HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/04/1986 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: January 30 , 1986
1. Judy Cox has informed me that the VFW Post No. 4046 is
renewing their gambling license with the State Gambling
Board. They meet the City of Shakopee ' s criteria for a
license, so no action is needed by Council (application
attached) .
2. The staff had a memo in the suspense file to review changes
in the walk lights for pedestrians crossing First Avenue
downtown. Since we made the minor adjustments last fall
we have had no further contact from citizens , and LaVina
Busacker representing the senior citizens had been informed
about the minor changes made last fall. This item will
no longer be tracked and will only be addressed if someone
brings it up again.
3 . Attached is the meeting calendar for February 1986 .
4. Attached is a letter from the Governor ' s office responding
to our concerns regarding the Bloomington Mega-Mall.
5 . Attached is a letter from Senator Durenberger responding
to our concerns regarding the reauthorization of the Clean
Water Act.
6. Attached is the monthly financial newsletter from Ehlers
and Associates, Inc.
7. Attached is the quarterly financial report the Evensen
Dodge Report. Please note the graph on page two.
8 . Attached is an insert in the Briggs and Morgan monthly
financial newsletter addressing many of the proposed federal
changes for non-exempt bonds.
9 . Attached are the minutes of the January 8 and January 22 ,
1986 meetings of -the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee.
10. Attached are the minutes of the January 9 , 1986 meeting
of the Shakopee Coalition. Please note that the Coalition
is reviewing their list of community needs to select projects
for 1986 .
11 . Attached are the minutes of the December 23 , 1985 meeting
of the Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory Commission.
12 . Attached are the minutes of the January 9 , 1985 meeting
of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission.
13 . Attached are the agendas for the February 13 , 1986 meeting
of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission.
JKA/jms
FOR BOARD USE ONLY
Charitable Gambling Control Bd i
Rm N-475 Griggs-Midway Bldg
� `'•'� 1821 University Avenue
h1.1l5A•s
St. Paul , MN 55104-3383
GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION
(Class A, B, or 0
INSTRUCTIONS: 1. PRINT OR TYPE.
2. Bring completed application to local governing body, obtain signature and date on all copies,
and leave goldenrod copy. Applicant keeps pink copy and sends remaining cupies to above
address.
3. Changes in application information must be submitted within 10 days after the Chan
T e of Application:
Class A - Fee $100.00 (Bingo, Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Pull-Tabs)
❑ Class B - Fee $ 50.00 (Raffles, Paddlewheels, Tipboards, Pull-Tabs)
❑ Class C - Fee $ 50.00 (Bingo only)
Make checks payable to: Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board.
f
Applic nt (Official, legal Site A dress,
42
of organization)
Business Address City,.,, State Zip _
City, State, Zip County
County Yes .No 1. Are all gambling activities conducted at
rthe above site? If no, complete a sepa-
Business Telephone Number Federal I.D. Number rate application form for each site as a
(;11/�) A40(5% ?,, separate license is issued for each site.
Type of Organization
� 2. Is site located within city/town limits?
C] Fraternal IN Veterans
❑ Religious ❑ Other Nonprofit Organization 3. Does organization own the site where
Type of Organization Charter gambling activity will be conducted? If
❑ International National ❑ State no, attach copy of the lease for the
Number of Years in Number of Articles of site.
Existence, 'n Minnesota) Incorporation (if incorporated) Lessor Name kit lease or rent
Locations Where Articles are Filed Address
Yes No 1. Does organization have a dues stru r ? City, State, Zip
ers "
number of active memb
2. Has organization been previously lice Gamb g Manager Name
��
by •the Boards If yes, give date '7// inG W 'r
3. Has license ever been denied, suspended Address
or revoked? If yes check all that apply: � 1r J` s r� E' ,`f
❑Denied ❑Suspended ❑Revoked City, State, Zip
4. Is organization exempt from payment of �- �' O ��'� ��� �'�; '" 7f
U.S. income tax? If yes, attach copy of The $10,000"fidelity bond required by Minnesota
letter declaring exemption. Statutes 349.09 has been obtained.
5. Is organization tax exempt from payment Company Name Bond Number
of Minnesota tax? If yes, attach copy of r
letter declaringexemption. `'f7el�t4
�f Name of Organization's Officers andf /Titles
c. �►-� .1'fr:%/S '� �,,� .�-,-, ��L.
b.'6o d .z. T"l'`" )fj— ,� -`Y I JCtr ..
CG-00001-01 (12/64) Continued on Page 2
- 2 _
vfinnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION
(Class A, B, or C)
GAMBLING SITE AUTHORIZATION
By my signature below, local law enforcement officers or agents of the Board are hereby
authorized to enter upon the site , at any time gambling is being conducted, to observe
the gambling and to enforce the l.aw for any unauthorized game or practice.
BANK RECORDS AUTHORIZATION
By my signature below, the Board is hereby authorized to inspect the bank records of the
General Gambling Bank Account whenever necessary to fulfill requirements of current gambling
rules and law.
OATH
I hereby declare that
1. I have read this application and all information submitted to the Board;
2. All information submitted is true, accurate , and complete ;
3. all other required information has been fully disclosed;
4. I am the chief executive officer of the organization;
5. I assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful operation of all activities to be
conducted ;
6. 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 Narne of Or aniza ion
Signage (Must tw, signed b Chief Executive Officer)
Title
Date s t
ia
:)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY
I hereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. By acknowledging receipt, I
admit having been served with notice that this application will be reviewed by the
Charitable Gambling Control Board and if approved by the Board, will become effective 30
days from the date of receipt (noted below) , unless a resolution of the local governing
body is passed which specifically disallows such activity and a copy of that resolution is
received by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 30 days of the below noted date.
LOCAL GOVERNING BODY
vame of Local Governing Body
City of 3hfo-kopett
Signgtvpe of Persbn Wei4ing App at on
II % � 1Q ' ORGANIZATION
i
Date R egeive d (This is date from which the 30 day Name of Representative for Gambling License Applicant
approval�egins) (serving notice)
jimucry 28, 1'w86 ,7Q/Y+ '/ ';Ci.S
M-00001-01 (12/84) White - Board
y
K
W �
� n rom � � �
w Z7 m o n w •• rr C
o � (no (D o
(D
b t-1
ro rt 0 d
• C !n
N .7 > N N
to K < O W
inn „ per.
p � rt oG rt
Ln
Ul cc F
�] 0 C7 V)
rt
�u rt 0 c
rt- h
(Dt� K
Ln 61
w 0) (D w 3 a y
In LO r
110 'z� `C LOH•
0 CIO
R. ~-L
rr 0
� � K
rt,
�] O O W
H
K
N N ~
i
Cn
f-3
C
a
}
S'T'ATE OF MINNESO'T'A
OFFICE OF THE GovERRVOR RECEIVED'6
ST. PAUL 55155 JAN 2 2
RUDY PERPICH
GOVERNOR
January 20, 1986
Mr . John K. Anderson
City Administrator
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376
Dear Mr . Anderson:
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on the Bloomington megamall
proposal with Governor Perpich. He appreciated receiving your
comments and has asked me to respond to your letter.
The Governor ' s support was based on his desire to create jobs and
bring new development to Minnesota. For the same reasons, he has
supported and assisted business enterprises in all parts of the
state.
Thank you again for taking the time to write and to share your
thoughts on the project with Governor Perpich.
Sincerely,
Ann M. Glumac
Deputy Communications Director
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
DAVE DURENBERGER
MINNE SOT;,
,I cnif eft Zf of ez ,donate
WASHINGTON, D.G. 20510
January 22 , 1986
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379
Dear John :
Thant crnr,u for contacting mcg office regarding the
reauthorization of the Clean Water Act . I appreciate your
taking time to share your thoughts on the amendment requiring
permits for municipal separate storm sewers . I understand the
concern you have with the potential cost of requiring every city
to go through a separate permitting process .
As you know, the House and Senate have passed separate
clean water reauthorization bills . These bills are currently in
a House-Senate Conference Committee , to which I have been
appointed. However , because this particular provision is
contained in both the House and Senate bills , technically it is
not before the committee for discussion .
At the same time , please be assured that I will give
careful attention to the Conference Committee ' s handling of this
provision . In addition , I will be working with the
Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that this requirement
will not impose an unreasonable burden on municipalities .
Again , thank you for sharing your thoughts with me on this
important environmental legislation . I will be in touch again
when the Conference Committee has concluded its work .
ir,cerely ,
Dave Durenberger
United States Senator
DD/jle
EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
FINANCIAL SPECIALISTS
FIRST NATIONAL-SOO LINE CONCOURSE 507 MARQUETTE AVE. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 339-8291 (AREA CODE 6121
F I LE: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates. Inc.
Please distribute to governing body members
January, 1986
NEWSLETTER
We have just had a most unusual half year with its unprecedented supply of tax exempt bonds matched only
by unprecedented demand. Everyone predicted a year-end crunch of offerings by issuers attempting to beat
the December 31 tax law deadline that was sure to force up interest rates. What few did not anticipate was
that investors, too, saw a phantom deadline, and their demand overpowered supply. The BBI dropped from
9.35% on September 23 to 8.51% by December 5.
Much of the buying was by institutions speculating that reduced supply after January 1 which would reduce
tax exempt interest rates and increase bond values. However, if a large supply of speculative tax exempts
overhangs the market, the expected increase in bond values may not materialize.
Variable Rate Bonds: Who's the "Stuckee"? It is possible to get much lower interest rates on long term
financings if you allow the bondholder to "put" the bonds back at short intervals -- every day, week, month,
six months or a year. Thus, an 8% or 9% long term rate becomes, say, 5% (plus letter of credit and other
costs).
The obvious risk is that holders might put the bonds to the issuer who might be hard pressed to come up with
the cash. The issuer then has to be prepared to "up the ante", raise the short term rate, to make the bonds
L attractive to holders.
Short term rates might increase dramatically, higher than long term rates. It has happened before. Then, so
they say, the issuer can convert to long term, fixed rate obligations. However, short term rates are likely to
rise because long term rates have risen so high so that borrowers may not want to commit to them. The
issuer may be trapped.
We can protect the issue with a letter of credit, but the LOC bank protects investors, not issuers. If the
bonds are put to the issuer, and if the LOC bank has to take them, the interest rate typically will go to
prime plus 1% -- much higher than short term or long term tax exempt rates. This will force the issuer to
remarket the bonds, either short term or long term, at what could be surprising rates. So the issuer is the
"stuckee."
Meet Jim Thoreen, Our Newest Associate. Jim comes to us from Clay County, Minnesota (Moorhead) where
he was Executive Secretary to the County Board following service as a representative to the Minnesota
Association of Counties. Before that he was County Auditor and Executive Secretary to Beltrami County,
MN. Jim is a graduate of Bemidji State University. He and his wife, Bonnie, live in Minnetonka.
Have a goody r! We look fo Ar arking with you in 1986.
Ehle s and Assocates, Inc.
7
THE EYE SEN DODGE REPORT
Trends In Public Finance
3608 IDS Tower, Minneapolis, MN * Winter 1986 * 612/338-3535 * 800/328-8200 800/328-8100 MN
Brothers, Inc., predicts a sharp
Tax Reform Market Trends decline in volume in the new year.
His prediction is based on the belief
Update that there will be no powerful rally
1985 — A Record Year in 1986 comparable to the one in
Rates Down, Volume U 1985 and that much of the bor-
P rowing done at the end of 1985 was
On December 17, 1985,the long- really financing that would have
awaited Tax Reform proposal been done in 1986 if there had been
passed the House. Issuers should 1985 was a banner year for the
e�rathe H n im tax-exempt market.After two years no pending tax bill. The net effect
involving a new distinction be- of relative stability, tax-exempt is ecrease in supply;accord—
g rates declined dramatically. The ing to Kaufman,is that institutions
tween bonds for essential and well outbid individuals for the re-
"non-essential"functions.Non-es- 20-bond index which opened the
se on- functions include, but are year at 9.87%dropped to 8.36%by maining supply and that tax-ex-
not limited to the include,
single the end of the year, a fall of 151 empt yields should fall, relative to
following: g basis points (1.51%). This is its taxable fixed-rate investments.
and multifamily housing, indus-
trial development and redevelop- lowest level since July index
also
ment bonds, student loan bonds, The revenue-bond na
established a five-year record low Evensen Dodge
and financing for 501(c) (3) or-
ganizations. Bonds for non-essen- T the last week of December.
1985
tial functions would fall under a These sharp declines came despite
record-high volume in the market. Highlights
volume cap of$175 per capita or
Decembers volume of$27.2 billion
$200 million per state,whichever is
was the largest monthly total ever
greater. In addition, some func- exem t bond markyear
due record low
tions previously eligible for tax- and brought the total for the year interest rates and the uncertain outlook
exempt financing are no longer to $161.5 billion, a record
increase for the future of municipal bonds. In
authorized. over the previous record of$101.9 1985,Evensen Dodge assisted clients with
The bill also contains restric- billion set last year. a variety of financial consulting services
tions on advance refundings and
The two primary causes of this includingthe issuance of $1.3 billion in
increase were the strength gth of financings, consisting f 168 separate
outlines provisions which would g � g op
require arbitrage earnings to be the market and uncertainties about issues. The following are examples:
rebated to the federal government. the eventual course of proposed tax State of Missouri — Conducted an
reform legislation. The legislation advance refunding The effective date of the House g of $150.5 million in
nt form has an effective
in its current bonds for the Department of Administra-
bill is January 1, 1986. Although p — _
_tli_e Senate as not acted on a tax date of janamy ' g-a tion.
last l
th
t i
k
th
to e maren e a
reform bill yet and is not likely to rushMontana Health Facilities Authority—
do so until late spring, issuers in quarter of the year by issuers of Structured and sold two variable rate
1986 must be prepared to comply certain types of bonds which would issues($66.9 and$18.0 million)for loans
with the law if it is passed in its be eliminated or severely restricted to various health institutions in the State
current form. Until the bill is under the terms of the proposed of Montana.
Y P
further clarified or the effective
bill. One type of issue particularly Cit of Minneapolis,Minnesota—Eval-
dates are changed, it may not be affected was advance-refunding uated the feasibility of and made recom-
possible to issue certain non-essen- bonds. The strength of the market mendations regarding financing measures
tial function bonds. Before pro- made refundings feasible and the to fully fund the City's outstanding pen-
ceeding too far in planning for a potential restrictions in 1986 made sion liability.
new issue, municipalities should it necessary to complete them prior Olmsted County (Rochester), Minne-
contact their financial advisors and to year-end. sota — Developed financing options,
bond counsel to determine the feas- Regarding the outlook for the reviewed contracts and project structure
ibility of any new financing under market in 1986, one influential and sold$25 million in bonds for a solid
current law. commentator, Henry Kaufman, waste resource recovery facility.
Chief Economist at Salomon (Continued on back)
Evensen Dodge,Inc.,formerly T.G.Evensen&Associates,Inc.,was founded in 1922 as the nation's first independent financial consultant to
■.
■■ state,regional and local governments.The firm assists its clients in planning,structuring and marketing cash flow,capital improvement and
other long-term financing.Evensen Dodge also prepares feasibility studies,performs rate analyses,and provides computer services,software,
and a variety of additional financial services.
January 9, 1986 BOND BUYERS INDEX Highlights(continued)
1985 MARKET HISTORY City of Ames, Iowa- Structured and
Prepared by Evensen Dodge, Inc. sold $10.6 million in bond anticipation
notes for a wastewater treatment plant.
10.0% Local Governments in North Carolina
9.8% - Designed and conducted a series of
9.6% competitive advance refundings for the
counties of Union, Robeson, New Han-
9.4% over and Halifax,and the cities of Burling-
H9.2% ton,Southern Pines and Greenville.
a 9.0%
W
8.8% Revenue Sharing,
A 8.6% Urban Grants Slashed
8,4% 20 Year G.O. index Administration Warns
8.2% This Week -8.04% Local Governments
8.0% Last Week- 8.33%
7.8% 1 Year Treasury Bills Local governments face a cut of$502
7.6% This Week -7.48% million in the$4.6 billion revenue sharing
Last Week -7.58% program and cuts of 33%in urban grants
7.4% 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 for 1986.
Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec The revenue sharing reductions,which
will affect 36,000 municipalities, were
RECENT BOND SALES outlined by the Office of Management
Amount BBI NIR and Budget to the National League of
Date Issuer (0001s) Purpose Maturity % Rating %
Cities in early January. According to the
12-2 Richfield,MN $ 6,265 Refunding 87/02 8.51 Aa 7.77 OMB, the $502 million cut will result in
12-2 Lake Comas
Rehab.Dis.,WI 1,000 Improvement 86/00 8.51 NR 8.39 part from compliance with the Gramm-
12-2 Elmhurst,IL 3,500 Improvement 87/96 8.51 Aa 7.17 Rudman plan to balance the budget by
12-3 Oak Creek,WI 4,665 Refunding 87/98 8.51 A 8.03 1991. Last year, Congress voted t0 cut
12-3 Florida Dept. y g
of Nat.Res. 250 Revenue 87/10 8.51 A 8.77 $380 million from the $1.1 billion that
12-3 Arizona State University 57,700 Refunding Rev. 86/05 8.51 Al 7.97 ]OCalltleS will receive in October. The
12-3 Dallas-Ft.Worth 153,000 Airport Rev. 88/00,
International Airport 05,15 8.51 A/A 9.23 OMB proposal would cut an additional
12-3 Halifax County,NC 6,500 Refunding 86/97 8.51 A/A- 7.09 $122 million.Although local government
12-3 Mesa County,CO 41,185 Refunding Rev. 89/00,
07,13 8.51 NR 8.93 groups have vowed to fight for congres-
12-3 Ocean City,NJ 4,300 Improvement 86/95 8.51 A/A- 7.35 sional reauthorization of revenue sharing,
12-3 Santa Barbara the administration assumes that the
Red.Agy.,CA 19,830 Tax Allocation 87/07 8.51 Baal/A- 9.31
12-3 State of Texas 30,000 Parks 87/01 8.51 Aaa/AAA 7.89 program will expire next October as
12-3 Jackson,TN 6,500 Refunding 90/98 8.51 A 7.71 scheduled.
12-3 Columbia,SC 1,000 Improvement 87/96 8.51 Al 7.07
12-4 Pope County,MN 1,025 Sewer 88/02 8.51 A 8.04 Cities with grant proposals pending are
12-4 Cherry Hills Twp.,NJ 11,035 Various 86/97 8.51 Aa/AA 7.54 being sent letters by the Department of
12-5 Council Bluffs,IA 5,200 Improvement 87/05 8.51 Aa 8.27
12-5 Normal,IL 11,450 Improvement 87/00 8.51 Aal 7.72 Housing and Urban Development warn-
12-6 Monmouth County,NJ 11,900 Refunding 91/96 8.51 Aa 7.44 ing them to expect cuts Of up to one-third
12-9 New Hope,MN 415 Improvement 89/03 8.54 Al 8.08
12-9 State of Pennsylvania 99,400 Refunding 87/03 8.54 A/AA- T85 in the amount they receive. These reduc-
12-9 _ Red Wing,MN 1,425 Improvement 90/06 8.54 Aa 8.14 tions are due to the administration's
12-10 Olmsted County,MN 24-,V550 Waste Recov. 88/07 8.54 Aa/AA- 8.A0= - r----
12-10 Des Moines Area proposal to reduce the fiscal 1987 deficit
Com.Col.,IA 1,605 Job Training 87/95 8.54 Aa 7.15 to $144 billion from the projected $200
12-10 State of Nevada 16,500 Reservoir 88/05 8.54 Aa/AA 8.02 billion.
12-10 State of Missouri 150,560 Refunding 86/09 8.54 Aa/AA 8.19
12-10 Bloomington,IL 17,300 Improvement 87/01 8.54 Aal 7.77 Community Development Block
12-10 Greenville,NC 3,525 Refunding 87/01 8.54 Al/A 7.69 Grants would be cut by $1 billion next
12-10 Port of Seattle,WA 40,800 Revenue 87/01 8.54 AI/AA 8.10 year,to$2.1 billion.The block rants are
12-11 Moorestown Twp.,NJ 3,500 Various 86/00 8.54 AI/AA- 7.48 y g
12-11 Orange,CT 9,600 Sewer 87/05 8.54 Aa 7.65 the main source of federal aid for redevel-
12-12 Duluth,MN 6,000 TAN 12-86 8.54 NR 6.24 ment of blighted areas and general
12-12 Manhasset Union FSD,NY 19,700 School 87/01 8.54 Aa 7.27 o P g g
12-12 MAC for the economic development.
City of New York,NY 123,750 Refunding Rev. 94/02. The administration has also proposed
04,08 8.54 A/A 8.27
12-16 Bloomington,MN 2,500 Improvement 88/95 8.42 AA 7.03 the elimination of Urban Development
12-16 Golden Valley,MN 6,700 Improvement 90/06 8.42 Aa 7.98 Action Grants in its 1987 budget,which
12-17 State of Florida 55,965 Revenue 86/04,10 8.42 AI/A 8.35 goes t0 Cori Feb4. UDAG'S
12-17 Memphis,TN 58,000 Improvement 88/05 8.42 Aa 7.78 g Congress February
12-17 Johnstown,NY 2,850 Water 86/03 8.42 Baal 7.86 have already been targeted for reductions
12-17 Robbinsdale,MN 3,000 Improvement 86/05 8.42 A 8.04 f 30% b Congress t0 meet deficit-
12-17
Franklin County,OH 16,400 Port Facilities 87/06 8.42 AA 8.00 O ) On g
12-17 St.Paul ISD#625,MN 17,000 TAN 2-87 8.42 MIG-1 5.90 cutting requirements for 1986.
12-17 Battle Creek,MI 9,930 various 87/95 8.42 A/A+ 7.67 In addition, the budget is expected to
12-17 Summit,NJ 3,105 Various 87/98 8.42 Aaa/AA 7.29
12-18 Lakeville,MN 1,050 Improvement TIF 89/96 8.42 A 7.35 call for major reductions In subsidized
12-18 Aiken County,SC 2,400 Improvement 88/97 8.42 A/A 7.56 housing,housing programs for the elderly
12-18 Chesterfield Co.,VA 62,300 Improvement 88/06 8.42 Aal 7.60 and haridiCa ed, and mass transit
12-19 Minneapolis,MN 70,200 Improvement TIF 87/14 8.42 Aaa 8.26 PP
12-20 Litchfield.MN 1,615 Refunding 86/95 8.42 A 7.26 spending.
Please distribute additional copies to members of your board or council.
BRIGGS AND MORGAN
Public Finance - Conflict with state law. The alloca-
tion of bonding authority in current
IMPACT OF PENDING FEDERAL LEGISLATION state law is nearly $100 million
more than the proposed federal volume
The U.S. House of Representatives cap. Bonds issued after December 311
has passed a tax bill that includes 1985, in comp is
ting
many new provisions related to public ., .
h the bill has not state legislat' • comply
finance. Even though with the restrict' r servations
been adopted by the Senate it will of bonding uthority in the pending
affect the ability of governments to federal legislation. There ore, bonds
issue bonds because of its retroactive g'
December 31, 1985, effective date. Until whit are un er exicome
Congress acts to either change the state an aca ecome
effective date or pass the bill, uncer- taxable if" ongress a opptts the proposed
tax bill.
tainty in the public finance market
will continue. Arbitrage. Arbitrage refers to
The unified volume cap. The federal the investment earnings on tax exempt
legislation would create a new unified bond proceeds at yields greater than
g the yield on the bonds. The proposed
volume cap that is smaller than the federal legislation contains arbitrage
existing caps. The new volume cap would limitations that are far more restrictive
apply to bonds that have never before than in current law. It also extends
been subject to a cap. those provisions to apply to all tax
exempt bonds, and imposes onerous com-
- Volume. In the bill, Minnesota pliance standards. Rebates of excess
is allocated tax exempt bonding author- earnings from the governmental issuer
ity of $175 per capita or approximately to the federal government are also
$728 million. In comparison, existing required. Failure to comply with these
Minnesota caps for student loan and requirements would result in a loss
industrial development bonds ($624 of tax exempt status.
million) and for single family housing
revenue bonds ($200 million) total Impact on traditional uses of
over $824 million. Many other bonds bonds. Because of its retroactive effec-
would also be subject to the cap. tive date, the pending federal legisla-
The total current uses of tax exempt tion is affecting the current tax exempt
bonds that would be subject to the bond market. In order to enhance their
cap in the pending federal legislation marketability as tax exempt bonds,
are estimated by some to exceed $1.6 it may be necessary to assure that
billion--more than double the size the bonds comply with existing state
of the proposed unified cap. and federal legislation and also with
- Bonds included. The new unified the pending federal legislation. In
volume cap would apply to a broader some cases this may be difficult or
range of bonds. Currently, student impossible.
loan bonds, industrial development
bonds and single family housing revenue The brief discussions below suggest
bonds are subject to a cap. The new some of the issues that must be con-
cap would also apply to other housing sidered for four of the traditional
bonds, many tax increment bonds, uses of tax exempt bonds.
bonds for hospitals and other nonprofit
entities and perhaps some general - Housing bonds. Housing revenue
obligation bonds. The test for whether bonds would be subject to the new
a bond is subject to the cap relates volume cap and the more restrictive
to the amount of non-governmental arbitrage requirements. In addition,
benefit or use of the bond proceeds. single family bonds must meet new
This use or benefit test would be income limitations on home purchasers.
far more restrictive than the test Rental housing bonds currently not
imposed by current law. subject to a volume cap would be
included in the new unified volume
- Allocation. The pending federal cap.
legislation allocates bonding authority
among various uses. Most of these - Industrial development bonds (IDBs) .
allocations can be changed by actions IDBS would be subject to the new
of the state. In addition, 50% of volume cap and to the more restrictive
the cap is allocated to the state arbitrage limitations. It is probably
and its agencies and 50% is allocated not realistic for existing entitlement
to local jurisdictions. This allocation issuers to assume that they will
between the state and local jurisdic- continue to have the same entitlement
tions may also be changed by the because of the increased competition
state. for less state total bonding authority.
BRIGGS AxD MORGAN
- Tax increment bonds. Many tax Competitive Pool
increment bonds as they are currently Allocated by
used in Minnesota would be subject Commissioner of the
to the new volume cap. In addition Department of Energy
there are more restrictive substantive and Economic Development $350.3
limi taions,_on, efli3crement
bond prod,„„6 ,. kle g -imitations
would prevent many of the uses of
-. Housing Revenue Bonds
tax incremer, r � �gn �rMtted
Minnesota Housing Finance
by existing state legislation. The Agency $145.0
more restrictive arbitrage requirements Minneapolis 16.0
would also apply to tax increment St. Paul 8.5
bonds. Duluth 3.0
Pool 27.5
- General obligation bonds. General Subtotal Housing $200.0
obligation bonds for traditional
government purposes would now be State Total $824.3
subject to the more restrictive arbi-
trage requirements, including the The competition for tax exempt
requirement for periodic rebates bonding aut orifi-'wi` -` probably be
to the federal government. In addition, more intense because `" 1 ti�ta°1 amount
some G.O. bonds could be subject to of bonding 6M—f educed. The
the volume cap. nature of '`th6—c�' i 16-ff will also
be substantially different than in
previous years because of the many
State legislative issues. The different tax exempt bond uses to be
pending federal legislation raises included under the single unified cap.
several issues that the state legislature For example, within a single city the
should address. The most difficult agency responsible for housing develop-
ment will be e-'-^efi^g for allocations
and potentially divisive of these is
the allocation of the new unified volume from the same pool of bonding authority
cap. another agency in the city respon-
cap. sible for general economic development.
In addition to the competition between
housing and economic Q1P_P uses,
The following table lists the student loans, tax increment no rofit
current allocation of state tax exempt and some.. QnP ��tign „issuers
bonding authority for 1986. This total will be colnpvt n_a_ fg the same limited
”
allocation is much larger than the pool of bonding authority.
proposed federal volume cap and does -`.Y
not address the many other types of Because of the limited amount
bonds that would be subject to the of tax exempt bonding authority allocated
new unified volume cap in the pending to the state, some issuers may want
federal legislation. to consider issuing taxable bonds to
finance their projects. Some changes
to state law may also be proposed in
order to make taxable bonds more market-
able. For example, exemption from state
taxes could reduce the cost of this
1986 Allocation and State Tax type of financing. Changes in the
Exempt Bonding Authority interest rate limitations for taxable
(In Millions - $000,000's) general obligation bonds may also be
desirable.
Entitlement Issuers The state legislature will probably
Higher Education Coordinating adjourn by May 1 and Congressional
Board $ 25.0 action on the tax bill may not occur
Iron Range Resources and by then. If the federal legislation
Rehabilitation Board 30.0 is still pending, the legislature may
Department of Energy and adopt an allocation plan contingent
Economic Development 60.0 on passage of the pending federal legis-
Duluth 17.3 lation. However, the legislature might
Minneapolis 73.9 not act on this issue. If the legislature
St. Paul 53.8 does not act and the federal bill passes
Moorhead 5.0 or is still pending, the state allocation
Rochester 5.0 system will remain inconsistent with
St. Cloud 5.0 federal legislation. This inconsistency
will make it difficult to market many
Subtotal $274.0 tax exempt bonds.
Proceedings of the
Downtown Ad Hoc Committee
Shakopee, Minnesota
January 8 , 1986
Chm Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 A.M. with the
following members present: Steve Clay, Terry Forbord, Gary
Laurent, Mike Sortum, Dan Steil, Jim Stillman, Joe Topic, Bill
Wermerskirchen and Liaison, Jerry Wampach. Also present Jeanne
Andre,Community Development Director, John Anderson, City Ad-
ministrator, Timm Nelson, Intern and Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer.
Tim Erkkila and Barb Cross , Westwood Engineering arrived later.
The agenda was amended to include a report on the City Hall
Citing Committee and the Housing Alliance.
Steve Clay/Terry Forbord moved that the minutes of December
4th, 11th, and 18th, 1985 be approved. Motion carried.
The Committee reviewed and discussed proposed streetscape policies
with the help of computer run examples of eight parcel samples
which included information in five unit intervals for assessment
formulas ranging from 30/ff/70 sq ft to 70/ff/30 sq ft. The
Committee is to keep in mind that in order to keep the city' s
option to special levy for streetscape the city is required
by law to assess at least 200.
Joe Topic/Steve Clay moved that assessments on residential property
be deferred with no interest until property is converted to
commercial use and that those assessments be paid for initially
from tax increment proceeds or other funds until the conversion
use occurs.
Mike Sortum/Steve Clay moved to amend the motion by adding and
that for any non-street scape street improvements the residential
property owners pay that now (eg. street improvements) . Motion
carried on amendment.
Motion on amended motion carried.
Steve Clay/Terry Forbord moved not to assess the city parking
lots but distribute that cost to the rest of the assessed parcels
in the District. Motion carried.
Steve Clay/Jim Stillman moved to use the 70 ff/30 sq ft assessment
formula for assessment purposes . Motion carried.
The Community Development Director proposed to further refine
assessment parcels under the new scheme for Committee ' s perusal
at a later date.
The Committee turned their attention to Westwood' s Streetscape
planning summary. A proto type of the streetscape design with
a jog at mid-block, nodes , parking spaces and placement of trees
and other amenities was studied. Some additional storm sewer
work would need to be done because of the nodes. Tim Erkkila
said there was an alternative for drainage by maintaining a
flow line along the curb but this might not be desirable. The
City Engineer said that this type of drainage could cause additional
problems of maintenance.
Since the Committee could not come to full agreement on the
jog and the nodes Tim Erkila suggested they move on to another
issue. A diagram showing streetscape planning costs for each
construction dollar was reviewed along with a summary cost sheet
for streetsccape.
The City Administrator reported that the City Hall Siting Committee
would be meeting January 14 .
The Housing Alliance has officially withdrawn from the proposed
housing project but they will be meeting to see if there is
an alternate cite for senior housing.
The next meeting of the Downtown Committee will be held on January
29 at 7: 30 A.M.
Steve Clay/Jim Stillman moved to adjourn at 9: 15 A.M.
Motion carried.
Darleen Schesso
Recording Secretary
Proceedings of the
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
Shakopee, Minnesota
January 22, 1986
Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 a.m. with
the following voting members present: Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent,
Jim Stillman and Pete Sames. Absent: Steve Clay, Don Martin,
Mike Sortum, Dan Steil, Joe Topic, Bill Wermerskirchen and Tim
Keane. Also present: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director,
John Anderson, City Administrator, Timm Nelson, Intern and Beth
Moe, Shakopee Valley News.
The Committee met to discuss sites which they would like the
City Hall Siting Committee to consider. The twelve sites were
as follows:
1. The half block where the library sits
2 . The half block immediately west of St. Marks school
3 . The present City Hall block
4. Cactus Jack
5 . Block 47 (Phillips Funeral Home block)
6 . The half block west of the present highrise on Levee
Drive
7 . Block 5
8. The block south of the Post Office
9 . Shared space with a new County Public Safety building
in Block 48 (Rock Spring building block)
10. Shared space with Scott County Administration south
of their new addition after it is vacated by the Sheriff ' s
Department
11. The present Fire Station plus additional adjacent
lots with the Fire Station being moved to the current
Public Works Building.
12 . Any other sites the Downtown Committee feels would
rate well based upon the evaluation criteria.
The Committee considered each site individually keeping in mind
the criteria used by the Siting Committee. They were also sensitive
to the fact that the Siting Committee would probably not consider
a renovated building. A discussion was held about shared space
with the County. It was the consensus that although there were
some definite advantages to this arrangement separate facilities
would be more desireable.
By process of elimination the following sites were picked in
order of preference for recommendation to the Site Committee.
( 1) Block 47 - Some of the property could possibly be acquired
through "creeping acquisition" and possibly an arrangement
could be worked out with St. Mark' s for shared parking
space. This site fits almost all the Committees weighting
criteria identified by the Committee and it fits into the
institutional core identified in the downtown plan. Need
for acquiring homes is the largest disadvantage although
the advanced age of some of the residents would make acquisition
with life estates possible. It was judged that Phillip
Funeral home could remain, with initial acquisition to
include the other four lots in the south half of the Block.
( 2 ) The half block where the library sets - since the City
owns the whole block, maybe the new City Hall could include
a Library. The main advantage of this site over Block
47 is that no property would have to be acquired, but it
wouldn' t follow the downtown land use plan of the City,
and creeping acquisition to the north would not be likely.
( 3 ) The present City Hall block - It was pointed out that this
would be an excellent way to get rid of some of the downtown
blight and have a highly visible City Hall. The building
on the corner of lst & Holmes would have potential as a
museum or some similar use. The disadvantages of this
site are that it would take up land from the retail core
and the commercial buildings would have a higher acquisition
cost. Also the block could be redeveloped with grant funds
and tax-increment financing if it remains privately owned.
It was the consenus of those present that these sites be recommended
to the Siting Committee for their January 28th meeting which
will be held either at the Council Chambers or the St. Francis
Regional Centers Health Education room. The attached itemized
criteria outlines the consensus of those present on how the
various sites meet the rating criteria.
Darleen Schesso
Recording Secretary
City :all
ee
:•?:D"`: John Y.. nnder�
. Lty Administrator
£-. neighing of Ci`y :all S • L
i . ing - va_..a:icn Cri: er�a
L1 TZ • February 22, i 9B
cn
I - have discussed HEI-1
Committee
he 1: eria for evaluating the Cii HEI si`
,.ha . ..he Committee will be reviewing wi`h some departmentY1 . e5
and one Suggestion waS that ; � . heads
. he cr_.,erla ..hems elves be weigr+ped .
i believe that that will ,
be is_f`1 exercise and encourage
} ou to weight the following -_ Oi Si ,.e Cr ' ` , y r
to the ma:,rix . Which is ^ �, 1Ler�a kiLhou� - _ipping
atta„hed as ..ne next item on the agenda.
There are. 27 criteria to be used in evaluatingthe 22
the Committee has identified t sites
�o date. The criteria are * fisted
.
below and I would like each Commitee N,ember to rank the criteria
in importance by giving it 1 point for ver 1 i +
and 1 0 points for very i Y i V •.le importance
t;,o -: �_ 3 sportant. I kill collect your scores '
On �._- C+ i Viera and :.2bUlate them "'Or future use by the CO^1mit:.ee• 7
. - r.•�+.c- idc; _•F.- rig _'} ��" �y / �' '�
1 . fiew b::il�ing s.to C3'�
wO leve_ entry . . .
L . Good. ,iconven:ent stree� access . �.o
:asy ..0 locate. .
Center
Of urban pODL'_Z':` max li i ✓ �,
on.
- • . • • ,
VG a 1✓?'
•4_
^ n- re_GCa:iOn C^s
t5 1/•�
prOblemS
1 0. 'v;nen s_;.e _s ava..a. 1e • c / ;✓.
1i . Condemns ion recuired ' . . . . . . . . _ `` ✓
12. Cther Dr�jects re0uired
i3 . kQec ate pari: ng. y :�; ^�•�uy- =• �V „/`
On meiGr i
plc a :.o Major t' - r
_ �0 D+ OUgL_ 2re Cr int£: SeCt10n
0• ='r C;:�� Dy : C
.0 cen-ral business 15Dr_CtSj
18. ..e _).Pansicn pcss�b:l_-_es. �, , z: ) • - ✓ ���,rk
C1SD ry exi �
Degree
houof o_:up ion Y ting bus nesses
19. Aesthetic patent i ✓
+
20 . land use co��_11ct with• ad acent area. .
21 • 1rea compatible with a c_ty hali
.22 Lff eC` On r r � - � V� ✓
• _ a. _ is pa Vterns and f_ow
�.+ • ..en�ral_:.G „1Gn o� C1 ..y _ unc ..lc. • • _ �,�
211 • he_G . lor.sn_p Vo -aVne- s. O
+ 9overnmer+;.a.l agencies .
2Z• T CSS o: DroDer- .
+-y ..ax pG-�r,ti 1
V-
2c 2xposure-fo^al point a . . . � y `�
27 . heeds other agency DK . . . . .
is
SHAKOPEE COALITION
JANUARY 9, 1986
MEETING MINUTES
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 A.M. by Chairman Brian Norris.
Members Present: George Muenchow Shakopee Community Services
Pat Ploumen
Sr Jo Lambert St. Francis Regional Medical Center
Maggie Lind St. Francis Regional Medical Center
Jim Streefland Lions Club
Gene Skalsky Knights of Columbus
Diane K. Johnson Shakopee Chamber Of Commerce
Joan Salter Food Shelf
Gary Laurent DownTown Committee
Jackie Kes Scott-Carver Economic Council
John K. Anderson City Of Shakopee
Jerry Knutson M.C.I.W.
Kay Louis Scott County Extension
Todd Schwartz Shakopee Rotary
Brian Norris Citizens State Bank
Old Business
Highlights of the last meeting were briefly reviewed. Chairperson Norris distributed
a summary of excerpts from previous minutes and letters which describe what the Shakopee
Coalition is, (copy enclosed) . He also distributed a summary of the three main functions
of the Shakopee Coalition as were identified during the organizational stage, (Copy
enclosed). Further some of the objectives established each year by the Coalition were
identified and distributed, (copy enclosed) . Organizations are requested to review
past objectives and list suggested 1986 Coaltion objectives on the form provided and
submit by or at the February meeting.
Updates of three projects were presented:
1) Downtown Re-Development
Gary Laurent identified two significant developments within the past year or
so: Mn. DOT identified. Federal funds which are available for Hwy 169 bridge
improvements. Mn, DOT then agreed that a portion of those funds is available
for the Shakopee bridge - 169 junction improvements with projected completion
in 1989. (It was noted that this is distinct from the southerly by-pass
project. )
A committee is meeting regularly on current projects of the design of downtown
streetscapes, identifying how the streets are going to look and defining streets
to be included. Issues being considered include parking plans, cost, funding,
assessments, etc. Gary is available to present current plans to community
groups.
Gary introduced Diane Johnson who has been appointed to represent the Chamber
of Commerce on the Shakopee Coalition.
2) Chemical People Project
Gene Skalsky summarized past activity including the 1983 identification of
chemical problems among youth, twon meetings held in conjunction with the
statewide Chemical People Project, speakers sponsored by the K.C.s, formation
of an interested citizens group which eventually disbanded as interest waned.
The K.C.s sponsored several teen dances. Currently there is an awareness
program which provides volunteer youth counseling/support, held at the KC Hall.
Contact may be made through the Senior High.
3) Scott-Caver Economic Council Food Shelf/Holiday Project
Jackie Kes reported that 1985 Food Shelf utilization was up 65% over
that of 1984. In 1984, a total of 1, 172 families or 3,835 individuals
were served with 1377 individuals being from Scott County. In 1985,
1 ,797 families or 5958 individuals served, 2040 individuals from Scott
County.
The Give Where You Live Campaign will continue through February 15, 1986.
Minnesota Food Share begins March 1, 1986. Storage space is needed for
2-3 months. The SCEC Holiday Project, held at the Mall, was successful
thanks to excellent community support. In Scott County the following
was provided: 299 dinners for families, 615 children provided gifts and
toys, 42 senior home bound given dinner and gifts; with a total 1055
persons served. In Shakopee only, 290 persons were served including 91
families and 17 senior home bound. Jackie thanked the Coalition for
continued support .
New Business
With time running short, Chairperson Norris touched on the following:
1. Development of a form to be used for identifying problems, issues, needs as
they arise.
2. An alphabetical list of all Community organizations should be available by
the February meeting for purposes of mailing list and resource use.
3. 1986 objectives need to be identified - suggestion for a computer bank for
volunteers as a group project.
4. A list of previously identified problems, issues, and needs was distributed.
These along with any additions should be ranked and returned at the February
meeting or before.
5. Established Coalition recognition or volunteers by a Volunteer of the Month
Award. Citizens State Bank has contributed a $50 Savings Bond; other businesses,
organizations are requested to contribute toward the awards. Nominations for
Volunteer of The Month will be called for at the February meeting.
6. Chairperson Norris will contact a printer(s) for costs of a simple letterhead
for the Coalition.
7. Volunteer needs: Develop a form to be used to identify volunteer needs. Develop
a form for volunteers to identify services they will provide. This would be
appropriate material for computer utilization.
8. The value of community networking was stressed by John Anderson.
9. Kay Louis offered possible computer assistance.
Meeting adjourned at 8: 15 a.m. The next meeting will be held Thursday, February 6,
1986 at the Citizens State Bank to begin promptly at 7:00 a.m. Coffee and rolls
available.
Respectfully submitted,
Pat Ploumen, Secty.
Member Action Items for February Meeting
I. Complete list of 1986 Coalition Objectives
2. Prioritize list of identified problems, issues, needs.
3. Be prepared to nominate candidate for Volunteer of the Month award.
4. Storage space for SCEC Minnesota Food Share Project.
January 9 , 1986
What is the Shakopee Coalition?
Formed during 1983 .
Excerpts from 11-10-83 meeting minutes .
- the Coalition functions as a facilitator of solving problems
identified in the community
-it is a forum for discussion by broad representation of
community groups ; a general interest group
-it is vital to have representation by all community organiza-
tions
Excerpts from 2-14-84 letter by John Neely
-its purpose is to bring local Shakopee organizations into
a central forum where the exchange of ideas and community
efforts can be openly discussed, coordinated and acted upon
most efficiently
- the Coalition in itself does not take on community services
-what the Coalition does do is identify problems that can
be realistically addressed by existing organizations , discuss
how and who is going to work on a project , then assist in
the completion of the project by involving other organiza-
tions interested in helping .
Excerpts from 3-28-85 letter by James Streefland
-the sole purpose of the Shakopee Coalition is to bring local
Shakopee organizations into a central forum where the exchange
of ideas and community efforts can be discussed, coordinated
and acted upon efficiently.
3 MAIN FUNCTIONS OF THE SHAKOPEE COALITION
1 ) Bring local Shakopee Organizations into a central forum where
the exchange of ideas and community efforts can be discussed.
2 ) Identify problems that can be realistically addressed by exist-
ing organizations .
3 ) Provide coordination , continuity, and creativity in facilitating
solutions to pressing needs in the Shakopee community.
January 6 , 1986
SHAKOPEE PROBLEMS, ISSUES , AND NEEDS LIST
I . Volunteer Issues
1 ) How to find volunteers . Need a method .
2 ) Funneling them to needed community projects .
3 ) Need awareness of present volunteer services .
4 ) Volunteer police work.
5 ) Need for volunteers in youth programs .
6 ) Volunteer Services Awareness . Need a co-ordinator . Perhaps
could be emphasized through a specific column in newspaper
such as done in Minneapolis Star 8 Tribune .
7 ) Utilization of Senior Citizen talent and experience . Eileen
Moran to check out possibility of placement of co-ordinator .
8 ) How do you find and tap new residents in greater Shakopee
to get them to work on problems .
9 ) How do we prioritize needs and match them with new volunteers?
10 ) Little or no communications between volunteer organizations .
11 ) Citywide programs to recognize volunteers .
II . Economic Development
1 ) Joining together of industry, business , city government ,
Chamber in hiring a coordinator who has the expertise to
help attract new business to Shakopee as well as industry .
2 ) Downtown re-development . Has started .
3 ) Street and storm sewer problems . Need repair and completion .
4 ) Number of people looking for jobs in the community.
5 ) Method to tap tourists passing through to benefit city economi-
cally.
6 ) Need for starter home ownership program for young co-habitors .
7 ) Traffic problems on First Avenue , i . e . doesn ' t like to walk
across First Avenue .
2 -
to
III . Family Needs
1 ) Chemical and alcohol abuse .
2 ) Domestic violence .
3 ) Support for single parents .
4 ) Support of early release of patients from hospital .
5 ) Lack of Church leadership in many family issues .
6 ) Domestic violence . Battered women.
7) Health care support services . St . Francis started Crisis
Center.
IV. Community Needs
1 ) Food Shelf in Shakopee . Space needs .
2 ) Lack of community understanding of women ' s Prison .
3 ) Cooperation between city, churches , schools , and parents
in helping to curtail teenage alcohol use/abuse . (Problem
is severe in the 11-17 year age group . )
4 ) General community-wide communications . Need method to reach
all segments of the community, including apathetic .
5 ) Re-cycling needed. Process currently in place? Need to
encourage more participation in recycling .
6 ) Homeless in area.
7 ) Affordable child care for working mothers and single parent
families .
8 ) Civic organizations have ideas about what they' d like to
do but there ' s no parent organization to steer them in right
direction.
9 ) No churches represented here tonight at Coalition meeting .
10 ) Need for activities for youth other than sports activities .
11 ) Public apathy when it comes to community issues/people/needs .
12 ) Lack of sense of responsibility and understanding of proper
work effort/habits that are required for opportunity to use
CETA program.
- 3 -
13 ) Lack of affordable housing . A current major problem.
� v
LIST OF OBJECTIVES
1983 Objectives
-pursue the need for a Food Shelf in Shakopee
-mail a form asking each organization to identify community
projects which they sponsor or are involved with
-make a formal request for an appointed representative to serve
on the coalition from the various organizations in the commun-
ity
1984 Objectives
-to increase the involvement of other community organizations
in the Shakopee Coalition
-to facilitate development of a continuing organized effort
in the Shakopee area for the collection and distribution of
supplies for the Scott County Food Shelf
1985 Objectives
-to increase attendance at coalition meetings
-current organizations elect an alternate to attend coalition
meetings
1986 Objectives
PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DECEMBER 23, 1985
Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. with Commissioners
Abeln and Harrison present. Commissioners Davis and Moonen were absent.
Barry Stock, Administrative Intern, was also present at the meeting as was
Mr. Ron Ward, a representative of the Shakopee School District.
Harrison/Abeln moved to approve the minutes of November 25, 1985, as kept.
Motion carried unanimously.
CABLE FRANCHISE MODIFICATIONS
Mr. Stock recalled that on August 30, 1985, Zylstra-United formally presented
City staff with a request for modifications to the Cable Franchise Ordinance.
On October 1 , 1985, staff was authorized by the Shakopee City Council to work
with the consultant firm of Cooper-Rutter Associates, Inc. , Zylstra-United (ZU) and
the City of Chaska in completing an analysis of ZU's existing and projected financial
condition. On November 14, 1985, Cooper-Rutter completed their analysis and on
December 9, 1985, the consultant appeared at a regular meeting of the Chaska
Cable Commission to discuss findings and answer questions. In brief, the
consultant recommended, at a minimum, the adoption of ZU's proposed concessions.
Mr. Stock noted that on December 5, 1985, staff received correspondence from Mr.
James Stillman, Chairperson of the Shakopee Board of Education, expressing strong
concerns in regard to the preservation of the Cable Franchise Ordinance as it
relates to the Institutional Network (I-Net) . ZU has proposed to defer the
activation of 23 channels on the I-Net until a positive cash flow is achieved.
In addition, ZU is requesting that any maintenance costs associated with the I-Net
be assessed to its users (Shakopee Schools, Chaska Schools, Carver-Scott Coopera-
tive Center, and the Women's Correctional Facility) . According to the Franchise
Ordinance as it exists today, Mr. Stock explained that no charges may be assessed
to public users utilizing the I-Net.
Staff proposed to send ZU management a letter informing them of Shakopee's
position in regard to their request for concessions. The meeting centered
around the Commissioner's comments in regard to staff's proposed cable franchise
modifications which were based on comments made by members of the Cable
Commission, City officials, School District officials, and concerned residents.
In regard to franchise fee reductions, Barry Stock explained why staff recommended
that the franchise fee be froze at a set dollar amount rather than at a percentage
as it is now. He also noted that a definition of "positive cash flow" would have
to be developed prior to any formal changes in the Franchise Ordinance.
The next section discussed was public access support. Staff suggested that ZU
utilize their existing office staff in Shakopee to provide assistance in
checking in and out equipment when the studio manager is not available. Commis-
sioner Harrison requested that a procedure be developed for checking equipment
for damages when it is returned. Mr. Stock recommended that only one person,
Shakopee Cable Commission
December 23, 1985
Page 2
such as the studio manager, be responsible for all equipment checks in or out,
and in the manager's absence, only transactions prearranged with the studio
manager be permitted.
Mr. Stock submitted that ZU lease all existing studio equipment to the City for
$1 .00 per year for the remainder of the franchise. He noted that ZU would still
be responsible for equipment maintenance and insurance as well as updating the
equipment every five years.
The Commissioners suggested wording changes as follows:
"That Zylstra-United is willing to dedicate the existing public access
channel to the City of Shakopee. Final program authority to rest with
the City of Shakopee pursuant to FCC regulations."
"That Zylstra-United is willing to provide property insurance coverage
on the studio and its equipment."
In regard to asking that ZU provide the City of Shakopee with a $5,000 cash
settlement for studio equipment that has not been supplied, Barry Stock volunteered
to review the inventory to find out exactly what equipment has not been supplied.
Discussion then turned to the character generator. Commissioner Harrison asked
that a portable modulator with pulse switching also be supplied so the character
generator could be moved to Community Services if the need arose. He added that
the modulator should have three heads.
The next topic discussed was the Institutional Network (I-Net). The Commissioners
requested a wording change as follows:
"That the maintenance charges assessed to the non-profit users in
Shakopee/Chaska shall not exceed a combined total of $936 per
activated channel annually."
Discussion followed on the definition of "channel" (upstream/downstream). Barry
Stock will be sure to have the definition clarified.
The Commissioners agreed with staff's proposals for tiers, franchise extension,
and management fees. In regard to leased access channel, staff proposed that
the City of Shakopee is willing to share with the Company, 25 percent of any
revenues which can be generated on the leased access channel by the City of
Shakopee. The Commissioners clarified that there should be no cost for the
leased channel.
The Commissioners also agreed with staff's proposals for refinancing and
performance bond.
Mr. Ron Ward and the Commissioners discussed the status of the I-Net. Mr. Ward
suggested that Mr. Roger Knutson at the Women's Correctional Facility be contacted
to develop a program whereby inmates could participate in running the cable studio.
The Commissioners were very excited about the possibilities associated with this
proposal.
Shakopee Cable Commission ! i
December 23, 1985
Page 3
Harrison/Abeln moved to request staff to send Zylstra-United a letter informing
them on Shakopee's position in regard to their proposed concessions. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock noted that in January staff will be meeting with ZU management to
finalize modifications to the Franchise Ordinance. Following that meeting,
the Cable Commission will make a final recommendation to City Council. He
emphasized that the effective date for any modifications will be contingent on
the development of a formal amendment to the Cable Franchise Ordinance. This
amendment will have to be drafted by legal counsel with costs to be paid for by
ZU.
The Commissioners reviewed ZU's October marketing report, the Public Access
report for November, the Cable Television report for November, and the Cable .
Television Service report for November.
Harrison/Abeln moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Barry Stock will notify the Commissioners if a special meeting will be called
prior to the next regularly scheduled meeting on January 27, 1986.
Barry Stock Judy Hughes
Administrative Intern Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 9, 1986
Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Commissioners
Lane, Pomernke, and VanMaldeghem present. Commissioners Rockne, Schmitt,
and Stoltzman were absent. Also present were Judi Simac, City Planner,
and Councilperson Lebens.
VanMaldeghem/Pomernke moved to approve the agenda as printed. Motion carried
unanimously.
VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to approve the minutes of December 5, 1985, as kept.
Motion carried unanimously.
There was no additional business.
VanMaldeghem/Pomernke moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:32 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Judi Simac Judy Hughes
City Planner Recording Secretary
PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 9, 1986
Chairman Czaja called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. with Commissioners
Lane, Pomernke, and VanMaldeghem present. Commissioner Rockne arrived at
7:36 p.m. and Commissioner Schmitt arrived at 7:54 p.m.. Commissioner
Stoltzman was absent. Also present were Judi Simac, City Planner; Jeanne
Andre, Community Development Director; and Councilperson Lebens.
VanMaldeghem/Pomernke moved to approve the agenda as printed. Motion carried
unanimously.
Commissioner Lane moved to approve the minutes of December 2 and December 5,
1985, as kept. Motion died for lack of second. VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to
table the approval of the minutes until the end of the meeting. Motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - "LAND USE REGULATION (ZONING)," SECTION 11 .32, SUED. 3 J
VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to open the public hearing to consider the amending of
Shakopee City Code, Chapter 11 , entitled "Lane Use Regulation (Zoning),"
Section 11 .32, Subd. 3 J. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner, in explaining the background and considerations of this item,
emphasized that the proposed ordinance amendment is a "housekeeping" action to
clarify the intent of the code. Therefore, staff is recommending approval.
Mr. Greg Voss of 97 North Blake Road in Hopkins asked if a mixed use would be
considered in the I-2 zone. Commissioner VanMaldeghem replied that this action
would merely clarify the ordinance, not make any changes. Commissioner Lane
added that only one conditional use would be allowed per property.
Chairman Czaja asked if there were any other comments, and there were none.
VanMaldeghem/Lane moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
VanMaldeghem/Pomernke moved to recommend to the City Council that Section 11 .32
Subdivision 3 of the Zoning Ordinance be amended to allow motels and tourist
accomodations, automotive service stations, restaurants and supper clubs, drive-in
establishments and open sales or rental lots as conditional uses only if the
property abuts a State Highway. Motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING - L.P.V. FIRST ADDITION PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Lane/Pomernke moved to open the public hearing to consider an application for
Preliminary and Final Plat of L.P.V. First Addition and a conditional use permit
to construct a recreational vehicle park and campground upon the property
located on the S2, NE4, Sec. 12, 115 N, Range 22. (NE corner of the inter-
section of County Road 89 and 13th Avenue) . Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986
Page 2
The City Planner reviewed the background and considerations of this request.
Staff recommendation is for approval of preliminary and final plat plus
approval of Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 442.
Present on behalf of L.P.V. Enterprises were Jack VanRemortel, the applicant,
Paul Fjare and Diane Klausner of Brauer and Associates, and Steve Harvey of
Valley Engineering.
Mr. Fjare showed the Commissioners several different layouts of the proposed
campgrounds. He explained there would be 205 units with six temporary units
which would be taken when the bypass comes through.
Commissioner Schmitt arrived and took his seat at 7:54 p.m.
Mr. Fjare continued to explain that a small swimming pool was being proposed.
He noted there would be one garbage can per four sites with one master collection
point for garbage. He explained their plan to collect sanitary wastewater in
holding tanks which would be transported on a daily basis to preferably the Blue
Lake Treatment Plant. Mr. Fjare also pointed out two proposed play areas, and
in regard to electrical service, he explained that Minnesota Valley Rural Electric
would provide three services: two 400 amp and one 600 amp.
The City Planner noted that this project would require an Environmental Assessment
Worksheet.
Commissioner Schmitt voiced his concern that a playlot was being proposed by the
sanitary dumping station. Mr. Fjare explained their rational behind this propo-
sal.
Commissioner VanMaldeghem asked for the County's comment on the project. The
City Planner replied that the County preferred access on 13th Avenue as is being
proposed.
Commissioner Pomernke asked how long a camping season was being proposed, to
which Mr. VanRemortel replied they were planning an eight month season, from
April through November.
Discussion followed on how future right-of-way for the bypass could be designated
on the plat.
Commissioner Czaja asked if there would be a problem as far as wetland preserva-
tion was concerned. Mr. Fjare replied that Mr. Mike Mueller of the DNR verbally
assurred him that there would not be a problem.
Chairman Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience, and there
were none.
VanMaldeghem/Pcmernke moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to enter a letter from the Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District which stated their approval of the project with two restrictions into
the record. Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986 1
Page 3
Pomernke/VanMaldeghem moved to recommend to the City Council that preliminary
and final plat of L.P.V. First Addition be approved subject to the following
conditions:
1 . Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
2. A variance of seven tenths (0.7) of an acre from the required minimum lot
size of twenty acres be included in plat approval.
3. The developer shall petition for the improvement of 13th Avenue.
4. Park Dedication fee be paid prior to recording of the plat.
5. Revision of the signature block in accordance with Section 12.05, Subd. 1 , E.
Motion carried with Commissioner Schmitt abstaining.
Pomernke/VanMaldeghem moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution #442
subject to the following conditions:
1 . The applicant shall submit drainage calculations to be approved by the City
Engineer prior to issuance of a Building Permit.
2. The review of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet by agencies on the
distribution list and the general public finds no significant environmental
effects which would indicate the need for an Environmental Impact Statement.
Should Staff receive any comments regarding the EAW, which significantly
affect the project, the application shall be brought back to the Planning
Commission for review. No building permit shall be issued until the EAW
comment period is closed.
3. The applicant must obtain a MWCC Septage Management permit, which provides
for dumping sewage, prior to the issuance of a building permit. The permit
application must include a contingency plan, should Blue Lake be closed down.
4. The applicant shall obtain a Recreational Camping License from the Minnesota
Department of Health prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Pre-
liminary approval must be granted prior to issuance of a building permit.
5. The proposed planting plan shall be incorporated as part of the Conditional
Use Permit and shall be adhered to. All plantings must be installed prior
4L--.c issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
6. A separate sign permit must be obtained prior to construction of any
advertising signage.
7. The submitted Management Plan shall become a part of the Conditional Use
Permit and must be adhered to.
8. Annual staff review.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986
Page 4
9. The applicant shall obtain a permit for water supply from the Department
of Natural Resources.
10. As per Ordinance No. 185, no recreational vehicle shall be used as a
permanent place of residence. Continuous occupancy extending beyond three
months in any twelve month period shall be presumed permanent occupancy.
11. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted until all permits are received.
Motion carried with Commissioner Schmitt abstaining.
PUBLIC HEARING - GARDENVILLA FIRST ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to open the public hearing regarding Preliminary Plat
approval of Gardenvilla First Addition, a replat of Lot 7, Nehl's Addition and
abandoned railroad property. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner noted that information was not received by Staff in time to meet
the mailing of public hearing notices deadline. Therefore, Staff recommended
that the public hearing be continued to February 13, 1986. However, discussion
of the preliminary plat approval was held.
In explaining the background and considerations of this application, the City
Planner clarified that the applicant is proposing the plat in order to assign
a legal description to each of six apartment buildings now existing on the
property as well as to establish a "common ownership" area with the intent to
sell the buildings to different owners for investment purposes. The developer
also indicated to the City Planner that he has no intention of future develop-
ment on the site.
Commissioner Schmitt asked the City Planner to provide the Planning Commission
with the following information prior to the next meeting:
1 . Find out if storm sewer lines exist under the abandoned railroad right-of-
way.
2. Check to see if park dedication fees have been paid on the abandoned rail-
road right-of-way or if they have only been paid on the actual lot.
3. Review the files on the abandoned railroad right-of-way. He could recall
considerable discussion of this property in the past.
4. Study the feasibility of straightening out the angle of the road's exit/
entrance to provide better fire vehicle access.
Present at the meeting on behalf of B.V.C. Partnership were Mr. Geh l Tucker,
Mr. Jim Vandergriend and Mr. Ron Swanson. . They did not present any additional
information to the Commissioners.
Chairman Czaja asked if anyone from the audience had any comments, but there
were none.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986 l �
Page 5
VanMaldeghem/Rockne moved to continue the public hearing to February 13, 1986.
Motion carried unanimously.
VanMaldeghem/Schmitt moved for a five minute recess at 8:46 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Chairman Czaja called the meeting back to order at 8:56 p.m.
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT OF SHAKOPEE VALLEY SQUARE FIRST ADDITION
The City Planner reported that the Environmental Assessment Worksheet was
completed as required by law and the conditions of preliminary approval. She
noted there does not appear to be any significant environmental effects of the
projects, but cited three recommendations made by the Department of Natural
Resources and one by the Minnesota Historical Society which brought to light the
fact that there may be Indian burial mounds on the site.
Discussion followed on the fact that the project appears to be located on the
site of Chief Shakopee's Village. State law would regulate the moving of any
Indian burial mounds that might be found. The City Planner will continue her
attempts to contact the State Archaeologist, Dr. Christy Laine, to discuss the
site.
Commissioner Pomernke voiced his concern over the landscape design. Mr. Dennis
Aldrich, the architect who is located at 9211 Plymouth Avenue in Golden Valley,
expressed his willingness to work with Commissioner Pomernke on the landscape
plan.
Chairman Czaja asked for any comments from the audience, but there were none.
Schmitt/Rockne moved that final plat approval be granted subject to the following
conditions:
1 . Name of the plat be changed to Shakopee Valley Square First Addition.
2. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
3. Vacation of drainage and utility easements which were dedicated in Halo
Second Addition.
F
4. Dedication of a sanitary sewer easement across Lot 4.
5. Dedication of a drainage easement for storm sewer outfalls from Lots 1 , 2,
and 3 through Lot 4.
6. Review of the purported burial sites by the State Archaeologist, Dr.
Christy Laine, and relocation if found to be necessary.
7. The developer shall submit a recordable Association Agreement which
describes the operation and maintenance of shared parking arrangement
among lot owners.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986
Page 6
8. The City Engineer must receive and approve final plans and specifications
for all public facilities including, but not limited to, roads, sanitary
sewer system, storm sewer, and grading.
9. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement which provides for the
development of Lots 1 through 5 as per submitted site plans seen and
reviewed on January 9, 1986, and that any amendments to the plans shall be
brought to the City Council prior to issuance of Building Permits.
10. Execution of a Developer's Agreement for the construction of the required
improvements:
a) A sidewalk to be reconstructed along the north side of TH 101 in
accordance with the Design Criteria and standard specifications of
the City of Shakopee.
b) Water system and electricity to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Utilities Manager.
c) 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.
d) Installation of fire hydrants in accordance with the requirements of
the Fire Chief and City Engineer.
e) Construction of Bluff Street to serve Lot 4 and all other street
improvements to be made in accordance with the Design Criteria and
Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee.
f) Sanitary sewer and storm water system to be installed in accordance
with the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of
Shakopee.
g) A copy of the Rules and Regulations of the Shakopee Valley Square
Campground shall be made a part of the Developers Agreement to ensure
that the operator of the campground has the authority to remove any
occupants or equipment within twenty-four hours after the river
reaches a point of two feet below the lowest sanitary sewer. j
h) Park dedication fee to be paid for the existing Lots 2 and 3 of Halo
Second Addition ($1 ,736.00 for each lot) . The City Council shall
determine whether a park dedication fee shall be paid for Lots 4 and
5 of the plat, or if the existing public easement is satisfactory.
11 . Commissioner Pomernke is designated as the Planning Commission liaison
regarding final landscaping design.
Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986 %
Page 7
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT NOTERMANN'S 2ND ADDITION
The City Planner detailed the background and considerations of this final plat
and recommended approval with conditions.
Chairman Czaja asked if there were any comments from the audience, but there
were none.
Lane/Schmitt moved to recommend to the City Council that the Final Plat of
Notermann's 2nd Addition be approved subject to the following conditions:
1 . The approval of a 25 foot lot width variance for each of the four lots.
This variance constitutes the only variance that can be granted on the
subdivision.
2. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
w 3. Execution of a Developer's Agreement to provide for the construction of
the required improvements:
a) Sidewalk - Construction of a five foot sidewalk along the south side
of Fourth Avenue, in accordance with the Design Criteria
and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee.
b) Streets - Construction of Fourth Avenue in accordance with the Design
Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of Shakopee.
Soil borings shall be taken, to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer, which demonstrates the suitability of the road bed.
The developer shall agree to be responsible for the increased
cost for the subgrade correction of Fourth Avenue.
c) Assess- - The developer shall agree to the City Engineer's method of
ments apportioning the installments remaining unpaid against the
plat and the developer waives his right to appeal the
apportionment.
d) Water - Installation of the water system in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
e) Sanitary - To be installed in accordance with the requirements of the
Sewer Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City of
Shakopee.
f) Park Dec- - In lieu of land dedication, cash payment should be made to
Ica the park fund at the time building permits are issued.
4. The City Engineer must receive and approve final plans and specifications
for all public facilities including but not limited to roads, sanitary
sewer system, storm sewer, drainage, grading, et cetera.
Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986
Page 8
DISCUSSION - FINAL PLAT OF HENTGES FIRST ADDITION
The City Planner explained that the developer has not complied with conditions
one, four and five of preliminary plat approval. In addition, he has been
cited by the Code Enforcement Officer for code violations pertaining to exterior
storage. Therefore, Staff recommended that consideration of final plat approval
be postponed until the exterior storage is screened or removed.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to table any further consideration of the final plat of
Hentges 1st Addition until such time as the property has been brought into
compliance with city code.
The Commissioners requested that the City Planner secure legal opinion on when
the preliminary plat approval would expire.
Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - CONCEPT PLAN OF EAGLE BLUFF P.U.D.
The City Planner presented the concept plan of Eagle Bluff P.U.D. noting that
the developer, Mr. Joe Link, is requesting that the Planning Commission review
and provide comment on the proposed residential development, in order that the
developer may proceed in preparing preliminary plat drawings.
Commissioner Schmitt stated it is his belief that 11th Avenue will never be
constructed. Therefore, it is not reasonable to require the developer to
construct part of that street. Discussion on access followed.
Commissioner Schmitt questioned Mr. Link as to whether there were any restrictive
covenants on Lots 8 and 9. Mr. Link replied there were no restrictive covenants
between the seller, Gene Brown, and himself. Commissioner Schmitt asked Mr. Link
to check into any restrictive covenants more thoroughly.
Commissioner Lane stated he felt the development proposed was a good way to
utilize the property, and the use was reasonable.
Commissioner VanMaldeghem stated she also liked the proposal and thought it
looked very nice.
Commissioner Pomernke felt it would be a good buffer and was a good design of
the space.
Commissioner Rockne agreed that he liked the proposed development, and his main
concern was that there could be restrictive covenants.
Commissioner Schmitt believed the proposed plan continues the residential
character of the neighborhood.
Schmitt/Rockne moved to accept the proposed Concept Plan of Eagle Bluff P.U.D.
and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986
Page 9
DISCUSSION - J.L. SHIELY MINING PERMIT PLAN REVIEW
The City Planner presented the 1986 plan for operation as submitted by the J.L.
Shiely Co. in accordance with Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 375 and
City Council Resolution No. 2373 which specifies that the Planning Commission
annually review the Shiely Mining Permit and serve as a long range planning
committee for the purpose of reviewal and to address site reclamation planning.
Discussion followed on future development of the western site and possible
reclamation uses.
Commissioner Pomernke cited an example of mining in Apple Valley that resulted
in a lake surrounded by residential area which he felt was done very nicely.
Commissioner Lane agreed with the concept of a lake and development around it,
either residential or industrial.
' Commissioner VanMaldeghem also agreed that she liked the concept.
Commissioner Czaja pointed out that the Plan for Operation which was submitted
by the Shiely Company stated the mills could operate 24 hours a day. He questioned
that this was in violation of the conditional use permit which allows them to
mine from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
Mr. Ray Lappegaard and Ms. Linda Schutz were present on behalf of the J.L.
Shiely Company. Mr. Lappegaard responded to Commissioner Czaja that mining
hours are restricted to from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. , but the plant operation is what
is being referenced and that is not limited.
Mr. Lappegaard also stated that there is no interaction between the drainage
ditch and the quarry pit. He discussed their Gray Cloud Island plants and
invited two or three Planning Commission members to be a liaison to meet with
the J.L. Shiely Company three to four times per year in working on the
reclamation process.
Commissioner Rockne left the meeting at 10:27 p.m.
Schmitt/Lane moved to accept the annual review of Conditional Use Permit
Resolution No. 375. Motion carried unanimously.
R
Schmitt/Lane moved to direct the Planning Commission to establish a steering
committee composed of at least two members of the Planning Commission initially
to work with the J.L. Shiely Company to continue the review of the proposed
end use plans for the reclamation development of the Shiely property. Such
body shall meet at least twice a year for the 'our'pose of formulating plans
and policy relative to the long-term development f the end use of that property.
Commissioners Czaja, Lane and Schmitt volunteered to sit on the new committee.
Concensus was to limit the committee to Planning Commission members at this
time with other interested parties from the community to be added at some future
point in time.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986
Page 10
Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion followed on reclamation projects being done at other J.L. Shiely
plants. Concensus was that the newly established steering committee should
conduct on-site reviews of these projects.
DISCUSSION - AMENDMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION RULES AND REGULATIONS
The City Planner recalled that at the last meeting the Commissioners suggested
that the Rules and Regulations be amended to include the policy that no action
will be taken on cases if information is being submitted for the first time at
the Planning Commission meeting with no chance for prior review. Discussion
followed on the possible wording of the amendment.
Schmitt/Lane moved to amend the Rules and Regulations to include policy #16
which shall read as follows:
"The Planning Commission shall not take formal action on a proposal
that appears on the agenda if the documentation requirements are
not complete at the time of publication. Publication shall be
defined as the official date of legal publication or in lieu
thereof, submittal 24 hours prior to the submittal of the meeting
packet to Planning Commission members."
Motion carried unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL - FISCHER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 386 ANNUAL REVIEW
VanMaldeghem/Schmitt moved to approve the annual staff review of Conditional
Use Permit Resolution No. 386, acknowledging that the permit becomes void on
January 10, 1986, for lack of utilization and moved for its adoption. Motion
carried unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL - BARLOW CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 381 ANNUAL REVIEW
Schmitt/VanMaldeghem moved to approve the annual staff review of Conditional
Use Permit Resolution No. 381 and moved for its adoption. Motion carried
unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL - LEGAL OPINIONS FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY
Lane/VanMaldeghem moved to return the memorandum from the City Attorney for
further consideration regarding the issue of time limitation of testimony.
The Commissioners did not find the memorandum clear in light of precedence
previously set by the City Council. Motion carried unanimously.
Lane/Schmitt moved to approve the minutes of the December 2, 1985, Special
Session as kept. Motion carried with Commissioners Pomernke and VanMaldeghem
abstaining.
Shakopee Planning Commission
January 9, 1986 1 7/
Page 11
Schmitt/Lane moved to approve the minutes of the December 5, 1985, meeting as
kept. Motion carried with Commissioners Pomernke and VanMaldeghem abstaining.
OTHER BUSINESS
Lane/Schmitt moved to direct Staff to send a notice to Mr. Wally Bakken
expressing disappointment that he presented a final plat that did not adhere
to all the stipulations of preliminary approval or offer testimony as to why
those stipulations were not adhered to. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion followed on the fact that an applicant could be allowed to have
more than one conditional use per lot.
In response to discussion that the HRA let an item die for lack of action/
lack of motion, Schmitt/Lane moved to direct Staff to request a legal opinion
on what happens if the Planning Commission were to fail to take action on an
application. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on how to reserve land which will be used in the future for
the bypass or highways rather than letting it be developed and then confronting
the need to buy it back in the future after it is in use.
The Commissioners also discussed why the retail business continued to be
conducting business in the Bankers Life building in violation of the zoning
ordinance.
Pomernke/Schmitt moved to adjourn the meeting at 11 :20 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Judi Simac Judy Hughes
City Planner Recording Secretary
b
TENTATIVE AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota February 13 , 1986
Chairman Czaja Presiding:
1 . Roll Call at 7 : 30 p.m.
2 . Approval of Agenda
3 . Election of Officers
4. Passing of the Gavel
5 . Approve January 9 , 1986 minutes
6 . Other Business
7 . Adjournment
Judi Simac
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota February 13 , 1986
Chairman Czaja Presiding:
1 . Roll Call at 7 : 30 p.m.
2. Approval of Agenda
3 . Election of Officers
4 . Passing of the Gavel
5. Approval of January 9, 1986 minutes
6. 1985 Annual Report
Action: Acceptance of Report
Forward Report to City Council
7 . Presentation: Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge
8. 8 : 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider an application
for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of Meriden Addition
a replat of Outlot A, Prahmcoll Addition and an application
for rezoning this property from I-1 , Light Industrial to
B-2 , Community Business.
Applicant: Meriden Corporation
Action: Recommendation to City Council
9 . 8 : 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider a preliminary
plat approval of Gardenvilla 1st Addition, a re-plat of
Lot 7 , Nehl ' s Addition and abandoned railroad property.
There are six apartment buildings now existing on the property.
Applicant: Lavista Land Development Inc.
Action: Recommendation to City Council
10 . 8 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a rezoning request
of the Ackerberg Companies , Ltd. to rezone 6 . 5 acres of
property located at 1267 Marschall Road, from B-1 , Highway
Business , to R-4 , Multi-Family Residential.
ADiDlicant: Ackerberg Companies , Ltd.
Action: Recommendation to City Council
11 . 8 : 45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use
Permit Amendment of Resolution No. 440 , to allow the assembly
of fabricated metal products upon the property located
on Lot 1 , Block 1 , Superior Supply 1st Addition.
Applicant: Cherne Contracting Co.
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 440
12 . 9: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use
Permit to construct a 67 unit room suite type motel with
atrium and indoor pool upon the property located on Lot
2 of Century Plaza Square 3rd Addition.
Applicant: The Suite Quarters (J.O.N. Investments)
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 444
13 . 9: 15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a Conditional Use
Permit to construct a hotel with a Class II restaurant
in excess of 25 feet in height upon the property located
on Block 1 and 2 , Canterbury Park 2nd Addition.
Applicant: Scottland Companies
Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 443
14 . Informational: a. Racetrack Study Needs Statement
b. Cul De Sac Regulation
C. Planning Seminars
d.
15 . Other Business
16 . Adjournment
Judi Simac
City Planner
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 4, 1986
Mayor Reinke presiding
1] Roll Call at 7 : 00 P .M.
2] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting
3] Reconvene
4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
61 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. )
�7] Approval of Minutes of January 21st and 28th, 1986
8] Communications :
a] Tom Worthington, U.S . Fish and Wild Life Service, Mn. Valley
Wild Life Refuge - update on refuge development - 20 min.
b] Mn. Dep ' t . of Jobs and Training re : office relocation
c] League of Mn. Cities re : Governor' s Budget Proposal
d] Legislative Commission on Mn. Resources re : natural resource
opportunities
e] Wood Kidner, Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand & Yost re : tax exempt bonds
f] City of Prior Lake & Canterbury Downs re : naming of CR-83
91 Public Hearings :
a] 7 :30 P .M. - Vacation of drainage and utility easements within
the plat of Halo 2nd Addition
+ 7 :45 P .M. - Considering amendments to the Shakopee Cable Communi-
cations Franchise Ordinance relating to the Cable
Company' s provision of public access , institutional
network equipment and services, and non-essential
capital equipment ; also, a five-year extension to
franchise term.
101 Boards and Commissions:-
Energy and Transportation Commission:
a] Dial-A-Ride Bid Specifications
b] Van Pool Request for Proposal Specifications
City Hall Siting Committee :
c] City Hall Siting Committee Report
TENTATIVE AGENDA
February 4, 1986
Page -2-
[Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 :00 P .M. ]
111 Reports from Staff:
+ a] Park Dedication Fee for Shakopee Valley Square 1st Addition
AJUb] Fuel Storage Tanks
,T�c] Dental Insurance Bids
d] Options for Paying for Garbage Service
-'e] Electrical Inspection Services
-t-fl League of Mn. Cities Proposed 1986 Legislative Policies & Prioritie_
�g] 1974-1 CSAH-17 Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Installation
h] 1985-3 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement
Program
Oeefzi] Engineering Computer System Purchases
. .j ] Approval of Bills in Amount of $853 , 946. 10
k] League of Minnesota Cim
ties (LMC) Amicus Program - tabled 1/21
11 Publication of Official Proceedings
1985 Shakopee Municipal Home Mortgage Program
-fin] Intoximeter Purchase
-No] City of Shakopee vs Ladder Towers Inc .
4p] Municipal Ordinance Codifiers 1986 Contract
-tq] 1986 Goals and Objectives
4 r] Property Tax on City Property
12] Resolutions and Ordinances :
.t a] Ord. No . 188, An Ordinance Amending the City Code Relating to
Insurance Coverage for Business Licensing
Quo b] Ord. No . 184 Moratorium Ordinance
131 Other Business :
a] Future Council Meetings
b] Promotional event scheduled March 5th for Shakopee booth at
the Taste of Minnesota Festival in July
c]
d]
e]
14] Five Minute Recess
151 Convene in Executive Session to discuss labor negotiations
16] Reconvene as City Council
17] Adjourn to . . . F ),Sl/qV-�
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
TENTATIVE AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Shakopee, Minnesota
Regular Session February 4 , 1986
Chairman Wampach presiding
1. Roll call at 7 : 00 p.m.
2 . Approval of Minutes of January 7 , 1986
3 . Authorize execution of Satisfaction of Mortgage
4 . Other Business
5 . Adjourn
Jeanne Andre
Executive Director
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ANNUAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 7, 1986
Chrm.Vierling called the meeting to order at 7 :01 P.M. with Comm.Lebens, Wampach,
Colligan and Leroux present. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Admr. ; Judith
S. Cox, City Clerk; Jeanne Andre, HRA Director; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; Tom
Brownell, Chief of Police; and Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney.
The City Attorney administered the Oath of Office to Comm.Lebens and Comm.Vierling.
Colligan/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of December 3rd, 10th and 17th, 1985.
Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Colligan moved that Mr. Wampach be elected Chairman of the Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee. Motion carried with Comm.Wampach
opposed.
The HRA Director read the disclosures of real property by the Commissioners: Leroux:
Lot 4, Block 4, Scenic Heights 3rd Addition; Vierling: parcels 27-907004-0 and
27-907005-0; Lebens: parcels 27-001260-0 and 27-001453-0; Wampach: parcels:
27-001256-0, 27-001257-0, 27-001259-0 and 27-001560-0; and Colligan: Lot 8, Block 2,
West View 3rd Addition plus two parcels lying in section 5-115-22.
Colligan/Leroux moved that the disclosures of real property be placed on record. Motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved that Mr. Colligan be elected Vice-Chairman of the H.R.A. Motion
carried with Comm.Colligan abstaining.
Leroux/Colligan moved the Mrs. Lebens be elected Secretary of the H.R.A. Motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Colligan moved to adjourn at 7:09 P. A. Motion carried unanimously.
Jeanne Andre
HRA Director
Judith S. Cox
Recording Secretary
TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA)
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Executive Director
RE: Satisfaction of Mortgage for Lot 9 , Block 2,
Macey Second Addition
DATE: January 10 , 1986
Introduction•
In the Fourth and Minnesota Neighborhood Revitalization
Project the HRA provided lots to lower-income families conditioned
on those families continuing to reside in the homes purchased
for at least five years. Residence for a shorter period would
require prorata repayment of the lot value.
Background•
Mr. Scott Gratz has requested a Satisfaction of Mortgage
for the property on Lot 9 , Block 2 , Macey Second Addition. He
has met the five year requirement of the promissory note that
was executed December 2 , 1980 and is now planning to sell the
property.
Requested Action:
To authorize appropriate HRA officials to excecute and
deliver Satisfaction of Mortgage to Scott T. and Judith R. Gratz
for the property located on Lot 9 , Block 2 , Macey Second Addition.
c
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REG SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 21, 1986
Vice Mayor Wampach called the meeting to order at 7: 00 p.m. with
Cncl. Leroux, Vierling and Lebens present. Mayor Reinke arrived
late and Cncl. Colligan was absent. Also present were John
K. Anderson, City Administrator; Jeanne Andre, Community Development
Director; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; Judi Simac, City Planner;
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk and Julius A. Coller II , City Attorney.
Cncl. Wampach read the Policy of Non-Discrimination on the Basis
of Handicapped Status.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers.
Vierling/Lebens moved to approve the minutes of January 7, 1986 .
Roll Call: Ayes ; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Discussion ensued on the liability insurance for taxicab licensees
coinciding with the license term. Leroux/Lebens moved that
staff prepare an ordinance amending the City Code eliminating
the requirement for liability insurance for taxicab licenses
coinciding with licensing period except those of local licensees.
Motion carried unanimously.
Considerable discussion ensued on the proposed GC4 Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) Policy. Leroux/Vierling moved to oppose the
proposed GC4 Tax Increment Financing Policy and to contact Shakopee
County Commissioners requesting the County not support the Policy
as proposed. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to table the letter from Stan Peskar,
League of Minnesota Cities regarding the Municipal Amucus Program
until an opinion is received from the Assistant City Attorney.
Motion carried unanimously.
George Muenchow, representative on the Hennepin-Carver Park
Reserve Board, introduced Mr. Del Miller, Land Acquisition Officer
from Hennepin Parks. Mr. Miller gave a presentation on the
proposed Regional Trail Park Corridors and a slide show on Hennepin
Parks.
The City Administrator reported that he had talked with Richard
Kinzel, Vice-President/General Manager of Valleyfair Amusement
Park and explained to him what was happening regarding the Valley
Park Drive proposed extension. Cncl. Leroux explained he also
had a meeting with Mr. Kinzel regarding Valley Park Drive.
Wampach/Vierling moved to receive and place on file the letter
from Mr. Kinzel, Valleyfair, dated January 10 , 1986 . Motion
carried unanimously.
Mayor Reinke was presented the Rotary Citizen of the Month Award
Shakopee City Council
January 21 , 1986
Page 2
by Robert Mayer from the Shakopee Rotary Club in recognition
of his service to the community.
Leroux/Wampach moved to direct the City Attorney to insitutue
a suit to restrain Paul Walker, Paul ' s Furniture Outlet, from
operating his business at 8700 East Hwy 101 in violation of
Section 11 . 32 , Subd. 2 of Shakopee City Code. Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach offered Ordinance 186 , Fourth Series, An Ordinance
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending the Shakopee City
Code, Chapter 11 Entitled "Land Use Regulation ( Zoning) " by
Changing Certain Conditional Uses in the Light Industry ( I-1 )
District; and, By Adopting By Reference, Shakopee City Code
Chapter 1 and Section 11 . 99 which, Among Other Things, Contain
Penalty Provisions, by changing certain conditional uses in
the Light Industry ( I-1 ) District and by adopting by reference
Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 11. 99 , and moved its
adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes ; None Motion carried.
Wampach/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2512 , A Resolution Approving
the Final Plat of Notermann' s 2nd Addition, with the addition
of condition 3g, that the developer agrees to accept the City' s
standard street assessment for future Adams Street Improvements ,
and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Wampach, Vierling, and Mayor Reinke
Noes ; Leroux
Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2513 , A Resolution Approving
The Final Plat of L.P.V. 1st Addition, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Barry Stock, Administrative Intern, gave a brief report on the
Cable Franchise Modifications being requested by Zylstra-United.
Leroux/Lebens moved that Mayor Reinke and City staff place a
formal request to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission to
waive the pole rental charge to Zylstra-United for a 5 year
period beginning January 1 , 1986 . Motion carried unanimously.
The Community Development Director updated the Council on the
proposal for the 1986 Small Cities Development Grant to rehabilitate
the Merchant ' s Hotel. Scott Carver Economic Council is looking
into having the rehabilitation done by a private developer with
the agency renting from them. She explained that so far no
private developer has expressed an interest. The grant as currently
structured would provide a grant for the housing portion of
the project with the money for the office rehabilitation to
Shakopee City Council
January 21 , 1986
Page 3
be repaid with interest of 2-30. Discussion followed on adequacy
of parking.
Vierling/Leroux moved to direct staff , to the Downtown Committee
and to the Planning Commission to study the parking problems
relative to this area. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved to have appropriate City officials execute
a letter of agreement with Ashland Chemical outlining the require-
ments to be fulfilled by Ashland to meet Conditions 2 , 3 and
6 in their license to operate a Hazardous Waste Transfer Storage
Facility. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to remove from table the application of
Yellow Taxicab Service Corp. for a taxicab license. Motion
carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to table the application of Yellow Taxicab
Service Corp. for a taxicab license. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize purchase of computer equipment
for Police Department in amount of $12, 007. 50 with $6 , 000 . 00
from Capital Equipment Budget, $3 , 316 . 00 from Building Departments
Capital Equipment budget and the remaining $2 ,691 . 50 being funded
by Revenue Sharing.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to authorize purchase of Finance Department ' s
computer equipment in the amount of $5 ,420 . 00 with $5 , 000 . 00
from Capital Equipment Budget and $420 . 00 from Revenue Sharing.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to authorize purchase of Building Department ' s
computer equipment in amount of $1 , 684 . 00 from Capital Equipment.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling authorized the computer transfer from the Police
Departmernt to the Building Department. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved -that a unanimous ballot be cast for appointment
of Dave Czaja and Dave Pomerenke to the Planning Commission
for four year terms ending January 31 , 1990 .
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes ; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for appointment
of Jane DuBois and Al Furrie to the Industrial Commercial Commission
for three year terms ending January 31 , 1989 .
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Shakopee City Council
January 21 , 1986
Page 4
Vierling/Leroux moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for appointment
of John Roepke to the Police Civil Service Commission for a
three year term expiring January 31 , 1989 .
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for appointment
of Jim Cook to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission for
a three year term ending January 31 , 1989 .
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes ; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for appointment
of Barry Kirchmeier to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
for the balance of a three year term ending January 31 , 1988.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved that a unanimous ballot be cast for appointment
of Todd Schwartz and Carol Schmidt to the Energy and Transportation
Commission for three year terms ending January 31 , 1989 .
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the transfer of $135 , 907 . 47
from Revenue Sharing Fund to General Fund and $9,769 . 60 from
Capital Equipment Fund to General Fund for capital equipment
purchases and $9 , 000 . 32 from Judgement Bond Fund to Capital
Improvement Fund.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to declare the following as surplus property:
1 - KRll Radar Unit, property #0252 , 1978 , used as
trade-in on new budgeted unit.
1 - 1982 Buick Regal, 85 , 000 miles , serial #1G4AJ69A
3CH193763 to be sold at auction.
2 - MH70 Portable Radios ( 1974 ) .
2 - MH70 Portable Radio Chargers ( 1974 ) .
1 - Desk Radio Control ( 1966 ) no replacement.
1 - Mobile Radio Base Station ( 1972) no replacement.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to accept quotations and disburse funds
not to exceed $7 , 000 . 00 for purchase of one used vehicle for
the Police Department.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Lebens/Vierling moved to approve the bills in amount of
$1 , 193 , 133 . 58 .
Roll Call: Ayes, Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Lebens/Vierling moved to take a 15 minute recess at 9 : 05 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee City Council
January 21 , 1986
Page 5
Leroux/Vierling moved to reconvene at 9 : 15 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Lebens/Wampach moved to direct staff to meet with property owners
in Timber Trails Addition to determine whether or not they wish
the installation of street lights as a MSA 429 special assessment
improvement and to report back to Council.
Roll Call: Ayes , Unanimous Noes , None Motion carried.
The City Administrator updated the Council on the 1986 Goals
and Objectives Worksession scheduled for January 28, 1986 at
7 : 30 p.m.
Wampach/Leroux moved City Council to authorize payment of $6 , 607 . 00
to Egan McKay Electrical Contractors Inc. Amount to be paid
out of 84-8 T.H. 101 Intersection Improvements Project Costs.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Wampach, Vierling, Leroux and Mayor Reinke
Noes ; Lebens
Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct City Engineer to pursue Federal
Urban Aid funds for the 10th Avenue Overlay Project from CSAH
17 to T.H. 300. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Leroux moved to direct City Engineer to pursue Municipal
State Aid System Funds for reconstruction of 13th Avenue from
CSAH 89 to City of Savage. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct City Engineer to pursue County
State Aid funds for reconstruction of 4th Avenue from Filmore
Street to Scott Street. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2510 , Accepting Work
on County Road 83 Widening Contract #1984-9 , and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Wampach, Vierling, Leroux and Mayor Reinke
Noes ; Lebens
Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2511, Ordering the Preparation
of A Report on Improvement to Valley Park Drive Extended North
of T.H. 101 Approximately 350 ft. , and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2506 , Designating Executive
Committee and Overall Committee Members and Alternative Members
to Scott County Transportation Coalition, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to offer Resolution No. 2507 . Reaffirming
Approval of a Joint Powers Agreement Establishing a Watershed
Shakopee City Council
January 21 , 1986
Page 6
Commission for the Shakopee Basin Watershed with the City of
Prior Lake, Louisville Township and Jackson Township, and move
its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes ; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Lebens moved to adopt Resolution No. 2508 , A Resolution
Amending the City of Shakopee Personnel Policy Adopted by Resolution
No. 1571 , and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes ; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved to offer Ordinance No. 187, An Ordinance
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code,
Chapter 8 entitled "Traffic Regulations" by Striking therefrom
the Words "or ATV" and making no substitution therefore and
by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section
8 . 99 , Which Among Other Things contain Penalty Provisions, and
moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to approve Resolution No. 2509, A Resolution
Establishing a Pay and Benefit Agreement for Police Sergeants
for 1986 , and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Wampach/Leroux moved to authorize City Officials to execute
the maintenance contract with Associated Mechanical for $1 , 815 . 00 ,
and the rate of $42. 50 per hour for all repair work completed
on call, plus parts, for work done not in conjunction with normally
scheduled maintenance checks, for 1986 operational year.
Roll Call: Ayes; Wampach, Vierling, Leroux and Mayor Reinke
Noes; Lebens
Motion carried.
Lebens/Leroux moved to authorize City Officials to pay Peter
Patchin and Associates Inc. , $1 ,720. 00 for market value appraisal
of commercial land on parcels on Fuller Street, between 2nd
and 3rd Avenues in Shakopee.
Roll Call: Ayes; Vierling, Leroux Lebens and Mayor Reinke
Noes ; None .
Abstain; Wampach
Motion carried.
Leroux/Vierling moved to recess for Executive Session at 10: 03
p.m. to discuss 1986 labor negotiations. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling movd to reconvene at 10: 21 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved to adjourn to Tuesday, January 28 , 1986
at 7: 30 p.m. at St. Francis Regional Medical Hospital in the
Health Education Room. Meeting adjourned at 10: 23 p.m.
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
Carol Schultz , Rec. Sec.
1
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA JANUARY 28 , 1986
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7 : 40 P.M. in the Health
Education Room at the St . Francis Regional Medical Center. Present
were Cncl .Leroux, Colligan, Vierling, Lebens and Vierling. Also
present were John K. Anderson, City Administrator, Jeanne Andre ,
Community Development Director, Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer, Tom
Brownell , Chief of Police, Julius A. Coller II , City Attorney, Judith ,
S . Cox, City Clerk, Leroy Houser, Building Inspector, Jim Karkanen,
Public Works Superintendent , George Muenchow, Community Services
Director and Gregg Voxland, Finance Director.
The Community Development Director updated the Council on the 1986
Small Cities Development Grant. She explained that it would be for
approximately $650, 000 and would be used to acquire and rehabilitate
the Merchant ' s Hotel . It would provide offices for the Scott Carver
Economic Council and nine efficiency apartments upstairs.
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2514, A Resolution Authorizing
Submission of A Small Cities Development Grant (Merchant ' s Hotel
Rehabilitation) , and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued with Councilmembers and staff on the Goals and
Objectives for 1986.
Mr. and Mrs . Harold Bigot , Chairpersons for the high school graduation
party, requested use of the upstairs of the police department for the
preparation of the decorations for the graduation party.
Leroux/Lebens moved that the High School Graduation Party Committee
be granted use of the upstairs of the Polic Department . Motion
carried unanimously.
Discussion continued on the Goals and Objectives .
Lebens/Leroux moved to adjourn at 10: 31 P .M. Motion carried unanimously.
Judith S . Cox
City Clerk
Recording Secretary
i
-
�� tiF United States Department of the Interior
-�
o FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN aI►cr acica To:
31innesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge
.' � 4101 East 80th Street
Bloomington. Minnesota 55420
December 13, 19850,
�1i..
Judy Simac
Shakopee City Hall
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Judy:
As I discussed with you on the telephone, I am trying to schedule an
appearance before the city council to present a general update on the
progress and status of the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge.
Ed Crozier, the refuge manager, and I would like to present a ten minute
slide show illustrating the refuge's land acquisition status and the
current development of wildlife and recreation programs. we plan to
follow the slide show with 5-10 minutes of discussion and a
question/answer period.
As we discussed we hope to be on the council's agenda for the meati `
on Tuesday, February 4th, 1986 and on the Planning Commission'g ,t►+ !V=
on Thursday, February 13, 1986. 1 will confirm a time with you
the coming weeks.
'.:a �s�..:n ,w��ci+cw'sp-auw�caL:tiuYCy
Again, our intention is to provide information to the CORi Wf a t*rihre.
answer any questions about the present and future cumil po"e- n,* -
refuge. Please call if you have any questions.
'ftp C. crrtt "� a4
out400r swot"Oa t :
m� -
h
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF A�� 2 f ON and Training CIT), r, y"'
Field Operations
309 Second Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55401
612/341-7300
January 24 , 1986
Mr. John K. Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee , MN 55379-1376
Dear Mr . Anderson :
On behalf of the Minnesota Department of Jobs and
Training we want to extend our sincere appreciation for
the office space the City of Shakopee has provided to us
over the past four years . Although this letter is some-
what belated, please don ' t think that we are somehow
less grateful for what you ' ve done. If it weren' t for
your support and action in 1982 , it seems certain that
our department would not have an office in Shakopee now.
We feel extremely fortunate ! Not many cities would have
been so generous and hospitable. Rather than continuing
to be your tenants we are about to become your neighbors .
As you know, we are planning to relocate to the old
Minnegasco building at 205 South Lewis on or about
January 31 , 1986 . We have been pleased with the down-
town area and have been able to provide quality services
to both job seekers and employers . We are confident
that our new downtown location will allow us to to be a
part of the growth and development of the Shakopee area
now and in the future .
Please convey our thanks to the City Council and invite
r
them to visit our new facility. We want the inter-
governmental cooperation demonstrated over the past few
years to continue even though we ' re no longer together
in the same building.
Sincerely ,
.ate
Thomas Hogan Duane Henke , Manager
Minneapolis Area WIN Manager Minnetonka Job Service
cc: Mayor Eldon Reinke
JOB SERVICE
® EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
action
alert
q11111
ID I
league of minnesota cities
CITY
January 23, 1986
TO: League Board of Directors and
Mayors, Managers, and Clerk
FROM: Diane Loeffler �1��
Legislative Representative
RE: Governor' s Budget Proposal
Revised revenue and expenditure forecasts for the state were
released today along with Governor Perpich's recommended budget
revisions. Trie latest forecasts for the biennium indicate a
$720 million shortfall . Governor Perpich has recommended
that $380 million be cut from the appropriations approved last
spring. Unfortunately cities are heavily impacted by those
cuts.
Tne General Approach
The Governor has recommended retention of $100 million of the
budget reserve in case their estimates are again proven too
optimistic. The remainder of the budget shortfall is dealt
with through expenditure cuts. No state tax increases are
proposed. 'dost budget items are cut 3.5% for the biennium.
However. because we are already more than hail roug he
first year of the biennium, the practical reality is that it is
a 710p cut in the last year of the biennium for most Pr grams.
Educations cut only 2. 5; on a biennial basis.
1986 Local Government Aid
Cities will lose approximate) 8. 1;e of their 1986 LGA payments.
Because cities have already received their local government aid
from the first year of the biennium, all cuts must be takes:
from the calendar year 1985 LGA payments (state fiscal year
137) . The cut represents loss of 3. 5' of the biennial total for
LGA plus an additional cut of $4.2 million which represents a
3. 55 out of miscellaneous credits and expenditures (pension
aid, wetlands credit, enterprise zone credits, etc. ) .
This 8. 1% cut in LGA weans that overall fundin7 to cities will
be less than it was in 1985. The administration proposes that
all cities have their previously certified 1986 LGA reduced by
8 . 1%. The result of this is that grandfathered cities will
1 83 university avenue east, st. paul, mii ,nesota 551 01 (61 2) 227-5800
Ab
receive cuts from their 1985 level of 8 . 16P and that only those
cities who were certified to receive close to the maximum
increase of 12% in 1986 will realize any real growth.
Future LGA
Tiie 1966 Legislature must set LGA levels for 1987 so that they
can be certified prior to cities setting their levies in the
fall . The Governor has recommended only a 3% increase for 1987
over the reduced base.
Homestead Credit
The Governor has recommended that homestead credit payments to
local governments in 1986 be reduced by 8 .78%. This represents
a biennial reduction of 3.5n applied in one year plus a 3 .5%
biennial reduction in the circuit breaker property tax refund
program. This reduction would be implemented by each
jurisdiction' s scheduled payment being reduced by 8 .78 .
In order to make state costs more controllable, it is being
recommended that in 1987 (state fiscal year 188) the total
homestead credit appropriation be capped at the 1986 level
prior to the reductions .
Payment Schedule
In order to improve the state' s cash flow and help eliminate
the need for the state to do short term borrowing, a revised
LGA and homestead credit payment schedule has been proposed.
Cities now receive these payments in six equal payments each
month from July to December. It is proposed that , beginning in
1986, cities receive payment for these programs in July and
December. Because the first payment would be equal to three
months of payment under the current system, interest earnings
on the larger first payment would theoretically balance out any
borrowing costs incurred waiting for the second payment. It is
important to note that the administration has agreed to an
appeals procedure for cities experiencing cash flow problems.
Motor Vehicle Excise Tax Transfer
Almost 0 million in savings is realized by the Governor
recommending that no motor vehicle excise tax transfer be made
from the general fund to the transportation funds. This will
result in the following program reductions:
F.Y. 1986 F.Y. 1987
TAF $139165 , 100 13, 399 ,000
Tk . Hwy 24 ,486 ,800 24, 922, 100
CSAR 11 , 453, 600 11 , 657 , 100
MSAH 3, 554 , 700 3, 617 ,700
Almost $13 million from the general fund would be provided each
year for the Transit Assistance Fund .
J �y
Other programs
In general , all programs will be cut 3. 50 on a biennial basis .
No specific information is available yet on how these cuts
would be implemented in individual grant programs. While the
Finance Department has asked state agencies to not seek to
alleviate the cuts in their agencies through new or increased
fees , it is to be expected that these will emerge as policy
options .
Clearly cities have been asked to absorb a major share of the
budget problem. As you are aware , it is very difficult to
respond effectively to major cuts in a year already budgeted
for. Cities are already having difficulties due to the major
cutbacks in Federal Revenue Sharing and other federal programs ,
declining taxbases, costs such as insurance rising faster than
inflation, and implementation of comparable worth studies . It
is important that city officials communicate these roblems=o
their legislators and the Governor .
The League Board of Directors will be meeting next week to
consider appropriate policy and lobbying steps. We will
continue to keep you informed as new information becomes
available. Additional information and analysis will be
available at the Legislative Conference on February 5th.
Time has been scheduled in the afternoon for you to visit with
your legislators. Please plan on attending and meeting with
your legislators on the budget and other pressing concerns.
O �da e� of � M4 0� R
ROOM 65 / STATE OFFICE BUILDING • ST.PAUL,MINNESOTA 55155 • (612)296-2406 •,
ROBERT E.HANSEN _
Executive Director
January 16, 1986 r)
. AN' 2r19086
CITY Li •�-
Fellow Government Official:
The Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources,
usually referred to as LCMR, requests your candid opinion
about which natural resource opportunities exist for the
State of Minnesota. The LCMR will consider your opinion
as it makes recommendations to the Legislature for 1987
program funding.
The LCMR consists of fourteen senior legislators,
seven Senators and seven Representatives. Please refer
to the enclosed brochure for more background on LCMR
itself. For over twenty years LCMR has successfully
recommended appropriations to state agencies in the
general areas of fisheries, wildlife, recreation, for-
estry, minerals, soil and water. These have been short
term programs designed to: (1) improve natural resource
management, (2) develop and organize natural resource
information, or (3) acquire land or develop facilities
for a broad range of natural resource purposes.
Every two years the LCMR reviews the issues and needs
facing Minnesota' s natural resources. This request and
the review of your responses marks the beginning of
another round of that process. After careful considera-
tion of the responses received, the Commission will ask
for specific proposals in areas where LCMR will focus
its attention. Therefore your response to this letter
should not be a funding request, but rather a statement
of the priority natural resource issues. Please send us
your comments by March 7, 1986 .
The LCMR members have found past responses to this
request to be thoughtful and useful. Thank you for the
time and effort involved in responding to this request.
Your assistance will be valuable to the Commission
members as they initiate natural resource programs for
Minnesota.
Sincere yours,
Repre entative Doug Carlson, Chairman
Legi ative Commission on Minnesota Resources
Enc.
REP. DOUGLAS CARLSON, CHAIRMAN, SANDSTONE SENATOR GENE MERRIAM, VICE CHAIRMAN,COON RAPIDS•REP.WILLARD MUNGER,SECRETARY,DULUTH
• SENATORS: HOWARD KNUTSON, BURNSVILLE •WILLIAM LUTHER, BROOKLYN PARK • ROGER D.MOE,ERSKINE•CLARENCE PURFEERST,FARIBAULT• EARL
RENNEKE, LE SUEUR• GERALD L.WILLET,PARK RAPIDS•REPRESENTATIVES: TONY BENNETT,SHOREVIEW•GAYLIN DEN OUDEN,PRINSBURG•VIRGIL JOHNSON,
CALEDONIA 9 FRED C.NORTON,ST.PAUL•JOHN ROSE,ROSEVILLE.
LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION ON MINNESOTA RESOURCES
The Legislative Commission on to the effects of a regular budget
those programs to prepare recom- that is done with acceleration
Minnesota Resources (LCMR) was created program,
in 1963 in order to: ...provide whichmendamay on solutions to problems in mind, not replacement.
the Legislature with the background which may be revealed in the program
necessary to evaluate programs operations. It is quite significant to point out
proposed to preserve, develop and A complete listing of the programs that any staff employed through LCMR
maintain the natural resources of which received LCMR funding recommenda- recommended appropriations are temporary.
this state." tions is available through the Staff are in the unclassified civil
Legislative Reference Library or service and their positions last only
(Minnesota Statutes Chapter 66) the LCMR office (296-2406) . so long as the appropriation is available.
It is the usual practice to make the ,
The membership consists of seven appropriation available for no more than
Senators, appointed by the Committee The LCMR also makes inquiries one biennium at a time. Thus, all the
Into natural resource program areas ro in biennium are new and
on Committees, and seven Representa- programs any
tives appointed by the Speaker of which bear potential for future state short term. In certain instances, the
involvement. The Commission also LCMR recommends renewed funding of a
the House. All members serve until g
their successors are a initiates action and/or program ro ram depending upon how long it may '
appointed. funding in order to fully explore P g P g P y
Vacancies which may occur do nottake to accomplish the desired objectives.
affect the authority of the Commis-
sion. The members elect theirThe LCMR develops its recommendations
officers, currently rotating the Aa one of its primary operating after an extensive review of current
principles, the LCMR avoids funding problems and prospects in all natural:
Chair from the Senate to the House P P P
every two years. The LCMR employs recommendations which would amount to resource fields. This review is con
replacement of regular budget ducted during each even numbered year,
a full time professional and 9 Y
funding with LCMR a is
The in preparation for determination of
support staff. Commission's charge is to accelerate P P
and improve resource management, not which issue areas require initial or
Commission administration isaccelerated funding. The LCMR re-
to substitute one source of money quests doth written and oral advice
subject to the coordination of 4
for another. In some cases, the from a wide variety of interested and
the Legislative Coordinating Y
Commission recommends that an knowledgeable persons and professionals.
Commission (LCC) , as are all the g P P
legislative commissions. agency conduct a more extensive After examination and discussion of the
or more intensive program in a issues, the members request more con-
given area than regular budget crete suggested solutions to the problems
One mill per cigarette (2 cents gg
per pack) is set aside by law for financing might allow. This may described in selected issue areas.
appear to be a supplement to the Eventually, the members decide to
the Minnesota Resources Fund. The regular budget. The Commission is
LCMR makes recommendations to thewell aware of the regular budgets recommend both the appropriation amount
and the program details for those selected
Legislature each odd year, for P g
appropriations which should be co the agencies, by virtue of the solutions. Those recommendations go to
committee assignments of the mem- the Senate Finance and House A prooria-
made from the Fund. During theAopro- p-
biennium, LCMR provides very close tiers which includes the Committees
tions Committees for their consideration
priations and Finance Committees and inclusion with the State Departments
monitoring and review of the P
among others. Thus, if an LCMR program ro
programs supported by those appro- recommendation would supplement or add Appropriations Bill. The LCMR recommenda-
priations. The Commission reviews P
tions become law when enacted in that Bill.
• li i
DOUGHERTY,, DAWKINS, STRAND & YOST r
INCORPORATED C jjT
January 23, 1986
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear John:
Please find enclosed as per our telephone conversation forms of a proposed
issuer letter and issuer resolution requesting that the Senate Finance Committee
hold public hearings on the treatment of municipal tax-exempt finance and the
pending tax reform bill , H. R. 3838 and requesting a delay in the effective date
thereof. I have also included the addresses of Senators Durenberger, Boschwitz,
Packwood and Dole. Senator Packwood is Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee
and Dole is one of its more influential members. We would appreciate it if, in
all of our best interests, the City would adopt a form of the enclosed resolu-
tion and mail both the resolution and the letter to the four Senators, but most
especially Durenberger and Boschwitz, who are in a position to pressure Packwood
to re-open debate on the issue of tax-exempt finance.
As you know, the tax reform bill as presently drafted places very substantial
new restraints on the ability of states and their political subdivisions to
issue tax-exempt bonds for any purpose, even traditional financings for public
buildings and infrastructure improvements. The proposed bill requires that all
arbitrage earnings on all tax-exempt bonds be rebated to the federal government,
which in most instances will require the issuing municipality to issue more
bonds than otherwise would need to. In addition, there are stringent new
requirements relating to the timing of the spending of proceeds such that muni-
cipalities will loose most of their flexability in attempting to bond when the
market is at its most desireable. Additionally, municipalities will now have to
compete for reduced volume allocation for many bond issues that were previously
considered true public financings, such as tax increment bonds, even if such
proceeds were not loaned to non-governmental entities.
Additionally, I mentioned to you the fact that certain provisions of the new
bill essentially exclude commercial banks and savings and loans as purchasers of
tax exempt securities; such institutions have traditionally been large purcha-
sers for general obligation -bonds. Enclosed is a summary of this portion of the
bill including one significant exception to this provision allowing municipali-
ties to issue up to $10,000,000 in bonds per year ($3,000,000 per project) for
sale to in-state financial institutions not subject to requirements of the tax
reform act. If the City should be in a position to issue any such bonds,
Dougherty Dawkins believes it could make a market in such bond to in-state
financial institutions and would appreicate an opportunity to bid on any such
issue.
INVESTMENT BANKERS
100 SOUTH FIFTH STREET❑SUITE 2300 E3 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402❑612/341-6000
Mr. John Anderson
January 23, 1986
Page Two
Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions or if Dougherty
Dawkins or myself can be of any assistance to the City.
Very truly yours,
Wood Kidner
WK/kea
Enclosures
that proposed Code section 149(c) (relating to early issuance)
will be applicable; however, may be a technical error, and the
appropriate citation is assumed to be proposed Code section
149(e) (relating to information reporting) .
Project Specific Transitional Rules
The bill provides numerous transitional rules
applicable to specific projects or programs identified therein.
MINIMUM TAX
The bill provides generally that interest on
nonessential function bonds issued after December 31, 1985 will
be treated as a "tax preference" item which is subject to the
25% minimum tax applicable to corporate and individual
taxpayers. Interest on refunding bonds issued after
December 31, 1985 will be exempt from treatment as a preference
if issued to refund bonds issued on or before December 31,
1985. The Committee report indicates that a series of
refundings will be exempt from treatment as a preference if the
first issue occurred on or before December 31, 1985.
` INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS
Bank Bondholder Interest Deduction
Under prior law the interest deduction on indebtedness
incurred by banks, thrift institutions and other financial
institutions to purchase or carry tax-exempt obligations
acquired after December 31, 1982 was reduced by 20',x. The bill
goes a significant step further and denies financial
institutions 100•, of the deduction for that portion of interest
expense which is allocable t'o tax-exempt obligations acquired
after December 31, 1985 . The bill contains no exception for
refundings.
A transitional exception is provided for any
tax-exempt obligations acquired after December 31, 1985
pursuant .to a direct or indirect written commitment to purchase
or repurchase such obligations, which commitment was entered
into before September 25, 1985. Such obligations are treated
as obligations acquired before January 1, 1986. Interest
allocable to such obligations is, therefore, not subject to the
100° disallowance rule, but is subject to the 20% disallowance
rule contained in prior law which remains in effect for
tax-exempt obligations acquired between January 1, 1983 and
December 31, 1985.
s
-36-
The bill also provides that certain tax-exempt
Obligations acquired during calendar years 1986, 1967 or 1988
will be treated as acquired before January 1, 1986. The
tax-exempt obligations that qualify for this treatment are any
bond issued during calendar years 1986, 1987, or 1988 which (a)
is not a nonessential function bond, (b) is acquired by a
financial institution authorised to do business in the State of
the bond issuer, and (c) is designated by the issuer as either
(i) a tax anticipation note with a term not exceeding 1 year;
or (ii) part of an issue not exceeding $3 million (including
other issues having a common purpose) and issued to provide
qualified project bond financing, including financing for
schools, jails, municipal building improvements, and other
public projects. Not more than $10 million of aggregate
obligations may be designated for these purposes by any issuer
during a given calendar year. The exception is limited to
bonds issued by States or political subdivisions which were in
existence on October 23, 1985. As in the case of the
previously mentioned transitional exception, tax-exempt
obligations that are not subject to the 100', disallowance rule
are subject to the 20,E disallowance rule of prior law.
Property and Casualty Insurance Companies
The bill provides that 20% of interest earned on
tax-exempt obligations (along with the deductible portion of
dividends received) must be used to reduce deductible
underwriting losses by property and casualty insurance
companies. The provision applies to tax-exempt obligations
acquired by property and casualty insurers on or after November
15, 1985. This percentage increases to 15% in 1988.
The bill also provides that for taxable years
beginning after December 31; 1987, property and casualty
insurers will be subject to an alternative tax of 20% on their
net gain from operations. Interest on tax-exempt obligations
acquired on or after November 15, 1985 will be included for
purposes of this computation.
= end -
-37-
ISSUER LETTER
Dear Senator
On behalf of 1 am writing to urge your immediate attention
to a number of very serious concerns which we have with the proposal for tax
reform as found in HR3838 presently pending in front of the Senate Finance
Committee. Specifically our concerns focus on the provisions for the issuance
of tax exempt bonds.
We urge that you do everything possible to immediately eliminate the retroactive
effective date in this bill . It is not only punitive and historically
unprecedented, but also has caused a tremendous amount of unnecessary chaos in
the ability of local governments and non-profit sponsors to borrow in the tax
exempt market place. The retroactive effective date has the force of law in the
bond market with only one House of Congress adopting it. The effective date
should be moved at a minimum to January 1, 1987, for any measures relative to
the limitation of the issuance of tax exempt bonds.
We are also extremely concerned about what we understand to be the difficulty of
the tax exempt bond industry to gain a full hearing in front of the Senate
Finance Committee. It appears that a very serious area has been traded away and
many issuers around the country have not had a chance to fully realize the
impact. We feel tax-exempt financing deserves a full hearing in front of the
Senate Finance Committee early in its deliberations.
y
Finally, we would strongly urge keeping 50* 3 (non-profit) borrowers outside
the proposed unified volume cap. As you are well aware, the aging population in
this country is burgeoning and without the ability of 501c.3 organizations to
borrow in the tax exempt bond market place a number of very socially responsible
projects will immediately become infeasible. Under today's tax bill , many
future facilities will be out of business. Consequently, we strongly urge you
to do everything possible to keep this particular group of issuers outside of
any proposed volume cap limitations.
Once again, we need your positive consideration of:
(a) An immediate change in the effective date to January 1, 1987, to allow
for a rational transition to a reduced use of tax-exempt bonds.
(b) A hearing before the Senate Finance Committee so issuers can help the
Committee see the dire consequences of several features in HR3838.
(c) Exclusion for non-profit borrowers from the bond volume caps in each
state.
Sincerely,
�� W
RESOLUTION NO. 2517
A RESOLUTION ON TAX EXEMPT BONDS
WHEREAS, borrowing in the tax exempt market place has been
essential to local governments and non-profit organizations, and;
WHEREAS, tax exempt borrowing for eligible issuers is important
to all citizens and taxpayers , and;
WHEREAS, declining federal participation back to state and
local governments makes tax exempt borrowing even more essential ,
and;
WHEREAS, HR3838 is punitive and historically unprecedented
in relation to tax exempt bonds.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that we require immediate
attention to moving forward the effective date of sections of
the bill addressing tax exempt bonds to at least January 1 , 1987 ,
and;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Senate Finance Committee
grant the tax exempt bond issuers and industry a full hearing,
and;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that non-profit borrowers be excluded
from the state-by-state bond volume caps.
Adopted in session of the City Council
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
1986 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1986.
City Attorney
UT
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE
AftPoll, MICHAEL A. McGUIRE, MANAGER
January 31, 1986
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear John:
At the January 27, 1986 City Council meeting the issue of renaming Columbia
Avenue north of County Road 42 was discussed. The Council discussed the issue
in detail and deliberated on the following items: (1) purpose of the name
change; (2) resident opinions; (3) cost to the City and residents; (4) Prior
Lake and Shakopee street numbering differences; (5) effective date of the name
change, if adopted; and (6) extending the name change further south within the
City.
The City Council unanimously passed a motion to change the name of Columbia
Avenue north of County Road 42 to Canterbury Road. Included in the motion were
the following contingencies:
1. Effective date of the change is one week prior to the 1986 opening of
Canterbury Downs Race Track.
2. Retaining the Prior Lake five-digit numbering system.
3. Reasonable costs of the name change and the street sign at County Road
42 and the future Canterbury Road be paid by some other source, either
the City of Shakopee or Canterbury Downs.
All residents' bills relating to the cost of the name change would be submitted
first to the City of Prior Lake and then we would forward them to the paying
entity.
If all contingencies are met, the City of Prior Lake will agree to the name
change. After your review of this letter, please contact me with the City of
Shakopee's position and/or response to the above contingencies.
Sincerely,
Michael A. McGuire
City Manager
City of Prior Lake
MAM:11
(612) 447.4230 4629 DAKOTA STREET S.E. P.O. BOX 359 PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA 55372
CAh,TfRB,uRr
D O W N S
January 30, 1986
Mr . John Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Canterbury Road
Expense Reimbursement
Dear Mr . Anderson:
This letter will serve as acceptance on behalf of
Canterbury Downs of the conditions incorporated into the
approval by the City of Prior Lake of the change in name of
County Road 83, between TH. 101 and County Road 42 , now to be
known as Canterbury Road.
Canterbury Downs, as a private citizen, has offered and
does agree to pay minimal, out of pocket, expenses incurred by
residents affected by this name change. We understand this
will avoid any precedent being set by the City of Shakopee in
situations like this.
We appreciate your attention to this matter.
Yours sin rely,
i
i
�_--'Fred J./ orrigan
Director of Operations
Canterbury Downs/1100 County Road 83/P.O. Box 5081 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379/(612) 445-7223
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk \ �L/
RE: Vacation of Certain Easements Within the Plat
of Halo 2nd Addition
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction
A public hearing has been set for February 4 , 1986 to consider
the vacation of certain easements within Halo 2nd Addition.
Background
Halo 2nd Addition is being replatted along with some land to
the north into Shakopee Valley Square 1st Addition. Shakopee
Valley Square 1st Addition was given preliminary approval on
November 6 , 1985 with a number of conditions , one of which was
the vacation of drainage and utility easements dedicated in
Halo 2nd. The developer has petitioned for the vacation of
drainage and utility easements along the interior lot lines
as well as along the Northerly 99 . 56 feet of Lot 4 , Block 1 ,
Halo 2nd.
The City Engineer sees no problem with vacation of lot line
easements. The 99 . 56 feet utility easement over the north portion
of Lot 4 , apparently was for a sanitary sewer line that was
never located in this easement area but instead installed somewhat
north according to his maps . He has requested the developer
dedicate an easement for the actual location of the sanitary
sewer line across Lot 4 , Shakopee Valley Square.
The City Planner recommends that the easements be vacated because
they will be replaced with new ones to be dedicated in Shakopee
Valley Square 1st around the perimeters of the lots.
The SPUC Manager has no problem with the vacation of the easements
as long as the new plat shows the 20 foot utility easement needed
within the northerly 99 . 56 easement as well as the utility easement
along the east side of Lot 1 , Halo 2nd where existing electric
lines are located.
The developer is requesting the vacation of other easements
dedicated by separate document which request does not require
a public hearing. The resolution authorizing the release of
these easements as well as the resolution vacating the easements
on the plat of Halo 2nd will be brought to Council for consideration
at a subsequent meeting. All easements needed by the City will
be shown on the final plat of Shakopee Valley Square.
So as not to vacate the easements and have a subsequent problem
if the plat of Shakopee Valley Square 1st is never recorded,
it is recommended that Council not actually adopt the appropriate
resolution of vacation until the final plat of Shakopee Valley
Square is in order , properly executed by the developer and on
file with the City ready for recording.
Alternatives
1. Hold public hearing on vacation of easements in plat of
Halo 2nd and direct preparation of the proper resolution
when the final plat of Shakopee Valley Square is in order
and on file with the City.
2. Hold public hearing and deny request for vacation of easements.
3 . Hold public hearing and direct preparation of proper resolution
for next Council meeting.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1.
Action Recommended
1. Hold public hearing.
2 . Direct the preparation of the proper resolution vacating
certain easements within the plat of Halo 2nd Addition
for consideration when the final plat of Shakopee Valley
Square 1st Addition is approved and on file with the City
ready for recording.
JSC/jms
g
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Intern
RE: Cable Franchise Modifications
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction•
After several negotiation sessions between the cable company
and City staff, the Cable Communications Advisory Commission
is recommending Council approval of a set of franchise modifications
that they feel will provide both financial relief for the cable
company and a better public access forum for Shakpee residents .
A public hearing is scheduled for the February 4, 1986 Council
meeting to hear comments to the proposed franchise modifications.
Background:
On August 30 , 1985 , Zylstra-United formally presented City staff
with a request for modifications to the cable franchise ordinance.
On October 1, 1985 , staff was authorized by the Shakopee City
Council to work with the consulting firm of Cooper-Rutter Associates',
Inc. , Zylstra-United and the City of Chaska in completing an
analysis of Zylstra-United' s existing and projected financial
condition. On November 14 , 1985, Cooper-Rutter completed their
analysis of Chaska and Shakopee ' s cable system. On December
9 , 1985 , the consultant appeared at a regular meeting of the
Chaska cable commission to discuss his findings and answer ques-
tions. In brief, the consultant recommended, at a minimum,
the adoption of Zylstra-United' s proposed concessions . At the
January 21 , 1986 Council meeting, staff presented a list of
franchise modifications being considered by the City and the
Cable Company. At that time, the Council moved to request the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission to waive Zylstra-United' s
pole rental fee ( approximately $2 , 000 - $3 , 000 annually) for
a five year period commencing January 1, 1986 . On February
3 , 1986 , the Utility Commission will take some action in regard
to the City' s request.
On January 27, 1986 , the Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory
Committee met to finalize their recommendations for modifications
to the cable franchise ordinance. A cost summary of the modifi-
cations being proposed by the Advisory Committee appears in
attachment #1 . Attachment #2 is a verbal understanding of the
proposed modifications which are being recommended by the Advisory
Committee for City Council approval.
Initially the City of Shakopee was requesting that a $25 , 000
performance bond be supplied by Zylstra-United as a condition
of the proposed modifications. In light of the fact that we
have a cable security fund of $12, 400 which can be drawn from
in event of the company' s non-compliance, staff is proposing
that the performance bond be dropped as a condition of these
modifications. However, staff is proposing that all cash payments
for equipment, maintenance etc. be supplied to the City prior
to the formal approval of any amendments. The Council may also
wish to add a clause to any amendments which states that, agreed
to modifications shall be non-transferable. Staff will provide
more information on this concept at the meeting.
Following the public hearing, it would be appropriate for the
City Council to take some action in regard to the proposed franchise
modifications
I would like to add that should Council approve the proposed
modifications , the appropriate amending ordinance to the Cable
Franchise Ordinance will have to be drafted by legal counsel.
Staff has been in contact with the law firm of Herbst and Thue
( the firm that originally prepared Shakopee ' s and Chaska' s Cable
Ordinance) . The cost estimate for the development of the appropriate
ordinance changes ranges between $3 , 000 - $4 , 000 (combined
Shakopee/Chaska cost) . Staff has informed Zylstra-United that
they will be responsible for any legal costs incurred by the
City in accordance with Section 8 . 12(D) of the Cable Franchise
Ordinance.
Alternatives:
1. Approve the cable franchise modifications as they appear
in attachment no. 2.
2 . Make additions and/or deletions to attachment no. 2 .
3 . Do nothing.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative no. 1
Action Reauested:
1 . Move that the Cable Franchise modifications as they appear
in attachment no. 2 be approved as an amendment to the Cable
Franchise Ordinance.
2 . Authorize the appropriate City officials to proceed with
the law firm of Herbst and Thue in the development of the
appropriate amending ordinance at an estimated cost not to
exceed $4 , 000 . 00. Costs to be paid for by Zylstra-United.
BAS:cah
Attachment
Attachment No. 1
Summary of Proposed Cable Franchise Modifications
Annual operational savings accrued by the Company if the following modifications
are approved:
Permanent deferrals unless otherwise noted.
Shakopee Chaska
1. Elimination of Public Access Staffing $22,500 $22,500
*2. Elimination of the Pole Rental Fee 2,000 est. 2,100
*3. Institutional Network Maintenance Fee 2,340 approx. 2,340 approx.
4. Elimination of Studio Insurance Expense 2,000 2,000
5. Elimination of Studio Rental Expense -- 3,600
Total $28,840 $32,540
*Five year deferment
One-time capital expenses accrued by the Company as a result of the proposed
modifications:
Shakopee Chaska
1. Payment for Equipment not provided $5,000 $5,000
2. Provision of a Character Generator 4,000 --
3. Provision of Institutional Network Equipment $8,000 jointly
4. Provision of Joint Playback Equipment 2,000 Jointly
Combined Total $24,000
Miscl. Company Costs
Shakopee Chaska
1. Payment of an annual Studio Maintenance Fee $ 2,000 $ 3,000 est.
2. Monthly Subscriber Fee ( .25 sub/mo. ) 3,600 3,600
3. Reduction in Management Fee (77 to 4%) 11,000 11,000
4. Guarantee Studio space rent and utility
free for a five year period. ?
Miscl. Company Savings (Shakopee and Chaska)
1. Five year extension of the existing franchise term.
2. Five year deferral of capital commitments not addressed in these
modifications with the exception of line extensions.
l
City of Shakopee ' s
Verbal Understanding of Zylstra-United' s Cable
Proposed Cable Franchise Modifications
I. Public Access
A. Shakopee will take over operation of the public access
studio effective April 1 . 1986 .
B. All equipment owned by the cable company and presently
being used for access programming pursuant to the
equipment list as provided by the company and in-
cluding equipment dedicated to the computer and
viewing center shall become the property of the City
of Shakopee effective April 1 , 1986 .
C. The company agrees to provide the existing studio
space at its existing location for the City' s use,
rent and utility free (phone, heat electricity, etc. )
for a five year period commencing April 1 , 1986 .
* D. The company agrees to pay the City $2, 000 per year
for studio equipment maintenance on April 1 , of each
year for the remainder of this franchise.
E. The company agrees to provide $5 , 000 by April 1, 1986
for studio equipment not provided.
F. The City shall be responsible for studio equipment
insurance costs for the remainder of this franchise
commencing April 1 , 1986 .
G. The company agrees to provide and install the nec-
essary equipment for joint playback by April 1 , 1986
at a cost not to exceed $2 , 000 .
H. Effective April 1 , 1986 the company shall assess a
subscriber fee of 25 cents/subscriber/month. This
financial -support shall be increased by 3% per year.
This fee shall be turned over to the City on Septem-
ber 15th of each year ( for subscriber fees collected
between April 1 - August 31 ) and April 15th of each
year ( for subscriber fees collected between Septem-
ber 1 and March 31) .
* Note: The financial obligation of the company in
terms of equipment maintenance may be increased upon
an analysis of the operating condition of the existing
studio equipment.
I . The company is willing to dedicate the existing public
access channel to the City of Shakopee. Final program
authority to rest with the City of Shakopee pursuant
to FCC regulations .
II . Institutional Network
A. The company agrees to provide up to $ 8, 000 by April
1 , 1986 for equipment to activate Shakopee and Chaska' s
institutional network.
B. The company shall be allowed to charge Institutional
Network users an annual fee of $936 per activated
channel (up and down) for a five year period commencing
April 1 , 1986 . During this time the maintenance fee
shall not be subject to increase.
III . Pole Rental
Shakopee agrees to eliminate Zylstra-United' s annual pole rental
fee for a five year period commencing January 1 , 1986 .
IV. Franchise Term
Shakopee agrees to extend Zylstra-United' s franchise term
for a five year period ( i.e. until 2002) .
V. Character Generator
The company agrees to provide $4 , 000 by April 1 , 1986 for
character generator equipment not provided plus free in-
stallation of the character generator and the necessary
equipment to activate the character generator.
VI . Franchise Fee
The company agrees to pay the 5% franchise fee to the City
on a semi-annual basis .. (Payments to be made on January 31
and July 31 of each year) .
VII . Management Fee
The company agrees to reduce their management fee from
7% to 4% for the remainder of the franchise.
VIII . Ca ital Deferrals
The City agrees that any and all other capitol commitments
required by the franchise not addressed in these modifications
effective April 1 , 1986 , with the exception of new plant
extensions shall be deferred until April 1 , 1991 .
9 a
IX. Non-Compliance
The company agrees that failure to comply with these modifi-
cations shall subject them to the non-compliance fines
and forefeitures as specified in the franchise ordinance.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Intern
RE: Dial-a-Ride Bid Specifications
DATE: January 28 , 1986
Introduction:
The current dial-a-ride (D-A-R) contract with Van Pool Services
Inc. (VPSI ) expires on April 15 , 1986 . In order for us to continue
adequate service levels it becomes necessary for the City of
Shakopee to develop and approve a set of bid specifications
for potential D-A-R providers.
Background:
On September 1, 1984 the City of Shakopee entered into an agreement
with VPSI for the provision of D-A-R transit service within
our community. Authority for Shakopee to proceed under the
Metropolitan Transit Service Demonstration legislation was granted
by MnDOT on July 1 , 1984 .
In December of 1985 , MnDOT approved the extension of our MnDOT
Transit Service Contract for calendar year 1986. This action
allows Shakopee to proceed with the rebidding of our D-A-R program.
While the existing contractor has done an adequate job in providing
D-A-R service and would like to renegotiate the current contract
( see attachment 1 ) , in the opinion of our City Attorney and
officials at the League of Minnesota Cities, it is not legally
possible for us to pursue renegotiation. Staff with the assistance
of our Regional Transit Board project manager has prepared the
attached D-A-R bid specifications for your review and approval
( see attachment 2 ) .
This set of bid specifications include several changes from
our initial D-A-R bid specifications sent out in 1984 . Briefly,
the major areas that have changed are as follows: A. A less
restrictive set of vehicle specifications is being addressed
by the City, B. The City' s ability to request additional vehicles
with a 30 day notice is being added, C. The contract will be
for two years with an additional one year at the option of the
City, D. The contract will be bid on an hourly basis with a
built in incentive clause, E. Separate bids will be taken for
dispatching services and facilities located in Shakopee and
outside of Shakopee, F. The contractor shall have the right
to subcontract for handicapped services and, G. The following
criteria will be evaluated in determining the successful bidder:
cost of service , quality of vehicles , reliability of service
and past experience.
on January 23 , 1986 the Energy and Transportation Committee
moved to recommend to City Council approval of the D-A-R bid
specifications .
Alternatives -
1 . Approve the D-A-R bid specifications as recommended by
the Energy and Transportation Committe.
2 . Do not approve the D-A-R bid specifications.
3 . Make changes and/or deletions to the D-A-R specifications
and recommend approval.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
Action Requested:
Move to approve the D-A-R bid specifications as recommended
by the Energy and Transporation Committee and authorize the
appropriate City officials to proceed with the bidding process.
BAS:cah
Attachments
Attachment #1
SERVICES VAN POOL
C S I NC.
a
ov P.O. BOX 159 • DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48288-0159 • 313/977-5081
January 10, 1986
Mr. Barry Stock, Transit Manager
City of Shakopee ane;c
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MLS 55379-1376
c'TY 0%,-
Dear
,-Dear Mr. Suck:
Van Pool Services, Inc. (VPSI) has provided van pool and dial-a-ride
services on behalf of the City of Shakopee for the last fifteen months.
The van pool service has expanded to six vehicles which transport res-
idents to St. Louis Park, the University of Minnesota and downtown
Minneapolis on a daily basis. The dial-a-ride service is widely used
by Shakopee residents as evidenced by the large and continuing increases
in monthly ridership. In fact, all of the services now enjoyed by
Shakopee residents are being provided by VPSI at a net cost substantially
less than what Shakopee previously contributed to the transit taxing
district.
It is the desire of VPSI to continue to provide these services on be-
half of the City of Shakopee beyond the current contract expiration
date. With your concurrence, VPSI would like to negotiate a two year
extension of the existing contract.
Please respond at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
T. J. McDonald
President
TJWka
cc: Mr. R. J. Henning
Mr. S. C. Pederson
Mr. F. C. Sexton
Mr. G. R. Delno
SUBSIDIARY OF CHRYSLER
I CORPORATION
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
DIAL-A-RIDE
SPECIFICATIONS
OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
( 612) 445-3650
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
NOTICE FOR BIDS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:
The City of Shakopee , Minnesota will receive bids at City Offices,
129 East 1st Avenue , Shakopee , Minnesota until 10 : 30 A . M. on
March 10 , 1986 at which time they will be publicly opened in
the Council Chambers of City Hall , 129 East 1st Avenue, Shakopee ,
Minnesota by the City Clerk and will then be tabulated and will
be considered by Council at 7 :30 P. M. , or thereafter on August
7 , 1986 in the Council Chambers at the Municipal Building of
such City for the following :
Dial-A-Ride Transit System for City of Shakopee , MN .
Consisting of :
A community-centered transit service that is custom-
designed for residents of Shakopee . Dial-A-Ride pro-
vides door- to-door rides under the "shared ride " con-
cept . All trips are coordinated to carry as many pas-
sengers as possible and as inexpensively as possible ,
keeping in mind the comfort and safety of the passengers.
All bids submitted must be inclosed in a sealed envelope clearly
marked, "Bid proposal for Shakopee Dial-A-Ride Transit System. "
All bids shall be accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier ' s check,
bid bond or certified check, payable to the City of Shakopee
for not less than $5,000 .00 .
City Council of the City of Shakopee reserves the right to reject
any or all bids, to waive irregularities and to award the contract
in the best interest of the City.
Plans and Specifications may be obtained from the City of Shakopee,
129 East First Ave. , Shakopee, MN 55379 .
/s/ Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Published in the : Shakopee Valley News on
February 11 and February 18 , 1986
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
DIAL-A-RIDE
SPECIFICATIONS
1 . General
a. The Dial-A-Ride is a community-centered transit service
that is custom-designed for residents of Shakopee .
Dial-A-Ride provides door-to-door rides under the
" shared ride " concept . All trips are coordinated
to carry as many passengers as possible and as inexpens-
ively as possible , keeping in mind the comfort and
safety of the passenger. The program is geared to
reducing traffic and parking problems , conserving
energy and to improve air quality.
b. The proposed service is funded 100 percent of the
deficit by the "Metropolitan Transit Service Demonstration
Program" established by the legislature , Minnesota
Statute 1982, 17 + , 265 .
C. The funding of the program is contingent upon the
availability of dollars from the Regional Transit
Board.
2. Contract
a. Award
The awarding of the contract by the City of Shakopee
shall be subject to prior approval by the Regional
Transit Board. Each of the following components snall
be evaluated equally in determining the successful
1
bidder ; cost of service , quality of vehicles, reliability
of service , and past experience .
b. Duration
The contract will be 214 months in length with a third
year renewable at the option of the City . It will
begin April 16 , 1986 and terminate on April 15 , 1988 .
Actual operation will be for a 24 month period.
C. Termination
( 1) The City may terminate the contract with 30 days
advance written notice , if the Contractor fails
to comply with the provisions of the contract.
( 2) The City may terminate the contract at any time
if funding or the program becomes unavailable
through the Regional Transit Board , prior to
the expiration of the contract.
3. Program Service Area
a. The system' s service area for origins and destinations
shall be operated within the city limits of : City
of Shakopee.
b. Service Area will continue to be within the city limits
of Shakopee (See Exhibit 1) for the 24 month period ,
unless otherwise directed by the City.
4 . Service Hours
Total service hours during this contract period sriall not
exceed 12 ,096 unless otherwise directed by the City .
2
5 . Program Operating Schedule
a. Operating time will be the hours of 6 : 00 A.M. to 6 : 00
P . M . , five days per week , Monday through Friday .
The system will not operate on federal holidays.
b. Operating time shall be established by City and may
be changed by the City to provide the best possible
service to the public .
C. Hours of operation shall not exceed 12 hours per day
unless otherwise directed by the City.
6 . Fare Structure
a. The fare structure shall be determined by the City .
The ares are as follows :
(1) $ . 75/ ride for less than a 12 hour notice and
$ . 50/ride for more than or 12 hour notice for
Sr. Citizens and children 5 and under with proper
identification.
( 2) $1 . 00/ride for less than a 12 hour notice and
$1 . 00/ ride for more than a 12 hour notice for
students under age 18 with proper identification.
( 3) $1 . 50/ride for less than a 12 hour notice and
$1 . 00/ride for more than a 12 hour notice for
Adults.
b. The Contractor shall use a form that is acceptable
to the City to assure an accurate method os accounting
of the fares collected.
3
7 , Qollection of Fares
All revenues derived from the operation os the transit
system shall be and remain from the initial receipt thereof
the absolute property of the Contractor and the treatment
of such revenues by the Contractor including collection,
banking and the accounting shall be the responsibility
of the Contractor.
8. Marketing
a. The Contractor agrees to participate in all marketing
plans as set forth by the City . These plans could
include but are not limited to :
(1) Name of the Transit Service
(2) Advertising Photographs
(3) Some Type of Vehicle Classification.
( a) Decal designs and lettering.
( b) Magnetic promotional signs.
b. The Contractor will not share in the cost for the
marketing materials or preparations ; however , the
Contractor will supply the vehicles to carry out the
plan.
9 . Billing_and Reimbursement
a. The Contractor shall enter into a performance based
agreement. The Contractor shall receive the quoted
hourly bid per vehicle on a munthly basis when the
monthly average ridership falls between 1500 and 2100
4
i
passenger trips . In the event that the ridership
falls below 1500 passenger trips during any given
month, the contractor hourly bid price per vehicle
shall be reduced by $2.00 per hour during the month
in question. Conversly, in the event that the Contractor
exceeds 2100 passenger trips during any given month
the hourly bid price per vehicle spall be increased
by $2 .00 per hour during the month in question.
b. The Contractor shall maintain daily ridership records
that specify the following : name of each passenger,
pick-up point , destination point , and the time of
day of each trip. The daily ridership records shall
be open to the public during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to
14 : 30 p . m. Monday thru Friday . These reports will
be reviewed and verified on a randam bases by the
City.
C. A monthly ridership report compiled by the Contractor
shall be submitted to the City by the 15th day of
each month. The format for the report shall be provided
by the City.
d. Upon submittance oi- the monthly ridership report ,
the Contractor shall be reimbursed accordingly by
the City within 30 days of the receipt of said report.
10. Record Keeping and Data Collection
The Contractor agrees to keep complete records as required
by the Regional Transit Board and/or the City of Shakopee.
5
All records pertaining to the transit service will be open
to inspection by officials of the City of Shakopee and
the Regional Transit Board, during regular business hours .
11 . Service Package
a. The Contractor shall furnish the necessary office
space , garage facilities , equipment , utilities and
personnel sufficient to provide daily transportation
of passengers.
b. The Contractor shall be required to meet ail requirements
as established by City Ordinance and all other requirements
required by the City, State, and Federal Government.
C. The Contractor is responsible for aii maintenance
and operating costs of the Dial-A-Ride System.
d . The Contractor is required to provide all scheduling
for radio and telephone dispatching, including a separate
local ( Shakopee ) telephone number for the program .
All vehicles in service must have a two way communication
system as approved by the City.
e . All bidders must submit a bid to include option 1
of this section . A separate bid may be submitted
by the bidder fro option 2 if they feel it is more
cost efficient to do so . All bids submitted shall
be based on a cost per passenger trip for the total
service package as proveded for in these Dial-A-Ride
specifications.
6
Option 1 : The Contractor is required to locate
necessary office space and dispatching
services within the city limits of
Shakopee .
Option 2 : The Contractor is required to provide
necessary office space and dispatching
facilities at a location to be determined
by the Contractor .
f. The Contractor must make available two vehicles (minimum
7 passenger maximum 24 passenger) . At least one lift
equipped vehicle ( handicapped assessible ) with at
least one three point wheel chair tie down must be
available at all times during designated service hours .
4e-
The
fhbThe ContractorKmayjt subcontract for
To assure that there is no disruption in service ,
the contractor must provide adequate back-up vehicles.
g. All vehicles provided by the Contractor must be equipped
with fare boxes.
h. All Capital and operational costs will be the responsi-
bility of the Contractor. These costs must be included
the bid.
i. All vehicles must be maintained in good working condition
with interior and exterior appearance kept in a condition
acceptable to the City and the Regional Transit Board.
7
j . Any other responsibility related the Dial-A-Ride operation
not specified.
k. Standard Dial-A-Ride vehicles provided by the Contractor
shall provide easy accessibility to elderly passengers.
Additionally each vehicle provided by the Contractor
shall meet the following minimum specifications :
7 passenger capacity , air conditioning, interior lighting
system and tinted glass windows.
The handicapped assessible vehicle to be provided
by the Contractor shall also be required to meet ail
Federal and State guidelines and regulations.
1 . The bidder shall provide on the attached statement
qualifications form the following information : Name ,
make, model and specifications of the vehicles he/she
intends on providing for the Shakopee Dial-A-Ride
service .
M. The bidder shall ensure that the above vehicles are
in conformance with all applicable State and Federal
laws governing such services and equipment.
12. Personnel
Bidder shall furnish qualified , licensed and responsible
drivers necessary for the safe operation of buses used
in providing service and shall furnish all other personnel
necessary for continued operation of service , including
8
D c�
but not limited to dispatching, maintenance , cleaning and
washing, operations and maintenance accounting , legal ,
clerical and managerial personnel and will assume ail labor
and other contractual obligations incident thereto.
(1) Drivers shall :
-hold a current Minnesota Class B Driver ' s License ;
-be able to read and write the English language ;
-have knowledge of streets and major activity centers
in Shakopee area ;
-have knowledge in the use of handicapped lift and
securement devices ;
-have knowledge and ability to perform general vehicle
maintenance ;
-keep simple records and make reports ;
-be neat in appearance ;
-cater to the special needs of senior citizens, handicapped
persons, children, etc. ;
-willingly. assist passengers ;
-deal courteously and effectively with passengers
and the public;
-be informed that they are responsible for the lives
of public passengers ;
-a physicians statement of pnysical examination is
required ;
9
-have a police check and motor vehicle record cueck
( to be done by the Contractor and submitted to the
City) . Anyone convicted within five ( 5 ) years prior
to employment of (a) a crime involving harm to a person
or ( b) driving while under the influence of intoxicating
liquor or non-intoxicating malt beverages or ( c) careless
or reckless driving shall not be considered for employ-
ment . Bidder shall certify to the City that each
driver has been properly trained and licensed and
is physically , mentally and legallly qualified to
operate the vehicle and to assist passengers . No
person shall drive a vehicle without this certification.
Bidder must provide the necessary documentation which
states that all employees operating in conjunction
with the Shakopee Dial-A-Ride system are bonded by
a surety company . The manager shall not permit a
driver to drive if the driver has consumed intoxicating
liquor or non-intoxicating liquor or non-intoxicating
malt beverages or4a drug within eight hours prior
6C- 14 f%nt Wlir-"V
to the time/,. he/she begins driving. e-r iX t "p dr"'&r
Lz_,.i n t o
w n-i-c•f�"-'.�* �-e�---d r• v..i.n g-�-aha.l..i.�.y_.w n 8 n--h�-/-sh e
g,-t g.
(2) Dispatcher shall :
-know the location of streets of the City of Shakopee ;
10
w
-handle the public in a courteous manner under all
conditions.
Iris specifically understood that all personnel furnished
by bidder in connection with the performance os service
shall be and remain the employees of the bidder and not
the City . Bidder shall pay all wages , salaries, fringe
benefits , social security taxes , worker ' s compensation
and unemployment compensation or other contributions as
required by law. Bidder shall be considered an indepentent
contractor as the term is used under the laws of- the State
of Minnesota.
13 . Supervision
All services to be performed for the City by the Contractor
pursuant to the terms of the contract snall be supervised
by such employee , agent , or officer of the City as the
City Administrator shall designate .
14 . Insurance
A. Liability Insurance
(1) The Contractor shall provide insurance under a primary
policy, coverage shall include bodily injury insurance
in the amount of at least $200 , 000 for each person
and at least $600,000 for any number of persons included
in bodily injury . Property damage insurance shall
also be provided by the contractor in the amount of
at least $100 , 000 . In addition to these coverages
an umbrella excess liability policy in wnich the City
11
of Shakopee is to be included as an additional insured
shall be provided by the contractor in the amount
of at least $1, 000 , 000 . Such policies must provide
for a 15 day notice to the City of any change , cancellation
or lapse of such policy .
( 2) The Contractor shall further guarantee to save the
City and e harmless and indeminify the City and
3-ta-te for any and all laws, claims, suits, judgements ,
and recoveries which may be asserted , made or amy
arise or be hand , brought or recovered against the
�P�iCNn,F fr?Qr,.e� baar,�t
City and e by reason of any of the foregoing claims ;
and that he shall immediately appear and defend the
same at Xhis own cost or expense .
( 3) Prior to the effective date of the contract the Contractor
shall file a copy of such policies with the CiLy .
B. Worker' s Compensation
( 1) The Contractor will at all times keep fully insured
at his own expense all persons employea by him in
connection with performance of this contact as required
by the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to
Worker ' s Compensation Insurance and shall hold the
City and the harmless from liability from
any cause that may arise by reason of injurious to
an employee of the Contractor who may be injured while
performing work or labor necessary to carry out the
provisions of the contract . Such policy must provide
12
for fifteen (15) days notice to the City of any change ,
cancellation, or lapse of such policy periods.
( 2) Prior to-the effective date of the contract the Contractor
shall file a copy of the such policy with the City .
C. Performance Bond
(1) Before the contract shall be valid and binding against
f;le-
the City, the Contractor snall a performance
bond with the City of Shakopee for the use of said
City and also for the use of anyone wno may perform
or cause to furnish any skill , labor , equipment , or
material in the execution of such contract which bond
shall be signed by the Contractor with a surity company
and shall be in the amount of $20 ,000 which bund snall
at all times be kept in full force and effect for
the term of the contract . Such policy must provide
the thirty (30) days notice to the City of any change,
cancellation, or lapse of such policy .
( 2) The conditions of such bond shall be that the Contractor
shall fully and faithfully perform all conditions
of the contract and these specifications ; snail pay
anyone who may perform or cause to be performed any
work of labor , or cause to be furnished any sxi.11 ,
labor, equipment , or kRt- erial in the execution of
contract ; and such bond shall provide that the full
amount thereof shall be forfeited upon contractors
failure to comply therein.
13
D. Bid Bond
This bid shall be accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier ' s
check , bidders bond or certified check in the amount
of $5 , 000 , payable to the City of Shakopee. No proposal
shall be considered unless accompanied by such deposit.
As soon as a contract is awarded, all deposits shall
be returned to the bidders, except that of the successful
bidder , which shall be retained until the contract
has been signed and the bonds of the Contractor have
been filed, approved , and accepted which shall be
within ten (10) days of notice of award of the contract.
If the successful bidder shall fail to enter into
such contract in accordance with his accepted proposal
or shall fail to furnish the required bond within
ten (10) days from notice of award, his deposit snall
be forfeited to the City of Shakopee as liquidated
damages. The next best proposal snall then be considered
the successful bid , and , at the discretion of the
City Council , the contract may be awarded to the bidder
submitting that proposal .
15 . Subletting for Assignments Contract
a. No assignment or subletting other than handicapped
accessible services of this contract , all or in part
will be permitted without authorization os the City
and the Regional Transit Board.
14
b. The Contractor alone will be held responsible for
full and faithful performance of the contract.
16 . Non-Discrimination
a. In hiring of common or skilled labor for the performance
of work under the contract, the Contractor, any subcon-
tractor , material supplier , or vendor shall not, by
reason of race , creed , age , or color discriminate
against any person or persons who are citizens of
the United States who are qualified and are available
to perform the work to which such employment relates.
b. The Contractor, any sub-contractor, materials supplier
or vendor shall not, in any manner, discriminate against,
or intimidate , or prevent the employment of* any such
person or persons, or on being hired, prevent or conspire
to prevent any such person or persons from the performance
of work under any contract on account of race, color,
age, or creed.
C. Any violation of this section be a misdeamenor. The
contract may be cancelled or terminated by the City
and all money due , or to become due , may be forfeited
for a second or any subsequent violation of terms
or conditions of the contract.
17 . Contractor to Make Examination
a . The Contractor shall make his own examination, investi-
gation, and research regarding the proper method of
15
doing the work, and all conditions affecting the work
to be done and the labor, equipment , and materials
needed thereon, and the quantity of work to be performed.
b. The Contractor agrees that he has satisfied himself
by his own investigation and research regarding all
such conditions and that his conclusion to enter into
the proposed contract is based upon such investigation
and research.
C. The Contractor shall make no claims against the Ctiy
because of any of the estimates, statements, or inter-
pretations made by any official , officer , or agent
of the City that may prove to be in any respect erroneous.
d. The Contractor soley assumes that risk; of all conditions,
foreseen and unforeseen and agrees to complete the
work without additional compensation under wnatever
circumstances which may develop other than as herein
provides.
18 . Forms
The following forms must be submitted with the bid proposal .
a . Bid Proposal Form . The Contractor must submit his
bid on the form provided by the City of Shakopee.
b. O.A. S. Compliance Form.
C. Affidavit of Non-Collusion.
d. Affirmative Action Form.
e . ,Statement of Qualifications Form.
16
19 . Past Performance Statistics
Ridership levels for the past 16 months of service in Shakopee
appears in Exhibit 2 .
17
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
P R O P O S A L
F 0 R
S H A x L R I D E P A R A T R A N S I T S Y S T E M
Date
The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee , MN 55379
Gentlemen :
The undersigned, as bidder, hereby proposes and agrees to enter
into a contract with the City of Shakopee for a Shared Ride
Para Transit System.
I/We propose to supply all labor, equipment and all other part-
iculars as specified in the City ' s plans and specifications
for the sum of :
Option 1 : To be bid on by all bidders.
(See page 5 of bid specifications)
PER HOUR RATE : $
Option 2 : (See page 6 of bid specifications)
PER HOUR RATE : $
This bid is accompanied by Bidder ' s Bond or Certified Check
in the amount of $5 ,000 . 00 . Bidder further agrees to supply
a Performance Bond in the amount of $20 , 000.00 , if he/she is
the successful bidder.
Name of Company (Bidder)
By
Signature
Its
Address
Telephone Number
18
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Intern
RE: Van Pool Request for Proposal Specifications
DATE: January 28 , 1986
Introduction-
The van pool contract with Van Pool Services Inc. (VPSI ) expires
on April 15 , 1986 . It therefore becomes necessary for the City
to develop and approve a set of minimum specifications so that
potential contractors can develop a proposal for van pool services.
Background:
As with the dial-a-ride contract, the City cannot renegotiate
the existing van pool contract. Staff has therefore developed
a preliminary set of van pool proposal specifications for your
review and comment (see attachment) .
Because of our difficulty in acquiring vehicles that met the
City' s performance standards , I have included language in the
proposal specifications which will at a minimum require the
contractor to establish a replacement schedule for vehicles
upon their attainment of 75 , 000 miles. The language will also
ensure that no vehicle can be supplied to our program that has
mileage in excess of 10 , 000 miles.
The only other change in the proposal specification is a provision
which gives the City the authority to request 7 or 8 passenger
vehicles with a 60 day notice. This will allow us to acquire
mini-vans if we determine that there is a need for them.
On January 23 , 1986 the Energy and Transportation Committee
moved to recommend City Council approval of the Van Pool Request
for Proposal Specifications .
Alternatives :
' 1 . Approve the Van Pool Request for Proposal Specifications
as recommended -by the Energy and Transportation Committee.
2. Do not approve the Van Pool Request for Proposal Specifications.
3 . Make changes and/or deletions to the Van Pool Request for
Proposal Specifications and approve.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
Action Requested:
Move to approve the Van Pool Request for Proposal Specifications
as recommended by the Energy and Transportation Committee and
authorize the appropriate City officials to proceed with the
request for proposal process .
EAS: cah
Attachment
9 . Insurance
(A) The Contractor shall provide insurance under a primary
Policy, coverage shall include bodily injury insurance
in the amount of at least $200, 000 for each person
and at least $600, 000 for any number of persons included
in bodily injury. Property damage insurance shall
also be provided by the contractor in the amount of
at least $100 , 000 . In addition to these coverages
an umbrella excess liability policy in which the City
of Shakopee is to be included as an additional insured
shall be provided by the contractor in the amount
of at least $ /, 000, 000 . Such policies must provide
for a 15 day notice to the City of any change, cancellation
or lapse of such policy.
(B) The Contractor shall further guarantee to save the
City and State harmless and indeminify the City and
State for any and all laws, claims, suits , judgements,
and recoveries which may be asserted, made or amy
arise or be had, brought or recovered against the
City and State by reason of any of the foregoing claims;
and that he shall immediately appear and defend the
same at this own cost or expense.
( C) Prior to the effective date of the contract the Contractor
shall file a copy of such policies with the City.
5
the City of any change, cancellation, or lapse
of such policy.
B. The conditions of such bond shall be that the
contractor shall fully and faithfully perform
all conditions of the contract and thes specifi-
cations , shall pay anyone who may perform or
cause to be performed any work of labor or cause
to be furnished any skill, labor , equipment or
material in the execution of the contract, and
such bond shall provide that the full amount
therefore shall be forfeited upon contractors
failure to comply therein.
8. Contract Duration
The contract will be 24 months in length with a third
year renewable at the option of the City. It will begin
April 16 , 1986 and terminate on April 15 , 1988. Actual
operation will be for a 24 month period.
4
K�. The contractor shall designate in the proposal
the estimated miles per gallon for the vehicles
to be provided in the program.
L All vehicles must be maintained in good working
condition with interior and exterior appearance
kept in a condition acceptable to the City and
the Regipnal Transit Board. The Contractor shall =4n.� -,L;MF
"r f � o vans that have mileage in excess
of 10 , 000 miles. Additionally, vehicles provided
by the contractor shall be taken out of service
and replaced upon reaching an odometer reading
Of 75 , 000 . .. `X�,t}fiCN� =z:+� Jicrc:�a � c_
5 . Contract
A. Award
The awarding of the contract by the City of Shakopee
shall be subject to prior approval by the Minnesota
Regional Transit Board.
B. Termination
1. The City may terminate the contract
with 30 days advance written notice.
2 . The City may terminate the contract
at any time if funding of the program
becomes unavailable through the Regional
Transit Board, prior to the expiration
of the contract.
6 . Record Keeping and Data Collection
-- jam'%cva C ir�i vsi �oCrr�
The contractor,.,agrees to keep complete records as
required by and/or the
City of Shakopee. All records pertaining to the van pool
project will be open to inspection by officials of th
City of Shakopee and the Regional Transit Board during
regular business hours.
7 . Performance Bond
A. Before the contract shall be valid and binding
against the City, the contractor shall enter
into a performance bond with the City of Shakopee
for the use of said City and also for the use
of anyone who may perform or cause to furnish
any skills, labor, equipment, or material in
the execution of such contract. The bond shall
be signed by the contractor with a surity company
and shall be in the amount of $10 , 000 which bond
shall at all times be kept in full force and
effect for the term of the contract. Such policy
must provide for a thirty ( 30 ) day notice to
3
1. Identify potential van pool markets,
including interested drivers in those
potential areas.
2 . Assist drivers in organizing their
van pool groups.
3 . Assist drivers in getting licensed.
4. The contractor shall agree to keep
full and complete books of account
under generally accepted accounting
principles , as specified by the City
of Shakopee.
5 . The contractor shall provide the necessary
van pool registration for each vehicle
as required by the MTC for reduced
parking rates and preferential parking.
6 . Assist van pools in finding parking
lots that 4A-_-t the needs of the driver.
f-1
4. Vehicle Requirements
A. Vehicles provided must be air conditioned.
B. The contractor shall include the following information
pertaining to vehicles to be provided in the
proposal: Name, make, model and specifications.
C. Vehicles must have automatic transmission, power
steering and power brakes.
D. At least six vehicles should be made available
for the program with a minimum carring capacity
of 12 persons and a maximum carrying capacity
of 1S passengers. Additional vehicles shall
be made available by the contractor for the program
with a two week notice from the City of Shakopee.
Additionally, provision shall be made that will
permit the City to request with a 60 day notice
7 or 8 passenger vehicles.
E. Maintenance program for the vehicles should be
identified in the proposal.
F. The contractor shall verify in writing that the
vehicles to be provided in the program are in
accordance with State and Federal laws governing
such vehicles and equipment.
G. All vehicles shall be completely insured by the
contractor so as to hold the city harmless in
the event of an accident.
H. In the proposal the contractor should provide
a plan desUe''4" how transportation or replacement
vehicles wil? be provided in the event of a break-
down.
I . Vehicles shall be made available for 150 miles
of personal use each month for drivers and back-up
drivers. The drivers shall pay the gasoline
costs during this time.
Ve4TJes �ca�- � e��l f��� �� t�� ;we 1ecz H� s- 7�1 c2sr
PL/ Wm/1'&t S v=Ts r
Z
City of Shakopee
Van Pool
Request for Proposals
1. General Overview
The services specified under terms of this agreement
are to be provided as part of the City of Shakopee ' s Transit
Demonstration Program being implemented and managed by
the City of Shakopee and the Regional Transit Board. Principle
elements of the van pool portion of the Transit Demonstration
Program include but are not limited to:
A. A van service contract to provide commuter vans
and fleet management services.
2 . Proposal Requirements
A. Project organization and staffing.
1. Names of project personnel
2 . Organization of project personnel and corporate
lines of authority.
3 . Professional qualifications of key personnel.
4. Responsibilities of key personnel for development
and implementation of the project.
5 . Location of office.
B. Corporate background/resources/relevant experience.
C. All items listed below and those items discussed
in Section 3 - Contract Requirements of this
proposal, should be discussed briefly in the
proposal.
1. Annual administrative cost for the
program.
2 . Capability to provide telephone brokerage
or follow-up to van pool applicants.
3 . Proposed van pool formation and follow-up
program.
4. Written policy statement regarding
Affirmative Action/Equal Employment
opportunity.
3 . Contract Requiremdnts
A. Van Pool Formation Activities
The contractor will set up a program for assisting
the City of Shakopee in the formation of van
pools. The following are some elements of this
activity:
1
This request for proposals does not obligate the City of
Shakopee to complete the project and the City reserves the right
to cancel the solicitation if it is considered to be in the
best interest of the City.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Published in the: Shakopee Valley News
City of Shakopee
Notice of Request for Proposals
The City of Shakopee is seeking a qualified supplier to
provide vehicles for a commuter van pool service that operates
using volunteer drivers. This service is to be provided as
part of the City of Shakopee ' s Transit Demonstration Program
being implemented and managed by the City of Shakopee and Regional
Transit Board.
The commuter service would service specific locations ;
such as the airport, downtown Minneapolis , U of M, etc. Vehicles
would be instituted at such time as a minimum ridership is estab-
lished, (eg. minimum of 9 filled seats on a 12-passenger van. )
It is anticipated that services requested will be for approx-
imately an 24 month period starting approximately April 16 ,
1986. Projected ridership is approximately 56 , 000 passenger
trips for the contract period.
Requirements to be included in the proposal may be obtained
from City of Shakopee, 129 E. 1st Ave. , Shakopee, MN 55379
on February 10 , 1986. -The deadline for submission of completed
proposals is March 7 , 1986. Questions regarding the request
for proposals should be directed to Barry Stock, 445-3650 .
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
VAN POOL
Request For Proposal
SPECIFICATIONS
OFFICE OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
( 612 ) 445-3650
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: City Hall Siting Committee Report
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction
The City Hall Siting Committee has met with the Downtown Ad
Hoc Committee to add a downtown site to the list of sites to
be analyzed by an architectural firm employed by the City to
help locate and construct a new City Hall.
Background
In July 1985 Council directed the City Hall Siting Committee
to add a downtown site to the list of sites to be analyzed by
an architect for locating a new City Hall. The Siting Committee
has met with representatives of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee
on several occasions and is presenting two downtown sites to
City Council for evaluation by the architect.
The Siting Committee is providing the City Council with the
attached information so that it can analyze the Committee ' s
siting recommendations:
1. Minutes of the Siting Committee meeting of January 28 ,
1986 .
2. Minutes of the Siting Committee meeting of January 14 ,
1986 .
3 . Minutes of the January 22 , 1986 meeting of the Downtown
Ad Hoc Committee.
4. LeRoy Houser ' s memo regarding City Hall siting dated January
23 , 1986 .
The Siting Committee is recommending that Council employ an
architectural firm to analyze three sites: ( 1 ) The Committee ' s
recommended site on the east side of Gorman Street across from
the Police Department, -( 2 ) The 1/2 half block including the Library,
and ( 3 ) Block 47 containing Phillips Funeral Home.
The Committee has also prepared a mailing list including the
names of the architectural firms that will be individually mailed
a copy of the Request For Proposals (RFP) , and the proposed
Request For Proposal forms for Council review and approval.
Alternatives
1. Sites to be examined:
a. Accept the Committee ' s recommendation to examine three
possible sites for a City Hall. This might include
some additional expense, but the Committee felt it
was worth examining the additional site. The Committee
also felt that the cost of the third site could be
discussed when interviewing the architectural firms.
If the cost was excessive that third site could be
deleted from the contract with the firm finally selected.
b. Make a decision to limit the analysis by the architectural
firm to two sites at this time.
2. Recommended list of firms receiving RFPs :
a. Accept the list presented by the committee without
changes. The Committee did not spend time analyzing
the list. The list simply includes all firms that
have contacted the City regarding the project over
the last 12 months.
b. Specifically reduce the list to minimize the number
of RFPs the Committee will be required to review.
This would reduce the amount of work required by the
screening committee but might eliminate a firm that
could do an excellent job for the City.
3 . Approve the proposed RFP:
a. Approve the RFP as proposed. Please note that the
RFP is broken into two phases. The first phase deals
with analyzing the three sites , selecting a final
site and preparing for a bond election. The second
phase includes the final architectural design of the
project to be constructed. The City is not required
to use the firm selected in both phases.
b. Make modifications to the proposed RFP based upon
discussion at the Council table on Tuesday.
Recommendation
The Siting Committee is recommending alternatives l .a. , 2 .a. ,
and 3 . a. for the reasons discussed above.
Action Reauested
Pass a motion authorizing the appropriate City officials to
advertise for architectural firms interested in submiting an
RFP to the City for final site selection and construction of
a new City Hall utilizing the list of architectural firms and
the draft RFP supplied by the City Hall Siting Committee and
approved at their January 28 , 1986 meeting.
CITY HALL SITING COMMITTEE
Tuesday, January 28 , 1986
6 : 30 p.m.
St. Francis Regional Hospital
Health Education Room
The meeting was called to order at 6 : 40 p.m. by Chairman Leroux.
Present were John Leroux, Dolores Lebens , Gloria Vierling and
Dave Czaja. Absent, Dave Rockne. Also present were John K. Ander-
son, City Administrator and Gary Laurent and Bill Wermerskirchen
Sr. representing the Downtown Committee.
Chairman Leroux asked if there were additions to the agenda.
There were no additions to the agenda.
M/S/P Lebens/Vierling to approve the minutes of the 1/14/86
meeting.
Chairman Leroux invited Gary Laurent to outline the recommendations
for downtown siting of a City Hall as presented by the Downtown
Committee. Mr. Laurent listed the three sites recommended by
the Downtown Committee as Block 47 (Phillips Funeral Home block) ,
the half block including the Library and the present City Hall
block. Mr. Laurent pointed out that the primary reason for
selecting Block 47 as the Committee ' s first choice was because
it fit into the planned institutional areas in the downtown
redevelopment plan. Discussion followed regarding site costs,
phasing, parking, potential lost of future taxes , etc.
Dave Rockne arrived at 7: 00 p.m.
The Committee then reviewed Mr. LeRoy Houser ' s memo discussing
site acquisition costs and listing the pros and cons of the
various sites .
M/S/P Lebens/Czaja to recommend to City Council that the City
Hall Siting Committee suggest that the architect selected to
analyze the potential City Hall sites analyze three sites including
the original site east of Gorman Street, Block 47 and the Library
block.
M/S/P Rockne/Lebens to recommend to City Council that the list
of architectural firms- attached to the Committee ' s agenda along
with the firm of Hammel Green be mailed Request for Proposals
(RFPs ) .
M/S/P Vierling/Lebens to present the draft RFP to City Council
with modifications incorporated to include analysis of a third
site.
M/S/P Lebens/Czaja to adjourn at 7 : 31 p.m.
John K. Anderson, Recording Secretary
CITY HALL SITING COMMITTEE
Tuesday, January 14 , 1986
7 : 45 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
The meeting was called to order at 7: 45 p.m. on January 14 , 1986
by Chairman Leroux. Members present included John Leroux, Gloria
Vierling, Dolores Lebens , Dave Rockne and Dave Czaja. Members absent
none. Also present were John Anderson, City Administrator, Terry
Forbord and Gary Laurent, representing the Downtown Committee.
M/S/P Lebens/Vierling to approve the minutes of the 7-23-85 meeting.
Committee discussion then moved to the sample request for proposals
(RFP)for architectural services . The sample was the City of
Eagan) s. RFP for their City Hall.
M/S/P Rockne/Czaja to draft an RFP based upon the one used by the
City of Eagan for their City Hall with elements added regarding
site selection.
The Chairman then opened up the discussion of the City Council ' s
directive to add a downtown site to the sites to be reviewed by
the architect. The Chairman recognized Gary Laurent and asked that
he make comments on behalf of the Downtown Committee. Mr. Laurent
reviewed the desires of the Downtown Committee to have a downtown
site professionally evaluated along with the site adjacent to the
Police Station chosen by the Committee. He expressed his desire
to have the downtown site within the central business district
(CBD) generally recognized by the Downtown Committee, and shown on
the map displayed at the meeting. .
Chairman Leroux noted that the County Road 17 area is developing
as a "convenience shopping area" according to the Planning Consultant
reviewing the zoning in that area in conjunction with the racetrack
zoning re-evaluation. Mr. Leroux noted that this type of convenience
shopping was distinct from the "core retail shoppingy occuring
downtown.
Dave Rockne asked Mr. Laurent for a clear definition of the downtown.
boundaries. Mr. Laurent said that the boundaries indicated on the
map were arrived at through lengthy discussions by the Downtown
Committee but were a guide and not fixed. Mr. Laurent also
commented that he felt the County Road 17 area development was good
for Shakopee , but still qualified as strip or "convenience" shopping
and was probably not desireabie for a City Hall location.
Mrs. Lebens noted that if a new City Hall was built downtown it
could end up near the railroad track which would also distract from
a nice new City Hall building.
Mrs. Lebens said that since City currently owned the Library site
which was a full half block it might make sense to use that site for
a City Hall. Mr. Leroux said that he felt since the City had
acquired the land around the Library the land uses were no longer
efficient and that it might make a lot of sense to redevelop the full
site for both a City -Hall and a Library.
Mr. Leroux asked if the Telephone Co. might be donated to the City.
Dave Rockne responded that it couldn't be donated because it was
needed for cableing for 25 other jurisdictions besides Shakopee. He
did say that the Telephone Co. had been selling their buildings very
reasonably, and that space could be leased on the second floor of the
present building.
M/S/P Vierling/Czaja to have the Downtown Committee present a ranked
list of proposed sites to the Siting Committee prior to 1-28-86 .
Terry Forbord was recognized and emphasized that the Downtown
Committee had hoped that the Housing Alliance project might be a
"flagship" for downtown redevelopment. Now that that project had
been set aside for an unknown period, perhaps the City Council could
use the City Hall development for redevelopment as a "flagship"
project. He said it would send an excellent signal to the community
as a whole and to other developers.
Chairman Leroux asked that the Committee be prepared to make a final
recommendation to City Council at their 1-28-86 meeting based upon
the recommendations , to- be provided by the Downtown Committee.
M/S/P Lebens/Czaja to adjourn at 8 : 37 p.m. to 1-28-86 at 6 : 30 p.m.
The Chairman noted that the meeting would have to end in time for
City Council members to make their annual goals and objectives
session at 7:30 p.m.
John K. Anderson
Recording Secretary
dbs
Proceedings or the / 6C%
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMM?TTEE
Shakopee, Minnesota
January 22, 1986
Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7: 40 a.m. with
the following voting members present: Terry Forbord, Gary Laurent,
Jim Stillman and Pete Sames. Absent: Steve Clay, Don Martin,
Mike Sortum, Dan Steil, Joe Topic, Bill Wermerskirchen and Tim
Keane. Also present: Jeanne Andre, Commurity Development Director,
John Anderson, City Administrator , Timm Nelson, Intern and Beth
Moe, Shakopee Valley News.
The Committee met to discuss sites which they would like the
City Hall Siting Committee to consider. The twelve sites were
aS fol-Lows:
1. The half block where the library sits
2. The half block immediately west of St. narks school
3 . The present City Hall block
4. Cactus Jack
5. Block 47 (Phillips Funeral Home block)
c . The half block west of the present highrise on Levee
Drive
7. block 5
S. The block south of the Post Orrice
9. Shared space with a new County Public Safety building
in Block 48 (Rock Spring building block)
10. Shared space with Scott County Administration south
of their new addition after _t is vacated by the Sheriff ' s
Department
11. The present -ire Station plus additional adjacent
lots with the Fire Station being moved to the current
Public Works Buildinc.
i2. Any other sites tre Downtown Committee =eels would
rate well based upon the evaluation Criter_r .
The Committee considered each site individually keeping in mind
the ^r_ter_a used by t^e Siting na C:O^'r _tae They were a-s0 sersiti`ve
to the _act tafithat- the j_t_I7g CO:�.._ zee would prObaD1V no cons=Qer
a renovated building. A dis:,.:SS:On was held about Shared Space
with the County. It was the consensus that although. there weYe
Some definite advantages t0 this arrangement Separate faci-_ties
would be more deS_reable.
By process cf elimination thefollowing sites were picked in
Order of =reference fcr recomm-nendation to the Site Com:-Tutee.
(1) =lock 47 - Some cf the ^rcper'-y could possibly be ac ruir ed
t^rough it accT isition" and moss_b y an arrangement
could be worked out w-ith St. Mark' s for shared parking
Space. This Site fits almost all the Committees weigring
criteria identified by the Committee and _t fits _nto the
ins i tut:Oral core iderti '' ;
pied in the down.town pl_ar. Nee
z,
ro nt ro It en 11- 0 ft w
(] 1i H P-IQ 1-1 .�
O 1-' 1' rt t-•• I- ft £
P. D 1; N b b , m In N O N In n O b' S I-3 N £ ,NN O t3 P- IT) C rt th
1- 0 to N• N to U O :j P. r- J 1-' O U' b O J £ U" p F= F'• :3' O
U N 1- in rt p, to p, ft N P- f= m [] I✓ t► p (D O U rt m H
to (n In P. b" ft (D m rt'ia t' I-' F'• t- in t-' to �'
O 1-'• C) U" ft m rt • ft �' �' R,'d O p, to t1' p' G ft (v W
In a' rt. O ro tD P. n1 :3. N to rt it 11 ►i It P► p, Pr " o, O
to (D to r U t-' U o k m H U' to (D - N b' 1-' to t- F'• C IQ
O to to ft ft P.tq O 1 ;r, (D O N (D (n to rt ft ►t (D th th Pt G
H In t-j (D 0 F-'- P () O O 0 (D 'd :X IC rt to U P_
to O 1-'- H to (-) to :y In O rt Ii H R, N U Imo- th N • tr p" 5' () it
ft (D :itnP. 0M 00Rty :j :j It UOft £ t- mommN-
P► to m ft H :j H Pt m IQ I-` U O �3 In ab
it 1-1 to :s: p' r m ft m ft in tt :71' m 1--' :J 13 O 0 O ro rt Q
'C to to P- to �J 7' H O PI r; 0 Pt O O �Y 1-' r' r 1 P) N
ft n► Hft tomo1- 50 cON• O £ roto �3' rt IQ :3'
:.1' ft IJ ft O U N• ft m th (D to ft in £ (D O m to O
m b' ft to th ft b' P) IJ'C G Ft'TJ U' :J' Ft O In �1
(D 0, P) to t-' N F-' N I-' I' �3 H :5 F- m r O to
it rt ft- 1 h O £ In to (D :C to m O N O H H, t--` th (n
N tri 5' N• (] b' O P. It :1 N t-'- 'd t'- () to O ri'd
If O 0, Ft 1-110 :J �Vr r ,i' r1 I , rt 0, (D ,'3 r O In
1-O r- U' O to P► 1�. �, a. W, I-.. j_; P. O it 1t !n O t,.
p 7 () to H m p n t- " p t £ O s. rt ft H In �j In
to (n P' O O P. Pt b' N U U ►C N tY F ' to P. to
(D (t 'd P. N• ft ft p, W m O 5 b'
(] :i 11- 0 ft H J t-' U P) O 'C I-' ft O £ C 'C ft Pt I-' O rt
1 f (n O O U' m kq p,on r' 1-' f t O O £ O Pt b' In 1 m th 5"
I- t- tJ r. m in In m r- 5 -; o () r_ ;j ro 1- :1 to
f t to b 1-'- ro P. b' in (D 1 r" rt t-' It tom•
(D O H ;i Hr m £ to to to IQ U' p. a Ft b' U'
1t H P. ft O 0 t•- (D I m 1- to :J' It to F-'
1'- O O N Imo- H 1✓ b t, ft N to to Pt r tS• 1-1 P)
P' 1-110 C-1 ft- it m H' £ 1-' 1 1 U d 5' H ::s' I' If It of
• 0 P► :1' p, a F-' O (D H rt O p, W 'C m rt (D IQ
• :►' 0 P) H to P► 1-3 1✓ t-'- it C O (D 0' to to
Ft F ft (D C b' U :3' t-' p• £ rt m th £ to £ P. to
oN 0 to 0) P. m p, (� N :3, r_ to O N a ft
11 f t P► 1-' C t'- O in In ft (7 m r- p- to to
In 13 m ►C D' P. O m rt 1h £ to O rt t-'- rt It :j :i
M b' ti to b 'd 1-h p, p'W.. "d O :j' rt to 5' t1• ft p,
M In to to ro w " t- N N O r_ P-I.,! rt t--j• In t-'-
N (D a O to C :z. O N- t-,Id b' to p' N- 0 w
'd O oo 'd :T pi (D P' d p, F' m :z: I P' P) p, £ W
H Pt ►i it In ti £ N• p, F-' (D ft W P► 1-' N W O p.
M ft b' 1-'• p- W W ft C IJ m d b N to VA th to I✓ C
N rt ft ft <; ft U' :7' P► 'd • O p, O O I-'- IJ in p, N N
mP► p' to P) :3mropp th ft Icl0 I1• ON " :j
:J t) m ;I In ft tt rt ft O O 1. (o O U th () rt
Ft 5' to m N m 1-3 ft r- b' th Imo• O O ,U ft 5 w
m to m b' IJ Q a H to :j ::Y' D' rt to H 1; ro ft r- :3' a 'Q
O Iy ft ft (D ►C ti O m to r► ro to m O t-' U' Imo- N r' m
p P. P) ,q ft to t-'- rt IJ ft " C 0, m In ft m
1� b H o a r- N a U' t), �3' t,• :3'- (D rt 1,- P)
',]' r1- 1*3 W m ft t'- P. O t--' r O W 7;' m tt t'- U' tit ft ►v PW t-'
O to ►i O In N H, P- £. ft (D b" �J to 1 Imo- p' O ft
V. 0 P) :C O m th t-'• I-' :-t I-' 0 G tri O O O P-,Q �3
P- :j t1' p, !✓ rt n ft N rh ft ft W. P- rt N 1-' () O :7 1-' r O
Ftt" 0P • :JP- OU" tnP- 0 ::Y rt Ort-'• r I- r-
U' to t-'• O to P. O ti P. U P. rC N- O P. ft ft P- to '1)
ro " In 'a' :J to p m In w W 0 In - rr r,' ro ►C o b I'- :3'
p. rt
to P_
P. 0
MEMO TO: City Council
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official
RE: New City Hall Siting
DATE: January 23 , 1986
Introduction:
The Downtown Committee has finalized their choices for the
downtown location for the new City Hall . I feel , as a tax
paying resident and concerned City employee , I have a moral and
legal obligation to comment on their recommendation and offer
my analysis , conclusion and recommendation.
Background:
The first choice of the Downtown Committee was block 47 , O. S .P.
Logistically it is an ideal location, however, financially it
presents a considerable problem.
First , acquisition and demolition costs will be approximately
$340 ,000 for 34,080 sq. ft. of land. Salvage value of the two
buildings that could be moved will be at maximum $25 ,000. This
estimate is based on buildings that I personally know of that
were moved off of Highway 12 and Highway 100 in the last two
years . This makes the City Hall site acquisition cost $9 . 24
per sq. ft . or $315 ,000. This figure does not include reloca-
tion allowances or any sundry items . Compared to County Road
17 land values of $2 . 80 - $3 . 00 per sq. ft . this makes our
premium penalty $212 , 760 . This equatesto 2 , 127 sq. ft . of new
City Hall building area -we could have for the premium penalty.
Second, the properties we would be taking presently generate
$4 , 675 . 80 per year on the tax rolls . I feel we should try to
utilize vacant property or property we presently own that is
not currently on the tax rolls .
I personally feel that Council has an obligation to all of the
taxpayers to spend their money wisely. This reouires you to
get the ,maximum value for the dollar spent . Paying a X212, 760
premium to accommodate z special interest group is not fulfill-
ing the obligation you have to the taxpayers .
My biggest concern is will this premium cost us the votes
needed to get the project offthe drawing board.
I think to insure the success of the City Hall project , a
referendum is needed to provide some honest options like
1 ) should we build a new City Hall , 2 ) should we locate it
downtown and 3 ) should we pay $9 .24 per sq. ft. or 53 . 00 per
sq. ft. or locate on land presently owned by us on Gorman St.
I don' t think Council should give any. consideration to utilizing
the present City Hall site. The land area is not adequate and
the location is terrible. The Library site presents some design
problems and limited area for expansion. I think the Library
benefactor (Mr. Rahr ) would turn over in his grave at the
thought of tearing down the present Library to build a City
Hall . Considering this is a very visible contribution Mr .
Rahr has made to this community I don ' t think it is good
public relations to tear it down.
Conclusion:
I think the Downtown Committee made an excellent choice in
Block 47 , however, I believe the taxpayer should be apprised
of the cost of this site and should have the opportunity to
say yea or nay .
Recommendation:
I recommend Council employ an architect to study the sites
under consideration and make a recommendation to Council then
provide the taxpayer the opportunity to vote on the issue for
both the location and the building project.
LH: cah
Architectural Firms to Receive RFP
Don Amundson
Architectural Design Group, Inc.
300 Third Avenue , SE
Rochester, MN 55904
( 612 ) 758-2650
(507 ) 288-8100
Larry Smith
Arvid Elness Architects Inc.
200 Butler North
510 1st Avenue North
Minneapolis , MN 55403
339-5508
Walker F. Angell
Jamieson and Associates , Inc.
5200 Willson Road - 300
Minneapolis , MN 55424
920-3770
Peter L. Racchini
Peter Racchini and Associates
Getty Building
2150 Third Street
White Bear Lake, MN 55110 429-5376
Sanders M. Ackerberg
Ackerberg and Associates , Inc.
4201 Excelsior Blvd.
Minneapolis , MN 55416
920-9020
H. L. Dahlen
Cornell Corporation
7204 West 27th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55426
925-5363
Gair & Associates
2021 East Hennepin Avenue
Suite 250
Minneapolis , MN 55413
331-8668
Mr. John R. Natwick
Cording-Natwick Architects , Inc.
1004 Wesley Temple Building
Minneapolis , MN 554C3
870-4290
Donald M. Erickson
Patch Erickson Madson Watten, Inc.
2730 Nevada Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55427
593-5106
Gary Turpening
Gary Turpening & Associates , Ltd.
14500 Burnhaven Drive, Suite 109
Burnsville, MN 55337
435-8004
S. C. Smiley
Smiley/Glotter Associates
1021 LaSalle Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55403
332-1401
Willard L. Thorsen
Thorsen & Thorshov Associates
1000 Title Insurance Building
Minneapolis , MN 55401
339-7671
Al Mjcrud
Carlson Mjorud Architecture Ltd.
4915 West 35th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55416
922-6677
Don Granholm
Boarman Architects Inc.
710 Chamber of Commerce Building
15 South Fifth Street
Minneapolis , MN 55402
339-3752
Wilford F. Johnson
BWBR Architects
400 Sibley Street
St. Paul, MN 55101
222-3701
Richard V. Berggreen
Ayres Associates
700 Transfer Road
St. Paul, MN 55114
644-0604
Craig D. Wolfgram -
Wolfgram/Knutson Architects
3960 Minnehaha Avenue South
Minneapolis , MN 55406
724-1916
Robert A. Kilgore
McDnary Krafft Birch & Kilgore Inc.
10501 Wayzata Boulevard
Minnetonka, MN 55343
546-8917
Edward J. Voat
The Voat Corporation
Suite 400 Dupont Center
9801 Dupont Avenue South
Bloomington, MN 55431
888-4459
Thorbeck & Lambert Inc.
1409 Willow Street
Minneapolis , MN 55403
871-7979
Mary B. Hustad
Arthur Dickey Architects, Inc.
4930 France Avenue South
Minneapolis , MN 55410
920-3993
lone Biesterfeld
Wells Concrete Products Co.
Box 308
Wells, MN 56097
(507 ) 553-5113
Hammel Green & Abrahamson
1201 Harmon Place
Minneapolis , MN 55403
332-3944
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870 ' '
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379.1376 (612) 445-3650
February 5 , 1986
it
Dear Prospective Architectural Firm:
The City of Shakopee is proceeding with the possibility
of building a new City Hall. In the past when you contacted
me concerning possibilities of projects for your firm for the
City of Shakopee , I informed you that I would keep your inqui-ry
on file and that I would contact you when and if any prcject
did occur. Therefore , enclosed please find information on the
proposed new City Hall facility and the services that would
be required of an architectural firm.
Please note that cost proposals must be submitted to the
City prior to 10: 00 a.m. on Friday, March 7 , 1986
If you have any questions , please feel free to contact
me at the Shakopee City Hall at 445-3650 .
Sincerely,
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
JKA/jms
The Heart of Progress Valley
- -
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
February 5 , 1986
Dear prospective Architectural Firm:
The City of Shakopee is seeking an architectural firm to
provide considerable assistance in final site selection (two
alternatives ) , design and construction of a new City Hall.
The City of Shakopee will be seeking architectural services
for potentially two phases of a City Hall Construction. Phase
I will involve site analysis of two alternative sites with concept
sketches for each site along with detailed acquisition and con-
struction estimates. The City of Shakopee will need assistance
preparing a preliminary design and budaet cost so the public
Will understand completely the City Hall proposal. The bond
referendum is planned for November, 1986 . Phase II will take
piace only if the bond referendum is passed. This phase would
consist of all architectural services normally associated with
the construction of a municipal building.
Enclosed is a description of the services which the City
of Shakopee will expect the selected firm to provide during
the process of constructing the new Shakopee City Hall. The
Citv of Shakopee will better define the expected services with
the architectural firm which is ultimately selected. The City
of S'rlakopee is requesting from your firm an estimated cost of
providing the services outlined in the following document for
Phase I and phase II. The cost should be specified as a lump
sum, hourly rate or percentage.
Please zresent vour cost r)ro_r)osal in a se-nara`e sealed
envelope marked "Proposal for City Hall Ar c'r._tectu_'-al Services"
in addition to your firm' s experience and other information
that is helpful for our review of proposals prior to 10 : 00 a.m.
Friday, March 7 , 1986 . The proposals will be reviewed, firms
screened, and an interview held before the City Council for
the final candidates during the month cf Parch.
If you have any questions , please feel free to contact
me at the Shakoaee City Hall at 445-3650 .
Sincerely,
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
JKA/jms
The Heart of Progress Valley
SERVICES REQUIRED FROM SELECTED ARCHITECTURAL
FIRM FOR NEW SHAKOPEE CITY HALL
1986
PHASE I
The City of Shakopee is expecting to finance the new City Hall
through a bond referendum, which will take place in November.
There are three alternative sites for a City Hall which the
City of Shakopee would require the architect to address in an
effort to prepare for the bond referendum. Once a decision
has been made by the City of Shakopee as to which City Hall
site to pursue, that plan will then be put before the voters
for the bond referendum.
Site A: Construct an 11 , 000 square foot City Hall on approximately
one acre ( 1/2 block) now currently owned by the City.
The site is in our Central Business District ( CBD)
and has one structure on it, the City Library.
Site B: Construct an 11 , 000 square foot City Hall on a 5 . 5
acre site across Gorman Street, near the City' s present
police and public works facility.
Site C: Construct an 11 , 000 sqare foot City Hall on approximately
1. 45 acre site (Block 47 , Lot 2 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 8 and
1/2 of 9.
So the City of Shakopee can determine which alternative is best,
and so the public can be aware of the new City Hall plan before
the bond referendum, the selected architectural firm will be
expected to provide the following services:
1. Meet with all department heads to conduct a needs assessment
of the various items each person will need for his office
and the things each person will need for the efficient
operation of this department.
2. Provide preliminary designs, an architectural rendering
and concepts of a new City Hall for Site A.
3 . Provide preliminary designs , an architectural rendering
and concepts of a new City Hall for Site B.
4. Provide preliminary designs , an architectural rendering
and concepts of a new City Hall for Site C.
5. Provide an estimate of what a new City Hall would cost
for Site A, Site B and Site C.
6 . Assist the City of Shakopee with all necessary documents ,
graphics, needs and procedures for bond referendum.
7. Other services common to similar proposals or as required
by the City.
City of Shakopee
Architectural Services
Page Two
The main objective of Phase I is to gather all necessary information
on the City Hall alternatives prior to the bond referendum.
If the referendum for the new City Hall fails , the City of Shakopee
will pay the architectural firm for all services that have been
provided. However, if the referendum is approved, additional
services from an architectural firm will be required. We expect
that the architectural firm which provided services during Phase
I will be retained to provide services during Phase II . However,
all interested architectural firms should be aware that the
City of Shakopee reserves the right to hire a different firm
for Phase II .
PHASE II
The services the City of Shakopee will require from the architectural
firm during Phase II will be much more intensive than in Phase
I . These services will include:
1. Follow up meeting with all department heads to further
review the needs assessment of the various items each person
will need for his office and the things each person will
need for the efficient operation of his department.
2. Attend all necessary meetings with the City Council to
be sure they are well informed on the progress of the new
City Hall.
3 . Prepare all documents and drawings to fix and describe
the size and character of the new City Hall. These documents
and drawings must include floor plans, structural mechanical
and electrical systems , materials , interior decoration,
signage, landscaping, parking lot and other essentials
as may be appropriate.
4. Submit a statement of estimated construction costs.
5. Prepare documents setting forth in detail the requirements
for construction of the new City Hall including the necessary
bidding information. The architect shall assist in the
preparation of the necessary bidding forms , conditions
of the contract and the form of agreement between the City
of Shakopee and construction contractors.
6. The architect will be required to assist the City of Shakopee
in awarding all construction contracts .
7. The architect will continue to work for the City of Shakopee
during the construction phase and assist on any matters
required by the City. This will include periodic visits
to the new City Hall as construction proceeds, providing
construction supervision.
City of Shakopee
Architectural Services
Page Three
8. The architect will issue certificates of payment to contractors
as construction progresses to a point indicated that to
the best of the architect ' s knowledge is in accordance
with all contract documents.
9. The architect will be required to serve as a witness in
connection with any public hearing, arbitration or legal
proceeding.
10. Provide any other services usually associated with architectural
projects of this nature.
11. other services as required by the City.
PROPOSAL FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES
NEW SHAKOPEE CITY HALL
1986
NAME OF ARCHITECTURAL FIRM:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
CONTACT PERSON:
DATE FOR COMPLETION OF PHASE I
( Site analysis and preparation of
Bond Referendum) :
COST FOR PREPARATION OF PHASE I
Assuming the bond referendum is approved in November, complete
the following portion of the proposal.
DATE FOR COMPLETION OF PHASE II :
COST FOR PREPARATION OF PHASE II :
(Please indicate if this amount
is in addition to the amount for
Phase I )
SIGNATURE OF ARCHITECTURAL FIRM
REPRESENTATIVE:
DATE OF PROPOSAL:
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Park Dedication fee for Shakopee
Valley Square 1st Addition
DATE: January 28 , 1986
Introduction•
The Planning Commission has recommended final plat approval
of Shakopee Valley Square 1st Addition, subject to many conditions.
One of the conditions is that the City Council will determine
whether a park dedication fee shall be paid for lots 4 and 5
of the plat (previously unplatted land) or that the existing
public easement for the DNR Trail and access to the City property
is satisfactory.
Background:
The park dedication fee for lots 4 and 5 would be $1 ,795 . 00
according to the schedule in the subdivision ordinance. Through
the platting process the developer has not lost any "developable"
land because the public easement existed when he bought the
land from the City several years ago and was aware of the restric-
tions of the easement.
In addition, to be dedicated public open space the developer
would have to deed ownership to the City, not just provide an
easement. Thirdly, when the Prairie House Addition was platted
the easement for the State Trail was not considered part of
the park dedication. The developer was required to contribute
to the park fund for the whole parcel.
The developer has previously requested the City Council to reduce
the park dedication fee in lieu of the trail easement for the
reasons that the development will provide access to existing
City Park land ( access which did not previously exist) and that
the proposed use of the campground is quasi-public.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the developer be required to pay a park
dedication fee of $1 ,795 . 00 for the lots 4 and 5 of Shakopee
Valley Square 1st Addition.
Action Requested:
Motion to require the developer of Shakopee Valley Square 1st
Addition to pay a park dedication fee of $1 ,795 . 00 for the lots
4 and 5 in the plat.
JS:cah
Attachment
...ul). IIL.UIIi ��
f I I 3NV S1N IY,1SV3 �� _
/11111111 U11V 39VIIIVda
...�^ (.�li:i � :a.l.1j-• _ fel •1.
zi
�31IONVNStx1
G i 61 rl 1s )43o 1+
1 11 oq,4 211101 U'p 3!. 1 3„15 111 1 O
11-13 Iso.,
11f)0
1.0,1'A
f/JU1S 3 d311Uo �;
11309
1
13►1u. nlv>twnvu u; I �1 i �1 1 i �!� U► C
1110% 1311VUVJ 3111 I ? tl l 1 1 1-•^ % '• 71 �) •1- t 1
--- •QI �1 40 '1 1iYP1 0))ti�a`'Nl +t)11�.
I o0-00%
_-. i .i'1 d '.�-` 1•'• 1
JIUAW�
%1 +_ 00 04_ "),3.3q11 f a
0 _ - 1•ii �� . .1 41 Z v ►01 USN• �'
u_ —__ :i i',1 � C�;/�-- 1?12vi
•Gl.
1. �ILIoGLN►, ; ;;i.i•,;`.• �x 11091
w,���11141/ -`r� 11vtiLJE'>l.tl
GG a �1'01
L
0
/1111LU1£U�11 to
N
A14,913 01'ol :,� • '0 , 1, er�aS l���� �0> o!
11 �';
�(/,��,','`1,,I 111My 15n
1N� Isu)1 (1Vi!.1Y 'n'I 1� r1^1 !0 b)Inlo)
--__- (1) Ir:.,i�(•_ --- ;' i'?
6"w(yo lull-110 U11„s� j53N,11►11°1)
iCF. C's 1.7 fL5 1i_`� 1113Y13SV3
/.�ci vtz ) 111
n )Irl O)YI!0 _ l- -110 ,' 3 `40 54.19 ►-_ -; \ i0 31,;►
9 1113 V I� ' - 01 1 rin0
t13'1 t^----^ 1 u ► ► .1)11 I
1 C IV��_ 15,41 31111,4
1 n t(1 1311J 1+'IJ
1 UI
1 1 (l) I
0000r I ,
.� �.✓� r .• 9Z G1/;
OZ
co
_ M„6f 9f 48 S
1 9
vov,n
l I
llb
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner
RE: Fuel Storage Tanks
DATE: January 28 , 1986
Introduction•
A member of City Council has requested information on the regulations
controlling placement of fuel storage tanks within the City
of Shakopee.
Background:
The Zoning Code permits fuel storage in the light and heavy
industrial zones by conditional use permit only. The state
law limits the size of both above ground and below ground tanks
to 1100 gallons. The present code does not address fuel storage
in the Ag and R-1 , therefore the interpretation is that the
use is not permitted.
New regulations aimed at preventing pollution from leaking under-
ground storage tanks were passed by the 1985 Legislature. The
law, which took effect July 1 , includes temporary standards
for new tanks and reporting requiremernts for tank owners and
sellers. The law directs the MPCA to develop additional rules
for underground storage tanks to protect human health and the
environment, concurrent with similar federal requirements under
development. They must also develop an inventory of active
tanks and tanks abandoned since 1974. The Building Official
is involved in the inventory preparation. Farm and residential
tanks holding fuel are exempt from reporting if under 1100 gallons.
Because of Minnesota' s heavy reliance on ground water as a source
of drinking water, leaking underground storage tanks have become
an increasingly urgent problem in the state. An estimated 25 , 000
underground tanks exist in Minnesota, most of which store petroleum
products. The MPCA estimates that at least 250 of the tanks
are now leaking.
The State Building Code and State Fire Code address handling
and use of fuel storage tanks . They must be cathodic protected
and pressure tested. An above ground tank must be diked. The
Building Official can provide more information on the State
Codes.
Recommendation:
In light of the ground water contamination problems and goal
of the MPCA to inventory all tanks staff does not recommend
that the existing Zoning Code be amended to allow fuel storage
tanks in the Ag or R-1 .
Action Requested:
Motion to direct staff to not proceed with an amendment which
would allow fuel storage in the Ag or R-1 districts.
JS:cah
i �
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Dental Insurance Bids
DATE: January 31, 1986
Introduction and Background
Bid opening was held January 27 for employee dental insurance. Ten bids
were received with a total of about 60 options. All employee groups have
expressed an interest in this coverage and the police union has a clause in
thier 1985 contract that the City will provide the coverage if the union unani-
mously requests it. The union has not, as of this date, made that request
but have indicated verbally through representatives that they intend to.
The complete bid tabulation is about 8 pages long and therefore is not
attached but is available for review if any Councilmember desires. Attached
is a weeded down bid tabulation. Deletion of bids was based on eliminating
the two extremes of benefit caps, those of $500 and $2,000, eliminating deductables
of $75 and $100, and eliminating plans which had deductable or co-payment
on preventive care. One exception to the eliminations is the plan from Bankers
IA which is our current health carrier and had given the employees some information
previously. Bankers IA has a co-payment but no deductable on preventive care.
The biggest factor in narrowing down the choice of bids is the number
of employees enrolled. Council has set a benefit level (unions not settled
for 1986) and therefore the employees will be bearing some of the cost of
dental insurance. Naturally, if the employer will pay for all of the cost,
all the employees are interested. Based on the premise that the City will
not pickup any more of the cost, less than 756 of the non-union and less than
75% of the public works group are interested. Assuming that the City is not
going to "force" this coverage on the employees and make payroll deduction
against their wishes, there are only two plans left to consider. All the
other plans require at least 75`6 of all employees to be enrolled. Therefore,
what is left to consider is coverage for the police union only through coverage
provided by either the League or Firemans Fund.
The League offers one plan only with a benefit cap of $750. Firemans
Fund offers four plans with several options for benefit caps and deductables.
The bid they turned in was based on the total employee census and offered
two plans with options. They are recalculating the premiums for the police
group only and we should have that information early next week. Depending
upon what those numbers turn out to be, we may want or need to rebid.
Attached is the weeded down version of the bid tabulation. I will have more
information and recommended action on the table for the meeting.
City of 5hakooee, Minnesota
1986 Dental Insurance Bids
31-Jar-86
lr�.
Monthly Deauct- Deduct Emo. Ort idon-
Comoany Plan Single Family Total Cap able Max Co-oav tia
Firemans Fund Plan Al 10. 10 30.30 1,'.99.30 750 No
Firemans Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund25 75 50% Class 2
Firemans Fund ° " 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund " 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund 9.10 27.30 1.081.30 750
Fireman Fund 0 0 0X Class 1
Fireman Fund 50 150 50% Class 2
Fireman Fund " " 50X Class 3
Fireman Fund " 50X Class 4
Leaoue Basic 12.91 41.45 1,613.14 750 No
Leaoue 0 0% Preventive
Leaoue 50 Lifetime 20% Basic
Leaque 50 Annual 50X Major
Leaque Option 12.91 46.09 1,766.^c6 Yes
Leaque Particiaption, 75% of ar, e¢aiovee group, City pay at least 50%, at least 60% of dependents enroll
Leaque Orthodontics; 50% coveraoe, $50 deductable, $1,500 maximum payment
Guardian Plan 2h 12.13 36.68 1,440.91 1,000 No
Guardian 0 0 0% Preventive
Guardian 25 75 20% Basic
Guardian 50% Maior
Guardian +4.77 1,598.32 1000 ° " 50X Yes
Guardian Plan 2i 10.66 31.84 1,253.26 11000 No
Guardian 0 0 0% Preventive
Guardian 50 150 20% Basic
Guardian ° 50% Major
Guardian +4,77 1,410.67 1000 ° 50% Yes
Fireman Fund Pian B1 11.50 34.50 1,364.50 1,000 No
Fireman Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund 25 75 52% Class 2
Firemans Fund ° ° 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund " 50% Class 4
Fireman Fund 10.50 31.50 1,246.50 11,009
Firemans Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund 50 150 50% Class 2
Firemans Fund 50% Class 2
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Delta Dental Basic 14.60 37.05 1,500.05 1.000 50 150 No
Delta Dental 0% Preventive
Delta Dental 20% Basic
Delta Dental 501. Maror
Delta Dental Alt. 1 16.00 41.05 1,658.65 1,000 25 7 No
Delta Dental 0% Preventive
Delta Dental 20% Basic
Delta Dental 50% Major
SunLife Plan 1 10.24 28.76 1,143.64 1,000
SunLife 0% Type A No
SunLife 25 20% Type B
SunLife 25 50% Type C
SunLife 10.24 30.93 1,215.25 1,000 50% Type D yes
SunLife Minimum 30 hour work week, 75% of dependents enrolled, City pay for employees
SunLife Plan 2 9.81 27.12 1,081.35 1,000
SunLife 0% Type A No
SunLife 50 20% Type B
SunLife 50 50% Type C
SunLife 9.46 28.33 1,114.63 11000 50% Type D yes
SunLife Minimum 30 hour work week, 75% of dependents enrolled, City pay for employees
New England Plan 3 11.84 34.62 1,367.42 1,000 No
New England 0 0 0% Type 1
New England 50 150 20% Type 2
New England " 50% Type 3
Blue Cross. Base 13.72 3B.62 1,535.14 1,000
Blue Cross 0 0 0% Type 1 No
Blue Cross 50 150 20% Type 2
Blue Cross ' ' 50% Type 3
Blue Cross Base 1 13.72 44.32 1,723.24 1,000 ° 50% Type 4 Yes
Blue Cross Alt. 14.97 41.88 1,665.90 11 M
Blue Cross 0 0 0% Type 1 No
Blue Cross 25 75 20% Type 2
Blue Cross ' 50% Type 3
Blue Cross Alt. 1 14.97 47.59 1,854.90 1,000 ° ° 50% Type 4 Yes
Firemans Fund Plan A2 10.70 32.10 1,270.10 1,250
Fireman Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund 25 75 50% Class 2
Fireman Fund 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund ° 50% Class 4
Fireman Fund 9.70 29.10 1,152.10 1,250
fire®an Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Fireman Fund 50 150 50% Class 2
Firemans Fund ' 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund ° 50% Class 4
Bankers IA 9.71 22.77 935.90 1,500 No
Bankers IA 0 20% Preventive
Bankers IA 25 20% Basic
bankers IA 25 50% Major
Firemans Fund Plan B2 12.10 36.38 1,435.30 1,500 NO
Firemans Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Fireman Fund 25 75 50% Class 2
Firemans Fund 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Fireman Fund 11.10 33.30 1,317.30 1,500
Firemans Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund 50 150 50% Class 2
Firemans Fund 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund " 50% Class 4
Guardian Plan 20 12.74 38.51 1,512.89 1,500 No
Guardian 0 0 0% Preventive
Guardian 25 75 20% Basic
Guardian 50% haror
Guardian +4.77 1.670.30 1.000 " " 50% Yes
Guardian Plan 2q 11.19 33.43 1,315.80 1,500 No
Guardian 0 0 0% Preventive
Guardian 50 150 20% Basic
Guardian n n 50% Maror
Guardian +4.77 1,473.21 11000 50% Yes
}}}}ff#f*f}ffff}}ff}}}}ff*#**}#*}}}}}f*f#f#}}}}}f}f#}}f*f}}f*ff#ff}##fff}fff**##*f**fff
Company Aaent Particioation
Guardian Capesius 75% of total
Guardian Bob Martin
Fireman's Bob Martin 75%, may split into groups, rate may change
Leaoue N/A 75% of a eroup, City pay 50'. of cost
Delta N/A 100X
Bankers N--- Bob Martin 100%, City pay 108%
SunLife Bob Martin 75%, City pay employee cost
New England Bob Martin 75%
Blue Cross N/A 10411,
Bankers IA Capesius 100%
f#}}f#ffff*ff}f
1. All plans have a predetermination clause
1.
2. All plans address usual and customary charges
3. The $50e and %2,003 benefit Plans are excluded because there is only one bidder
and these are the ends of the benefit ranee, in C, to weed out soee cr000sals
4. Deductable Plans of $75 and .10@ have been weeded out.
5. Plans that apoly deductable ar+ co-payment to preventive care are weeded out
except for Bankers IA
IlL
City of Shakocee, Minnesota
1986 Dental Insurance Bids
04-Fe tr-86
Ind.
Monthly Deduct- Deduct Exg. Ortidon-
Company Plan Single Family Total Cap able Max Co-pay — —tia—
No
Firemans Fund Plan Al 10.10 3e.30 1,199.30 750 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund
25 75 Sex Class 2
Firemans Fund
Firemans Fund Sox Class 3
• 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund
Firemans Fund 9.10 27.30 1.081.30 750
F 8 0 0x Class 1
Firemans Fund
Firemans Fund 50 150 50x Class 2
• ■ 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund
Firemans Fund Plan does not cover bridge work or dentures 1�
No
League Basic12.91 41.4 1,613.14 0 0% Preventive
League 50 Lifetime 20% Basic
League 0 Rnnu 50% Major
League Yes I
League Option 12.91 46.09 1,766.26
Particiaotion; 75% of an employee group, City pay at least 50%, at least 68% of dependents enroll`
League
League Orthodontics; 50% coverage, $50 deductable, $1,500 maximum payment
League Plan does rover bridge work and dentures f
_ j
�— No
Firemans Fund Plan B1 C11.50 34.51 1,36k.50 �`� 0 0 0% Class 1 /\-
Firemans Fund 2% Class 2
Firemans Fund
• 50% Class 3 j
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund
F `18.58 31._ ' 1,246.50 ON
iremans Fund �.
0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund 1581 20% Class 2
Firemans Fund l ■ 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund
Firemans Fund Plan does rover bridge work and dentures
Firemans Fund Plan R2 10.70 32.10 1,27e.10 1,250 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund 25 75 50% Class 2
Firemans Fund 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund
Firemans Fund 9.70 29.10 1,152.10 1,250 8x Class 1
Firemans Fund 8 0
50 150 58% Class 2
Firemans Fund 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund
Firemans Fund Plan does not rover bridge work and dentures
No
Firemans Fund Plan B2 12.10 30.38 1.435.30 1,580 0 0 9% Class 1
Firemans Fund 25 75 20% Class 2
Firemans Fund
Fireman Fund " 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund 50% Class 4
Fireman Fund 11.10 33.30 1,317.30 1,500
Firemans Fund 0 0 0% Class 1
Firemans Fund 50 150 20% Class 2
Firemans Fund " 50% Class 3
Firemans Fund ' " 50% Class 4
Firemans Fund Plan does cover bridge work and dentures
Company Agent Participation
Fireman's Bob Martin 75%, may split into groups, rate may chance
League N/A 75% of a group, City pay 50% of cost
1. All plans have a predetermination clause
2. All plans address usual and customary charges
3. Plan do not apply deductable and co-payment to preventive care.
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator 1 / a
FROM: Patrick Ploumen, Intern
RE: Options for Paying for Garbage Service
DATE: January 31, 1986
Introduction
In response to the request of the City Council, the Finance department
has considered the possibility of financing the cost of garbage removal services
through property taxes. Also, the possibility of establishing a special service
district for the City's urban area garbage removal has been studied.
I. Background
Currently, payments for garbage collection are collected monthly with
the utility bills. The proposal is that this billing system be switched and
instead use taxes as the means of collection, increasing the city tax levy.
The City receives an amount of local government aid (LGA) from the state based
on the City' s municipal levy along with other factors. The increase in the
city levy would lead to an increase in the preliminary aid amount, which in
turn is reduced according to the aid formula. However, this reduced amount
is subject to a maximum aid limit which is calculated using the previous year' s
LGA.
Presently, Shakopee' s reduced preliminary aid amount is above its allowed
maximum. Therefore, Shakopee only receives an amount equal to this maximum.
If taxes are used to charge people for their use of garbage collection services,
the city' s preliminary aid amount would increase, but the actual amount received
would stay the same due to the maximum aid limit. The League of Minnesota
Cities has estimated that Shakopee' s 1987 reduced preliminary amount will
also be above the maximum aid amount.
Additionally, the variables which are used to determine Shakopee' s LGA
may be changed during the 1986 legislative session. If not, the 1987 session
will probably cause alterations in the formula, which hinders an attempt to
predict how future aid amounts will turn out.
There are other problems that arise from using taxes to charge for garbage
collection, which include the following:
1 . The proposed tax would require industrial, commercial, and agricultural
areas to pay for a service that they would not receive, unless a special
service aistrict could be established. (This will be discussed in section
II.) These areas contract for their own garbage removal service.
2. Higher taxes would discourage new businesses from developing.
3 . Taxes would increase approximately 2 mills.
4. The tax increase would restrict future needs for taxing due to a levy limit
constraint which limits the amount of taxes that the city may impose.
5. It is more appropriate to pay for a utility type service with utility type
charges.
6. Paying for the service through taxes would be based on the value of the
house and not on the amount of service used.
7. A residential person would be required to pay for the garbage service whether
they used it or not. The proposed tax would be levied on an area, and
anyone in the area would be taxed.
8. The taxing for garbage services would be inconsistent with the City placing
storm drainage charges on utility bills and off taxes.
Possible benefits of the proposed tax include:
1. The tax increase would increase state aid as applied to the state aid formula.
However, based on the previous discussion of this proposal, the state aid
amount would not increase.
2. Increased taxes are deauctible on tax returns.
3 . Higher taxes would increase tax increments.
Alternatives
1. Implement the use of taxes for collecting garbage service fees.
2. Continue on with the present method of billing using utility bills.
Recommendation
Alternative number 2.
Take no action because the City of Shakopee would gain no extra revenue
by using taxes to collect garbage service fees.
II. Background
The City contracts with Waste Management for the City's urban area garbage
removal service and the people who receive this service pay a monthly charge
with their utility bills. With a special service district, people would pay
for the garbage service through taxes.
The intended purpose of a special service district is to raise revenue
collected through taxes to pay the costs created by additional or more intensive
services rendered to the public, such as the provision of parking services.
Since the establishment of a special service district would not create additional
garbage removal services, a special service district would not be appropriate
in this instance. Basically, the only change that would occur would be in
the form of the payment and not in the service itself.
If a special service district would be found desirable, special legislation
would be required in order to establish the district. In pursuing this possi—
bility, the staff has been advised that the special service district would
be difficult to acquire due to the unusual and inappropriate purpose of establish—
ing such a district.
Alternatives
1 . Seek special legislation to develop a special service district for the
city's garbage removal service.
2. Take no action.
Recommendation
Alternative number 2.
A special service district for the City' s garbage removal would not be
appropriate and legislative approval for this would be difficult since historical—
ly, the purpose of a special service district is to provide additional or
more intensive services.
Action Requested
Move to maintain the present utility billing system to pay for the cost of
garbage service.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official
RE: Electrical Inspection Services
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction:
It appears the probability of having Roy Baker return to provide
electrical inspection services is remote. Roy had a quadruple
bypass and a heart attack while it was in progress.
Background:
I contacted the State Board of Electricity and they assured
me that if we decide to go with the State inspection service,
the level of service we are receiving now would not be reduced
below what we are now getting. Also, we would not have a liability
insurance problem as outlined in John' s memo of 1/27/86 .
Recommendation:
I recommend we let the State take over our electrical inspections.
Action Requested:
Direct staff to write a letter to the State Board of Electricity
confirming their appointment as the Shakopee Electrical Inspection
authority for 1986 at 850 of the electrical permit fees collected.
LH:cah
I 1 F k,�4 �1TJ0IV f� L
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Liability Insurance for the Electrical Inspector
DATE: January 29, 1986
Introduction and Background
Roy Baker, Electrical Inspector, has carried professional liability insurance
on himself with a policy through his membership in a professional association.
His policy has been cancelled and he has not been able to find a replacement.
He related to me that many inspectors are quitting the field because of the
lack of insurance.
He can reinstate the policy he had if the City makes him an employee,
as opposed to contract employment. I called Capesius Agency to see if they
had any information on the subject. They did not have any first hand knowledge
but if the City wants them to search the market for a policy, they will.
They estimated a premium of around $2,000. Roy Baker's last premium was $80.00,
the new premium would be $105.00.
The City would probably incur costs of around $1,1400 for employee pension
benefits and workcomp insurance. The City is probably liable for workcanp
insurance already but has not been charged for it.
Alternatives
1 . Make Roy Baker an employee of sane sort.
2. The City provide the insurance if a policy can be found.
3. Roy Baker continues to work without insurance.
4. Have State do inspections.
Recommendation
Alternative number 1 .
Action Requested
Move to direct staff to develop and return to Council with a proposal to establish
a new category of employee that will enable the Electrical Inspector to be
covered Dy liability insurance under the International Association of Electrical
Inspectors.
Jl
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: League of Minnesota Cities Proposed 1986 Legislative
Policies and Priorities
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction
Several weeks ago I asked City Councilmembers if they had received
the above referenced package of League of Minnesota Cities ( LMC)
legislative proposal for 1986 . All Councilmembers had indicated
that they had received the packet so I have not attached it
again because of its length. Please bring your packet to the
meeting on Tuesday night for discussion purposes.
Proposed Policies
City department heads have reviewed the policies and agree with
all policies with three exceptions . Chief of Police Tom Brownell
does not agree with the following policies:
1. Policy PPS-7 - Minnesota Public Employment Labor Relations
Act (B) . There are four policies listed under PPS-7 and
Tom does not agree with policy No. 1 regarding the option
to strike by essential employees.
2. Policy PPS-8 - Law Enforcement Personnel (B) . Tom does
not agree with the policy opposing any increase in State
standards for the recruitment, training and conduct of
law enforcement personnel.
3 . Policy PPS-12 - Worker ' s Compensation (B) . Tom does not
agree with the policy requesting that the legislature eliminate
the presumption that heart and lung aliments of police
and fire personnel arise from their employment.
No other exceptions to the policies were noted by department
heads except that Jim Karkanen, Street Superintendent, agreed
with the Chief of Police regarding No. 1 above.
Alternatives
1. Council can approve the policies as proposed in the League
mailing.
2. Council can approve the policies as listed in the League
mailing with the expection of one or more of the three
policies listed above. Tom will be present to explain
his disagreement with the policies so Council can discuss
the pros and cons.
Recommendation
I recommend approval of the League policies pending comments
from Tom Brownell regarding the three items discussed above.
Action Reauested
Pass a motion approving the League of Minnesota Cities proposed
Legislative Policies for 1986 as mailed.
JKA/jms
CITY OF_ SH-$kKCDF>
INCORPORATED 1870
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Adminis rator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: CSAH 17 Reconstruction and Storm Sewer
Installation ( 1976 Project)
DATE: January 28, 1986
INTRODUCTION:
Scott County is asking for $5, 462. 63 as reimbursement for a
non-fundable storm sewer outfall item associated with the recon-
struction of Marschall Road in 1976.
BACKGROUND:
The City undertook a reconstruction and storm sewer project
on Marschall Road (CSAR 17) in 1976. The storm sewer outalls
north of Bluff Avenue to the Minnesota River.
Apparently, during construction the City Council authorized
the City Engineer to execute a supplemental agreement to upgrade
the outfall structure to minimize pollution of the receiving
waters. The cost of the supplemental agreement was $7, 579. 01
with an anticipated federal share of $5, 462. 63. The City was
the lead agency on this project.
During project auditing, the $5, 462. 63 was declared an ineli-
gible cost and repayment was made by Scott County since this
is a County State Aid Highway (see attached correspondence
from Brad Larson) . Mn/DOT State Aid indicates that the City
is responsible for this cost .
ALTERNATIVES :
1. Reimburse Scott County in the amount of $5, 462. 63 for work
ordered by the City and determined ineligible for federal fund-
ing.
2. Do not reimburse Scott County.
CSAH 17 Project
January 28, 1986
Page 2
RECOMMENDATIONS :
Reimburse Scott County in the amount of $5, 462. 63 for work
ordered by the City in conjunction with the 1974-1 County State
Aid Project CSG 70-617 .04) 1 that amount being ineligible for
federal funding.
ACTION REQUESTED :
Offer a motion to reimburse Scott County in the amount of
$5, 462. 63 for work ordered by the City in conjunction with
the 1974-1 County State Aid Project CSR 70-617-04) .
KA/prop
CSAH17
SCOTT COUNT Y I
1HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
COURT HOUSE A106
7-A 4
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379.1396 (612445-7750,Ext.346
BRADLEY J.LARSON December 11, 1985
Highway Engineer
DANIEL M.JOBE
Asst.Highway Engineer
Mr. Ken Ashfeld
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: SP 70-617-04
SP 70-618-03
Dear Ken:
When the above projects were constructed, a Supplemental
Agreement was drawn up to change the storm sewer outlet so that
the outfall would not pollute a trout rearing pond. A copy of
this Supplemental Agreement No. 2 is attached together with a
copy of a letter written to C. E. Weichselbaum, Mn/DOT, from
Doug Goriesky, City Engineer.
The Mn/DOT State Aid Division requested Federal Participation in
these costs. See report attached.
In October, 1984 a Final State Aid Payment Notice and Request
for Deposit was received from Mn/DOT. Request was made for
payment of $5,462. 63. Mike Doherty of the State Aid Division
was called and he stated that the cost was for the storm sewer
outlet north of First Avenue and therefore is a City of Shakopee
cost. Payment was made by our department together with a
request for further information for our file (see attached) .
If you have any questions in regard 'Co this billing, please
contact Dan Jobe of this office.
Sincerely,
Bradley J. on, P.E.
County Highwa Engineer
BJL/miv
Attach.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
IvmiDOT 1913 (8.77)
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION S.P.
INTRA-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM Neg.
County
To Date
From
Subject:
Return to
RE- CE 1VED OCT 3 0 1984
_ •_ Sequence No.
�t .•Jl�
k�.itinc Sc�;, ct,�e !
P.o_om To IN I''.7 i.( OJT INiT.
419 Time Ext. Toch. �+ I State Prcject No. /f. L/7-c �
610 Bridge Const. I Contract No.
706 F.stimatincy Unit
S.A. No.
i
309 Traffic E^.gi^._eri n,* Date F.ec.
419 Claims Enein-er I
Checked To Form ��-
419 Agreement Technician I I I Dollar Amount 5 7%', C�
X417 Attorney Ceneral (� ?,c ' I •�/
i ro-op Agree. No.
419 Agreement Technician
419 Construction in�:r. PR 1365 1%
419 Contr. Admin. Engr. I��• '��; �� Appr. Date
419 Agreement Tech. 3� ����
Phone
408 Commissioner of Hwys. , $5
A1.9 At reement Tech. }! f FED: PART
J l I ! Participat�on
Y •�
305
Hi-N. Cost. Acctg. �S �rr�,�11
,; PENDING
v 305 Hwy. Encumb. Cort.
114
Admin. Comm. of Admin. �� � FI�`� �(� Cost Justification Letter
101 Encumb. Cont. Sunv. 1 s//�
Admin. Received:
r �
305 Hwy. Encumb, Ccnt.
419 Agreement Tech. To Engineer & Contr c r
Date:
� ► 1 7�
REMARKSAir) z:
u��•t-Y.i ti /7^ .c' � �/:,2La�C., �L.�t•L' LC•C l�Sr, /.
F i �
.0 I•J' 01i,. ..t'. _ai.: J /,•'--�?.'.1-�...•/ ., ._.. . �)' 1 )... i,... 3'C Ll;ii. to �.'1':1 J•:�C'( 1�( .___ _ ..._.
.•1::.' i'l u'; •,.. ... ..---_
L- - - - -10'100 i__nclale r_` c. . So_- --.plF, . l_] 17 C t•. i�
��-_.__.:°.f.-' .- --- _
this C•Ui]tl'riCt prc,•,-i c:(_s for nlac-inn ii Stvr'Ili s twcr o:2tl.C� , Lind
0
the Shal:opee Cite Council has ;Lire:tud the P,ngi neer to
e- constr•t:tc.^t; a silt trap at the outfall to prevent pol] uting the :Minnesota
r'? Rive :mind
G 1 i77 F':Ll:S, the p1ui3.�oc.? ot:`fi?.' ]. J-.n. t. be c:han�eci, ;-.Ls s}lo1:n on Sheet. IDS
and attac.ricd h: ,-eto rtn,, P,--Fide part of this Agr'`emcnt , to avoid polluting
c s: a trc,ut rearing pond.
W h7HEREAS , THE PLANNED OUTTALL DESIGI`' IS AC:CEPTt%BLE 7'0 THE LMR1•,D as
-='rjrmF-;lly approved 4-23-75.
oma' Iv01:%, TIILREF ORE , IT _TJ H£RZ_ -Y MUTUALLY J',GI:EDD AS FOLLO:bS :
a, o r
=t 1 construct .ter
The Contractor steal cer._ t_ t,ct the storm seiner outfall as shown
s r-,n said Plan Sheet !OS .
os
w
i ? . �.Til :'.v. .. J}ia�wii 1 .'. '
i . � ✓C �i....a'_. va`•a:,�.0l.vl'Ciu.il.'C :''J.tll L11C !t'11I1J1e5VLci
v iii itt;c.y iie}liil iJ1Jer1L ' S 'Jl.cindard jpeciIlcar ions for .,fighLtiay
e � Construction" dated January 1 , 1972 , as amended by Supplemental
` s Specification: dated January 1 , 1974, and as directed L the
Engineer.
-• CS � r.
n w �
3. Payment for the construction of the revised outfall shall. be
sas Force Account work .
E t=• a
EY =
j Index j Item I Clan i Gunner + Yuud I Gounq
I+ II
A:nounr )leoutsted S
7579 .O1 � /t
' Dated �` l�� ` I eC i.
i Aawvved b) rojekF, La.^.ineer or .rrzki:t
'
Original Contract 977 165 .40 J /
1 Datcd I /
Prev. Additions 5 333 . A
00 —�'- -
t eeer�+ by Crtrb:t-r
—J wlsl to rate $
I
LCII,
IIYcrcrntr.;c—ilicrcast`-y�y,�v:� 1 .3 ;o I
Approved as to form end execution � AI'!'RUVET): --
Comniluioner of AGntiui�rratk,n
Dated I9��2__ _ ��_l r i
A
ADrr.tved by Arr'u:T li--.setwat At{erne}- Genera i
Ura ted
I—STATE AUDITOR 7—MilRACTOR "Miry
iB"t:.......-.n rzl:.ti /�.t-1--- at
1 21
��F1.Y'.! C.�'_.�JS.L('J'n:.,.: r .I LIi_�.- -- -- - ---I.1°I -'�.��)`l�' ( ] ) - - -•---- ----- ---- � - ---' -
f.�ri.. I
),I, i". oil
J Q 7 ).._l��_l iC l�- ---,f-'C- -'-,'^ \1)- ) �)1_i I_C �_f�.._`''
TEis cc!:lt'.'.%I ib
LS'1 1-:A TE C: COST
s
v
1 . L.la30i�
Y u ---
a Posi tj on Hc))Ir-; Rate Amo:lnt
a
to
a. I orerr,ELI 1 30 9 . 3G 280. 80
b . Operator 7 9 . 1.8 688 . 50
t c . Laborers J.0 7 .40 7,'. . 00
w
d. Benefits
y t
J. . Ilealth & Welfare 51 .00
C M O
= 2 . Pension Fund 40. 30
s „ 3 . Vacation 1 . 60
I o e. Flus 4C)`/z,
470. 50
TOTAL LABOR $] ; 606 . 60
' 2 . M.ATF,RIAL
- -
ilater� Rate Atnoul;t
y , -
a. 1-, CY Grovt mix 30. 50/CY 457 . 50
�.a b. 300 Ton Clasp A P,iprap 3 .25/Ton 975 . 00
C. 300 Ton Type A Filter 2 . 50/Ton 750.00
r Blanket .
d. 400 SY Sod 1 .74./SY 696 . 00
e . 50 Lb. Secd Mix. 1 . 50/Lb. 75 . 00
R 3
J% `600 Ton D,,livery Chg. 1 .20/'Ton 720. 00
~ `
Sales Tax 40 146 . 94
Plus 15% 573 .07
$4 , 393 . 51 -- -
fi indez ttzrn Cfsa. I puariv J Fund Gnunp -
Amount 1tequerted S 7 , 579 . 01
- Dated .hc� _I9Z/
Original contract V )
977 , 165 .40 _
I-rev. AdclitionK
5� 333 . 00
AreeJDbd .� Cearect�: G'
! 3 cit is to Date S ^ --�I J(/�Y�•�t.'� ff�..{. j_��r:
fl Pc:ccnta�r--ircrrx�•-- . ��,te
3 .3
oproved as to form and e:ecutioa I •I'I'110VED:
Corn=ixaioaer o: Administration
D2 ted
/..wtaat Atwr°q' Grret al �) ADDtm•ed by t�'�c3•l:+.rc•:
'.=STATE IlUO)TOR 2-CD1:i t?ACTt7R 3-AGENCY �----- - --_�- ------•_-__-----
(R'hitr oririnel) (;inl) (Goldrnrod)
._..... s ! .�� ii�.., -- ,Js ,. .1 ....�.J. ��•. � -1....:1 . •. :. ,•t: i(r (.t:..:t. •t s.G
s
_l t,,t,l.r•�; J?p�:3•t.I'i: r � ;I:.. . ._._._ __. ._ ._ .._ . '•i .r� ':ff( .i.� ----- ----- -- -- ---• --Lf�- ��.. 0_L- -•--
II o^rl T :t �.0 ".\'Cr i
CG:It:t'C'- 1° t.IIiCiiCiGC .:� .U..011...
3
3 . F(1L11 F'i�I%;'�•'T I:E r, r J�T
Total
0
s No . Desc•rint i.on }lours Rate Amo-,.int
1 Case. 13.50 35 14. 1F /;tr'. .195
Mich. 125-3A 20 30.40/1Ir. 606 .00
t; 1 Case 350 10 10.42/Hr. 104 .20
1 L-B 5 , 000 B .H. 10 37 . 02/Hr. 370. 20
j
i� TOTAL EQUIPINIZNT 1 , 57u .7U
o�
GRANT) 'TOTAL
v
s 4
U
n c
� G
c c
_ Y
C
R
P_
w V
n 9
e
r
C
O y
c
u t'
7
-- — _---- i lndcx � lrem—= .I IXas>. -- I purer«r --—'—i-uud ---' G;,unty
elf
-=-I•—fes•` =---•--� - . ..�-
Asnount Requested S 7 , ,579 .0! i _L.:= 1 ---
—
OrIginal C+ontrnrt I Approved oy tlamjsct li:.rinee: or Areit+e2 .
V
l �
_ r
Prev. /tddltione
5 , 33 -1�_147L•_!-<'�: .Ls.�� c:' r ,�.•
3.00 , Acee;+:ed by
Tot:l to Data.
I'c:centn�c—tr:rres.ar--yzc.��ef:,� 1 . 3 "'
— ---
form ilatcd_
rov;1:r.•ro :lrtti c�.:t:t��n � �lF'!'1:C!�'L'1:: — _ I
r ,/��J•�+ � Cosumia>cioltel of Adminlotrstiun
Dated-1/—J:3 19y - _. L Jif h<,.1
wYtt..at Attnrn'ey(`et,trDl ( ,/Y~' ADCro�tr! F•y AR.n�_•Jlt.\d
r � I `✓
Datt d_--
-STATE AUDITOR 1--CON7PA".70R :—AGLf:CT
(11'4ilr ariliaaf) (link) (Cr,lcrRroj)
CITY OF SHAKOPFF
r
INCORPORATED 1870 '�^y
�I 11
129 E. FIRST AVE. 55379 r'`V
r
March 3 , 1976
Mr . Chuck Weichselbaum
Assistant District Engineer
MINNESOTA HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
2055 No . Lilac Drive
Golden %%alley, Minn . 55422
RE : Letter of Justification for Supplemental Agreement
No. 2 , S .P. 70-617-04
Chuck:
This Supplemental Agreement calls for the construction of the
revised outfall , as directed by the City Council of Shakopee .
The contract unit prices for Cl . B riprap and type 2 filter
blanket were 530.00/c .y. and $10 .00/c .y. respectively. Whereas
these prices were based on relatively small quantities , it was
estimated that the revised cutfall could be constructed under
force account at less expense. The estimated cost for construc-
tion on a force account basis is approximately $7 , 600. 00. The
cost of this construction under contract prices is estimated at
$13 ,000. 00.
Due to the considerable cost difference, it was agreed that
payment for construction of the outfall should be as force
account work.
Sincerely,
Doug G�riesky
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
DG/j sc
The Re ,a -rt of Progress V e
G= TY OF SHfniKCDF:"
INCORPORATED 1870
* ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT +�
129 E. 1st Avemie - Shakopee, linnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Fulton Schleisman, Engineering Inspector
SUBJECT: 1985 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway
Apron Replacement Program
DATE: January 28, 1986
INTRODUCTION:
The attached Partial Estimate Voucher No. 2 , the Semi-Final
Estimate for this project, requires council approval.
BACKGROUND:
The work accomplished under this year' s contract was as follows:
1. Pro pert y Owner Requests - $1, 668- 26
2. Eag l ewood Project C ur b & Gutter - $4, 104. 80
3. Miscellaneous; Sidewalk connection between Park Ridge
Drive and 11th Avenue - $2, 155. 00
The contractor has agreed that the quantities on this Semi-Final
Estimate represent the final contract amounts.
The amount retained, $100. 00, will be released as final payment
after adoption of a -resolution accepting the work.
ACTION REQUESTED :
A motion to authorize _payment of Semi-Final Estimate No. 2
for 1985 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement
Program, in the amount of $626. 52, to Siehndel Construction,
210 Elmwood, LeSuer, MN 56058.
Approved for Submittal
Ken Ash f e 1'`d, City Engineer
FS/pmp
MEMNO5
SEMI-FINAL
�'ARTIAL ESTIMATE VOUCHER
L'ontract No1985-3 Partial Estimate Voucher No.
Period Ending: December 31, 1985
TO: Contractor Siehndel Construction
Address 210 Elmwood LeSuer, MN 56056
Project Description 1985 Curb 8 Gutter, Sidewalk, arid Driveway APT-on
Replacement Program
1. Original Contract Amount $ 7,285. 00
V. Change Order No. --- Thru No. --- -@-
3. Total Funds Encumbered 7,285. 00
4. Value of Work Completed $ 7,928. 06 Value of Work
Remaining
5. L.S. Percent Retainage $ 100.00
G. Previous Pay_ meats $ 7, 201. 54
Percent Complete
7. Deductions or Charges $ -0-
100%
B. Total $ 7,301. 54
Pavment Due (Line 4 - 8) $ 626. 52
CERTIFICATE OF PAYMENT
(I, We) hereby agree that the quantity and value of work shown herein is a fair
estimate of the work completed to date.
CONTRAC _S
BY
j -
TITLE
APPROVED - CITY OF SHAKOF'EE
'ro.� " t Er Vie r Date
Cit Aar istrator Date
SEMI-FIN_U
'.0 -W,: 1935 Cl!RB/GC{iER/SIDEwAL!;/DRIVEWAY REAL EMEIvT ''ROGRAY ==7TN
_ _
'CQ T-.101) ENDING: December 31, 1985 CONTRACTOR: SIEHNDE� 2.11.
- rUnit
--!------------------_------1-- -- ---! ----- - ---'----------------- -------------
Ite - -.
Contrac Curren* Per:ccTeta. t�' Date
No. ! Contract Ttem iJrii: . Price f G uant ity Amount ?!ant i t i uMrn Quant iiv : o, t
!
1. iMountaoie Cures & butter !
A. 0-50 L.F. IL.F ! $6.50 12.00 t-78.00 , oe SO.ell', 24,8e
. Mor nan 5' L.. . $ .br: �,.00 i $.9i;.0� 00
!
C. IB-615 Curb & Gutter '; I I I ;
':A. 0-50 L.F. I L.F. 1 $6.60 1 i2.0$ i $73.2K F.Ok $i:..00 ! 20.i 0 $:32.6:,
I,,. more than 52 L.F. ! $5.60 35.00 i $'.'3e.0t 0.U, $:;.U, i 33.Y:O 1 $4.104.8:
3. !B-624 Cur: & Gutter I I i !
IA. 0-50 L.F. IL.F, ! $8.00 . 12.00 ! $96.00 0..00 ! $0.00 . 24.00
IB. More t;:ar 50 L.F. 1 L.F. 1 $7.50 ! ?5.00 i $262.52 ! 0.00 $0.00 ! 0.00 $0.V
4. !vertical Curb I I i f ! !
!A. 0-50 L.F. 11".F. ! $e.00 1 -$E. 1 $72.00 i 0.010 1 $0.00 i 0k
!E. More than 50 L.F. IL.F. 1 $ .00 35.00 ! $210.00 i E.Ok $0.00 1 0.00 1 SO.e0
5. 14" Sidewalk I I
IA. 0-200 S.F. !S.F. 1 $1.60 ! 200.00 I $v2k.00 i 0.00 i $0.eel ! e,.Oe. !
[B. More than 2@0 S.F. I S.F. 1 $1.50 ! 400.00 1 $600.01 2.00 $0.00 0.010, $01.00, .
E. !6" Sidewalk I ! I ! 1 ! !
!A, 0-202 S.F. !S.F. $2.40 ! 24.00 1 $5:7.60 1 2.00 I $0.00 I 0.00 .
IB. More than 200 S.F. S.F. i $2.3d 50.00 ! $1 i5.00 1 0.00 : $0.00 i 900.00 ! $2.070.00
'. 16" Driveway Approach
iA. 0-200 S.F. K2.4p 20e.00 I $480.00 ! 0.00 1 $0,00 ! 50.00 I $144.00
!B. More tnan 200 S.F. !S.F. 1 $2.30 -35.00 1 $540.50 i 0.00 $O.Q ! 300.00 x690.00 !
B. 18" Reinforced Concrete i I
IA. Driveway 0-200 S.F. !S.F. $3.k0 1 24.00 1 $72.00 ! 01.00 1 $0.00 1.00 $0.01
IB. More than 200 LS.-. iL.7.IL. $3.0r 1 24.02 ! $72.00 ! 0.00 , $0.0r, 1 Ir.0? ! $0.00 .
9. !10° Reinforced Concrete ! i I I I I I I
[A. Driveway 0-200 S.F. ?S.F. i $3.75 1 24.00 1 $90.00 i C.00 1 $0.00 1 C.00 1 $0.00
IB. More than 200 S.F. !S.F. I $3.75 1 24.00 1 $90.00 0.00 1 $0.00 i 0.00 i $0.00 i
10. ICurb Removal tall types) !L.F. 1 $1.00 . 141.00 1 $141.0° 1 O.Ot , $01.0 I 83.90 $80.92 .
! ! ! I
11. IExistinQ_ Concrete Removals 15.Y. I $2.50 ! 660.00 ! $1,65E.Q0 ! 0.00 ! $0.00 1 ^.00 I $5.00 '
I
12. ISubnrade Excavation !C.Y. I ".5.00 ! 24.00 $_21x.00 ! 31.00 $:55.00 i 31.00 1 $155.01
I ! !
13. !Pit Run Base i+";aterial ,C.Y. 1 $5.as I 20.00 ! $100.U 0.00 ! $0.00 1 k`.00 1 $0.00
I
14. IClass 5 or, ! $d.5'2 ! 28.00 1 $c381.00 ! 10.00 1 $85.00 i 10.00 1 $85.00
15. ISod IS.Y. 1 $3.00 I 35.00 I 5105.00 i 0.00 ! $0.00 i 0.00
I I ! I I I !
------ ----------------------- ----- -------- ------ ----------- -------- ---- ------ ------
i i 1 ! lotai ! I I I I ?
-IRVCCT: 1985 r' R^a/SJTT�R/SIDEW4LY/DRIVEWAv RERLFfCi M_N' PR06RA11 EST.IMii' N . : 3
DERiOD ENDING: Decemaer 31, 1985 CONTRACTOR: O
Si1EE' NO.:; .: c
----em---�----------------------f------i--unit —! __..—Contract------------------ !_-' Current P -----` otci------ -- ----------
riod
tf,
No. I Contract Item I Unit Pr.ce ! Quantity Amaurt Quantity ; Amount I Quantity Arcurt
I
I
ivI41 itumino.e Pav.h+nn, iTan 40.00 25 ?9?.CiE
17. iConcrete Sawinc IL.F, $17.5e 30.ZO F125.8a -5.00 ! 417.52 5.V 317.5e
!(b" Death)
-------- -------------------- ---- ------— --------- -------------- ----------!------------ ----------------------
! Total 4?.085.82 i Tata: ! 4347.5t? 1 Total i 47,S,cc.Q:
1hi5 :ITT OF SHAKUP Y :HE:( REGISTER 01-20-H6 PAGE 1
Na. DATE 9MOUVT /ENOOK- ITEy 7.zGRIPT[OI ACCOUNT NO• .INV. N 3.0. 4 MESSAGE.
�Y
0190,53 01/29/86 437.98 200 LEVEE )RIVE JFILITIES 01-4310-184-18
- --_ - __.. . . _. .,___._..... ._..431.88 ►
Ct)004 li1/21/86 143.55 A3A43 PEST CDN INC P20= 3=2V 01-4310-361-30
143.55
' tftkrr **+—CKS
0?70710 01/2 )/86 29245.75 BARTIN-ASCiMAV P20= SERV 27-4310-546-41
029030 01/2.)/86 57.52 HART7N-ASCiM44 P13= 371V 27-4310-547-41
0?lOtiJ 01/27/35 11x141.84@ARTIN-pSCIMAN. _PZQ? .SERy - .._ ._ . _. - 27-4310-548-41
13x445.11 •
023102 01/2i/8.i 19.22 COPY EQUIP. IV,^.. SJP'LI_3 01-4210-411-41
U?II1 U1/t`?/85 ..__. .__... ... -_ 15.72. -.COPY EQUIP. INS!...-- _--Pit 4T i, PUH -
34.94
_ 029234 — 01/23/86 292.10 INST. TESTING IVC PiO= SEiV 01-4510-412-41
I` tttk*t ***-CKS
029342 01/2i/86 150.00 M:V/3J9LIC/3AF=TY t=YT3 01-4380-311-31
150.00 •
4ktef* ••*—CKS
029432 ____ .._01123185 _..___.._______.__.__-.937.40-------—_ _..0, C_PETERS7NA3I?-.M4INTOT-_:_
937.40
*rtrrr !,ar CKS
023525 01/29/86 155.00 SJBJ28AN EVG INC P20= a_ZV 71-4310-711-71 '
*ff*•* ***-CKS
11?3521 01/29/86 24.74 SJPEiAMERI:A SJP31LIE3 01-4210-312-51
"' 023521 01/29/86 14.29 SJPE2AMERi:A M7T3R =JEL 01-4222-312-31
,.i
kt4kff ..t—[�Kj
023600 01/29/86 33.40 GIES; VOXLm P-O= S:2V 01-4310-151-15
33.40
'z *r*ktt ***-CKS
.s
023515 01/27/85
99845.31 •
R_b i R _---- --------•----• --. - _CKS._.
1 I Ili O i0 G 'O 41 r
( I '•t IV w aV Nu V
W :W hJ j YJ
Go LP 64) lz
OD
i i I M
rl
! c
i
,N a
i _ • N N N 'N N
Co
:rt;) .�
'�.. :f �• 1'7
1 i I I 1 t
1 f I f t !
• D
s
10 1�'r IA Ui r•+ LA L4 ...1
I ! r r N'N W GN F+rI- 0 0
F tll t i• W
w.w w W N N
: wl o�-•w W' w w �•r �'+* o.o v o o.o .
. r!1 0.+rw v V ulrT I'm 1-4 -4 V o0 00
La
( i i i i i i :C iN ,2 .2. •S G7
I t 1 1 C C C L !lt Y!
!26 :L
_ r c ;1n
• ~--4 rq
0000
1 l i i i l yy-1�•'l' - J I 71 w ;V! i ITl
Vt
EP
c -K v c
rn
Z Z IZ i G7
i !
711
t-0 !•9 :'•1
r•I:D
1 i t i i 1 I 1 I l C r)a Z 1 !'!1 I u .1.1 �L .o i0 'r•t
PI I"G 1•1� L !` .d ly :-,r 1lt.. id
v)N -V) nn Y tr I
i at rl a•t r .r Y! w
VI m A•I r•I
[ 1
i i i f
i { ; i
'p •o
vi ;Ln
:1
_ o .o r it yr r ••
p .o {o ,N
C
•
O �
. I [ • 1
W
I 2
- [ C'*t
C1) D
1 rl
t,
r Lo
1735 CITY OF SHAK()PEE :HEC( REGISTER 01-29-86 PAGE 1
;1=4i. N9, DATE A4OJNi _-_ VENDOR_ ..__-. ,._.__•.___ [!E-4 .3-SCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. it 3.0. q MESSAGE
1 029027 01/29/86 25.15 JEANNE ANDRE TRAVEL i SUBSIST 15-4330-191-19 I'
s **2929 ***—CKS
a li
029036 01/29/86 10.00 -JOHN K. ANDERSON MOTOR FJEL 01-4222-121-12
029035 01/29/86 25.97 JOHN K. AW ERSON T14VEL i SUBSIST 01-4330-111-11
--_...._..__..__.13.00 . -_ _._JO11Y K. AN3ERS.3N.� _-- --TRA�'�-j SUHSISf - ---- 01-4330-121-12_:__. . --
48.37
' h
*rrr*r *rr-CKS
029033 01/29/86 281.41 CHW ION AJTO STORE E3UI3 44INT 01-4232-321-32
---- —- ----- -- ---- ---- ---- -
Z81-31
•rrrrr *r*-CKS
023233 0112'/96 120.00 -ICBD _____--.----CDN i SCHOOLS - 01-4390-331-33
120.00 •
r*9999 — ***—CKS
023275 01/29/86 5t 477.75 K::NS DOOR 2EP4IR 9LD6 4AINT 01-4230-321-32
i-' S�477.75 ... ._
#ra—CKS
• I
027270 01/23/86 10.75 LEAGJE OF 4N CITIES SJPoLIES 01-4210-121-12
027290 01/23/86 10.75 LEAGJE OF4N_ ITIES SJR' IES 01-4210-131-13
_
-. 029290 01/27/86 - - 10.75 —LEAGUE OF MN CITIES -SUPPLIES - 01-4210-411-41
32.25
r*t-CKS
023345 01/23/45 295.45 M=TAO SALES INC 'jT9T S PUH 01-4350-911-91
295.45
I
rr:sr* ***—CKS
` 323354 '1/29/86 15.00 M A J 4 A 4J=S 3 SUBSCRIPT 15-4391-191-19
�.: 15.00
I . rrrtrr . ..—CKS
023393 01/2i/86 236.93 NSP UTILITIES 01-4370-427-42
236.93
rrrtrr ***-CKS
o�
Dal 924..---------01/29lH6.-----•--•--•-•-•---......12900.- --_.Y.�_..�ARO6.3. P-Il,�?.----_........_:�.._--- T1A.N=�,_3�_.SU�iSj-ST--•--_..—.___01-4330-421'4.'2....___._ _- _._.._ _..._-... .
�2 -- 12.00 •
023430... _ ._ 01/2'3/86.—_ -- -- 15.00.. —.P .ARSON,FLIRISTS.-- MIS, _ _..-01-4499-111-11 -
—.ttc:•_•-------.--_._--•------..___..-.__...__..._.-- _.____._..___.: ___..�_._.___..:.__._:.r.___._`_._:_.. _ ._._ _ .. -CKS
1)36 CITY OF SHAKOPEE :HE:( REGISTER 01-29-86 PAGE 2
,iZ:i .Y7. DATE _ .. A90UVi _.._VEN00B... .._._. . [TE`l O=SCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. .INV. # ?.0._ q MESSAGE -
i I.
_----._--........... 13.09 _. RNS_._-. _:--••-_ ----:•--•--_-----_---EOUI'_84INT_.._.__._ .--- ----___01-4232-432-42 -- ..._ _.. _.
19.09 •
*f trrt _ __. _ .. . _. -- -. ...-._ --._.-•-- -- --- ---_.._._...._ ... ... .. .........___. - .r*-CKS
I� I:
' 029494 01/29/96 15.30 SCOTT COUNTY 4UOIT0.R SJP3LIES 01-4210-155-15
15.00
rf*rr* fff-CKS
I
023513 01/29/.96 31.30 Sr FAANCI3 REG MED Pl)= SEIV 01-4310-313-31
31.90 •
i'
rr**ff *f*-CKS
0?7533 01/29/85 9.50. BARRT. STQC<... -_ - _ _Tl4VEL & SUNSIST 16-4530-2.31-23 .
9.30 •
U1/29/86 -. ....2 983.12-- --_ SCHILZ _ORNAME4TAL._-----.-•---0TiEi_ IIPRQV_..__._ - - 1.3-4519-000-00 .
21883.12 •
�f�trr _.. _._..._. ._......._. __. .. ... ......... _. __ _...__ ..__ - --.._-.... . ...-CKS
023545 01/29/de 123.15 SNA?-ON TO)LS CORP SJPaLI_S 01-4210-441-44
029576 31/29/86 100.00 U 0= N C34= S SCHOOLS 01-4390-312-31
100.90 •
023577 01/29/86 65.00 U.S. POSTM4ST-2 P3ST4i' 01-4320-311-31
66.00 •
**f-CKS
.0 _023571... .___.U1/29/86._._.____..._...-..._.78.78.. ...._.--..--V4LL.• Y..TEtl'.. _ .P30-_SEiV_:_.._.._.._ .._. ----- --..Q1-.4310-171-1T..- - -- - �
79.78 • - _:._.._.+_--- •-- - ---- - -- - . - -i
kfr*4r _. ._. ..... _.. .__... ....._._.. ...._.._•� --. .. _ .._.._ .._ .. .. .. .. ........ ___ .... _. ..***-CKS
023571 01/29/86 2,192.66 VAN SICKLE-ALL_V PRO= S.1V 01-4310-331-33
*frfrr ***-CKS
029506 01/'29/86 2057.34 VAN 300L SERV INC JTILITIE'S 14-4370-143-14
2,857.94
023519 ..__...__-I01/2`3/86_ _____ _. _.. ... 18.00 H-ST. PUBLI3HIN3._. ,.._- .-- _ PIT VT & PUH ,- _ 01-4350-111-11 1B.00
1335 CITY OF SHAKOPEE CHEC< REGISTER 01-29-86 PAGE 3
:1=:4 NO. DATE AyDJNT _ JENOOR ___• •._.,ITE4 D=iCRIPTION ._, ._ -.ACCOUNT ND.- INV. 4 P.O. N MESSAGE
OJI' MAINT-,._-__._ .__ __.._ _..D1-4�32-12I-]2. - _.
!' 0?7624 01/23/86 72.00 WAHL B YAH_ IVC =3JI3 4AINT 01-4232-171-17
033524 U1/29/80 144.00 WAHL d WAH_ IVC E1JI' 4AINT 01-4232-311-31
288.30 f
o tf tfft
t..-CKS i.
I'" 0?3337 01/29/85 181-18 �
310.08 •
0?9303 01/29/86 125.00 A4 IVST/RE4L EST APP DJ:S L SUBSCRIPT 01-4391-331-33
125.00 f
023309 01/29/8L) 239.30 G30DIN CO SJP I73 01-4210-431-42
238.30 t
I.
023810 01/29/86 90.00 MN PADS DEV IVC C34F L SCHOOLS 01-4390-314-31
90.00
023311 01/21/86 300.00 MN P3LICE IEC SYS DJ- S i SUBSCRIPT 01-43.31-312-31
300. 0 •
0?3312 01/29/86 280.30 MN' ST FIRE 6H 'AS50 DJES i SUBSCRIPT 01-4391-321-32
280.00 f
023313 01/2`)/86 270.90 MIC13 DATA SERVICE SJP�'LIES 01-4210-411-41
270.30 .
'
0?3914 01/21/8G 23.97 HEARST COR'ORATION DJ=S i SUBSCRIPT 01-4391-421-92
23.37 •
-._.._.__....- - -
0?7915 C1/2 )/Sn 59.50 PHOiDGENIC PR33 SJR3LIE3 01-4210-618-61
59.50 t
023315 O1/27/8G 203.75 . PRECISION LA9 INC SJP:'LIES 01-4210-426-42
209.15 t
0?3917 01/29/86 15.00 FRAN( RIES P3STA6=_ 01-4320-321-32
15.00 •
�4, 02331B 01/29/86 5.00 SCOTT CTY --EXT SERV SJPPLIES 01-4210-131-13
44 5.00
14,
a° 0?9819 01/23/86 101.39 D_NNIS ANDERSON C347 SCHOOLS - --01-4390-312-31
101.39 •
***-C
rrttrtKS
119481.23 FJVD O1 TOTAL G=N=RAL FUND
--..".----- ----__---. ------....--.----------------2sgB3.12 -_ FU40_.13_TOTAL PAR<- *iEPERV'E..FQM _.____._.-•--_-__.-....... .._ __
ys 29857.?I4 FJVD 14 TOTAL i24'V3IT
4D.55 FUVD 15 TOTAL H44
FJ40• 16. TOTAL--.. C43_- - - -- - -
179272.24 TOTAL
t h January P119e 3 ACCOUN'T'S PAYABLE LEDGI,"R 1986
iL Acct. Cr. Acct. Amount Batch Remarks Ck. No. Vendor Ck. Amt.
01.4130.421.42 01.1010 $ 253.00 Salaries- Part-time 20041 Dorothy McPherson $ 253.00
26.4310.197.19 26.1010 1,720.00 Prof Sery 20043 Jerome Wampach 1,720.00
27.4519.546.41 27.1010 6,607.00 Other Improv 20044 Egan Mckay 6,607.00
27.4519.547.41 27.1010 1,000.00 Other Improv 20045 C. S. McCrossan 1,000.00
81.4920.000.00 81.1010 6,611.69 Remit FIT 20046 1st Natl - Shakopee 61611.69
81.4921.000.00 81.1010 2,941.53 Remit SIT 20047 Comm of Revenue 2,941.53
81.4922.000.00 81.loio 4,879.28 Remit FICA 2oo48 D.O.E.R.S.S. Flet. Div. 4,879.28
81.4932.000.00 81.1010 196.30 Remit uniform Rent 20049 unitog Rental Sery 196.30
81.4927.000.00 81.1010 100.00 Remit Defer Comp 20050 IDS 100.00
81.4931.000.00 81.1010 1,125.00 Remit Payroll Sav 20051 lst Natl - Shakopee 1,125.00
81.4927.000.00 81.1010 2,205.00 Remit Defer Comp 20052 PEBSCO 2,205.00
81.4923.000.00 81.1010 6,771.61 Remit PERA 20053 State Treasurer 6,771.61
81.4926.000.00 81.101.0 238.70 Remit Cancer Ins 20054 Am Fam Life 238.70
85.1010.000.00 85.1010 7702000.00 Transfer 20055 lst Natl - Shakopee 770,000.00
01.4511.311.31 01.1010 4,930.00 Capital Equip 20056 North Star Auto Auct 4,930.00
01.4390.121.12 01.1010 50.00_ Conf & Schools 20057 League of MN Cities 50.00
$809,029.11 $809,029.11
FUND TOTALS
01 - General Fund $ 5,233.00
26 - Downtown Redevelopment 1,720.00
27 - Racetrack 7,607.00
81 - Payroll Trust 25,069.11
85 - Investment Trust 770,000.00
$8o9,629.11
II ��
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson
RE: League of Minnesota Cities (LMC)
Amicus Program
DATE: January 27 , 1986
Introduction
The Shakopee City Council, at its regular January 21 , 1986
meeting, tabled the attached memo from Stan Peskar from the
League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) regarding the creation of an
Amicus Program supported by additional LMC dues.
Background
I have discussed this with Rod Krass , who has seen the specific
proposal, and the fee Shakopee would pay under the proposed
dues schedule. Rod stated that the Court generally realizes
that other cities are affected when any one city is involved
in litigation before the Court. Therefore, Rod felt that the
only benefit that would accrue to Shakopee would be when the
League Amicus filing would provide an opportunity for drafting
a stronger legal case in support of cities . He suggested that
this might help in cases where smaller communities with less
experienced legal staff might get bound up in a complicated
case that would affect all cities.
Rod ' s firm handles the bulk of the City' s litigation and liti-
gation for a number of other cities. Based upon his experience
and his comments above, he felt that the program "probably was
worth $400 but not much more than $400" to the City of Shakopee.
Alternatives
1 . Support the proposed League Amicus Program by agreeing to
participate. Again, this program if instituted would probably
help a smaller percentage of cases in which Shakopee might be
affected, and for which the legal arguments could be bolstered
by League Attorneys participating.
2. Choose to support the program but with conditions . Such
conditions would include a certain percentage of cities par-
ticipating before Shakopee would consider participation.
3 . Choose not to participate in the program at all. The value
of the program is apparently "a close call" when looking at
the $400 price tag for Shakopee. If Council feels that there
would not be sufficient benefit then alternative #3 would make
sense.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative #2 setting the participation require-
ment at 750. This approach forces collective support by well
over half of the cities in the state before Shakopee would par-
ticipate. It would mean that other cities , in making a decision
on this "close call" , agreed that there was some benefit to
the program.
Action Requested
Direct the appropriate City officials to complete the application
form for the proposed League of Minnesota Cities Amicus Program
with the stipulation that the City will not participate unless
750 of the cities in the state choose to participate.
JKA/dd
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk �-
RE : Publication of Official Proceedings
DATE : January 29 , 1986
INTRODUCTION:
On January 7 , 1986 Council asked staff to research the cost of
publishing the council proceedings.
BACKGROUND :
During 1985 , the City published 38 sets of council proceedings
for a total cost of $7 , 000.00 approximately. Other publications
include ordinances, some resolutions, public hearings notices, job
openings, and financial reports. Total publication and printing '
for 1985 was approximately $13, 500. We have already scaled down our
publication by eliminating publishing bills , most resolutions and a
summary of lengthy ordinances.
Current legislation requires publication of the official council
proceedings, or a condensed version including action on motions, resolutions
ordinances, and other official proceedings; or the city may mail , at
city expense, a copy of the proceedings to any resident upon request.
If the city were to publish a condensed version of the minutes,
I believe the cost would be under $100.00 for regular meetings and under
$25 .00 for special meetings. I would roughly estimate an annual cost
then of $3 , 090-00.
The city could dispense with the publishing of minutes altogether.
If the cost of copying, postage and time for mailing proceedings upon
request were to equal or exceed the estimated cost of publishing a
condensed version, publication could always be resumed.
ALTERNATIVES :
1 . Publish official proceedings in entirety . . . . . +$580/mo
2. Publish condensed version of official proceedings . +$250/mo
3 . Eliminate publishing official proceedings and + 35/mo
mail copies to- residents upon request . . . . . . . _$
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternative 3 for six months, and see how many requests are made .
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to dispense with publication of the Official Proceedings of
the City Council and direct staff to mail copies to any resident upon
request, and report back to Council after six months.
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director
RE: 1985 Shakopee Municipal Home Mortgage Program
DATE: January 24 , 1986
Introduction:
The City, with local builder involvement, secured 52 million
in reduced interest mortgage funds for first-time home buyers.
It is now suggested that some changes to the city program be
implemented.
Background:
The existing program was for the construction of new houses ,
with a certain number to be attached and all to have increased
energy standards. Market-rate mortgage rates have been dropping,
and for some reason only about two mortgages have been placed
in the local program. Therefore MHFA has opted to take funds
for which an alternative use can be found. All of the Shakopee
participating builders are requesting to give up their funds
if possible. However Rich Logeais has also requested that he
be able to use his funds for mortgages on existing housing.
MHFA has verbally suggested that this option would be acceptable
to them if a written request is received. The attached letter
has been sent out - however Council concurrance in this direction
for local funds is now requested.
Reauested Action:
Expand the 1985 Shakopee Municipal Home Mortgage Program
to include existing housing.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE i >>
INCORPORATED 1870
129 EAST FIRST AVENUE. SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 5379.1376 (672) 445-3550
�anua_z° 24 , =980
Ns. Mae u:.cninson
D:_4 nnesV i CL'S_ng nance ;iO_encv
,,00 Sibley S-. Sui_e 300
St. Paul, Mn 53101
P,'. Use of Shakopee Mc._gage Funds for Z'xis:ing ilous4nlg
Dead Ms. auzchir_so^_:
'r.
the r ea_ es, of local Shakopee 'bu__de=s, :.Ile _-y WCL'.Ld
like :.O recr est =_Cm 1' -_FA ':�ne au__7nc=_=y _C use 1CCc1 mor. gaga
=un s t0 =_nan=e -he purchase of e}:is`i ng ho s1ng.
? under s�_nd that- _= you gran.-_ thist _s =e- es- , G_==e.en'
sales p-=Ces and qua___-y' nc =,-,Comes and also --h-=--
are
h-=--are C__ exis__ng IlOuses.
please advise me as soon as =oss= e C= ac=_Cn
On
Cn _e_ti
r�
Je^nria :»rd.e
:y De V el, =.Jl lie nt D__ev`.fir'_
cc: Dan See_ ==-c:
im Siekumamn
R;_CP Lc)ae s
'Cm Rea:nev
i1 A:=W
117e Heart of Progress Vallev
MEMO TO: Mayor and Councilmembers /
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Intoximeter Purchase
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction:
An intoximeter is a portable breath testing device carried in
a patrol vehicle to determine in a preliminary manner if the
operator of a motor vehicle is under the influence of alcohol.
Background-
The primary purpose of the device is to provide an officer with
sufficient probable cause to bring the suspected offender to
the station for an intoxilyzer test which takes approximately
two hours and requires a second officer to be involved in the
process.
During 1985 the department arrested 152 persons for driving
under the influence, therefore it is very important that the
best decision is made on the street, so that man hours are not
wasted.
The State Patrol purchased 175 units three years ago and only
four have required minor repair. There are no grants available
to assist in the purchase of these units at this time.
The Crime Bureau laboratory will provide operator training at
no cost. These items are not included in the 1986 Police Department
budget. The Finance Director recommends using general contingency
funds should the request be approved.
Recommendation:
Purchase three Alco-Senser Intoximeter units at a cost of $1 , 335 . 00
( $445 . 00 each) using general contingency funds. (See Res. No. 2515
for budget amendment, Item llo) .
Council Action Reauested:
Authorize staff to purchase three Alco-Senser Intoximeter units
at a cost of $1 , 335 . 00 ( $445 . 00 each) using general contingency
funds .
TB:cah
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson
RE: City of Shakopee Versus
Ladder Towers , Inc. , et al
DATE: January 27 , 1986
Introduction
The Shakopee City Council had authorized the Assistant City
Attorney' s Office to pursue recovery of the City' s expense
for repairing our aerial ladder truck.
Background
The City of Shakopee purchased a used aerial ladder truck and
several years later had a major repair bill which was required
because of an undersized engine originally installed in the
vehicle. Our attorneys have negotiated a proposed settlement
of $2 , 000 . 00 . The proposed settlement information from our
attorneys is attached.
This means that the City would still be out $5 , 557 . 63 ($7 , 557. 63 -
$2 , 000. 00) plus legal costs of $1,529. 25 . Or, to restate it in a
positive way, our legal efforts reduced the net cost of repairs
from $7,557.63 to $7,242.13 .
Alternatives
1. Agree to the setlement as proposed by Susan L. Estill
from our Assistant City Attorney' s Office for $2 , 000 . 00 .
Clearly a settlement in this amount will not recoup the City' s
full cost.
2. Direct Susan L. Estill to continue with the claim in an
attempt to recover more costs. This seems unlikely and will
require additional expenses by legal- personnel.
Recommendation
Joe Ries and I concur with Susan Estill ' s recommendation that we
take the proposed settlement of $2 , 000 . 00 for the reasons listed
in her letter dated January 21 , 1986 .
Action Requested
Direct Susan Estill from Krass & Monroe to accept the $2 , 000 . 00
settlement offered by Detroit Diesel Allison and Hendrickson
Manufacturing Company for repairs to the City' s ladder truck.
I
J
r
v , LAW OFFICES
KRASS & MONROE
CHARTERED h
JANiMars`chall Road Business Center
Phillip R. Krass 327 Marschall Road
Dennis L. Monroe —r f 41,4D. Box 216
Barry K. Meyer CITY Or rtslialiogee=Minnesota 55379
Trevor R. Walsten Telephone 445-5080
Peter L. Cooper
Elizabeth B. McLaughlin Livery Building
Bryan Wm. Huber January 21, 1986 218 Pine Street
Susan L. Estill P.O. Box 316
Chaska. Minnesota 55318
Telephone 448.7666
Mr. John Anderson
Shakopee City Administrator
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: City of Shakopee vs. Ladder Towers, Inc. , et al
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Following negotiations with the Defendants in the above captioned
matter, Detroit Diesel Allison and Hendrickson Manufacturing Company, two of the
named Defendants, have offered the settlement of $2,000.00. I am writing to
recommend the City accept this offer of settlement for the following reasons:
1. Necessary discovery for full litigation of this lawsuit would be
costly in comparison to the amount of damages the City is
claiming. It would not be cost effective to fully litigate this
lawsuit.
2. The statute of warranty claims are very weak because of the long
time period which lapsed between the discovery of the transmission
problems and the filing of the lawsuit.
3. Ladder Towers, Inc. has filed a summary judgment motion. It is
better to settle the lawsuit before incurring additional expenses
in defending against this summary judgment motion.
Please review this matter and indicate whether we have authorization to
settle this lawsuit. If you have any further questions regarding this matter,
please feel free to call.
Very truly yours,
BRASS & MONROE CHARTERED
Shakopee Assistant City At rneys
SLE/eg Susan L. Estill
File No: 8-1373-134
1 �
LAW OFFICES i I_ F`'
KRASS & MONROE
CHARTERED
Marschall Road Business Center
Phillip R. Krass 327 Marschall Road
Dennis L. Monroe P.O. Box 216
Barry K. Meyer Shakopee. Minnesota 55379
Trevor R. Walsten Telephone 4455080
Peter L. Cooper Livery Building
Elizabeth B. McLaughlin 218 Pine Street
Bryan Wm. Huber January 28, 1986 P.O. Box 316
Susan L. Estill Chaska. Minnesota 55318
Telephone 448.7666
Mr. John Anderson
Shakopee City Administrator
129 East First Street
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: City of Shakopee vs. Ladder Towers, Inc. , et. al.
Dear Mr. Johnson:
The additional information you requested is as follows:
a. The original repair cost $7,550,63.
b. Legal fees on this matter paid $1,529.25, balance $315.50.
If you have any further questions about this matter, please call.
Very truly yours,
BRASS & MONROE CHARTERED
Shakopee Assistant Attorneys
Susan L. Estill
SLE/ls
LAW OFFICES
KRASS & MONROE
CHARTERED
JAN ? a"r
�- 1Ma�chall Road business Center
Phillip R. Krass 327 Marschall Road
Dennis L. Monroe -2.J. Box 216
Barry K. Mever CITY O; Minnesota 55379
Trevor R. Walsten Teiepnone 445-5080
Peter L. Cooper
Elizabeth B. McLaughlin Livery Building
Brvan Wm. Huber January 21 , 1986 218 Pine Street
Susan L. Estill P.O. Box 316
Chaska. Minnesota 55318
Teiephone 448.7666
Mr. John Anderson
Shakopee City Administrator
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: City of Shakopee vs. Ladder Towers, Inc. , et al
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Following negotiations with the Defendants in the above captioned
matter, Detroit Diesel Allison and Hendrickson Manufacturing Company, two of the
named Defendants, have offered the settlement of $2,000.00. I am writing to
recommend the City accept this offer of settlement for the following reasons:
1. Necessary discovery for full litigation of this lawsuit would be
costly in comparison to the amount of damages the City is
claiming. It would not be cost effective to fully litigate this
lawsuit.
2. The statute of warranty claims are very weak because of the long
time period which lapsed between the discovery of the transmission
problems and the filing of the lawsuit.
3. Ladder Towers, Inc. has filed a summary judgment motion. It is
better to settle the lawsuit before incurring additional expenses
in defending against this summary judgment motion.
Please review this matter and indicate whether we have authorization to
settle this lawsuit. If you have any further questions regarding this matter,
please feel free to call.
Very truly yours,
KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED
Shakopee Assistant City Attqrneys
SLE/eg Susan L. Estill
File No: 8-1373-134
Y
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator I '
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk ��
RE: Municipal Ordinance Codifiers 1986 Contract
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction
Our contract with Municipal Ordinance Codifiers has expired
and it is desirable to renew it for 1986 .
Background
Municipal Ordinance Codifiers prepared the current City Code
in 1978 and have been under annual contracts for updating and
annual revision conferences ever since.
The most recent updating covers 1984 and 1985 because there
were not many ordinances adopted in 1984 for an updating.
We are currently copying the newest revision pages in house
at a cost saving of approximately $450 . 00 .
The attached proposal for 1986 contains the same fees as were
used for the past four years. Based on previous years costs,
I would estimate a cost of $1 , 800 to Municipal Ordinance
Codifiers , plus $400 for printing. The 1986 budget needs to
be amended to include this cost. This has been budgeted in
the Council division in the past, but I would like to recommend
that it be budgeted in the City Clerk' s division in the future.
Alternatives
1. Continue with annual updating of City Code.
2. Regular updating every two years.
3 . Unstructured periodic updating.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1 .
Recommended Action _
Authorize appropriate City officials to enter into a 1986
contract with Municipal Ordinance Codifiers , Inc. at $85 . 00
per hour for counsel, $45 . 00 per hour for Codifier, and $20 . 00
per hour for typing revision pages for updating the Shakopee
City Code.
Offer Resolution No. 2515 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No.
2457 Adopting the 1986 Budget, and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
RESOLUTION ? 1
A RESOLUTION AHENDIrG RESOLUTION 24 57 ADOPTING THE 1986 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City Council hasa adopted a budget for the fiscal year,
and
WHEREAS, changing conditions and circumstances warrant amending the budget.
NOW, THE=ORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
KINNESOTA, that the appropriations are increased as follows:
Fund Account Amount
General 01-4310-131-13 Professional Svs. $1 , 800.00
General 01-4350-131-13 Printing $ 400.00
General 01-4511-312-31 Capital Equipment $1 , 335 .00
and the increases are offset or funded by i=xtr (decreases) in the following
accounts:
Fund Account Amount
General 01-4993-911-91 Contingency $2 , 200.00
General 01-4993-911-91 Contingency $1 , 335 .00
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of 1986.
Havor of the City of Shakopee
kTTEST.
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1986.
City Attorney
1986 MAINTENANCE PROPOSAL
TO: THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA (City) fI
FROM: MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE CODIFIERS , INC. (Revisor)
7400 Lyndale Avenue South
Minneapolis , MN 55423
THE REVISOR HEREBY PROPOSES to revise, update and maintain the
City Code of the City on a regular basis. Upon acceptance of this
Proposal, the City and the Revisor agree , as follows :
At a time agreeable to both the City and Revisor, the City
shall forward to the Revisor all ordinances adopted during the
preceding year .
Thereafter, the City and Revisor shall hold a revision
conference in the City for the purpose of reviewing City Code
provisions affected by interim court decisions and legislative
enactments. Revisor shall, as a result of such conference ,
prepare revision ordinances and submit them to the City for
adoption. Copies of the revision ordinances, after adoption,
shall be provided the Revisor and the Revisor shall prepare
substitute Code pages ready for off-set printing by the City.
The City shall provide Revisor with two copies of all substitute
pages at no cost to Revisor.
The City shall pay Revisor for such maintenance , billed semi-
annually, at the following hourly rates:
$85 .00 - Counsel
$45. 00 - Codifier
$20 . 00 - typing revision pages
(No separate charge for typing ordinances prepared by Revisor)
This Maintenance Proposal encompasses the calendar year 1986 .
This Proposal expires forty-five (45) days after the date hereof
unless previously accepted.
MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE CODIFIERS , INC.
Rodger/A. Jense , - Date
Pres ' and Counsel
THE FOREGOING PROPOSAL is hereby accepted by the City this day
of 19
Mayor
City Administrator
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council 1 /
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: 1986 Goals and Objectives UUU
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction
The comments from the Council ' s Goals and Objectives worksession
held January 28 , 1986 have been incorporated in the new Goals
and Objectives list attached for Council review and approval.
Background
The Council' s standard procedure for approval of the annual
Goals and Objectives has been to vote on the Goals and Objectives
at a regular Council meeting. The attached Goals and Objectives
incorporate all of the Goals and Objectives carried over from
1985 with new target dates established, plus the new items added
for 1986 have been edited, dated and inserted under the proper
goals and subgoals. All new items are again denoted by the
asterisks.
Councilmembers and department heads are urged to pay particular
attention to completion target dates so that they can be changed
at the Council meeting if they are unrealistic.
Alternatives
1 . Approve the Goals and Objectives as presented.
2 . Modify the Goals and Objectives as appropriate after Council
review and discussion at the Council meeting.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 1 unless Councilmembers find that
specifically listed items failed to accurately reflect our discus-
sions at the January 28th worksession.
Action Reauested
Pass a motion approving the Shakopee City Council Goals and
Objectives for 1986 as outlined on pages 1 through 18 on the
attachment dated February 4 , 1986 .
JKA/jms
COUNCIL WORKSESSION GOALS & OBJECTIVES 1986
Approved February 4, 1986
Communications
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 Objective - 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 - City staff needs to provide more public information
on the results of special organization activities such as
the Suburban Rate Authority and the MWCC's reduction in utility
rates for the City residents. Liason members should report
this at meetings and/or to the news media.
1. 12 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 2/28/86 for 1985.
1.13 Objective - 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.
" Action - Consider changes to the existing telephone system
such as ring back, outgoing lines, etc. Have a report on
alternative suggestions by March 31st.
1.14 Objective - 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! ! !
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.
1
i( `r
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.
1.15 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, 1986. (See 1.17 below)
Action - Request the Community Access Corporation to provide
a camera operator at all City Council meetings beginning March
1, 1985.
1. 16 Objective - 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.
• 1.17 Objective - Better sound system with portability.
Action - Budget for '87 or purchase in '86 a portable sound
system that provides better sound and can be used when Council
meetings are held at different locations. Obtain a free demon-
stration of an automatic microphone system and make a decision
on purchasing system by May 31st.
1.2 SUBGOAL - The City Administrator should undertake steps to resolve
personnel problems in a timely manner and improve employee morale.
1.21 Objective - Investigate 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, 1986.
1.22 Objective - 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
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.
1.23 Obiective - Implementation of comparable worth study with
minimum disruption for employees.
Action - Hold a special Council worksession with employees
to thoroughly involve them in the implementing in the comparable
worth study to insure smooth and effective implementation.
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 Objective - 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 Objective - Survey City services to determine if they are
all being used to the optimum.
Action - Review results of consultants staffing needs analysis
and costing of city services making additions in '86 with
monev set aside in contingencies and with further additions
handled through preparation of the 1987 budget.
Action - Establish a standard procedure for providing
temporary engineering personnel to optimise productivity of
permanent employees during peak city service demands. Prepare
a memo analyzing '86 staffing needs, etc. by April 30th.
Action - Set a goal to accomplish more in-house engineering
of project design engineering.
Action - Minimize attorney costs by using the City Attorney
for legal questions and call the Assistant City Attorney
only when cleared to do so by City Administrator and/or City
Attorney. Prepare a list of specific functions performed
by each attorney for distribution to Council and department
heads.
3
Action - Consider hiring a rehab specialist to sell
potential downtown rehab projects, etc. but not begin a full
code compliance program.
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. 13 Objective - Establish goals as to the City's computerization
so that we have orderly enhancement of the system.
Action - Maintain contact with SPUC for possible computer
coordination.
2.2 SUBGOAL - To strengthen the Council and to improve the efficiency
and workability of this form of municipal government.
2.21 Objective - Improve 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 - Councilmembers should call department heads and schedule
tours, review of specialized equipment and procedures (eg. snow
plowing) .
.. Action - Council members should seek to resolve problems with
staff privately and/or in executive session.
Action - Council members and staff need to review the role
of staff in processing agenda items. Staff understands its
role to be to work for each agenda item until Council as a
group votes to approve, alter, table or drop the proposal.
We do not understand our role to be one of reacting to the
"desires" of individual Council members unless those "desires"
take the form of a directive from Council as a whole.
2.22 Obiective - Council should become more involved in monitoring
involvement of commissioners and potential applicants for
commission appointments. 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 on screening potential applicants for commission/
committee screening and appointing by 7/1/86.
4
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 11/1/86.
Action - How can we solve the problem of "filling volunteer"
committee positions and provide replacement members?
2.23 Obiective - Look at the role of liaison to various commissions
and how that role is 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 Objective - 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 Objective - Would Council park/development sub-committee be
useful to coordinate efforts or park department, Community
Services, park reserves and park grants?
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 Objective - Continue advocating construction of a bridge in
the area- of County Road 18 as well as a southerly by-pass.
Action - The recent HRA survey indicated that 1,123 people
wanted an improved downtown bridge crossing and 575 people
wanted downtown redevelopment of streets and buildings. The
Cite should continue its contract with Barton Aschman & Assoc.
to complete the final brige alignment selection by September
using the Task Force as approved by Council.
Action - The HRA survey indicated a strong desire for Senior
Citizens for a pedestrian crossing on Hwy #169. Such a cross-
ing should be included in any downtown plan.
5
Action - Consensus has been achieved on the location and need
for the southerly by-pass, the County Road 18 Bridge, and
the downtown bridge replacement and Hwy. 101 realignment (note
final location is being restudied). The City must continue
to discuss all three projects together and clearly articulate
for the news media and citizens how the three projects are
inter-related and serve different needs of the community as
a whole whenever any one project is discussed.
3. 12 Objective - 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 Objective - Begin implementation of the Street Preservation
and Rehabilitation Policy that classifies how the City will
finance maintenance for all streets.
Action - Schedule 1986's systematic street maintenance program
based upon the pavement and traffic analysis study.
Action - Schedule streets to receive overlays and seal coats
in 1986 by May 1, 1986.
Action - Get the 4th Avenue Project completed in 1986.
• Action - The HRA study clearly indiacted that the second greatest
problem in Shakopee was the condition of local streets including
dips, storm sewers, pot holes, signing, speed and signals.
Policies are now in place to finance storm sewers and street
rehabilitation. Now we need to show some results through
improved streets! The street preservation program and seal
coating program should move from reactive programs to preventive
programs over the next two years.
-• Action - Improvement of the storm sewer system rec'd 99
votes on the HRA survey. The Holmes Street Basin Project
will allow us to improve the Lewis and 7th and 2nd Avenue
problem areas plus improve street drainage generally.
3.14 Objective - 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 unnecessaary 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.
6
3. 15 Objective - Improve City traffic signing.
Action - Remove yield signs and replace them with stop signs
where appropriate by 12/31/86.
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.
3.18 Objective - Upgrade or remove railroad crossing.
Action - Coordinate with traffic study done by Westwood and
approved by the Planning Commission and the Downtown Committee.
Action - Work with Rahr Malting and other nearby businesses
to consolidate railraod sidings in a manner more condusive
to good street maintenance, ride and safety.
• 3.19 Objective - Complete alignment mapping of 13th Avenue between
CR 15 (Adams Street) and CSAH 16.
Action - Direct the City Engineer by formal Council action
to prepare the alignment plans by December, 1986. Coordinate
plans with Jackson Township.
3.19A Obiective - Review by Council and appropriate staff the Block
50/Alley Improvements.
Action - Schedule on site inspection with all parties in April
of 1986.
3. 19B Obiective - Evaluate in the abstract what subsidy per passenger
(maximum) makes sense 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.
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
7
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 6/1/86.
3.19D Objective - Adopt a records retention schedule and begin
planning in preparation for micro filming all city records.
Action - Take action directing the City Clerk to present an
implementation time table to Council for Council action by
March 31st.
3.2 SUBGOAL - Improve regulations, compliance and land use thru zoning
of property within the City.
3.21 Objective - 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, 1986.
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.
Action - Provide a smooth, efficient implementation of the
rezoning study recommendations by the Hoisington Group by
May 1986.
3.3 SUBGOAL - Improve the management of City owned property (parks,
buildings, etc. ) .
• 3.31 Objective - Beautification of City levee property along the
Minnesota River Valley Trail.
- Action - Select one or more civic groups to provide the matching
grant for the LAWCON grant project such as the Lions Club
(note: The- City Council has directed the Engineering Staff
to prepare specifications for bid letting to clean up the
big items in this area and the area to the West along the
new trail).
3.32 Objective - 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.
3.33 Objective - Place ALPHA ownership file on computer.
Action - Complete by 6/1/85.
8
3.4 SUBGOAL - Monitor appropriate level of Community Services Department
programs.
3.41 Objective - The Community Services Department should deal
with the issue of township financial support for Community
Services.
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 Objective - 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 1986.
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 - NSP negotiations still underway.
3.55 Objective - Finalize TIF financing for storm sewer projects
such as the Holmes Street Basin and the Upper Valley Drainage
Project, and for the Downtown Streetscape improvements, and
the highway projects by conducting any necessary hearings,
analysis, etc. by March 31st. This financing will be effected
by the new Federal Legislation that is currently pending.
3.6 SUBGOAL - To improve and make more efficient park services to the
public.
3.61 Objective - 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 1986.
3.7 SUBGOAL - Improve the current "perspective" citizens have of police
officer's overall concern for the citizens.
3.71 Objective - 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,
9
) I �,
junk ordinances, etc. ) and the level of expected enforcement
after discussing this with City Council.
Action - Enforce park rules.
3.72 Objective - review police patroling methods for 1st Avenue.
Action--- Increase patroling and issue tickets for vehicles
that fail to stop. Have our consultant estimate the cost
of providing more patrolling after the initial study is completed.
3.73 Objective - Keep Council informed on police arrest activities.
Action - Provide Council with an informational item on monthly
arrests by local police. Have our consultant estimate the
cost and time needed to provide quarterly activity reports
after the initial study is completed.
3.8 SUBGOAL - Reduce the cost of services provided citizens through
the City's sanitary sewer system.
3.81 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.
3.82 Objective - Provide some type of financial relief for sewer
back-up clean-up.
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 7/1/86.
Action - have this issue reviewed by our risk manager.
3.9 SUBGOAL - Periodically review regulating ordinances.
Physical 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 program 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.
10
11�-
Action - Drainage analysis for the joint powers agreements
and a letter from MN/Dot combining the drainage with By-pass.
Action - Activate Water Management Organization (WMO) for
Shakopee Basin and develop rough draft of plan by December
of 1986.
4. 12 Objective - Drainage problems, (1) 2nd Avenue and (2) 4th
and Minnesota.
Action - No action scheduled for (2) in 1986, (1) will be
resolved with Holmes St. Basin Project.
4. 13 Objective - 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 - Hire an architectural firm for analysis of the final
two sites, assistance in the bond sale, and providing final
architectural services for the construction of a new City
Hall. Note: There were very few comments on the HRA survey
regarding the need for a new City Hall.
Action - Select and acquire a site for a new City Hall by
7/1/86.
Action - Determine a preliminary time frame for construction
and bond election by 11/1/86.
Action - Try to tie to a revenue source.
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.
4.13A Objective - Make the present City Hall facilities more ef-
ficient by making small changes prior to the construction
of a new City Hall.
- Action - Increase the Engineering office space to optimize
equipment utilization.
Action - Provide a space that will allow Community Development
to have its own discret space.
Action - Make inexpensive changes within City Hall to fa-
cilitate smoother operations.
- Action - Provide more conference rooms for meetings, interns,
etc.
11
4.14 Objective - Support SPUC in continued Waterline looping.
Action - On-going job of SPDC. Develop policies that support
looping.
4. 15 Objective - 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 Objective - 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).
4.17 Objective - 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 Objective - 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.
Action - Pursue construction of a 100 unit multi-family housing
project in 1986-87.
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.
12
l f F
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.
Action - Develop specific priorities for economic development
activities.
5. 12 Objective - 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 streetscape design and bridge alignment
design.
Action - Do additional downtown concept plans after the bridge/-
junction alignment is set. Plan to address institutional
development and parking needs.
5. 13 Obiective - Establish 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 Main Street application for 1986.
5.14. Objective - 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, 1986.
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 of Directors to reactivate it.
5.16 Objective - Continue 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.
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.
13
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 Objective - 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 6/1/86.
5.32 Objective - MWCC Study - may need reimbursement followup.
Action - Process claimes for SAC reimbursements in 1986
if legislation passes.
5.4 SUBGOAL - Create the financing for key development needs.
5.41 Objective - 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 - 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 to avoid negative
affect on taxes and a policy on City benefit from each project
by 3/1/86.
Environmental
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.
14
6.11 Objective - Follow hazardous waste siting process. V,
Action - On-going. Shakopee's industrial park has been included.
Our Building Inspector is on the committee.
6.12 Objective - Intensify beautification efforts of City in 1986.
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 Objective - Could the City provide more types of housing?
Action - Staff should renew contacts with potential residential
developers 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.
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.
Action - The HRA survey indicated that 444 people wanted more
low and moderate income housing and 107 people wanted a housing
rehabilitation program.
7. 12 Objective - Encourage development of areas with unique problems
such as Section 6, north of County Road 16 now served with
E 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 role does City/HRA wish 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 12/31/86.
15
Intergovernmental 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 Objective - The City should attempt to coordinate policies
with Scott County and SPUC where possible.
Action - This would include salary, personnel, benefit, work
rule, and other policies that the administrators of each unit
could review for coordination.
8. 12 Objective - 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.
8.13 Objective - 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 Objective - Develop a better bond/unity between the City of
Shakopee and SPUC 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.
16
01
8.3 SUBGOAL - The City of Shakopee should respond to State and regional
policies, regulation and taxes that affect Shakopee's citizens.
8.31 Objective - 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 Objective - 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 Objective - 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.
Action - Begin implementation by 7/1/86.
• 8.34 Objective - Assist the Chamber of Commerce and establishing
a permanent information booth at Memorial Park.
Action - Work to create a new log Chamber of Commerce building
at Memorial Park where the temporary building was located
in 1985. Try to have this accomplished by the tourist season
in 1986 with little or no City funding.
Action - Assist the Chamber of Commerce Committee assigned
to establish, "Welcome to Shakopee Signs" at the three major
highway entrances to Shakopee.
8.35 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 Countv 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.
17
8.41 Objective - 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 10/1/86.
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 Objective - Withdraw City of Shakopee land from Prior Lake/Spring
Lake Watershed District.
Action - Complete petition to withdraw by 11/1/86.
18
T0: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
FE: Property Tax on City Property
DATE: January 29, 1986
Introduction and Background
The City has received a property tax statement for the first time for parcel
number 27-001161-0. This is lot A and the West 20 feet of lot B, block 30,
East Shakopee plat. There is no street address but it is Malkerson's new
car lot. It is mostly paved and used by Malkerson's for years. The assessor
has finally put it on the rolls because a private party is getting benefit
from it. The amount of the tax for 1985, payable 1986 is $1 ,561 .38.
There is also an alley (undeveloped) running behind Happy Chef. The
City should consider vacating it and turning it back to surrounding owners,
subject to a utility easement for SPUC.
Alternatives
1 . Bill Malkerson's for the amount of the tax.
2. Negoiate a lease with Malkerson's including the tax.
3. Negoiate a sale to Malkerson's with the tax figured into the settlement.
4. City pay the tax.
5. Put the lot up for sale.
6. Take no action on the vacation.
7. Initiate vacation proceedings.
Recommendation
Alternatives 3 and 7.
Action. Requested
Move to declare parcel number 27-004161-0 surplus property to be sold
and start vacation proceeding for the alley in block 30, East Shakopee plat,
subject to a utility easement.
RESOLUTION NO. 2516
A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE VACATION OF THE
PUBLIC ALLEY IN BLOCK 30,
ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF EAST SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS , there exists a 16 foot alley lying within Block 30
of the plat of East Shakopee; and
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City
Council that the said alley serves no public use or interest; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing must be had before such action
can be taken and two weeks published and posted notice thereof must
be given.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that a hearing be held in the Council
Chambers on the 4th 'day of March, 1986 at 7: 35 p.m. , or there-
after, on the matter of vacating the 16 foot alley lying within
Block 30 of the plat of East Shakopee.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that two weeks published notice be
given by publication in the SHAKOPEE VALLEY NEWS and posted notice
be given by two weeks posting a copy of such notice on the bulletin
board in the Shakopee City Hall and on the bulletin board in the
First National Bankand one on the bulletin board in the main floor
of the Scott County Courthouse.
Adopted in session of the Shakopee City
Council held this day of , 1986.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form thf s
day of 1986 .
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk = �
RE: Ordinance No. 188
Amending the City Code Relating to Insurance Coverage
for Business Licensing
DATE: January 30 , 1986
Introduction and Background
On January 7 , 1986 Council directed the preparation of an
ordinance amending the City Code Eliminating the requirement
for liability insurance for taxicab licenses coinciding with
licensing period, except those of local licenses.
The City Attorney has prepared the attached ordinance for
Council action.
Alternatives
a. Adopt Ordinance No. 188.
b. Don' t adopt Ordinance No. 188 .
Recommended Action
Offer Ordinance No. 188 , An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee
Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 6 Entitled "Other Business
Regulation and Licensing" by Repealing Sec 6 . 10 and by enacting
a New Sec. 6 . 10 as hereinafter Setout and by Adopting by
Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 6 . 00 which
Among Other Things Contain Penalty Provisions , and move its
adoption.
JSC/jms
ORDINANCE NO._ 188
Fourth Series.
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 6
Entitled "Other Business Regulation and Licensing" by Repealing Sec 6.10
and by enacting a New Sec6.10 as hereinafter Setout and by Adopting by
Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 6.99 which Among Other
Things Contain Penalty Provisions
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
SECTION' I Shakopee City Code Section 6.10 is hereby repealed.
SECTION II Shakopee City Code is Further Amended by Adding a New Section 6.10 as
follows:
Insurance requirements - Whenever insurance is required by a section of
this chapter, after approval by the Council, but before the license shall
issue, the applicant shall file with the City Clerk a policy or certificate
of public liability insurance showing (1) that the limits are at least as
high as required, (2) that the coverage is effective for at least the license
term approved except in the case of a non-local licensee, and (3) that such
insurance will not be cancelled or terminated without(30) thirty days written
notice served upon the City Clerk. Cancellation or termination of such
coverage shall be grounds for license revocation.
SECTION III PENALTIES
Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
applicable to the entire City Code including Penalty for Violation" and Section 6.99
entitled "Violation a Petty Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by
reference as though repeated verbatim herein.
SECTION IV When in Force and Effect
After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance,it shall be
published one in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full
force and effect on and after the date of such publication.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of , 1986.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
27th day of January, 1986.
ity Attorney
Published in the Shakopee Valley- News this
day of 1986.