and F&M Marquette National Bank since the date hereof.This Official Statement does not constitute an
offer or solicitation in any jurisdiction in which such offer or solicitation is not authorized, or in which the
person making such offer or solicitation is not qualified to do so,or to any person to whom it is unlawful to make
such offer or solicitation. The information set forth herein has been obtained from the Authority, Minnesota
Racetrack, Inc., Santa Anita Operating Company, North American Life and Casualty Company, Scottland,
Inc., and F&M Marquette National Bank and other sources which are believed to be reliable, but it is not
guaranteed as to accuracy or completeness by, and is not to be construed as a representation by, the
Underwriter. CONTENTS OF OFFICIAL STATEMENT
Page
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
THE BONDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
SECURITY FOR THE BONDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
BONDHOLDERS' RISK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
TAX INCREMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
THE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
THE ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
THE LETTER OF CREDIT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
THE BANK GUARANTY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
THE GUARANTY AGREEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
THE GUARANTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
THE AUTHORITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
THECITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
THEINDENTURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
ENFORCEABILITY OF REMEDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
LEGAL MATTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
TAX EXEMPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
UNDERWRITING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
MISCELLANEOUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
APPENDIX A SCOTTLAND, INC., AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
APPENDIX B NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
APPENDIX C SANTA ANITA REALTY ENTERPRISES, INC. AND SANTA ANITA
OPERATING COMPANIES AND SUBSIDIARIES COMBINED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
APPENDIX D F&M MARQUETTE NATIONAL BANK FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
APPENDIX E BOND COUNSEL OPINION
THESE SECURITIES HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED WITH THE SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION BY REASON OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3(aX2) OF THE
SECURITIES ACT OF 1933,AS AMENDED.THE REGISTRATION OR QUALIFICATION OF THESE
SECURITIES UNDER THE SECURITIES OR BLUE SKY LAWS OF THE JURISDICTIONS IN WHICH
THEY HAVE BEEN REGISTERED OR QUALIFIED,IF ANY,AND THE EXEMPTION FROM REGIS-
TRATION OR QUALIFICATION IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS SHALL NOT BE REGARDED AS A
RECOMMENDATION THEREOF.NEITHER THESE JURISDICTIONS NOR ANY OF THEIR AGEN-
CIES HAVE PASSED UPON THE MERITS OF THESE SECURITIES OR THE ACCURACY OR COM-
PLETENESS OF THIS OFFICIAL STATEMENT. ANY REPRESENTATION TO THE CONTRARY
MAY BE A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
$4,200,000
THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE BONDS
(CANTERBURY DOWNS PROJECT)
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
This Official Statement is furnished in connection with the offering of
$4,200,000 aggregate principal amount of Tax Increment Revenue Bonds,
(Canterbury Downs Project) (the 'Bonds") of the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "Authority"). This
Official Statement may not be reproduced or used, in whole or in part, for any
other purpose. The Introductory Statement of this Official Statement should be
regarded as a brief overview and, therefore, this Official Statement should be read
in its entirety. Where agreements, reports, or other documents are referred to
herein, reference should be made to such agreement, reports, or other documents
for more complete information regarding the rights and obligations of the parties
thereto, facts and opinions contained therein, and the subject matter thereof. No
statement contained in this Official Statement should be considered less important
than any other by reason of its position herein. Certain terms spelled with initial
capital letters are defined herein.
The Bonds are being issued in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 462.411 et seg. (the "Redevelopment Act") and Minnesota
Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78 (the "Tax Increment Act") and pursuant to the
Indenture of Trust (the "Indenture") executed by the Authority and the First Trust
Company of Saint Paul (the "Trustee"). The proceeds from the sale of the Bonds
will be used to acquire land and improvements for resale to Minnesota Racetrack,
Inc. ("MRI"), a Minnesota corporation, at a sale price which is less than the
acquisition cost. The land and improvements will be used in the development of a
horse racing facility (the "Facility") which has an estimated cost of approximately
$69,400,000.
The Authority entered into the Second Amended Contract for Private
Development dated November 20, 1984 (the "Development Contract") with MRI to
provide for the development of land located within a redevelopment project.
Pursuant to the terms of the Development Contract, MRI is required to construct
the facility in a manner so that its market value, for purposes of real property
taxation, is at least $43,245,000.
In order to secure the timely payment of the principal and interest due on
the Bonds, the Authority will pledge to the annual payment of the principal and
interest on the Bonds, a portion of the tax increment generated by the parcel of
real property on which the racetrack is constructed (the "Property"). The tax
increment generated by the Property and the improvements undertaken by MRI on
the Property (the "Improvements") is hereinafter referred to as the "Tax
Increment." The Property and the Improvements comprise the Facility. Tax
Increment received with respect to any calendar year in an amount equal to one
the sum of (i) one hundred percent (100%) of the principal and interest due on the
1
Bonds during the Bond Year commencing in such calendar year (a 'Bond Year"
being the twelve-month period commencing on any August 1 during which Bonds
will be outstanding), plus (ii) the fees of the Trustee, less a credit for certain funds
on deposit with the Trustee and available to pay debt service on the Bonds, will be
pledged to payment of the debt service on the Bonds and to the payment of the
Trustee's fees (the "Pledged :increment"). Any Tax Increment in excess of the
amounts so pledged will constitute property of the Authority and will not be
accumulated, used to replenish a reserve, or otherwise made available for payment
of debt service on the Bonds.
A portion of the Principal and Interest on the Bonds will be secured by a
Letter of Credit (the "Letter of Credit") issued by F&M Marquette National Bank
(the "Bank") in the amount of $782,775.00. The Letter of Credit will be payable to,
and held by, the Trustee. MItI has entered into a Standby Letter of Credit and
Reimbursement Agreement (the "Reimbursement Agreement") with the Bank
providing for the repayment of amounts paid by the Bank upon presentation by the
Trustee of a draft drawn wider the Letter of Credit, and certain additional
covenants. The Bonds will also be secured by a reserve fund (the "Reserve Fund")
funded solely with amounts drawn, if at all, as a final draw under the Letter of
Credit. Investment income, if any, derived from the investment of amounts
deposited in the Reserve Fund will be deposited in the Bond Fund.
Tax Increment will be pledged and assigned by the Authority to the Trustee
under the Indenture. Tax Increment will be paid by the Authority to the Trustee
periodically throughout each year while any Bonds are outstanding.
Principal and interest on the Bonds will be further secured by several (not
joint) guarantees (the "Guarantees") from the three corporate shareholders of MRI
(the "Guarantors"), in the foLp_owing amounts: Santa Anita Operating Company,
$405,936.00, North American Life and Casualty Company, $649,838.00, and
Scottland, Inc., $649,838.00. Each guaranty is subject to proportionate reduction
for amounts drawn under the Letter of Credit. If the Tax Increment and the Letter
of Credit, together with other available funds, are not sufficient to meet debt
service requirements on the Bonds, the Trustee may draw on any one or more of
the Guarantees, up to the amount of each guaranty, to meet such debt service
needs.
The Bonds are not general obligations of the Authority or the City of
Shakopee (the "City"), but are special limited obligations of the Authority payable
solely from the funds and other security held by the Trustee pursuant to the terms
of the Indenture, including the proceeds of the Bonds, investment earnings thereon,
and Tax Increment. The Bonds and the premium and interest thereon do not
constitute an indebtedness of the Authority, the City, the County of Scott (the
"County"), or the State of Minnesota, within the meaning of any constitutional
provision or charter or statuto^y limitation, and will never constitute or give rise
to a pecuniary liability of the Authority (except from Tax Increment and other
Trust Funds), the City, the County, or the State of Minnesota. In addition, the
Bonds and the premium and interest thereon can never constitute a charge against
the general credit or taxing powers of the Authority, the City, the County, or the
State of Minnesota.
2
Each holder of a Bond, by acceptance of such Bond, irrevocably waives any
Federal Deposit Insurance and any claim it may have against the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation by virtue of such Bond being secured by the Letter of
Credit. See, "THE INDENTURE - Waiver of Deposit Insurance."
This Official Statement contains summaries and descriptions of various
documents and agreements. All summaries and descriptions of documents and
agreements are qualified in their entirety by reference to such documents and
agreements, and all summaries of the Bonds are qualified in their entirety by
reference to the form thereof included in the Indenture, copies of all of which are
available for inspection. Copies of the Indenture are available upon request at the
principal office of the Trustee. During the period of the offering, copies of all
such documents will be available at the principal office of Miller & Schroeder
Municipals, Inc., 2400 Northwestern Financial Center, 7900 Xerxes Avenue South,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431.
SOURCE AND APPLICATION OF BOND PROCEEDS
Sources
1985 Tax Increment Bonds $ 4,200,000.00
Add: Accrued Interest to March 7, 1985 6,695.00
Less: Discount (126,000.00)
Add: Interest Earnings 71 700.48
Totalsources 4,152,395.48
Uses
Site Acquisition $ 3,300,000.00
Capilized Interest 769,925.00
Issuance Expenses 75,000.00
Miscellaneous Costs 7,470.48
Total uses $ 4,152,395.48
THE BONDS
Authority for L%uanee
The Minnesota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the
"Redevelopment Project") was designated a redevelopment project pursuant to the
Redevelopment Act through adoption of a redevelopment plan by the Authority on
December 19, 1978, and by the City in Resolution No. 1361 of the City Council on
January 23, 1979. The Redevelopment Project was initiated in 1979 and certified
as a tax increment district as of January 2, 1978. The initial Redevelopment
Project was redesignated Tax Increment District No. 1. The Redevelopment
Project was expanded in 1984 to include additional property which was not included
in Tax Increment District No. 1. Tax Increment .District No. 4 was adopted by the
Authority on February 14, 1984 and approved by the City Council on November 20,
1984. The Facility is located partially in Tax Increment District No. 1 and
partially in Tax Increment District No. 4. Only Tax Increment generated from the
3
Facility is pledged to the payment of the Bonds. After August 1, 1979, all tax
increment bonds for new or previously existing projects must be issued pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71 et seq. (the "Tax Increment Act").
The Bonds are being issued pursuant to provisions of the Redevelopment
Act, the Tax Increment Act, a resolution of the Authority authorizing issuance of
the Bonds (the "Resolution") and the Indenture. As such the Bonds do not
constitute an indebtedness of the Authority or the City within the meaning of any
constitutional or statutory debt limitation or restriction. Neither the Authority,
nor any director, commissioner, council member, board member, officer, employee
or agent of the Authority nor any person executing the Bonds will be liable
personally on the Bonds by reason of the issuance thereof. The Bonds, and the
Bonds will so state on their face, will not be payable from nor charged upon any
funds other than the revenues and property pledged to the payment thereof, nor
will the Authority be subject to any liability thereon or have the powers to obligate
itself to pay or pay the Bonds from funds other than the revenues and properties
pledged and no Holder or Holders of the Bonds will ever have the right to compel
any exercise of any taxing power of the Authority or any other public body, other
than as is permitted or required under the Tax Increment Act and pledged therefor,
to pay the principal of or interest on any such Bonds, nor to enforce payment
thereof against any property of the Authority or other public body other than that
expressly pledged for the payment thereof.
Description of the Bonds
The Bonds are to be issued in the principal amount of $4,200,000, as fully
registered bonds in the denominations of $5,000 and any integral multiple thereof.
The Bonds are special obligations of the Authority and are payable at the principal
corporate trust office of the Trustee upon presentation and surrender to the
Trustee duly endorsed in writing. Interest on the Bonds is payable semiannually on
each February 1 and August 1, commencing February 1, 1986, by check or draft
mailed by the Trustee to the person in whose names the Bonds are registered as of
the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date ("Interest
Payment Date") on the Bonds.
Redemption
The Bonds are subject to optional redemption and prepayment, at the option
of the Authority, in whole or in part, on any Interest Payment Date on or after
August 1, 1991, at a price equal to the principal amount of the Bonds to be
redeemed, plus accrued interest to the redemption date, plus a premium, expressed
as a percentage of the principal amount of Bonds to be redeemed, for the various
redemption dates set forth below.
Redemption Date Premium
August 1, 1990, and February 1, 1991 3%
August 1, 1991, and February 1, 1992 2%
August 1, 1992, and February 1, 1993 1%
August 1, 1993, and thereafter none
4
It is provided in the Indenture that Bonds of a denomination larger than
$5,000 may be redeemed in part ($5,000 or a whole multiple thereof) and that upon
any partial redemption of any such Bond the same will be surrendered in exchange
for one or more new Bonds in authorized form for the unredeemed portion of
principal. If less than all Bonds are to be redeemed on any redemption date, the
Bonds to be redeemed will be selected in inverse order of maturity and by lot
within a maturity.
Notice and Effect of Redemption
Notice of redemption will be mailed at least twenty (20) days before the
redemption date to each Holder of the Bonds to be redeemed at the Holder's last
address appearing on the Bond Register; but no defect in or failure to give such
mailed notice of redemption will affect the validity of proceedings for redemption
of any Bond not affected by such failure or defect. All Bonds so called for
redemption will cease to bear interest on the specified redemption date, provided
funds for their redemption have been duly deposited, and, except for the purpose of
payment, will no longer be protected by the Indenture and will not be deemed
Outstanding under the provisions of the Indenture.
Additional Bonds
No additional Bonds or other obligations will be issued under the Indenture.
SECURITY FOR THE BONDS
The Bonds are special obligations of the Authority and, as such, are secured
solely by the revenues and funds specifically pledged to payment of the Bonds
pursuant to the terms of the Indenture. The following is a complete list of the
revenues and funds pledged to payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and
interest on the Bonds, in the order in which such revenues and funds will be applied
to debt service on the Bonds:
(1) A portion of the proceeds of the Bonds;
(2) Earnings from the investment of any amounts held in the funds
established by the Indenture;
(3) Pledged Increment;
(4) Proceeds from one or more drafts drawn under the Letter of
Credit;
(5) Payment made by any one or more of the Guarantors under the
Guarantees; and
(6) Amounts in the Reserve Fund (funded from a draw on the
Letter of Credit).
The Authority has allocated $769,925.00 of the proceeds of the Bonds (and interest
earnings on the unspent proceeds of the Bonds) to payment of interest on the
Bonds.
5
The Authority expects to pay all principal, premium, and interest on the
Bonds from Pledged Increment (except for interest on the Bonds to be paid from
proceeds of the Bonds specifically allocated for such purpose and except for
certain investment earnings to be applied to such purpose). See "TAX
INCREMENT" herein for a detailed analysis of the availability and pledge of tax
increment to payment of the Bonds.
In the event Pledged Increment is not sufficient to pay all principal,
premium, and interest on the Bonds when due, then the Trustee is required to
obtain the deficiency from a draw on the Letter of Credit. If, at any time the
Letter of Credit is in effect, there is not on deposit with the Trustee at least five
days prior to any interest payment date on the Bonds sufficient funds to pay all
principal and interest due on the Bonds on such interest payment date, then the
Trustee must immediately submit a draft on the Letter of Credit to the Bank. The
draft must be drawn in an amount equal to the difference between (i) the sums held
by and available to the Trustee to pay principal and interest on the Bonds on such
interest payment date, and (ii) the principal and interest due on the Bonds on such
interest payment date. Such amount must be applied to payment of principal and
interest on the Bonds on such interest payment date.
If, within sixty days from the date of receipt by the Trustee of any amount
drawn under the Letter of Credit, the Trustee receives written notice from the
Bank that the Bank has not been reimbursed for the amount of such draw on the
Letter of Credit and the Letter of Credit has not been reinstated to its full face
amount, then the Trustee must submit a draft on the Letter of Credit for the full
remaining amount of the Letter of Credit. This amount must be deposited in the
Reserve Fund maintained by the Trustee and thereafter the Trustee will use the
amounts in the Reserve Fund for the purposes provided in the Indenture. See "THE
INDENTURE," "THE LETTER OF CREDIT," and "APPENDIX D" herein for a more
detailed analysis of the foregoing.
In the event Pledged Increment is not sufficient to pay all principal,
premium, and interest on the Bonds when due, and in the event the Letter of Credit
is unavailable to pay debt service on the Bonds and there are no moneys in the
Reserve Fund, then the Trustee is required to obtain any deficiency in payment of
debt service on the Bonds from one or more of the Guarantors pursuant to the
terms of the respective Guarantees. If, at any time the Letter of Credit is not in
effect, there is not on deposit with the Trustee at least five days prior to any
interest payment date on the Bonds sufficient funds to pay all principal and
interest due on the Bonds on such interest payment date, then the Trustee must
immediately make demand under one or more of the Guarantees. The demand must
be made for an amount equal to the difference between (i) the sums held by and
available to the Trustee to pay principal and interest on the Bonds on such interest
payment date (other than amounts in the Reserve Fund), and (ii) the principal and
interest due on the Bonds on such interest payment date. The Trustee will have no
obligation to take any action to secure payment under the Guarantees other than
the making of a demand for payment as provided in the Guarantees until such time
as the Trustee has been indemnified for such additional actions by the Authority or
Bondholders. See, "THE GUARANTY AGREEMENTS," "THE GUARANTORS,"
"APPENDIX A," "APPENDIX B," and "APPENDIX C."
6
PAYMENTS MADE TO THE TRUSTEE UNDER THE LETTER OF CREDIT
AND THE GUARANTEES MAY NOT EXCEED, IN THE AGGREGATE, TWENTY-
FIVE PERCENT OF THE INTEREST ON THE BONDS.
The Tax Increment Act provides that no amounts may be applied to payment
of the Debt Service on tax increment revenue bonds except for those amounts
specifically pledged to such payment.
BONDHOLDERS' RISKS
The following is a summary statement of certain risks to holders of the
Bonds. This summary statement is intended only to highlight certain risks and is
not a complete statement of all such risks. In addition, the risks outlined here are
not intended to be exhaustively analyzed but are only outlined. Reference is made
to the other sections of this Official Statement, including "THE BONDS,"
"SECURITY FOR THE BONDS," "TAX INCREMENT," "THE INDENTURE," "THE
LETTER OF CREDIT", "THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT," "THE GUARANTY
AGREEMENT" and "THE ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT," for analysis of various
aspects of the Bonds and security for the Bonds.
1. Pursuant to the Development Contract, MRI has agreed to construct
the Facility with a Market Value of $43,245,000. Construction of the Facility
commenced on June 2, 1984 under a guaranteed maximum costs contract with
Kraus-Anderson Construction Company. MRI has stated that as of February 1,
1984, the construction of the Facility is 52% complete. It is expected that the
Facility will be substantially complete on or before January 2, 1986, the date of
valuation for taxes payable in 1987, the first year during which Tax Increment will
be collected. Industrial Development Bonds in the principal amount of $46,000,000
were issued on October 15, 1984, to provide a portion of the financing for the
Facility. As of June 15, 1984, MRI had placed in escrow $21,000,000 for a portion
of the costs of the Facility. A portion of the amount in escrow has been disbursed
for construction costs incurred. The amounts in escrow will be disbursed prior to
the disbursement of the proceeds of the Industrial Development Bonds.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no assurances can be given that MRI will complete
construction of the Facility as planned. Pursuant to an Assessment Agreement
between MRI and the County Assessor, a minimum Market Value of $43,245,000 for
property tax purposes has been established for the Facilities. MRI has agreed not
to contest the value so established. The enforceability of an Assessment
Agreement has not been the subject of any judicial decision in the State of
Minnesota. If the Facility is not completed as planned, Tax Increment may be
inadequate to pay principal and interest on the Bonds when due.
2. If the assumptions used to calculate the Tax Increment projections in
"TAX INCREMENT" do not change (including the assumption that MRI will
continue to occupy the Facility and retain its obligation to pay such taxes), then
payment of the debt service on the Bonds will depend on the ability of MRI to pay
its real estate taxes on the Facility in a timely manner. See "MINNESOTA
RACETRACK, INC." herein.
3. Even though MRI may continue to retain the ability to pay the real
estate taxes on the Property and Improvements, MRI could abandon the Facility
and elect not to continue to pay such taxes. In such event there would not be
7
sufficient Tax Increment to pay the debt service on the Bonds. No assurance can
be given that MRI will not abandon the Facility during the term of the Bonds. Even
though MRI may continue to retain the ability to pay the real estate taxes on the
Facility, MRI could transfer its interest in the Facility to a person who does not
have the same ability to pay such taxes. In such event no assurance can be given
that such taxes will be paid.
4. Even though MI;,I may continue to pay all real estate taxes on the
Facility during the term of the Bonds, there are circumstances under which such
taxes could be insufficient to pay the debt service on the Bonds. Such
circumstances include the following:
(a) Real estate taxes on the Facility could be reduced due to a
reduction in the Assessed Market Value of such property. A reduction in
Assessed Market ValUE could result from damage to or destruction of the
Improvements, a successful administrative or legal challenge by MRI to the
present assessment imposed upon the Facility pursuant to the Assessment
Agreement, a change in the assessment criteria used to asseas the Facility,
or an alteration in the local taxing system.
(b) Real estate taxes on the Facility could be reduced due to a
reduction in the percentage tax classification imposed against the Assessed
Market Value as a result of a statutory amendment imposed by the
Minnesota Legislature.
(c) Real estate taxes on the Facility could be reduced due to a
drop in the mill rate imposed against the Assessed Value of the Facility.
Such a reduction in mill rate could result from an increase in state aid to
the City, County, anc school boards in the County, an increase in the
Assessed Market Value of real estate in the City and County, or a reduction
in the cost of services provided by the City, County, and school boards in
the County.
In order to prevent any of the foregoing events from causing a default on the Bonds
debt service on the Bonds has been scheduled so that the Facility will generate
Tax Increment in amounts from 1.97% to 3.71% of the debt service on the Bonds
each year during the term of the Bonds. No assurance can be given, however, that
this level of coverage will be sufficient upon the occurrence of any one or more of
such events.
5. Tax Increment (!ould be insufficient in any year to pay debt service
on the Bonds due to events no presently foreseeable.
6. Tax Increment will be applied to debt service on the Bonds annually.
Excess Tax Increment in one year will not be available to cover deficiencies in
prior or subsequent years.
7. The Letter of Credit is in the amount of $782,775.00 which is one
year's maximum debt service on the Bonds. To the extent that the Letter of Credit
is drawn against and the Bank is not reimbursed pursuant to the Reimbursement
Agreement, the Trustee is required to draw the remaining amount available under
the Letter of Credit and deposit such amount in the Reserve Fund. There is no
8
source, other than certain limited rights with respect to the Guarantees, for
replenishment of the Reserve Fund of amounts withdrawn from the Reserve Fund
by the Trustee after termination of the Letter of Credit, as a result of deficiencies
in the Tax Increment. Future Tax Increments will not be used to fund the Reserve
Fund.
8. The Guarantees are in an amount of 25% of the principal and interest
on the Bonds, and are reduced by any amounts drawn under the Letter of Credit.
To the extent that Tax Increment is not sufficient to pay at least 75% of the debt
service on the Bonds, the Guarantees will not be sufficient to provide for the full
payment of principal and interest on the Bonds.
TAX INCREMENT
Tax Increment
Assessed Market Value. The Assessed Market Value of taxable real property
for ad valorem tax purposes in Minnesota is established as of January 2 of the year
of assessment. Through a statutory local, county and state appraisal and review
process an Assessed Market Value is assigned to each parcel of property and the
structures, if any, upon it. At least one-fourth of all existing real estate in a
taxing unit must be reappraised by the local assessor each year. Each year the
appraisal and review process is completed by November 15th.
Assessed Value. Assessed Value of taxable property is determined by
multiplying the Assessed Market Value for such property by a statutorily prescribed
percentage. Assessed Value depends upon the property's tax classification.
Minnesota law treats different types of real property differently for assessment
purposes. The result is that some classes of property bear a greater share of the
property tax burden than others. For example, commercial and industrial property
(with certain exceptions) is statutorily categorized as Class 4c property and
Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.13, subdivision 9 currently provides that Assessed
Value for Class 4c property shall equal thirty-four percent (34%) of the first
$50,000 of Assessed Market Value and forty-three percent (43%) of the remaining
Assessed Market Value.
Captured Assessed Value. Captured Assessed Value is the Assessed Value of
the Property in excess of the Original Assessed Value, that being the Assessed
Value of the Property on January 2, 1984, the date of certification of the Property
for tax increment financing purposes. If the City so elects, in the case of all tax
increment districts established after August 1, 1979, the Captured Assessed Value
is reduced by the portion of the Assessed Value of the Property which is
contributed to the Metropolitan Area Fiscal Disparities Pool. Captured Assessed
Value increases can be the result of revaluation, inflationary growth or the
construction of real estate improvements.
Tax Increment. The annual Tax Increment is determined by multiplying the
Captured Assessed Value times the combined Mill Rate computed for taxes levied
by all taxing authorities upon the Property and the Improvements, which includes
the City, the County, the school district and certain special taxing districts.
9
The combined Mill Rate for such taxes is determined by the County Auditor.
Each of the taxing authorities submits its tax levy to the County Auditor. The
County Auditor determines the Mill Rate for each taxing authority by computing
the rate at which taxable Assessed Value, excluding Captured Assessed Value, must
be taxed in order to generate the tax dollars required by that taxing authority.
The combined Mill Rate is then applied against the Assessed Value of all
taxable property, including the Captured Assessed Value. The taxes generated by
application of the Mill Rate to the Captured Assessed Value is the Tax Increment,
which, if collected, is paid to the Authority and transferred to the Trustee to the
extent required under the Indenture.
Estimated Market Value
Tax Increment Projections. Pursuant to the Development Contract, MRI has
agreed to construct a Facility with a value of $43,245,000. Pursuant to the
Assessment Agreement, the County Assessor and MRI have agreed that the Facility
when constructed will have a Market Value for tax purposes of at least
$43,245,000.
Assessed Value. Minnesota law currently provides that, for property
taxation purposes, the Assessed Value of commercial real property such as the
Facility is thirty-four percent (34%) of the first $50,000 of Assessed Market Value
and forty-three percent (43%) of the remaining Assessed Market Value.
Application of this formula to an estimated Assessed Market Value of $43,245,000
yields an Assessed Value of $18,590,850. $8,170,000 of the Assessed Value is
allocated to Tax Increment District No. 1 and $10,420,850 is allocated to Tax
Increment District No. 4. The Tax Increment projections contained herein assume
that such property tax classification percentages will not change during the term
of the Bonds.
Captured Assessed Value. The Original Assessed Value of the portion of Tax
Increment District No. 1 comprised of the Property, its value as of January 2,
1978, if zero because the entire Original Assessed Value of the District has been
attributed to other development in the district which has already occurred. The
Original Assessed Value of the Property located in Tax Increment District No. 4,
its value as of January 2, 1984, has been certified as $99,085 by the Scott County
Auditor. With respect to tax Increment District No. 4, the Authority has elected
to not contribute forty percent (40%) of the increased Assessed Value over the
Original Assessed Value to the Metropolitan Area Fiscal Disparities Pool.
Therefore, the estimated Captured Assessed Value of the Property, which captures
the difference between the Original Assessed Value and the final Assessed Value of
the Property, based upon the above assumptions, is $18,491,765.
Mill Rate. The combined Mill Rate established for taxes payable in 1984
within the City was 110.580, or approximately $110.58 per $1,000 of Assessed
Value. For purposes of these Tax Increment projections, the Authority has assumed
this Mill Rate will remain constant during the term of the Bonds.
Tax Increment. The amount of Tax Increment is determined by multiplying
Captured Assessed Value times Mill Rate. As summarized below, the Authority has
estimated the amount of Tax Increment to be generated from the Property and
10
Improvements from 1987 to 1994, inclusive, to be approximately $2,030,000
annually, and to be $1,466,589, for 1994.
In Minnesota, the Assessed Market Value determined as of January 2nd of
one year is used in conjunction with budgets, Mill Rates, and taxes payable in the
following year. For example, the Mill Rate will be applied against the Assessed
Market Value as of January 2, 1986 to determine taxes payable in 1987.
The schedule below shows the estimated Tax Increment and principal and
interest payments on the Bonds.
Cashflow Projections
Annual
Tax Increment Total Annual Annual
Year Revenue Principal Interest Debt Service Coverage Surplus
1985
1986
1987 2,154,938.74 380,000.00 200,850.00 580,850.00 3.7100 1,574,088.74
1988 2,153,601.10 410,000.00 369,400.00 779,400.00 2.7632 1,374,201.10
1989 2,152,142.40 450,000.00 333,525.00 783,525.00 2.7467 1,368.617.40
1990 2,150,551.68 490,000.00 293,025.00 783,025.00 2.7465 1,367,526.68
1991 2,148,817.01 535,000.00 247,700.00 782.700.00 2.7454 1,366,117.01
1992 2,146,925.35 585,000.00 196,875.00 781,875.00 2.7459 1,365,050.35
1993 2,144,862.50 640,000.00 138,375.00 778,375.00 2.7556 1,366,487.50
1994 1,548,062.75 710,000.00 72,775.00 782,775.00 1.9777 765,287.75
16,599,901.53 4,200,000.00 1,852,525.00 6,052,525.00
Factors Which Could Affect Authority Tax Increment Assumptions. There
are many factors which could affect the validity of the assumptions made by the
Authority in arriving at its Tax Increment projections:
(1) The Tax Increment anticipated to be derived from the Property will
be derived solely from the Improvements. Therefore, non-completion, partial or
total destruction of the Improvements, partial or total condemnation of the
Improvements, reduction in Assessed Market Value of the Improvements,
reductions in the Mill Rate, abatement proceedings or litigation initiated by MRI to
reduce the Assessed Market Value of the Property and the Improvements, or any
other factor which results in a reduction in the Tax Increment estimated to be
generated by the Improvements could have a direct, adverse impact on the amount
of Tax Increment available to pay debt service on the Bonds.
(2) Payment of real estate taxes, and therefore Tax Increment, depends
upon the financial ability of MRI to do so. Financial failure of MRI during the term
of the Bonds could have a direct adverse effect upon the Tax Increment. In the
event MRI ever fails to pay real estate taxes by the first Monday in January of the
year following the year in which they are payable, under Minnesota law the taxes
will be deemed delinquent. The Scott County Auditor would thereupon list the
Property with the clerk of district court by February 15. The listing would be
equivalent to filing a complaint against the Property for enforcement of taxes and
11
penalties. The list of tax delinquent lands is published annually by March 20. After
completion of publication, the court would obtain jurisdiction over the Property
and the Developer would have twenty (20) days to file an answer. If no answer is
filed a default judgment would be entered. If an answer is filed, a trial would be
,field in district court. A judgment would result in a lien against the Property.
Following judgment, MRI would have three years to redeem by paying the
delinquent taxes and penalties. At the expiration of the three year period, the
Scott County Auditor would prepare and have served a notice of expiration of the
redemption period, after which legal title to the Property would vest in the State
of Minnesota. The Scott County Auditor would then conduct a public sale of the
Property awarding it to the highest bidder, or the state would sell it to the
Authority at a price equal to its appraised value upon petition and a showing of an
authorized public purpose. In any event, realization of any proceeds from the
Property and Improvements following a failure to pay real estate taxes will require
at least five years. No Tax Increment would be available to pay debt service on
the Bonds during this period.
(3) Any legislative property tax deemphasis or provision of income to
taxing authorities having the effect of reducing the property tax rate would
necessarily reduce the amount of anticipated Tax Increment that would otherwise
be available to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds. Broadened property
tax exemptions could have a similar effect. Further, any decrease in the
statutorily prescribed assessment ratios applied to the Asessor's Market Value for
commercial property to determine Assessed Value, against which tax rates are
applied, would reduce anticipated Tax Increment.
(4) The Authority has assumed that the Mill Rate applicable to the
Property will remain constant. Such ].Mill Rate levels will depend, in part, upon
budgetary needs of the taxing authorities which must be met by local property tax
levies. Changes in federal or state funding of local government activities could
result in changes in these budgetary needs. In addition, Market Value changes
within the jurisdiction of the various applicable taxing authorities could be such
that Mill Rates might be changed to generate the same level of tax dollars or
reduced to avoid exceeding statutory per capita levy limitations. Application of a
Mill Rate other than that assumed by the Authority to the Assessed Value of the
Property and Improvements could result in changes in the estimated Tax
Increment.
THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
General Information
The Redevelopment Project was created on January 2, 1979, upon the
adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council of the City. At that time
the Redevelopment Project was designated as the "Valley Industrial Park
Redevelopment Project No. 1." The Redevelopment Plan was amended on July 17,
1979, to expand the geographic area of the Redevelopment Project.
On February 28, 1984, the Redevelopment Plan was substantially modified.
Among other changes, the area within the Redevelopment Project was greatly
expanded and the Project was redesignated as the "Minnesota River Valley Housing
and Redevelopment Project No. 1."
12
The initial tax increment district designated in the Redevelopment Plan as
"Tax Increment District No. 1," was not expanded with the 1984 expansion of the
Redevelopment Project boundaries. On February 14, 1984 the Authority approved
the creation of Tax Increment District No. 4, and on November 20, 1984, the City
of Shakopee approved the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment District
No. 4. The Facility is located partially in Tax Increment District No. 1 and
partially in Tax Increment District No. 4. Tax Increment from the Facility from
both tax increment districts is pledged as discussed under "Security for the Bonds"
for the payment of principal and interest on the Bonds.
Redevelopment Activity
The objectives and proposed activities of the Authority in the
Redevelopment Project and Tax Increment District are summarized in the
Redevelopment Plan as follows:
The Commissioners of the Authority have determined that there is a need
for housing, development and redevelopment within the corporate limits of the
City to provide employment opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve
the general economy of the State of Minnesota.
The Commissioners have determined that there is a need for safe, decent,
sanitary housing for all residents of the City, particularly for the elderly and
handicapped. There is a need to provide an adequate housing supply for all
residents at a cost they can afford, particularly to provide standard housing choices
to persons and families of low and moderate income. Therefore, the
Commissioners have determined that certain parcels of property qualify as a
"housing project" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, Subdivision 12
and as a "housing district" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73,
Subdivision 11.
The Commissioners have found that there are certain parcels of property
within the City which are potentially more useful, productive and valuable than is
being realized under existing conditions, and, therefore, are not contributing to the
tax base of the City to their full potential. The Commissioners have determined
that certain parcels of property, substantially occupied by buildings, streets,
utilities or other improvements, are deemed to be blighted because fifty percent of
the improvements are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial
renovation or clearance or that twenty percent of the improvements are
structurally substandard and that another thirty percent of these improvements
require renovation or clearance due to inadequate street layout, incompatible uses
or land use relationships, excessive diversity or obsolete buildings not suitable for
improvements or conversion. The Commissioners have determined that certain
parcels of property are deemed to be blighted by virtue of conditions of unusual
and difficult physical characteristics of the ground, which conditions have
prevented normal development of the land by private enterprise, resulting in a
stagnant and unproductive condition of land potentially useful and valuable for
contributing to the public health, safety and welfare. Therefore, the
Commissioners have determined that certain parcels of property qualify as a
"redevelopment project" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421,
Subdivision 13 and as a "redevelopment district" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Section 273.73, Subdivision 10.
13
The Commissioners have found that other parcels of property do not qualify
as housing or redevelopment districts as defined above but do qualify as an
"economic development district" pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.73,
Subd. 12 because the project or a portion of the projeet will discourage commerce,
industry or manufacturing from moving operations to another state, will result in
increased employment or will result in preservation and enhancement of the City's
tax base.
The Commissioners have further determined that the establishment of
Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 will provide the Authority and the City
with the ability to achieve certain public purpose goals not otherwise obtainable in
the foreseeable future without the intervention of the Authority and the City in
the normal development process. These goals include: the restoration and
improvement of the tax base and the tax revenue generating capacity of the
housing and redevelopment project, increased employment opportunities, the
availability of safe healthful housing for all residents, the realization of
comprehensive planning goals, the removal of blighted conditions, and the
revitalization of the property within the housing and redevelopment project to
create an attractive, comfortable, convenient and efficient area for industrial,
commercial and related uses.
The Authority has determined that it is desirable and in the public interest
to designate a specific area within the corporate limits of the City as Housing and
Redevelopment Project No. 1 and to establish, modify and administer a housing and
redevelopment plan (the "Modified Housing and Redevelopment Plan") for
Redevelopment Project No. 1.
The Authority and the City through this Redevelopment Plan, seek to
achieve the following objectives:
(1) To provide logical and organized land use for the area
consistent with the City comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance.
(2) To eliminate blighting influences which to date have impeded
potential development in the area.
(3) To provide safe and adequate drainage in this area.
(4) To provide adequate utilities and other public improvements
and facilities to enhance the area for both new and existing development.
(5) To stimulate commercial and industrial development in the
Project area and in the City.
(6) To provide increased employment and to supplement the
financial and property tax base of the City.
(7) To provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound
needs of the City as a whole, for redevelopment by private enterprise.
(8) To encourage planning and development of a desirable and
unique character within Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 through
14
quality land use alternatives and design quality in new and remodeled
buildings and residences, in a manner consistent with the comprehensive
plan of the City and with a minimum adverse impact on the environment.
(9) To acquire certain property with Housing and Redevelopment
Project No. 1 which is not now in productive use or in its highest and best
use, to make soil corrections on said property and to construct public
improvements on said property, thereby promoting and securing the
development of other land in the City.
(10) To subdivide and sell or lease the improved property to private
developers, including new, small and/or local businesses, which will provide
increased employment opportunities in the City and the surrounding area
and increase the tax base of those taxing jurisdictions within which Housing
and Redevelopment Project No. 1 is located, in order to better enable such
entities to pay for governmental services and programs required to be
provided by them.
(11) To provide safe, decent, sanitary housing for all residents of
the City at a cost they can afford.
(12) To provide additional new housing units so as to accommodate
the needs of expanding commercial and industrial employment base
including high quality housing choices to persons and families of low and
moderate income.
(13) To provide sound residential neighborhoods that are ascetically
[sic] developed, well located and adequately serviced with municipal
utilities and amenities.
(14) To provide the impetus for residential development by private
enterprise consistent with the goals of the Authority and the City including
the policies, present and future housing needs, and housing allocation plans
and implementation pfugran,s of the tiousing Element of the Metropolitan
Development Guide of the Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area.
The Facility
Construction of the Improvements commenced on June 2, 1984 under a
guaranteed maximum costs contract with Kraus-Anderson Construction Company.
It is anticipated that the construction will proceed on a schedule which will allow
the Improvements to be substantially completed and operational on June 29, 1985,
the opening day of the 1985 racing season. It is currently anticipated that final
completion of the Improvements will take place after the 1985 racing season, and
prior to the opening day of the 1986 racing season.
In the initial year of racing, 1985, a 78-day season of Thoroughbred meets
will be conducted. In the following years, it is anticipated that the racing season
will be lengthened to 145 days, with 95 days of Thoroughbred racing followed by 50
days of Standardbred (harness) racing. Mixed meets of racing other types of horses
are being considered. It is anticipated that, begining in 1986, the season will begin
in late April and will run into the month of November.
15
The Improvements are located on approximately 390 acres of land in the
City. The grandstand will be substantially glass enclosed permitting all weather
racing starting in 1986. The six level facility is approximately 275,000 square feet
in size with patron viewing and dining permitted on three levels. The main track is
a one (1) mile dirt track with a turf track planned for 1986. Track lighting will
initially be installed to permit twilight racing. Stable facilities will initially
provide stall space for approximately 1400 horses with future expansion of the
stable area planned.
THE DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
The following is a summary of certain provisions of the Development
Contract. The City and the Authority have subordinated all of their right, title and
interest in the Facility under the Development contract to the interests of First
Trust Company of Saint Paul, St. Paul, Minnesota (the "Trustee") under a Mortgage
and Security Agreement, dated as of October 15, 1984 (the "Trustee Mortgage"),
executed by MRI in favor of the Trustee, and to the interests of Twin City Federal
Savings & Loan Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota ("TCF") and Security Pacific
National Bank, Los Angeles, California ("Security Pacific") under a Mortgage and
Security Agreement, dated as of October 30, 1984 (the "Bank Mortgage") by a
Subordination Agreement, dated as of October 30, 1984. The Trustee Mortgage
secures payment of $46,000,000 in industrial development bonds issued by the City
to finance acquisition and construction of the Facility and the Bank Mortgage
secures MRI's reimbursement obligation to TCF and Security Pacific relating to
issuance by TCF and Security Pacific of their irrevocable letters of credit in a
cumulative amount of $46,000,000 securing payment of the principal of such
industrial development bonds. It is anticipated that, absent acceleration or
prepayment of the industrial development bonds, that the Trustee Mortgage will
remain in effect until at least October 1, 2014 and that the Bank Mortgage will
remain in effect until at least October 1, 1994.
Pursuant to the Development Contract, the Authority has agreed, subject to
certain conditions precedent, to acquire the Facility for the sum of $3,000,000 (the
"Purchase Price") from MRI: and to immediately reconvey the facility to MRI for
the sum of $1.00, such purchase price representing a portion of the public
redevelopment costs associated with construction of the Facility incurred by MRI,
including construction of earthwork and grading, curb and gutter, sewer and
drainage improvements, sidewalk and open space amenities (the "Qualifying
Improvements"). It is presently anticipated that prior to issuance of the Bonds, the
City, the Authority and N[RI will execute an addendum to the Development
Contract providing among other things, that the Purchase Price for the Facility is
increased from $3,000,000 to $3,300,000. Conditions precedent to the obligation of
the Authority to purchase the Facility include certification by MRI that MRI has
completed construction of Qualifying Improvements in an amount of at least
$3,000,000 and provision by MRI to the Authority of the Letter of Credit and the
Guarantees. It is anticipated that all conditions precedent to purchase and
reconveyance of the Facility by the Authority will be satisfied on the date of
issuance of the bonds. The Authority has additionally agreed to construct certain
highway improvements located in the City but not on the Property relating to the
Facility at a cost of up to $2,900,000 pursuant to the Development Contract.
16
MRI has agreed to construct the Facility in substantial conformance with
construction plans submitted to and approved by the Authority, and has agreed
that, subject to unavoidable delays, such construction will be substantially
completed by December 31, 1985. Upon completion of the Facility in conformance
with the construction plans, the Authority will furnish MRI a Certificate of
Completion (the "Certificate of Completion") constituting a conclusive
determination by the Authority that MRI has fulfilled its obligation under the
Development Contract to construct the Facility.
The Development Contract contains provisions requiring MRI to maintain
certain specified types and amounts of insurance with respect to the Facility and
the operation thereof, and requiring MRI to reconstruct the Facility upon casualty
thereto from the proceeds of insurance and other funds of MRI. However, pursuant
to an Intercreditor Agreement, dated as of October 30, 1984, between the City, the
Authority, MRI, TCF and Security Pacific, the City and Authority have agreed that
the provisions of the Development Contract relating to the maintenance of
insurance by MRI and application of any proceeds thereof will be controlled by
certain provisions of the Bank Mortgage so long as it shall be in effect.
MRI has agreed that so long as the Assessment Agreement shall remain in
effect, the Company will maintain its existence as a Minnesota corporation and
shall not consolidate with or merge into another corporation or dissolve or
otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of its assets, provided that MRI may
consolidate with, merge into or transfer its assets to another entity and be
discharged from liability under the Development Contract provided such transferee
entity assumes in writing all obligations of MRI under the Development Contract
and the Assessment Agreement and provided that the Letter of Credit and
Guarantees remain in effect or are replaced with substantially identical
instruments. Additionally, MRI has agreed that, so long as the Assessment
Agreement shall remain in effect, it shall not transfer any interest in the Facility
or the Development contract, except to obtain construction financing for the
Project, without the approval of the Authority; provided, however, that the
Development Contract provides that the company may convey an identified portion
of the Project site upon which no improvements are anticipated to be constructed
without the approval of the Authority. If a proposed transferee accepts in writing
all obligations of MRI under the Development Contract, the Authority may deny
approval of the transfer of interest in the Agreement for the Project only in the
event that the Authority reasonably determines that the security provided to the
Authority under the terms of the Agreement or the likelihood the Project being
sucessfully constructed and operated will be materially impaired by such transfer.
The following are 'Events of Default" under the Development Contract:
(a) Failure by MRI to timely pay all real property taxes assessed with
respect to the Facility, or to provide or maintain the Letter of Credit or
Guarantees;
(b) Failure by MRI to commence and complete construction of the
Project;
(c) Transfer of any assets of the company or interest in the Project in
violation with the provisions of the Development Contract;
17
(d) Failure by the Company to substantially observe or perform any
material covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part to be
observed or performed under the Development Contract;
ty or any
The cesholder of forreclosu en proceedings as e on a result llof any default lo thereof
nder
commences
co
applicable mortgage documents.
Upon the occurrence of any Event of Default the Authority and the City
may, among other remedies, suspend their performance under the Agreement until
they receive adequate assurances from the company that MRI will cure its default
or may take any action, including legal or administrative action, which may appear
necessary or desirable to enforce performance and observance of any obligation,
agreement or covenant of MRI under the Development Contract. However, the
City and the Authority are requried to give MRI, the Trustee, TCF and Security
Pacific written notice of the occurrence of any Event of Default, and may exercise
any remedies only if such Event of Default is not cured within thirty days, or if
such Event of Default cannot be cured within thirty days, if MRI does not provide
satisfactory assurances to the Authority and the City that the Event of Default
will be cured as soon as reasonably possible.
Additionally, the Development Contract provides that the Authority will
retain a right of reversion to the Property after conveyance thereof to MRI which
may be exercised if (i) MRI shall fail to construct the Project, (ii) MRI shall
transfer the Facility or any portion thereof in violation of the terms of the
Development Contract and such violation shall not be remedied within ninety days
of receipt by MRI of written notice thereof, or (iii) the holder of any mortgage on
the Facility or any portion thereof commences a foreclosure action; provided,
however, that the reversionary interest of the Authority in the Property shall
terminate upon receipt by MRI of the Certificate of Completion.
THE ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
The Authority and MRI have executed an Assessment Agreement, dated as
of October 29, 1984, establishing a minimum market value for the Facility
(exclusive of a portion of the Property upon which no portion of the Improvements
are anticipated to be constructed) for the calculation of real property taxes of not
less than $43,245,000 (the "Assessor's Minimum Market Value") effective as of
January 2, 1986. (See "SECURITY FOR THE BONDS" and "TAX INCREMENT"
herein for a description of the relationship of such market value to the
determination of the amount of Tax Increment). The Assessment Agreement will
be filed of record in the real estate records of Scott County, Minnesota, upon
reconveyance of the Facility to MRI pursuant to the Development Contract. The
Assessment Agreement has been executed pursuant to and in conformance with the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 8, and pursuant to the
operation of such statute, the Assessor for Scott County shall not assign a market
value to the Facility of less than $43,245,000 for purposes of the calculation of real
property taxes in the years 1986 through and including 1993 (for taxes due and
payable in the years 1987 through 1994) regardless of actual market values which
may result from incomplete construction of improvements, destruction or
diminution by any cause, insured or uninsured, except in the case of reacquisition
18
of the Property by a public entity. The Assessment Agreement has been
acknowledged and the Assessor's Minimum Market value agreed to by TCF,
Security Pacific and Valley Industrial Company II, a Minnesota general partnership
and vendor of the Property on a contract for deed. Under applicable Minnesota
law, filing of the Development Contract, in the real estate records for Scott
County shall constitute notice to any subsequent encumbrancer or purchaser of the
Property, whether voluntary or involuntary, and the Assessment Agreement shall
be binding and enforceable in its entirety against any such subsequent purchaser or
encumbrancer. Nothing in the Assessment Agreement shall be binding and
enforceable in its entirety against any such subsequent purchaser or encumbrancer.
Nothing in the Assessment Agreement limits the discretion of the Assessor to
assign a market value to the property in any year in excess of such Assessor's
Minimum Market Value or prohibits 'MRI from seeking through the exercise of legal
or administrative remedies a reduction in such market value for tax purposes,
provided, however, that MRI may not seek a reduction of such market value below
the Assessor's Minimum Market Value in any year so long as the Assessment
Agreement shall remain in effect. Although specifically authorized by statute, the
validity of an assessment agreement such as the Assessment Agreement or the
enforceability of the minimum market value established therein has not been
judicially tested in the State of Minnesota, and there is no assurance that upon
judicial challenge the Assessor's Minimum Market Value established by the
Assessment Agreement will not be held to be unenforceable, particularly in the
event of incomplete construction of or damage to or destruction of the Facility.
MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC.
Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. was formed for the purpose of developing and
owning the Facility.
General
In May, 1983, the State of Minnesota enacted a law permitting pari-mutuel
wagering on horse racing. This law established a Racing Commission empowered to
monitor and regulate the pari-mutuel horse racing industry in Minnesota.
MRI was formed in November 1983 to apply to the Racing Commission for
the necessary licenses to construct and operate the first horse racetrack in
Minnesota on which pari-mutuel wagering is conducted.
MRI is owned by Santa Anita Operating Company, a California based
company owning and operating the horse racing facility at Santa Anita Park,
California; North American Life & Casualty Company, a Minnesota based life
insurance company; Scottland, Inc., a Minnesota based land development company;
and Messrs. W. Brooks Fields and J. Brooks Hauser, individuals having an interest
in Scottland, Inc. The land on which the Improvements are being constructed is
owned by Valley Industrial Development Company 11, a Minnesota general
partnership comprised of North American Life & Casualty Company, Scottland,
Inc. and Messrs. Fields and Hauser, and is being purchased by MRI in exchange for
$4,708,000 in preferred stock of MRI.
19
On March 28, 1984, the Racing Commission granted MRI both a "Class A"
license for the ownership and operation of the racetrack to be built in Shakopee,
Minnesota and a "Class B" license for the sponsorship and management of horse
racing. The Class B license is an annually renewable license and has been issued
for an initial period commencing on January 1, 1985 and expiring on December 31,
1985. The Class A license is currently in effect, has no stated expiration date, and
can only be suspended or revoked for cause.
THE LETTER OF CREDIT
The Letter of Credit is being issued by the Bank in the amount of $782,775,
which equal one year's maximum debt service on the Bonds. The Letter of Credit
is an irrevocable obligation of the Bank to pay the Trustee upon its draft made in
accordance with the terms thereof. The Letter of Credit expires March 5, 1995,
but may be terminated earlier by the Bank on July 1 of any year, if, by June 1 of
that year, the Bank gives the Trustee notice of the Bank's intention to terminate it
on July 1. Upon receipt of notice from the Bank of its intention to terminate the
Letter of Credit, the Trustee is required by the Indenture to draw under the Letter
of Credit for deposit to the Reserve Fund created under the Indenture for the
payment of principal and interest on the Bonds, whether at maturity, or
acceleration or redemption.
THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
Reimbursement by the Company
Pursuant to the Reimbursement Agreement, MRI agrees to pay to the Bank
a fee based upon the outstanding liability of the Bank under the Letter of Credit
and immediately to pay to the Bank all amounts that are drawn under the Letter of
Credit, together with interest on all such amounts. In addition, MRI agrees to pay
all costs and expenses incur^ed by the Bank in connection with the preparation and
issuance of the Letter cf Credit and the Reimbursement Agreement and
enforcement of its rights under the Reimbursement Agreement and enforcement of
its rights under the Reimbursement Agreement and to indemnify and hold harmless
the Bank from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, liabilities, costs and
expenses claims against or incurred by it in connection with the Letter of Credit.
Certain Covenants
The Reimbursement Agreement includes a number of covenants by MRI
which are to remain in effect as long as the Bank remains obligated under the
Letter of Credit or MRI':; obligation remains outstanding and unpaid. These
covenants include a number of financial covenants and other matters which are
customary in loan agreemE!nts and are solely for the benefit of the Bank, which
may waive or amend any such covenant and may agree with MRI to add new
covenants. The Bondholders will have no rights or obligations as a result of such
covenants and any amendmE!nts thereto or waivers thereof.
20
Event of Default Under the Reimbursement Agreement
Events of Default under the Reimbursement Agreement include:
(1) MRI shall fail to pay amounts due under the Reimbursement
Agreement;
(2) the Guarantors shall fail to pay any amount due under the Guarantee
Agreements or the Guaranty;
(3) any representation or warranty of the Company or of any Guarantor
made in connection with the Reimbursement Agreement or any related document
providing to be incorrect in any material respect;
(4) MRI shall fail to perform any other covenants or agreements of the
Reimbursement Agreement;
(5) certain events of bankruptcy of MRI or any of the Guarantors;
(6) an event of default occurs under the Indenture, the Second Amended
Contract for Private Development, or the Guarantee Agreements; or
(7) without the prior written consent of the Bank, MRI or any principal
shareholder of MRI shall at any time consolidate with or merge into another entity.
Upon a default under the Reimbursement Agreement, the Bank may refuse to
reinstate the Letter of Credit following a drawing by the Trustee to pay principal
and interest on the Bonds. If the Bank refuses to reinstate the Letter of Credit,
the Indenture requires the Trustee to draw the balance of the Letter of Credit for
deposit into the Reserve Fund.
The Bank Guaranty
By the Bank Guaranty, the shareholders of MRI severally, and not jointly,
guaranty to the Bank the prompt payment of amounts drawn under the Letter of
Credit and all other sums payable to the Bank under the Reimbursement
Agreement.
THE GUARANTY AGREEMENTS
The following is a summary of certain provisions of the Guarantees. By
separate Guaranty Agreements executed by each Guarantor in favor of the
Trustee, the Guarantors have severally, but not jointly, guaranteed payment of up
to twenty-five percent (25%) of the principal of the Bonds and up to twenty-five
percent (25%) of the interest on the Bonds. The Guarantors have guaranteed the
following maximum amounts, subject to the limitations and adjustments
hereinafter set forth: Santa Anita Operating Company, a Delaware corporation:
$405,936.00; North American Life and Casualty Company, a Minnesota corporation:
$649,838.00; and Scottland Inc., a Minnesota corporation: $649,838.00.
21
Each Guarantor has guaranteed to the Authority and the Trustee for the
benefit of the holders from time to time of the bonds, subject to the limitations
hereinafter set forth, full and prompt payment of (a) the principal of any Bond
when and as the same shall [)ecome due at its stated maturity thereof or by
acceleration, and (b) any interest on any Bond when and as the same shall become
due. The obligations of each Guarantor shall be subject to the following
limitations: (1) the liability of each Guarantor shall be limited to the maximum
amounts provided in the preceding paragraph; (2) the maximum liability of the
Guarantors under the Guarantees shall be reduced by the amount of any draw made
by the Trustee under the Letter of Credit, the liability of each Guarantor to be
reduced pro-rata to the total amount of principal on the Bonds originally
guaranteed by such Guarantor; and (3) no demand shall be made under any
Guarantee by the Trustee so long as the Letter of Credit is outstanding. The
Trustee shall not be required to take any action to collect any sums owing under
any Guaranty other than to make a demand for payment, until such time as the
Trustee is indemnified by the Authority or by bondholders for such actions. The
Trustee, in its sole discretion.., shall have the right to proceed first and directly
against any Guarantor, witr,out proceeding against or exhausting any other
remedies which it may have ,except for a draw under the Letter of Credit) and
without resorting to any other security held by the Authority or the Trustee and
without proceeding against any other Guarantor. In no event may the Trustee pay
more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the principal of the Bonds or more than
twenty-five percent (25%) on the interest on the Bonds from amounts drawn under
the Letter of Credit and the Guarantees.
THE GUARANTORS
Scottland Inc.
Scottland, Inc. is a Minnesota corporation which has owned and developed
the Valley Industrial Park in Shakopee, Minnesota, founded in 1969, Scottland, Inc.
is owned by approximately 250 shareholders, 85% of whom live in Minnesota. The
stock has been traded publicly, local over the counter since 1969. The Company
and its wholly owned subsidiary, Scott Builders, Inc., have built and managed over
300 million dollars of construction and land development. See "APPENDIX All
North American Life and Casualty Company
North American Life and Casualty Company, a Minnesota corporation, or a
predecessor has been selling insurance since 1896 and has assets in excess of $600
million, thus ranking the company in the top five percent (5%) of all U.S. life
insurance companies. See "APPENDIX B."
Santa Anita Companies
The Santa Anita Companies comprise two separate, but paired companies.
Santa Anita Realty Enterprises, Inc. ("Realty") is an equity-oriented real estate
investment trust ("REIT") whose principal asset is Santa Anita Park, a 323 acre
thoroughbred racing facility in Arcadia, California. Realty also owns the
contiguous 73 acres underlying Santa Anita Fashion Park and a fifty percent (50%)
equity interest in a partnership which owns and operates this major regional center.
22
The balance of Realty's real estate assets consists primarily of equity interests in
commercial and industrial properties in California.
Santa Anita Operating Company is a holding company whose principal
subsidiaries are Los Angeles Turf Club, Incorporated ("LATC") and Santa Anita
Development Corporation ("SDC"). LATC leases Santa Anita Park from Realty and
conducts thoroughbred racing. SDC originates, develops, owns, manages and sells
neighborhood shopping center projects in California and Arizona.
Combined net income for The Santa Anita Companies in 1982 was
$10,308,000 or $1.68 per share on combined revenues of $75,888,000. This
compares with combined net income of $10,939,000 or $1.87 per share on combined
revenues of $82,697,000 for the year ended December 31, 1981. See "APPENDIX
C."
THE AUTHORITY
The Authority is a public corporation which was created to carry out the
public housing and redevelopment activities of the City within the corporate
boundaries thereof. The Authority is governed by a five member Board of
Commissioners, all of which are members of the City Council, all of which are
appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. The table on the
following page sets forth certain information relating to the present Board of
Commissioners.
Authority Authority City Council
Members Position Term Position
Dean Colligan Chairman 12/87 Council Person
Gloria Vierling Secretary 12/85 Council Person
Delores Lebens Vice Chairman 12/85 Council Person
John Leroux Commissioner 12/87 Council Person
Jerry Wampach Commissioner 12/87 Council Person
Authority Powers
Pursuant to the Redevelopment Act the Authority is empowered to utilize
public monies to promote the clearance, replanning, rehabilitation and moderniza-
tion of substandard areas and to provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing for
persons and families of low and moderate income through the participation of
private enterprise.
The Authority may finance its activities through tax increment revenue, a
limited tax levy, bonds and notes of the Authority, rental and sale of property,
bonds of the City, and federal and state grants and loans. However, the principal
and interest on the Bonds are not payable from any source other than those
specified in the Indenture.
23
THE CITY
General Information
The City of Shakopee is located on the Minnesota River in northeastern
Scott County approximately 25 miles southwest of the City of Minneapolis. The
City covers an area of approximately 29 square miles. In 1980, the U.S. Census
reported the City's population at 9,941, a 44.6% increase over the 1970 Census.
Tag Rates
In October of each year the City Council adopts the City budget for the
ensuing year and levies taxes upon all property within the City which will be
sufficient to cover all expenditures of the City. Taxes on real property become
due on January 1 of each year. One half must be paid by May 15 and the other
half by October 15 of each year.
Shown in the table below are the tax rates established by the City for City
purposes and the respective tax rates for other governmental units within or
overlapping upon the City.
Mill Rates Per $1,000 of Assessed Value
1976/77 1977/78 1978/79 1979/80 1980/81 1981/82 1982/83 1983/84
Scott County 35.47 40.27 41.089 42.961 36.252 39.046 36.736 33.004
City of
Shakopee 20.18 20.47 17.076 18.323 15.631 19.145 18.770 17.465
ISD 720 61.04 61.23 55.879 52.850 38.646 52.380 62.390 55.630
Special
District* 3.34 3.28 3.528 4.257 4.423 5.594 4.755 4.737
Total 120.03 125.25 117.572 118.391 94.952 116.165 122.651 110.836
* Special districts are: Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Transit District,
Metropolitan Mosquito Control, Lower Minnesota Watershed, and Shakopee Housing
and Redevelopment Authority.
NOTE:The foregoing mill rates are computed on the basis of total levies and
taxable assessed values, and do not reflect reductions for property tax
credits.
24
Assessed Valuations
Set forth on the table below are the assessed valuations of property located
within the City.
Trend of Values Taxable Assessed Value
1983 $96,443,444
1982 89,424,032
1981 87,284,603
1980 68,451,455
1979 51,555,892
1978 46,334,403
1977 41,679,864
1976 39,988,370
THE INDENTURE
The following is a summary of certain provisions of the Indenture:
Initial Deposits in Trust Funds
The Indenture creates the following Trust Funds: Acquisition Fund, Bond
Fund, Reserve Fund, and Cost of Issuance Fund. The net proceeds from the sale of
the Bonds shall be deposited with the Trustee on the date of delivery of the Bonds
and credited in the following amounts to the following Trust Funds:
Bond Fund: $ 704,919.52
Acquisition Fund: $3,372,475.96
Cost of Issuance Fund: $ 75,000.00
The Acquisition Fund
Moneys in the Acquisition Fund will be used exclusively to purchase the
Property pursuant to the terms of the Development Contract. It is expected that
all moneys in the Acquisition Fund will be used to pay the Purchase Price (as
defined in the Development Contract) for the Property. The Trustee shall disburse
moneys from the Acquisition Fund to the Authority or its designee upon receipt of
an Authority Order specifying the Purchase Price, the name of the payee, that all
conditions precedent to purchase of the Property under the Development Contract
have been complied with or have been waived by the Authority and certain other
matters.
All investment earnings on moneys on deposit in the Acquisition Fund shall
be deposited in the Bond Fund upon receipt. All moneys, if any, remaining in the
Acquisition Fund after purchase of the Property shall be transferred to the Bond
Fund.
25
Bond Fund
Bond proceeds initially deposited into the Bond Fund and investment
earnings thereon will be used to pay interest on the Bonds to and including
February 1, 1987. All Pledged Increment and all investment earnings on amounts in
the Cost of Issuance Fund, Acquisition Fund and Reserve Fund (if any) and any
other moneys received by the Trustee for payment of principal, premium or
interest on the Bonds will be deposited in the Bond Fund upon receipt by the
Trustee. The Bond Fund shall be for the payment of principal or Redemption Price
of and interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due, whether upon maturity,
Redemption prior to maturity, acceleration or otherwise in accordance with the
Indenture. The Trustee shall also withdraw from the Bond Fund on each Interest
Payment Date an amount equal to the compensation then owed to the Trustee, if
any.
Reserve Fund
The Reserve Fund shall be funded solely from the proceeds of a Final Draft
(as defined in the Letter of Credit), if any, drawn under the Letter of Credit by the
Trustee (see "THE LETTER OF CREDIT" herein). If on any Interest Payment Date
the amount then on hand in the Bond Fund is insufficient to pay the principal of and
interest on the Bonds due on such Interest Payment Date or any Trustee fees due
on such Interest Payment Date, the Trustee shall transfer from the Reserve Fund
to the Bond Fund an amount equal to such deficiency. Additionally, upon an Event
of Default and the acceleration of the principal of the Bonds in accordance with
the terms of the Indenture, the Trustee shall transfer from the Reserve Fund to the
Bond Fund the amount needed to pay principal and interest on the Bonds on the
date fixed for redemption thereof pursuant to the terms of the Indenture.
All investment income derived from the investment of amounts on deposit in
the Reserve Fund shall be transferred to the Bond Fund upon receipt.
Cost of Issuance Fund
The Cost of Issuance Fund shall be used to pay or reimburse the Authority
for the payment of expenses relating to the issuance of the Bonds, including fees
and disbursements of attorneys for the Authority and the Underwriter and of bond
counsel, reimbursement for staff administrative time and expenses relating to the
Bonds, fees and disbursements of accountants and fiscal consultants, printing of the
Bonds and any official statement, fees of any rating agencies, out-of-pocket
expenses of the Authority in connection with the issuance of the Bonds, and
expenses and fees and disbursements of the Trustee in connection with the
acceptance of the Indenture and the issuance of the Bonds. All investment
earnings on moneys in the Cost of Issuance Fund shall be transferred to the Bond
Fund upon receipt. On September 1, 1985, any moneys on hand in the Cost of
Issuance Fund shall be transferred to the Bond Fund and thereafter used for
purposes of said Fund.
Letter of Credit; Substitute Letter of Credit; Guarantees
The Indenture directs the Trustee to draw upon the Letter of Credit, if the
Letter of Credit shall be in effect, if there shall not be on deposit in the Bond Fund
26
five days prior to any Payment Date sufficient moneys to pay all interest and
principal due and payable on such Payment Date, an amount equal to the difference
between (i) the amounts on deposit in the Bond Fund and available under the terms
of the Indenture to pay principal of and interest on the Bonds on such Payment
Date, and (ii) the sum of principal of and interest on the Bonds due and payable on
such Payment Date. Additionally, if (i) within 60 calendar days from the date of
receipt by the Trustee of any moneys drawn under the Letter of Credit, the
Trustee shall receive written notice from the Bank that the Bank has not been
reimbursed for the amount of such draft (a "Debt Service Draft," as defined in the
Letter of Credit), the Letter of Credit has not been reinstated to its full face
amount immediately preceding such Debt Service Draft, or (ii) 15 calendar days
prior to the expiration date of any Letter of Credit the Company has not caused to
be delivered to the Trustee a Substitute Letter of Credit (as hereinafter defined) or
the written commitment of a bank, in form and substance acceptable to the
Trustee and the Authority, to issue a Substitute Letter of Credit, effective as of
the date of expiration of the Letter of Credit, the Trustee shall submit a Final
Draft (as defined in the Letter of Credit) for the full amount of the Letter of
Credit less the amount of such Debt Service Draft.
The Indenture provides that any time during the term of the Letter of
Credit, the Company may deliver to the Trustee a Substitute Letter of Credit from
a bank or other financial institution which: (i) is doing business in the United States
of America, (ii) is authorized by law to issue letters of credit, and (iii) is
acceptable to the Authority. Any Substitute Letter of Credit must be an
irrevocable letter of credit issued in an amount at least equal to the amount of the
Letter of Credit at the time the Substitute Letter of Credit becomes effective and
must be in substantially the same form as the Letter of Credit.
If at any time the Letter of Credit is not in effect, there shall not be on
deposit in the Bond Fund five days prior to any Payment Date sufficient moneys to
pay all principal and interest on the Bonds due on such Payment Date, the Trustee
shall immediately make demand under one or more of the Guarantees for the
difference between (i) the amounts on deposit in the Bond Fund and available under
the terms of the Indenture to pay the principal of and interest on the Bonds upon
such payment date, and (ii) the sum of principal and interest on the Bonds due and
payable on such Payment Date, provided, however, that the Trustee shall have no
obligation to take any action to secure payment under the Guarantees other than
the making of a demand for payment until such time as the Trustee has been
indemnified for such additional actions by the Authority or by Bondholders.
The cumulative amount of principal on the Bonds paid from moneys drawn
under the Letter of Credit or Guarantees shall not exceed $1,050,000.00 and the
cumulative amount of interest on the Bonds paid from moneys drawn under the
Letter of Credit and the Guarantees shall not exceed $634,537.00.
Investment of Trust Fund Moneys
Moneys held in Trust Funds shall be invested and reinvested by the Trustee
upon the directions of the Authority, to the extent permitted by law, in any of the
following investments: (1) direct obligations of the United States of America for
the payment of which the full faith and credit of the United States of America is
pledged, or (2) obligations issued by a person controlled or supervised by and acting
27
as an instrumentality of the United States of America, for the payment of which
the full faith and credit of the United States of America is pledged, or (3) such
other investments as may be permitted by law and which are directed by the
Authority.
The Trustee shall, without further direction from the Authority, terminate
or sell such investments as and when required to make any payment for the purpose
of which such investments are held. Any income received on such investments
shall be credited to the Bond Fund upon receipt, subject to any provision of the
Indenture specifying any different credit or the transfer thereof to another Trust
Fund.
Pledge of Tax Increment
The Authority has pledged to collect from the County Auditor of Scott
County, Minnesota, the entire Tax Increment derived from certain parcels included
in Tax Increment Districts Nos. 1 and 4 (the "Tax Increment") and to remit to the
Trustee for deposit in the Bond Fund from all Tax Increment received with respect
to any Calendar Year (i) first, an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of
the principal and interest on the Bonds which shall become due on the Bonds in the
Bond Year next beginning after the first day of such Calendar Year, less any
amounts on deposit in the Bond Fund and available to pay such principal and
interest, and (ii) second, an additional amount equal to all Trustee fees which will
become due in such Bond Year (the "Pledged Increment"). Tax Increment is
received "with respect to" a particular Calendar Year if the Tax Increment was
generated by ad valorem real property taxes (or taxes in lieu thereof pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 273) first becoming due and payable in such Calendar
Year, irrespective of when such Tax Increment is actually paid to the Authority.
"Bond Year" means any twelve month period beginning on September 1 and ending
on the subsequent August 31. The Authority shall not use any Tax Increment
received with respect to any Calendar Year for any purpose other than payment to
the Trustee of the amounts pledged hereunder until such amounts shall have been
paid in full; provided, however, that if the Authority shall have made all payments
of Tax Increment with respect to the Tax Increment received with respect to any
Calendar Year, any additional Tax Increment received by the Authority with
respect to such Calendar Year in excess of the Pledged Increment ("Excess
Increment") shall be retained by the Authority and be available to the Authority for
any legal purpose and shall not be or thereafter become subject to the lien of this
Indenture for payment of the Bonds, or premium or interest thereon, or for any
other purpose. The Authority shall remit all Pledged Increment received by it to
the Trustee within fifteen (15) days of receipt by the Authority, but in any event
prior to the next Interest Payment Date. If the Authority shall not receive with
respect to any Calendar Year sufficient Tax Increment to make the payments to
the Trustee, such shortfall shall not affect the obligation of the Authority to make
such payments in future years, but the Authority shall have no present or future
obligation to pay such shortfall from any Excess Increment received in any future
year or from any other source whatsoever.
28
Events of Default
The following events constitute 'Events of Default" under the Indenture:
(a) default in the payment of any principal of any Bond when it
becomes due and payable, whether at its Stated Maturity or upon prior can
for redemption; or
(b) default in the payment of any interest on any Bond when it
becomes due and payable; or
(c) default in the performance or breach of any other covenant or
warranty of the Authority in the Indenture and the continuance of such
default or breach for a period of sixty (60) days after there has been given,
by registered or certified mail, to the Authority by the Trustee or to the
Authority and the Trustee by the Holders of at least twenty-five percent
(25%) in principal amount of the Outstanding Bonds, a written notice
specifying such default or breach and requiring it to be remedied and stating
that such notice is a "Notice of Default" hereunder; provided, however, that
if the default be such that it cannot be corrected within such period, it shall
not constitute an Event of Default if corrective action is instituted by the
Authority within such period and diligently pursued until corrected.
If an Event of Default has occurred and is continuing, the Trustee shall have
the following rights and remedies:
(a) The Trustee may declare the principal of all the Bonds to be
due and payable immediately, by a notice in writing to the Authority, and
upon any such declaration such principal shall become immediately due and
payable.
(b) The Trustee may in its discretion proceed to protect and
enforce its rights and the rights of the Bondholders by such appropriate
judicial proceedings as the Trustee shall deem most effectual to protect and
enforce any such rights (other than acceleration of the Bonds), whether for
the specific enforcement of any covenant or agreement in the Indenture, in
aid of the exercise of any power granted herein, or to enforce any other
proper remedy. If an Event of Default shall have occurred and be
continuing, and if requested to do so by the Holders of not less than twenty-
five percent (25%) in aggregate principal amount of Outstanding Bonds, the
Trustee shall be obligated to exercise one or more of such remedies as the
Trustee, being advised by counsel, shall deem most expedient in the
interests of the Bondholders.
Any Event of Default under the Indenture and its consequences may be
waived and any acceleration may be rescinded by the Trustee or the Holders of not
less than a majority in aggregate principal amount of the Bonds Outstanding,
provided, however, without the consent of the Holder of each Bond so affected, a
default in the payment of principal, premium, if any, or interest or a default in
respect of certain covenants and provisions shall not be waived.
29
In the case of an Event of Default under the Indenture, the Holders of a
majority in aggregate principal amount of the Bonds then Outstanding shall have
the right to direct the method and place of conducting all remedial proceedings to
be taken by the Trustee in connection with the enforcement of the terms and
conditions of the Indenture, the Mortgage and the Assignment. However, such
direction must not be contrary to law or the provisions of the Indenture, and the
Trustee may decline to follow any such direction which, in its opinion, would be
prejudicial to Holders of Bonds not parties to such direction. No Holder of any
Bond shall be entitled to institute any proceeding in equity or at law to enforce any
provision of the Indenture or any remedy thereunder unless, after written notice of
such Event of Default, the Trustee shall refuse or neglect to institute such suit
within sixty (60) days after receipt of the written request of and the offer of
indemnification from the Holders of not less than twenty-five percent (25%) in
aggregate principal amount of the Bonds Outstanding. Nothing in the Indenture is
intended to affect or impair the right of any Holder of Bonds to enforce the
payment of the principal or Redemption Price of and interest on its Bonds or the
obligations of the Issuer to pay the principal or Redemption Price of and interest
on each Bond in accordance with its terms at the time and place expressed in the
Indenture and the Bonds.
Notiee of Default
Within ninety (90) days after the occurrence of any default, the Trustee
shall transmit by mail to all Registered Holders of Bonds notice of such default
known to the Trustee, unless such default shall have been cured or waived;
provided, however, that, except in the case of a default in the payment of the
principal of or interest on any Bond, the Trustee shall be protected in withholding
such notice if and so long as the board of directors and/or officers of the Trustee in
good faith determine that the withholding of such notice is in the interests of the
Bondholders; and provided, further, that in the case of any default in the
performance, or breach of any covenant or warranty of the Authority as specified
in Section 6.01, subsection C of the Indenture, no such notice to Bondholders shall
be given until at least 30 days after the occurrence thereof. For the purpose of
this Section, the term "default" means any event which is, or after notice or lapse
of time or both would become, an Event of Default, as defined in the Indenture.
Supplemental Indentures
Without the consent of the Holders of any Bonds, the Authority, when
authorized by an Authority Resolution, and the Trustee, at any time and from time
to time, may enter into one or more indentures supplemental hereto, in form
satisfactory to the Trustee, for any one of the following purposes:
(a) to evidence the succession of another entity to the Authority
and the assumption by any such successor of the covenants of the Authority
herein and in the Bonds contained; or
(b) to add to the covenants of the Authority, for the benefit of
the Holders of the Bonds, or to surrender any right or power herein
conferred upon the Authority; or
30
(c) to authorize the issuance of Bonds in coupon form and to
establish the form of such coupon Bonds, if permitted by applicable law; or
(d) to cure any ambiguity, to correct or supplement any provision
herein which may be inconsistent with any other provision herein or to make
any other provisions with respect to matters or questions arising under the
Indenture which shall not be inconsistent with the provisions of the
Indenture; provided such action shall not adversely affect the interests of
the Holders of the Bonds.
With the consent of the Holders of not less than a majority in principal
amount of the Bonds Outstanding by Act of said Holders delivered to the Authority
and the Trustee, the Authority, when authorized by an Authority Resolution, and
the Trustee may enter into an indenture or indentures supplemental hereto, for the
purpose of adding any provisions to, changing in any manner or eliminating any of
the provisions of this Indenture, modifying any of the provisions of the Indenture or
modifying in any manner the rights of the Holders of the Bonds under the
Indenture; provided, however, that no such supplemental indenture shall, without
the consent of the Holder of each Outstanding Bond affected thereby:
(a) change the Stated Maturity of the principal of or any
installment of interest on any Bond, reduce the principal amount thereof or
the interest thereon, change any place of payment where or the coin or
currency in which any Bond is payable or impair the right to institute suit
for the enforcement of any such payment on or after the Stated Maturity
thereof (or, in the case of redemption, on or after the Redemption Date); or
(b) reduce the percentage in principal amount of the Outstanding
Bonds, the consent of whose Holders is required for any such supplemental
indenture or the consent of whose Holders is required for any waiver (of
compliance with certain provisions of the Indenture of certain defaults
hereunder and their consequences) provided for in the Indenture; or
(c) modify any of the provisions of the Indenture to modify the
percentage of Bondholders required to waive Events of Default or approve
Supplemental Indentures except to increase any such percentage or to
provide that certain other provisions of this Indenture cannot be modified or
waived without the consent of the Holder of each Bond affected thereby.
Discharge
When the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on all the Outstanding
Bonds have been paid and provision has been made for the payment of all other
sums payable under the Indenture, then the pledge and assignment of all Tax
Increment and other revenues and receipts under the Indenture and the covenants,
agreements and other obligations of the Authority thereunder to the Holders of the
Bonds shall cease, terminate and become void and be discharged and satisfied.
After the above conditions have been met, the Trustee shall cancel and discharge
the Indenture. All of the Bonds shall be deemed to have been paid for purposes of
discharging the Indenture if there shall have been deposited with or held by the
Trustee or any Paying Agent either moneys in an amount which shall be sufficient
or Government Obligations (not subject to redemption at the option of the issuer
31
thereof) the principal of and interest on which when due shall provide mounts
which (together with such moneys, if any) shall be sufficient to pay when
due the
principal of, premium, if any, and interest due or to become due on all Outstanding
Bonds; provided, however, that the Issuer shall have taken all action necessary to
redeem such Bonds and notice ()f such redemption shall have been duly given by the
Trustee as provided in the Indenture. "Government Obligations" means: (a) direct
obligations of the United States of America for the payment of which the full faith
and credit of the United States of America is pledged or (b) obligations issued by a
person controlled or supervised by and acting as an instrumentality of the United
States of America, for the payment of which the full faith and credit of the United
States of America is pledged.
Waiver of Deposit Insurance
Each holder a Bond, by its acceptance of such Bond and for the benefit of
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and to preserve the tax-exempt status
of interest on the Bonds, irrevocably waives any Federal deposit insurance and any
claim it may have against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, now existing
or hereafter arising, by virtue of such Bond being secured by the Letter of Credit
and the Trustee, on behalf of itself and the holders from time to time of the Bonds
and for the benefit of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and to preserve
the tax-exempt status of interest on the Bonds, has irrevocably waived any such
insurance or claim and has agreed that it will not assert any entitlement to such
insurance or assert any such claim in an action against the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation or otherwise; rop vided that the foregoing waivers shall not
be taken to imply that the Trustee or any holder of a Bond is entitled to any such
Federal deposit insurance or has or under any circumstances would have any such
claim against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
ENFORCEABILITY OF REMEDIES
While the Bonds are sei�ured by a portion of the proceeds of the Bonds and
by the Tax Increment, the practical realization of such security upon any default
may depend upon the exercise of various remedies specified by the Indenture.
These and other remedies may be dependent upon judicial actions which are subject
to discretion and delay. Under existing constitutional,, statutory, and judicial law,
such remedies may not be readily available or may be limited. A court may decide
not to order the specific performance of covenants contained in such documents.
The various legal opinions to be delivered concurrently with the delivery of the
Bonds will be qualified as to the enforceability of the various legal instruments by
limitations imposed by state and federal laws affecting remedies and by
bankruptcy, reorganization or other laws affecting the enforcement of creditor's
rights.
LEGAL MATTERS
Legal matters incident to the authorization, issuance, and sale by the
Authority of the Bonds and with regard to the tax-exempt status thereof will be
passed upon by O'Connor & Hannan, Bond Counsel. A copy of such opinion is
included herein as Appendix D. Copies of such opinion will be printed on the
32
reverse side of the Bonds. Certain legal matters will be passed upon for the
Underwriter by Holmes & Graven, Chartered, as counsel for the Underwriter.
Certain legal matters will be passed upon for the Authority by the City Attorney as
counsel to the Authority.
TAX EXEMPTION
In the opinion of O'Connor & Hannan, Minneapolis, Minnesota, bond counsel,
under existing statutes, court decisions, and rulings, interest on the Bonds is
exempt from federal income taxes, and under present Minnesota laws interest on
the Bonds is not includable in gross income for State of Minnesota income tax
purposes, except Minnesota corporate and bank excise taxes measured by income.
UNDERWRITING
Pursuant to the terms and conditions of a Bond Purchase Agreement, Miller
& Schroeder Municipals, Inc. has agreed to purchase the Bonds from the Authority
at an aggregate purchase price of $4,074,000 plus accrued interest from March 1,
1985, to the date of delivery of the Bonds. The Underwriter is obligated to take
and pay for all of the Bonds, if any Bond is purchased. The Bonds are being offered
for sale to the public at the initial prices or yields determined to produce the yields
or prices to maturity stated on the cover page of this Official Statement, plus
accrued interest. The public offering prices may be changed from time to time and
may be reduced for sales to selected dealers. During the initial offering period the
Bonds will be sold at par. The Underwriter reserves the right to join with other
dealers in offering the Bonds to the public.
The Bonds are offered, subject to prior sale, when, as and if issued by the
Authority, subject to the opinions as to validity and certain other matters of
O'Connor & Hannan and Holmes & Graven, Chartered, and certain other conditions.
Under the Bond Purchase Agreement, certain of the parties will indemnify
certain other parties with respect to matters relating to this Official Statement
and the information provided herein.
Subject to prevailing market conditions the Underwriter intends, but is not
obligated, to effect secondary market transactions for the Bonds. However, the
Underwriter is not obligated to repurchase any of the Bonds at the request of the
Holders thereof.
MISCELLANEOUS
Any statements in this Official Statement involving matters of opinion,
whether or not expressly so stated, are intended as such and not as representations
of fact. This Official Statement is not to be construed as a contract or agreement
between the Authority or the Underwriter and the purchasers or Holders of any of
the Bonds.
Certain provisions of the operative legal documents relating to the Bonds
are summarized in this Official Statement. Such summaries do not purport to be
33
comprehensive or definitive and reference is made to such documents for a full and
complete statement of
atheir the respective .
pr ncipal officelsionsof the Truptee.of such documents are
available porequest
34
APPENDIX A
SCOTTLAND; INC., AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
35
i
(This page has been left blank intentionally.)
ARTHUR
ANDERSEN
CO
SCOTTLAND INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1984 AND 1983
TOGETHER WITH AUDITORS' REPORT
ARTHUR ANDERSEN & CO-
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
To the Shareholders of
Scottland Inc. :
We have examined the consolidated balance sheets of
SCOTTLAND INC . (a Minnesota corporation) AND SUBSIDIARIES as of
September 30, 1984 and 1983, and the related consolidated state-
ments of operations , changes in shareholders ' investment and changes
in financial position for the years then ended. Our examinations
were made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards
and, accordingly, included such tests of the accounting records and
such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements
referred to above present fairly the financial position of Scottland
Inc. and Subsidiaries as of September 30, 1984 and 1983, and the
results of their operations and the changes in their financial
position for the years then ended, in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis.
December 28, 1984•
SCOTTLAND INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF SEPTEMBER 30
A S S E T S LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS' INVESTMENT
1984 1983 1984 1983
CASH $ 30,572 $ 21,464 NOTES PAYABLE (Note 3):
Related parties $ 668,000 $ 244,921
Unrelated parties 8,850,021 1,956,781
ACCOUNTS AND NOTES RECEIVABLE:
Trade 368,320 335,513 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: 271,673 88,141
Related parties (Note 6) 403,736 237,357 Trade
Related parties 37,499 12,564
ACCRUED EXPENSES 172,001 45,334
PREPAID EXPENSES AND DEPOSITS 26,846 669
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY 254,589 153,468
DEFERRED INCOME TAXES (Note 5) 39,700 39,700
INVESTMENT IN ASSOCIATED COMPANIES (Notes 2 and 3) 6,9593868 549,778
CONVERTIBLE SUBORDINATED DEBENTURES (Note 3) 25,000 25,000
----------- ----------
Total liabilities 10,318,483 2,565,909
----------- ----------
LAND, at cost (Notes 1 and 3) 3,202,551 1,757,095
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Note 7)
SHAREHOLDERS' INVESTMENT (Notes 2, 3 and 4):
RENTAL PROPERTY, at cost, less accumulated Common stock, par value $.05 per
depreciation of $23,719 at September 30, share; 2,000,000 shares authorized,
1984 (Notes 1 and 3) 780,101 608,178 989,840 issued and outstanding 49,492 49,492
Additional paid-in capital 1,821,088 1,821,088
Accumulated deficit (1,746,376) (1,867,278)
OFFICE EQUIPMENT AND LEASEHOLD IMPROVEMENTS, Distribution in excess of investment 1,402,153 1,033,439
at cost, less accumulated depreciation ----------- ----------
of $62,248 and $43,912, respectively (Note 1) 72,846 92,596 Total shareholders' investment 1,526,357 1,036,741
-----------
----------- ----------
$11,844,840 $3,602,650 $11,844,840 $3,602,650
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these balance sheets
SCOTTLAND INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30
1984 1983
REVENUES :
Sales of real estate $ 674,969 $ 111, 595
Construction 147, 323 107, 043
Rent 105, 621 -
commissions and fees 74,0
Interest 224,09944
80, 904
Other ----33,984 ---17, 261
Total revenues 11260,014 316,803
---------- ---------
COSTS AND EXPENSES: 670,762 104,675
Cost of real estate sold 133, 397 88,031
Construction 449,968 407,912
Operations
Rental operations 83,932 -
Interest, net of $483,000 and
$74,000 capitalized (Notes 1 and 2) ----79,322 --124,387
Total costs and expenses 1 , 417, 381 725, 005
---------- ---------
Operating loss (157 , 367) (408, 202)
Net equity in earnings of
associated companies 278, 269 4, 432
---------- ---------
Net income (loss ) before income
taxes and extraordinary item 120,902 (403, 770)
PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES (Note 5) (65,000) -
---------- ---------
Net income (loss) before
extraordinary item 55,902 (403, 770)
EXTRAORDINARY ITEM:
Utilization of net operating
loss carryforwards (Note 5) 65,000 -
---------- ---------
Net income (loss ) $ 120,902 $(403,770)
NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE $ . 12 $ ( . 41 )
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements
SCOTTLAND INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS ' INVESTMENT
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30 1984 AND 1983
Distribution
Additional in Excess of
Common Paid-In Accumulated Investment
Stock Capital Deficit (Note 2)
BALANCE,
September 30,
1982 $49, 492 $1, 821, 088 $(1, 463, 508) $1, 035, 180
Net loss - - (403, 770) _
Distribution
recognized
in income _
1' 741)
------- -------- ----------- -----
BALANCE, - -
September 30,
1983 49, 492 1, 821, 088 (1, 867,278) 1, 033, 439
Net income - - 120, 902 _
Distribution
in excess of
investment _
- - 634, 378
Distribution
recognized
in income _
(265, 664)
BALANCE, ------- ---------- ----------- ----------
September 30,
1984 $49, 492 $1,821, 088 $(1, 746, 376) $1, 402, 153
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements
SCOTTLAND INC . AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
FOR THE YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30
1984 1983
CASH WAS PROVIDED FROM (USED FOR) :
Operations- $ 120, 902 $ (403, 770)
Net income (loss)
Add (deduct) items not affecting
cash: 42, 844 15, 468
Depreciation
Equity in earnings of 432)
associated companies (278, 269 ) ( '
Total cash used in operations (114,523 ) (392, 734 )
Property transactions- 1, 445, 456) (544, 101)
Cost of land improvements , net
(Purchase) sale of office equipment 625 (21, 074)
and leasehold improvements , net ty (195, 642) (608, 178)
Construction costs of rental proper
Investment transactions- _
Distributions from associated companies 1, 244, 773
Contributions to associated companies (7,004,880)
Financing transactions-
Borrowings for investment in 5, 653, 000 -
associated company 1, 663, 319 817,538
Other borrowings, net
Changes in other balance sheet items- 1 186) 677, 389
Accounts and notes receivable (208, 467 (32, 901 )
Accounts payable
Accrued expenses, special 227, 788 122, 879
assessments and income taxes
Prepaid expenses and deposits ---(26, 177)
Total cash provided 9, 108 19,749
CASH, beginning of year 21, 464
1, 715
---------- ---------
CASH, end of year $--_30,572 $-_21, 464
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements
SCOTTLAND, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
SEPTEMBER 30 , 1984 AND 1983
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies-
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts
of Scottland, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries
(collectively referred to as the Company) . All signifi-
cant intercompany transactions and balances have been
eliminated in consolidation.
The Company ' s primary business activity is the purchase,
sale, management and development of real estate. Also, the
Company is an investor/owner in two associated partnerships
which are involved in real estate ownership and development
and in an associated corporation which is involved in the
construction, management and operation of a horse racing
facility.
Significant accounting policies followed in the preparation
of the accompanying financial statements are described
below.
Unclassified Balance Sheet :
The Company follows the industry practice of reporting
financial position in an unclassified balance sheet.
At September 30, 1984 and 1983, a substantial por-
tion of the Company 's assets consist of investments
in associated companies , land and other long-term
assets , while many of its liabilities (including
approximately $2, 466, 000 and $1, 487, 000, respec-
tively, of notes payable) are current.
Sales of Real Estate:
The Company records the sale of real estate at the
time that a binding contract is signed and the buyer
has a significant and continuing investment in the
property. Costs related to the sale, including
selling expenses , closing costs , land acquisition
and improvement costs, are charged to operations at
the time of sale. Allocation of costs to parcels
sold is determined by a combination of the specific
identification and value methods.
Construction Revenues :
Construction revenues are recognized using the
percentage-of-completion method of accounting
-1-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(1 ) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies ( continued)-
Construction Revenues (continued) :
for financial reporting purposes. For income tax
purposes , the completed-contract method of revenue
recognition is used.
Land:
Land held for resale is carried at cost which does
not exceed market as determined by independent
appraisal. Cost includes the cost of acquisition,
improvements , and related interest and real estate
taxes capitalized during the holding period. A
summary of land by major development is as follows :
September 30
-----------------------
1984 1983
Being improved:
Greenhaven Village $11118, 370 $ -
Brooksville Hills
Sixth Edition 663, 490 719, 263
Brooksville Hills
Quad Homes 443, 048 2,097
Sunset Hills 405, 651 342, 598
Lakeville 89,606 168, 825
Other 3, 471 38, 370
---------- ----------
2,723, 636 1 , 271 , 153
Unimproved (LaTour
Parcel) 478, 915 485, 942
---------- ----------
$3 , 202 , 551 $1 , 757, 095
Interest capitalized in connection with the Company ' s
land development activities totaled $227,000 and
$741, 000 in fiscal 1984 and fiscal 1983, respec-
tively.
Depreciation :
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line
method over the estimated useful lives of the
related assets which range from 3 to 10 years for
equipment and leasehold improvements and 5 to 30
years for rental property.
-2-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)-
Income (Loss) Per Share:
Income (loss) per share is based on the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding
during each year (989,840 shares in fiscal 1984 and 1983). The exercise of options, the assumed
conversion of subordinated debentures and the exercise of the stock warrants have not been included
in the per share computations, since the effect is either antidilutive or not significant.
(2) Investment .in Associated Companies-
The Company owns a 50% equity interest in Valley Industrial Development Company (VIDCO), a 35% equity
interest in Valley Industrial Development Company II (VIDCO II) and a 27% equity interest in Minnesota
Racetrack, Inc. (MRI). Transactions related to the Company's investment in associated companies,
reported on the equity basis, were as follows:
VIDCO VIDCO II MRI Total
Balance, September 30, 1982 $547,087 $ - $ - $ 547,087
Equity in earnings of associated companies,
excluding recognition of $1,741 of distribution
in excess of investment as income 2,691 - - 2,691
-------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Balance, September 30, 1983 549,778 - - 549,778
Distribution of 50% interest in 318 acres of land
having a book cost in excess of the Company's
Investment in VIDCO of $634,378 (549,778) - - (549,778)
Contribution of a 70% interest of the Company's
50% interest in 318 acres of land distributed
from VIDCO and a 70% interest of the Company's
50% interest in 72 acres of land acquired from
an officer/director - 1,095,819 - 1,095,819
Investment in 113,060 shares of MRI common stock - - 5,653,000 5,653,000
Interest capitalized on investment in MRI common
stock - - 256,061 256,061
Cash distribution - (57,617) - (57,617)
Equity in earnings (losses) of associated companies,
excluding recognition of $265,664 of distribution
in excess of investment as income (24,524) 72,436 (35,307) 12,605
Balance, September 30, 1984 $(24,524) $1,110,638 $5,873,754 $6,959,868
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(2) Investment in Associated Companies (continued)-
Summarized unaudited financial data of these associated companies for the years ended September 30, 1984
and 1983 is as follows (in thousands):
VIDCO VIDCO II MRI
--------------- ----------- -----------
1984 1983 1984 1984
ASSETS:
Cash and other current assets $ 2 $ 45 $ 42 $12,503
Contract for deed receivable from MRI - - 4,708 -
Construction in progress - - - 10,269
Land and land held under option 5,660 7,983 506 4,708
Other assets 12 15 - 2,421
------ ------ ------ -------
$5,674 $8,043 $5,256 $29,901
------ ------ ------ -------
------ ------ ------ -------
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY:
Accounts payable and accrued expenses $ 121 $ 243 $ - $ 4,324
Contract for deed payable to VIDCO II - - - 4,708
Notes payable 415 245 - -
Deferred gain on sale of land to MRI - - 2,083 -
Equity 5,138 7,555 3,173 20,869
------ ------ ------ -------
$5,674 $8,043 $5,256 $29,901
------ ------ ------ -------
------ ------ ------ -------
OPERATIONS:
Operating revenues, net of deferred portions $ 20 $ 89 $2,625 $ -
Costs associated with operating revenues - (27) (2,625) -
------ ------ ------ -------
Gross profit 20 62 - -
Operating expenses (69) (57) - (131)
Interest income - - 207 -
------ ------ ------ -------
Net income (loss) $ (49) $ 5 $ 207 $ (131)
------ ------ ------ -------
------ ------ ------ -------
VIDCO:
VIDCO is a general partnership which was formed in November 1981 following the liquidation of a
predecessor partnership, Valley Industrial Park, Ltd. (VIP) in which the Company had a 25%
partnership interest. Immediately prior to liquidation, VIP sold approximately 1,100 acres of
undeveloped land to North American Life and Casualty Company (NALAC) for $6,572,000 and distributed
such proceeds to its partners. The Company then acquired all remaining partnership interests and
assets of VIP (primarily 160 acres of land) in exchange for 189,840 shares of the Company's common
stock. The Company's common stock issued in this transaction was valued at $5 per share ($949,200)
based upon appraisals of the Company's underlying net assets.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(2) Investment in Associated Companies (continued)-
VIDCO (continued) :
Following the above transaction, the Company and NALAC
formed VIDCO. NALAC contributed the 1, 100 acres of
undeveloped land obtained from VIP and $428,000 in
cash for a 50% partnership interest and the Company
contributed the 160 acres of developed land obtained
from VIP for $428, 000 in cash and a 50% partnership
interest.
The distributions received by the Company from VIP were
approximately $1, 035,000 in excess of the Company 's
$493,000 investment. Recognition of this excess
distribution as income has been deferred because of
the Company ' s significant ownership interest in both
VIP and VIDCO. This excess will be recognized as
income as VIDCO sells land to unrelated parties.
Such land sales by VIDCO resulted in the recognition
of $265, 664 and $1, 741 of income in fiscal 1984 and
1983, respectively, which is included in equity in
earnings of associated companies.
During 1984, VIDCO acquired a 50% interest in a
72-acre parcel of land from an officer/director of
the Company for $381, 300. The purchase of this
land by VIDCO was funded by a capital contribution
by NALAC. The remaining 50% interest in this parcel
of land was acquired by the Company for $381, 300,
which was funded through a note payable to the
officer/director which has subsequently been paid.
VIDCO then distributed an undivided 50% interest
in approximately 318 acres of land to each of its
partners and also distributed the 50% interest in
the 72-acre parcel to NALAC.
The Company sold 30% of its interests in the land
distributed from VIDCO and the 72-acre parcel to
a partnership consisting of an officer/director
and shareholder/director of the Company (the
Partnership) . The land was sold at the Company 's
book cost of $469, 637.
The amount of the distribution to the Company by
VIDCO (at VIDCO 's cost of $1, 184, 156) exceeded
the Company ' s equity basis investment in VIDCO by
$634,378. Recognition of this excess distribution
as income has been deferred until the underlying
land is sold to unrelated parties and adequate cash
consideration is received.
-5-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(2) Investment in Associated Companies (continued)-
VIDCO (continued) :
During 1984, VIDCO entered into option agreements with
two unrelated companies. Under one agreement, the
option holder may acquire a 1/9, 2/9 or 3/9 partner-
ship interest in VIDCO. Under the other agreement,
the option holder may acquire a 1/10 partnership
interest in VIDCO. Had these options been exercised
at September 30, 1984, the option prices would have
been $3, 290,000 for each 1/9 interest acquired under
the first agreement and $2, 961, 000 for the 1/10
interest acquired under the second agreement. Both
options expire 18 months after MRI commences racing
operations (racing operations are scheduled to
commence on June 29, 1985) .
The VIDCO partnership agreement provides that cash
distributions will be 50% to the Company and 50% to
NALAC until capital contributions to fund operating
deficits have been repaid, and then 10% to the
Company and 90% to NALAC until NALAC ' s initial
capital account is repaid. After NALAC ' s initial
capital account is repaid, cash distributions will
be 25% to the Company and 75% to NALAC until accrued
interest of 14% on NALAC ' s initial capital account
is paid. Thereafter, distributions will be 50% to
the Company and 50% to NALAC.
VIDCO II :
VIDCO II is a general partnership formed in 1984 to
acquire 390 acres of land which was then sold to
MRI. The partners in VIDCO II are NALAC, the
Company and the Partnership. The Company, NALAC and
the Partnership all contributed their respective
interests in the land distributed from VIDCO and, in
the case of the Company and the Partnership, in the
land purchased from an officer/director as well.
VIDCO II sold the 390 acres of land to MRI in June
1984 for $4, 708,000 and received an option to
reacquire approximately 65 acres of the land for
$1. This repurchase option expires in June 1989.
MRI gave VIDCO II a $4, 708, 000 contract for deed
in payment of the land. The contract for deed is
due December 31, 1993, bears interest at 12%, is
payable monthly, and has deferred interest payable
at maturity at rates ranging from 3% to 13%. Subse-
quent to September 30, 1984, VIDCO II exchanged the
-6-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(2) Investment in Associated Companies (continued)-
VIDCO II (continued) :
contract for deed for 941, 160 shares of MRI preferred
stock. Because of the common ownership interests of
VIDCO II and MRI, VIDCO II has deferred recognition
of the gain on the sale of land to MRI pending
receipt of adequate cash consideration. The gain
will be recognized as capital distributions are
received on the preferred stock.
MRI :
MRI is a Minnesota corporation formed in October 1983
to obtain the sole Class A license to construct,
operate and manage the first horse racing facility
in the Minneapolis/Saint Paul metropolitan area.
The racetrack is presently under construction on the
land acquired from VIDCO II and racing operations
are scheduled to commence on June 29, 1985.
Initial construction of the racetrack was financed by
funds obtained through the issuance of $21, 000,000
of common stock to the Company, NALAC, Santa Anita
Operating Company, an officer/director and a
shareholder/director. In October 1984, additional
financing was obtained through the issuance of
$90, 000,000 of City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Sports
Facility Revenue Bonds (Shakopee Racetrack Project)
Series 1984-A (1 ) , A (2) and B. These bonds are
due October 1, 2014 and bear interest at 9. 75%.
Additional financing in the form of Tax Increment
Revenue Bonds is under negotiation with the City
of Shakopee.
-7-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(3) Notes Payable-
Notes payable at September 30 consisted of:
1984 1983
Unsecured demand notes payable to related parties, interest rates
of 12.5% to 1% over prime $ 668,000 $ 244,921
---------- ----------
Due to unrelated parties:
Note payable to bank, interest at 12.75%, payable in quarterly
installments of principal and interest of $184,462, with a final payment
of $5,544,000 due on June 1, 1989, collateralized by 113,060 shares of
common stock of MRI, a life insurance policy on an officer/director
with a face value of $1,500,000 and the personal guarantee of an
officer/director 5,653,000 -
Demand notes payable to banks, interest rates from 1% to 2% over
prime, collateralized by certain land and personal guarantees of
an officer/director 1,243,102 1,236,102
Contract for deed, due September 15, 1988, noninterest-bearing,
payable in annual installments of $150,000, collateralized
by certain land 890,000 -
Note payable to insurance companies, due February 2014, interest at
13.5%, payable in monthly installments of principal and interest of
$7,445, collateralized by rental property and assignment of rents 648,898 458,934
Note payable to bank, paid November 16, 1984, interest at 16% 220,000 -
Note payable to bank, paid October 5, 1984, interest at 14% 160,000 244,000
Other 35,021 17,745
Total due to unrelated parties 8,850,021 1,956,781
---------- ----------
Total notes payable $9,518,021 $2,201,702
---------- ----------
---------- ----------
Subsequent to September 30, 1984, the Company refinanced a portion of its notes payable. Through December 28,
1984, the Company borrowed $1,859,000 from various financial institutions and used the proceeds to repay
certain notes payable of approximately $1,296,000, purchase a subdivided residential real estate development
and meet working capital requirements.
Interest expense incurred on related party indebtedness was approximately $79,000 and $9,000 in fiscal 1984
and 1983, respectively.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(3) Notes Payable (continued)-
Convertible Subordinated Debentures :
The convertible subordinated debentures bear interest
at 8% and mature May 31, 1985. The debentures are
held by a related party and are convertible into
common stock of the Company at a conversion value
of $4. 00 per share.
(4) Stock Options and Warrants-
In October 1983, the board of directors adopted the 1983
Employee Stock Option Plan for key employees of the
Company. Under terms of the plan, options may be granted
at not less than the market value of the Company 's stock
at the grant date. Options for 30, 000 shares have been
granted to key employees at a price of $3. 00 per share
exercisable through September 30, 1993. At September 30,
1984, no stock options have been exercised and 50, 000
shares of stock have been reserved for future issuance
under the plan.
Subsequent to September 30, 1984, options for 10, 000 shares
were forfeited by a terminated employee and options for
203. 000 shares were granted to an employee at a price of
$4. 00 per share.
During 1984, the Company issued a stock warrant to an
unrelated company to purchase up to 7% of its common stock
at $4. 00 per share. The Company has reserved 74, 504 shares
of its common stock for possible issuance under the warrant
which expires on June 1, 1989.
(5) Income Taxes-
The Company and its subsidiaries file a consolidated federal
income tax return and separate state income tax returns .
Deferred income taxes have been provided for timing differ-
ences between financial statement and income tax reporting.
The principal timing differences result from capitalizing
certain land carrying costs for financial reporting pur-
poses while deducting these costs currently for income
tax purposes and from depreciating certain equipment and
leasehold improvements using the straight-line method for
financial reporting purposes and accelerated methods for
tax reporting purposes.
-9-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(5) Income Taxes (continued)-
The fiscal 1984 effective income tax rate of 54% differs from
the 46% federal statutory tax rate primarily as a result of
state income taxes, net of federal tax benefit ($11,000) ,
nondeductible expenses ($18,000) and graduated federal
income tax rates ($20,000) .
1 84 the Company has tax and book net
As of September 30, 9 , �
operat
respectively, $2,373,000,
respectively,
and 1999.
(6) Related Party Transactions-
In addition to the transactions discussed in Note 2 and the
indebtedness discussed in Note 3, the Company was involved
in the following related party transactions:
Accounts and Notes Receivable:
Included in related party accounts and notes receiv-
able is an 8% note due April 30, 1985 due from an
officer/director and a shareowner of the Company.
The balance of this note was $227,000 at
September 30, 1984 and 1983; $102, 000 was paid on
this note subsequent to September 30, 1984. The
remaining related party accounts and notes receiv-
able at September 30, 1984 consist of an
$88,000 receivable from the Partnership.
This bears interest at 1% over prime and was repaid in
October 1984. Interest earned on related party
receivables was $36,000 in 1984 and $67,000 in
1983.
Additional Land Purchases from Related Parties :
The Company purchased a parcel of commercial land in
1983 from an officer/director for cash of $200, 000,
plus assumption of real estate taxes, special
assessments and miscellaneous closing costs. The
officer used the proceeds from the sale to repay a
$200,000 advance from the Company.
In 1983, the Company purchased a subdivided residential
real estate development from an officer/director for
$300, 000, plus assumption of special assessments.
The purchase price consisted of $150,000 cash and a
$150, 000, 13 1/2% note payable to a related party.
The property is pledged as collateral on a note
payable to a bank by the related party.
-10-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(6) Related Party Transactions (continued)-
Additional Land Purchases from
Related Parties (continued) :
The Company also purchased a parcel of commercial
property in fiscal 1983 for $30,000 cash from a
partnership owned by an officer/director, an officer
and a shareholder.
Subsequent to September 30, 1984, the Company
purchased additional subdivided residential real
estate developments from an officer/director for
$182,000. The purchase price consisted of $74, 000
cash, with the remainder being applied to reduce a
note receivable due the Company from the officer/
director and a shareholder.
These land purchases from related parties were
approved by the Company ' s board of directors. The
purchase price of the above properties (individu-
ally and in the aggregate) was in excess of the
officer' s/partnership's cost.
Sales :
Construction revenues of $147, 000 and $107, 000 for
1984 and 1983, respectively, were from companies
in which an officer/director held significant
equity interests. Gross profit recognized on these
construction projects was $16, 000 and $21, 000,
respectively.
Leasing Commissions, Management
Fees and Accounting Income•
The Company has agreements with various companies
affiliated through common ownership under which the
Company received leasing commissions and management
fees of $74, 000 in 1984. No such fees were received
in 1983.
In addition, the Company received accounting and other
income from related parties of $34, 000 and $6,000 in
1984 and 1983, respectively.
Rents :
Rents of $13, 500 for both 1984 and 1983 were paid by
the Company to a partnership in which an officer/
director has an interest.
-11-
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
(6) Related Party Transactions (continued)-
Management Service Expense:
A management serv'_.ce charge of approximately $38, 000
and $18, 000 in fiscal 1984 and 1983 was paid to a
company affiliated through common ownership. In
addition to general management, this enterprise
provides accoun':ing, personnel and other services
to the Company.
(7) Commitments and Contingencies-
The Company and the other shareholders of MRI have provided
letter of credit guarantees to two banks in connection with
the issuance of the Sports Facility Revenue Bonds by MRI
discussed on Note 2. The guarantees expire on November 14,
1986. The Company' s proportionate share of these
guarantees is $2, 690, 000.
In addition, the board of directors has agreed to a guarantee
by the Company in the amount of $481 , 000 in connection with
the proposed financing for MRI from the City of Shakopee.
The Company has also agreed to assume the guarantees of
an officer/director and a shareholder/director totaling
$200, 000 related to this proposed financing in exchange for
an agreement of indemnification from both parties .
-12-
APPENDIX B
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
36
(This page has been left blank intentionally.)
PEAT
MARWICK
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Statutory Financial Statements
Years ended December 31, 1983 and 1982
(This page has been left blank intentionally.)
r@1PEAT
MARMCK Peat, ;Marwick, ,Mitchell j
Certified Public�\ccu
ontants
1700 IDS Center
Minneapolis,Minnesota 55402
The Board of Directors
North American Life and Casualty Company:
We have examined the statutory statements of assets and liabilities of North
American Life and Casualty Company as of December 31, 1983 and 1982, and the
related statutory statements of income, changes in unassigned deficit and
changes in financial position for the years then ended. Our examinations
were made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and,
accordingly, included such tests of the accounting records and such other
auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.
As described in note 1, the Company's policy is to prepare its financial
statements on the basis of accounting practices prescribed or permitted by
the Insurance Division of the State of Minnesota. These practices differ in
some respects from generally accepted accounting principles. Accordingly,
the accompanying financial statements are not intended to present financial
Position and results of operations in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles. This report is intended solely for filing with regu—
latory agencies and is not intended for any other purpose.
In our opinion, the aforementioned statutory financial statements present
fairly the financial position of North American Life and Casualty Company as
of December 31, 1983 and 1982 and the results of its operations and the
changes in its financial position for the years then ended, on the basis of
accounting described in note 1, which basis has' been applied on a consistent
basis.
February 13, 1984
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Statutory Statements of Assets and Liabilities
December 31
1983 1982
Assets ---
Cash and investments (note 2) : $ 2,291 ,048 7 ,238 ,993
Cash 4,549,957 48,303,068
Short-term investments 202 ,035,943 155,437 ,118
Bonds, at amortized cost 17 ,972,709 21 ,647,846
Preferred stocks, at cost 47 ,134,909 32,864,283
Common stocks, at market
Mortgage loans on real estate, at amortized 149 ,498,503 140,431 ,465
cost
Real estate, at cost less accumulated depre-
ciation of $3,115 ,947 in 1983 and
$2,798,353 in 1982 and mortgages payable of 8 015,762
$2,637 ,418 in 1983 and $2 , 142 ,168 in 1982 9,322,923
Investment in real estate partnerships, at 8,601 ,558 6,171 ,413
equity 53, 177 ,626 50,212,037
Policy loans 2,138,435 2,275,838
Other invested assets 496,723,611 472,597,823
Total cash and investments
1 ,001 ,775 2, 121 ,200
Federal income tax recoverable. 1 ,434,375 5,272,596
Accrued investment income 23,256,446
20,300,632
Premiums due and deferred 9,930 ,501 632 3,074 ,646
2,090 ,
Reinsurance recoverable on paid losses149 3,098 ,275
Other assets
Total assets $ 537 ,4811044 509 ,420 ,980
See accompanying notes to statutory financial statements.
Liabilities and Stockholder' s EquityDecember 31
1983 1982
Liabilities:
Future policy benefits:
Life insurance $ 224,524,948 216,418,861
Annuities 168,892,045 141 ,124,338
Accident and health insurance 20,813,918 16,728 ,896
Policy claims 23,416,805 15,803,170
Other policyholder funds 22,229,031 18,198,945
Commissions and other accrued
expenses 13,828,500 9,549,245
Unearned investment income x ,815,792 1 ,634,422
Notes payable (note 3) `10791289 35,624,582
Other liabilities 4,948,920 7,294,362
Mandatory securities valuation reserve 10,319,232 5,417,970
Group and reinsurance contingency reserve 2,346,678 2,254,729
Total liabilities 498,215,158 470,049,520
Stockholder's equity (note 8) :
Common stock $1 par value per share.
Authorized and issued 20,000,000 shares 20,000,000 20,000,000
Paid—in surplus 23,498,428 23,498,428
Unassigned deficit (4,232,542) _(4,126 ,968)
Total stockholder's equity 39,265,886 39,371 ,460
Contingent liabilities (notes 6 and 7)
Total liabilities and stockholder's
equity $ 537 ,481 ,044 509,420,980
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Statutory Statements of Income
Years ended December 31, 1983 and 1982
1983 1982
Income:
Premiums:
Life insurance $ 84,983,215 112,249,937
20,075,494 21 ,491,656
Annuities
Accident and health insurance 51 ,417,774 33,345,220
Other deposits and consic:erations 13,025,814 4,585 ,201
Investment income, less expenses of
$3,932,701 in 1983 and $6,217,179 42,257,610 38,569, 191
in 1982 (note 3)
Other income 7,664,976 4,047 ,259
219,424,iFff M--4--,288,46�
Benefits and expenses:
Life insurance and annuity benefits 45,014,660 61 ,254,169
Accident and health insurance benefits 36,393,752 21,582,351
Surrenders and other polic;i benefits 18,730, 138 33,969,500
Increase in liability for future policy
benefits 44,014,393 35,669,657
Commissions 37,850,563 30,082,507
General and administrative expenses 26,310,030 22,182,440
208,313,T3-6 204,740, 2
Gain from operations before income
11 ,111,347 9,547,840
taxes
Income tax benefit (note 4) 153,458 21,222
Net gain from operations $ 11 ,264,805. 9 ,569,062
See accompanying notes to statutory financial statements.
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Statutory Statements of Changes in Unassigned Deficit
Years ended December 31, 1983 and 1982
1983 1982
Balance at beginning of year $ (4,126,968) (4,558,027)
Net gain from operations 11 ,264,805 9,569,062
Realized losses from sales of investments
Increase in unrealized appreciation of (3,727,236) (4,658,989)
investments
Increase in nonadmitted assets 4,687 , 4,474,154
Increase in mandatory securities valuation (4,471 ,992525) (1 ,183,074)
reserve (4,901 ,262) (3 ,132,714)
Dividends to stockholder (3,000,000) (3,000,000)
Equity in operating results and surplus
changes of subsidiaries 56,094 (1 ,564,157)
Change in net adjustment in assets and
liabilities due to foreign exchange rates 285,007 (457,379)
Federal income tax adjustment for prior years 593 ,733
Other, net (298,308)
(209 ,577)
Balance at end of year $ (4 ,232 ,542) (43126,968)
See accompanying notes to statutory financial statements.
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Statutory Statements of Changes in Financial Position
Years ended December 31 , 1983 and 1982
1983 1982
Funds provided:
From operations:
Net gain from operations $ 11 ,264,805 9,569 ,062
(3,727 ,236) (4,658,989)
Net realized investment losses
Charge: (credits) to operations not
affecting fund::
Increase in liability for future 39 ,958,816 32,093 ,941
policy benefits
Increase in liability for policy 7 ,613 ,635 3,271 ,638
claims
Increase in other policyholder funds 4,030,086 1 ,975,095
Change in federal income tax 1,119 ,425 (1 ,951 ,241 )
recoverable
Increase in commissions and other 4,279,255 1 ,201 ,442
accrued expenses
Change in accrued and unearned
investment income, nest (1,980,410) 238 ,870
Change in premiums due and deferred 2,955.814 (2,015,955)
Depreciation on real estate and 719 ,998 635,579
other assets
Amortization of bond d%scount (374,923) (694, 103)
(1 ,901 ,708) 1 ,502,799
Other, net
Funds provided from operations 63,957 ,557 41, 168, 138
From sales or maturities of investments: 72,763 ,635 81 ,529 ,900
Bonds
Stocks 11,569,437 20,507 ,949
Mortgage loan principal rezeipts 13 ,546,702 7 ,835,755
Real estate 36,495 75,068
Decrease in short-term investments 43,753,111 -
Decrease in policy loans - 983,516
Increase in notes payable - 4,500 ,870
Decrease in cash 4,947,945 -
$ 210,574,882 156 ,6_ 01`196
(Continued)
2
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Statutory Statements of Changes in Financial Position, Continued
1983 1982
Funds used:
Cost of investments acquired:
Bonds
Stocks $ 118,965,546 65,118,348
Mortgage loans on real estate 17,511 ,394 16,208,459
Investment in real estate 22,592,081 13,173,803
partnerships
Other invested assets 2,846,135 2 ,751 ,870
Increase in policy loans 707,106 11101 ,438
Increase in accounts receivable from 2,965,589 -
subsidiaries
Increase in reinsurance recoverable 818,947 2,282,323
on paid losses
Dividend to stockholder 6,855,861 796,814
Increase in short-term investments 3,000,000 3,000,000
Decrease in notes payable - 46,818,251
Increase in cash 30,545,293 -
Other, net 4,436,355
3,766,930 9132535
$ 21095741882 15696011196
See accompanying notes to statutory financial statements.
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Notes to Statutory Financial Statements
Years ended December 31 , 1983 and 1982
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Nature of Business
sellsnd
The Company is engaged in the lifesu and ehlth b sines uranceand aannue
forma of individual and group life
ities.
Purchase and Liquidation Transaction
The Company is a wholly-
owned subsidiary of Allianz of America, Inc. ,
which in turn is a majority-owned subeidicom an ry of Allianz
Companyher-
was
ungs, A.G. , a Federal Republic of Germany company.
organized in 1979 for purposes of acquiring the outstanding common
stock of the former North American Life and Casualty company o ("the
acquired company") from the Mutual Life insurance 19 company
mpand the ac-
quired
York. The acquisition took place on November27 ,
into the Company,
company was liquidated on January Company,
which changed its name to that of the acquired company.
The previous
ities of the acquir
accounting basis and unchangedhe assets dtolthelfinanc al statementse ofcthe
pany was carried foo rty
surviving company.
Statutory Accountin&_ Preictices
The accompanying financial statements have been prepared in accordance
with insurance accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the
Insurance Division of the State of Minnesota. Pursuant to statutory
accounting requirements:
as ther
ts
ted
(a) Acquisition costs sucomamreschargedsions ntoocurrent soperations
to acquiring new business as incurred , whereas the related premiums are taken into
earnings over the premium paying periods of the policies.
(b) Policy reserves for ordinary life insurance policies are based
on statutory mortality withdrawals interest erequirements without
consideration of
(Continued)
2
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Policy reserves applicable to life insurance as of Decem-
ber 31 , 1983 and 1982 were determined based on the following
mortality and interest assumptions:
Reserve basis 1983 1982
A1924-29, 3%-3-1/2% $ 2,246,304 2,329, 543
American Experience,
3%-3-1/2% 6,948,079 7,308,737
1941 CSO, 2%-3-1/4X 36,772,722 39,547,670
1958 CSO, 2-1/2X-4-1/2X 164,166,788 162,488,488
Other 14,391 ,055 4,744,423
$ 224,524,948 216,418,861
Approximately 29% of the ordinary life reserves at Decem-
ber 31 , 1983 has been calculated on the net level reserve
basis, and 71% on a modified basis. Use of a modified
reserve basis partially offsets the effect of immediately
expensing policy acquisition costs by providing a lower
Policy reserve in the first contract year.
Annuity reserves as of December 31 , 1983 and 1982 consist of
the following:
Reserve basis 1983 1982
Certain deferred, 2-1/2% to
3-1/2X $ 780,118 889 ,625
Group annuity contracts 7, 712, 727 6,579, 662
Single and flexible premium
current interest annuities,
3-1/2% to 5-1/2% 163,204,756 136,320,329
Other 2,673,734 2,235,592
Reinsurance ceded (5,479,290) (4,900,870)
$ 168,892,045 141 ,124,338
During 1983 the Company changed its method for calculating
annuity reserves to conform with the 1980 amendments to the
standard valuation law. The change resulted in a reduction
of annuity reserves of approximately $4,600,000 as of Decem-
ber 31 , 1983 and corresponding increase in the gain from
operations for 1983.
(c) Certain assets designated as "nonadmitted assets" (principally
advances to affiliates, office equipment and other miscella-
neous receivables) aggregating $12,263,317 at December 31 ,
1983 and $7 ,791 ,392 at December 31 , 1982 have been excluded
from the statutory statements of assets and liabilities
through charges to unassigned deficit.
(Continued)
3
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
(d) The mandatory securities valuation reserve, which is in the
nature of a contingency reserve for possible losses on
investments in bonds and stocks , is recorded as a liability
through charges to unassigned deficit.
(e) Certain transactions (realized and unrealized investment gains
and losses, operating results of the Company' s subsidiaries,
unrealized Canadian exchange translations, etc.) are re-
flected direc_ly in unassigned deficit.
(f) Deferred federal income taxes are not required to be provided
for the tax effects of income, expenses and surplus items
that are recognized for tax purposes in different years than
for financial statement reporting purposes.
(g) The individual assets , liabilities, income, expense, and sur-
plus accounts pertaining to the Company' s Canadian business
are expressed in Canadian dollars and combined with the
accounts for the U.S. operations. A separate liability is
recorded with a corresponding charge or credit to unassigned
surplus for the adjustment of the net Canadian assets to
reflect the currency exchange rates in effect at year end.
(h) Investments:
Bonds and stacks are valued in accordance with the valuation
guidelines of the National Association of Insurance Com-
missioners (NAIC) . Investments eligible for amortization
are carried at cost, adjusted for amortization of premium
or accretion of discount. Investments not eligible for
amortization are stated at values adopted by the NAIC.
Mortgage loans on real estate, all of which are first lien,
are carried at the aggregate unpaid principal balances of
such loans , less unearned discounts. Discounts are amor-
tized to :he maturity date or call date, whichever is
first. Mortgage loans include $8,675,000 at December 31 ,
1983 (1982 , $8,254,000) of loans made to real estate part-
nerships in which the Company has an ownership interest.
Real estate is carried at cost, less accumulated deprecia-
tion and mortgages payable.
Policy loans are stated at the aggregate of unpaid loan bal-
ances, which are not in excess of the cash surrender
values of the related policies.
Realized ga:.ns and losses from sales of investments are
determined on an identified-cost basis.
(Continued)
4
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
(2) Investments
Investments in bonds and stocks are summarized as follows:
MarketAdmitted
Amortized
value coat asset
value
December 31 , 1983:
Bonds $ 195,877,730
Preferred stocks: — 202,088,059 202,035 ,943
Unaffiliated issues
Subsidiaries $ 15,130,229 17,569,255 17,468,109
----5-0-4-1600
504,600
$ 18,073,855 17,972,709
Common stocks:
Unaffiliated issues $ 40,866,527
Subsidiaries — 30,239,536 40,866,527
__6_1268,382 6,268,382
S 36,507,918 47,134,909
December 31, 1982:
Bonds $ 155 323 057 _
Preferred stocks: — 155,511,224 155,437,118
Unaffiliated issues
Subsidiaries $ 16,377,950 21,170,611 20,993,246
6- 5— 4___,600 654,600
$ 21 ,825,211 21 ,647,846
Common stocks:
Unaffiliated issues $ 32,818,972
Subsidiaries — 26,546,223 32,818,972
—
45L311 45 ,311
$ . 26,591 ,534 32 ,864,283
The net unrealized appreciation in unaffiliated common stock issues
Of $10,626,991 at December 31, 1983 consists of gross unrealized
appreciation of $113225,680, less gross unrealized depreciation of
$598,689.
(Continued)
5
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
Real estate at December 31 , 1983 and 1982 is summarized as follows:
1983 1982
Real estate not under contract for sale: $ 10 ,411 ,735 9 ,230 ,231
Cost (1 ,596 ,720) (1 ,346 ,793)
Less accumulated dep7^eciation
Less mortgages payable, interest of 742,168)
a able through 2000 (2 ,637 ,418) (2a
9 .OX to 9 .75X p ow y g
Less writedown of real estate to (227 ,477) (462,277)
lower of cost or market 120 4,678 ,993
5 9 50 , --11 —.
Real estate under contracts for sale
108,595 J 6,150
Home office property: 4,783 ,435 4,672,179
Cost (1 ,519 ,227_) (1 ,451 ,560)
Less accumulated) depreciation 3 ,264,208 3,22, 0 ,619-
$ 9 ,3923 8'015'762
(3) Notes Payable
Notes payable at December 31 , 1983 and 1982 consist of:
1983
1982
able $ — 29 ,625 ,000
Senior installment note pay 5,079 ,289 4,500,870
13-1/2X note payable to reinsurer
(note 6) — 1 ,498,712
Accrued interest
$ 5,07_ 9;289 35,682
The senior installment: note payable wa.s issued by the Company to The
Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York in connection with the
acquisition of the acquired company (note 1). Interest expense was
$3 ,030 ,638 for 1982 (none in 1983) , which is included in investment
expenses. The note contains restrictions upon the
amtrnt of .in—
debtedness , types of investments, dividend payments
with affiliated companies.
(4) Federal Income Taxes
Income Tax Act of 1959, life
Pursuant to the Life Insurance Company
insurance companies are taxed on
lsh onethe ehalf of anysser of sexcessvoftgain
m plus income or gain frooperations
from operations over taxable investment income. One—half of the
(Continued)
6
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
excess (if any) of the gain from operations over taxable investment
income, an amount which is not currently
special deductions allowed in computing e gain to taxation, plus
placed in a special memorandum tax accountknown oasoP he dons, is
holders' surplus account." The accumulated amount of income"subject
policy-
to current taxation, leas the tax thereon, is placed in another spe-
cial memorandum tax account designated as the "shareholders' surplus
account." These accounts are
Pear opurely tax memoranda accounts and ap-
pear on the tax returns. They are not related in any way to
unassigned surplus as that term is used in insurance accounting. The
balance in the "policyholders' surplusaccount"
federal income tax at the then-prevailing rates only whenecomes sdi
distribu-
tions are considered to be paid out of the "Policyholders'
account." The balance in the "policyholders' surplus account"surplus
acquired company became fully taxable upon
acquired cthe liquidation of the
company on January 1 , 1981.
" Additions to the Company' s
Policyholders' surplus account" commenced in 1979 and the accumu-
lated balance at December 31
1983 was not significant.
Agreement has been reached with the Internal Revenue Service on all
issues for all years of the acquired company through 1976, and all
deficiencies have been paid or provided for
refunds have not yet been received by the Com an yexcept certain tax
opinion of
management, adequate provision has been made for anyItaxhdeficiencies
that may arise from examination of returns filed, or to be filed for
periods ended on or before December 31, 1983.
The provision for federal income taxes differs from the amount which
would result by applying the federal tax rate of 46Z to pretax in-
come. A reconciliation of this difference follows:
1983 1982
Expected income taxes at 46%
$ 5,111 ,220 4,392 ,006
Adjustments:
Additional adjustment for tax purposes
for increase in liability for future
Policy benefits
Amortization of value assigned to (4,549,321) 13,137,446
insurance in force for tax purposes
at date of liquidation of acquired
company
Nontaxable investment income (7,969,907) (8,044,039)
(376,039) (1,031 ,842)
Operating loss to be carried forward
for tax purposes
Capital gains offset by tax losses 3,759,552 _
4,769,672
Utilization of prior _
losses Years' operating
Other - (6,953,261)
(89_.8,635) (1 ,522)
Income tax benefit per the accom-
panying financial statements
$ 153_ 458 21 222
(Continued)
7
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
presently computing federal income taxes under stopgap
The Company is p and Fiscal Responsibili-
provisions enacted as part Ththe
heTax legislation expired on December 31 ,
ty Act of 1982 (TEFRA) • Congress . While
1983. New tax legislittion is under colslationlwi by make significant
it is expected that any new tax leg no new
law has
changes in the way li:'.e insurance companies are taxed,
been enacted at this time. Should Congress fail to pass any new tax
legislation for life insurance companies , they will continue to be
taxed under the Life Insurance Company Tax Act of 1959 .
1983 the Company had an unused operating loss carry-
At December 31 , available for offset against
forward of approxims,tely $20 ,771 ,000 will begin to expire in
future taxable income which, if not used,
1996.
(5) Pension and Profit Shatinn
has various pension plane covering ogfice employees and
The Company who have attained age 25 and completed ons year
field underwriters, generally to fund
of qualified service. The Company' s Policy la olio benefits
pension costs accrued. The ment liabilities of &Ssetso and future liab policy
include
in the accompanying statement 1983 and $6 ,579 ,662 at December 31 , 19821
$7 ,210 ,136 at December 31 , enaion costs applicable to a group
for the portion of the accrued P
annuity contract issued by
the Company.
The Company
also makes discretionary contributions to profit sharing
plans for its office: employees.
Total pension and profit sharing expense aggregated $1 ,388 ,000 for 1983
and $1 ,296 ,000 for 1982.
ation is
vail-
Information as of December 31 , 1988 t assets and accum(latest date ulated planbene
and 1981 for pension plan pension plan is presented
fits for the Company' s defined benefit p pension benefits
below. The actuarial present value of accumulated
represents benefit" chat have
levelseandeanbaasumed 7X diacountes toratee
using current employee salary
December 31
1982 1981
Actuarial present value of accumulated
pension plan benefits: $ 4,174,324 3,784 ,346
Vested 278,259_ 239 ,293
NonvestedJ—
$ 4 ,45 ,583 4,02�9-
Net assets avai:.able for pension benefits:
Group annuity contract issued by the 5 ,945 ,885 4,942,712
Company 179694 21;963_
Security investments and other assets
$ 6 ,12_ 3_ ,579_ 5,166L�5
(Continued)
8
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
(6) Reinsurance
The Company reinsures that portion of an individual life insurance risk
in excess of $500,000 (less than $500,000 for most substandard risks)
with other insurance companies. The amount of life insurance
force ceded to other companies approximated in
$846,077,628 at Decem-
ber 31 , 1983 and $773,822,250 at December 31 ,
liability exists with respect to insurance ceded98n� the eventnghate obligations assumed under the
reinsurers might be unable to meet th
reinsurance contracts. In the opinion of management, this contin-
gency will not result in any material liability to the Company.
Life insurance in force ceded to other companies included $274,469,599
at December 31 , 1983 and $303,759,287 at December 31 , 1982 ceded to
Munich American Reinsurance Company, an affiliated com an
both yearly renewable term and coinsurance basis. p yd under
related ren-
surance ceded premiums were $1 ,689,404 in 1983 a de $1,570,770 lin
1982, respectively. The liability for policy
$28,402,000 and claims was reduced by
$9,898,000 at December 31 , 1983
lively, for reinsurance recoverable on unpaid claims.
Additional
1982, reapec-
Additional information for reinsurance assumed and ceded is as follows:
1--- 983 1� 982
Reinsurance assumed premiums;
Life insurance
Accident and health $ 22,988,985 58,501,737
24,371 ,613 6,458,974
$ 47,360,598 64,960 711
Reinsurance ceded premiums:
Life insurance
Accident and health 5,964,350 9 ,828,761
42,945,452 12,968,011
$ 48,9`09,802 22,7_ 9`2
The Company ceded annuity reserves of $5,479,290 in 1983 and $4,900,870
in 1982. The Company issued a 13-1/2X note payable to the reinsurer
for the related ceded premiums (note 3)
note of $578,420 in 1983 and $144,127 in 1982 nisrinclud desteise n gon the
eneral
and administrative expenses.
Reinsurance assumed premiums included
from the acquired company' s former parent 4under an modified coi192 of nsurs
ante agreement.
(7) Litigation
The Company is a defendant in various law suits related to the normal
conduct of its insurance business. In the opinion of management, the
ultimate resolution of such litigation will not result in any mate-
rial liability to the Company.
(Continued)
9
NORTH AMERICAN LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY
ions on Distribution of Statutory Surma
(8) Restrict
e only
the
stock can
Distributions to stockholders on common determined einadaccordancfrom
mwith
Dist surplus as
Company's statutory r;=act ices prescribed 'by the Minnesota insurance
insurance accounting F As of December 31, 1983, the Com-
regulatory authorities (note l) • surplus Distributions in any one
parry had $19 ,265,886 of statutory surplus and if the dis-
year cannot exceed lOX of
rcarecapital
sstock thanend 0%, the difference can be
tributions in any oneyear
year or years from surplus accumulations.
made up in any subsequent
APPENDIX C
SANTA ANITA REALTY ENTERPRISES, INC. AND
SANTA ANITA OPERATING COMPANIES AND SUBSIDIARIES
COMBINED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
37
(This page has been left blank intentionally.)
SANTA ANITA REALTY ENTERPRISES, INC.
AND SANTA ANITA OPERATING COMPANY
AND SUBSIDIARIES
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
_--_18
-
COM B|w--- Eo- ' sTAT6� ENTS OF ��pE�AT|����s
"
nita
'
Operating Company and Subsidiaries
Santa Anita Realtv Eriterprises, Inc. and Santa A
Really snwdiancs
Revenues $62,280,000 $62,280,000
Thoroughbred racing 26,023,000 $0 IM00,000)(d) 15,023,000
(,,ommercial development $11,430,000 (6,985,000)(1) 4,445,000
Rental (Note 15) 3,739,000 1,047,0110 (2,245,000)(hl 2,541,000
!interest and other 84,289,000
Total revenues
Costs arid expenses 49,678,000 49,678,000
Direct operating costs 18,807,000 (8,604'0()())(d) 10,203,000
C:ost of commercial sales 1,759,000 2,695,000
Depreciation and amortization (Note 1) 936,000 (162100o) 6,598,000
nd administrative 1,251,000 5,509,000 (2,155,000)(h) 4,576,000
Selling, general a 1,194,000 5,537,000
Rental expenses (Note 15) 3,381,000 88,275,000 73,750,000
Total costs and expenses
income (loss) from continuing operations 11,788,000 1,075,000 10,539,000
before provision (benefit) for income taxes 311,000 182,000 (l'1�)8M()()) (705,000)
provision (beriefit) fol. income taxes (Note 9) 11,477,000 893,000 11,244,000
income (loss) from continuing operations
Loss froin discontinued operations (Note 4) '1244,000
Net Incolne (1,010 es outstandivify 6,230,018 6,230 0 18 6,230,018
weighted average
Earnings(loss) per common share (Note 3) $1.84 $.14 $1.80
I 11COule(loss) from Continuing.operations
,,o.is [,ronI discontinued operations
Net Income (loss)
Div,(It-Ilds paid per share of common stock and
related status for income tax purposes: $1.72 'w
Ordinary income
/n�'',�w /'"/
'llw/x«le /»»"'�l.
°;w/~/* �� 'xo,^'«/''fl'/ o/ r`//^vx�
�
^ '--' �� * x�ft^«1xuxJon/ ,/ v' `
w'x«� /» �'
Sn,o^",y" iln"gno^".
�
/
19
For the Year Ended December 31,1982
For the Year Ended December 31,1981
Operating
Company and Adjustments and Operating
Realty Subsidiaries Eliminations Combined Company and Adjustments and
Realty Subsidiaries Eliminations
Combined
$57,776,000 $57,776,000 $57,228,000
11,776,000 11,776,000 $57,228,000
$10,861,000 16,684,000 16,684,000
$(6,619,000)(') 4,242,000 $11,189,000
2,473,000 1,378,000 (1,757,000161 $(6,669,000)(a) 4,520,000
2,094,000 2,580,000 2,662,000 (977,000)(b) 4,265,000
13,334,000 70,930,000 75,888,000 13,769,000 76,574,000
82,697,000
46,044,000 46,044,000
8,143,000 8 44,464,000 44,464,000
,143,000 12,240,000
721,000 1,720,000 2,441,000 750,000 1,397,000 12,240,000
2,147
1,126,000 5,279,000 (289,000)11 6,116,000 1,589,000 4,907,000 (243,000)(") ,253,000,000
727,000 5,267,000 (1,757,000)(b) 4,237,000 1,101,000 4,255,000 843 6'253
6,619,000 (6,61 000)(a) ( )000 (b►
4,513,000
6,669,000 (6,669,000)(')
2,574,000 73,072,000 66,981,000 3,440,000 73,932,000
69,617,000
10,760,000 (2,142,000) 8,907,000 10,329,000 2,642,000
65,000 (1,466,000) 13,080,000
(1,401,000) 250,000 1,449,000 1,699,000
10,695,000 (676,000) 10,308,000 10,079,000 1,193,000
11,381,00()
(631,000) (189,000)(61 (442,000)
$10,695,000 $ (676,000) $10,308,000 $10,079,000 $ 562,000
$10,939,000
6,144,554 6,144,554 6,144,554 5,845,641 5,845,641
5,845,641
$1.74 $(.11) $1.68 $1.72 $.20
$1.95
$1.74 (.10) (.U8)
$(.11) $1.68 $1.72 $.10
$1.87
$1.68 $1.68 $1.60
$160
20
COMBINED BALANCE SHEETS
Santa Anita Realty Enterprise>. Inc. and Santa .finita Operating CompanY and Subsidiaries 1 1982
983
.as of December 31,
As.cet5
Real estate investments
Realty
Santa Anita Racetrack, less accumulated depreciation of$11.819,000 $ 8,141,000 $ 8.790,000
and$11,170,000, respectively
Commercial properties, less accumulated depreciation of$1,250,000 and 14,420,000 5,921,000
$1,018,000,respectively (Note 10)
Real estate loans receivable, less unamortized discount of$65.000 and 1,835,000 1,479.000
$74,000, respectively (Note 5) 3,427,000 3,026,00
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures(Note 7) 9_ 823.000 19.216,00
�
Operating Company
Real estate projects less accumulated depreciation of$3,324,000 and 31,178,000 35.931.000
$2.814,000, respectively (Notes 6. 8 and 10)
Receivables arising from real estate sales. less allowance for uncollectible 1,372,00 2,786,000
accounts of$47.000 and $579,000, respectively (Notes 5 and 8) 2,256,00 1,484.000
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures (Note 7)
34,806,000 40,201,000
8,188,000 7,463,000
Cash (Note 8) 10.947,000 10,052.000
Short-term investments, at cost (approximates market) 4,041,000 4,135,000
Accounts receivable 864.000 777.000
Due from officers and a company owned b� an officer (Notes 12 and 15) 183.000 1.064,000
Refundable income taxes (Note 9) 770,000 763,000
Notes receivable, less unamortized discount of$180,000 and $187,000, respectively 3,887.000 2,816,000
Prepaid expenses and other assets
Property. plant and equipment, at cost, less accumulated depreciation of 4,584,00 3,439.000
$3,527.000 and $3.010,000. respectiveh,
$96,093,000 $89,926,000
Jrr uri ,rv ;�noft;.
21
As of December 31, 1983 1982
Liabilities and.Sharehalders'Equiij-
Real estate loans payable (Note 8) $30,565,000 $25,560,000
(Mier loans payable (Note 8) 2,300,000 3,000,000
Short-term hole payable to bank (Note 8) l 500 000
Accounts payable 8,493,000 10,161,000
Accrued liabilities (Note 16) 3,181,000 3,220,000
Dividends payable 2,905,000 2,591,000
Construction and land loans payable, net of undisbursed funds of$2,150,000
and $2,436,000, respectively (Note 8) 9,714,000 9,142,000
Income taxes (Note 9) 8,775,000 8,845,000
Deferred income 3,441,000 1,994,000
69,374,000 66,013,000
Commitments and contingent liabilities (Note 11)
Shareholders'equity
Common stock, authorized 20,000,000 shares; issued and outstanding
6,314,620 and 6,169,909 shares, respectively 1,261,000 1,233,000
Additional paid-in capital 17,004,000 14,467,000
Retained earnings 8,454,000 8,213,000
Total shareholders'equity 26,719,000 23,913,000
$96,093,000 $89,926,000
ZOMBINED STATEMENTS OF S�, AREH^� _CE ? S EQLjITY
Sr.nir Anita R 21th Ent, rr.risr, Inc. and.Santa .-mita Operatingu CombanN and.Subsidiaries
Additional Total
Common Stock Paid-in Retained Shareholders'
For the Years Ended December 31, 1983, 1982 and 1981 Shares Amount Capital Earnings Equity
December 31,1980
Combined balance 5,582.942 $1,116,000 $ 6.066.000 $ 6.964.000 $14,146.000
Stock options exercised (;dote 12) 46.250 10.000 307,000 317,000
Stock issued in connection with public
offering, less related issuance costs 510.000 102,000 7,i 59,000 7,861,000
Dividends declared on common stock (9,667,000) (9,667,000)
10,939,000 10,939,000
Net income
December 31. 1981
Combined balance 6.139.192 1,228.000 14,132,000 8,236,000 23,596,000
Stock options exercised (Note 12) 10,000 2.000 47,000 49,000
Stock issued in connection with
dividend reinvestment plan, less
related issuance costs 20,717 3,000 288,000 291,000
Dividends declared on common stock (10.331,000) (10,331,000)
Net income 10.308.000 10,308,000
December 31. 1982
Combined balance 6,169.909 $1.233,000 $14,467,000 $ 8.213,000 $23,913,000
Stock issued in connection with
dividend reinvestment plan,
less related issuance costs 105.911 20,000 2,025,000 2,045,000
Stock issued in connection with
public offering, less related
issuance costs 38,800 8.000 512.000 520.000
Dividends declared on common stock (11.003,000) (11,003,000)
Net income 11,244,000 11.244.000
1),rernher +1. 1983
Combined balance 6.314.620 $1,261.000 S17.004.000 $ 8,454,000 $26.719,000
COMBINED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL. POSITION
--- — -— 23
Santa .finita Realtx Enterprises,Inc. and Santa Anita Op!-rating Companti and Subsidiaries
For the Years Ended December 31,
1983 1982 1981
Sources
Funds provided by operations
Net income $11,244,000
Charges (credits) to income not involving funds $10,308,000 $10,939,000
Depreciation and amortization 2,695,000
Deferred income taxes 2,441,000 2,147,000
Receivables arising from real estate sales (98,000) (322,000) 392,000
in the current year (77,000
Collections of real estate receivables, net of repayment on ) (458,000) (200,000)
related notes payable of$137,000 in 1982 and
$144,000 in 1981 1.491,000 504.000
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures 303,000
Other (523,000) (504,000) (1,048,000)
34,000 72,000 65,000
14,766,000 12,041,000 12,598,000
Repayment of real estate loans receivable 213,000
Repayment of amounts due from officers and a company 137,000 980,000
owned by an officer 113,000 171,000 311,000
Dispositions of real estate investments 607,000
Dispositions of real estate projects 17,229,000 9,919,
Dispositions of property, plant and equipment 9,000 000 9,716,000
Proceeds from real estate loans payable 223,000 106,000
9,877,000 3,454,000 5,279,000
Proceeds from construction loans 8.479.000 5,396,000 2,398,000
Proceeds from other loans payable 3,000.000
Proceeds from the exercise of stock options
Proceeds from stock issued in connection with public offering, 49,000 317,000
less related issuance costs 520,000
Proceeds from stock issued in connection with dividend 7,861,000
reinvestment plan, less related issuance costs 2,045,000 291,000
Net decrease (increase) in
Accounts receivable 94.000 (248,000
Refundable income taxes ) (540,000)
Net increase (decrease) in 881,000 (1,064,000)
Dividends payable 314,000 13,000 446,000
Income taxes 28.000
Deferred income (783,000) 866,000
1.447,000 282,000 (483,000)
$56.622.000 $32,881,000 $39.855,000
SPP!1C(ryII1pU I,1'7710 1101P�.
-------� — _ — POSITION '�nllll�,1l�-'
COMBINED STATEMEN 7 S OF CHANGES IN FINAN rA �
1983 1982 1981
For the bears Ended December 31.
Applications
$ 9,385,000 f 3,026,000 $ 700,000
Additions to real estate investments 560,000
Increase in real estate loans receivable
Increase in investments in unconsolidated 650,000 1,601,000 609,000
joint ventures 13,648,000 15,305,000 12,873,000
Additions to real estate projects
Decrease in receivables arising from (970,000)
real estate sales 1,674,000 463,000 1,301,000
Additions to property, plant and equipment 4,872,000 3,745,000 4,112,000
Repayment of real estate loans payable 7908,000 4,925,000 6,393,000
Repayment of construction loans payable 700,000 214,000 220.000
Repayment of other loans payable
Loans to officers and a companc o�•ned by 200,000 48,000 463.000
an officer 11,003,000 10.331,000 9,667,000
Dividends declared
Change in net assets of discontinued (1,938,000)
operations held for disposal
Change in reserve for estimated losses from 670,000
disposal of discontinued operations
Net increase (decrease) in 725,000 2,525,000 290,000
Cash 895,000 (5,474,000) 2,176,000
Short-term investments 1.195,000 51,000 1,670,000
Prepaid expenses and other assets
Net decrease (increase) in 1,500,000 (200,000) (1,300,000)
Short-term note payable to bank 1,668,000 (3,330,000) 2,062,000
Accounts payable 39,000 (149,000) 857,000
Accrued liabilities
$56,622,000 $32,881,000 $39,855,000
Jrr notes.
NO- E = TC FiNANCiA � STATEMENTS - -
---
25
Santa Anita Rt ail) Enterprises, Inc. and Santa .finita Opt rarir
December 31. 1983. 1982 and 1981
Aott- 1—Summar 1• of Significant Accounting Real Estate Im,estments
Policies Investment properties are carried at cost and consist
Basis of Presentation of land, buildings and improvements which are depreci-
Separate and combined balance sheets have been pre- ated on the straight-line basis over the estimated useful
sensed for Santa Anita Realty Enterprises, Inc. ("Realty") lives of the properties, ranging primarily from 15 to 35
and Santa Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries years (Note 9).
Consolidated ("Operating Compare and Subsidiaries"). Prepaid Expenses and Other Assets
as of December 31, 1983 and 1982. Separate and com- The costs relating to the organization of Realty and Op-
bined statements of operations and changes in financial erating Company and Subsidiaries have been capitalized
position have been presented for Realty and Operating and are included in prepaid expenses and other assets.
Company and Subsidiaries for the years ended Decem- The amount capitalized has been allocated equally
ber 31, 1983, 1982, 1981. between Realty and Operating Company and Subsid-
All significant affiliate and intercompany balances and iaries and is being amortized over five vears,beginning
transactions have been eliminated in consolidation and in 1980.
combination.
The following accounting principles pertain to both Investments in Unconsolidated Joint lentures
Realty and Operating Company and Subsidiaries. Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures are
accounted for under the equity method.
Real Estate Projects
Real estate projects are carried at the lower of cost or net Deferred Income
realizable value and consist primarily of neighborhood Deferred income consists of prepaid seasonal tickets,
shopping center properties. Completed projects are passes and parking which are amortized to income
depreciated on the straight-line basis over the estimated ratably over the period of the race meet and deferred
useful lives of the properties. ranging primarily from revenues relating to the sale of land.
25 to 35 years. Land and offsite development costs of Property, Plant and Equipment
projects in process are generall} charged to the cost of Depreciation of property, plant and equipment is
commercial sales by the relative sales method and other provided primarily on the straight-line method over
costs generally by specific identification. the following estimated useful lives-
Substantially all commercial real estate properties are
pledged as collateral for construction loans and certain Building and improvements 25 years
long-term debt. Machinery and other equipment 3 to 15 years
Interest is capitalized to qualifying projects (Note 2). Leasehold improvements 20 years
A sale is generaliv recorded and profit recognized Expenditures which materially increase property lives
when title has passed to the buyer who has met down are capitalized. The cost of maintenance and repairs is
pav-ment and continuing investment criteria. When it charged to expense as incurred. When depreciable prop-
is determined that profit has not been earned, such erty is retired or disposed of, the related cost and accu-
unearned profit is deferred for recognition in future mulated depreciation is removed from the accounts and
periods. any gain or loss is reflected in current operations.
Reclassification
Certain amounts from prior years have been reclassified
to conform to the current year presentation.
.Note?—Interest
Operating Company Inter-Entity
Interest for the year ended December 31, 1983 Realty and Subsidiaries Adjustments Combined
Total incurred $1,194,000 $5.875,000
Capitalized $(2,245,000) $4,824,000
(338,000) 90,000 (248,000)
Total interest expense $1.194,000 $5,537,000 $(2,155,000) $4,576,000
'6
FINA NC !AL s-4TEMENTS
Tutt �—lnlerest ,� rr''rrrrcr�
Interest for the year ended December 31. 1982: $
727.000 $5,856.000 $(1.757.000) $4.826.000
-Ictal incurred (589,000)
Capitalized4:237.000
$ 727,000 $5.267,000 $(1,757,000) $
Total interest expense
Interest for the year ended December 31. 1981:
$1.101,000 $6,396.000 $ (977.000) $6,520.000
Total incurred (1,097.000) (1,097.0010
Capitalized (1,044.000) 134,000 (910.000
Related to discontinued operations(Note 4)
$1,101.000 $4.255.000 $ (843.000) $4,513,00(
Total interest expense
1 r t, —Earnings Per Common Ji+are standing during each period. Stock options have not
been included to the computation since they have no
Earnings per common share are computed based upon material effect.
the weighted average number of common shares out
dote 4—Discontinued Opera!ir.r'iy at December 31, 1980) and the balance ($442,000) to loss
from discontinued operations. Losses for 1982 and 1983
Robet H. Grant Corporation were charged to current operations and any future
In 1976, the Board of Directors adopted a plan to dis- income or losses will be charged or credited to normal
continue the operation of the home building subsidiary, operations as they are incurred.
Robert H. Grant Corporation ("Grant"), and the antici-
pated losses from disposal were reflected in that year. Hadley
Operating results of Grant from June 30, 1976 (meas- The note receivable from the sale of a subsidiary
urement date of disposal) through December 31, 1980 included in Realty's and the combined balance sheet of
�.et e reflected as changes in the reserve established for Realty and Operating Company and Subsidiaries' arose
estimated losses from disposal of these discontinued from the sale of Hadley .Auto Transport to Cartrans in
operations.The discontinuance period spanned a longer a prior year. The note with i face amount a d has b 0
time frame than was originally anticipated. During 1981, at December 31. 1983 bears interest at 8%,and has been
substantial activity was incurred to dispose of the then reflected in the financial statements net of a discount
remaining assets and reduce the operations of Grant, based upon an imputed interest rate of 9%. The note is
thus substantially completing disposal. due in 1988.
Grant's 1981 operating loss was charged first to the
remaining reserve for discontinued operations($670,000
„r Rt ceivables Secured bV Real Estate Operating Company
Realty and Subsidiaries Combined
December 31. 1983
Real estate loans receivable consist of the following:
Receivable from municipality bearing interest at an effective rate of 617, $1,125.000
due in installments through 1991, less unamortized discount of$65,000 $1.125.000
loci( second trust deed due from a joint venture in which 150,000 150.000
Realty is a 50% partner
12 17( plus contingent interest first trust deeds, due in 1992 from a
subsidiary of Operating Company, pavments are interest only (Note 15) 5,513,000-
560.000
.
10% second trust deed. due in 1984 $
$7,348.000 1,835.000
Receivables arising from real estate sales consist of the following: $1,025,000 $1.025.000
8.0% to 10% sales contracts. primarik due in 1984 208,000 208.000
6.6% to 1117c first trust deeds due in installments through 1994 139,000 139,000
Noninterest bearing first trust deeds.due in 1984
$1,372.000 $1,372.000
Operating Compam
I►i,reit c 31. 11042 Rrali% and Suhsidiane. Combined
Real estate loans receivable consist of the following:
Reeei%able from municipality bearing interest at an effective rate of 617(.
less unamortized discount of$74.000 $1.313.000 $1,313.000
lu; second trust deed due froni a joint %euture in %%hick Reale is
a 5111i partner 166,000 16(i.0011
I_2'_ plus contingent interest first muse deeds due from a subsidiar% of
t)pe•ratint;(.onipan%. p,n menti are interest only (\ote 15) 6,960.0010
S,X.4 39.(100 $1.479.000
Retmables arising from real estate sales consist of the following:
6.51-, to 12`i sales contract. less allo%%ante for uncollectible
accounts of 5516.000 $1.811.000 $1,811.000
6-ti'( to 12r first trust deeds 245.000 245.000
Pritne interest rate second trust deeds 244.1100 244.000
7`- to r..V unsecured notes 486.000 486.000
52.786,000 $2.7186.000
Of the S1.025,000 in sales contracts receivable at Operating Compam
December 31. 1983, $847.000 represents notes receivable Realm and Subsidiaries
in default at December 31. 1983. Operating Compam 1984 S 703.000 S 1._'34,000
filed for judicial foreclosure of the real estate securing 1985 151.000 4,000
the notes receivable and received the final settlement of 1986 160.000 4.000
S869.(100 in 'March 1984. Principal collections due on the 1987 174.000 4.000
aforementioned receivables are as follows: 1988 186.000 4,000
Thereafter 5,974,0011 122.000
—lttre.rmeut it, (. tentures The accounting policies of the joint ventures are sub-
Santa Anita Development Corporation("SDC"),a •holly- stantialk the same as those of Realty and Operating
owned subsidiary of Operating Company, entered into Company.During 1983, Realti purchased the minority interest
joint ventures »ith some of its officers and employees in its only consolidated joint venture.
and in subsequent years with outside parties to develop The assets of the joint ventures primarily consist of
certain commercial and industrial real estate properties. commercial real estate properties (Note 10). Condensed
E picall. SDC contributed land at appraised value. fur- finanical statement information for the consolidated
niched %%orking capital and was responsible for the day- joint ventures as of December 31. 1983. 1982. and 1981
to-day affairs of the joint ventures including accounting. and for the ended December 31, 1983. 1982 and
SDC's share of the profits or losses of the joint ventures 1981 are as years years follows:
ranges from 5O`ic to 65�.
Operatin Compam
bciemfK•t tI. l4ti_; Rcaltc and Subsidiaries Combined
C:onuner(ial real estate properties S 5,247,000 $ 5.24 i.000
Related liabilities S 5.117.000 $ 5,117.000
Revenues S 670.000 S 670.000
Los,before income tax benefit S (419,000) $ (419.000)
bmenibei al. 19ti2
Conurtercial real estate properties 51.892.000 S 6.854,000 $ 8.746,000
Related liabilities $ 6,563.110[) $ 6,563.000
Re%enUe> $ 359.000 $ 1.486,000
$ 1,845.000
Loss before income tax benefit $ (125,000) $ (355,000) $ (480,000)
T
' ..,,
(-I Piz t,,gn,i •p..., in ( onsuhdaii djoinI Ientur(
Drcember 31. 1981
Commercial real estate properties $1.994,00(1 514x31,000 $16.525.000
Rrlated liabilities 514.424.000 S14.424.000
Rt%enues S 345.000 5 3.674.01111 $ 4.024.(1(10
Loss before income tax benefit S (147.0001 S(1.092.000) $(1.439.000)
Aote Invest►nt tit in C ntt:ncoi.,dort rt joint It r;tr:res
Condensed financial statement information for unconsolidated joint ventures as of December 31. 1983. 1982 and 1981
and for the vears, then ended are as follows:
Operating Compam
Drct•mhvr:SI. 19r13 Realn and Subsidiaries Combined
lotal assets. principalh commercial real estate $23.634.000 $15.606.(1(10 539.240.000
liabilities• principalh unsecured line of credit and long-term financing $21.275.000 $ 4.111.000 525.386.00 ►
Partner,, equit%:
Reale Operating Compam 5 3,4`27.(100 $ 2.256.000 5 5.683.000
(1065.000) 9.239.000 8,171,WtI
Other
$ 2,359.000 $11.495.000 $13,834.000
Re%enues $ 6,763.000 5 3,261.000 $10.024.000
Income(loss) before income taxes:
Realty Operating Compam (1(1
5 320,000 $ 3.000 $ 323.00
520.000 116. 0 636.0000
Other
5 1.040.000 $ 119,0()O S 1.159.000
Uecemlxr.SI. I982
Intal assets, principalh commercial real estate 5`24.120.000 $ 8.420.000 S32.540,000
Liabilities. principalh unsecured line of credit and long-term financing $21.172.000 S 7.367.000 $28.539,000
Partners'equitN:
Realts Operating Compam $ 3.026.000 $ 1.1((4.000 $ 4,510.000
()then (78.000) (431.000) (509,000)
$ 2,948,000 $ 1,053,000 $ 4,001,000
Re%enues $ 7.24(1,(100 $ 1.444.000 S 8,684.1110
Income(loss►before income taxes:
Realts,Operating Compam S 816.000 $ (312,000) $ 504.(1('
Other ri16.000 (650,000) 160,000
S 1,632,0t)0 $ (962.0(.)0) $ 670.0110
De,riubt•r31. 19ri1
Intal assets. principally commercial real estate $20x81.000 $17.641.000 $38,222.000
Liabilities. principalh unsecured line of credit and long-term financing $20.432.000 $12.194,000 $32,626.000
Partners'equip:
Reale Operating Compam $ 470.000 $ 1.935.000 $ 2,405,000
Other (321.000) 3.5 12,000 3.191.000
$ 149.000 $-5.44 7.000 $ 5.J9 (W)
Rexenues $ 6.662.000 $ 6,046.000 $12,708.000
Income(loss)before income taxes:
Real 'Operating Compam $ 831.000 $ 217,000 $ 1,048.000
n
Other 831,000 (342,000) 489.000
$ 1,662.000 $ (125,000) $ 1,x3 7.000
dote 1-f.tU,'': .,ate Loons fcrch;:
Real estate loans payable consist of the following:
December 31. 1983 Operating Compam
8.5% note.secured b.1 land Aith assignment of ground lease and rent as Reale and Subsidiaries Combined
collateral. payable in monthh installments through 2009
8.81% to 13.Y-r notes• secured bs commercial real estate properties, $ 4,933.000 $ 4 933.000
due in installments through 2010
Prime plus 1% to prime plus 1,37Y7( notes, principalh from banks, 9.214.000 $1•;.186.00(1 22.402,000
secured bs commercial real estate properties. due in 1961
121%( plus contingent interest first trust deeds due through 1992 to Realm, 3.230,000 3 230.000
payments are interest onl% (Note 15)
5.513.00014'
314.14 .U(I(( $21.931.000
$30.565.000
December 31. 1982
6.5(7( note• secured bN land with assignment of ground lease and rent as
collateral
Li.81(%r to 13.517c real estate notes. secured b% commercrtl $ 'x.984.000 3 -1.984.000
real estate properties
Prime plus 1 c notes, principalh from banks, secured b% 2,791,000 $13.953.(100 It;,i 1�,01►U
commercial real estate properties
12(-( plus contingent interest first trust deeds due to Realty. 3,830.000 3.830.000
payments are interest onl% (Note 15)
Other 6,960,000(4(
2.000 2,000
$ i.i i 5.000 $24,i 45.000 $25.560.000
7
• rn rnmhnr,rltnrr.
Realty has an agreement for a revolving line of credit Principal payments due on real estate loans payable
with two banks providing a $20,000,000 unsecured line are as follows:
of credit until June 1990. The line requires maintaining
compensating balances equal to 2.5% of the outstanding ��peand, (:c'mpc(m
Realtc and ub.idianes
borrowing plus a 114,17( per annum commitment fee on 1984 $ 1,724,000 $ 3-1(1, (1110
the unused portion. At December 31, 1983, $20,000,000 1985 107.000 114,000
of the fundi were available to Realty under the revolving 1986 114.000 126.000
line of credit. 198' 122.000 140,000
In 1982. Realtv borrowed $3,000.000 to finance cap- 1988 1.433.000 154.000
ital improvements at Santa Anita Racetrack. The loan, Thereafter 10,647,00(► 17.990.0()()
with a principal balance of$2,300,000 at December 31.
1983. is unsecured, requires a compensating balance Generalk, real estate loans are repaid from sales of the
equal to 5(-( of the unpaid outstanding principal balance related properties, operations, collections of'receivables,
plus M7( of the commitment. and/or refinancing of'eaisting debt.
Operating Company and Subsidiaries' loan agreement Construction and land loans payable of S9.714.000
for a reyolying line of'credit with a bank provides a and $9.142,000 at December 31, 1983 and 1982, respec-
$5.000.000 unsecured line of credit until June, 1984. lively, bear interest at 10% to prime plus 3.517(: the con-
The line requires maintaining a compensating balance scruction loans are generally due within one year and the
equal to 517c of the unpaid principal balance plus 5% of land loans are due to periods through 1988.
the commitment. The funds can only be used in connec-
tion with the racetrack operations. At December 31.
1983, $5 million of funds were available to a subsidiary
of Operating Company under the reyol ing line of
credit.
In addition, Operating Company and Subsidiaries
have a $2,000.000 unsecured line of credit with a bank.
The line has a compensating balance requirement of
10% of the outstanding balance plus 10 c of the total
commitment. Borrowings are at the bank's prime rate
plus .25%.
The prime rate ranged from 10.5% to 11.0% during
the year ended December 31. 1983 and was 11.0% at
December 31, 1983.
30
Icy<'' 1483 1982 1981
As a real estate investment trust (-REIT )• Realty is
taxed onl% on undistributed REIT income. For the years Y�r' t�oonet real estate
projects 1 l.000 (159,11Ot1) (128.000)
ended December 31, 1983. 1982 and 1981, Realty has dis- realizable value
tributed at least 95ir of its REIT earnings to its share Effect of timing differences
holders. Realt%'s income tax provisions of 5311.000. on income recognition
565,000 and $250.000 for 1963. 1982 and 1981. respec- of unconsolidated joint
15.000 (58,000) 59.000
Heel%,. represent current income tax expense. X51 000) (12.000) 168.000
Operating Compam and Subsidiaries file a consoli- Ovether.ntures net
5198.110
dated federal income tax return.
(11 S(322,O1N11 $ 392.111)11
ense tbenefit)
The composition of the income tax exp
for Operating Compam and Subsidiaries for the \ears
Total income tax expense (benefit) for financial sate-
ended December 31. 19n3. 1982 and 1981 is as follows: ment purposes for Operating Company and Subsidiaries
14414:3 1982 1981 differs from the amount computed by applying the fed-
eral income ax rate of 461%( to income (loss) from con-
Current expense tinuing operations before provision for income taxes
tbenefit): due to the following:
�°�-}.I)l1U Sill-l�.lt(101 C K�').0(10
Federal o05.0i
19;: 19142 1981
State 6.000 t
280,000 (1.144.(100)i98.000) ( 1.0392,11110•000 Com uted "expected-
322.71001392,11110P
Deferrec{ tax expense (benefit) 5 495.000 S (985.0( 0) S1.21-71-000
S 18`> 000 5(1.466.000) S 1.449.0(10 State income taxes,
net of federal 138.000
Deferred tax expense arises from timing differences income taxes 26.000
in the recognition of revenues and expenses for financial tion-taxable interest
statement and tax reporting purposes. The sources of
income (286.000) (454,000)statement
timing differences and the related ax effects are as Nonodt a aibl[ ributions 49,000 51,000
political
follows: (102.0(1(1) (78.000) 96.000
1983 14ri`� 1981 Other. net 5 182.000 5(1.466.000) $1.449.000
accelerated depreciation
methods utilized for tax
reporting purposes S 63.000 41.0(1(1 5 34,000 through- methodcOperatingrCompan% and using
ubsidiaries'
Reduction of deferred tax net operating loss carryforward at December 31,
taxes dut- t„ net 1983 approximates 52,543,000 and expires in 1997. Dur-
operatin; lose
y resulting
carrvokers (663.000) Ing 1983. SDC: sold certain properties to Realtung
State income tax provision in income before income taxes of$2,396,000 to SDC.
deductible when paid for In eliminating these transactions in combination, the de-
deductible $1,198,000 fess-
federal income tax ferred tax benefit for 1983 was incr
purposes 22.000 (76.000) (118'000) timated axes relating to the taxable income), resulting in
Deferred gross profit on a combined benefit for income taxes of$705.000 and
real estate sales recog- prepaid income taxes of$1,198,000 (which are classified
nized on the installmentpenses and other asset
d in-
method for tax purposes 636.000 (2•(111(1) (2.000) come taxes
ew 11 be recognized in thescombi e d sp at ement
Compensation deductible of'operations when the properties are sold to an outside
for tax purposes third party.
when paid (72.000) (153.000) 44.000
Interest capitalized for Certain prior ��ears tax returns of Santa Anita. Realty
financial statement and Operating Company and Subsidiaries are under
purposes and deducted audit by the taxing authorities.
currentIN for tax
purposes
(59.000) 9 .000 335,000
%ot, lll—Lra+Ps
Substantially all of these leases provide for additional
Rental Properties contingent rentals based upon the gross income of the
Operating Company and Subsidiaries'completed real tenants in excess of stipulated minimums. Contingent
estate projects consist primarily of neighborhood shop- rentals were approximately $443,000 in 1983, approxi-
ping centers which are leased with terms ranging from mate1v $498.000 in 1982 and approximately $400,000
3 to 10 years for shop leases and up to 30 vears for in 1981.
ground leases. Lease Commitments
Realty's real estate held for investment consists of At December 31, 1983, Operating Company and Subsid-
Santa Anita racetrack• including the land underlying iaries are obligated under various noncancelable leases,
Santa Anita Fashion Park, a regional shopping center, the most significant of which are ground leases on
various neighborhood shopping centers and an apart- commercial real estate properties. Aggregate payments
ment complex. The racetrack is leased to LATC (see under these ground leases for the five years ending De-
terms in Note 15). The land underlving Santa Anita cember 31. 1988 are as follows:
Fashion Park and various neighborhood shopping cen- 1984
ters are leased with terms ranging from 3 to 5 vears for 1985 $140.000
shop leases and from 30 to 65 years for ground leases. 1986 140.000
All leases are accounted for under the operating 1987 140,000
140,000
method in accordance with FASB Statement No. 13. 1988
140,000
Minimum future lease payments to be received for Operating Company and Subsidiaries have sublet por-
the five years ended December 31,.1988. are as follows: tions of these properties with annual rentals of$146,000
Operatin Compam through the year 2033.
Realty' and subsidiaries Combined All leases are accounted for under the operating
1984 $2.636,000 $2,437,000 $5,073.000 method in accordance with FASB Statement No. 13,
1985 2.790,000 2.115,000 4,905.000 "'Excludes rentals relatingto the Santa Anita Racetrack paid In
1986 2,954,000 1,596,000
1987 4,550.000 LATC to Realty. -
3,088,000 1,163,000 4,251,000
1988 3,363.000 979,000 4,342,000
-%-ote 11—Commitments and Contingent Lial,';ht-�` As is customary with the thoroughbred racing oper-
Realty has guaranteed a $3 million note of a subsidiary ation, certain contracts are outstanding for the perform-
of Operating Company. ante of essential services by outsiders. These contracts
In 1981. Realtv entered into a limited partnership to are for periods not exceeding five years and are cancel-
build and lease an industrial park (approximately lable if racing meets are not held.
800.000 sq. ft.) in the City of Baldwin Park. California. Certain other claims, suits and complaints arising in
Realty contributed $450,000 in 1981, $2.711,000 in 1982 the ordinary course of business have been filed or are
and$1.190.000 in 1983, and has committed an additional pending against Realty and Operating Company and
$1,149,000 over the next two years to the partnership. Subsidiaries. In the opinion of their managements, all
Realty leases the Santa Anita Racetrack to Operating such matters are adequately covered by insurance, or if
Company's subsidiary, LATC. The lease provides for a not so covered, are without merit or are of such kind, or
rental fee of 1.5% of the total gross pari-mutuel handle involved such amounts, as would not have a significant
generated at the racetrack and expires in 1994. The effect on the financial position or results of operations if
lease amounts are eliminated in combination. disposed of unfavorably.
----------
_._ --- 32
NANCIAL STATEMENTS -
!v
plovment. are exercisable at am time and expire in 1988.
stogy k Option Prot;rr.M: Information with respect to shares under option as of
Under its Employee Incentive Stock Option Program. December 31, 1983, 1982 and 1981 and for the years
30.000 shares of common stock are reserved for sale.
then ended is as follows:
The options, which are conditional on continued em- Option Price Market Price
Per
Per
Number Share Total
of Shares
Shari Total
Shares Under Option At: 1.;,; (1110 S20.75 $623.000
December 31- 1983 ;ill 000 $4.44
Realt- $20.73 $623.000
Operating Compam 30.000 $4.44 $133.000
Combined $18.25 $348,000
December 31. 1982 30.000 $4.44 $133.000
Realty
UperatmeCompa30.00() $4.44 $133.000 $18.25 $548,000
m
combined
December 31. 1961 30.000 $4.44 $133,000 $15.63 $469. 00
RraltN 44,(1011 S15-63 $15 i.00110
I0Ao0 $4.44 $ $15.63 $626.000
operating CompanN 40.000 $4.44 $177.000
Combined
Options Exercised:
Near ended December 31. 1083-None
Year ended December 31. 1982 $15.50 $155.000
Realty $4.89 $ 49.000
10,000 $4.89 $ 49.000
Operating Compam 10.000 $15.50 $155 AUU
Combined
Near ended December 3l, 1981 90 81`� $6 73 S140,000 $21-00 $437.000
Realh438 $21.00 $534.0011
�- $6.73 $l i°.000
Oprrntrnz Compan-N 46.250 56.75 $312.000 $21.00 $971.000
Combined
For options exercised during the periods. the market
At the time of exercise of Realty options, the officers
riv
price is at the date of exercise. There were no options f°Oheratin uComeany stock at its fairmarket aalue per
s
granted nor did am options expire during the three
share pair with heir Realty shares.
ears. Operating Company was required to purchase Realty
During 1982 and 1981, various Realty and Operating
ther Company directors and officers exercised
ii theRtime C.ompan,,ealtv shares at f shares air rbeing purchased by the officers. The
and,,or Operating Compari stock options. perating
are
of exercise.the officers delivered to Realty and Operating purchases, enced byRromissory
notes bearing inte re at`10q/
Company the $.10 par value of the stock in cash and payable nwnthh with principal payments to be made
signed notes for the balance of the purchase price and five years
the required federal and state withholding taxes on the in annual The differencelents betweenrthe option price e the
taxable gain from the exercise of their options. Operating Company shares exercised and the fair market
The notes representing a portion of the purchase
price of the stock and the required l`it h withholding
taxes
pay amortized to%alue of the expense over ired shares tthe life of he relatedtnot is g
bear interest at 7�c payable quarte principal
ments due in five annual installments. The portion of of<the officerei\able os wthichefier is shorter.xpected emp oyment
the note representing withholding taxes is due and pay
able on the first anniversary date of the note. The por
tion of the note representing the purchase price of the
stock is payable with 10 of'the principal due annually
over the first four nears and the balance of the note due
in the fifth year.
-- ---- 33
.Vote 13—Empluver Benefit Plana Realty and Operating Company and certain of its sub-
Realty and Operating Company and certain of its subsid- sidiaries have deferred compensation agreements which
iaries have a retirement plan for certain employees not provide certain key employees a fixed benefit at retire-
covered by collective bargaining agreements. It has been mens. The provision for 1983 for Realty and Operating
the policy of the Santa Anita Companies to make annual Company and Subsidiaries was $42,000 and $81,000,
contributions to the plan equal to the pension provision. respectively; for 1982 was $42,000 and $98,000,
The provision for 1983 for Realty and Operating Com- respectivek; and for 1981 was $37,000 and $42,000,
pan and Subsidiaries was$44,000 and$188.000, respec- respectively. It is the policy of the Companies to fund
tiveh; for 1982 was$53,000 and$117,000, respectively; only amounts sufficient to cover current deferred com-
and for 1981 was $43,000 and $207,000, respectively. pensation benefits payable to retirees. The present value
The provisions include amortization of past service cost of unfunded benefits at December 31, 1983, based upon
over 30 years. Based upon an actuarial valuation date of an actuarial valuation at f anuan 1, 1983, was$977,000
January 1, 1983, the present value of vested plan benefits (calculated using a rate of return of 10%). Plan assets
(calculated using a rate of return of 7.5%) and the plan's at December 31, 1983, represented by the Companies'
net assets available for benefits at December 31, 1983 accrued liability at that date, were$958,000.
were $2.890,000 and $2,310,000, respectively.
Note 1.1—Quartcrtt Ftnanctallntormatinpi — ,
Condensed combined quarterly results of operations for Realty and Operating Company and Subsidiaries are as
follows:
Earnings Per
Common Earnings Per
mon
Quarter Ended Re%enues Nei Income Share Quarter Ended Revenues Net Income Com
o Share
1983
December 311981
$15._2 i7 8,000 $3.122.000 $ .50
September 30 $ 3.791,000 $ 97,000 $ .02 December 31 $10,679,000 $1,987,000 $ .28
September 30 $ 5,096,000 $ 243.000 $ .04
June 3U $16.431,000 $1.682.000 $ •27 June 30
318,413,000 $1,985.000 S .35
March 31 $48,789,000 $6,343,000 51.03
March 31 $48,509,000 56.724.000 S I.20
1982
December 31 S 9.650.00(1 $2,406,000 S .39 The total of the amounts shown above as quarterly
earnings per share may differ from the amount shown
September ;30 S 4,628.000 S 246,000 S .04 on the Combined Statements of Operations because
June 30 $16,093,000 51,585,000 $ .26 the annual computation is made separately and is
March 31 $45.517.000 $6.071,(1011 $ .99
based upon average number of shares outstanding for
the year.
34
E� Tp '. jNAtiC14L c-ATE`!E`,' -
to Realty and paid $642.000 in contingent interest to
V.,t, i5—Related Part% Tran•nc i--' Realty in accordance with the terms of the loan(,Vote 5).
Based upon the formula of 1.5% of the aggregate wager- Realty has agreed to loan to SDC $5.230.000 secured
inq at Santa :mita racetrack, for the years ended by a shopping center located in Newark, California.
December 31. 1983. 1982 and 1981. LATC paid Realty
Through the first half of 1983. Realtv had funded
�xiinately S9.10().000. $8.400.(100 and $8.600.000• $4.420,000 of the total. Realty $2,191.1)(10
In the latter half of 1983. SDC:
resprctiyely, in rental income. Of these amounts. sold a portion of the center and repaid
�ippn
res (►.00(). S6.600.00 () and 56.700-000- respectiyeh• and cancelled the S810.000 unfunded commitment. Re-
vere attributable to the Santa Anita meets. with the re- alty earned contingent interest of$4 1.000 from SDC on
mainder being attributable to the Oak Tree meets. The this sale. The remaining balance of'S2.223.000 bears in-
lease arrangement bet%%een LATC and Realty requires terest at a fixed annual rate of 12`x, %vith a provision for
L.ATC to assume costs attributable to taxes. maintenance future contingent interest. and Realty has an option to
and insurance. purchase the property.
LATC has agreed to pad all interest charges on a On March 1, 1979,Glenn L.Carpenter, Inc..a compam
loan of�Realty's with a balance of$2.3UU,0(10 at Decem- wholh' owned by Glenn L. Carpenter (vv'ho became
ber 31. 1983. which was obtained in 1982 to finance an officer of Realty in December. 1979). entered into a
capital improvements at the racetrack. limited partnership agreement with Operating Company
During 19t?3. SDC sold certain properties to Realty for relating to the development of certain real estate in
SI l,iu►u.00(i. SDC s cost of these properties was Orange County. California. Glenn L. Carpenter. Inc. acts
58.604.000, resulting in income before income taxes of as the general partner of the limited partnership. Oper-
S2.346.0i)0. These transactions have been eliminated in ating Compam's participation is limited to a 10',-c per
the combined financial statements. annum return on its$150.000 investment or 36.c of the
In 1981. Realty loaned to SDC $3.290.000 secured by a profits of the project, whichever is greater. Payment of
shopping center in Phoenix. Arizona. The term of the the $150.000 investment. of which $65.000 is outstand-
loan was for 10 years and Realty had an option to pur- ing as of December 31. 1983, has been personally guar-
chase the property. In January 1984, Realt\ exercised anteed by Mr. Carpenter.
this option and acquired the property for$4.066.000
which had a book value of$2.782.000. As a result of the
transaction. SDC: paid off$3.290.000 in real estate loans
.,Vote 16—:n'ditional Financial Data
Capital Stock—Operating Company's subsidiaries have no shares reserved for options, warrants. conversions or other
rights.
Accrued Liabilities—Accrued liabilities as of December 31. 1983 and 1982 are comprised of the following:
Operating Company Combined
Realtv and Subsidiaries
December 31. 198351,000 $ 751,000 $ 802.000
$
.Accrued salaries 430.000 680.000 1.110.000
Deferred compensation 110,000 213.000 323.000
.Accrued interest 215,000 215.000
.Accrued payroll and property taxes 85,000 646.000 731.000
Other
$ 676.000 $2.505.000 $3.181,000
Total
December 31. 1982930.000 $1.117,000
Accrued salaries 8 187.000 $ 836.000
389.000 447,000
Deferred compensation 89,000 334.000 423.000
Accrued interest 429,000 429,000
Accrued payroll and property taxes 415,000 415.000
Other $ 665.000 $2.555,000 000 $3.220.000
Total
\We I,--Due t- art,Y %rom .4ila
t�h
Operating Company and Subsidiaries oh,ed amounts to Realty as follows:
Operating Company
December 31. 1983 December 31. 1982
Santa Anita De%elopment Corporation $4.902.000 $5.113,000
Robert H. Grant Corporation 439,000 `' 520 000
Los Angeles Turf Club, Incorporated 1.230,000 1.237.000
3,139.000 828.000
$9,730.000 $9.698,000
Certain of the above amounts bear interest at rates ranging from 10 c to 11( per annum.
.rote 18—Buwy?(,.N.k Seomcyi' Data
Operations of Realty and Operating Company and Subsidiaries are conducted through three business segments. These
segments, and the primary operations of each, are as follows:
Business Segment Operations
Thoroughbred Racing The operations of Santa Anita racetrack,a major thoroughbred racetrack
located in Arcadia. California.
Commercial De%elopment The de%elopment and sale of commercial and industrial properties. in Califor-
nia and Arizona.
Real Estate Investment The holding and investing in real propert%.
Business segment information as of and for the three years ended December 31, 1983. 1982 and 1981 for Realty, Oper-
ating Company and Subsidiaries and Realty and Operating Company and Subsidiaries combined is presented below.
Revenues of each segment are as follows:
December 31, 1983 Operating Compam
Thoroughbred Racing:
Realt% and Subsidiaries Combined
Sales to unaffiliated customers
Commercial Development: $62.995.000 $6:5,139.000
Sales to unaffiliated customers
Intersegment transactions 15,294,000 15.294,000
Real Estate In%estments: 11,000,000
Sales to unaffiliated customers $ 5.939.000
Intersegment transactions3.795.(11)0
9,230.00(1
Revenue of segments 15.169,000 89,289.000
General corporate revenues 84.228,000
61,000 61,000
Total revenues $13,169.000 $89.350.0110 �
December 31. 1982
$84._89.000
Thoroughbred Racing:
Sales to unaffiliated customers $58,948.000
Commercial Development: $60,758,000
Sales to unaffiliated customers 11,885.000
Real Estate Investments: 11.885,000
Sales to unaffiliated customers S -1,95`+.000
Intersegment transactions 3.148.000
8.376.(1011
Revenue of segments 1'3.3;34.000 70,833,000 75.791.000
General corporate revenues
97,000 97.000
Total revenues $13.334,000 570,9311.000
$75.888.000
3 I)
'ATEMEt,
i•`—Bu• ' 1cYrnc Ilatc
December:�I. 1981
Thoroughbred Racing: $59,350,000 $61,272.000
Sales a,unaffiliated customers
Commercial Development: 17,131.00017.131,00(1
Sales to unaffiliated customers 4.201,000
Real Estate Investments: $ 6.123.000
Sales to unaffiliated customers 7.646,000
Intersegment transactions 13.769.000 76,481.000 82.604.000
Revenue of segments 93.000 93.000
General corporate revenues S13.769.000 $76.574.000 $82.697.000
Total re\enues
The operating proht (loss) of each segment is as follows: Operating Companv
RealtN and Subsidiaries Combined
December 31. 1983 S 2,980.000 $11,460.000
Thoroughbred Racing 4.330.000 1.934.000
Commercial De\elopment $12,982.000 2.257.000
Real Estate Investments 12.982.000 7.310.000 15.651.1100
Operating profit of segments (6y8.000) 1536.000)
General corporate expenses (1,194,000) (5,537,000) (4,576.000)
interest expense
$11,788,000 $ 1.075.000 $10.539.0(10
Income before provision for income taxes
December 31. 1982 $ 3,048,000 $10,962.000
Thoroughbred Racing 787.000 828,000
Commercial Development $11.487.000 1,816.000
Real Estate Investments 13,606,000
Operating profit of segments (710.000)
11,487.000 3,835.000 (462.000)
General corporate expenses (727,000) (5.267.000) (4,237•000)
Interest expense
Income (loss) before provision for income taxes $10.760.000 $(2,142.000) $ 8,90,.001
December 31. 1981
$ 5.239,000 $13.369,00
Thoroughbred Racing 2,351.000 2.351.000
Commerri.,l De\elopment $11,430,000 2.324.000
Real Estate Imestments
11,430.000 7,590.000 18.(144,000
Operating profit of segments (693.000) (451.000)
General corporate expenses (1.101,(100) (4,255,000) (4.513,000)
Interest expense
Income before provision for income taxes and loss from $10.329.000 $ 2.642.000 $13,080,000
discontinued operations
Operating profit represents total re\enues less operating expenses. In computing the operating profit of each segment.
general corporate (Operating Compam—Parent) expenses. 'interest expense and mcotne taxes have been excluded.
_— — -- — —
317
ante 18—Business Segment Data
Identifiable assets of each segment are as follows:
Operating Company
December 31. 1983 Realtv and Subsidiaries Combined
Thoroughbred Racing $20,245,000 $28,386,000
38,488,000 39,596,000
Commercial Development
:52,616,000 26,836,000
Real Estate Investments
Identifiable assets of each segment 52,616,000 58,733,000 94,818.000
General corporate assets 1,600,000 1.275,000
Total assets $52.616,000 $60,333,000 $96,093,000
December 31. 1982
Thoroughbred Racing $17,584,000 $26,374,000
Commercial Development 42,637,000 42,637,000
Real Estate Investments $43,499,000 18,051,000
Identifiable assets of each segment 43,499,000 60,221,000 87,062,000
General corporate assets 168,000 3,184,000 2,864,000
Total assets $43,667,000 $63,405,000 $89,926.000
December 31. 1981
Thoroughbred Racing $17,217,000 $23.521,000
Commercial Development 40,067,000 40,067,000
Real Estate Investments $40,064,000 19,441,000
Identifiable assets of each segment 40,064,000 57,284,000 83,029,000
General corporate assets 173,000 1,389.000 882,000
Total assets $40,237,000 $58,673,000 $83,911,000
Identifiable assets of each segment are those assets that are used in the operations of each segment. General corporate
assets are principally Operating Company (Parent) assets.
NCE-: TO F' % ANCIAL STATEMENTS
ik
.dot(, 18—Business Segamcnt Data I,.:,d
Other information of each segment is as follows:
Operating Company
December 31. 1983 Realtv and Subsidiaries Combined
Depreciation and Amortization:
Thoroughbred Racing $ 472,000 $ 1,121.000
Commercial Development 1,224,000 1,224,000
Real Estate Investments $ 936.000 287,000
Depreciation and amortization expense of segments 936,000 1,696,000 2,632,000
General depreciation and amortization expense 63,000 63,000
Total depreciation and amortization expense $ 936.000 $1,759,000 $ 2,695.000
Capital Expenditures:
Thoroughbred Racing $1.590,000 $ 1,590,000
Commercial Development 77,000 77,000
Real Estate Investments $11,781,000 9,385,000
Total capital expenditures $11,781,000 $1,667,000 $11,052,000
December 31. 1982
Depreciation and Amortization:
Thoroughbred Racing $ 349,000 $ 864.000
Commercial Development 1,308.000 1,308.000
Real Estate Investments $ 721,000 206.000
Depreciation and amortization expense of segments 72I,000 1,657,000 2,378,000
General depreciation and amortization expense 63,000 63.000
Total depreciation and amortization expense $ 721,000 $1,720,000 $ 2,441,000
Capital Expenditures:
Thoroughbred Racing $ 401.000 $ 3,447,000
Commercial Development 42,000 42,000
Real Estate Investments $ 3.026,000
Total capital expenditures $ 3,026,000 $ 443,000 $ 3.489.000
December 31, 1981
Depreciation and Amortization:
Thoroughbred Racing $ 294,000 $ 755,000
Commercial Development 1,039,000 1.039,000
Real Estate Investments $ 750,000 289,000
Depreciation and amortization expense of segments 750,000 1,333,000 2,083,000
General depreciation and amortization expense 64,000 64,000
Total depreciation and amortization expense $ 750.000 $1,397,000 $ 2.147,000
Capital Expenditures:
Thoroughbred Racing $1,252,000 $ 1,952,000
Commercial Development 49,000 49,000
Real Estate Investments $ 700,000
Total capital expenditures $ 700,000 $1,301,000 $ 2,001.000
A ^' - - - -
�cr
;toll Realli Lwcr-pl ;,v%.
X„ j December 31.
1462
heal es[We In\estments
Santa .mita Racetrack. less ace umulated depreciation of$11,819.000 and
511.170.000. respectiveh $ 8.1.11.000 $ 8.790,000
Commercial properties, less accumulated depreciation of 51.250,000 and
$1.018,000, respectiveh (Note 10) 16.816.Uttt1 5,921.000
Real estate loans receivable, less unamortized discount of$65.000 and
$74.000, respectiveh—including$5,513,000 and $6.960,000,
respectiveh, from affiliate companv (Notes 5 and 15) 7,348.000 8.439,000
Imrstments in unconsolidated joint ventures (Note 7) 3.427,000 3,026.000
35.732.00o 26.176,000
C.oh (Note 8) 847,000 2,519,000
Short-term investments. at cost (approximates market) 3,325,000 2,650.000
accounts receivable 1.252.000 979,000
I►ue from officers and officers of affiliate companies (Notes 12 and 15) 149.000 168.000
Notes receivable, less unamortized discount of$180.000 and $187.000, respectively
(Note 4) 770.000 763.000
Prepaid expenses and other assets 811.000 714.000
Due from affiliate companies (Note 17) 9.730,000 9,698,000
$52,616,000 $43,667,000
'. anrtrr, .:nrl Shareh :lder� f o�.i,`r
Real estate loans payable (Note 8) $14,147,000 $ 7,775,000
Other loans payable (Note 8) 2,300,000 3,000,000
Vcounts payable 303,000 205,000
Accrued liabilities (Note 16) 676,000 665,000
Dividends payable 2,905.000 2.591,000
Income taxes 8,284.000 8,262,000
28,615.000 22,498.000
Commitments and contingent liabilities (Note 11)
Shareholders'equity
Common stock. $.10 par value: authorized 20,000,000 shares:
issued and outstanding 6,314,620 and 6,169.909 shares, respectiveh 631.000 617,000
Additional paid-in capital 15,813,000 13.469.000
Retained earnings 7.557,000 7.083,000
24.001.000 21,169.000
$52.616.000 $43,667,000
40
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
Santc .-mita Realty Enterprises. Inc.
Additional Total
Common Stock Paid-in Retained Shareholders'
For the Years EndedShares Amount Capital Earnings Equity
December 31, 1983,1982 and 1981
912,000
Balance. December 31. 1980 5,582,942 $558,000 $ 5,047,000 $ 6,307,000 $11.669,000
Stock options exercised (Note 12) 46,250 5,000 664,000
Stock issued in connection with public 347000 7,398,000
offering, less related issuance costs 510,000 51,000 7, , (9,667,000) (9,667,000)
Dividends declared on common stock 10,079,000 10,079,000
Net income
Balance. December 31. 1951 6,139,192 614,000 13,058,000 6,719,000 20,391,000
Stock options exercised (Note 12)
10,000 1,000 143,000 144,000
Stock issued in connection with
dividend reinvestment plan, less 270.000
related issuance costs 20,717 2,000 268,000 (10,331,000) (10,331,000)
Dividends declared on common stock 10,695.000 10.695.000
Net income
Balance. December 31. 1962 6,169,909 617,000 13,469,000 7,083,000 21,169,000
Stock issued in connection with
dividend reinvestment plan, less 1,883,000
related issuance costs 105,911 10,000 1,873,000
Stock issued in connection with
public offering, less related 475,000
issuance costs 38,800 4,000 471,000
Dividends declared on common stock (11,003,000) (11,003,000)
11,477,000 11,477,000
Net income
Balance, D�Jcember 31, 1983 6.314,620 $631.000 $15,813,000 $ 7,557,000 $24,001,000
41
:- = ^^ = NTS OF CHANGES !N FINANCIAL PC' - C "+
Santr ac?ta R,a!t% Enterpri•cs,Inc.
14K M41Fier the)e.,r,Ended December:it. tutt3
Sources
Funds provided by operations
ince Mme S 11.4 77,444 $10,695,000 $10.079,000
Net
Charges (credits) to net income not inolying funds
Depreciation 936.000 7 21,41)4 75((,440
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures (5 34.000) (816.000) (86 ,000)
4.000 72.00065,00(1
Other
3
1 1,927,000 10.6 7 2,000 10,063,000
Repayment of real estate loans receivable 2,410.000 137.000 980,000
Repavment of amounts due from officers and
officers of affiliate companies 19.000 5,000 102.1140
Increase in real estate loans payable 6.459.000
Proceeds from sale of real estate assets 607.000
Proceeds from other loans payable 3.000,000
Proceeds from stock options exercised 144.000 669.000
Proceeds from stock issued in connection with public offering,
less related issuance costs 475,000 7.398.00()
Proceeds from stock issued in connection with dividend
reinvestment plan, less related issuance costs 1,883,000 270,000
Net decrease (increase) in _
1.6/`x.000 (2,1 5 1.000) (82.0(1(1)
Cash
lm estment in unconsolidated joint ventures 119.000 (1.740,000) 358,000
Net increase (decrease) in
.-accounts payable 98.000 12,000 27,000
Accrued liabilities 11.000 54,000 67,000
Dividends arable 314,000 13,000 446,000
Income taxes 22.000 (53,000) 272,000
$26.016.000 $10,363,000 $20,300,000
apt.=!t_atior
Increase in real estate loans receivable (including $750,000
in 1983. $3.670.000 in 1982 and $3,290.000 in 1981
$ 1.310,000 $ 3,670,000 $ 3,290,004
from affiliate compan)
Additions to real estate investments 11,781,000 3,026,000 700,000
Repayment of real estate loans payable 87,000 160,000 2,324.000
Repayment of other loans payable 700,000 214,000 220.000
Dividends declared 11,003,000 10.331.000 9,667,000
Loans to officers and officers of affiliate companies 207,000
Net increase (decrease) in
Short-term investments 675,000 (5,700,000) 3,550,000
Accounts receivable 213,000 (94,000) 211,000
155,000 87,000 118.000
Prepaid expenses and other assets
Due from affiliate companies
32.000 (1,331,000) 13.000
$26,016,000 $10,363,000 $20,300,000
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS - --
- 42
Santa .Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries
As of December 31.
1983 1982
.assets
Cash ('.Mote 8) $ 7,341,000 $ 4,945,000
Short-term investments, at cost (approximates market) 7,622,000 7,401,000
Accounts receivable 2,789,000 3,156,000
Due from officers and a company owned by an officer of affiliate company
(Notes 12 and 15) 715,000 609,000
Refundable income taxes (Note 9) 183,000 1,064,000
Receivables arising from real estate sales, less allowance for uncollectible
accounts of$47,000 and$579,000, respectively (Notes 5 and 8) 1,372,000 2,786,000
Real estate projects (Notes 6, 8, and 10)
Land held for development and sale 9,225,000 2,690,000
Commercial projects in process 1,712,000 3,921,000
Completed commercial properties, less accumulated depreciation of
$3,324,000 and $2.814,000. respectively 20 331,000 29,320.000
31,268,000 35,931,000
Investment in unconsolidated joint ventures (Note 7) 2,256,000 1,484,000
Prepaid expenses and other assets 2,231,000 2,611,000
Property, plant and equipment, at cost
Buildings and improvements 198,000 198,000
Machinery and other equipment 4,370,000 4,157,000
Leasehold improvements 3,502,000 2.068,000
8,070,000 6,423,000
Less accumulated depreciation (3,514,000) (3,005,000)
4,556,000 3,418,000
$60,333,000 $63,405,000
-- --- -- - -- - 43
1983 1982
A,of December 31.
Liabilities and Shareholders'Equity
Accounts payable $ 8.190,000 $ 9,956,000
2.505.000Accrued liabilities (Note 2.505.000 ,555.000
1
Short-term note payable to bank (Note 8) 1,000A00
Construction and land loans payable, less undisbursed funds of 9,714,000 9,143,000
$2.150,000 and $2,436,000, respectively (Note 8)
Real estate loans payable, including$5,513.000 and $6.960.000. respectiveh,
due to an affiliate company (Notes 8 and 15) 21,931,000 24,745,000
Income taxes (Note 9) .000
Deferred income taxes (Note 9) 4855.000 583,000
3.441.000 1,994,000
Deferred income
9.1311•(1(10 9.b98,000
Due to affiliate com any (Note 17)
56.002,000 60,174,000
Commitments and contingent liabilities (Note 11)
Shareholders' equity
Common stock $.10 par value: authorized 20,000,000 shares; issued and
outstanding 6,314,620 and 6,169,909 shares, respectively 631,000 617,000
Additional paid-in capital 2,380,000 2.187,000
Retained earnings1,320,000 427,000
4,331,000 3,231,000
$60,333,000 $63,403,000
--------- -
CONSOL!DATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY 44
Santa Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries
Common Stock Additional Total
For the Years Ended Paid-in Retained Shareholders'
December 31, 1983. 1982 and 1981 Shares Amount Capital Earnings Equity
Balance. December 31, 1980 5,582,942 $558,000 $1,755,000 $ 541.000 $2,854,000
Stock options exercised (Note 12) 46,250 5,000 1,000 6.000
Stock issued in connection %%ith public
offering, less related issuance costs 510,000 51,000 412,000 463,000
Net income 562,000 562,000
Balance,December 31, 1981 6,139,192 614,000 2,168,000 1,103,000 3,885,000
Stock options exercised (Note 12) 10,000 1,000 1,000
Stock issued in connection with
dividend reinvestment plan, less
related issuance costs 20,717 2,000 19,000 21,000
Net loss (676,000) (676,000)
Balance,December 31. 19,S2 6,1614.904 617.000 2,187,000 427,000 3.231,000
Stock issued in connection with
dividend reinvestment plan, less
related issuance costs 105,911 10,000 152,000 162,000
Stock issued in connection with
public offering, less related
issuance costs 38,800 4,000 41,000 45,000
Net income 893,000 893,000
Balance. Decemher 31, 1983 6,314,620 $631.000 $2,380,000 $1,320.000 $4,331,000
)enc aeco?nPa; ,m1 iiul/
C:ONSOL!DATE C STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
45
Santa.finita Operating (o,npan,, and Subsidiaries
For the Fears Ended December 31.
15+r3 I982 1981
Courres
Funds provided by operations
Net income (loss) $ 893,000 $ (676,000) $ 562.000
Charges (credits) to income not involving funds
Depreciation and amortization 1,7 59.000 1,720,000 1,39 7,000
Deferred income taxes (98.000) (322,000) 392,000
Receivables arising from real estate sales in the
current year (77.000) (458,000) (200,000
Collections of real estate receivables, net of repayments )
on related notes payable of$137,000 in 1982
and$144,000 in 1981 1,491,000 504,000 303,000
Equity in (earnings) losses of unconsolidated
joint ventures (3.000) 312.000 (217,000)
3,965,000 1.080,000 2.237,000
Repayment of amounts due from officers and a company
owned by an officer of affiliate company 94,000 166,000 209,000
Dispositions of real estate projects 17,229,000 9,919.000 9,716,000
Dispositions of property,plant and equipment 9,000 223,000 106,000
Proceeds from construction loans 8,479,000 5,396,000 2,398,000
Proceeds from real estate loans payable (including$750,000,
$3,670,000 and $3,290,000,respectively, from
affiliate company) 4,168,000 7,124,000 8,569,000
Proceeds from the exercise of stock options 1,000 6,000
Proceeds from stock issued in connection with public offering,
less related issuance costs 45,000 463,000
Proceeds from stock issued in connection with dividend
reinvestment plan, less related issuance costs 162,000 21,000
Net decrease (increase) in
Accounts receivable 367,000 (342,000) (329,000)
Refundable income taxes 881,000 (1,064,000)
Receivables arising from real estate sales 910,000
Prepaid expenses and other assets 313,000 209.000 (1,707,000)
Net increase (decrease) in
Income taxes 6,000 (730,000) 594,000
Deferred income 1,447,000 282,000 (483,000)
Due to affiliate company 32.000 (1,331,000) 13,000
$37.197,000 $20,954,000 $22,762,000
S., a<,u,,,p��,nn,� nulF•e.
c cti �E c A _
Opt rte ( nn?�i[ni� [t r,•. .��tfir•;i7IartI
For the Nears Ended December 31.
',/Th!(cat io nl,
Loans to officers and a companv owned b% an officer of $ >Ip►,000 $ 48.0(10 S '56.000
affiliate company
-additions to real estate projects 13.738.000 15.305.000 12,S73.000
Increase (decrease) in investments in unconsolidated joint ventures 769,000 (139.0(10)
967.000
000
Additions to property. plant and equipment 1,661.000 113.000 1,391,b.393•000
Repayment of construction loans payable 7.908.00(1 4,925.000 1►1)
Repayment of real estate loans payable 6.982.000 3,585.000 1,788,000
Change in net assets of discontinued operations held (1,938,000)
for disposal (Note 4)
Change in reserve for estimated losses from disposal ;7;i 5,000
of'discontinued operations (Note 4)
Net increase (decrease) itt
(lash 2.396.000 175.0110 20S.000
221,000 225,000 (1„i74.1u.►0)
5hurt-term inyesunents
Net decrease (increase) in
Accounts payable 50.000
(3,318.000) 2,089.1100
50.000 (95.000) 924,000
Accrued liabilities
Short-term note arable to bank 1,500.000 (200.000) (1,300,000)
$37.197.000 $20,934,000 $22,762,000
. ENT CER71F EG F�,BL,C ACCCutiTANTS
-i;
To the Shareholders and Board of Directors
ti,inta Anita Realty Enterprises. Inc.
Santa .mita Operating Companc
We have examined the separate. consolidated, and combined balance sheets of:
■Santa Anda Rraltl Enterprises, Inc.
■Santa Anita Operating Companl and Subsidiaries
■Santa.4nila Ri altY Enterprise, Inc. and
Santa Anrla Oprrating Compant and Subsidiaries Combined
respectively, at December 31, 1983 and 1982, and the related separate, consolidated, and combined statements of
operations, shareholders' equity and changes in financial position for the years ended December 31, 1983, 1982 and
1981. Our examinations were made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and, accordingly,
included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly the separate, consolidated. and combined
financial position of the above listed entities, respectively,at December 31. 1983 and 1982 and the separate,consolidated,
and combined results of their operations and changes in their financial position for the years ended December 31.
19tH, 1982 and 1981. in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis.
Aolkm� A_
7-7�
Kenneth Leventhal & Company
\ex%-port Beach. California
February 24. 1984
COMBINED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS THREE MONTHS (Unaudited)
Santa Anita Realty Enterprises,Inc. and Santa Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries
(000's Omitted Except Per Share Amounts) For the Three Months Ended Sept.30, 1983(d)
For the Three Months Ended Sept.30,1984
Operating Adjustments Operating Adjustments
Company and and Company and and
Realtv Subsidiaries Eliminations Combined Realty Subsidiaries Eliminations Combined
Revenues
11,282 $(8,650)' $ 2,632
Commercial development $ 3,533 $ 1,249 $ 494 3,533 $ 494
Rental $ 1,249 944 (r') B65
Interest and other 1,103 96 $(467)'6' 732 1,539 70 ( )
Total revenues 2,352 3,629
5,514 2,033 11,352 3,791
Costs and expenses
Cost of commercial sales 2,055 2,055 9,509 (7,149)^' 2,360
Depreciation and 325 109 335 444
amortization 161 257 (93)'"'
Selling,general and833
administrative 364 672 (13)«' 1,023 287 559 (13)''
Interest 755 816 (186)(6' 1,385 234 1,750 (913)'6' 1,071
Total costs and expenses 1,280 3,800 4,788 630 12,153 4,708
Income(loss)before
provision(benefit) for 726 1,403 (801) (917)
income taxes 1,072 (171)
Provision (benefit) for
income taxes 23 (6) 17 59 (322) (75 1)" (1,014)
Net income(loss) (Note 3) $ 1,049 $ (165) $ 709 $ 1,344 $ (479) $ 97
Weighted average
number of common
shares outstanding 6 423,692 6,423,692 6,423,692 6,230,475 6,230,475 6,230,475
Earnings(loss)
shper common
are(Note 3) $ .16 $ (.03) $ 11 $ 22 $ (.08) 0`
Dividends paid per share $ 46 $ .44 $ .44
of common stock $ .46
""to eliminate inter-entity sales and related depreciation
",to eliminate inter-entity interest
'"to eliminate the effect of exercising stock options
""certain amounts from the prior year have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation
See accompanying notes.
COMBINED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS NINE MONTHS (Unaudited)
3
Santa Anita Realty Enterprises,Inc. and Santa Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries
(000's Omitted Except Per Share Amounts)
For the Nine Months Ended Sept.30-, 1984 For the Nine Months Ended Sept.31). 1983(e)
Operating Adjustments Operating .adjustments
Company and and Company and and
Realty Subsidiaries Eliminations Combined Realty Subsidiaries Eliminations Combined
Revenues
Thoroughbred racing $64,081 $64,081
Commercial development $ 5,581 $56.705
Rental 12,976 $(4,066)^� 8,910 15,581 $(8,650)'•" 6,931
Interest and other $12,788 1,054 (7,129)(b)
2'998 $ 8,115 (6,591)(6' 1,524
(1,778)- 2,064 2,632 1,043 (1,824)"' 1,851
Total revenues 12,915 78,111 78,053 10,747 75,329 69,011
Costs and expenses
Direct operating costs 50,832 50,832 46,575 46,575
Cost of commercial sales 7,756 (2,760)(-) 4,996 11,340 (7,149)(.') 4,191
Depreciation and
amortization 904 1,201 (93)(^' 2,012 628 1,318 1,946
Selling,general and
administrative 1,247 5,162 (1 42)(d) 6,267 895 4,811 (142)'(" 5,564
Interest 1,701 3,629 (1,457)10 3,873 662 4,472 (1,734)w 3,400
Rental expenses 7,129 (7,129)(b) 6,591 (6,591)'6'
Total costs and expenses 3,852 75,709 67,980 2,185 75,107 61,676
Income before provision
for income taxes 9,063 2,402 10,073 8,562 222 7,335
Provision(Benefit)
for income taxes 70 1,161 (653)w 578 144 (180) (751)1,-' (787)
Net income(Note 3) $ 8,993 $ 1,241 $ 9,495 $ 8,418 $ 402 $ 8,122
Weighted average
number of common
shares outstanding 6,378,255 6,378,255 6 378 255 6,206,348 6,206,348 6,206,348
Earnings per common
share(Note 3) $ 1.41 $ .19 $ 1.49 $ 1.36 $ .06 $ 1.31
Dividends paid per share
of common stock $ 1.38 $ 1.38 $ 1.28 $ 1.28
-to eliminate inter-entity.sales and related depreciation
'b'to eliminate inter-entity rent
"'to eliminate inter-entity interest
'd'to eliminate the effect of exercising stock options
",certain amounts from the prior year have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation
See accompanying notes.
4
COMBINED BALANCE SHEETS
Santa Anita Realty Enterprises,Inc. and Santa Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries
(Unaudited)
September 30, December 31,
1984 1983
Assets
Real estate investments
Realty
Santa Anita Park, less accumulated depreciation of $ 7,669,000 $ 8,141,000
$12,291,000 and $11,819,000, respectively
Commercial properties, less accumulated depreciation of 23,070,000 14,420,000
$1,581,000 and $1,250,000, respectively
Real Estate loans receivable,less unamortized discount of 1,132,000 1,835,000
$58,000 and $65,000, respectively 3,280,000 3,427,000
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures
35,151,000 27,823,000
Operating Company
Real estate projects, less accumulated depreciation 32,216,000 31,178,000
of$3,446,000 and $3,324,000, respectively
Receivables arising from real estate sales,
less allowance for uncollectible accounts of 502,000 1,372,000
$39,000 and $47,000, respectively 6,747,000 2,256,000
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures
39,465,000 34,806,000
1,224,000 8,188,000
Cash 8,738,000 10,947,000
Short-term investments, at cost (approximates market) 4,255,000 4,041,000
Accounts receivable 1,022,000 864,000
Due from officers and a company owned by an officer (Note 2) 361,000 183,000
Refundable income taxes
Notes receivable, less unamortized discount of$174,000 and 776,000 770,000
$180,000, respectively 4,398,000 3,887,000
Prepaid expenses and other assets
Property, plant and equipment, at cost, less accumulated 5,708,000 4,584,000
depreciation of$3,938,000 and $3,527,000, respectively
$101,098,000 $96,093,000
See accompanying notes.
5
(Unaudited)
September 30, December 31,
1984 1983
Liabilities and Shareholders'Equity
Real estate loans payable $ 29,256,000 $30,565,000
Other loans payable 10,000,000 2,300,000
Accounts payable 2,897,000 8,493,000
Accrued liabilities 5,306,000 3,181,000
Dividends payable 2,959,000 2,905,000
Construction and land loans payable, net of undisbursed
funds of$4,680,000 and $2,150,000, respectively 12,199,000 9,714,000
Income taxes 8,697,000 8,775,000
Deferred income 3,441,000
71,314,000 69,374,000
Shareholders'equity
Common stock, authorized 20,000,000 shares;
issued and outstanding 6,431,553 and 6,314,620 shares, respectively 1,286,000 1,261,000
Additional paid-in capital 19,373,000 17,004,000
Retained earnings 9,125,000 8,454,000
Total shareholders'equity 29,784,000 26,719,000
$101,098,000 $96,093,000
See accompanying notes.
6
BALANCE SHEETS
Santa Anita Realty Enterprises,Inc.
(Unaudited)
September 30, December 31,
1984 1983
Assets
Real estate investments
Santa Anita Racetrack, less accumulated depreciation of $ 7,669,000 $ 8,141,000
$12,291,000 and $11,819,000, respectively
Commercial properties, less accumulated depreciation of 22,700,000 12,755,000
$1,547,000 and $1,211,000, respectively
Apartments, less accumulated depreciation of$127,000 and 3,979,000 4,061,000
$39,000, respectively
Real Estate loans receivable, less unamortized discount of
$58,000 and $65,000, respectively, including$2,223,000 and 3,355,000 7,348,000 ,
$5,513,000, respectively, from affiliate company 3,280,000 3,427,000
Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures
40,983,000 35,732,000
866,000 847,000
Cash 2,500,000 3,325,000
Short-term investments, at cost(approximates market) 1,163,000 1,252,000
Accounts receivable 130,000 149,000
Due from officers and officers of affiliate companies (Note 2)
Notes receivable, less unamortized discount of$174,000 and 776,000 770,000
$180,000, respectively 769,000 783,000
Prepaid expenses and other assets 16,519,000 9,730,000
Due from affiliate companies
Furniture and fixtures, less accumulated depreciation of$16,000 and 28,000 28,000
$13,000, respectively _
$63,734,000 $52,616,000
Liabilities and Shareholders'Equity
Real estate loans payable $15,879,000 $14,147,000
O 10,000,000 2,300,000
Other loans payable
330,000 303,000
Accounts payable
697,000 676,000
Accrued liabilities
2,959,000 2,905,000
Dividends payable
Income taxes 7,526,000 8,284,000
37,391,000 28,615,000
Shareholders'equity
Common stock, $.10 par value; authorized 20,000,000 shares;
issued and outstanding 6,431,553 and 6,314,620 shares, respectively 643,000 631,000
Additional paid-in capital 17,973,000 15,813,000
Retained earnings 7,727,000 7,557,000
26,343,000 24,001,000
$63,734,000 $52,616,000
See accompanying notes.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
7
Santa Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries
(Unaudited)
September 30, December 31.
1984 1983
Assets
Cash
Short-term investments, at cost (approximates market) $ 358,000 $ 7,341,000
Accounts receivable 6,238,000 7,622,000
Due from officers and a company owned by an officer of affiliate 3,092,000 2,789,000
company (Note 2)
Refundable income taxes 892,000 715,000
Receivables arising from real estate sales, less allowance for 361,000 183,000
uncollectible accounts of$39,000 and $47,000, respectively 502,000
Real estate projects 1,372,000
Land held for development and sale
Commercial projects in process 4,515,000 9,225,000
10,714,000 1,712,000
Completed commercial properties, less accumulated depreciation
of$3,446,000 and $3,324,000, respectively 17,157,000
20,331,000
32,386,000 31,268,000
Investment in unconsolidated joint ventures 6,988,000
Prepaid expenses and other assets 2,256,000
Property, plant and equipment, at cost, less accumulated 2,615,000 2,231,000
depreciation of$3,922,000 and $3,514,000, respectively 5,680,000
4,556,000
$59,112,000 $60,333,000
Liabilities and Shareholders'Equity
Accounts payable $ 2,567,000
Accrued liabilities $ 8,190,000
Construction and land loans payable, less undisbursed funds 4,609,000 2,505,000
of$4,680,000 and $2,150,000, respectively 12,199,000 9,714,000
Real estate loans payable, including$2,223,000 and $5,513,000,
respectively, due to affiliate company 15,600,000
Income taxes 21,931,000
Deferred income 1,824,000 491,000
Due to affiliate company 3,441,000
16,519,000 9,730,000
53,318,000 56,002,000
Shareholders'equity
Common stock $.10 par value; authorized 20,000,000 shares;
issued and outstanding 6,431,553 and 6,314,620 shares, respectively 643,000 631,000
Additional paid-in capital 2,590,000 2,380,000
Retained earnings 2,561,000 1,320,000
Total shareholders'equity 5,794,000 4331 000
$59,112,000 $60,333,000
See accompanying notes.
8
OTHER INFORMATION
Santa Anita Realty Enterprises,Inc. and Santa Anita Operating Company and Subsidiaries
September 30, 1984
Note 3—Separate Results
Note I—Accounting Policy The separate results of operations and the separate
Operating Company and Subsidiaries have an earnings per share of Santa Anita Realty Enter-
accounting policy whereby the estimated annual prises, and Santa Anita Operating Company
revenues and costs and expenses associated with
and Subsidiaries cannot be added together to total
thoroughbred horse racing are being allocated be- the combined results of operations and earnings
tween the first, second and fourth quarters on the per share because of adjustments and eliminations
basis of the number of racing days in the quarters. arising from inter-entity transactions.
Note 2—Due from Officers and a Company Owned by Note 4—Legal Proceedings
an Officer On April 5, 1984, the State Board of Equalization
This amount arose primarily from the exercise of issued its opinion and order denying an appeal by
stock options by officers of Realty and Operating Pl of protests and claims
Company pursuant to stock option plans whichre with [eopectf a dto he 1970 through 1979 taxouyearso f
approved by the shareholders. The amount is due
over a term of five years and bears interest at 7% Realty's predessor, Santa Anita Consolidated, Inc.
("SAC"). The amounts at issue arise from a dispute
per annumwith respect to whether SAC and its subsidiaries
Included in the amounts due Operating Company P
is $65,000 at December 31, 1983, representing Oper- should be treated as separate businesses or as a
ating Company's investment in a limited partnership unitary business for purposes of the California
with a company owned by an officer of Realty. unitary tax.
Realty has estimated that the total liability for tax
and interest will approximate $6,000,000, all of
which will be due and payable upon receipt of a no-
tice to such effect by the California Franchise Tax
Board. Realty intends to pay this amount, file claims
for refund and seek recovery of such amounts. If
such recovery is denied, Realty intends to file a suit
for recovery of such amount in the appropriate State
court. Payment of the tax and interest will not be a
charge against earnings.
Santa Anita Operating Company Santa Anita Realty Enterprises,Inc.
Royce B. McKinley
Robert R Strub President and Chief Executive
President and Chief Executive Officer
Officer
Glennon E.'King Glenn L. Carpenter
Vice President,
Vice President-Finance Secretary and Treasurer
Controller and Assistant Secretary
Alexander W. Ingle
Secretary and Treasurer
Santa Anita Operating Company Santa Anita Realty Enterprises, Inc.
285 West Huntington Drive One Wilshire Building,Suite 2303
.Arcadia,California 91006 Los Angeles,California 90017
(
(818)574-7223 213)485-9220
Market Information
Transfer Agent and Registrar The Santa Anita Companies trade on the New York Stock
Union Bank Exchange under the name Santa Anita Realty Enterprises
3810 Wilshire Boulevard and the symbol"SAR"
Los Angeles,California 90010
For information on the Dividend Reinvestment Plan
please write the Secretary of the Corporation.
APPENDIX D
F&M MARQUETTE NATIONAL BANK
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
38
Consolidated Statements of Financial Position
December 31, 1983 and 1982
F&M Marquette National Bank and Subsidiaries
1983 1982
ASSETS $ 58,094,000 $ 61,807,000
CASH AND DUE FROM BANKS, non-interest bearing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
FEDERAL FUNDS SOLD AND SECURITIES PURCHASED 73,000,000 114,732,000
UNDER RESALE AGREEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . • • 7,349,000 4,472,000
TRADING ACCOUNT SECURITIES(Note 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • • • • . • ' . . . 228,550,000 213,895,000
INVESTMENT SECURITIES(Notes 1 and 4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LOANS: 204133,605,000
Commercial,financial, agricultural and other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,378,000
Real estate— 4,729,000 2,156,000
Construction and land development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • • . • . . • . • . • . . . 653,726,000 700,462,000
Mortgage(Note 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,488,000 31,909,000
Installment loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 895,321,000 868,132,000
Less— (1,395,000)
• . . . • . , • • . . . (1,211,000)
Unearned income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2 3,527,000)
Reserve for possible loan losses(Note 3). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,950,000) 863,210,000
Total loans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 891,160,000
OTHER ASSETS, PRINCIPALLY INTEREST RECEIVABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . ' . 19,234,000 30,596,0005,809,000 —
DEFERRED FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAX BENEFITS(Note 7). . . . . . . . . . .
—
2,352,000
INCOME TAX REFUND RECEIVABLE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
BANK PREMISES, EQUIPMENT AND LEASEHOLD IMPROVEMENTS, less 14,182,000 13,597,000
accumulated depreciation and amortization(Note 1) . . . . . . . . . $1,304,661,000
$1,297,378,000
LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL 1983 1982
DEPOSITS: 120,741,000 $ 122,151,000
Demand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $. . . . . 849,247,000 913,215,000
Time and savings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Total deposits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969,
988,000 1,035,366,000
SHORT-TERM BORROWINGS, principally federal
funds purchased and securities sold under 205,720,000 163,410,000
repurchase agreements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 27,093,000
20,287,000
ACCRUED FEDERAL AND STATE INCOME TAXES(Note 7) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . —
5,018,000
FUNDED OPERATING EXPENSE SUPPORT REFUNDS(Note 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,708,000 —
11,089,000 11,038,000
LONG-TERM DEBT(Note s). . . . . • • • • • • • • . • • • • . • . • • • • • • • . • . • • . ' . ' . • • . • 598,000 1,235,119,000
Total liabilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,223,
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES(Note 9)
CAPITAL(Notes 2, 5 and 10): 3,145,000
Common stock, $50 par value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,145,000 41,357,000
41,357,000
Paid-in capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,278,000 25,040,000
Undivided profits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69542,000
Total capital. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73,780,000
$1,297,378,000 $1,304,661,000
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these statements
11
Consolidated Statements of Income
F&M Marquette National Bank:and Subsidiaries For the Years Ended December 31, 1983 and 1982
1983 1982
INTEREST INCOME:
Loans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 87,779,000 S '9,321.000
Investment securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,293,000 16,651,000
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale agreements. . . . . . . . . 6,607,000 11,090,000
Loans and investment securities exempt from federal income taxes . . . . . . . . . . 2,098,000 2.26.1:,000
Trading account securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847,000 505,000
Total interest income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116,624,000 109,831,000
INTEREST EXPENSE:
Deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,046,000 85,423,000
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Short-term borrowings and other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,004,000 16,131,000
Long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 961,000 821,000
Total interest expense. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98,011,000 102,37/5.000
NET MARGIN SUPPORT(PAID)RECEIVED(Note 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5,159,000) 6,805,000
NET INTEREST INCOME . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,454,000 14,261,000
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PROVISION FOR POSSIBLE LOAN LOSSES(Note 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (600,000) (1,559,000)
NET INTEREST INCOME AFTER PROVISION FOR POSSIBLE LOAN LOSSES . . . . . 12,854,000 12,702,000
OTHER INCOME:
Fees from fiduciary activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,104,000 1,650,000
Fees from data processing services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,643,000 1,312,000
Gain on sales of investment securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 868,000 391,000
Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,452,000 7,037,000
Total other income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,067,000 10,390,000
OTHER EXPENSES:
Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,462,000 11,983,000
Data processing fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,346,000 2,608,000
Occupancy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,167,000 1,989,000
Supplies and postage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,634,000 1,683,000
Depreciation and amortization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,542,000 1,499,000
Advertising and marketing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 999,000 1,143,000
Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,595,000 ',258,000
Operating expense support(Note 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,745,000 28,163,000. . . . . (12,000,000) (15,000,000)
Total other expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,745,000 13,163,000
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAX PROVISION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,176,000 9,929,000
INCOME TAX PROVISION(Note 7). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1,422,000) (2,611,000)
NET INCOME. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,754,000 S 7.318.000
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these statements.
12
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Financial Position
F&M Marquette National Bank and Subsidiaries For the Years Ended December 31, 1983 and 1982
1983 1982
SOURCE OF FUNDS
From operations:
Net income. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,754,000 S 'x,318,000
Depreciation and amortization,provision for possible loan losses
and deferred income tax(benefit) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (7,802,000) '.019.000
Amortization of excess of assets acquired over liabilities assumed(Note 2). . (3,241,000) (2,869,000)
Total from operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (4,289,000) 11,498,000
Capital contribution and proceeds from sale of common stock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 40,002,000
Sale of securities to FDIC(Note 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 37,437.000
Funded operating expense support refunds(Note 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,708,000 —
Increase in:
Deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.666,000
Short-term borrowings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,310,000 —
Long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216,000 —
Decrease in:
Cash and due from banks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,713,000 —
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale agreements. . . . . . . 41,732,000 14,401,000
Loans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 40,060,000
Other, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,510,000 —
$ 110,900,000 5172,064.0011
APPLICATION OF FUNDS
Increase in:
Cash and due from banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ — S 11,726.000
Investment and trading account securities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,532,000 59,840.000
Loans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,309,000 —
Savings Bank assets and liabilities at date of acquisition(Note 2):
Federal funds sold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — (6,Soi),000)
Investment securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — (146.-10,000)
Loans. net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — (769.170,000)
Other assets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — (25.-70,000)
Deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 788.570.000
Short-term borrowings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 129 008,000
Long-term debt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 10,178,000
Other liabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 20.014,000
Decrease in:
Deposits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,378,000 —
Short-term borrowings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — X3,314,000
Repayments of long-term debt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165,000 140,000
Cash dividends paid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,516,000 2,642,000
Other, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — 24,402,000
$ 110,900,000 $172,064,000
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these statements
13
Consolidated Statements of Capital
F&M Marquette National Bank and Subsidiaries For the Fears Ended December 31. 1983 and 1982
Common Stock
Shares
Authorized,
Issued
and Out- Paid-In Undivided Total
standing Amount Capital Profits Capital
BALANCE, DECEMBER 31, 1981. . . . . . . . . . . . 45,000 S 2,250,000 5 2,250,000 $20,364,000 524,864,000
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — — — ',318,000 7,318,000
Sale of common stock(Note 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . 1',900 895,000 9,10'•000 — 10,002,000
Capital contribution(Note 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . — — 30,000,000 — 30,000,000
Cash dividends, $42 per share. . . . . . . . . . . . . . — — — (2,642,000) (2,642,000)
BALANCE, DECEMBER 31, 1982. . . . . . . . . . . . 62,900 3,145,000 41,357,000 25,040,000 69,5 42,000
Net income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — — — 6,754,000 6,7754,000
Cash dividends, $40 per share. . . . . . . . . . . . . . — — — (2,516,000) (2,516,000)
BALANCE, DECEMBER 31, 1983. . . . . . . . . . . . 62,900 S 3,145,000 541,357,000 $29,278,000 S73780.000
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these statements.
Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements
(1) Significant Accounting Policies— discount. Gains or losses on the sale of these securities are
Significant accounting policies not described elsewhere in computed based upon specific adjusted cost.
the notes to consolidated financial statements are as Security gains and losses are classified as other income and
follows: the income tax effect is included in the income tax
provision.
Principles of Consolidation:
Trading Account Securities:
The accompanying consolidated financial statements
include the accounts of F&M Marquette National Bank Trading account securities are recorded at market. Gains
(Bank)and its subsidiaries, all of which are wholly owned. or losses on the sale of trading account securities(based
The Bank is a majority owned subsidiary of Bank Shares generally on average cost)and adjustments to market
Incorporated(BSI).All material intercompany balances values are included in other income. Prior to 1983, trading
and transactions have been eliminated from the account securities were recorded at the lower of cost or
consolidated financial statements. market. The effect of this change on 1983 net income is
Certain amounts previously reported in the consolidated not significant.
financial statements as of December 31, 1982 have been
` reclassified to conform with classifications used in the Bank Premises, Equipment and
consolidated financial statements as of December 31, Leasehold Improvements.
1983. These reclassifications have no effect on previously Bank premises, equipment and leasehold improvements
reported consolidated net income. are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and
amortization of $6,07 1,000 and 54,530,000 at December
Investment Securities.• 31, 1983 and 1982, respectively.
Securities held for investment purposes are stated at cost, Depreciation is computed on the straight-line basis over
adjusted for amortization of premium and accretion of the estimated useful lives of the assets and amortization of
14
annual installments through 1989.
ement
leasehold improvements is computed over the shorter of that these refunds will be funded asnetope ening expects
the lease terms or the estimated useful life of the carryforwards of the Savings Bank are realized.
improvement. Rates are as follows: Accordingly, the liability for the refunds is being recorded
Classification Annual Rate as"funded operating expense support refunds" at the time
the tax benefit attributable to the net operating loss
Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t-�y� carryforwards are realized. Cumulative benefits realized
Equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.33% through December 31, 1983 total 511,338,000 and
Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense cumulative refunds total 51,630,000(see Note').
currently. Replacements and improvements are capitalized The excess of fair value of assets acquired over the fair
in the property accounts at cost. value of liabilities assumed("excess fair value")of
Available investment tax credit is applied as a reduction $27,408,000 was recorded as of February 21, 1982 as a
of the current year provision for income taxes. reduction of mortgage loans, the most significant asset
acquired. Income tax benefits resulting from refunds to
(2) Acquisition— the FDIC for operating expense support are reflected
On February 21, 1982, the Bank acquired assets and when realized as adjustments to the "excess fair value".
assumed liabilities of The Farmers and Mechanics Savings The"excess fair value" is being amortized on the constant
yield method into interest income over the estimated
Bank of Minneapolis(Savings Bank). Under terms of the remaining life of acquired mortgage loans. Amortization
transaction, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was 83,241,000 and $2,869,000 for the years ended
(FDIC)contributed to BSI capital of 830,000,000 without December 31, 1983 and 1982, respectively.
an ownership interest. BSI, in turn,contributed
830,000,000 to the Bank and purchased 17,900 shares of
the Bank's common stock for an additional 510,002,000. (3) Reserve for Possible Loan Losses—
The transaction was accounted for under the purchase The reserve for possible loan losses is maintained at an
method of accounting. Assets acquired and liabilities amount considered adequate to provide for future loan
assumed were recorded by the Bank at their estimated losses.The provision for possible loan losses is based upon
fair value. an analysis of the Bank's current loan portfolio by
The FDIC also purchased from the Bank certain management,review of historical chargeoff experience
investment securities of the Savings Bank and agreed to and other such factors which, in the judgment of
provide certain financial assistance to the Bank for up to management,deserve recognition. Loans are charged off
15 years. Financial assistance includes varying payments when, in the opinion of management,such loans are
for defined net interest margin deficits,specific annual uncollectible.All known uncollectible loans have been
operating expense support and indemnification against loss written off as of December 31, 1983.
on earning assets acquired. Transactions in the reserve for the years ended
Net interest margin support is intended to compensate December 31, 1983 and 1982 are:
the Bank for anv deficiencies in the interest rate spread 1983 1982
between earning assets and liabilities of the Savings Bank,
as defined,calculated quarterly for up to 15 years. Balance, beginning of
Operating expense support will be received over a ten year. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $3,527,000 51,903,000
year period in declining monthly amounts,which amounts Reserve of Savings Bank
may be further reduced dependent on net interest margin at date of acquisition. . — 135,000
changes and deposit growth, as defined. During 1983,a Provision for possible
defined positive net interest margin of $5,159,000 was loan losses . . . . . . . . . . 600,000 1,559,000
realized on Savings Bank earning assets and liabilities, Loans charged off. . . . . . . (1,228,000) (269,000)
which amount was paid to the FDIC. For the year ended
December 31, 1982, net interest margin support of Recoveries of loans
86,805,000 was received from the FDIC. Operating previously charged off. 51,000 199,000
expense support of 812,000,000 in 1983 and $15,000,000 Balance, end of year . . . . $2,950,000 $3,527,000
in 1982 is reflected as a reduction of other expenses.
The agreement with the FDIC requires refunds of
817,897,000 of operating expense support in varying
15
Notes (Continued)
(4) Investment Securities—
Investment securities as of December 31, 1983 and 1982
are summarized as follows:
1983 1982
Issuer Book Value Market Book Value Market
U.S. Government and its agencies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $124,556,000 $126,248,000 5141,255,000 5145,514,000
States and political subdivisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,307,000 12,737,000 15,924,000 14,409,000
Corporations and others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,687,000 89,636,000 56,716.000 56,688.000
Total. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $228,550,000 $228,621,000 $213,895.000 5216,611,000
The FDIC has agreed,for the life of the agreement, to indemnify or replace any otherwise unrealizable principal
balance of investment securities acquired from the Savings Bank.At December 31, 1983 and 1982, investment
securities previously acquired from the Savings Bank had book values of 589,000,000 and 5102,000,000, respectively.
Management has attributed market values equal to the book values of these securities to reflect the value of FDIC
support.
Securities with par values of$136,340,000 as of December 31, 1983,were pledged to secure certain public and trust
deposits and for other purposes as required by law.
(5) Long-Term Debt– same as could have been obtained with unrelated parties
At December 31, 1983 and 1982,long-term debt consists and have been in the best business interests of the Bank
of the following: and its subsidiaries.
1983 1982 (7) Income Taxes–
Subordinated capital The Bank and its subsidiaries are included in the
notes,8'/2%, due in consolidated Federal income tax return of BSI,and file
1985 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10,000,000 $10,000,000 state income tax returns on a unitary basis.A tax sharing
Capital notes,87/A%,due agreement with BSI provides for allocations of income tax
in annual installments charges and benefits among affiliated companies to
of $125,000 to 1989. . 750,000 875,000 produce results similar to those that would be obtained on
Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339,000 163,000 a separate entity basis.
Total . . . . . . . . . . . $11,089,000 511,038,000 Income taxes in the consolidated statements of income
are as follows:
The subordinated capital notes are unsecured and 1983 1982
subordinated to the claims of depositors and,with certain Currently payable
exceptions, to all other creditors of the Bank.The (receivable)–
subordinated capital note agreement provides that each Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ — 5(1,380,000)
year over the term of the notes,pro rata amounts of State. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,000 —
undivided profits must be reserved for retirement of the 28,000 (1,380,000)
notes.The amount of undivided profits reserved for debt
retirement at December 31, 1983 is $8,132,000.
Deferred(benefit)–
(6) Transactions with Related Parties– Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10,488,000) 3,419,000
State. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544,000 572.000
As of December 31, 1983, the Bank had loans to executive
officers, directors and principal stockholders of the Bank (9,944,000) 3991,000
or to the corporations with which these persons are
affiliated. In the opinion of the loan committee of the Net operating loss
Board of Directors,such loans are adequately carryforward utilized. . 11,338,000 —
collateralized and do not involve more than the normal Total provision. . . . . $ 1,422,000 5 2,611,000
risk of collectibility or present other unfavorable features.
The Bank and its subsidiaries have had transactions with Tax benefits of $11,338,000 from the utilization of net
other companies having certain common officers and/or operating loss carryforwards attributable to the Savings
directors with the Bank. Management believes these Bank(see Note 2)were realized in 1983,thereby reducing
transactions were consummated at terms substantially the the Company's current income tax liability.
16
Deferred income tax charges(benefits)result from (8) Pension Plan—
timing differences in the recognition of certain revenues The Bank and its subsidiaries participate in the"Bank
and expenses for income tax and financial reporting Shares Incorporated Pension Plan" (BSI Plan)which is a
purposes. The tax effects of these differences are as defined benefit pension plan. Bank employees comprise
follows: approximately 73% of total participants in the BSI Plan.
1983 1982 During 1982, the former employees of the Savings Bank
were covered under the"Revised Pension Plan of The
Tax income determined Farmers and Mechanics Savings Bank"(Savings Bank Plan).
(g a cash basis The Savings Bank and BSI Plans were combined effective
(greater)less than January 1, 1983.
financial statement
income . . . . . . . . . . . . . $(10,413,000) $5,083,000 The Bank's policy is to fund pension costs accrued.
Pension expense totaled 5551,000 in 1983 and 5661,000
Tax provision for in 1982.
possible loan and A comparison of accumulated BSI Plan benefits and net
investment losses less assets as of the January 1, 1983 actuarial valuation and the
than financial combined BSI and Savings Bank Plans as of January 1, 1982
statement provision. . . (102,000) (505,000) is presented below:
Tax gain on sale of
investment securities January 1
less than financial 1983 1982
statement gain . . . . . . . (24,000) (620,000) Actuarial present value
Other, net. . . . . . . . . . . . . 595,000 33.000 of accumulated
Total deferred . . . $ (9,944,000) 53,991,000 plan benefits—
Vested. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8,299,000 5 8,119,000
Nonvested . . . . . . . . . . 655,000 1,136,000
The amount calculated by applying the federal
statutory rate of 46% to income diners from the income $ 8,954,000 $ 9,255,000
tax provision recorded as follows: Net assets available for
1983 1982 benefits. . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,153,000 $10,279,000
Amount at statutory rate. $3,761,000 $4,567,000
Increase(decrease) The rate of return used in determining the actuarial
due to— present value of accumulated Plan benefits was 6'/2% in
Interest exempt from 1983 and 6-7% in 1982.
federal income taxes (989,000) (1,123,000)
State income taxes, net (9) Commitments and Contingencies—
of federal income Rental Commitments.-
tax
ommitments.tax reduction. . . . . . 309,000 309,000 The Bank and its subsidiaries lease banking facilities and
Amortization of data processing equipment under agreements with
amount by which expiration dates through 2003.
Savings Bank assets Amounts paid under contingency clauses were nominal
acquired exceeded and no contingency clauses exist which are expected to
liabilities assumed . . (1,478,000) (1,300,000) significantly increase future rental payments. Minimum
Other, net. . . . . . . . . . . 181,000) 158,000 rental commitments under operating leases as of
Income tax provision . . . $1,422,000 52,611,000 December 31, 1983 are as follows:
Year Amount
Accumulated net deferred tax(benefits)of 1984 5 503,000
S(7,463,000)and $4,628,000 at December 31, 1983 and 1985 504,000 `
1982,respectively,are included in accrued federal and 1986 495,000
state income tax accruals(benefits). 1987 477,000
Net operating loss carryforwards as of December 31, 1988 374,000
1983 related to the acquired Savings Bank total $6,972,000 1989-1993 1,783,000
and $6,109,000 for federal and state income tax purposes, 1994-1998 1,657,000
respectively, and expire in 1985. 1999-2003 229,000
17
r
Notes (Continued)
Data Processing: (11) Sale of Mortgage Loan Servicing Rights-
The Bank's data processing services are provided under an The Bank sold for 510,783,000 the servicing rights to a
agreement between BSI and an independent operator. The substantial portion of its mortgage loan portfolio during
agreement provides for minimum payments by the Bank 1982. The Bank also agreed to pay over the life of the
during 1984 and 1985 of $2,630,000 and S2.1 10,000, loans, estimated at 15 years, annual service fees of':' of
respectively. The expense associated with the agreement I% of the principal balance of such serviced loans.
will be partially offset by revenue from data processing Proceeds from the sale approximate the present value of
services provided to correspondent banks. the estimated future servicing fees payable and,
Litigation: accordingly, have been recorded as a deferred liability.
Service fees paid are allocated to the liability-and to
Several lawsuits have been brought against the Bank expense to result in a constant interest rate over the
relating to lending activities and other operations. In the agreement term.
opinion of management, resolution of these actions will
not have a material effect on the Bank's financial position. (12) Income From Lease Cancellation-
(10) Dividend Restrictions— During 1982, the Bank consolidated its facilities into the
Regulations for national banks generally provide that a Savings Bank building and cancelled its lease of certain
bank may pay cash dividends in a year,without prior
office space. Because of favorable lease terms, the lessor
agreed to pay the Bank $1,060,000 to cancel the lease. The
approval, up to the amount of net income for the year plus
the portion of net income for the preceding two years Bank received $590,000 in January, 1983, and the
remaining 5.170,000 in January, 1984. The lease
which has not been paid as dividends. Consolidated cancellation income, net of $302,000 related moving and
undivided profits of the Bank at December 31, 1983 abandonment expenses, is included in 1982 other income.
include $11,989,000,which could be paid as a cash
dividend without prior approval.
Report of Independent Public Accountants
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
of F&M Marquette National Bank:
We have examined the consolidated statements of auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the
financial position of F&M MARQUETTE NATIONAL BANK circumstances.
(a national banking association and majority owned In our opinion, the financial statements referred to
subsidiary of Bank Shares Incorporated)AND above present fairly the financial position of F&M
SUBSIDIARIES as of December 31, 1983 and 1982, and the Marquette National Bank and Subsidiaries as of December
related consolidated statements of income,capital and 31, 1983 and 1982, and the results of their operations and
changes in financial position for the years then ended. Our the changes in their financial position for the years then
examinations were made in accordance with generally ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting
accepted auditing standards and,accordingly, included principles applied on a consistent basis.
such tests of the accounting records and such other Arthur Andersen&Co.
Minneapolis,Minnesota
February 17, 1984.
18
F&M Marquette National Bank
CONSOLIDATEC STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
(IN THOUSANDS)
SEPTEMBER 30, 1984
September 30, August 31, September 30,
1984 1984 1983
ASSETS
Cash and Due From Banks $ 62,338 $ 61 ,560 $ 70,333
Federal Funds and
Repurchase Agreements 61,789 76,100 55,807
Trading Account Securities 5,205 4,946 6,890
Investment Securities 227,222 229,635 227,561
Loans:
Commercial 213,214 213,339 195 ,704
Real Estate:
Construction 6,594 5,941 1,182
Mortgage 592,279 596,978 655,870
Installment 311,957 35 ,481 351234
Less -
Unearned Income (1,273) (1,171) (1,397)
Reserve for Loan Losses (27449) (2,929) (3,633)
Total loans 840,322 847,639 882,960
Other Assets 23,369 21 ,347 21,586
Bank Premises & Equipment, Net 13,959 13,929 14,308
$1,234,204 $1 ,255,156 $1,279,445
1
F&M Marquette National Bank
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
(IN THOUSANDS)
SEPTEMBER 30, 1984
September 30, August 31, September 30,
1984 1984 1983
LIABILITIES
Deposits:
Demand Deposits $ 110,562 $ 116,176 $ 121,321
Savings 306,429 304,008 299,119
CD' s Over $100,000 151,394 145,032 132,845
Other CD's 3901763 3892120 410,357
Total Deposits 959,148 954,936 963,642
Federal Funds and
Resale Agreements 164,142 185,960 203,809
Accounts Payable and
Accrued Expenses 7,458 11,278 11,235
Accrued Income Taxes 7,817 7,724 6,671
Loan Servicing
Obligation 79623 71,746 9,125
Long-Term Debt 109677 109678 11,099
Total Liabilities 12156,865 1,1781,322 11205 ,581
CAPITAL
Common Stock 3,145 3,145 3,145
Paid-in Capital 41,357 41 ,357 41,357
Undivided Profits 32,837 32,332 29,362
Total Capital _ 77$ 39 76,834 73,864
$19234,204 $1 ,255,156 $1,279,445
2
(This page has been left blank intentionally.)
F&M Marquette National Bank
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME
(IN THOUSANDS)
SEPTEMBER 30, 1984
Year-to
Current Year-to Date 1984 Year-to
Month Date 1984 Budget Date 1983
INTEREST INCOME-
Loan & Investment Interest $ 9,706 $ 87,805 $ 89,061 $ 84, 144
Interest Maintenance from FDIC (100) (445) (161) (4,007)
Amortization of assets acquired
in excess of cost 275 2,456 2,461 2,442
Total Interest Income 9,881 89,816 91,361 82,579
INTEREST EXPENSE 8,447 76,576 77,975 72,782
PROVISION FOR LOAN LOSSES 200 570 427 225
Net Interest Income 13,234 12,670 12,959 9,572
SECURITY GAINS/LOSSES -- (40) -- 774
OTHER OPERATING INCOME 848 7,689 79722 7,650
OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES-
Personnel 959 9,463 9,220 9,007
Data Processing Fees 265 2,463 2,475 2,164
Occupancy 226 2,061 1,949 1,969
Supplies 92 1,071 1,174 1,244
Depreciation & Amortization 84 756 791 794
Marketing 22 756 900 900
Other 586 4,615 4,412 4,591
Expense Maintenance from FDIC (750) (6,750) (69750) (9,000)
Total operating expenses 11,484 14,435 14,171 11,669
t
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES 598 5,884 6,510 6,327
INCOME TAX PROVISION 93 13,067 1,489 11251
Net Income $ 505 $ 4,817 $ 5,021 $ 5,076
F&A4 Marquette rational Bank
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
(IN THOUSANDS)
DECEMBER 31, 1984
December 31, November 30, December 31,
1984 1984 1983
ASSETS
Cash and Due From Banks 3 88,318 3 559028 3 58,094
Federal Funds and
Repurchase Agreements 92,404 82,073 73,000
Trading Account Securities 4,435 2,453 7,349
Investment Securities 217,871 2229772 2329606
Loans:
Commercial 255,005 243,032 218,638
Real Estate:
Construction 8,309 7,377 3,646
Mortgage 581,125 585.,563 643,511
Installment 369756 342988 311404
Less -
Unearned Income (2,520) (1,937) (776)
Reserve for Loan Losses (3,420) (2,722) (2,950)
Total loans 875,255 866,301 893,473
Other Assets 21,498 23,175 14,807
Bank Premises & Equipment, Net 13,959 14,009 149157
$1,313,740 $1,265,811 $1,293,486
i
F&M Marquette National Bank
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
(IN THOUSANDS)
DECEMBER 31, 1984
December 31, November 30, December 31,
1984 1984 1983
LIABILITIES
Deposits:
Demand Deposits $ 155,246 $ 121,965 $ 120,839
Savings 306,585 309,189 294,970
CD's Over $100,000 130,125 136,272 139,749
Other CD' s 390,931 3879156 409,228
Total Deposits 982,887 954,582 9649786
Federal Funds and
Resale Agreements 218,680 196,242 214,220
Accounts Payable and
Accrued Expenses 8,966 10,734 149008
Accrued Income Taxes 7,761 7,803 69850
Loan Servicing
Obligation 7,261 7,384 8,753
Long-Term Debt 10,631 10,633 11,089
Total Liabilities 1,236,186 121871,378 1,2199706
CAPITAL
Common Stock 3,145 3,145 3,145
Paid-in Capital 41,357 41,357 41,357
Undivided Profits 33,052 33,931 29,278
Total Capital 77,554 78,433 732780
$1,3139740 $1,265,811 $1,2939486
F&M Marquette National Bank
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF' INCOME
(IN THOUSANDS)
DECEMBER 31, 1984
Year-to
Current Year-to Date 1984 Year-to
Month Date 1984 Budget Date 1983
INTEREST INCOME-
Loan & Investment Interest $ 9,759 $ 1119017 $ 118,748 $ 112,807
Interest Maintenance from FVC (250) (885) (215) - (59159)
Amortization of assets acquired
in excess of cost 275 3,280 3,281 3,241
Total Interest Income 91,784 119,412 121,814 110,889
INTEREST EXPENSE 8,090 1019412 103,966 98,012
PROVISION FOR LOAN LOSSES 700 1,670 570 600
Net Interest Income 994 16,330 17,278 121277
SECURITY GAINS/LOSSES -- (40) -- 868
OTHER OPERATING INCOME 1,022 10,680 10,296 10,474
OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES-
Personnel 11,109 12,722 12,293 12,166
Data Processing Fees 185 3,199 3,300 2,955
Occupancy 235 2,758 2,598 2,545
Supplies 140 19464 1,565 1,631
Depreciation & Amortization 65 990 1,055 1,128
Marketing 155 1,010 1,200 999
Other 540 6,253 5,883 6,011
Expense Maintenance from FDIC (750) _ (9,000) (9,000) (12,000)
Total operating expenses 1,679 19,396 18,894 15,435
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES 337 7,574 8,680 8, 184
INCOME TAX PROVISION (42) 1,285 11,985 1,430
Net Income $ 379 $ 6,289 $ 6,695 $ 6,754
APPENDIX E
BOND COUNSEL OPINION
39
(This page has been left blank intentionally.)
SUITE BOO
O C O N N O R & H A N N A N WAS PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE N.W.
WASHINGTON,D.C.20008-3483
(202)887-1400
JOE AC WJ.OERSNNOR JAMESAS JO' EA A ATTORNEYS AT LAW PATRICK J.O'CONNOR PATRICK E.ODONNCLL•
THOMAS A KELLER X WILLIAM D.HULL EDWARD W.BROOKE• JOSEPH N.SLATCHFORD
MICHAEL E.MCGUIRE DAVID W.KELLEY JOHN J.FLYNN THOMAS B.EVANS,JR
`OB[RTJJ.µA RISTIANSON,JR. STEV EN-J. I MER 3800 I ps TOWER JOSEPHH. RE.DILLON T HALPER• CAROL NSPwRK OUR•
RMNK 2 DAVID ANTOR
A ES R.DORSEv INOA C.SCH WART2 THOMAS H.pLIINN• CNAEL E.VEVE
ANDREW J.SHEA ARLIN B.WAELTI DAVID R.-M FF.
JOHN J.MILES•
WILLIAM R.M-RANH RICHARD L.EVANS 80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET YCHARD G.MORGAN JOSEPH E.PATTISON•
MOUG LAS M.CARNIVAL 0 E H.BENE3H M LES J.AMBROSE• CHARLES N.GARRISON E•
TER ENCE P.BOYLE• GORDON .GAYER•
E-NT E.RICH EY EVIN M.8
.BUSCH MOPE S.FOStER• CHRISTINA W.FLE PS•
THO`AS R.s ERANEIN WOGDNIAI D' LORD MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-2254 BRIAN P.PHELAN F.GORDON LEE-
JOHN A.BURTON,JR. LJ UL.AUREN
M R.LONCORD S
BARRYS.CUOLELRY: CHRISTOPHER O.COU RSEN•
ROBCRT A.BRUNIG LAUREN R.LON ERGAN MICHAEL J.FCRRELL•
WILLIAM
W.MORRIS DANIEL L WILES PETER C.KI SSEL ON CHARNEY REGENSTEIN•
E.FLYNN LESLIE T.SINNER
(612) 341-3800
EL TELEX 29-OS84 OF
FREDERICK W.THOMAS
WILLIAM OT.HANNAN
JOSEPH F.CASTIELLO•
WILLIAM C.KELLY(1918-1970) SUITE 4700,ONE UNITED BANK CENTER
1700 LINCOLN STREET MEMBER o R
MINNESOTA 9
DENVER,COLORADO 80203 VELAZOUE2,21 -ADMITTED IN VIRGINIA ONLY
WRITERS DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (303)830-1700 MADRID 1,SPAIN
431-31-00
DAVID BURLINGAME• LARRY D.GALLEGOS TEL 23$43
MARTIN M.BERLINER- JENCE L.THOMAS•
ARNOLD R KAPLAN• JAMES E.GIGA.. LOCAL 101111L
ROBERT WIEGAND II• FRANK J.WIRGA•
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
in and for the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Tai: Increment Revenue Bonds (Canterbury Downs Project ) ,
Dated as of March 1, 1985
have acted as bond counsel in connect i cn witn the
issuance by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority ir. .an,
fcr the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, a public corporatic:n
and a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota. ( the
"Issuer" ) , of its Tax Increment Revenue Bonds (Canterbury
Downs Project) , dated as of March 1, 1985 , in the aggre^.ate
principal amount of $4 , 200 ,000 ( the "Bonds" ) , r,,aturing
February 1 of each year in the years and principal anicunits
and bearing interest at the rates provided in the :.a_eir.-
after mentioned Indenture.
The Bonds are issued as fully registered .,onds without
coupons in the denomination of $5, 000 or any integral mul .i-
ple thereof . Principal of the Bonds is payable at tine prin-
cipal office of First Trust Company of Saint Paull. ( the
"Trustee" ) , as Paying Agent, or its s'uccesscr as paying,
agent: .
We have examined a Bond as executed and we :?_,--,1.v` exa.,,in_ed
the law and such certified proceedings and other pagpers as
deemed necessary to render this opinion .
As to questions of fact material to our opinion we have
relied Ripon representations of the Issuer contained in th-e
Indenture of Frust described below, certified pro-eedirgs
and other certifications of Loubllc o f"iciais furnished tc
us, wit-1-out undertaking to verify the same by independent
investigation.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
City of Shakopee
Tax Increment Revenue Refunding Bonds
Dated as of March 1, 1985
Page 2
The Bonds are issued under and secured by an Indenture
of Trust , dated as of March 1, 1985 ( the "Indenture" ) , be-
tween the Issuer and the Trustee . The Bonds are issued to
acquire certain land and improvements for resale to Minne-
sota Racetrack, Inc. ( ",MRI" ) , a Minnesota corporation., at a
sale price less than the acquisition cost, pursuant to the
provisions of a Second Amended Contract for Private Devel-
opment and a First Addendum thereto executed between the
Authority, MRI and the City of Shakopee, Minnesota ( the
"Development Contract" ) . The Issuer has pledged a portion
of the tax increment generated by Tax Increment Districts
Nos. 1 and 4 ( the "Tax Increment Districts" ) of its Minne-
sota River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1
( the "Redevelopment Project" ) to payment of principal and
interest on the Bonds . Additionally, MRI has caused to be
provided to the Trustee a letter of credit ( the "Letter of
Credit" ) in the amount of $742, 012 . 50 , issued by F&M Mar-
quette National Bank securing payment of principal of and
interest on the Bonds when due, and the several guarantees
of certain stockholders of MRI guaranteeing in the aggregate
the payment of up to twenty-five percent of principal of and
twenty-five percent of interest on the Bonds, less amounts
drawn under the Letter of Credit . The Bonds are subject to
redemption prior to maturity as provided in the Indenture.
We express no opinion and make no comment with respect
to the sufficiency of the security for or the marketability
of the Bonds .
Based upon our examination, we are of the opinion, as of
the date hereof :
1 . The Issuer is a public corporation and a political
subdivision of the State of Minnesota, duly created and
validly existing under the laws and Constitution of the
State of Minnesota, with the corporate power to enter into
and perform the indenture and to issue the Bonds .
2 . The Indenture and the Development Contract have
been duly authorized, executed and delivered by the Issuer
and constitute valid and binding obligations of the Issuer
enforceable upon the Issuer in accordance with their terms .
3 . The Redevelopment Project and the Tax Increment
Districts are duly established and existing under the laws
of the State of Minnesota , and the Issuer has pledged the
Pledged Increment (as defined in the Indenture) to payment
of principal of and interest on the Bonds .
Housing and Redevelopment Authority
City of Shakopee
Tax Increment Revenue Refunding Bonds
Dated as of March 1, 1985
Page 3
4 . The Bonds have been duly authorized, executed and
delivered and constitute valid and legally binding limited
obligations of the Issuer payable solely from the Pledged
Increment and other moneys pledged to the payment thereof
under the Indenture and investment earnings thereon. The
Bonds and interest thereon do not constitute an indebtedness
of the Issuer (other than from the moneys pledged under the
Indenture) or the City of Shakopee within the meaning of any
State constitutional provision or statutory limitation and
do not constitute or give rise to a charge against the
Issuer ' s or the City of Shakopee ' s general credit or taxing
powers.
5. Under existing statutes , court decisions, and rul-
ings, interest on the Bonds is exempt from federal income
taxes, and under present Minnesota laws interest on the
Bonds is not includable in gross income for State of Minne-
sota income tax purposes , except Minnesota corporate and
bank excise taxes measured by income .
6 . Issuance of the Bonds will not affect the exemption
of Tax Increment District No. 1 from the application of
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 473F.
It is to be understood that the rights of the holders of
the Bonds and the enforceability of the Bonds and the Inden-
ture may be subject to bankruptcy, insolvency, reorganiza-
tion, moratorium and other similar laws affecting creditors '
rights heretofore or hereafter enacted to the extent consti-
tutionally applicable and that their enforcement may be
subject to the exercise of judicial discretion in accordance
with general principles of equity.
Dated this 7th day of March, 1985 .
Very truly yours,
O' CONNOR & HANNAN
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
COUNTY OF SCOTT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 3
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FIRST ADDENDUM TO THE
SECOND AMENDED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOP-
MENT WITH MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council" ) of
the City of Shakopee ( the "City" ) , as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1. 01. The Authority, the City and Minnesota Racetrack,
Inc. ( "MRI" ) have entered into a Second Amended Contract for
Private Development, dated as of November 20, 1984 ( the
"Development Contract" ) , with respect to the acquisition and
construction within the City by MRI of a thoroughbred horse-
racing facility (the "Project" ) .
1.02. As a result of revisions to the financing plan
for the Project a First Addendum ( the "First Addendum" ) to
the Development Contract, revising certain provisions
thereof, has been proposed in the form attached as Exhibit
A.
1. 03. The Council has received and reviewed the pro-
posed First Addendum and are of the opinion that execution
of the First Addendum will facilitate financing and con-
struction of the Project and is in the best interests of the
City and the Authority.
Section 2 . Approval of First Addendum to Development
Contract .
2 .01. The City hereby approves the execution of the
First Addendum in substantially the form attached hereto,
and directs the Mayor , City Administrator and the City Clerk
to execute the First Addendum and such other documents as
shall be deemed necessary to effect the intent of the First
Addendum; together with such necessary and appropriate
variations, omissions and insertions as permitted or
required or as the Mayor , in his discretion, shall deter-
mine, and the execution thereof by the Mayor shall be con-
clusive evidence of such determination.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ON
March 5, 1985 .
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1985.
City Attorney
2
Y
FIRST ADDENDUM TO SECOND AMENDED
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
THIS ADDENDUM, made as of the 5th day of March, 1985, by
and among the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City" ) , the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota (the "Authority" ) and Minnesota Race-
track, Inc. (the "Company" ) , and amending that certain
Second Amended Contract for Private Development, dated as of
November 20, 1984 ( the "Development Contract" ) , by and among
the City, the Authority and the Company;
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City, the Authority and the Company have
executed the Development Contract to provide, among other
things, for the acquisition of the Development Property (as
defined in the Development Contract) by the Authority and
reconveyance thereof by the Authority to the Company for a
reduced price as an inducement to the construction of a
horseracing facility by the Company on the Development Prop-
erty (all as further provided in the Development Contract) ;
and
WHEREAS, the City has also issued its . $90,000,000 City
of Shakopee, Minnesota Sports Facility Revenue Bonds (Shako-
pee Racetrack Project) ( the "Industrial Development Bonds" )
to finance the acquisition, construction, expansion and
installation of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Development Contract provides for purchase
of the Development Property by the Authority pursuant to
Article III thereof for the sum of $3, 000,000 (the "Purchase
Price" ) upon fulfillment of certain conditions precedent by
the Company; and
WHEREAS, said Purchase Price was determined as appropri-
ate by the parties hereto based, in part, upon certain as-
sumptions concerning probable investment earnings on the
proceeds of the Industrial Development Bonds which have
proven to be incorrect; and
WHEREAS, it is and has been the intention of the City
and the Authority throughout the negotiations with the Com-
pany as to the Development Contract (including the first and
second amendments thereof) to provide to the Company tax
increment assistance adequate to provide the Company, in
conjunction with all other sources of construction financ-
ing, funds equal to the projected construction budget for
the first phase of the Project, and whereas it now appears
that construction financing available to the Company from
all sources will be at least $300,000 less than the pro-
jected construction budget;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the
mutual obligations of the parties hereto and the covenants
of the parties made in the Development Contract, the parties
hereto agree as follows:
1 . Definitions. All capitalized terms used in this
Addendum and not defined herein shall have the meanings
given to such terms in Article I of the Development Con-
tract.
2. Section 3. 3(c) of the Development Contract shall be
and is hereby amended to provide as follows :
(c) Purchase Price. The Authority shall purchase
the Development Property from the Company for immedi-
ately available funds in the amount of the Purchase
Price in consideration of the covenants of the Company
to develop the Development Property in accordance with
the provisions of this Agreement and the Redevelopment
Plan, and as an inducement to the Company to construct
the Minimum Improvements. The purchase and reconveyance
of the Development Property is intended to reduce the
cost of acquisition and improvement of the Development
Property to the Company. The Purchase Price shall be
payable in full by the Authority at closing. The Pur-
chase Price shall be calculated as follows. The Pur-
chase Price shall be the total of the costs of the
requisite Qualifying Improvements as certified in the
Certificate of Qualifying Improvements, up to a maximum
of $3 , 300,000 . In no event shall the Purchase Price to
be paid by the Authority exceed $3,300,000 . Therefore,
if the certified cost of the Qualifying Improvements
shall be less than $3 , 300 ,000 , the Purchase Price shall
be such cost; if the certified cost of the Qualifying
Improvements shall be equal to or greater than
$3,300 , 000, the Purchase Price shall be the sum of
$3, 300 , 000 .
3 . Section 2 . 3(m) of the Development Contract shall be
and is hereby amended to provide as follows:
(m) The Company will pay to the City a one time
fee of $75, 000 for issuance of the Series A Bonds and
the Series B Bonds, allocable $50 ,000 to the Series A
Bonds and $75, 000 to the Series B Bonds.
2 -
v
Additionally, prior to December 31 , 1994 , the Com-
pany will pay to the City administrative fees with re-
spect to the Series A Bonds and Series B Bonds at the
following times in the following amounts:
Date Series A Fee Series B Fee
6/30/86 $ 28,750. 00 $ 7,179.41
12/31/86 28,750. 00 7 ,179 .41
6/30/87 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
12/31/87 28,750. 00 7 ,179. 41
6/30/88 28,750 . 00 7,179 .41
12/31/88 28,750 . 00 7,179.41
6/30/89 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
12/31/89 28,750 . 00 7,179. 41
6/30/90 28,750 . 00 7 ,179. 41
12/31/90 28,750 . 00 7,179 . 41
6/30/91 28,750 . 00 7,179. 41
12/31/91 28,750 . 00 7,179 . 41
6/30/92 28,750. 00 7 ,179 .41
12/31/92 28,750. 00 7,179.41
6/30/93 28,750. 00 7,179. 41
12/31/93 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
6/30/94 28,750. 00 7,179 .41
12/31/94 28,750. 00 7,179. 41
provided; however , that ( i ) if the Series A Bonds and/or
the Series B Bonds shall be redeemed in part but not in
whole prior to December 31, 1994, whether by optional or
mandatory redemption or otherwise, the administrative
fees payable on the dates provided above shall not ex-
ceed an amount equal to 1/16 of 1 percent of theprinci-
pal balance of the Series A Bonds and/or Series B Bonds,
as the case may be then Outstanding (as defined in the
Supplemental Indentures of Trust executed between the
City and First Trust Company of Saint Paul, St . Paul,
Minnesota with respect to the Series A Bonds and Series
B Bonds) unless the Authority shall provide the Company
a written opinion of counsel experienced in matters of
municipal finance and industrial development bond fi-
nancing that administrative fees in excess of such
amount up to and including the amounts provided above
will not adversely affect the exemption of interest on
the Series A Bonds and Series B Bonds from federal and
state income taxation and ( ii ) if the Series A Bonds
and/or the Series B Bonds are redeemed in whole prior to
December 31, 1994, whether by acceleration, or redemp-
tion prior to maturity or otherwise, that all unpaid
administrative fees payable with respect to such issue
on or prior to December 31 , 1994 shall become immedi-
ately due and payable in their entirety to the City by
the Company on the first day immediately subsequent to
3 -
the date of payment in full of the Series A Bonds and/or
the Series B Bonds , as the case may be , provided that
such fees shall be discounted back to present value as
of the date of payment at a discount rate of ten ( 10 )
percent .
Subsequent to December 31 , 1994 , the Company will also
pay to the City an annual fee of 1/8 of one percent of
the principal balance of the Series A Bonds then Out-
standing (as defined :in the Supplemental Indentures of
Trust , dated as of October 18 , 1984 , executed between
the City and First Trust with respect to the Series A
Bonds) , said fee to commence January 1, 1995 and to
thereafter be payable January 1 of each year so long as
there shall be any Series A Bonds Outstanding .
The Company further acrees to pay all consultant ' s fees
and attorney ' s fees incurred by the City and the Author-
ity with respect to the Series A Bonds and the Series B
Bonds and the amendment to this Agreement .
Dated as of this 5th day of March, 1985 .
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
By
Chairman
Executive Director
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
By
Mayor
City Administrator
MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC.
By
Vice President
- 4 -
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985, by Dean Colligan and Jeanne Andre,
the Chairman and Executive Director , respectively, of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, a policial subdivision of the State of
Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority.
(SEAL) Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985, by , the Vice
President of Minnesota Racetrack, Inc. , a corporation orga-
nized under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corpora-
tion.
( SEAL) Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March,. 1985, by Eldon Reinke and John Anderson,
the Mayor and City Administrator , respectively, of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, a municipal corporation and politi-
cal subdivision organized and existing under the Constitu-
tion and laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the
City.
(SEAL) Notary Public
- 5 -
O CONNOR & HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3800 IDS TOWER
SUITE 600
80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET 1019 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE,%.W.
WASHINGTON,D.C. 20006-3463
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-2254 12021667-1400
(612) 341-3600 SUITE 4700 ONE UNITED DANK CENTER
1700 LINCOLN STREET
TELEX 29-0564 OENVER,COLORADO60203
TELECOPIER 612 341-3800 (256) (303)630-1700
VELA20UEZ,21
WOOD KIDNER MADRID I,SPAIN
(415I2) 343-1299 February 21 , 1985 -_--"-- 4-31-31-0O _
TELEI(23S43
RECEIVED
FEB 21 :n85
Mr. John Anderson CITY OF SHAKOPcc
City Administrator
Ms . Judith Cox
City Clerk
Ms. Jeanne Andre
HRA Executive Director
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: March 5 Resolutions for Racetrack Financing
Dear John, Judy and Jeanne:
Please find enclosed three resolutions for adoption by
the City and HRA on March 5 , 1985 relating to issuance of the
on-site tax increment revenue bonds and corresponding amend-
ment of the Development Contract to increase the HRA' s pur-
chase price of the Development Property. There are two reso-
lutions for the HRA, one approving adoption of a First Adden-
dum to the Development Contract and one approving the issuance
of the Tax Increment Bonds . There is one resolution for the
City to adopt approving the First Addendum to the Development
Contract.
It is my understanding that the City Council meeting is
generally opened first then recessed until the close of the HRA
meeting. The City Council should adopt its resolution prior
to recessing for the HRA meeting, as the amendment to the
Development Agreement should be approved prior to issuance
of the Bonds and the HRA should first adopt the amendment
approving the First Addendum to the Development Agreement and
then adopt the resolution issuing the Bonds.
John Anderson
Judith Cox
Jeanne Andre
February 21 , 1985
Page 2
I do not anticipate that the resolutions themselves will
change prior to the City Council meeting, although the provi-
sions of the First Addendum may change as I have not yet re-
ceived comments on it and there is some debate as to the amount
of the additional administrative fees which MRI should pay. If
you would like our office to provide multiple copies of the
resolution prior to the meeting, please contact my secretary,
Pam Frantum at 343-1292 . I will be out of the office the week
of February 25 but will be calling in. I am planning on atten-
ding the meeting on March 5 .
Incidentally, either Dan Wiles or myself of our office
will be forwarding to you under separate two additional resolu-
tions for the City for the March 5 meeting regarding the Super
8 Motel Project. One will be a resolution calling for a public
hearing on the Project for the April 2 City Council meeting.
The other will be a resolution giving conditional approval to
the Project. The "conditional approval" resolution specifically
does not bind in the City in any way to approve the Project or
the financing therefor or to give the Project an allocation;
however, it is my hope that this resolution will act to grand-
father the Project should any additional adverse federal legis-
lation
egislation be introduced prior to April 2 .
Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions
or comments .
Very truly yours ,
�4 k4
Wood Kidner
WK/pf
Enclosure
cc : Rod Krass
Jim Casserly
(w/ enclosures)
Law Offices of
KRASS,MEYER & WALSTEN F TM
Chartered p
•�`� rcc i��5
Suite 300
Marschall Road Business Center Phillip R. Krass Paralegals
327 South Marschall Road Barr K. Meyer P.O. Box 216 y y Barbara J.Hedstrom
Trevor R. Walsten Debra A.Karlson
Shakopee. Minnesota 55379 Elizabeth B. McLaughlin Jolene R.Wagner
(612)445-5080 Rochelle M.Anderson office Manager
Of Counsel Wanda BreimAorst
Dennis L. Monroe
February 27, 1985
Ms. Judy Cog
Shakopee City Clerk
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Racetrack Tag Increment Bonds
Dear Judy:
I just wanted to let you know I have carefully reviewed the documents
contained in Wood Kidner's February 21, 1985 packet. There were some changes
that will have to be made in the addendum, since there were some errors in
some of the figures. I have conveyed that information to Wood and he will be
making those changes.
The rest of the documents are fine and I want you and the council to
know I reviewed and approved them. I will be at the March 5th meeting for
purposes of answering any questions. Thanks.
Yours very ruly
BRASS, YER;' ALSTEN CHARTERED
Phi lip R. Krass
PRV of
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
COUNTY OF SCOTT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FIRST ADDENDUM TO THE
SECOND AMENDED CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOP-
MENT WITH MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ( the "Council" ) of
the City of Shakopee ( the "City" ) , as follows :
Section 1 . Recitals .
1 . 01 . The Authority, the City and Minnesota Racetrack,
Inc . ( "MRI" ) have entered into a Second Amended Contract for
Private Development , dated as of November 20 , 1984 ( the
"Development Contract" ) , with respect to the acquisition and
construction within the City by MRI of a thoroughbred horse-
racing facility ( the "Project" ) .
1 .02 . As a result of revisions to the financing plan
for the Project a First Addendum ( the "First Addendum" ) to
the Development Contract, revising certain provisions
thereof, has been proposed in the form attached as Exhibit
A.
1 . 03 . The Council has received and reviewed the pro-
posed First Addendum and are of the opinion that execution
of the First Addendum will facilitate financing and con-
struction of the Project and is in the best interests of the
City and the Authority.
Section 2 . Approval of First Addendum to Development
Contract .
2 . 01. The City hereby approves the execution of the
First Addendum in substantially the form attached hereto,
and directs the Mayor , City Administrator and the City Clerk
to execute the First Addendum and such other documents as
shall be deemed necessary to effect the intent of the First
Addendum; together with such necessary and appropriate
variations, omissions and insertions as permitted or
required or as the Mayor , in his discretion, shall deter-
mine, and the execution thereof by the Mayor shall be con-
clusive evidence of such determination.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE ON
March 5, 1985 .
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1985 .
City Attorney
2 -
FIRST ADDENDUM TO SECOND AMENDED
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT
THIS ADDENDUM, made as of the 5th day of March, 1985, by
and among the City of Shakopee, Minnesota ( the "City" ) , the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota ( the "Authority" ) and Minnesota Race-
track, Inc. (the "Company" ) , and amending that certain
Second Amended Contract for Private Development , dated as of
November 20, 1984 ( the "Development Contract" ) , by and among
the City, the Authority and the Company;
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City, the Authority and the Company have
executed the Development Contract to provide, among other
things, for the acquisition of the Development Property (as
defined in the Development Contract) by the Authority and
reconveyance thereof by the Authority to the Company for a
reduced price as an inducement to the construction of a
horseracing facility by the Company on the Development Prop-
erty (all as further provided in the Development Contract) ;
and
WHEREAS, the City has also issued its . $90 , 000,000 City
of Shakopee, Minnesota Sports Facility Revenue Bonds (Shako-
pee Racetrack Project) ( the "Industrial Development Bonds" )
to finance the acquisition, construction, expansion and
installation of the Project; and'
WHEREAS, the Development Contract provides for purchase
of the Development Property by the Authority pursuant to
Article III thereof for the sum of $3, 000 , 000 ( the "Purchase
Price" ) upon fulfillment of certain conditions precedent by
the Company; and
WHEREAS, said Purchase Price was determined as appropri-
ate by the parties hereto based, in part , upon certain as-
sumptions concerning probable investment earnings on the
proceeds of the Industrial Development Bonds which have
proven to be incorrect; and
WHEREAS, it is and has been the intention of the City
and the Authority throughout the negotiations with the Com-
pany as to the Development Contract ( including the first and
second amendments thereof) to provide to the Company tax
increment assistance adequate to provide the Company, in
conjunction with all other sources of construction financ-
ing, funds equal to the projected construction budget for
IV
the first phase of the Project, and whereas it now appears
that construction financing available to the Company from
all sources will be at least $300 , 000 less than the pro-
jected construction budget;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the
mutual obligations of the parties hereto and the covenants
of the parties made in the Development Contract , the parties
hereto agree as follows :
1 . Definitions . All capitalized terms used in this
Addendum and not defined herein shall have the meanings
given to such terms in Article I of the Development Con-
tract .
2 . Section 3 . 3 (c) of the Development Contract shall be
and is hereby amended to provide as follows :
(c) Purchase Price. The Authority shall purchase
the Development Property from the Company for immedi-
ately available funds in the amount of the Purchase
Price in consideration of the covenants of the Company
to develop the Development Property in accordance with
the provisions of this Agreement and the Redevelopment
Plan, and as an inducement to the Company to construct
the Minimum Improvements. The purchase and reconveyance
of the Development Property is intended to reduce the
cost of acquisition and improvement of the Development
Property to the Company. The Purchase Price shall be
payable in full by the Authority at closing. The Pur-
chase Price shall be calculated as follows . The Pur-
chase Price shall be the total of the costs of the
requisite Qualifying Improvements as certified in the
Certificate of Qualifying Improvements, up to a maximum
of $3, 300 ,000 . In no event shall the Purchase Price to
be paid by the Authority exceed $3, 300 , 000 . Therefore,
if the certified cost of the Qualifying Improvements
shall be less than $3 , 300 , 000 , the Purchase Price shall
be such cost; if the certified cost of the Qualifying
Improvements shall be equal to or greater than
$3 ,300 , 000, the Purchase Price shall be the sum of
$3, 300 , 000 .
3 . Section 2 . 3(m) of the Development Contract shall be
and is hereby amended to provide as follows:
(m) The Company will pay to the City a one time
fee of $75, 000 for issuance of the Series A Bonds and
the Series B Bonds, allocable $50 ,000 to the Series A
Bonds and $25 , 000 to the Series B Bonds .
- 2 - -
Additionally, prior to December 31, 1994 , the Com-
pany will pay to the City administrative fees with re-
spect to the Series A Bonds and Series B Bonds at the
following times in the following amounts :
Date Series A Fee Series B Fee
6/30/87 $ 28,750 . 00 $ 6,815 . 18
12/31/87 28,750 . 00 6,815. 18
6/30/88 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
12/31/88 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
6/30/89 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
12/31/89 28,750 .00 6,815 . 18
6/30/90 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
12/31/90 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
6/30/91 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
12/31/91 28,750 . 00 6 , 815. 18
6/30/92 28,750 . 00 6 ,815 . 18
12/31/92 28,750 .00 6 ,815 . 18
6/30/93 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
12/31/93 28,750 . 00 6 ,815 . 18
6/30/94 28, 750 . 00 6,815. 18
12/31/94 28,750 . 00 6,815 . 18
provided, however , that ( i ) if the Series A Bonds and/or
the Series B Bonds shall be redeemed in part but not in
whole prior to December 31, 1994 , whether by optional or
mandatory redemption or otherwise, the administrative
fees payable on the dates provided above shall not ex-
ceed an amount equal to 1/16 of 1 percent of the princi-
pal balance of the Series A Bonds and/or Series B Bonds,
as the case may be then Outstanding (as def ined in the
Supplemental Indentures of Trust executed between the
City and First Trust Company of Saint Paul , St . Paul,
Minnesota with respect to the Series A Bonds and Series
B Bonds) unless the Authority shall provide the Company
a written opinion of counsel experienced in matters of
municipal finance and industrial development bond fi-
nancing that administrative fees in excess of such
amount up to and including the amounts provided above
will not adversely affect the exemption of interest on
the Series A Bonds and Series B Bonds from federal and
state income taxation and ( ii ) if the Series A Bonds
and/or the Series B Bonds are redeemed in whole prior to
December 31, 1994, whether by acceleration, or redemp-
tion prior to maturity or otherwise, that all unpaid
administrative fees payable with respect to such issue
on or prior to December 31, 1994 shall become immedi-
ately due and payable in their entirety to the City by
the Company on the first day immediately subsequent to
the date of payment in full of the Series A Bonds and/or
the Series B Bonds , as the case may be, provided that
- 3 -
such fees shall be discounted back to present value as
of the date of payment at a discount rate of ten ( 10 )
percent .
Subsequent to December 31 , 1994, the Company will also
pay to the City an annual fee of 1/8 of one percent of
the principal balance of the Series A Bonds then Out-
standing (as defined in the Supplemental Indentures of
Trust, dated as of October 18, 1984 , executed between
the City and First Trust with respect to the Series A
Bonds) , said fee to commence January 1, 1995 and to
thereafter be payable January 1 of each year so long as
there shall be any Series A Bonds Outstanding.
The Company further agrees to pay all consultant ' s fees
and attorney' s fees incurred by the City and the Author-
ity with respect to the Series A Bonds and the Series B
Bonds and the amendment to this Agreement .
Dated as of this 5th day of March, 1985 .
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
By
Chairman
Executive Director
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
By
Mayor
City Administrator
Clerk
MINNESOTA RACETRACK, INC.
By
Vice President
4 -
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss .
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985, by Dean Colligan and Jeanne Andre,
the Chairman and Executive Director , respectively, of the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, a policial subdivision of the State of
Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority.
(SEAL) Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
ss .
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985 , by Eldon Reinke, John Anderson and
Judith Cox, the Mayor , City Administrator and City Clerk ,
respectively, of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, a
municipal corporation and political subdivision organized
and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of
Minnesota, on behalf of the City.
( SEAL) Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
5th day of March, 1985, by , the Vice
President of Minnesota Racetrack , Inc. , a corporation orga-
nized under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corpora-
tion.
(SEAL) Notary Public
5 -
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNED REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 19, 1985
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Wampach,
Vierling, Lebens and Colligan present. Cncl. Leroux was absent. Also
present were John K. Anderson, City Admr. ; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Judi
Simac, City Planner; H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer and Julius A. Coller, II,
City Attorney. Barry K. Meyer, Ass't City Attorney was present for part
of the meeting.
Liaison reports were given by Councilmembers.
Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone present who wished to address the
Council on any item not on the agenda, and there was no response.
Colligan/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of January 30, 1985 as kept.
Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens abstaining.
Colligan/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of February 4, 1985 and
February 5, 1985 as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to place on file the letter from Robert F. Vierling,
dated February 4, 1985 regarding the conditional use permit on Lots 6 & 7,
Block 56. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Lebens moved to accept the resignation of Gary C. Morke from the
Shakopee Community Access Corp. Board of Directors. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Vierling moved to accept the 1984 Annual Report of the Board of
Adjustments and Appeals and of the Planning Commission.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling moved to accept the Planning Commission recommendation to
not take action on the proposed B-3 amendment until a special public hearing
on the ordinance is conducted.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Planner summarized the background regarding the application by the
J. L. Shiely Co. for a Mineral Extraction and Land Reclamation Permit. She
said the J. L. Shiely Co. has maintained that they are a grandfathered use,
but have cooperated with the City and have negotiated the conditions imposed
on their Conditional Use Permit. . She said the most significant of the condi-
tions is the Hold Harmless agreement given by Shiely because they do not meet
the slope requirement for the lake and propose to leave the lake as an end
use, and the establishment of the Planning Commission as the long term plan-
ning committee for reviewing and approving reclamation procedures.
Colligan/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2373, A Mineral Extraction and Land
Reclamation Permit, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the
resolution.
Discussion followed regarding the dewatering condition, danger of explosives
and fencing around the perimeter of the site.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Jilanvrcc �,��y vv uii�,.,il
February 19, 1985
Page 2
The City Admr. stated that the City's insurance company has investigated
the claim for damages relative to the sewer backup at the Albert DuBois
residence, and deemed the City is responsible. The property damage items
are covered by the insurance policy. The City also has a second policy
covering "errors and omissions" which should cover reconstruction expenses.
The City is proposing to reimburse the DuBois' for those expenses and then
file a claim for that reimbursed portion against the second policy. This
amount does not include roadway repair, which will not be done until spring.
Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize payment of $2,966.00 to Albert DuBois
for itemized expenses incurred regarding sewer backups, such claim to be
submitted to the City's insurance policy for reimbursement.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Wampach/Vierling moved to authorize proper City officials to execute Change
Order No. 4 for Shenandoah Drive Street Construction 84-4 increasing the contract
amount by $1,678.00 to $243,972.30.
Roll Call: Ayes; Vierling, Reinke, Wampach, Colligan
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize payment of Partial Estimate No. 3 for
Shenandoah Drive Street Construction 84-4 in the amount of $4,078.49 to Buesing
Brothers Trucking, Inc.
Roll Call: Ayes; Wampach, Vierling, Colligan, Reinke
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling moved to appoint Pat Pennington to permanent status as
Engineering Secretary, after completion of her probationary period.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Admr. went over the various items and departments that would be
affected by the possible demise of the Revenue Sharing program. . He suggests
that the mower tractors be purchased now to be used in season, but the other
items could wait 3 to 4 months to see what will happen with the Federal gov't.
Lebens/Vierling moved to direct staff to refrain from any capital expenditures
over $1,000.00 for three months. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Vierling moved to nominate Robert Vierling and Larry Moonen to the
Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory Commission. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Lebens moved that bills in the amount of $495,115.42 be allowed
and ordered paid.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling moved to authorize the preparation and mailing of a letter
to the Highway Engineers of Hennepin and Scott Counties expressing concern
that there presently is not a guarantee for a walkway/bikeway as an integral
part of the proposed Highway #18 Minnesota River Bridge.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling moved to authorize staff to enter into an agreement with
Technetic Industries for drawing the plans and specs for the Shakopee Water
Slide for the sum of $3,500.00.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Shakopee City Council
February 19, 1985
Page 3
Colligan/Vierling moved to authorize Finance to transfer $3,500.00 from the
Contingency Fund to the Building Department Professional Service Fund ac-
count to pay Technetic Industries.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling moved to authorize proper City officials to execute the
maintenance contract with Associated Mechanical for $1,650.00 and the rate
of $42.50 per hour plus parts for all work completed "on call" or done not
in conjunction with normally scheduled maintenance checks, for the 1985
operational year.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Wampach/Lebens moved to direct the appropriate staff to spend the necessary
time to gather basic data and initiate discussions with Rahr Malting in an
effort to obtain a mutually agreeable reduction of switching trackage cross-
ing at Scott Street at the depot. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2370, A Resolution Establishing A
Policy To Not Endorse Candidates for Appointment to Metropolitan Boards
and Commissions, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2371, A Resolution Amending Resolu-
tion No. 1870, Approving the By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department Relief
Association, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2372, A Resolution to Establish
Angle Parking, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Admr. informed Councilmembers of a complaint by a resident about
the condition of the flag at City Hall. Discussion followed, with consensus
being to request a new flag from the VFW. Possibilities and expenses for
cleaning the flag should be explored, and if necessary the City should pay
to always have a good looking flag displayed.
Wampach/Vierling moved to authorize the listing of an Animal Warden's
phone number in the Shakopee telephone book, at a cost of $15.50 per month.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Engineer asked for an action authorizing the appraised amount for
by-pass rights-of-way to begin the negotiation process for its acquisition.
He said this is for the property in Kilarney Hills.
Colligan/Lebens moved to authorize staff to prepare offers for parcels 3,
4, 5 and 6 in an amount equal to the estimate of value as certified by Mn/
DOT. Motion carried unanimously.
Barry K. Meyer is present as Asst City Attorney.
The City Planner explained the action of the Planning Commission to recommend
the addition of Bed and Breakfast Inns to several zoning districts, subject
to 9 criteria. The Ass't City Attorney has issued his opinion that such
inns are a legitimate use and the City should make provision for that use
somewhere in the City. He also gave his opinion that the one application
for a Bed and Breakfast Inn is invalid because the ordinance is not yet in
effect.
Shakopee City Council
February 19, 1985
Page 4
The City Planner further explained that the Planning Commission wanted to
preserve the neighborhoods and to that end added the requirement of the inns
being at leas`' 350 feet from each other in the R-2 zone.
Mayor Reinke asked if there were any comments from the audience.
Dennis Moriarty stated he is appearing on behalf of the current applicants for a
Bed and Breakfast Inn. It is his opinion, based on various cases, that the
City Council does not need to amend the ordinance to grant a conditional
use permit. However, at this time it is more expeditious to seek the adop-
tion of the ordinance before the City Council, and then the granting of the
conditional use permit for this specific Bed and Breakfast Inn. He said he
feels the Planning Commission has a good feel for the area it is located in
and that it would be compatible and a good thing for the City. He stated
that of necessity this type of establishment must be neat, clean, carefully
managed and somewhat sheltered from a busy trafficked area. The conditional
use permit is appropriate because it allows the City to control and maintain
conditions.
Mr. Moriarty also asked that City Council expedite the public hearing and
hold it on March 5, 1985, rather than sending it back to the Planning Com-
mission to hold another public hearing and again recommend it favorably
and return it to City Council, which would add greatly to the time frame.
Jack Coller said everybody agrees that a Bed and Breakfast facility would
be a great thing for the City, but they don't want it in their neighborhood,
which is how he feels about it. He said the conditions placed on the appli-
cation for a Bed and Breakfast Inn by the Planning Commission can be changed
without notice because they are not part of the ordinance. This action is
throwing the whole residential area of Shakopee open to commercial intrusion.
Once the door is opened, something else can come in. He recognizes things
are changing, but they should change in an orderly fashion. He added that
besides the material supplied by the applicant and staff, Planning Commis-
sion has made no investigation of the impact this establishment would have
on Block 56.
Mr. Coller stated that in the case of Honn vs. Coon Rapids the Supreme Court
has said that the standard is the same for legislative law and quasi-judicial
law, which is if it is reasonable. That is, whether the classification is
reasonably related to the promotion of public health, safety, morals and
general welfare of the entire area under consideration. He said the origi-
nal classification in zoning is presumed to be well planned and intended to
be more or less permanent, and the burden is on the property owner seeking
a change to show either there was some mistake in the original zoning or
that the character of the neighborhood had changed to such an extent that
no reasonable use could be made of the property in the present classification.
He maintains the Planning Commission should furnish more information or the
City Council should make some investigation as to what the impact would be
as dictated by the Supreme Court. Mr. Coller said he has lived in that
neighborhood all his life and he doesn't think it has changed. He does not
believe it would be prudent to just blanketly permit this type of use in the
entire residential area of the City. He suggests the City Council follow
the opinion of the Ass't City Attorney and the Supreme Court on this matter.
Shakopee City Council
February 19, 1985
Page 5
Mr. Moriarty replied that he couldn't understand the application of Honn vs.
Coon Rapids to this case. He differentiated the facts between Honn and the
present application for a conditional use permit. The conditional use would
be a situation where the City has the control to regulate it. He also
doesn't believe the "domino" theory is valid, because good common sense was
used by the Planning Commission to establish conditions and the application
of the zoning laws to this particular application and the same common sense
would be used to examine each application. He feels this is a very appro-
priate use for this type of architecture as long as it is well managed and
monitored.
Mr. Coller responded that Honn laid out the procedural steps that had to be
followed in this type of matter, and he never claimed that the facts were
the same.
Mayor Reinke added that the ordinance to add this use as a conditional use
sets out the conditions for a Bed and Breakfast Inn, and therefore the con-
ditions are part of the ordinance, which could not be changed by Planning
Commission. It would take a two-thirds majority of the City Council to make
any changes to the ordinance.
Discussion followed regarding the possibility of postponing a vote until a
full Council is present, different criteria set out for different zoning
districts and the effect of another delay on the applicants.
Jane Hauer stated she now owns the property for which an application for
a Bed and Breakfast Inn has been made. She is representing her family. She
said they have had many offers on the home and they chose these three appli-
cants because they felt they would take care of the home and do the best in
keeping it that way and doing a good job for the entire neighborhood. They
think it is a really great thing and are totally in favor of this proposal
for its use.
Discussion continued on the appropriateness of its use.
Mayor Reinke cautioned that this ordinance amendment applies to the whole
City, not just one application. He believes the ordinance is stringent enough
so that- City Council does have control so no matter where the site would be
located, action could be taken to change an operation that isn't being man-
aged correctly.
Colligan/Wampach offered Ordinance No. 159, An Ordinance Amending Chapter
11 of the Shakopee City Code Entitled: Land Use Regulation (Zoning) ; to
Provide for Bed and Breakfast Inns as Conditional Uses in Certain Zoning
Districts, and moved its adoption. The City Admr. summarized the ordinance.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Planner stated that once the ordinance is effective by publication
the applicant can apply for a conditional use permit and the Planning Com-
mission will hold a public hearing. The conditional use only comes back to
City Council if there is an appeal. Discussion followed regarding a time-
table for the procedure, and the legality of publishing the ordinance and
the notice for a public hearing for the conditional use permit at the same
time.
Shakopee City Council
February 19, 1985
Page 6
The City Admr. stated that at the staff level, the City Planner can initiate
the notice for public hearing for the application for conditional use permit
and the City Clerk will take the necessary steps to get this ordinance pub-
lished. The public hearing can be set for the March 7, 1985 Planning Com-
mission meeting, which meets the 7 day publication requirement. If the Ass't.
City Attorney has any problem with that procedure, he will let staff know
next week.
Colligan/Vierling moved .for a five minute recess at 8:57 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Lebens/Vierling moved to reconvene at 9:09 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer went over the Supplemental Feasibility Report for Holmes
Street Basin Laterals, asked what level of service the City desires and
explained the various projects included in the report.
Considerable discussion ensued regarding the method of funding all storm sewer
projects, particularly those where there has already been an assessment levied
and residents are still paying for the improvements. The City Engineer fur-
ther explained the 5 alternate funding proposals for these storm sewer improve-
ments. It is staff's m commendation that a special improvement district be
created, so property owner's have the option of making one lump sum payment
for the special benefit. Further discussion ensued regarding tax increment
funding. The City Admr. pointed out that it will cost $187 non-residential
and $93 residential per year over 20 years for Shakopee to handle the storm
sewer needs presuming no use of tax increment funding. However, if no
improvement is needed in that particular basin, the cost is only $94 non-
residential and $47 residential. The City Admr. pointed out the idea of
giving a credit for the life of the storm sewer where there has already been an
assessment, similar to the credit given for street life in that policy.
Further discussion followed regarding various problems in the s-corm sewer system
in various areas of the City. r
Colligan/Wampach moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting ad-
journed at 10:43 p.m.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
Gt77 OP /
��� CITY OF SAINT PAUL
Il��;ii��� DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
V ,C
A
JAMES J. BELLUS, DIRECTOR
25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paul,Minnesota 55102
GEORGE LATIMER 612-292-1577
MAYOR
February 26, 1985
John Anderson
City Administrator
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
As you are undoubtedly aware, the Reagan Administration has proposed a series of budget
cuts that would all but eliminate federal aid to cities for housing and community
development activities. Their plan calls for eventual elimination of general revenue sharing,
urban development action grants (UDAG), small business administration (SBA) loans and
grants, all subsidized housing programs, economic development administration (EDA)
programs, all new sewer grants and severely limits federal funds for transportation projects
and the Community Development Block Grant Program.
We have all gotten used to repeated attempts over the past several years to reduce federal
aid to our cities. If anything, we have become a little complacent in our willingness to
continue to accept "minor" cuts in our program as a way of life. My reading of the present
situation, however, is that the Reagan budget proposals of this year are not ploys aimed at
simply trying to get minor reductions in city programs but that they are very directed
attempts to totally eliminate federal aid to cities. The threat is real and one which we
cannot afford to ignore.
The purpose of my letter today is to urge you to take a very active role in ensuring that our
feelings are made known to our Congressional delegation about the value of such programs
in our communities. There is a great story to be told in each community about the-positive
impacts of the programs we administer. Unless the story is told strongly and convincingly to
our Congressional delegation in the immediate future, we may find that cities no longer
have any community/economic development programs available to assist our business people
and residents. I would suggest that you communicate formally, in writing, and informally, if
you happen to have personal contact with someone in a Congressional office. Give them a
�S list of specific projects that would not have happened in your community without the -+
programs mentioned above. There is a fantastic story to be told of small businesses that
would not exist, of public facilities that would not have been built, and of people who would
not be housed, if it were not for federally assisted programs. I am convinced that if the
people in Congress can see the concrete and tangible results of these programs, if they can
see the facts of the number of jobs created, number of housing units built and the amount
the tax base has been increased and if they can be made aware that all of these programs
have directly affected their constituents, then they will overwhelmingly reject the Reagan
plan.
The President talks about taking his defense budget proposal to the citizens of this Country
in an attempt to generate broad based public support. I would suggest to you that we must
do the same if we are going to continue to receive the federal assistance that we so
desperately need. Therefore, in addition to your personal efforts at communicating with the
Congressional representatives and the State Legislature, you should also ensure that those
citizens in your community who have been benefitted by these federal programs also write
to make their views known.
The National Community Development Agency is one of the national groups spearheading
this lobbying and information sharing effort. For more information on the status of national
legislation you may want to call Luther Roberts at 202-293-7587.
Remember, the threat to all of us and our cities is real. Action and information are the only
two weapons we have to counteract the Reagan Administration proposals
Sincerely,
r
l
JaPector
J. ell s
'
JJB/Ile
attachments
C✓ r
1EDFJt),L cny
RELPORI IER
TO: Mayors Attending the Mid-Winter Meeting
FROM: John J. Gunther
DATE: January 18, 1985
RE: UPDATE ON THE FY86 BUDGET
The Administration ' s FY86 budget is expected to recommend that
many different urban programs be terminated or cut substantially.
Programs slated to be completely eliminated -- some in FY86 and
others over a two or three-year time span -- are :
GENERAL REVENUE SHARING;
EDA PROGRAMS ;
URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANTS (UDAG) ;
ALL NEW SEWER GRANTS ;
ALL SUBSIDIZED HOUSING PROGRAMS, INCLUDING HOUSING VOUCHERS ;
SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION LOANS AND GRANTS ;
LEGAL SERVICES ;
COMMUNITY SERVICES ;
THE JOB CORPS.
On December 14 , Mayor Hernan Padilla and Mayor George
Voinovich, presidents of the Conference of Mayors and the National
League of Cities , respectively, met with President Reagan and Vice
President Bush to discuss the FY86 budget. They were given the
budget table attached to this memorandum, describing in detail the
three year-plan for terminating and reducing .urban and low income
programs. This is the only actual document given to the mayors by
the White House or OMB so far.
Since the date of the memo, a few changes and additional
details have come to our attention.
UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS• 1620 EYE STREET, N.W. • WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006•TELEPHONE: (202)293-7330
2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
Community Development Block Grant funds to entitlement cities
( those over 50, 000 in population ) may be cut by nearly one-fourth
under the Administration 's proposed budget plan for FY86. When OMB
passed back the FY86 budget plan to HUD it recommended that in
addition to the 10 percent cut already
Farmers Home Public Facility Program should obedtransferredthe from
Agriculture to HUD, with no funding,
administered small cities CDBG roamnd combined with the state-
percent split for entitlement and neon-entitlementent jurisdictions in30
the CDBG program would be changed to 60 percent - 40
increases the cut for entitlement cities by 14. 3 Percent. This
funded through the small cities Percent.
ol the Cities
this proposed shift as well, since they would beecompetingact f
rural jurisdictions for funding.
PUBLIC TRANSIT
Based on materials obtained from the Office of Management and
Budget, it appears that the Administration is planning to propose in
February elimination, starting in FY86, of all public transportation
assistance, except for the 51. 1 billion generated annually by the
one-cent gasoline tax set-aside. Under the OMB scenario, the $1. 1
billion, currently a discretionary program, would replace the $2. 7
billion formula program. No operating assistance or new rail starts
would be permitted. The cut, if proposed, would represent a 71 per
cent reduction in federal transit assistance to cities.
HEALTH
A cut of almost eight percent below current services levels is
expected for the Public Health Service, a reduction of $386 million
from the FY85 level and $724 million less than the agency would
spend to keep programs operating at current levels. The cuts, which
extend across the Public Health Service, affect programs in the
Health Resources and Services Administration, the Alcohol, Drug
Abuse and Mental Health Administration , the Centers for Disease
Control, the Food and Drug Administration, and the National
Institutes of Health, formerly considered untouchable .
Entitlement programs will be cut in the FY86 budget as well.
The biggest cuts are expected in Medicare, scheduled to be reduced
by $4. 9 billion in FY86 and $21. 6 billion by FY88. The bulk of
savings will come from a one year freeze in hospital payments and
extension of the freeze on physician fees.
3
Smaller savings are to come from increases in the premiums paid
by Medicare beneficiaries and a delay in the initial eligibility to
the first day of the month following a beneficiary ' s 65th birthday.-
Medicaid cuts are to amount to $1 billion in FY86 and will rise
to $5. 7 billion by FY88 as a result of a planned federal cap on
payments to states. Congress last year refused to continue an
earlier three year cap on the program despite an Administration
request that the cap be extended.
The overall impact of cuts in the Medicare and Medicaid
programs is a shifting of costs to beneficiaries, providers and
local and state governments.
ALTERNATIVE BUDGETS FROM CONGRESS
Many senior Senators and Members of Congress have already
rejected the Administration budget and have pledged to draft their
own alternatives. Majority Leader Dole is leading an effort in the
Senate to draft a budget plan and release it prior to the
Administration ' s budget submission date of February 4.
In addition, many Members of Congress are promoting the concept
of a temporary one-year budget freeze which would reduce the deficit
by significantly more than the Administration ' s budget. Their plan
is to use the one year period to devise a more permanent
alternative method of reducing the federal deficit.
SUMMARY OF TENTATIVE 'FREEZE PLUS'. SPENDING REDUCTION PLAN
(SEE NOTE BELOW)
Proposal 1986
1987 1988
Budget Plan Targets
1) Deficit Share of GNP 4.0;
2) Deficit Target Ceiling ... ... . ... .. . . .. ... . .. 3,0: 2.01ZS170,
3) Spending Cut Needed to Nit Deficit Targets $138- $gg.
-42 -85 -110
Summary of Savings Proposals
Direct Freezes or Freeze Ecuivalents
1) Cost-of-Living Adjustment Except Social Security -2.6
2) Discretionary Programs: Budget Authority Freezes -3,0 -4'6 -6.0
'3.9 -4.5
3) Medicare/Medicaid Mostly Provider Freezes
-3.8 -8.3 -14.2
4) Subtotal , Freezes. . ...... . -g4
. ... . .
. . . .. ... . . . -16.8 -24.
Major Program Reforms
5) 5% Civilian Pay Cut -2.6
6) Child Nutrition Upper Income Subsidy „ -0,7 -0,7
7) Civil Service Retirement -0.8
•
8) Student Aid Reform � -0'3 '0:3 -0.8
. . . . . . . . -0.3 -1.1
9) Navigation User Fees -1.2
10) VA Medical Care System e � • '
11) REA Subsidized Loans � � � �•• � • � " • • � � . •'�" ' --- --- -0.4
12) Power Marketing Administrations : • .Debt.
Repay-• -0.2 -0'S -Q.5
ment Reform (Grace Commission) -0.5
13) Farm Price Support Reform . . . . .. '0.5 -0.5
14) Mineral Receipt Share with•States: . •Net .
Profit -1.2 -5'9 -6'7
Sharina
15) Subsidized.Farm�Credit•Reform• • � ' • • � � � � �� � � � � -0'4 '0.4 -0.4
15) Housing Guarantee Origination Fees . . . . . � •• � � • -2'5 -2.9 -3.1
-1'0 -1.0
17) Grace Commission User Fees
-1.0 -1.5 -1.7
18) Subtotal , Major Reforms . . . . , ,
. . . . . . . . . . . . -11.0 -18.5 •-21.
Program Terminations
19) Impact Aid Part B
20) Job Corps -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
21) WIN -0.1 -0.6
22) Legal and Co'nmunity.Services -0'2 -0.3 -0.3
23) Civilian Aeronautical R&D -0.5 -0.7 4,7
-0.3 -0.3 -0.3
Note: All dollar figures are in billions. The deficit target ceiling is the Administration's
goal -- the deficit figure they would like to achieve. Program reforms are reductions
which would require authorizing legislation by the Congress. Program termination are
complete eliminations of programs, sone over one year, others over a two or three .ear time
span.
Y
Proposal 1986 1987 1988
24) EDA and Appalachia .... .. .. . . .. . .... . . ... . . ... . -0.1 -0.2 -0.3
25) AMTRAK and Other Rail Subsidies .. . . . .. . . . .. . -0.5 -C.8 -0.8
26) Health Professions Training , , , -0.1 -0.2 -0.2
27) Soil and Water Conservation Programs -0.6 -0.6 -0.6
28) Urban Mass Transit ... .. ... ... ... .. .. ... ... .. -0.8 -1.6 -2,7
29) UDAG . .. . .... . . . . . ...... . .. .. .. .. . . .. . .. . .... . --- -0.1 -0.3
30) General Revenue Sharing --- -4.6 -4.6
31) New Sewer Project Grants . . .. .. . . .. . ..... .... . --- -0.1 -0.2
32) Postal Subsidy . ....... .. .. . ... . . . .. . . . .. .... . -0.8 -0.8 -0.8
33) Subsidized Rural Housing -2,2 -3.1 -3.7
34) HUD Housing Moratorium . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .... -0.1 -0.3 -0.5
35) Rural Water and Sewer .. ... . .. . ... . . . . . . . ... . . -0.1 -0.2 -0.3
36) Export-Import Bank Direct Loans . . .. .. . . . ..... -0.4 -1.4 -2.0
37) Small. Business Administration -1.6' -1.9 -1.8
38) Strategic Petroleum Reserve (Moratorium) -2,2 -2,2 -2.2
39-) Air Carrier Subsidies -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
40) Crop Insurance Subsidy (Phase-out) -0.1 -0,2 -0.4
41 ) Subtotal , Major Terminations . . . . .. . . ... . -10.9 -20.4 -23.
All Other Cuts
42) 10% 1986 BA Cut in Nuclear Fission & Fusion
43) 10% 1986 BA Cut in Non-Nuclear Energy .. . .... . -,2 -.2 -.2
44) lOp 1986 BA Cut in Agricultural Research ,.. . . -.1
45) Stop Public Lands and Park Acquisitions;
Consolidate Offices . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . -.2 -.3
46) 10X 1986 BA Cut in NOAA . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . .. -.1 -.1 -.2
47) SSA/SSI Administrative Reductions . . . -.1 -.2 -.3
48) lop Cut in Other Federal Administrative Accounts -.3 -.3 -.5
49) 10% Cut in CDBG . . * -.1 -.3
. . . . . . .. . .
50) Highway Obligations Freeze . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... . -.2 -.7 -.2
51) Space Program Stretchout .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . -.1 -.5 -.6
52) All Other . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . -.9 -1.7 -2.3
T
53) Subtotal , All Other Cuts . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . I-2.3 -4.3 -5.2
54) Grand Totals .. -33.6 -60.0 -74.7
�J
Mr. Robert F. Vierling Re : Improper installation
221 E. 4th Avenue of tarred alley in
Shakopee , Idnnesota 55379 Block 50 .
ahakopee City Council
129 E. 1st avenue
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379 February 19 , 1985
Mayor and Council Members:
The City of Shakopee forced me to pay nearly : 1200 .00
to tar my alley in Block 50 . The alley has been so "screwed
up" by the City Engineer of Shakopee that the water changes
directions five different times from one end of the block to
the other.
The first two lots on the 4est end of block 50 had three
times as much done in labor than the rest of the block; the
rest of the alley got nothing but a strip of uneven tar.
The first two lots on the Jest end of the block was also
given a crushed rock base the year before the tar was put in
the alley; the rest of us got nothing.
Now if this matter is not taken care of promptly in the
Spring of the year and the alley cambered to the center of the
alley so that the water will run off properly as any moron
should have known in the first place , the City will find them-
selves in deep trouble with a lawsuit from me .
It took me over 20 years to get a proper electrical ser-
vice to my house where when everytime there was a wind or a
storm, I had to go out with a 12 ' 2 x 4 to part the lines so
I' d have electricity. I was told when I requested new lines
last time that they were "good enough for me" . Finally Jim put
in new lines for -me . It took me 15 phone calls to the City of
Shakopee to explain to them that they were charging me X300 .00
too much for the storm drain on Lewis Street. I 've had other
harrassments by the City of Shakopee ; this certainly isn 't
just coincidence .
I hope the City will not take another 20 years to get my
alley straightened out, because they will not like the legal
action I will take .
Sincerely,
F
R� V/gd Rober r . Vierling/ �
9C
Mr. Robert F. Vierling Re: Demand for removal and
221 E. Fourth Avenue complete dismissal of
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379 Julius Coller, Shakopee
City Attorney for mal-
Shakopee City Council feasance of Office .
129 E. 1st Avenue
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379 February 19 , 1985
Mayor and Council Members:
This city has been burdened for too long with a senile
servant who retards the creativity and growth of Shakopee .
Though Coller has seen fit to illegally spot zone in my block
and into other places into Shakopee , he now retards progress
in Shakopee by trying to make his block inviolate .
Coller has been on the welfare role of taxpayers in
Shakopee for nearly 50 years , not including the forced leave
he had to take because of reasons we all know about. He has
never done anything to advance Shakopee ; example-the railroad
tracks running through the middle of Shakopee because he,
against the city' s wishes , gave the railroad the right to stay
where it was instead of having the tracks be put out of town,
as was the city' s express specifications. There are numerous
other examples of his malfeasance of office , , as many of the
people who have lived here as long as I have also know about.
On February 7th, 1985, at the Planning Commissioners meet-
ing, Coller deliberately lied about my serving him papers to
come to Court on the spot zoning in my block because he was too
gutless to face me , a layman, in Court. We do not need this type
of deviousness , such as Coller has shown us in the past.
That same night, Coller also lied to three women that were
there at the time , and they emphatically told him so. I realize
that Coller thinks he is more than anybody else , but you only
have to look closely at his past performance to see that it' s
just the opposite .
I hope that the City Council of Shakopee will acquiese to
this request, so that this can be done in a nice way rather than
the hard way where it must come down to a petition from the peo-
ple . Example ; the cancellation of Coller Drive . I 'm sure that
this will refresh the Council' s mind as to how much power the
people have .
With all sincerity, thank you,
Yours truly, ,
- obert . Vi
FEL=
RFV/gd
LAURENT BUILDERS, INC. RANDY LAURENT
Phone: 6121445-6745 Laurent Building GARY LAURENT
118 South Fuller Street
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 `����.�`.
JAN 2 81985
January 25 , 1985
John Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, 1,21 55379
Dear John,
As you may recall, this past summer our company
was required to increase the front yard setback of
a dwelling from that approved by an issued build—
ing permit. As a result of this requirement,
our company incurred certain expenses in moving
foundation footing forms . Subsequently, we
billed the City for reimbursement of these costs.
. We have thus far been unable to collect any
reimbursement.
Therefore , I am requesting an opportunity to
bring this before the City Council as soon as it is
possible for this to be placed on the agenda .
Please let me know when this would be . Thank you
for your cooperation .
Sincerely,
LAURENT BUILDERS, INC.
Gary L . urent
President
GLL/sb
�wcORrORATEO ta�c
129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
{
October 30, 1984
Mr. Randolph R. Laurent
Laurent Builders, Inc.
118 Fuller Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Request for Reimbursement
L 13 B 2 Mn. Valley 3rd
Dear Mr. Laurent:
Please find enclosed a copy of an opinion from the
office of the Asst. City Attorney which advises the City
that it is not obligated to reimburse Laurent Builders, Inc.
for costs incurred for moving a structure to meet the re-
quired setback. Therefore, the City of Shakopee has chosen
not to pay Laurent Builders, Inc. a sum of $1, 350. 00 for
costs related to a structure on L 13 B 2 Mn Valley 3rd
Addition.
Should you have any questions please contact me or
Rod Krass, Assistant City Attorney.
Yours truly,
?ud7i'Sijmmac
City Planner
JS:tw
Enclosure
i
i
T
n X71— -
- t ' ) ]
-
0 460
Law Offices of
KRASS, MEYER & WALSTEN `'''"
Chartered
Suite 300
Marschall Road Business Center Phillip R. Kress Paralegals
Barry K. Meyer Barbara J.Hedstrom
327 South Marschall Road GE �' 1. Trevor R. Waisten Debra A.Karison
P.O. Box 216 Elizabeth B. McLaughlin Jolene R.Wegner
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Rochelle M.Anderson
(612)445-5080 Of Counsel
Dennis L. Monroe
October 24, 1984
Ms. Judy Simac
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Ms. Simac:
Enclosed you will find a copy of an Interoffice Memorandum and a copy
of a Minnesota Supreme Court decision that is relevant to the Laurent
Builder's situation. Essentially, the city is most likely not obligated to
reimburse the builder.
if you have any questions, please call.
Very truly yours,
BRASS, ML= & WALSTEN CHARTERED
Rochelle M. Anderson
rma:lw
Enclosure
4J
INTEROFFICE N-F'; )kANDUM
TO: ROD
FROM: ROCHEUE
RE: LAUR£NT BUILTERS POSSIBLE SUIT AGAINST SHAKOP£E
DATE: OCTOBER 22, 1984
The possible lawsuit of Laurent Builders vs. n
following facts: Shakopee is based o
the city erroneously issued the
requiring a 30 foot set back on Laurent a building Ferr:it
July 5
actually required. on , 1984. A 50 foot set back is what is
July_ 11, 1984 the error was discovered and a stop work
order was issued. Laurent seeks $1,350.00 from
reliance on the initial ermit, the city, as a result of its
P Insurance will not cover this amount.
Anderson vs. City of �anneanolis � ,
case for Shakopee. In Anderson, the city 178 N-W-2d 215, (1970) is a strong
permit, and cancelled the Y granted property owners a building
was not persisted under theermit 5 days later because the structure involved
s.
$900.00 in damages they incurred betweenordinthee Issuance ownersthe sued
cance cit
the permit. Y for
tion of
The Anderson Court ruled that the act of an employee in is
building permit in a doubtful case is an exercise of discretion, and issuing
the
§466.03, Subd. 6, prohibits any claim being
tort .claim, negligence, and §466.03 allows a Wrought. The claim would be.Sa
claims based on discretionary municipality to be immune4 from
acts. The -Anders
the proposed use was illegal, then no element of discretion should have
_� Court went on to say that if
exercised by the city, and the owner is precluded from recovery because he is
charged with knowing the laws regulatingbeen
permits.
I have attached a copy of the
Sales vs. Cit_r of Eoseville Anderson case. In Frank's
Minnesota law 295 N.�.2d 6U4 (1980 Nursery
is clear in that administration � the Court said that
governmental not a proprietary °f zoning ordinances is a
estopped from correctly y function, and the municipality cannot be
relied to his enforcing the ordinance even if the property owner
33ear on prior city action.
A final relevant case is No
row Wing, 244 N.W.2d 279 1976 Air Products, Inc, vs.
music festival at the Donnybrook• Speedwarthern Air County of
Plaintiffs planned a rock
�f the Crow Wing Count Y• Plaintiffs met with the chairman
County Board of Commissioners, the Chairman of the Crow Wing
-ounty. Planning and Zoning Commission
ommission and principal draftsmen '°fa member of the Planning and Zoning
laintiffs asked these officials if they would be required under the
applicable zoning ordinance.
rdinance to obtain a permit for the Proposed old Plaintiffs that no zoning
p posed rock concert, and the officials
ivice permit was required_ a��� i ,
Plaintiffs expended approximate) -tn reliance otl this
eparing for the rock concert. _ �t y $75,000.00 in promoting and
-s required and it was apparent Pthat none would s were )beer informed that a permit
ter enjoined from holding the rock festival. issued. Plaintiffs were
The issue in this case was
whether Plaintiffs had a case
of action
tion. The Northern in tort for negligent misrepresenta-
Air Court distinguised between misrepresentation of law
and misrepresentation of facts. if a- misrepresentation is one of fact, then
the person has a cause of action against the city employee. If a misrepresen-
tation is one of law, however, rhea, there is no cause of action. The Northern
Air Court was influenced by public policy considerations. The Lefenaants
acted in good faith, they did not act with malice or with intent to deceive.
To subject county officials to liability for innocent misrepresentation would
discourage their participation in local government. The Court reasoned that
the Plaintiff had alternative means of obtaining("interpretat ion of the zoning
ordinance, either by consulting an attorney or by applying to tl,e Polk County
Planning and 'Zoning Commission. This caseifj nut all that helpful to S
an informal opinion. 11aku
a� that # the act of granting the permits was a formal action ana just not
If you want me to do more research on the other alternatives, please
let me know.
•s. � as,be"
Beverly J . I.oe_inen
2036 County Road -83
Shakopee, Einn. 5537a
9
February 26, 1985 `i _ "
Homorable Mayor Reinke
Members of the City Council
City of Shakopee
129 East First Pve.
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Ija.dies and Gentlemen:
Please accept this letter as my formal resignation
from Shakopee's Planning Commission. I have been
accepted by the University of Minnesota into the Doctor
of Pharmacy program. This is a rigorous course of
study which will require my full attention.
I have regrets in submitting this resignation at
a time when I feel Shakopee is entering one of her most
exciting periods of growth. On the other hand, I am
confident that Shakopee' s best interests are being guarded
and planned for by excellent staff and elected public
officials.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve a, city
which is one of the best because her reorle are the best.
ply best wishes to all of you as you me dMa,koree' s
future . -
Yours in Community Service,
Beverly Jean. Loehnen
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator / o�
��r- Cfi
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk'"
RE: Application for $2 , 000 ,000 Commercial Development
Revenue Bonds , Super 8 Motel Project
DATE: March 1 , 1985
Introduction
The City has received an application for $2 ,000 , 000 Commercial
Development Revenue Bonds from Bemidji Super 8 Partnership, a
Minnesota general partnership for a 100 unit motel to be located
at the N.E. corner of C.R. 17 and C.R. 16 .
Background
It is policy that Council receive the complete application prior
to setting the public hearing. It is also policy to adopt the
resolution giving preliminary approval the Council meeting
following the public hearing rather than at the same meeting of
the public hearing.
In addition to setting a public hearing Council is being asked to
adopt a resolution giving conditional approval to the project.
The resolution specifically states that it does not obligate the
city to take any additional action with respect to the project,
to approve the project financing, or to give the project a
portion of its state allocation. However, it does evidence the
present intention of the City to issue bonds based on the infor-
mation in the possession of the City, and it is the applicant ' s
hope that this Resolution would be effective to grandfather the
project should any adverse federal legislation be introduced
prior to the public hearing on April 2nd.
The Ass ' t City Attorney will be reviewing this resolution -and
will advise prior to Council action Tuesday, if he recommends
against its adoption. Shakopee' s 1985 IDB entitlement allocation
is $2 , 598 ,015.
Alternatives
1. Set public hearing. -
2. Don' t set public hearing.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1.
Recommended Action
J. Offer Resolution No. 2376 , A Resolution Calling a Public
Hearing on a Proposal to Undertake and Finance an Industrial
Development Project, and move its adoption.
2. Office Resolution No. 2377 , A Resolution Giving Conditional
Approval to the Issuance of Revenue Obligations of the City to a
Proposed Commercial Development Project , and move its adoption.
BND/bemidjil RESOLUTION NO . 2376
RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC
HEARING ON A PROPOSAL TO UNDERTAKE AND
FINANCE AN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, Bemidji Super 8 Partnership, a Minnesota gen-
eral partnership ( the "Company" ) , has presented the City
Council ( the "Council" ) of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota
( the "City" ) , with information concerning a proposed project
( the "Project" ) within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Company has requested that the City issue
its commercial or industrial development revenue obligations
under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, to provide financing
to the Company for the Project:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City
Council as follows :
1 . This Council will conduct a public hearing on the
proposal to undertake and finance the Project, as described
in the Notice of Public Hearing attached to and made a part
of this resolution ( the "Notice" ) .
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to cause the
Notice or a notice in substantially the same form thereof to
be published in the City ' s . official newspaper and in a news-
paper of general circulation in the City not more than 30
nor less than 15 days prior to the date of the public hear-
ing specified in the Notice.
3. The City Clerk shall file in his or her office, and
there make available , for public inspection following the
publication of the Notice, a draft copy of the application
for approval of the Project, including all required attach-
ments and exhibits thereto, proposed to be made to the Minn-
esota Department of Energy and Economic Development .
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee , Minnesota, held this 5th day of March, 1985 .
ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Approved as to form this 5th day
of March, 1985 .
City Attorney
Notice of Public Hearing
Commercial Development Revenue Bonds
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be
conducted by the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, at the City Hall, 129 East First Avenue,
Shakopee, Minnesota, at a meeting of the City Council to be
held on April 2, 1985, commencing at 7 : 00 p.m. , C.T. At the
public hearing the Council will consider a proposal that the
City assist the financing of a commercial or industrial
development project by issuing its bonds or other
obligations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474 .
The proposed project consists of the acquisition, con-
struction and installation of an approximately 100 unit
Super 8 motel ( the "Project" ) , to be located within the City
on the northeast corner of the intersection of County Road
17 and County Road 16, by Bemidji Super 8 Partnership, a
Minnesota general partnership ( the "Company" ) . It is pro-
posed that the City assist financing the Project from the
proceeds of an issue of the City ' s commercial or industrial
development revenue obligations in an amount presently esti-
mated not to exceed $2, 000 ,000 . If issued, such obligations
would be payable from lease payments or loan repayments to
be made or secured by the Company.
A draft copy of the proposed application to the Minne-
sota Department of Energy and Economic Development for
approval of the Project is available for public inspection
in the office of the City Clerk .
All persons appearing at the public hearing will be
given an opportunity to present their oral or written com-
ments on the proposal that the City undertake and finance
the Project.
7, ``_
Clerk ' s Certificate
I , the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, hereby certify
that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing
resolution with the original thereof on file in my office
and further certify that the same is a full, true and com-
plete transcript therefrom, insofar as the same relates to
the calling of a public hearing on a proposal that the City
undertake and finance a commercial or industrial development
project for Bemidji Super 8 Partnership, a Minnesota general
partnership.
I further certify that said resolution was duly adopted
by the Shakopee City Council at a duly called and regularly
held regular or special meeting thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such Clerk and the cor-
porate seal of the City this day of , 1985.
City Clerk
Shakopee, Minnesota
(SEAL)
BND-bemidji
RESOLUTION NO. p;�77
RESOLUTION GIVING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL TO THE
ISSUANCE OF REVENUE OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY TO
-A PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, Bemidji Super 8, a Minnesota general partner-
ship to be formed (the "Company" ) , has presented the City
Council ( the "Council" ) of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota
( the "City" ) , with information concerning a proposed project
within the City, consisting of the acquisition, construction
and installation of an approximately 100 unit motel ( the
"Project" ) ; and
WHEREAS, the Company has requested that the City issue
its commercial development revenue obligations in an amount
presently estimated not to exceed $2, 000 , 000 under Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 474 , to provide a portion of the financing
of the Project; and
WHEREAS, the City has called a public hearing on issu-
ance of the proposed revenue bonds for its regular meeting
on April 2, 1985, and will make a final determination sub-
sequent to such public hearing on whether to proceed with
the issuance of its revenue obligations for the Project ; and
WHEREAS, it has come to the attention of the City that
there exists a possibility that certain legislation may be
introduced at the federal level prior to the public hearing
which could delay or prevent the issuance of revenue obliga-
tions by the City for the Project if the City has not taken
any official action with respect to the Project prior to the
date of introduction of such legislation:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City
Council as follows :
1. On the basis of information given the City to date,
it appears that it would be in the best interest of the City
to issue its revenue obligations (the "Bonds" ) under the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474 , to finance
the Project in an amount presently estimated not to exceed
$2,000 ,000 .
2. The Project and the related financing thereof by
the City are hereby given preliminary approval, and the
issuance of the Bonds for such purposes and in such esti-
mated amount is hereby conditionally approved, subject - to
the holding of the public hearing and the comments received
at such hearing from interested members of the public, such
further review of such additional documentation of the Com-
pany as the City shall deem necessary or desirable, approval
of the Project by the Minnesota Department of Energy and
Economic Development ( "DEED" ) and to the mutual agreement of
the Council , the Company and the initial purchasers of the
Bonds as to the details and provision for payment of the
Bonds . In all events , it is understood, however , that the
Bonds shall not constitute a debt of the City or a charge,
lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable , upon any project of
the City except as interest in the Project, and each of the
Bonds when, as and if issued shall recite in substance that
it is payable solely from the revenues received from the
Project and property pledged to the payment thereof.
3 . The Company has agreed to pay directly or through
the City any and all costs incurred by the City in connec-
tion with the Project whether or not the Project is finally
approved by the City or DEED; whether or not the Project is
carried to completion; and whether or not the Bonds or ope-
rative instruments are executed.
4 . The adoption of this resolution does not constitute
a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue
the Bonds as requested by the Company. The City retains the
right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation
and accordingly not to issue the Bonds, or issue the Bonds
in an amount less than the amount referred to in paragraph t
hereof, should the City at any time prior to issuance
thereof determine that it is in the best interests of the
City not to issue the Bonds, or to issue the Bonds in an
amount less than the amount referred to in paragraph 1
hereof , or should the parties to the transaction be unable
to reach agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of
the documents required for the transaction. Additionally,
the City is an entitlement issuer within the meaning of
Minnesota Laws 1984, Chapter 582 ( the "Act" ) ; this resolu-
tion does not and shall not be deemed to constitute an
agreement on the part of the City to allocate a portion of
its entitlement allocation under the Act to the Project, and
this resolution and the preliminary approval of the City set
forth herein are contingent upon either an allocation of
such entitlement allocation by the City to the Project or
receipt by the City of an additional allocation of bonding
authority from the Commissioner of DEED with respect to the
Project in an amount equal to or greater than the principal
amount of the Bonds prior to issuance and sale of the Bonds .
S . All commitments to the City expressed herein are
subject to the condition that the City and the Company shall
have agreed to mutually acceptable terms and conditions of
the Bonds and all instruments and proceedings relating
thereto and that the closing of the issuance and sale of the
2 _
Clerk ' s Certificate
I , the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting
Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, hereby certify
that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing
resolution with the original thereof on file in my office
and further certify that the same is a full , true and com-
plete transcript therefrom, insofar as the same relates to
the preliminary, conditional approval of the issuance of
bonds of the City to finance a commercial project for
Bemidji Super 8 Partnership, a Minnesota general partnership
to be formed.
I certify that Councilmember introduced
said resolution, Councilmember moved its
adoption, which motion was duly seconded by Councilmember
, and upon roll call, the "Ayes, " "Abstains" and
"Nays" were as follows:
AYES ABSTAINS NAYS
Whereupon the resolution was declares duly passed and
adopted.
I further certify that said resolution was duly adopted
by the Shakopee City Council at a duly called and regularly
held regular or special meeting thereof.
WITNESS my hand officially as such Clerk and the cor-
porate seal of the City this 5th day of March, 1985 .
City Clerk
Shakopee , Minnesota
(SEAL)
Bonds shall have occurred not later than December 31,
1985 . If the events set forth herein do not take place
within the time set forth above, or any extension thereof, .
and the Bonds are not sold within such time, this resolution
shall expire and be of no further affect .
Adopted by the Shakopee City Council on March 5 , 1985 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this 5th
day of March, 1985 .
City Attorney
3 _
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator l b
FROM : Barry A. Stock, Administrative Intern
RE: Amendment to Shakopee Community Access Corporation
By-Laws
DATE : February 26 , 1985
Introduction & Background
On January 10 , 1985 the Shakopee Community Access Corporation
Board of Directors approved a motion amending their By-Laws .
The proposed change relates to Section 2. 151 - Annual Meeting .
( See attachment No . 1 . ) The Access Corporation is proposing
that this Section be amended to read "The membership shall meet
annually in the month of February" rather than "The membership
shall meet annually on the third Wednesday in February" .
In accordance with Section 3 .3 - Amending Procedures ( see attachment
No. 2) , the City Attorney has reviewed and approved the proposed
change as to form. On February 25 , 1985 the Shakopee Cable
Communications Advisory Commission reviewed the proposed amendment.
At that time the Commission made a motion to recommend approval
of the proposed amendment to City Council .
Alternatives
1 . Amend the Shakopee Community Access Corporation By-Laws
as proposed by the Shakopee Community Access Corporation
Board of Directors and as recommended by the Shakopee Cable
Communications Advisory Commission .
2. Do notapprovethe proposed Access Corporation By-Law amendment.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
Action Requested
Move to amend that portion of Section 2 . 151 of the Shakopee
Community Access Corporation By-Laws which currently reads ,
"The membership shall meet annually on the third Wednesday in
February" to read "The membership shall meet annually in the
month of February" .
BAS/jms
Attachment Number 1
2.13 -err o` Menbers^in ane,, Dues
2.131 Term: Membership shall run from January 1st to December 31st of
each year.
2.132 Dues: To remain in good standing members must pay dues as
established in Section 2.14 no later than the annual meeting.
Regular and family classes will not be prorated for members
joining after January 1st. The treasurer will prepare notice of
dues payable to be mailed with the annual meeting notice at least
two weeks prior to the annual meeting.
2.14 Classes of Membership
2.141 Regular (voting) Membership: Available to any person at an
annual cost of $3.00 per year.
2.142 Family (voting) Membership: Available to families at an
annual cost of $7.002 allowing two persons voting privileges.
2.143 Non—Profit Organizational Membership: Available, without
voting privileges, but with full access to the Corporation's
services and facilities for all members of an organization, at an
annual cost of $60.00
2.144 Sponsoring Membership: Available, without voting privileges,
to any person or organization that may wish to be recognized, but
no active in the Corporation, at a minimum annual cost of
$120.00.
2.145 Sustaining Membership: Available, without voting privileges,
to any person or organization that may wish to be recognized, but
not active in the Corporation, at a minimum annual cost of
$240.00.
2.146 Patron Membership: Available, without voting privileges, to
any person or organization that may wish to be recognized, but
not active in the Corporation, at a minimum annual cost of
$500.00.
2.147 The Board of Directors shall have disgression to offer special
membership promotions which modify stated membership classes
and fees.
2.15 Meetings
2.151 Annual meeting: The membership shall meet annually on the
third Wednesday_in February at a time and place to be announced by
the Board of Directors, for the purpose of receiving a report on
the Corporation's status, and deciding any other matters
requiring a vote of the membership.
Attachment Number 2
2.32 Ad Hoc Committees
The Board may organize any voluntary committees or councils deemed
necessary to achieve the purpose of the corporation.
III. Amending Procedures: If it becomes necessary to alter the Shakopee Community
Access Corporation's By-Laws, amendments or revisions shall be made by:
3.1 Proposal of the change by any voting member or Board member at a meeting of the
Board of Directors; and
3.2 Preliminary approval of the change by a majority of the Board members; and
3.3 Approval by the City Attorney as to form and, if a material change is proposed,
Council approval must be secured. Council rejection of the amendment will
terminate consideration of the amendment. Council approval will allow
continued consideration; and
3.4 A confirming vote of two-thirds of the members present at either the annual
membership meetings or a special membership meeting, of which all voting
members have been adequately informed; and
3 .5 Submitting the amendment to the City Council for information.
IV. Dissolution: In the event that both the members, at a regular members meeting, and
the Board of Directors, at a Board of Directors meeting, should each vote by a 2/3
majority to dissolve the corporation, or if the corporation is ordered dissolved by
any due process, all unencumbered funds of the corporation. will be prorated and
returned to the granting authorities; unencumbered membership dues will be prorated
and returned to the members.
V. Coordinator: As funds permit, a Coordinator may be hired to facilitate the
corporation goals. The coordinator would be selected by,'directly responsible to,
and advised by the Board of Directors. The Coordinator would be responsible for:
5.1 Coordinating, promoting and assisting in the development and cablecasting of
local programming;
5.2 Assisting individuals and organizations in creating programs and using
equipment;
5.3 The use and maintenance of equipment owned or used by the corporation;
5.4 Budgeting; administering, and reporting (as specified by the Board) on all
funds allocated by the Board;
5.5 Contracting with individuals and organizations for services as authorized by
the Board;
5.6 Managing the day-to-day affairs of the Shakopee Community Access Corporation;
5.7 Actively interfacing with the broadest possible range of members of the
community, institutions, organizations, and officials;
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Gambling License - National MS Society, Minnesota North
Star Chapter
DATE: February 28 , 1985
Introduction
The City has been advised that the National MS Society, Minnesota
North Star Chapter has applied for a gambling license from the
Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board. If the local governing
body wishes to disallow such activity, the Council must adopt such
a resolution and forward it to the Board prior to March 22 , 1985
(30 days from date of notification) .
Background
Over the years the Council has issued gambling and bingo licenses
to the American Legion and to the V.F.W. , only. Does the City
wish to limit gambling and bingo to nonprofit organizations located
in Shakopee and/or proceeds being used in Shakopee, or any other
desirable criteria? Also, there may be less problems if gambling
occasions are conducted by local organizations.
It Council wishes to adopt criteria, staff should be directed to
research and bring back a recommended ordinance or resolution for
Council consideration on March 19th to be forwarded to the State
Gambling Board prior to March 22 , 1985 .
Alternatives
1. Adopt regulations more restrictive than State law, limiting
gambling further.
G. Abide by State regulations and allow gambling in the community
consistent with State law.
3 . Don't adopt regulations more restrictive than State law, but
review each application on a case by case basis. (This increases
the chances of being arbitrary and capricious. )
Recommended Action
Direct staff to prepare an ordinance for Council consideration on
March 19 , 1985 which establishes gambling regulations more restrictive
than State law. [indicating restrictions desiredj
JSC/jms
CITY OF SHAKOPEE e
INCORPORATED 1870
29 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445.3650
r.�
ar a.
February l8 , 1985
r
Mr. Arnold Stage ,
Commander
American Legion
628 East 8th Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Stage:
The State Gambling Board has received an application from the
National MS Society, Minnesota North Star Chapter for gambling at
Capones. .Shakopee is considering limiting licenses to local organi-
zations which may be more professional and cooperative in complying
with gambling regulations than outside organizations.
Council will be discussing the attached memo from staff on
March 5th. If you have any opinions, please attend the meeting
or give me a call prior to Tuesday evening.
Sincerely,
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
JSC/jms
enciosure
cc: Doug Olson
The Heart Of Progress - Valley
AN rr),,A, nnDhnTn ui-,• ___
Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board FOR BOARD USE ONLY
ra�'""� c 900 Summit State Bank Building
LY
310 4th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
(612) 341-7676
GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION
(Class A, B, or C)
INSTRUCTIONS: 1. PRINT OR TYPE.
2• Bring completed application to local governin
and leave goldenrod copy• Applicant keeps g body, obtain signature and date on all copies,
address. P pink copy and sends remaining copies to above
Type of Application: lication information must be submitted within 1D
❑ Class A - Fee $100.00 (Bingo, Raffles p s a r the Chan
Class B - Fee $ 50.00 (Raffles, Paddlewheelsewheels, Tipboards, Pull-Tabs)
Class C - Fee $ 50.00 a
(BinTipboards, Pull-Tabs)
-lake checks a go only)
able to: Minnesota Charitable
Gamblin Control Board.
Oplicant (Official, legal name of organization) Site
:at'1. MS Society, MN North Star A drdss
isiness Address ChaAter
.344 Nicollet AvenueN S
City,/Ste, Zip
_ State, Zip n U
/«'c-�2.
-inneapolis, MN 55404 County / /�,
ennepin Yes No
siness Telephone Number Federal Are all gambling activities co
I.D. Number the above site? ucted at
12 ) 870-1500 41-079- If no, complete a sepa-
-e of Organization 0658 rate application form for each site as a
X separate license is issued for each site.
Paternal Veterans
Religious Other Nonprofit Organization 2• Is site located within cit
,e of Organization Charter - Y�town limits?
3. Does organization own the site where
International L7 National
cer of Years in ❑ State gambling activi
Number of Articles of X ty will be conducted? If
no, attach co
�tence (in Minnesota PY of the lease for the
31 years ) Incorporation (if incorporated) Lessor Name site.
19 lir lease or rent)
'tion Where Articles are Filed
New York Address
No I. Does organization have a dues structure?
If Yes, number of activemembers 33.000 City, State, Zip
X Has organization been previously licensed Gambling Manager Nam
by the Board? If yes,11 Y give date Willard M.
Has license ever been denied, suspended Address Munger, Jr.
X or revoked? If yes check all that a
❑Denied PP1Y: 2344 Nicollet Avenue
SUSoended ❑Revoked
4• Is organization exempt from City, State, Zip
Payment
U.S. income tax? of Minneapolis,
If MN 55404
letter decla g exemptionyes' attach copy of The $10,000 fidelity bond required b
. Statutes 349.09 has been
n tax exempt froobtained, y Minnesota
5• Is organizatiom payment
Of Minnesota tax? Company Name
letter declaring exemptio ,yes, attach copy of Bond Number
n
Fidelity & Depositors
9882268
Name of Organizations pFficers
and Titles
ingsley MurphyJr.J- Chair
C. Jeffrey J. Wood
Gerald . Treasurer
Friedell Vice h •Y
d• Joanne Levin SA Y
- .. -
nesota Charitable Gambling Control Board GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION
(Class A, B, or C)
GAMBLING SITE AUTHORIZATION
my signature below, local law enforcemeit officers or agents of the Board are hereby
thorized to enter upon the site, at any time gambling is being conducted, to observe
e gambling and to enforce the law for any unauthorized game or practice.
BANK RECORDS AUTHORIZATION � -
my signature below, the Board is hereby authorized to inspect the bank records of the-
neral- Gambling- Bank—Account whenever necessary-to T-ulfcurrent gamblin
ies and law. -
OATH
iereby declare that - -
I have read this application and all information submitted to the Board;
All information submitted is true, accurate, and complete;
all other required information has been fully disclosed;
I am the chief executive officer of the organization;
I assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful operation of all activities to be
conducted;
I will familiarize myself with the laws of the State of Minnesota respecting gambling
and rules of the Board and agree, :if licensed, to abide by those laws and rules,
including amendments thereto.
Official, Legal Name of Organization
Nat'l. MS Soci y, MN North Star Chapter
Signature�Mbq.�' oned by Chief Executive Officer)
Title
Executive Director
Date
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY
iereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. By- acknowledging receipts I
, it having been served with notice that this application will be reviewed by the
ritable Gambling Control Board and if approved by the Board, will become effective 30
s,=,from the date of--receipt -(noted below) , unless a resolution_ - of the. local. governing _
.y ig-passed-which-specificu
ally—disallows such activity and a copy._o-f_thatr- resolution is
lived by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 30 days of the- below noted date.
LOCAL GOVERNING BODY
ofnL ai Gover ing B d
A 44-
rum
epeW Rece vi
y-� ^ ! ORGANIZATION
Re (serving notice)
eive d (This i date f am which the 30 day Name of Representativ � Gambling Li ense pplicant
-,oval egins)
-
301-01 (12/84) White - Board Canary - Board Pink - Applicant Goldenrod - Governin
U
RE14TAL AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this
day of
1985, by and between
S
doing business at the address of
in the City/County of aZ_'7'x, �
hereinafter
called
FIRST PARTY, and theiIIP1P SpT3 7
A NORTH STAR CHAPTER OF THE
NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY, hereinafter
SECOND PARTY, called
WITNESSETH:
1• First party, being the owner of
operator of business
Premises, for and in consideration of
the sum of
Per month
an owner consideration hereinafter recited, due and
payable on the 10th of each month, does herebyr L
party for the - grant L-o second
period beginning
/ 1985 through
198 the ri ht �o
9 locate on the
business premises games of chance devices consisting st_ng of those `
legal in the State of _linnesota, such devices
to be located on
the premises where designated by the first Part
. oy.
f the location of such devices is shown On the l (A Sketch
this lease, last Page of
Second party shall provide all employees to
maintain and supervise the games of chance. Firs
have no interest in the outcome of such games of dance as t Party hall
stipulated by State law.
2. Second party shall
Pay first party the monthly rental
fee, which shall be a sum sufficient to provide
rental of for adequate
space. In complicance with State laws, rental fees
shall in no way reflect upon the variance of monthly gross
proceeds of the games of chance, but shall be contingent
upon actual space usage incurred by the games of chance and
the patrons thereof.
3 . Both parties agree to comply with all Federal , State
and local laws pertaining to the conduct of games of chance.
4. First party agrees that only one eligible organization
at a time may operate on the above stated premises and that
this premises shall be subject to rules provided by the
Minnesota State Charitable Gambling Control Board and house
rules compatible with :Minnesota State Law agreed upon by the
first and second party.
5. In accordance with all State law governing charitable
games of chance, the first party agrees that any relative,
employee or agent of the first party as stipulated in the
1
State law governing charitable games of chance shall
not participate in selling, distributing, conducting,
assisting or playing of lawful games of chance at the site
herein leased. Further, no employee nor spouse of an
employee of the second party shall participate in the purchase
Of lawful games of chance at the site herein leased.
G. Lawful games of chance shall take place on the leased
premises during time the leased establishment is open for the
lawful sale of alcoholic beverages during regular business
hours mutually agreed upon by the first and second party.
. 7. . First party agrees that no other eligible organization
shall operate games of chance devices on its premises until
cv
(30) days after second party has vacated the
This Rental Agreement is subject to the issuance
suance of a
gambling license by the Minnesota Charitable Gambling
Control Board.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set
their
hand the day and year first above written.
FIRST PARTY: �J \
(bate)
(Date)
SECOND PARTY: '
(Date) Willard M. Munger, Jr.
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Tom Brownell , Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Statt Position Resignation
DATE: February 27 , 1985
INTRODUCTION
Sherri Anton, Clerk Typist II , has submitted her resignation
effective March 8 , 1985.
BACKGROUND
Mrs . Anton is leaving to join her husband who is in the
service. During her employment with the Shakopee Police
Department, Mrs. Anton was a very good employee.
RECOMMENDATION
Accept the resignation of Sherri Anton effective
March 8 , 1985, and authorize the department to fill
the vacant position.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Accept the resignation of Sherri Anton effective
March 8, 1985 , and authorize the department to fill
the vacant position.
RESOLUTION NO. 2379
A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO SHERRI ANTON
WHEREAS, Sherri Anton nas served the City of Shakopee as a
clerk typist in the Police Department from October 20 , 1982 to
March 8 , 1985 : and
WHEREAS , during tier employment, Sherri took her responsibil-
ites seriously and performed them in a conscientious manner ; and
WHEREAS, Sherri well represented the City of Shakopee during
her employment.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Shaxopee City Council
does hereby extend a token of thanks and appreciation to Sherri.
Anton for ner dedication and hard work during her employment with
the City of Shakopee and wishes her well in her future endeavors.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, neld this day of
1985.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1985
City Attorney
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Advertising to Fill Public Works Position
DATE: March 1 , 1985
Introduction
The City Council , in approving the 1985 Budget, included filling
the existing Public Works ( Parkkeeper) position held vacant
for two years because of the State fiscal problems. Staff is
seeking authorization to advertise for the position.
Background
The City has budgeted for the above full-time position in the
1985 Budget. The position will be filled in accordance with
our normal advertising , screening and selection process.
We anticipate that one of our former seasonal employees now
working full-time under a temporary classification will apply
for the position. Normally when an internal candidate applies
for a position and the department head approves of the applicant
we do not need to advertise further. However, in this instance ,
the part-time seasonal employee was not hired through our normal
advertising and screening process . For this reason we feel
it is advisable to go through the normal process even though
it jeopardizes the employee ' s chances of being selected and
requires staff time spent on the screening and selection process.
If Councilmembers have specific questions about this unique
set of circumstances they should call me prior to Tuesday night' s
meeting.
Alternatives
1 . Authorize the City to fill the vacant Public Works position
through the normal advertising , screening and hiring pro-
cedures . This process will insure that we have complied
with all equal opportunity requirements imposed on a public
employer and will insure consistency with City policy in
requiring all permanent City employees to have gone through
a selection process before being hired . This is the procedure
we used when we made the Administrative Intern a full-time
two year position and the second Building Official a full-time
one year position shared with Scott County.
2 . Initiate the normal hiring process by posting the announcement
internally and stopping the procedure if an acceptable
internal candidate applies regardless of whether or not
that candidate was competitively screened when first employed
by the City. This procedure would eliminate the time consuming
advertising , screening , and hiring procedures and will
ensure that an existing; employee was promoted whether or
not that person was competitively selected for their current
position.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 1 for the reasons listed above.
Action Reguested
Authorize the appropriate City officials to advertise for one
Public Works Parkkeeper position utilizing the present Public
Works Parkkeeper union pay schedule .
JKAljms
PUBLIC WORKS PARKKEEPER
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
The City of Shakopee has an immediate opening in the Public Works
Department for a permanent full-time Parxkeeper. Minimum require-
ments include a Class 'B' License, High School diploma or equivalent
and two years of experience. Duties include maintenance of City
parks , sports facilities , custodial work, mechanical work, light
equipment and small tool work plus other assigned duties. Salary
range is $8. 12 - $10. 68/hour. Starting salary will be $8 . 12 -
$8. 64/hour depending upon experience.
Applications and job descriptions are available at Shakopee City
Hall , 129 East First Avenue, 445-3650. Applications will be
accepted through March 25 , 1985. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER.
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Accounting Clerk Resignation
Date: March 1 , 1985
Introduction & Background
Dorie Rosckes has submitted her resignation as Accounting Clerk effective
3/8/85. Her probationary period has not been completed, therefore there will be
no severance pay. The position is authorized and budgeted.
Alternatives
L Do not fill position
2. Fill position
Recommendation
Alternative no. 2
Action Requested
Move to accept the resignation of Ms. Rosckes and authorize the filling of the
Accounting Clerk position.
GV:mmr
March 1, 1985
Dear John Anderson,
This is to inform you that I will no longer be working for the
City of Shakopee. I am giving one week notice. My last day will
be March 8, 1985. I was offered a full time fob very close to our
new home in Plymouth. With the great expense of owning a house I feel
that I will not be able to work part-time any more. This is an opportunity
that I can not past up.
Sincerely,
a&'� �"ao
Doralee hosckes
cc: Gregg Voxland
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: 1985 Council Worksession Goals & Objectives
DATE: February 28, 1985
Introduction
The City Council worksessions scheduled on February 12 and 13
to review 1984 goals and objectives and establish a list of
1985 goals and objectives was successfully completed . The goals
and objectives carried over from 1984 have been consolidated
with the new goals proposed for 1985 in the attached list .
Department heads have reviewed this list and it is ready for
Council action.
Recommended Staff -Chan es
There are a few changes staff is recommending that I would like
to call Council ' s attention to. The changes are listed below
so Council can readily find them:
Item 3 . 15 - a fourth action item was deleted which recommended
scheduling a Council meeting to discuss snowmobiles and
three wheel all terian vehicles. It was the staff' s opinion
that these meetings were held in 1984 and did not need
repeating for 1985 unless they are specifically brought
forward.
Item 3 . 18 - we have added the second action item regarding
Rahr Malting and the railroad tracks based upon recent
Council action .
Item 3 . 12 - staff deleted an action item that read "zoning
is not always consistent with use in the area" , and incorporated
it in Item 3 .22.
Item 3 .62 - this item regarding posting of rules and regulations
in City parks was deleted . It was staff consensus that
after the discussion on February 12 and 13 , Council as
a whole was not interested in our systematically posting
the total list of park rules and regulations in each park.
Item 3 . 71 - staff has added one additional action item
regarding the hiring of a code enforcement officer based
on recent Council actions .
Item 3 . 72 - this item has been deleted . It dealt with
better control of loose dogs and reviewing our services
from the animal warden . We did review these services in
1984 and we have established the new phone number that
should better enable citizens to contact the animal warden
directly.
Item 3 .91 - this item regarded periodic review of ordinances
such as our snowmobile ordinance and our winter parking
ordinance . Since these ordinances were reviewed in 198 +
and not discussed by Council on the 12th or 13th staff
thought the item could be deleted from the list.
Item 14 . 15 - staff has updated this storm sewer item to
better reflect recent Council action regarding storm sewer
policy and storm sewer construction.
Item 5 . 16 - staff has updated this item to better reflect
our proposal to work with Mn/DOT to replace the Holmes
Street bridge and improve the Highway 169-Highway 101 inter-
section.
Item 8 . 41 - staff has added a second action item regarding
review and implementation of some of the Met Council study
findings related to senior citizens ' needs.
All of the other items listed in the goals and objectives carry
the same language Council saw on February 12th and 13th with
nothing but minor changes in grammatical errors and the updating
of some 1984 dates that were missed during our meeting on the
12th and 13th.
Alternatives
1 . Approve the 1985 Goals and Objectives as presented .
2. Discuss and direct staff to make any changes Council desires
in the proposed Goals and Objectives.
3 . Schedule a meeting to spend more time reviewing the final
Goals and Objectives list.
Recommendation
The 1985 Goals and Objectives worksession on February 12th and
13th went fairly well and we, were able to accomplish more than
we had in prior years during the two formal sessions. I do
not believe that we need an additional worksession to finalize
the list, and therefore I recommend alternative No. 1 or 2 .
Action Requested
Pass a motion accepting the Council worksession Goals and Objectives %
for 1985 as presented and dated approved March, 1985 .
JKA/jms
COUNCIL WOBKSESSION GOALS & OBJECTIVES 1985 y (�
Approved ?larch, 1985
Comannications
1.0 GOAL - It shall be the goals of the City of Shakopee to foster effective,
two-way communications between the City Councilmembers, City employees,
citizens, other governmental agencies and interest groups.
1.1 SUBGOAL - The betterment of public relations and improvement of
existing communications with the general public, news media and
groups using City services.
1.11 Obiective - Encourage department heads to get out press releases
on positive, more routine items to improve public knowledge
of City operations.
Action - City staff that make press releases in areas of expertise
other than their own should first check with the department
to assure accuracy.
Action -On going. Systematically review services/issues that
lend themselves to publication, etc. Make a seasonal listing
of notices for utility stuffers and news media by 8/1/85.
1.12 Obiective - How can the City get more and better citizens
participation in City affairs? What is the City's responsibility
in disseminating information, generating press or radio coverage?
Action - Staff should maximize all publication and notice
procedures to inform the public.
1.13 Objective - Create a good concise annual report that lists
activities in a statistical manner and narrative manner for
each department.
Action - Provide first draft by 2/28/85 for 1984.
1.14 Obiective - Insure quick response to citizen's questions channeled
through Councilmembers.
Action - Councilmembers should provide immediate feedback
to staff members with citizen's requests, or complaints, and
then provide the necessary feedback to the citizen rather
than waiting until the next Council meeting when the issue
becomes old and/or forgotten.
1.15 Obiective - If a Councilperson has a question on a Council
agenda item or other matter it should be discussed with the
Administrator or appropriate employee before putting on Council
meeting table, to determine if the matter is worth discussing
at the Council meeting vs. informational item. Twenty minute
rule! ! !
1
Action — Remind Councilmembers to make inquiries concerning
issues prior to the actual meeting, with a follow—up discussion
at the meeting if the Councilmembers so chooses.
Action — If an issue is taken up at a Council meeting that
is lacking pertinent facts the Council should move to have
it placed on the agenda of the next meeting.
1.16 Objective — Work with Cable Company to improve the Council 's
sound and video system so the viewing audience can better
hear Council meetings.
Action — Request the cable access studio coordinator and Cable
Commission to prepare some alternatives and cost estimates
for improving the City's sound system for the cable viewing
audience by April 1, 1985.
Action — Request the Community Access Corporation to provide
a camera operator at all City Council meetings beginning March
1, 1985.
1.17 Obiective — Better communications between departments. Examples
— giving up Viking Steel railroad crossing.
Action — Department heads are reminded to review any projects/
ation with legal counsel if there is a law suit on going that
relates to the project/action.
1.2 SUBGOAL — The City Administrator should undertake steps to resolve
personnel problems in a timely manner and improve employee morale.
1.21 Obiective — Invest:-gate incentive programs designed to encourage
City employees to look for money and time—saving ways to run
City operations.
Action — Prepare a report on possible alternatives by May
1, 1985.
1.22 Obiective — When there is a confrontation between a citizen
and staff, management presumes the citizen is right or gives
the impression the citizen is right. After staff has proven
innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, staff is believed. An
end should be put to the Doubting Thomas Policy. It adds
too much unnecessary stress and work. If a citizen proves
staff wrong. then take action and then doubt the staff but-- --
don't start until or a staff member fails.
Action — A three member committee (comprised of two Councilmembers
and the City Attorney) should be formed to hear cases in which
a City employee has been accused of a wrong doing. Two Council—
members' names will. be drawn by lot on a case by case basis.
2
c
Action - Establish in our personnel policy a procedure in
which an employee has a right of appeal to the 3 member committee
where a judgement is made against him or her that might affect
their personnel record. The appeal process will be held in
a closed hearing not subject to the open meeting law. Appeals
to the Committee must be filed within 30 days of the judgement.
Government Structure
2.0 GOAL - Continually strive for effective and efficient municipal government.
2.1 SUBGOAL - Recommend the establishment and improvement of programs
and department function to insure a smooth running, efficient and
more effective municipal government.
2.11 Obiective - City Administrator should make more decisions
without Council approval when covered by resolution, standard
procedure, ordinances.
Action - Council and staff should identify and assign more
areas of routine oversite to the Administrator and increase
use of consent agenda items with the exception of ordinances
and resolutions of commendation.
2.12 Obiective - People need to be continually learning and updating
with ever changing laws . Budget restrictions necessitate
deleting funds in department budgets.
Action - Council will review what each City department has
budgeted for the continuing education of employees.
Action - The Council will support both technical and personal
development training for those individuals who wish to continue
their education in their field.
2.13 Obiective - Survey City services to determine if they are
all being used to the optimum.
Action - On going low priority. Systematically question services
to determine if they are being used or if they are being provided
at the proper level. Do this through quarterly department
head meetings and budget cycle. Establish objective measurement
devices for services provided by each department.
2.14 Obiective - Establish goals as to the City's computerization
so that we have orderly enhancement of the system.
Action - The computer task force should establish a short
term and long range planning scheme for the continued implemen-
tation of computerization within our system by 6/1/85.
Action - Provide for an annual assessment of our computer
system by all users.
3
2.2 SUBGOAL - To strengthen the Council and to improve the efficiency
and workability of this form of municipal government.
2.21 Objective - Imprcve staff/Council relationship by encouraging
more Council visits to staff during working hours to obtain
a better insight of the work, programs, policies, etc. of
the department. Much progress has already been made in this
area.
Action - Counc;ilmembers should call department heads and schedule
tours, review of specialized equipment and procedures (eg. snow
plowing).
2.22 Obiective - Council should become more involved in monitoring
involvement of commissioners and potential applicants for
commission appoin-:ments. Look for leadership, attendance,
commitment, etc. Develop a better system for nominations
and appointments to boards and commissions. Develop an in
house orientation for new members, which should include among
other things developing a sense of importance and responsibility,
explaining routines, making new members feel welcome and more
comfortable and stressing importance of attendance and notification
when one will be unable to attend a given meeting.
Action - Staff should draft a set of: alternative procedures
for Council's use or. screening potential applicants for commission/
committee screening and appointing by 4/18/85.
Action - Review current practices and develop an in-house
orientation for new committee members which stresses individual.
commission activities as well as an overall City perspective
by 8/1/85.
2.23 Obiective - Look at the role of liaison to various commissions
and how that role ;_s met when there is no liaison.
Action - Staff should monitor commissions in which there is
no Council liaison. Staff should strive to effectively communicate
commission activities to the Council by developing clear and
concise memos.
Action - Upon request from staff Councilmembers should make
themselves available to commissions in which there is no liaison.
2.24 Obiective - Goals and Objectives should be an on-going thing
during the year, as something comes to mind or a problem surfaces,
turn it in.
Action - Add objectives as needed during the year when 3-4
new objectives .are suggested.
2.25 Obiective - Would Council park/development sub-committee be
useful to coordinate efforts or park. department, Community
Services, park reserves and park grants?
4
l
Action - An Ad Hoc Committee may be established to coordinate
the efforts for specific park development.
Government Services
3.0 GOAL - To provide the most effective and efficient level of service possible
to meet the needs of the citizens of Shakopee.
3.1 SUBGOAL - To develop and improve the efficiency and safety of the
City's transportation plans.
3.11 Obiective - Continue advocating construction of a bridge in
the area of County Road 18 as well as a southerly by-pass.
Action - Continue to advocate the construction of a bridge
in the area of County Road 18 as well as a southerly by pass.
Action - Support efforts to keep the bridge and CR 18 designated
as County roadways to better enhance financing.
3.12 Obiective - The Valley Mall traffic control circulation, situation
is to be corrected.
Action - Engineer's report on the Twelfth Street Mall entrance
should be coordinated with the construction of 13th Street
from the mall to Adams Street.
3.13 Obiective - Begin implementation of the Street Preservation
and Rehabilitation Policy that classifies how the City will
finance maintenance for all streets.
Action - Schedule 1985's systematic street maintenance program
based upon the pavement and traffic analysis study.
Action - Schedule streets to receive overlays and seal coats
in 1985 by May 1, 1985.
Action - Get the 4th Avenue Project underway in 1985.
3.14 Obiective - Reduce street maintenance costs/responsibilities
by systematically vacating unneeded streets.
Action - Based upon the report outlining streets to be vacated
set a street vacation public hearing on the least needed street(s).
Action - Encourage residents and businesses to initate vacations
of unuecessaary streets.
Action - Investigate a turn-over program whereby residents/busi-
nesses would agree to return vacated streets R-O-W to the
City if the City would clean-up the street and create a marketable
lot(s). Draft a policy addressing even handed action by Council
on all types of street vacations.
5
3.15 Objective - Improve City traffic signing.
Action - Check all traffic signing in Shakopee for proper
readibility and locational placement.
Action - Remove yield signs and replace them with stop signs
where appropriate by 1985.
Action - Improve citizen awareness and compliance with traffic
signing for all. vehicles - cars, tractors, bicycles, snowmobiles,
etc. thru targeted enforcement and public information.
3.16 Obiective - Get street cuts patched in a timely manner.
Action - A problem still exists with Contractors maintaining
their utility trenches in a callous manner. There are still
a few loose ends with our street permit process, although
we are close to controlling their work. They should provide:
a phone number list_-, etc.
3.17 Objective - Develop a "thru" street on Minnesota or Market.
Action - Placed on 5 year C.I.P. in accordance with traffic
study done by Westwood.
3.18 Objective - Upgrades or remove railroad crossing.
Action - Coordinate with traffic study done by Westwood and
approved by the Planning Commission and the Downtown Committee.
Action - Work wit:a Rahr Malting and other nearby businesses
to consolidate railraod sidings in a manner more conclusive
to good street maintenance, ride and safety.
3.19 Obiective - We need handicapped parking; stalls in the downtown
area.
Action - Report on potential locations, usefulness, etc. by
5/1/85.
3.19A Obiective - Review by Council and appropriate staff the Block
50/Alley Improvements.
Action - Schedule cn site inspection with all parties in April
of 1985.
3 .19B Obiective - Evaluate in the abstract what subsidy per passenger
(maximum) makes sease for the local transit system. Are we
willing to tax locally to provide ?
Action - Continue to monitor our current transit program always
seeking more cost•-efficient transit alternatives based upon
regional and local .funding and operating experience.
6
Action - Staff will provide monthly transit reports that will
be reviewed as to their long range implications when the '86
Budget is prepared.
3.19C Obiective - Discontinue the temporary sidewalk maintenance
on County Road 17 and East Shakopee Avenue (from Pearson School
to C.R. 17). When this roadway was completed,. Council instructed
the City crew to plow them, until more occupancy on the right-
of-way was established for sidewalk responsibility. This
problem could be compounded with the construction of more
sidewalks on the east side. Set a date to notify adjacent
property owners that they will be responsible for plowing,
mowing, etc.
Action - Council should address the temporary sidewalk maintenance
along County Road 17 and East Shakopee Avenue to decide if
and when City maintenance will be discontinued. Staff will
provide a memo on this issue by 6/1/85.
3.2 SUBGOAL - Improve regulations, compliance and land use thru zoning
of property within the City.
3.21 Obiective - The City should consider policy approaches to
assure private homes assciations adequately provide for improve-
ments jointly owned through homes associations deed covenants.
Action - Legal staff should draft a memo to Council regarding
this by May 15, 1985.
3.22 Objective - Keep zoning provisions up-to-date.
Action - Periodically review existing use and zoning provisions
in various zones to see if they are appropriate given changes
that have occurred over time.
3.3 SUBGOAL - Improve the management of City owned property (parks,
buildings, etc.) .
3.31 Obiective - Settle with the Girl Scouts to clear title of
the property north of 4th Avenue that cross City owned lots
(nos. 3 and 4 in Block 52) and develop lots or sell them.
Action - City Attorney processing sale to City.
3.32 Obiective - Encourage Scott County, Met Council, and the DNR
to acquire and develop regional trails thru Shakopee to O'Dowd
Lake and along the Minnesota River that will be of benefit
to local citizens.
Action - Council should support the trail and staff should
monitor its progress to assist Council in timely follow-up.
3 .33 Obiective - The Mill Pond was not treated with copper sulfate
to hold down algae bloom in 1983 because of the initial program
turn down by the D.N.R.
7
Action - The reve3-sal of this decision will allow this program
to be completed in 1985 by City staff.
3.34 Obiective - Place ALPHA ownership file on computer.
Action - Complete by 6/1/85.
3.35 Obiective - Complete water slide project for operation in
1985.
Action - Complete water slide project for operation prior
to the pool opening in June, 1985.
3.4 SUBGOAL - Monitor appropriate level of Community Services Department
programs.
3.41 Obiective - The Community Services Department should deal
with the issue of township financial support for Community
Services.
Action - Request and assist the Community Services Board in
developing recommendations for City Council and School Board
documenting the disparity by October 1, 1985.
3.5 SUBGOAL - The City should maintain sound fiscal management procedures
to insure that needed services can be provided.
3.51 Objective - Advisory - The City should better set criteria
to determine whether or not a grant is actually beneficial,
enough to offset the local cost cost of the study or project.
Action - This should be done for all projects where grant.
funds are available.
3.52 Obiective - Continue to pursue changes in fiscal disparities.
Action - The City lost the case in the State Supreme Court
and should press the issue legislatively through the Metropolitan
Caucus in 1984-85.
3.53 Objective - Support: SPUC in pursuing acquisition of REA.
Action - The condemnation decision was unfavorable and SPUC
is considering next, course of action.
3.54 Objective - Support SPUC in pursuing acquisition of NSP.
Action - SPUC - NSF' negotiations still underway.
3.55 Obiective - Change State Local Government Aid Formula (LGA) .
Action - Pursue legislative changes thru the Municipal Caucus
in the 1984-85 Legislative Session.
3.56 Obiective. - Establish financing for new storm sewer construction.
8
Action - Study and possibly implement a storm sewer fee for
newly developing areas by setting a dollar per acre fee like
Burnsville and Savage have established by 7/1/85.
3.6 SUBGOAL - To improve and make more efficient park services to the
public.
3.61 Obiective - Analyze playground equipment stock for replacement
and/or upgrading.
Action - Establish a schedule for systematic review of all
park equipment and begin with the 1st park(s) in 1984.
3.7 SUBGOAL - Improve the current "perspective" citizens have of police
officer's overall concern for the citizens.
3.71 Obiective - Continue proper miscellaneous noncriminal code
enforcement efforts by police officers.
Action - Clearly establish the level of expected working knowledge
of these City codes (junk cars, park rules, parking rules,
junk ordinances, etc.) and the level of expected enforcement
after discussing this with City Council.
Action - Enforce park rules.
Action - Hire Code Enforcement Officer in the Police Department
and have that person coordinate with the Planner, City Clerk,
Building Official and other departments who work with misc. code
enforcements.
3.8 SUBGOAL - Reduce the cost of services provided citizens through
- the City's sanitary sewer system.
3.81 Obiective - Reduce MWCC monthly charge for sewage treatment.
Action - Keep working with Governor's office and other groups
to put pressure on the MWCC to cut costs outlined in the Bollen's
Report.
Action - Reopen books to review fee/charge computation formulas.
3.82 Objective - Implement the recommendation from the I & I study
which equal approximately $39,000.
Action - Begin work on the specific recommendation. in 1984
that don't require budget amendments.
3.83 Obiective - Provide some type of financial relief for sewer
back-up clean-up.
9
Action - There is a failure to provide adequate compensation
to citizens who suffer losses due to City services such as
sewer and water damage. Investigate forming a committee to
review claims for sewer back-up, because the present policy
does not protect or help home owners. This committee would
review any claims and make a recommendation to the remainder
of the Council and a contingency fund for awards and indemnities
would have to be budgeted. Report by 7/1/85.
Action - have this issue reviewed by our risk manager.
3.9 SUBGOAL - Periodically review regulating ordinances.
Fhvsi.cal Development
4.0 Goal - To provide a consistent and constant plan to enhance the resources,
and strengthen the economic base of the area and provide for the enjoyment:
and well-being of the citizens of Shakopee.
4.1 SUBGOAL - Develop and use capital improvement program (CIP) and;
capital equipment prograII. on a 6 year basis to increase the coordination
of service and the economic well being of the community. Hold a
separate work session on the C.I.P.
4.11 Objective - Upper Valley drainage plan.
Action - Engineering follow-up on joint powers agreement witb
Jackson Township, etc. as per Chapter #509. Drainage analysis
for the joint powers agreements and a letter from MN/Dot combining
the drainage with By-pass.
Action - Have agreement executed by July 1, 1985, the 509
deadline.
4.12 Objective - Draia age problems, (1) 2nd Avenue and (2) 4th
and Minnesota.
Action - No action scheduled for (1) and (2) in 1985.
4.13 Obiective - Select and acquire a site for a new City Hall.
Determine a preliminary time frame for construction of a new
City Hall. Try to tie to a revenue source, i.e. end of a
tax increment project or stop permitting tax increment projects
to help generate additional income for funding. Develop on-going
suggestion box for all employees to submit suggestions for
City Hall space, equipment, needs, etc.
Action - Select and acquire a site for a new City Hall by
7/1/85.
Action - Determine a preliminary time frame for construction
by 7/1/85.
Action - Try to tie to a revenue source.
10
i
Action - When a building architect is selected hold a joint
meeting between the architect and employees to submit suggestions
for City Hall space, equipment, needs, etc.
Action - Building construction - Spring 1986.
4.14 Obiective - Support SPDC in continued Waterline looping.
Action - On-going job of SPDC. Develop policies that support
looping.
4.15 Obiective - The storm sewer system throughout the: City has
been studied and policy option established. We need to adopt
a policy and schedule necessary projects.
Action - Follow-up in basins where there is a clear critical
need, where residents are interested in it and/or where a
project is necessary for the orderly development of the City.
4.16 Obiective - Complete construction for railroad parking lot.
Action - This project is budgeted for 1984 and should be coor-
dinated with the Downtown Committee's program for '84.
4.17 Obiective - Establish a City-wide sidewalk program.
Action - Complete the sidewalk system in Shakopee in conjunction
with the school's safe street program. The City needs a formal
policy on where sidewalks are to be constructed, how we pay
for them, and what their purpose, function should be (used
for snow storage on boulevards during winter).
4.18 Obiective - Reduce street maintenance cost by completing curb
section on all streets.
Action - Report on needed curbing throughout town and determine
if it is practical to install it where the need is the greatest.
Economic Development
5.0 GOAL - Have an economic development plan that will create jobs and diversity
the City's economic base.
5.1 SUBGOAL - Continue with the advances made by the Downtown Committee
to redevelop the downtown area without letting the Racetrack development
sideline downtown efforts. -- - - -
5.11 Obiective - The City should make funding tools available for
the downtown redevelopment. The private sector, however,
must participate financially (50/50 or some other percentage) .
Action - Pursue hotel/motel development feasibility for the
downtown.
11
Action - Pursue construction of a 100 unit multi-family housing
project in 1985-86.
Action - Downtown redevelopment should be designated to capture
tourism trade from Valleyfair, Canterbury Downs, Little Six
Bingo, Murphy's Landing and the Renaissance Festival. The
City needs to put: on a new face for tourists going through
the community, provide adequate motel facilities and boat
landing access to the river.
Action - Design the funding tools used in TIF so that a strong;
commercial loan program for rehabing commercial businesses
can be established.
Action - Continue efforts to insure that other taxing juris-
dictions, local citizens, and potential developers understand
TIF and to what extent it is available in Shakopee.
5.12 Obiective - The Downtown Redevelopment Project should get
off the ground this year with some actual physical improvements
being completed. Council may be faced with some difficult:
decisions.
Action - Complete engineering and detail design work for one
bid letting in 198.E for one double project, complete streetscape
design and bridge alignment design.
5.13 Obiective - Establ:_sh a Chamber/City plan to get a more consoli--
dated and stronger retail core to Shakopee downtown.
Action - Work with the Downtown Committee, Chamber, Consultants
and businesses to establish a plan to encourage new and relocate!
existing retail/office businesses in the retail core area.
to make a stronger retail center as designed in the Downtown.
Concept Plan.
Action - Review Ma-_n Street application for 1984-85 by
5.14. Obiective - Should downtown projects get priority for IRB
entitlement funds?
Action - Staff should prepare a memo on the pros and cons
of establishing a priority for distribution of IRB entitlement
funds for downtown projects by May 1, 1985.
5.15 Objective - What can Council do to promote rebirth of local
development corporation?
Action - Investigate the probability of activating the local
development corporation or creating a new one and keep urging
its present Board cf Directors to reactivate it.
5.16 Obiective - Continua to work with Mn/DOT to relocate and construct
a new bridge and :intersection revitalizing downtown in order
to establish a more attractive downtown and attract more business.
12
Action - Continue working with Mn/DOT on the 50/50 agreement
to build a new bridge and intersection and get a written funding
commitment with Mn/DOT by 6/1/85 so the project can be advanced
in an orderly fashion.
5.2 SUBGOAL - Create economic development opportunities for new jobs
and expanding tax base.
5.21 Objective - Try to attract new business to Shakopee.
Action - Develop programs to advertise and promote the City's
businesses and attract private financing for business development.
(St. Paul's program for small business is an example).
5.22 Objective - Strengthen the public private partnership in Shakopee.
Action - Work with the ICC, Chamber, individual developers
and existing businesses to cement a strong relationship.
Action - Contact potential large scale developers with concrete
proposal such as a PUD using T.I.F. on the old correctional
facility site.
5.3 SUBGOAL - Review procedures and costs associated with new development.
5.31 Obiective - Try to develop a team approach to development
inquires to: (1) provide better service and, (2) to coordinate
internally the flow of information.
Action - Complete S.O.P. by 6/1/85.
5.32 Obiective - Review computation and assumptions for SAC and
MWCC charges.
Action - Complete review by 9/1/85.
5.4 SUBGOAL - Create the financing for key development needs.
5.41 Obiective - When will Council make policy decision on how
to divvy up "extra" funds available from Racetrack/Kmart TIF
districts (eg. downtown, upper valley)? Should the City consider
how much tax increment financing it desires to issue in advance
and consider staggering the years of issuance? Residents
begin paying for services when the taxes are withheld for
a given number of years. Might there be a point when that
should be considered?
Action - Establish a schedule which identifies potential T.I.F.
funding sources and dedicates those funds to specific city
projects by 5/1/85.
Action - Draft a list of policy options with pros and cons
that Council might use to measure the total number of T.I.F.
projects the City wants at any one time by 7/1/85.
13
1
Bnviroerental
6.0 GOAL - To protect and presure the natural environment of Shakopee, including
land, air and water.
6.1 SUBGOAL - To insure the well being of the community's environment
and to effectively monitor and manage its resources.
6.11 Obiective - Follow hazardous waste siting process.
Action - On-going. Shakopee's industrial park has been included.
Our Building Inspector is on the committee.
6.12 Obiective - Work for the sale of the Shakopee sludge farm
by the MWCC.
Action - The site has been found to be intrinsically suitable
by the PCA hearing examiner for land spreading at agronomic
rates. Staff must continue to push this issue and seek the
sale of the property by the MWCC (update Ray Siebenaler).
6.13 Obiective - Is Council interested in continuing recycling
once the demonstration project is over?
Action - Perform an evaluation of the recycling demonstration
project to consider if it should be continued.
6.14 Obiective - Intensify beautification efforts of City in 1985.
Action - Staff should draft a list of possible methods the
City can employ and implement as feasible to beautify the
City.
Housing & Redevelopment Authority
7.0 SUBGOAL - Have a housing and redevelopment plan that provides and promotes
the creation of needed housing units for Shakopee's growing population.
7.1 SUBGOAL - An indepth look and attention by the HRA Department for
improved community service to housing developments.
7.11 Obiective - Could the City provide more types of housing?
Action - Staff should renew contacts with potential residential
developersdevelopers and show them the community.
Action - (1) Staff should take the County HRA rehab program
referral calls and list them for follow-up purposes to insure
Shakopee residents benefit from the program. (2) Staff should
also check the percentage of rehab loans to insure that Shakopee
gets a fair percentage.
14
Action - HRA staff needs to put together a program that can
be used to build moderate income housing units on the vacant
lots around the City using T.I.F. without relying on Mn HFA
mortgages.
7.12 Obiective - Encourage development of areas with unique problems
such as Section Ii, north of County Road 16 now served with
utilities, Robert Pit, etc.
Action - Normal. development incentives are probably not sufficient
to encourage development on certain properties. Certain property
may need the assistance of T.I.F. , revenue bonds, mortgage
revenue notes, etc. That would tip the balance in favor of
development. Such a program would not be limited to one location.
7.13 Objective - What :tole does City/HRA wash to take in acquiring
and holding property for development purposes?
Action - Establish a policy which defines the role of the
City/HRA in acquiring the holding property for development
purposes by 12/31/85.
Interaovermnental Relations
8.0 GOAL - It shall be the goal of the City of Shakopee to work constructively
on relationships with other governmental agencies that have taxing and
regulatory impact on the City's citizens.
8.1 SUBGOAL - The City should seek to better understand, coordinate
and integrate its services with Scott County to better serve its
citizens and insure citizens are not taxed for duplicate services.
8.11 Obiective - The City should attempt to coordinate policies
with Scott County and SPUC where possible.
Action - This would include salary, personnel, benefit, wort:
rule, and other policies that the administrators of each unit
could review for coordination.
8.12 Obiective - The City should continue to work with the County
to eliminate all duplication of City and County services such
as overlapping police/sheriff department services.
Action - Continue current discussions of this type thru the
Mayors and Administrators Group and other groups.
Action - Scott County has at least 100 miles of County Road
that should be turned back to the Cities and Townships. Work:
on with County Engineer.
15
8.13 Obiective - The Scott County mill rate is relatively high
compared to the mill rate in the six other metropolitan counties.
This negatively impacts Shakopee and should be investigated
to determine what the possible causes are e.g. costly county
services, fiscal disparities, etc.
Action - Pursue thru Scott County Mayors and Administrator
Group.
8.2 SUBGOAL - The City should seek to keep its relationship with SPUC
in good shape to insure maximum cooperation and coordination.
8.21 Obiective - Develop a better bond/unity between the City of
Shakopee and SPDC in areas of mutual concern for the betterment
of the community.
Action - Develop a better bond/unity between the City of Shakopee
and SPUC by establishing quarterly joint meetings to develop
a better understanding of one anothers needs and responsibilities.
Action - Develop a mutual goals and objectives list between
SPUC and the City of Shakopee containing objectives both bodies
can work towards by discussing each bodies goals and objectives,
CIP' s and capital equipment purchases annually at a joint
meeting.
Action - Relocation policy meeting with SPUC by March 15,
1985.
8.3 SUBGOAL - The City of Shakopee should respond to State and regional
policies, regulation and taxes that affect Shakopee's citizens.
8.31 Obiective - What role or level of involvement should City
play in monitoring Met Council, MWCC, MPCA, etc.?
Action - Council's specific response for the City Engineer
was approximately 4 hours per month by serving on a committee
that deals with one of these agencies.
Action - Follow the highway jurisdictional study now being
undertaken by the Legislature.
Action - Council would like citizens like LeRoy Wolf, Ray
Siebenaler, Ray Joachim, etc. , who are on area committees
to regularly provide feedback to City government.
8.32 Obiective - Staff should continue to work towards equity in
state aids to schools, cities and counties, equity in transit
funding and equity in the fiscal disparities formula.
Action - This should be carried on thru the Municipal Caucus.
8.33 Obiective - Work jointly with the School District to microfilm
inactive City documents. School District has equipment and
will share with the City at a minimal cost.
16
Action - Work jointly with the School District to microfilm
inactive City documents so that a plan is in place by 6/1/85.
Action - Begin implementation by 7/l/85.
8.34 Obiective - Monitor the DNR's trail construction from Huber
Park to Chaska, targeted to be completed by the fall of 1985.
Action - Monitor the DNR's trail construction from Huber Park
to Chaska to insure it is coordinated with Shakopee's plans.
8.35 Objective - Support and help where possible the efforts of
the Scott County study of alternative forms of government.
Action - Support the efforts of the: Scott County study of
alternative forms of government and activity participate if
asked to do so.
Action - Request regular reports from the Scott County Study
Committee to monitor their progress and provide input when
necessary.
8.36 Objective - Continue to support the acquisition of an automated,
punch card voting system to be acquired when Scott County
selects a system and agrees to participate in the purchase
of the equipment.
Action - Staff should work with and support the acquisition.
of an automated punch card voting system to be acquired when.
Scott County selects a system and agrees to participate in
the purchase of the equipment.
8.4 SUBGOAL - The City of Shakopee should monitor care provided its
citizens by other agencies paraticularly those who are elderly or
economically disadvantaged even though services are provided by
other agencies.
8.41 Obiective - Provide more senior citizen protection such as
a ambulance and individual call system for stroke or heart
attach victims who live alone.
Action - Report on possible programs by 10/1/85.
Action - Review and report on possible City actions arising
out of the Met Council's study on the needs of seniors in
Scott County.
8.5 SUBGOAL - Clarify relationships with the Prior Lake/Spring Lake
Watershed District.
8.51 Obiective - Withdrar; City of Shakopee land from Prior Lake/Spring
Lake Watershed Dist:-ict.
Action - Complete petition to withdraw by 11/1/85.
17
cJULIUS A. COLLER, II
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAw 612-446-1244
JUL:
8S9-1940 2 1 1 WEST FIRST AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
553Z9
February 8, 1985
MEMO TO: Common Council of City of Shakopee
FROM: Julius A. Coller, II
REFERENCE: Amendment to Liquor, Beer and Wine License Ordinance
I have amended Subdivision 3 of Section 5.02 of the Liquor licensing
ordinance. The only way in which it differs from the discussion had
at the meeting is that I have included the wine and beer licenses in
addition to the liquor licensing.
If you have any objection to this, very little must be done to change
the amendment.
Respectfully submitted,
(aj
Julius A. Coller, II
Shakopee City Attorney
JAC/bpm
CITY OF SHAKOPEE j
INCORPORATED 1870
129 E. First Ave. - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 f
.t.
MEMO TO: All Beer, Wine and Liquorcensees f r
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Proposed City Ordinance Impld4nenting Additional Requirements Prior to
Renewing Or Issuing New Licenses
DATE: February 27, 1985
In conjunction with the residents of Shakopee recently authorizing the City to
issue three on sale liquor licenses in addition to the nine permitted by law, Council
is considering adopting new requirements for renewing or obtaining a new beer, wine
or liquor license. Council will be considering the enclosed ordinance on Tuesday,
March 5, 1985 at 8:00 P.M.
In summary, what the proposed ordinance says:
1) No new license will be issued until the building is in compliance
with all applicable codes ie. building
official. , plumbing and heating, etc.
and a certificate of occupancy has been issued by the building
2) No license will be renewed until a building meets all applicable
codes and receives a complaince certificate from the building official.
3) All licenses must obtain permits prior to any construction, remodeling,
or decorating whichwill alter floor plans, occupant loads, walls,
ceiling or floor covering or any electrical mechanical or structural
change.
4) On sale licenses must be connected to public sewer and water and must
post an occupancy load certificate provided by the building official.
This ordinance will be implemented with the Julv 1, 1985 renewals. If
you are not occupying a new structure and/or question whether or not your building
meets code and wish to know before Tuesday, please call the building inspector
(Leroy Houser 445-3650);- otherwise it is the City's intention to give all
licensees 60 to 90 days notice, prior to July 1, 1985, if there are any building,
plumbing, electrical etc. improvements that need to be made.
You are welcome and invited to attend the Council meeting and share any thoughts
or concerns you may have regarding the proposed ordinance.
T h c H � �i rt o � Pro o r s
An conal _.._-
ORDINANCE NO. v
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending Shakopee City Code
Chapter 5 entitled "Liquor, Beer and Wine Licensing and Regulations" by
Repealing Subdivision 3 of Section 5.02 entitled "Applications and Licenses-
Procedure and Administration" and in lieu thereof adopting a new Subdivision 3
entitled "Application, Investigation and Fees, Certificates of Occupancy and
Of Compliance" and Adopting by reference Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 and
Section 5.99 which among other things contains penalty provisions
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
SECTION I: REPEAL
h
Section 5.02 Subdivision 3 entitled "Application and Investigation Fee" is
hereby repealed. -
SECTION II: A New Subdivision 3 of Section 5.02 overnin A lication, Investiation
Fee Certificates of Occupancy and of Com liance.
Subd 3 Investigation and Certificates required
A. Inspection and Permits required
1. Original licenses and Premises
a. Prior to issuing a license for a new facility or existing building
which has never had a license hereunder, the facility shall be
inspected by the City Building official, the Fire Marshall and
electrical._ inspector for full compliance with all applicable
codes. Should nonconforming uses 'or code violations be found,
they shall be corrected prior to the issuance of the license.
b. All other requirements herein provided for renewal of license
shall be complied with.
2. Renewal of License
No licence shall be renewed if the building does not meet all code
terms at renewal time. y�j- , y
3. When permits required �I I
a. All establishments licensed pursuant to Chapter 5 of the Shakopee
City Code are required to secure permits prior to any construction,
remodeling or decorating:: which will alter floor plans, occupant
loads, wall, ceiling or floor- covering or any electrical, mechanical
or structural change.
b Prior to the reissuance of such license a code compliance certificate
must be issued by the building official.
B. Certificate of occupancy and compliance required for On Sale
Establishments
1. No license shall be issued if a suitable location is not part
of the application and there must be a certificate of occupancy
and of code compliance in effect beforea license is issued.
2. Prior to the issuance of any such- certification the licensed
premises shall be connected to public sewer and water and there
shall be posted therein an occupant load certificate for a
maximum permitted occupancycomputed bLy Table 33A of the State
Uniform Building Code.
SECTION III: Application and Investigation fees
At the time of the initial application an applicant for either an
Off-Sale_or On-Sale license shall pay the City the amount of the application and
investigation fees, which investigation fee shall be nonrefundable and to cover the
costs of the City for processing of the application and investigation thereof. Such
fee shall be fixed and determined by the Council and adopted by Resolution, and uniformly
enforced. The application and investigation fee- may, from time to time, be amended
by the Council by Resolution. A copy of the Resolution setting forth the currently
effective application and investigation fee shall b.e kept on filein the office of the
City Administrator and open to inspection during the regular business hours.
SECTION IV: Adopted by reference
General provisions and definitions applicable to the entire City Code including
the Penalty provisions of Chapter 1 and Section 5'.99 are hereby adopted in their
2ntirity by reference as though repeated verbatim herein.
SECTION V: When in force
After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance it shall be published
)nce in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and
effect on and after the date following such publication.
Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
innesota, held this day of 1985.
/ r
ML)nth February Page _I ACCOUNTS PAYABLE LEDGER 1984
l
Debit Acct. Cr. Acct. Amount Batch Remarks Ck. No. Vendor Ck. Amt.
71.4310.711.71 71.1010 $12,973.00 Prof Service 17332 SPDC $22,088.00
01.4310.721.72 01.1010 $2,427.00 Prof Service
83.4930.000.00 83.1010 $6,688.00 Remit Other Coll
91.4519.429.42 01.1010
$7,738.84 Other Improvements 17331 Allied Blacktop $7,738.84
$29,826.84 $29,826.84
FOND TOTALS
01 - General Fund $lo,165.84
71 - Sewer Fund $12,973.00
83 - Utility Trust $6,688.00
$29p826.8--4-
Month February Page 2 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE LEDGER 1985
Debit Acct. Cr. Acct. Amount Batch Remarks Ck. No. Vendor Ck. Amt.
✓ 01 .4390.331.33 01. 1010 $50.00 Da1(3 Conf & Schools 17293 Inter Conf of Bldg. Off $50.00
81.4927.Oo0.0o 81.1010 $100.00 Remit-Defer Comp 17319 IDS $100.00
81.4931.000.00 81.1010 $850.00 remit- Sav Deduc 17320 1st Nat-Shakopee $850.00
/85.1010.000.00 85.1010 $100,000.00 Cash 17321 lst Nat- Shakopee $100,000.00
/81..4920.000.00 81.1010 $6,138.46 Remit FIT 17322 1st Nat-Shakopee $6,138.46
81.4922.000.00 81.1010 $4,639.88 liemit FICA 17323 State Treasurer $4,639.88
81.4921.000.00 81.1010 $3,534.52 Remit SIT 17324 Commissioner of Revenue $3,534.52
,/81.4927-000-00 81.1010 $1,787.00 Remit-defer comp 17325 PEBSCO $1,787.00
81.4923.000.00 81.1010 $6,368.28 hemit PEEA 17326 State Treasurer $6,368.28
01.4380.152.15 01.1010 $1,285.76 Bents 17327 LOGIS $1,782.97
,01.4380.153.15 01.1010 $282.91
/01.4380.154.15 01.1010 $214.30
81.4926.000.00 81.1010 $238.70 liemit - Cancer Ins 17328 Am. Fam. Life Assur $238.70
27.4519.548.41 27.1010 $4,078.49 Other Improvements 17345. Buesing Brothers $4,078.49
71.4393.711.71 71.1010 $2,966.00 Awards & Indemnities 17346) Albert Dubois $2,966.00
01.4390.131.13 01.1010 $60.00 Conferences & Schools 17329 Business Consultants $180.00
01.4390.411.41 01.1010 $6o.00
✓o1.4390.151.15 01.1010 $6o.00
$132,714.30 $132,714.30
FUND TOTALS
01 - General Fund $2,012.97
27 - hacetract $4,078.49
71 - Sewer Fund $2,966.00
81 - Payroll Trust $23,656.84
85 - Investment Trust $100,000.00
3
1985 CITY OF SHAK)P�E CHECK REGISTER 02-27-85 PAGE 1
CHECK N1. D.:TE eMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. Y P.O. A MESSAGE
055641 112/?1/65 -103.70 --- -BARCO BEA4TNG__----EQUIP
-MA�11T�RE -�1 232432=4Z- -
103.70
� I
f t•f•• - --_ ._._.____- ._ _._.-.-_.-..-_ ._.__..-__-.__
_-..._ .•• CKS
^5x1129 J2/27/95 324.110 EARL F• AVOERSON SUPPLIES 01-4210-431-42
324.00
-.— ---_
ur►ff •••-CKS
n5au35 02/27/9: 42.50 ASS/M--CH/CDNT/INC. BUILD MAINT 01-4230-630-62
^58035 72/27/85 3117.°D4SS/ME.CH/:ONT/INC. EQUIP MAIf`T 6 RE 01-4232-181-18
058U3�, 112/27/95 - -- 759.4W _ -ASS/NECH/:UNT/INC. _EQUIP-MAIhT B Rz-`-----01-4232-182-18 "
1 ,101 .04 .
� i
05aL36 '02/27/85 3.38 JOHN K. ANDERSON TRAVEL & SUB 01-4330-121-12
3.39
••►f►• - --- ------- -- --
.••-CKS
r5oU4/ .,2/27/65 4.72 AT&T TELEPHONE 01-4321-311-31
4.72 .
-11K
r5a..72 2/27/95 106.89 DI AN_ S. 9=UCH PROF SERVICE 01-4310-111-11
:500/? ..2/27/85 58.13 OI AN_ S. d'cUCH PROF SERVICE 01-4310-171-17
1156U/2 ij2/27/85 - - 1.86 --- -- DIANE S. 9EUCH - PROF-SERVICE - --15-4310-191-19 '
050L12 u2/27/85 20.63 DIAN_ S. 9z_UCH PROF SERVICE 26-4310-197-19
187.53 •
ufr•• - u•-CKS
I
05dubu �2127/b� - 2 367.10 BARTON-ASCH14AN ' 0THrR IMPRCVE`-- ---- -77-4519-543-41
G5609C ::2/27/85 1:023.00 BARTON-ASCHMAN OTNER IMPRCVE 27-4519-544-41
(158.:60 u2/27/b5 1.087.45 BARTON-ASI4M4N OTHER IMPROVE 27-4519-546-41
C5a090 112/27785 -- ---9.100.57- —BARYON=ASCHMA!•I---` -iJTHER-IMPROVE----- -27-4519=548-41---"
13,583.12 •
CKS
i
^5aLtl2 X2/27/85 16.^0 CAPESIUS AGENCY INSURANCE 01-4360-421-42
16.06 • -------------
•.t:•• frr•-CNS - i
05b112 :2/27/85 4.19 JUDITH COU TRAVEL 8 SUB ' 01-4330-131-13
4.19 s
ftffr♦ •••..CKS
i
0561/5 02/27/85 - 49;Dr)----- FIRE INST.ASSN. --- PRINT'TN�R'-PUBL- -01-4350-321-32
49.00 •
1Y85 CITY )F iHAK3PEE CHECK REGISTER 02-27-85 PAGE 2
CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VE"lDO1 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. I P.O. 0 MESSAGE.
GSc1I9 v2/27/85 1,1175*14 FIR4STONE STOR"S EQUIP MAIAT i RE 01-4232-321-32
1.075.14
...... ***-CKS
05o2s6 2/27/85 -----11:34 �ATHROP Pa INT INC - "BOTL�-FTA7NT—" `" -- --01=4230=182-t8-
11.34
..,... **.-CKS I
':5031/ U2127185 21.30 MACQUEEN =QUIP. EQUIP MAINT 6 RE 01-4232-426-42
iI
,,,,,, *:•-CKS I �; '
^58s34 u2/27/85 27.90 MILAN*WALL?—Y 'CLEC. UTILITIES 01-4370-351-35
27. 0
uf►** *••-CKS .
158331 X2/27/85 67:82 - 'MINN=GASCO UTILTIES 01-4370-622-62
6702 •
...... - -------------
-.- - -- - .rr-CKS
^So344 J2/27105 4,371.37 METRO FIRr EDU''-P- CAP EQUIP 01-4511-321-32
49-371.37 i
...... .ff-CKS
X50501 .:2/21185 24F.10 MID-CENTRAL FIRE SUPPLIES 01-4210-321-32
249.10 • i'I
rfff.• _ ***-CKS
058395 ?2/27/35 - - --- 11;44 - -- NSP_ -- - UTILITIES '11-4370-427-42
11.44 *
_ .:.. . ._.._.—_.-._._.. .---- *r*•-CKS
058415 1:2/27/85 15.20 OFFICE PRODUCTS SUPPLIES 01-4210-411-41
C56415 X2/27/85 -- --"— 993:33--'— OFFICE PRODUCTS -CAP- EQUIP 01-4511-311-31
lt"nF.20 •
i
056429 . 2/27/85 10.00 HAROLD PASS - TRAVEL 5 SUB 01-4330-421-42 i
f i f f.• ***-CKS
05845/ . 2/27/85, 62.07 RADIO SHACK SUPPLIES 01-4210-111-11
fl5o 0l u2/27/85 62.37 RADIO SHACK SUPPLIES 01-4210-174-17
"5645/. _. 1/77/x5 - -- ---67:99--- —P,nT1-11.-K :r�z--_ -- .,i „
1985 CITY OF SHAKIPEE CHECK REGIST.R 02-27-85 PAGI 3
CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT V=MOO2 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. a P.O. # MESSAGE
05045/ U2/?7/85' 9`b. -__----R�OIO SNACK SOPPLIE�-- 0I�4'23Z-4Z6-42'--` --
201.98 •
15654U 02/27/85 -" _- 30.00 GLENDA-SPIOTTA`-_-- PROF SERVICE_ -- _01-4310-221-22
30:0 0 • --- ---.—. _ _
,..... **•_CKS
058545 ]2/?7/55 99.15 SNAP-ON TOOLS SUPPLIES 01-4210-426-42
8Q.15 * I
...... .rr.CKS
Lt
05o6JJ 02/27/85 22.56 GREGG VOKLAND TRAVEL 6-SUR _ 01-4330-151-15
22.56
- --
u•... - -.__ - - -_ ----- - ------ - ---. ... ..._ - - - •..-CKS i.
058622 ..2/27/85 102.86 WILL__NSKY AUTO EQUIP MAINT S RE 01-4232-426-42
102.96 _. ._. .. .._.
' I
•...*. ...-CKS
05dd37 W2127185 103.00 AMERICAN SOC CIVIL E DUES tt SUBS 01-4391-411-41
103.00 •
056038 j2/21/85 78.27 APACHE PAPER SUPPLIES 01-4210-181-18
".53638 -12/27/85 68.13 _APACHE PAPER SUPPLIES 01-4210-182-18
- - - --
OSdo38 32/27/95 30.93 APACHE PAo=R---__ - - -SOPPCIES - Cl-4210-;184-18-
^56s38
1-4210-184-18^56538 X2/27/85 159.93 APACIr PAPER SUPPLIES 01-4210-312-31
(15603N 02/21/99 52.90 A'IACHF PAO:R SUPPLIES 01-4210-421-42
^58433 32/27/85 - 24.06 - APACHE PAP=R --" SUPPLIES "- 01-4210-621-62
058838 02/27/85 33.87 APACHE PAoER SUPPLIES 11-4210-811-81
447.99
050o39 .,2/27/95 62.58 APPLE GLASS BUILD MAINT 01-4230-182-18
.62.58
C58640 02/27/85 60.00 ASSOC OF TNFORMATIJ:N DUES SUB 01-4391-411-41
60.00 +
r...r• r•*-CKS
0�8a4c ^2/27/85 100.64 BAUST:AD -CECT EQUIP MAINT 6 RE 01-4232-441-44
100.64
C56o43 2%21/85 - --__-456.46--CASE ?OWES---�— --�O1TIP-M7CIl1T S-RE----"01-4232-426-42 ----.___.-
456.46
-- -
r58644 02/27/85 15.00^- - CITY ENGR_ ASSOC OF M DUE$ B 9-001-4391-411-41 ---- - - --
15.00
SoC47 .2/71/ - 1.215.3 -----N 471, _ __ r -_ •• _
1985 rTTY OF SHAKOP_E CHECK REGISTER 02-27-85 PAGE 4 l
CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENO02 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. A P.O. 9 MESSAGE
D58b46 2/27/85 360.00 HENN TECH CENTER CONF & SCHOOLS 01-4390-321-32
--
360 -
i
05664/ 62/27/85 5.79 DAN HOLST REFUSE DISPOSAL 01-3650-000-00
i �
058648 02/27/85 39.50 JUDY HUGHES PROF SERVICE 01-4310-221-22
05db48 62/27/85 -- 35:J0 - - - JUDY HUGHES -"-"" PROF-SERVICE- - 01-4310-231-23
05do4R J2/21/85 24.50 JUDY HUGHES PROF SERVICE 14-4310-142-14
98 _0 -- --- --- .�- --- - .-�-.` - i
^5bb49 �2/27/95 25.70 INTER CONT OF BLDG 0 DUES 6 SUB 01-4391-331-33
25.00 •
058850 J2/27/85 51.P5 DENNTS JOH'ISON SUPPLIES 01-4210-441-44
51.05 •
05do51 j2/27/35 2,407.30 LUCAS ELE:TRIC BUILD MAINT 01-4230-321-32
2,407.33
056852 62/27/85 250.00 MACTA DUES & SUE 01-4391-231-23
250.30 •
15do53 X2/27/85 240.30 MCLEJO Co.iNTY CONF & SCHOOLS 01-4390-321-32
240.00
056854 02/27/95 25.30 MCM4 DUES S SUB 01-4391-121-12
25.00 • I
05SC55 .:2/27/85 110.65 R S M ANS INC DUES & SUB :1-4391-331-33
110.65 .
, I
058656 J2/27/95 495.00 MIDWEST PUNTING BUILD MAINT 01-4230-321-32
495.00
158651 X2/27/85 162.70 MN FIRE CHIEFS M44 DUES & SUBS 01-4391-321-32
162.00 •
^58o5R X2/27/85 10.10 MN SECTION ASCE DUES & SUES 01-4391-411-41 y
10.90 •
15bo59 _2/21/95 5.30 MUNICI �A- ASSOC DUES & SUBS 01-4391-131-13
5.00 •
056b00 u2/27/95 140.00 NATIONAL SOCIETY OF DUES & SUPS 01-4391-411-41 I
140.00 •
05do61 2/21135 216.94 NW SERVIC= ST EQUIP SUPPLIES 01-4210-426-42
216.94
058862 -.2/27/8`- 155.66 OEM DATA PRODUCTS SUPPLIES 01-4210-411-41
155.66
19P5 CITY OF SHAKIF:E CHECK REGISTER 02-27-85 PAGE 5
CHECK 60. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE
053r,64 u2/27/P.5 5.06 MARILYN R=MER TRAVEL & SUBS rl-4330-158-15 {
- -- 5006 ----- -
U5db65 .j2/27/85 916.46 RIES HEATING 8 SHEET BUILD MAINT 01-4230-321-32
914.66 • _____ ---------•--
058b66 02/27/95 6.50RING FIRE EXT EQUIP MAINT & RE 01-4232-321-32 I:
6.50.s - - -----
05666/ U2/27/85 50.00 SHAKOPEIE =ATHOLIC SC PROF SERVICE 01-4310-178.17
05dbo8 X2/27/85 2,500.00 J L SHTELY CO LT DEPOSIT 54-2300-000-00 a
2,500-00 i_
056b69 1.2/27/95 Sn.00 STATE WID. AUTO EQUIP MAINT 9 RE 01-4232-426-42
50.00"r- - - --- --- - ----- --
U56o/C .,2/27/b5 10.00 VAL THEIIS JR SUPPLIES 01-4210-321-32
05ob1U .+2/27/85 50.10 VAL THEIS JR BUILD MAINT01-4230-321-32
6^.00 •
7544/1 : 2/27/85 ---- -20:773--- -UNIV Of NTNNESOTA ----CONFZ-SCA-DOLS \ OTw4390 _621m62- '
20.00 •
ii
056612L)2/27195u2/27/95 80.0F OFFICE OF SPECIAL -COffF-V-SCHOOLS-'--- '- 01=4390-621-62 �
80.^D
j
0588/3 U2/27/85 ----2,f92.67 --VAN�OOIiERV'IC't UTTLI7It`5 1�1i370�T43-"1'4—`
2,592.67 •
05esb/4 .:2/27/85 10.00— _' -WALDEN LUARER - SUPPLIES--- `---- 01-4210--331-33' _
10.�D • 1 .I
CSdb75.. u2/27/0 -- --15F.5f ZIEGLER- — - -E00IP MATNT�RE -IIT-ZZ32=426=�2 ---
158.51 •
16,441.33 FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND
- -----
33.87 FUND 11TOTAL COMMUNITY SERVICES
__-2-•617.1.7 FUYD 14_TOTAL. TRA NSIT -- -- --`---"-_.-.-_. ..--•-- -. --- __...
1.88 FUND 15 TOTAL HSA
20.63 FUND 26 TOTAL DOWNTOWN REDEVELOMENT
13.5?3.12--------FUND 27 TOTAL RACETRACK - -T---` -
3:715.33 FUND 84 TOTAL ESCROW
---- - -
36,413.33
� I
i
TO: Jahn K. Andersen, City Adriiinistrator
FROM: Cree g Vc-r,l and, Finance Director
RE : Farm Lease for- Bypass Property
DATE: February O7, 19615
Intrroduction R Dackgrou id
The City purchased about 30 acres of land frorii Fredrick O. Watson
in December of 1984 for the future bypass. The purchase was
f urided by a loan from Met. C!unci 1. Mr. John We i dt contacted
the City regarding the Possibility of leasing the land for farming.
His family awned the land before selling it to Wat sort and has
been farming the land for- about the past 40 years.
He is offering the sum of $1, `00. 00 for the lease which is comparable
to the past lease from Watson and the "going" rate in the area. .
The taxes on the land will run about $1, 000. 00 which will leave
the City with abciut $1=00. 00. He lwever, because of the terms
of the loan from Met. Council, any proceeds that the City wc-uld
realize mo to the Met. Courici 1. Therefore, althouoh the City
has some administrative expense in leasing the lard and does
not gain any money from the lease, it does not have the expense
of mowing weeds either.
Alternatives
1. Accept offer from Mr. Weidt.
So11cit
bids for file lease.
Rec er!1 r.led at ion
Alternative n!_tuber 1.
Action Recuested
Move to authc Y'i z -he prc,per City Dff iCialS tip enter into a
fzZrr!1 lease with MY'. Weldt f_r the "F ✓paSS laYi " C1'I the west
side of the city for the amount of $1, '2200. 00 for 1985.
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director
RE: Consulting Services for Downtown Bridge/Junction Improve-
ments
DATE: February 28 , 1985
Introduction•
The City. Council held a special meeting with officials
of the Minnesota Department of Transportation ( MnDOT) District
5 to discuss a proposed partnership to undertake improvements
to the T.H. 169/101 junction/bridge improvements. At that meeting
there appeared to be consensus that the proposed project would
be mutually benefitial , and that the first step in the process
would be for both parties to agree on the desired conceptual
approach.
Background•
MnDOT has suggested that it would like to react to further
proposed solutions prepared by the City. The Downtown Committee
had previously recommended that these solutions would best be
prepared by a consultant and recommended that Barton Aschman
would be the best selection due to the continuity provided through
Ken Anderson' s involvement. The Downtown Committee reviewed
this decision and reaffirmed it at their February 27 , 1985 meeting
with the following motion:
Forbord/Wermerskirchen moved that the Downtown - Ad Hoc Committee
recommend to the City Council that they go ahead and hire the
consulting firm of Barton-Aschman and proceed with conceptual
geometric design of the T. H. 169/101 junction/bridge improvements.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Clay , Wermerskirchen, Laurent, Steil , Martin ,
Stillman and Forbord.
Noes ; Link
Other options considered were : 1) Committee suggesting options
to MnDOT without the benefit of engineering support ; 2) requesting
the City Engineer to assist in .the process ; 3) undertaking a
new RFP to solicit consulting services ; 4) asking MnDOT to prepare
the options (they declined ) ; 5) waiting until the City has completed
its selection process for transportation consulting services ;
6 ) waiting until federal confirmation of project eligibility
has occurred.
The committee wishes to proceed in order to encourage con-
struction of the project in a reasonable time frame . At the
Committee ' s request Barton Aschman has submitted the attached
letter offering to provide the requested consulting services
at a cost not to exceed $8 , 000.
A question also came up at the Downtown Committee regarding
the degree of involvement City Council would like to have in
the design selection process. The same process used in selecting
Alternative B-1, Revised will be used unless the Council wants
to get involved at an earlier stage. In the
reviousss
the Committee reviewed a number of elements of i mport ncerocthe
consultant prepared three alternatives for Committee review,
and the Committee selected one alternative and forwarded it
to the City Council . If any Council member wishes to suggest
an alternative process , it would be appropriate to do so at
the time a consultant is hired .
Requested Action -
Authorize appropriate City Officials to execute agreement
with Barton Aschman to provide consulting services for the conceptual
geometric design of the T.H. 169/101 junction/bridge improvements
at a cost not to exceed $8 , 000.
tw
Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 612-332-0421
February 28, 1985
y
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator -
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Based on discussions with yourself, Bo Spurrier, Jean Andre, and members of the
Downtown Committee, Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal
to assist the city in your negotiations with MnDOT for intersection improvements at TH
169 and TH 101. Overall objectives of this proposal are to provide analysis concerning
final geometrics and identification of future responsibilities of the city as well as MnDOT
to assure implementation of these improvements moves smoothly ahead.
To obtain the objectives stated above Barton-Aschman will:
- Prepare for and attend up to four meetings with the Downtown Committee.
- Prepare for and attend one meeting with the city council (this may be a joint
meeting with the Downtown Committee).
- Prepare for and attend up to two meetings with MnDOT along with the City of
Shakopee's staff.
- After the initial meeting with the Downtown Committee, review up to three
alternatives for the river crossing and intersection improvements.
- Prepare preliminary cost estimates for the three alternatives with the understanding
that MnDOT will be providing bridge cost estimates.
- Upon reaching a consensus on the alternative to be selected, Barton-Aschman
Associates, Inc. will draft a memorandum indicating work task, as well as agencies
responsible for each task. These tasks will be reviewed at a joint meeting of City of
Shakopee and MnDOT staff.
- After agreement to the work tasks, a time schedule will be developed to identify
short term critical path items to be addressed.
- A final memorandum report will be prepared for the city's future use.
Barton-Aschman shall be compensated for services rendered under the terms of this
proposal, on the basis of our standard hourly rates for staff time devoted to the project,
plus reimbursement at cost for directly related job expenses such as travel, printing, etc.
Our estimated maximum cost for these services will not exceed $8,000. The consultant
will not exceed this sum without specific written authorization from the city.
Barton-Aschrnan Associates, Inc.
Mr. John Anderson
February 28, 1985
Page 2
If you are in agreement with this proposal, please return one signed copy for our files. We
look forward to working with you on this project.
Sincerely,
John C ullan
Vice President and Contracting Officer
JCM:kro
ACCEPTED AND APPROVED BY:
Signature
Typed Name
AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE
AGREEMENT FOR:
Date
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Purchase of Used Vehicle
DATE: February 27 , 1985
INTRODUCTION
Council has appropriated $6 , 500 in the 1985 Capital Improvement
Fund for the replacement of the vehicle used for investigative
purposes and the purchase of one additional used vehicle.
BACKGROUND
The vehicle currently used by the Shakopee Police Department will
be transferred to the City Administration. I have obtained the
required quotations for the purchase of a replacement vehicle.
We will purchase the second vehicle when one is available within
funding limits .
1 . General Casualty Insurance - 1982 Ford Fairmont - $3 ; 025 . 00
2 . Gelco Corporation - 1982 Ford Fairmont - $3 , 175. 00 .
3 . Dart & Kraft Financial Corporation - 1982 Ford Fairmont - $3 , 250 . 00 .
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize staff to purchase a 1982 Ford Fairmont, 4-door sedan
for $3 , 025 . 00 from General Casualty Insurance.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize staff to purchase a 1982 Ford Fairmont, 4-door,
sedan for $3 , 025. 00 from General Casualty Insurance.
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Richards Pub Violation
DATE: February 15, 1985
INTRODUCTION
Council has directed the police department to submit
notification of all violations occurring at licensed
liquor establishments.
BACKGROUND
On November 27, 1984, council was informed of a fire code
violation, whereby officers
alleging Richard ' s Pub, filed a formal complaint
911 East First Avenue, had
exceeded the posted capacity on November 21, 1984.
The manager, Cameron Barnes, pled not guilty�
1985 , to the charge and requested a court hearinFebruary 4,
g.
eeh
Clerk of Courts office states. it will be two or thmonths
before a trial date is set. r
On February 14 , 1985, officers inspected the premises of
Richard ' s Pub, and believe the bosted capacity was exceeded
and found a fire door to be secured with bolts on the u
and lower sections . A f L upper
formal
complaint is being requested
of the City Attorney.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Schedule a formal hearing to consider the violations of
November 21 , 1984 and February 14 , 1985 , for April 2, X985
at 9 : 00 p .M.
T0 : John K. Anderson. , City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director
RE : Appointment to Downtown Committee
DATE : February 28 , 1985
Introduction•
Peter L. Sames has presented the attached letter requesting
to be appointed to the Downtown Committee .
Background •
Mr . Sames expressed an interest in participating in the
Downtown Committee . He attended the last Downtown Committee
meeting and has requested background material on the Committee.
The Committee currently has twelve voting members . Resolution
No. 2112 provides for eleven to twenty members to the Committee ,
so Mr. Sames can be appointed even though there has been no
recent resignation. Given the fact that there is no contest
involved in this appointment the Council may wish to suspend
its rules and nominate and appoint at the same meeting.
Requested Action•
Move to nominate ( and appoint , if rules are suspended )
Peter Sames to serve on the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee.
tw
i
Peter L. Sames
Cy's Amoco Service
312 W. First Avenue
Shakopee, Pin• 55379
445-9987
Shakopee City Council
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
Dear City Council Members;
Please consider me for a member of the Shakopee Downtown
Revitalization Committee. I feel that with my ten years of .
business experience in the Shakopee downtown area along with
my willingness to insure a prosperous future for the city of
Shakopee i can be an asset to the committee. As a member I
will use my time and talents to assist the committee in
reaching a firm recommendation to the council. Thank you again
for your consideration.
Si:?c ere ly,
eter L. Sames
1a O
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Appointment to Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory Commission
DATE: February 27, 1985
Introduction and Background
There is currently an opening on the Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory
Commission-, a three year term expiring January 31, 1988. On February 19, 1985.
Council nominated Robert Vierling and Larry Moonen.
Action Requested;
1) Conduct Election
2) Appoint to the Shakopee Cable Communications
Advisory Commission for a three year term expiring January 31, 1988.
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk Civ,
RE: Vacancy on the Planning Commission
DATE : March 1 , 1985
Introduction•
With the recent resignation of Bev Koehnen from the Planning
Commission, there is currently a vacancy on this commission through
February 1 , 1986.
Background•
In October of 1984, the city sought applications to fill the
vacancy on the Planning Commission created by the resignation of Joe
Perusich. The following persons, who expressed an interest, were
nominated with a final appointment made of John Lane: Nancy
Christensen, George Realander, David Pomerenke, John M. Lane, Charles
Mensing and James Weeks.
In December of 1984, the city sought applications to fill expiring
terms on various boards and commissions, including the Planning Commission,
because we did not know at the time if John Schmitt wished to be reappointed.
We received no response to our ad for a planning commission appointment.
During the recent weeks, two resumes have been received from
individuals interested in serving on the Planning Commission. One is from
James J . -O 'Brien who lives two blocks within Prior Lake city limits just
East of Pike Lake Road between CR16 and CR42. The City Code does state
that -all. members- of the Cities Boards and Commissions shall be residents
of the City, except such as the Council deems more representative.
Alternatives :
11 Advertise to fill vacancy
21 Make nominations from resumes on file
Recommendation:
Alternative No. 2, make nominations from resumes on file. Staff
would like Council to consider nominating only those who you wish to serve
rather than all seven interested parties. Staff will contact nominees
to see if they are still interested in an appointment.
Recommended Action:
Make nominations to fill a vacancy . on the Planning Commission from
the following: Nancy Christensen, George Relander, David Pomerenke, Charles
Mensing, James Weeks, James O 'Brien, and James Link.
J9
=TY --CDF-_'E;H.PiK_OPH
INCORPORATED 1870
ENGINEERING DEPARTMEP:T
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Adminis to
FROM: H. R. Spurrier, City Engineer
1 '
SUBJECT: Holmes Street Basin Laterals
Storm Sewer Assessment policy
DATE: March 1, 1985
INTRODUCTION:
On February 19, 1985 City Council received the Supplemental
Feasibility Report for the Holmes Street Basin Laterals. That
report contained recommendations for storm sewer assessment
policy to be established by City Council.
BACKGROUND :
The supplemental report identified most of the drainage system
improvements the City would have to build in order to provide
the same level of service City-wide. In identifying problems
in basins that have already received a lateral and a trunk
storm sewer assessment , the City must deal with a unique prob-
lem, unique because the level of service has been established
and in some cases increased, while the level of assessment
is very likely decreasing.
The Supplemental Report assessed all of the special benefit
to the property within the basin at each of the alternative
assessment rates. The report did not discuss any form of credit
for existing systems or existing assessment.
Assessment credit for storm sewer facilities are difficult
to compute because every situation is unique.
Because of the unique problems storm sewer construction credits
present , I have proposed a credit system which disreflarded
the level of service earlier construction provided, and dealt
only with the amount of money paid for improvement.
�l
Holmes Street Basin Laterals
March 1 , 1985
Page 8
An example is the proposed improvements for the West Side Storm
Sewer Basin. In 1978, 50 percent Of $1, 104, 870. 35 in storm
sewer improvements were assessed to the basin. Now an estimated
$2-89, 489. 00 in improvements are proposed. This would brrin❑
the total cost Of improvements made in the basin to _
$1, 13F94, 359. 34. Pro pert y owners in t h e basin have pa i d 39. 6
Percent of .that cost in special benefit.
The preceding figures can be seen On the attached bar charts.
The charts show that if the policy on special benefit deals
with aggregate special benefit paid and deals with aggregate
total project costs without regard to present worth adjustments
there is in effect a credit for existing facilities. When
the value of the special benefit falls below 25 percent ( level
Of special benefit 'as in Alternate 3 or 5) Of the total project
cost, then the difference between that value and the value
Of •lJ5 percent Of the total project cost must be charged for
as special benefit, so that the value of special benefit con-
forms to the modified policy.
The second alternative is to charge all of the property Owners
for the special benefit at a rate specified in the policy.
It is my hope that the discussion on the sixth alternative
will continue. These alternatives were proposed in Order to
stimulate discussion and show that the funding pie for storm
sewer assessment could be cut in a number of ways. There should
be a number in the alternatives listing that would match any
piece Of pie that might be cut. I would urge all of the Council
members to advise me if there is some combination that I have
overlooked and need to illustrate.
If there are no other alternatives to look at, then it is my
recommendation that Council begin to establish Or answer the
Policy issues identified in the report so that we may proceed
with street improvements and Other improvEments that have been
halted, until decisions are made regarding storm sewer policy.
ACTION REQUESTED :
Address issues and questions in the Supplemental Feasibility
Report for Holmes Street Basin Laterals.
HRS/pmp
MEMP.SL
$250,000
E �
a) E
> a
0 0
L.CL
z
>
70
I 0
-0
co x 75 %'
c 0
. Matching Cost
0
Q
$ 100,000
50%
Matching'- Cost $f 2,000
-_ I _ I_ ice._ ■
- $50 ,000 - -
rt-Iiia .
JrOo/ _ 25 % -
o.
Special Benefit °a Special Benefit
-
a
. 0
ANYWHERE
STORM SEWER BASIN
$ 1 ,394 ,389.34
01, 1ollf , =Imom I
o CO = cn
$ 1 , 1049870.38 1
mom, . ommo. m. mmool
60.4%'
Matching Cost
50%
Matchin
9 Cost
_ V - _ _ V
U U
LLI
Z � $552,435. 17 Cl) -7 $5529435. 17
cro - > o
E . C1.
- Lu0 .
< 50% < 39.6 %
0 Special Benefit' 0 Special Benefit
WEST SIDE,
STORM
ALT. 1 ALT. 2
\ 2.5Z
+yLA.TwxA-L oR
ILUKK
/ 5
Vit �ptl�Mt?lT
�ry— SvsUr�: $ra+ttrtT
s :
�,�{
�Mi Q.S Py�iT Cit. �4P,R 3!E �Df�i
li« Fiz . Z6�
1 -mmr.L oR
Tttuwc
Ups¢Fix
F
ALT. 3 ALT. 4
L y�F � IF�P�' LI,�
�. �Mpt7 ott
? 257
ilTEtII.L Oti TtQLAL DLC
TLUNK ltwNK
�t=Sdt'1lttT OR A�cesS►"�c1yT pR
?. l►st:sc Far.
ustm Fat
r •r q ;:
b�
tk
f S
G „/• •:v
JriSf
eL
f it
k � i
ALT.' 5 ALT. 6
i.
:J\T£(CI�� OR � ✓.:TiR.�L T.IC
1 RC1r►K
ro
)3 �• _
;; � .:• �1�� - sty,'w...k. g - -.
n
We
I , John Leroux, have interest in the following real estate
located within the corporate limits of the City of Shakopee:
1
Date: ?� `f Signature:
John Lerou
i
I, Dean Cclligan, have interest
in the following real estate
located within the corporate limits of the City of Shakopee.-
Parcel
hakopee:Parcel No. 27-037017-0
Lot 8, Block 2
West View 3rd Addition
City of Shakopee
That part of the North 340.42 feet of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of
Section 5, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County, Minnesota lying West of the East
4.0 rods of said East Half of the Southwest
Quarter
of the East 2.0 rods of the West Half of the Southwest d the Northuarter of said said S feet
QSection 5.
That part of the West 639. 85 feet of the East 705. 85 feet of the Northeast
Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22,
lying South of theNorth 340.34 feet of said Northeast -Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter. TOGETHER WITH The West 639.85 feet of
North 2.00 rods of the Southeast the East 705.85 feet of the
5, Township 115, Range 22. Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section
Date:
Signature: L
Dean Colligan
I, Dolores M. Lebens , have interest in the following real estate
located within the corporate limits of the City of Shakopee:
Parcel No . 27-001-0000-260-00
West 45' of Lot 10 , Block 32
City of Shakopee
Parcel No . 27-001-0000-453-00
Lot 10 , Block 60
City of Shakopee
Date: January 8 , 1985 Signature: 777
Delores M. Lebens
2, Gloria Vierling, have interest in the followi
located witorporhin the ct n9 real estate
j ae limits of the City of Shakopee :
Date:
D / Signature:
Gloria Vierling
(3 cv
cJULIUs A. COLLEB, �
JU LIU5 A. LLER ATTOILNEY AT LAW
1859-1944 0 612-445-1244
2 1 1 WEST F I R S T AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
55379
February 27, 1985 - -`
1,S 85
Mr. John Anderson, City Administrator
Shakopee City Hall
139 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Enclosed is proposed Resolution providing for recognition of many good
citizens. I don't know if this is exactly what you want. Look it
over and if you have any suggestions please contact me or feel free
to change it any way you want to.
Very truly yours,
Juli s A. jC er, II
JAC/nh
Enc.
On February 7, 1984 Council suggested that a recognition
event such as a picnic for all volunteers.
Action Recommended: Offer Res. No. 2375, Providing for the
Recognition of Many, and move its adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 2375
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE RECOGNITION OF MANY
WHEREAS, through the years countless fine citizens of the City of Shakopee
have performed gratitious services for the City with no expectations of compensation
of any kind, and
WHEREAS, these countless hours of service so generously rendered have been of
great and inestimable benefit to our City and its citizens, and
WHEREAS, it has long been desired by the Shakopee City Council to show the City's
gratitude to all these public spirited citizens in some visible way.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Shakopee City Council in regular meeting
assembled, that the Shakopee City Council each year on a date selected by it, put on
a picnic, dinner or other festivity as an expression of the City's appreciation to all
the public spirited citizens, who would be invited to be guests of honor of the grateful
City and to take part in an afternoon or evening of merriment, conviviality and relaxation.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the entire .cost of the said festivity be born by the
City and that the proper City officials be and hereby are authorized to do all things
necessary and proper to make the arrangements for whatever festivities and on whatever
Sate the Council decides.
Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held this
lay of 1985.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
.TTEST:
City Clerk
repared and approved as to form this
5-t day of February, 1985.
lius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
13b
F--:5;H. ..KOPa.1=
INCORPORATED 1870
* ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: Jahn K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Fulton Schleisman, Engineering Inspector
SUBJECT: Acquisition of Trunk Highway 101
Bypass Right-of-Way
DATE: March 1 , 1985
INTRODUCTION:
The loan application process and subsequent purchase of another
parcel in the T. H. 101 Bypass requires a Resolution by Council.
BACKGROUND :
The attached maps illustrate parcels the City has acquired
or is in the process of acquiring along the T. H. 101 Bypass
Right-of-Way.
Parcel No. 7, 14 acres of land south of Minnesota Valley 5th
Addition, is now also available for acquisition. The platting
process for this parcel ( 1980 - 1982) , fell short of filing
final plat as "Minnesota Valley 6th Addition".
Until recently the Trunk Highway 101 bypass was the only project
which Qualified for acquisition loan funds as administered
by Metropolitan Council. Therefore, Shakopee and Scott County
were the only eligible applicants for the money.
Metropolitan Council staff now say there are others eligible,
therefore it is important to continue making applications in
a timely manner.
The attached correspondence documents the pr-oyer-ty owner' s
desire to develop the property if it is not acquired by the
City. Therefore, we recommend that the City take the following
Action Requested to acquire the property.
Meme Bvpass Acquisition
March 1, 1985 X
Rage 2
ACTION REQUESTED :
1. Adapt Resolution No. 2380, A Resolution Aut horr i z i ng
the Loan Application and Purchase of Property in the Trunk
Highway 101 Bypass Right-of-Way.
2. Authorize proper City officials to execute and submit
a loan application far the purchase of property (Parcel
No. 7) in the Trunk Highway 10 Bypass Right-of-Way.
Ap rovedbmittal
Henry R. pu�i r, City Eng i neer
FSlpmp
MEM2380
RESOLUTION NO. 2380
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A LOAN APPLICATION AND
PURCHASE OF PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH
MINNESOTA STATUTES CHAPTER 473
WHEREAS, Minnesota St at i_i es Section 473. 1E7 a ut nor i z es
one acquisition of right-of-way of a State Trunk Highway; and
WHEREAS, the property described in Attachment A within
the City of S;h:akocee is in danger of imminent conversion; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee is eligible to incur this
debt • and
WHEREAS, there are no known waste c I can i_c m pro b I erns on
or under the ars Apert i es described in Attachment A; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee expects the total value
of the property to be approximately $280, 000. 00.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
that the proper City officials are hereby au.thor_zet to make
a - loan application and purchase of property within the Trunk
Highway 101 Bypass Right-of-Way shown on the official map mrenaced
`'y/_-her Minnesota Depart ment of Transportation.
Adopted in session o4 City Council held this
day of , 1965.
Mayor of ;.he City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Approved as to farm this
day of --- 1985.
City A t i_ rney —_.
l3 �'
C2 TY CD F7- SHAKOPaa
T.H . 101 B}mass R.O .W. Reservation
Attachment A
That part of the North Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 11,
Township 115, Range 23, Scott County, Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at the northwest corner of MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION,
also beinq_ the southwest corner of MINNESOTA VALLEY IST ADDITION,
according to the recorded plats thereof; thence South 1 degree
04 minutes 43 seconds East along the west line of said Minnesota
Valley 3rd Addition, a distance of 108. 11 feet; thence South
.88 degree 55 minutes 17 seconds West along the north line of
said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD ADDITION, a distance of 130.00 feet
to the point of beginning of the tract to be described; thence
South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East along the west line
of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 3RD AND 4TH ADDITIONS, a distance of
380. 00 feet; thence South 88 degrees 55 minutes 17 seconds West
along the north line of said MINNESOTA VALLEY 4TH ADDITION, and
the north line of EVERGREEN 1ST ADDITION, a distance of 245.00
feet ; thence South .25 degrees 25 minutes 17 seconds West along
the westerly line of said EVERGREEN 1ST ADDITION, a distance
of 380.00 feet; thence South 26 degrees 04 minutes 43 seconds
East along the westerly line of said EVERGREEN 1ST ADDITION,
a distance of 204.23 feet to the south line of said North Half
of the Southwest Quarter; thence South 86 decrees 56 minutes
16 seconds West along said south line of the North Half of the
Southwest Quarter, a distance of 724.91 feet; thence North 0
degrees 08 minutes 24 seconds West, a distance of 266. 52 feet
to the intersection with the southwesterly extension of the south-
easterly line of VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDITION, according to the
recorded plat thereof; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes 05
seconds East along said south-westerly extension and southeasterly
line of VALLEY MALL FIRST ADDITION, a distance of 1008.70 feet
thence South 51 degrees 29 minutes 55 seconds East, a distance
of 60. 00 feet; thence South 42 degrees 09 minutes 03 seconds
East, a distance of 120. 63 feet; thence North 38 degrees 30 minutes
05 seconds. East, a distance of 85. 00 feet; thence North 88 degrees
55 minutes 17 seconds East, a .distance of 226. 00 feet; thence
South 1 degree 04 minutes 43 seconds East, a distance of 50. 00
feet to the point of beginning.
t✓
City of _Shakooee, Minnesota
County of Scott
Date February 28, 1985
Assessed Valuation as of January 2, 1985 $9S, 610, 428. 00
Total Outstanding Indebtedness at 1/31/85 $ 8, 420, 000. 00
Less Debt Excluded from Limitation $ 5, 090, 000. 00
Debt Balance $ 3, 330, 000. 00
Less Sinking Funds Applicable to Debt Balance $ 471, 428. 00
Net Debt Outstanding $ 2, 858, 572. 00
Assessed Valuation $96, 610, 423. 00 multiplied by 6-2/3 Y. * $6, 376, 288. 00
Less Net Debt Outstanding $ 2, 858, 572. 00
Net Debt Limitation $ 3, 517, 716. 00
I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the above information
is correct, and that no further debt, :eligible for the net debt limitation,
will be incurred prier to the closing of the requested R-O-W loan, provided
closing will occur by June 1, 1985.
Finance Director of the of
i
or Auditor of the County of
*except cities of the first class.
PHDEV2. ER789Y
08. 02. 83
C
i l ,0
C,T -
at�a� , o�s,
252 South Plaza Building• Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 612/546-3325
.4� 1 I l�1
February 14, 1985
Air. H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Reference: Property South of Minnesota Valley 5th Addition,
approximately 14 acres, Legal attached
Dear Mr. Spurrier:
Regarding possible acquisition of property within the Trunk Highway 101
by-pass right-of-way. The undersigned is the fee owner of approximately
14 acres of land located immediately South of Minnesota Valley
5th Addition at the western interchange of proposed Trunk Highway 101 by-pass.
The subject 14 acres, having been reacquired upon a contract for deed can-
cellation in 1985, remain from our purchase in 1974 of over 100 acres upon
which we built the Minnesota Valley Mall Shopping Center with the addition of
the K-mart store and have' platted and/or sold for development by others all
but 7 acres of the original acreage that was zoned residential.
The subject 14 acres are ready for immediate development but platting is
affected by the proposed right of way area. The complication and uncer-
tainties caused by the proposed by-pass interchange and the city's insis-
tance that any nearby platting and/or development be made as if the inter-
change were an accomplished fact, has frustrated our attempts to properly
continue developing our property.
The subject property was sold on a Contract for Deed, but the purchase has
been so frustrated by the complications and delays relating to the by-pass
and arrangement of roads that he has defaulted on the contract and we have
reacquired the property by cancellation of the Contract for Deed.
The financial burden in monthly interest costs and taxes alone not to mention
lost development opportunities can no longer be tolerated and it is our
intention to actively market and develop the property without further delay.
Very truly yours ,
WATSON INVESTMENTS, INC.
R. B. Weigel, Vice-President
zow4o MAP
my
C I'I Y Of S H A K O P E E ACTION or mr=CA_
ZONING -
AG AGRICULTURE
R1 ,RURAL RESIDENTIAL
R2 URBAN RESIDENTIAL
R2 MID-DENSITY RES. 1
R4 MULTI-FAMILY RES. AG
Bt HIGHWAY BUSINESS ... _
_AAAA_.._.
12 COMMUNITY BUSINESS -
Bl CENTRAL BUSINESS -'
It LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
12 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AG
B FLOODPLAIN
•X1 � � L'Alg� 1 � 1 I I� �
s 131 �g �g R l
H3 _E �3 B2 12
AG
Rd�
R4
R2'
R2 C t
1 X
B1 R2
R4
BI
I Ii
1
AG '
t AG
', ....... �'•..,..........,�.,'AL-""'"^-AAAA_. _ __`J ...-- ' � i
JANUARY RSI 7 11 TO CERTIFY THAT
INSPARCEL NO. 7 MAP ETHEOFTICIAL ONCITY O,
MAP REFERRED ro m arr
CODE SECTION 11.21 OF THE ATTEST-
CITY OF SHAKOPEE.MINNESOTA CITY CLERK �'
I
/ / RrvERVlf• I
L, I j/ 1 ' Iii IEn~Yat�y
-
- ! ouuo) a / \ � K STATE MARY
�,C'
Ayr
EDWARD•a.cc
/ SWEE"
I KnoO�
CwRiST
i LUTR
IT
CNYRCR
MARKS
N Cd
1>
:ZE1 YI O
-MUNICIPAL
VALLEY WALL !I ! O POOL
2 +� O
BLACK I
LOT I
Y I —•—
L • I e r l . I � - I I
LDT i
\ o`'/�r ryl • I Z'I Ee p: I 16 '/2 TN AV£.
1 >
\ L T
+ A' LIONS PORK
Gv`rm
3/
I/3—Th'I b AV£. plrLor o [ \ .�-C-SO- t� s.,F
1 a r �.cRSDN TON1sRlf"'--
\ IIt
\
`• I ` I PARK Z \
I I
I
400 0 400 B00
"Ole reel
Wl wooaura[sr
CITY OF SHAKOPEE °`�"""`~
ZONING
AG AGRICULTURE
Rt RURAL RESIDENTIAL _h
R2 URBAN RESIDENTIAL -- _ -
R7 MID.DENSITY RES. - - --- -- /'
RI MULTIFAMILY RES. - mjl�
B1 HIGHWAY BUSINESS AG �\
B2 COMMUNITY BUSINESS i r -
Bl CEHTRAI BUSINESS, (, ',•\ _ ,! '����—_ - ._i A
I Rim11 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
12 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AG -c"-
WMM FLOODPLAIN
j.
AG •t- fit I'G~R''_ -_-1'� JI' 'I ! B2 12 i
-j� :. ,:tk" _.mar''—' �„�(wl�1 =i'�r•+__':_i , .. �•-
i i;�;;l�' ,• '� _r��� fir'` ,-14► 'J':;fli� (' . R4 I1
R4 ! �. {�;.(. _ 41' �L1i.�1LIlI��i.E �y, '.I.
n R2
-•- + I ,� � :I rill- Ta
4 .r '`y B1
R1 �1 AG I
;;, - - ------
P A R C E L S 1 & 2 �,..�., O TC�WK1 -1 ------ -
iiM.ETE..Ec TO.aT r
Cao[SICT”1,2i or T.E
.
011 01 vM.MtE,r.n JW.
it / .--` `� \ ♦ � H
4V'/�'/
/ i.� � .y )urt •..w
TV
'�/• �• - / / I 7�-' — _ _ 11 1. ...1 _ �...'� _-- � �. __.__
i + �
: 1. PARCEL _ l I
1� la � ft .l t : � y; � _i•. � I t' a _
_ , .
I •' j � ��. �• ''Li'l ,l i__'� � . ��• � � I l I�. -- ,r "si' .vc' __. --•�-
IN
XPARCEL 2 � ` '...,,.• -� i - �.j � rb' .,.,,,.. . �. .,�
I�tl��/�t�� -- _11 .!rte-�L:��-' �+ jr— T-.��•�^=�r,L �.r„S -
s.. -
I I �
G !ewr.w I i
�_.
I �
800 0 800 1600
scoie
-feet
ZONING AG
I AG AGRICULtUR[
RI RURALRESIDEH11Al '���: "f � •-
I RI NIGNvwr Rvsim"S x.. ..retj 1;; '! ♦ B 1 12 al
11 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
12 WAVY INDUSTRIAL I
S SNOREIAND .,•
FLOO12 B1
DPLAIN t
t ,
t evr.t rar uuwr]fr '. ,� .! • � •
-=
a
u
I 1
I
I
PARCEL 3 '
;'PARCEL 6
! (E. 1 I
C19 f 1 1
PARK � 2 fke04 I
1/��• =1 �.f� / � _ BEY I
! s PARCEL 5 �qo
PARCEL 4 i
OUTLOT O
OUTLOT F OUTLOT G
i
C
I �O
OUTLOT ClOUTLOT B OUTLOT A
1
= 800 '
13C,
CT TY C)F- SHAKOFz' E �
INCORPORATED 1870
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue - 5hakopee, Lnnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: Jahn K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Henry R. Spurrier, City Engineer
SUBJECT : Variance on Fourth Avenue
DATE: March 1, 1985
INTRODUCTION:
Minnesota Department of Transportation State Aid office has
accented the request for a variance on Fourth Avenue and has
requested that the City adapt the attached Resolution on the
variance.
BACKGROUND :
The attached Resolution No. 2381 , reiterates the City' s request
for the variance, acknowledges that the proposed work will
not conform to Mn/DOT Standards, and accepts liability for
any problems resulting from constructing the road contrary
to Municipal State Aid Standards.
The City has requested a reasonable exception from the Mn/DOT
Standards. The City has requested an exception from the Rural
Design Standards. The Rural Design Standards apply because
less than 100 percent of the land abutting the proposed roadway
has been platted or developed. After the adjacent property
develops Urban Standards apply and the proposed project conforms
to Urban Standards.
In my view and the view of aur consultant that the variance
request is reasonable because the City has the ability to use
platting_ requirements to obtain ariv additional right-of-way
in the future if it is necessary for safety or for conformance
with Urban Standards.
It is therefore recommended that City Council adopt Resolution
No. 2381, A Resolution Requesting a Variance on Fourth Avenue.
ACTION REQUESTED :
Adopt Resolution No. 2381 , A Resolution Requesting a Variance
on Fourth Avenue.
HRSfpmp
MEM2.�81
C4� ��1
Ind
G= 'TY ._...CDS._ _E;HA_KOP,aH.
INCORPORATED 1870
* ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, I!innesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator ,
FROM: Henry R. Spurrier, City Engineer
SUBJECT : Establishing Municipal State Aid High
DATE: March 119 1985
INTRODUCTION :
Attached is Resolution No. 2`388, a Resolution establishing_
Thirteenth Avenue as a Municipal State Aid Street in the City
of Shakopee, between Trunk Highway 169 and County State Aid
Highway No. 15.
BACKGROUND :
The City has mileage available for designation as a part of
the Municipal State Aid Street System. City Council earlier
designated Thirteenth Avenue as the priority route for desig-
nation. The attached Resolution designates Thirteenth Avenue
as Municipal State Aid Street No. 104.
ACTION REQUESTED :
1. A motion to adopt Resolution No. ;_382`, A Resolution
Establishing Municipal State Aid Highways.
2`. A motion to direct proper City officials to transmit
the necessary documents to the Commissioner of Highways.
HRS/prnp
MEM2382
RESOLUTION NO. 2362
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
MUNICIPAL STATE AID HIGHWAYS
WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota that the Street here and after described
should be designated as a Municipal State Aid Street under the
provisions of Minnesota Laws of 1967
Chapter 162.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota that the read described as fellows,
to-wit :
Beginning at the intersection of the north line of the
Southwest quarter of Section 11, Township 115, Range 23
Scott County, Minnesota and the easterly boundary of Trunk
Highway 169 and running thence southwesterly along said
southeasterly boundary a distance ..f 204. 3 feet to the
actual point of beginning ; thence southeasterly to Thirteenth
Avenue as dedicated in Evergreen 1st Addition in said Scott
County and thence along_ Thirteenth Avenue as dedicated
in Minnesota Valley 3rd Addition and along Thirteenth Avenue
extended East to County State Aid Highway No. 15 at the
east 'line of said Section 11 and there terminating.
be, and. hereby is established, legated, and designated a Municipal
State Aid street of said City of Shakopee subject to the approval
of the Commissioner of Highways of the State of Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Shakopee is hereby .
Authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this
Resolution to the Commissioner of Highways for his consideration
and that upon his approval of the designation of said road or
a portion of thereof that the same be constructed, improved
and maintained, as a Municipal State Aid Street of the City
of Shakopee to be numbered and known as Municipal State Aid
Street 104.
Ad=-opted in —. session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
, y98
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day of
Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Gregg Doxland, Finance Director
Re: Resolution No. 2383
Date: March 1, 1985
Background & Information
Resolution No. 2383 provides for compliance with MSA 475.553 . This statute
states that Council may authorize by resolution for the distribution of bonds and
coupons by the paying agent when there is a proper agreement to do so. We have
such agreements with a number of paying agents but were just made aware of the
need for an authorizing resolution for MSA 475.553 . This is a "housekeeping"
resolution.
Action Requested
Adopt Resolution No. 2383 .
RESOLUTION NO. 2383
A Resolution Providing for the Destruction of Bonds and Coupons
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee does issue bonds for various purposes, and
WHEREAS, the City is desirous o:- having the paying agent record and destroy the
bonds and coupons following redemp::ion.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA:
That the proper City officials are authorized to enter into agreements with
paying agents providing for the cancelation and destruction of bonds and coupons in
accordance with MSA 475.553 and all bonds and coupons shall be destroyed.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of , 1985.
Mayor of the City, of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1985.
City Attorney
)3'
TO: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director
RE : 1985 Small Cities Development Grant
DATE : March 1 , 1985
Introduction:
The City has submitted a Small Cities Development Grant
for 1985 which seeks funding assistance for the proposed improvements
at the 101/169 junction. State officials have asked for further
documentation of the City' s commitment to the proposed project
funding package.
.Background:
The documentation already submitted to the state includes
a City Council motion to request a 50/50 partnership with MnDOT
for a package of projects including design for the T. H. 101
by-pass and the T . H. 101/169 bridge/junction improvements .
No dollar value was included in this motion but is assumed a
$5 .9 million total price referred to in a letter from John Mullen,
which included $1 million for the design of the T. H. 101 by-pass.
Therefore the implied City commitment for downtown improvements
was 50% of $4 . 9 million or $2, 450 ,000, with a City commitment
of $500 ,000 for the T. H. 101 by-pass. The City has now requested
$617 , 000 from the Small Cities Development grant for this project
which leaves a $1 , 833 , 000 local commitment for the downtown
and $500 ,000 for the T.H. 101 by-pass, or a total of $2,333 ,000.
The division -of expenditures with MnDOT -have been arbitrarily
assigned , and may change before a formal agreement with MnDOT
is put forth. In fact it now appears the MnDOT contribution
will be larger than 50% of the $5. 9 million because it favors
a more costly bridge design. However these are the assumptions
used in the grant application and we have no new numbers to
substitute at this time. Therefore I request that the Council
be asked to adopt a motion which affirms the City' s financial
commitment to this project.
Reguested Action:
Adopt Resolution No. 2378
RESOLUTION NO. 2378
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
COMMITMENT OF FUNDS FOR THE PROPOSED T. H. 101/ 169
JUNCTION IMPROVEMENTS AS PART OF ITS 1985 SMALL CITIES
DEVELOPMENT GRANT FOR DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has submitted an application
for the 1985 Small Cities Development Grant for the purpose
of downtown revitalization ; and
WHEREAS , the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic
Development has requested additional information to confirm
the City ' s commitment to provide local funds to further this
project; and
WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee has previously requested
the Minnesota Department of Transportation ( MnDOT ) to enter
into a partnership that would further a MnDOT programmed project
(T.H. 101 by-pass) and a City of Shakopee priority project (T.H.-
101/169 Junction/Bridge Improvements) ; and
WHEREAS , the City previously received estimates that the
total cost of this partnership would involve $1 , 000 , 000 for
the design of the T. H. 101 by-pass and $4, 900 ,000 for the design
and construction of T. H. 169 bridge and junction improvements ;
and
WHEREAS , on December 11 , 1985 , the City Council expressed
an interest in proposing a 50/50 partnership with the Minnesota
Department of Transportation for this project and on January
9 , 1985 , the MnDOT District 5 Engineer sent a letter stating
a willingness of MnDOT to participate in funding the T.H. 169
bridge construction and to jointly pursue the design of the
T.H. 101 by-pass ; and
WHEREAS , the City has previously established the Minnesota
River Valley Housing and Redevelopment Project No . 1 and Tax
Increment District No . 4 which can provide for funding of a
portion of the proposed projects.
NOW , THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, Scott County, Minnesota that funds from tax
increment district number 4 be commited for the City' s contribution
to the proposed partnership with MnDOT, in the amount of $1 , 833 ,000
for downtown improvements and $500, 000 for the design of the
T. H. 101 by-pass.
t
c:
1985
-r C)r Cannon Valley
tt i t
Girl Scout Council
Box 61
Norin field, MN 55057
(507) 645-6604
February 28, 1985
Julius A. Coller, II
Shakopee City Attorney
211 West First Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Coller:
The Executive Committee of the Cannon Valley Girl Scout Council, which is
authorized to take actions rather than call a special board meeting, has
agreed to the City of Shakopee's offer of $500.00 to relinquish any and all
interest or claim to lots 3 and 4 of Block 52, City of Shakopee.
If you will send us a copy of a Quit Claim Deed to that effect, along with the
payment, we will sign the deed and return it to you.
If you have further questions please don't hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
� G%��Com. ,,•
ohn Y, Jacks
Executive Director
�c: John Anderson
- - �.•i.U....,Pn,'lin.,..
N
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Purchase of Second Used Vehicle
DATE: March 1, 1985
INTRODUCTION
Council has appropriated $6 , 500 in the 1985 Capital Equipment
Fund for the purchase of one investigative used vehicle and one
additional used vehicle.
BACKGROUND
I have obtained the required quotations for the purchase of
the second used vehicle.
1 . Gelco Corporation - 1982 Buick Regal - $3 , 730. 00.
2. ARI Leasing Company - 1982 Buick Regal - $3 , 675 . 00 .
3 . Dart & Kraft Financial Corp. - 1982 Buick Regal - $3, 525 . 00 .
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize staff to purchase a 1982 Buick Regal, 4-door sedan
for $3 , 525. 00 from Dark & Kraft Financial Corporation.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize staff to purchase a 1982 Buick Regal, 4-door sedan
for $3 , 525. 00 from Dark & Kraft Financial Corporation.