Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
02/25/1986
_ r MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: February 21 , 1986 1 . The City received a very nice thank you note and phone call from Howard Jones who had received flowers from the City while in the hospital. He is recovering nicely. We also received a thank you note from Roy Baker who received flowers while in the hospital recovering from By-Pass surgery. 2 . In September the Employee Benefit Administration Company conducted its annual safety inspection of City vehicles and facilities. They sited 12 items for which they made recommended changes affecting three City departments. All recommended changes have been made except final appiicati.on of anti-slip material on fire vehicle running boards which has been scheduled to be completed. 3 . City Administrator evaluation of all department heads was completed February 13 , 1986 . 4. City Council had tabled an item penalizing the cable company for not meeting its deadline on installation of the character generator. This item had remained on the table during franchise amendment negotiations and has been resolved in the City' s favor as part of those negotiations leading to franchise amendments. Because of its inclusion in this package, I am dropping it from my list of agenda follow-up items. If you have questions regarding this please contact me. 5 . The Scott County Coalition on roads will be participating in the Minnesota Fly-In for roads in Washington D.C. The Coalition will be represented by one County Commissioner, the County Highway Engineer and a representative from Canterbury Downs, either Fred Corrigan or Bruce Malkerson. 6 . The American Legion and Knights of Columbus are applying to the State Gambling Board for renewal of their gambling license. They are in compliance with the Shakopee code relating to gambling, so no action is necessary by the City. 7 . Attached is a memorandum from Tom Brownell regarding the Police Department' s "post mortem" on the affect of the Racetrack on Police Department activities. Council had requested this report and as you can see in the recommendation Tom suggests we check the track again after a full season before we arrive at any conclusions. If you have questions regarding the report please contact Tom. 8 . The City Council had included in its 1985 goals and objectives the creation of a master list of seasonal publication dates . That list is attached for your information and will be monitored by our office which will contact the department head involved prior to the beginning of each month. 9 . Attached is a memo from Rod Krass updating the Capesius Agency on the status of various lawsuits the City has been involved in. In addition to the list covered by our Inter- national Insurance Company policy the City is proceeding with two other cases . The first is the 10th Avenue lawsuit initiated by the City and the second is a pending lawsuit against NSP over their unwillingness to relocate their poles in the public right-of-way along 4th Avenue where we are currently making roadways improvements. We currently have sent NSP an official notice giving them 10 days to commit to us in writing that they will move the poles. If they do not move the poles we will commence legal action. Rod Krass will be present at the Council meeting to further discuss this issue when we break for the executive session on labor negotiations. 10 . Attached is the notice to the League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference in Duluth June 17-20 . Please call Jeanette so reservations can be made for a hotel. Indicate to her whether you want a single or double room occupancy and for which nights you want reservations. June 17th is a regular Council meeting night so we assume most reservations will be for the 18th and 19th. 11. Attached is a letter from Judy Cox to the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board noting that the City of Shakopee does object to the Minnesota Deer Hunters Assocation, PO Box 413 , Grand Rapids, Mn, request for a charitable gambling license at the K of C Hall because they do not meet local requirements . 12. Attached is a memorandum that was sent by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) to all septage waste transport haulers regarding the new disposal site at Blue Lake Treatment Plant. This dumping site had been approved by City Council some time ago and implementation of the site had been held up pending MWCC action. Please note we will have some additional administrative responsibilities at least during the first year of this operation. 13 . Attached is a copy of a letter from Glenn Purdue, Counsel for the Suburan Rate Authority ( SRA) , to Senator Neil Dieterich, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Utilities , regarding the SRA' s interest in intervening to propose changes to the ethical code of conduct regulating the activities of public utility commissioners, their staff and the regulated utilities themselves. This intervention has grown out of the recent revalations regarding public utility commissioners accepting positions with the utilities they regulate prior to leaving the commission itself. 14 . Attached is a thank you letter from Orr-Schelen-Mayerson and Associates, the firm we contract with for general civil engineering services. 15. Attached is a letter from senator i3op` 6cnrhrt-z-re-�—pUiTc3`fiig to City Council ' s comments regarding the Governor' s proposal for cutting back local government aid to resolve the state budget problems. 16 . Attached is a letter from Representative Chuck Dimler outlining the Independent-Republican (IR) intentions to balance the state budget while avoiding cuts in local government aid and school aid that would result in higher property taxes. Chuck' s letter pre-dated legislative proposals that have since been introduced and passed by House Committees that have eliminated or minimized cuts in local government aid and school aids by putting the major portion of the cuts on State government. 17. Attached is a mailing from the League of Minnesota Cities requesting that cities "sign up" and pledge a certain number of hours of work over the next four week legislative session to fight the proposed cuts in local government aid to cities. Shakopee ' s cuts in local government aid and homestead credits would amount to $60 , 056 in 1985 if the cuts are passed as proposed by the Governor. If you are interested in volunteering some time please contact me and I will forward the pledge sheets to the League. BECAUSE THE IRs ARE MAKING A MAJOR PUSH TO ELIMINATE A CUT IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID FROM THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL, GREGG AND I BELIEVE IT IS PREMATURE TO SPEND A LARGE AMOUNT OF TIME WORKING ON ALTERNATIVES TO ADDRESS THE CUTS. JURIS- DICTIONS WITH LARGER AMOUNTS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AID AND HENCE LARGER CUTS WILL UNDERSTANDABLY BE WORKING ON CONTINGENCY PLANS MUCH SOONER THAN WE NEED TO FOCUS ON SUCH PLANS. 18 . Attached are two memorandums updating all jurisdictions participating in the joint compensation study (comparable worth study) . 19. Attached is a notice regarding Northwestern Bell' s rate changes. These rate changes cover only private lines and therefore the Suburban Rate Authority does not feel that cities need to get actively involved in opposing the rate change. 20 . Attached is the Building Activity Report for the monthly ending January 31 , 1986 . 21 . Attached are the minutes of January 27 , 1986 meeting of the Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory Commission. 22 . Attached are the minutes of the February 6 , 1986 meeting of the Shakopee Coalition. 23 . Attached are the minutes of the January 29 , 1986 meeting of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. 24 . Attached are the minutes of the January 6 , 1986 meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. 25 . Attached is the monthly calendar for March. 26 . Attached is a memo from Barry Stock regarding Public Access Manager Non-Compliance. 27 . Attached is Revenue and Expenditure Report as of 1/31/86 . JKA/jms TO: Mayor, Council Members FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Canterbury Downs Report DATE: January 31 , 1986 INTRODUCTION Council requested a police report regarding traffic and police service required at Canterbury Downs during the 1985 season. BACKGROUND Traffic problems: It is a well discussed fact that traffic congestion was a serious problem and will continue until major road construction is undertaken. Traffic in the residential area will probably sub- stantially increase as motorists attempt to avoid First Avenue. We noticed a southerly shift onto Fourth and Tenth Avenues. The department expended $3 , 000 in non-budgeted overtime funds directing traffic at the intersection of First and Holmes. The installation of stop signs on East Fourth Avenue at Shenandoah Drive should reduce vehicular speeds in the area and reduce the number of accidents experienced in 1985 . Non-traffic Police Services: Attached is a report complied by Canterbury Downs Security Department relative to on-site problems. The employees or patrons of the track did not have an impact on the community of any signifigance. Due to the short season, it is felt that 1986 will reveal a better evaluation of the track and its impact on the community and required services. The following statistical information was compiled from the 1985 Meet . #1 Assault Aggrevated Total 19 -Stable employees 14 -Patron-Patron 3 -Patron-Employee 2 #2 Alarms Total 76 -False Alarms 64 -Fires 4 -Hazard situations 6 -Possible fires 2 #3 Harassment Total 17 -Stable Area 11 -Employee-Patron 3 -Employee-Employee 3 #4 Intoxification - Druck Disorderly Total 25 -Patron 16 -Stable Area 4 -Employee 3 -Other 2 #5 Eviction Total 21 -Stable Area 21 #6 Juvenile Total 59 -Illegal betting 41 -Unescorted 3 -Lost Child 10 -Abandoned Child 2 -Child Abuse 2 -Runaway 1 RECENED NOV -12 10b. 7 #7 Burglary Total 3 -Stable Area 2 -Frontside 1 #8 Theft Total 110 -Auto 2 -Theft from auto 9 -Theft in stable 37 -Theft in main facility 27 -From person 25 -By check 2 -Other 8 #9 Accident Total 73 -Employee motorvehicle 5 -Patron motorvehicle 32 -Canterbury motorvehicle 9 -Motorcycle 12 -Hit and Run 13 -Property damage 2 #10 Vandalism - Criminal damage to property Total 16 -Auto 12 -Other 4 #11 MRC Rulings Total 152 #12 Controlled Substance Total 14 #13 Assist other police agencies Total 4 #14 TRPB Rulings Total 22 #15 Disorderly Conduct -Domestic dispute, fighting, disturbance Total 59 Emp ogee 6 Patron 22 Stable 31 7 #16 Medical - Patron, Employee, Horses , Jockeys, Hotwalkers, Grooms Total 236 Patrons 115 Employee 89 Stable 30 Other 2 #17 TRPB Reports and Investigations Total 82 TOTAL OF ALL REPORTS 993 List of Seasonal Public Service Notices Publications Utility* Chamber Bills Newspaper Radio Cable TV Newsletter Month Jan Feb Home Occu- Home Occu- Home Occu- Home Occu- Portable pation Ord. pation Ord. pation Ord. pation Ord. Sign Ord. Labor Survey Mar Dog Ord. Dog Ord. Dog Ord. Dog Ord. Apr Clean-up Clean-up Clean-up Clean-up Clean-up Campaign Campaign Campaign Campaign Campaign May Weed Notice Weed Notice Weed Notice Weed Notice Weed Notice June Annual Annual Annual Annual Annual Sidewalk Sidewalk Sidewalk Sidewalk Sidewalk Repair Repair Repair Repair Repair Program Program Program Program Program July Aug Budget & Budget & Budget & RS Hearing RS Hearing RS Hearing Sept Cable Access Cable Access Cable Access Cable Access Oct Community Community Community Survey Survey Survey Nov Winter Winter Winter Winter Winter Parking Ord Parking Ord Parking Ord Parking Ord Parking Ord Notice of Notice of Notice of Actual Use Actual Use Actual Use Report RFS Report RFS Report RFS Notice of Notice of Notice of Adopted Adopted Adopted Budget Budget Budget Dec Sidewalk Ord Sidewalk Ord Sidewalk Ord Sidewalk Ord Sidewalk Ord Snowmobile Snowmobile Snowmobile Snowmobile Ord Ord Ord Ord *Recycling notices to be inserted when space available (as budget permits). F F 1 3 $ LAW OFFICES KRASS & MONROE �°`�,� <�.a- � - "'A` FE CHARTERED Marschall Road Business Center Phillip R. Krass 327 Marschall Road P.O. Box 216 Dennis L. Monroe Barry K. Meyer Shakopee. Minnesota 55379 Trevor R. Walsten Telephone 445-5080 Peter L. Cooper Livery Building Elizabeth B. McLaughlin 218 Pine Street Bryan Wm. Huber P.O. Box 316 Susan L. Estill Chaska. Minnesota 55318 February 7, 1986 Telephone 448.7666 Capesius Agency, Inc. ATTN: Sue Sichmeller P.O. Box 97 First National Bank Bldg. Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: International Insurance Co. Policy 524-062342-8 Public Officials & Employees Liability Coverage City of Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Sue: Thank you for your letter of February 3rd asking for an update on the lawsuits listed therein. The status of those files is as follows: 1 . In the matter of Chard vs. City of Shakopee, we have success- fully obtained a summary judgment motion dismissing Mr. Chard's claim against the City. Mr. Chard has appealed that summary judgment to the Minnesota Court of Appeals. That appeal is pending. 2. In the matter of Wangerin, Inc. , that suit is still pending. Discovery is proceeding and the City is, in fact, just a bit player in this litigation which is essentially between the contractor and owner of the K-Mart property and Wangerin, Inc. , a subcontractor. The City's only involvement was as a conduit for the land through a tax increment financing district. Nonetheless, we have been unable to successfully dismiss the claims against the City despite two attempts at summary judgment. 3. The Lindstrand and Grayson suit against the City was tried several years ago and the City prevailed. Lindstrand and Grayson obtained no money damages at all. 4. Richard's Pub suits against the City, one in Scott County District Court and one in Federal District Court, have both been volun- tarily dismissed by the Plaintiff. 5. The Albert DuBois claim has, to the best of my knowledge, been taken care of. 6. The Farmer-Bugher suit against the City was tried many years ago and the City prevailed and there were no damages assessed. Ms. Sue Sichmeller Page Two February 7, 1986 7. The Muhlenhardt suit against the City was dismissed upon the City's motion for summary judgment. 8. The Scott County Lumber and Bert Notermann suit against the City for a conditional use permit to operate a gravel pit is pending. Discovery has not yet commenced. Should you need more detailed information on any of these matters, please don't hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED Phillip R. Krass PRK:ph File #1-1373-1 cc ; Mr. John Anderson Northern States Power Company Normandale Division io oft 5309 West 70th Street Edina,Minnesota 55435 Telephone(612)941-2992 ' k TY OF February 3 , 1986 Mr . Phillip R. Krass Krass & Monroe Chartered Marschall Road Business Center 327 Marschall Road P. 0 . Box 216 Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr . Krass : Thank you for your letter of December 16 , 1985 regarding the Fourth Avenue reconstruction . We have again researched and reviewed this matter and have arrived at the same conclusion as indicated in our original letter to Mr . Warzala dated November 20 , 1985 . We do not agree thatthe poles in their present, position pose a danger, to the driving public . Their position to the driven roadway is relatively the same as before. Based on Shakopee ' s plans of the project , the paved portion of Fourth Avenue will be 14 feet from centerline to the edge of the blacktop. Our closest pole to the edge of the blacktop will be 13 feet. or 27 feet from centerline . From our prospective the project affected the roadway in two basic ways : it upgraded and widened the shoulder areas and it widened the blacktop portion of the road by 1 foot. on each side of centerline . That widening brought the paved road l foot closer to our poles but still left a 13 foot separation to the nearest. pole . We believe that is appropriate, reasonable, and does not. require NSP ratepayers to bear the financial burden of relocating our facilities . We are in agreement. that Shakopee should not lose state funding for the project based on our difference of opinion regarding the pole move. We believe the state' s financial involvement in the project is far greater than our request for reimbursement . Good business practices would indicate that acquiring substantial state financial aid while paying a modest relocation charge to NSP would be prudent . f Mr. Phillip Krass February 3 , 1986 Page 2 NSP is prepared to relocate our facilities and can begin that process soon . We believe , however, that we are justified in being reimbursed for that. relocation . We again ask the City to sign the appropriate contracts for $18, 297 . 00 and return them to me. Once the contracts are received, we can schedule a crew to being the necessary work . Sincerely, Stuart Stuart E . Fraser Staff Assistant. SEF : pe cc: Ralph Towler, Senior Attorney John Anderson , City Administrator MEMORANDUM TO: Rod FROM: Lyn DATED: December 9, 1985 RE: Shakopee's Dispute With NSP Over Repositioning of Power Lines You asked me to research the question of whether or not the City of Shakopee can require NSP to move its poles further back into the public access without having to pay for the repositioning. My research indicates that NSP is required to relocate the power lines at the City's request and at no cost to the City. The basic law regarding the City's ability to regulate a utility is set forth in the case of Village of Blaine v. Independent School District No. 12, 272 Minn. 343, 138 N.W.2nd 32 (1965) . In that case, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that pursuant to Minn. Stat. 300.04 that: "The furnishing of heat, light, power, and gas also is properly within the scope of the police power and therefore subject to control and regulation by a municipality." Minn. Stat. 300.04 is the statute which gives a municipality power to regu- late a utility. Pertinent in part, the statute provides : "The corporation obtaining a franchise from a city is subject to conditions and restrictions as from time to time are imposed upon it by the city." The Court in Blaine went on to say that: "No one disputes that the police power, to whatever extent it has been invested by the legislature and municipalities such as cities and villages, has application to the furnishing of water, heat, light , power, gas and other essential public services . Utilities furnishing such services must be subject to reasonable regulations in order to properly protect the consumer and the public." Blaine at 39. Although there is not a Minnesota case which deals specifically with a city requiring a utility to move a power line, I was able to locate a Michigan case that is fairly similar to this dispute. In Michigan Bell Telephone Company v. City of Detroit, Mich. App. , 308 N.W.2d 608, the telephone company demanded that it be compensated for having to relocate its telephone lines as a result of the city vacating certain streets . In holding that the city was not required to compensate the utility, the Court held: "At common, and in most recent cases to consider this issue, the right of the public utility to use public streets is subject to the right of the local government to require the utility to relo- Cate its lines and facilities at its own expense when made necessary by considerations of public health and welfare." The Court then goes on to cite 12 cases from various jurisdictions around the country which cite the same rule. Based upon the general rule in Minnesota that municipalities can regulate utilities in order to protect the public and the case law from other jurisdictions which specifically state that a utility must relocate its own lines at its own expense to facilitate a municipality's public improvements , it is clear that NSP must relocate its power line, at its own expense. NSP claims that it is not required to pay for the relocation of the power lines since they are only being relocated to qualify the city for state aid not for the public's health, safety, and welfare. (See letter from NSP dated November 20, 1985. ) NSP's position is untenable. Originally the power lines in question were 17 feet from the roadway. Now, after the improvements , the power lines are at the most 10 to 13 feet away from the edge of the paved portion of Fourth Avenue and at the most only a couple of feet away from the shoulder of the road. I base these figures on the distances quoted in the letters from Barton-Aschman and NSP regarding this dispute. I drove out there and it appeared to me that the power lines were even closer to the road than this. However, at any rate, the City has a strong argument that the power lines must be set back further from the road to protect the public welfare, particularly in light of the increased traffic stemming from Canterbury Downs. The fact that this move to protect the public welfare also qualifies them for state aid should have no affect on NSP's responsibility to relocate the poles. In fact, it seems ridicu- lous to me that NSP would make such a claim. It is obvious that the sole reason the state requires a 30-foot recovery zone is to make the road safer to drive upon and thus protect the public welfare. For NSP to claim that they are not required to relocate the power lines because the purpose of the relocation is not to benefit the public safety and welfare but rather to qualify the City for state aid is ridiculous since the whole purpose for meeting the state aid requirements is to promote the public safety and welfare. I spoke with David Warzala at Barton-Aschman regarding this dispute. He seems to feel that the NSP representative who is handling this dispute, Stuart Fraser, knows that NSP is obligated to bear the costs of the relocating but is just making a half-hearted attempt to get Shakopee to foot the bill. I would also point out that there might be a misun- derstanding upon the part of NSP. In his letter of November 20, 1985, Mr. Fraser says : "In general, NSP will relocate its facilities situated in public right-of-way when it is reasonably necessary for the public's health, safety, and welfare. For instance, NSP usually bears the costs of relocations when its facilities are in the way of a public improvement such as water and sewer installations, curb and gutter installations , or widening of driven roadways." He then goes on to say: "NSP's poles and overhead lines in no way obstruct the construc- tion improvements . NSP's facilities are in the same basic rela- tionship to the driven roadway as they were when first installed. t. To our knowledge their location has not affected past roadway sur- face improvements or caused any difficulties for the traveling public." It appears to me that NSP/Mr. Fraser may think that Fourth Avenue was only repaved and not widened. I have not had a chance to proofread this memo. I, therefore, apologize if it is disjointed and somewhat unorganized. Northern States Power Company l i Normandale Division 5309 West 70th Street Edina,Minnesota 55435 Telephone(612)941-2992 November 20, 1985 NOV 2 ' 1985 CITY Mr. David B . Warzala Barton-Aschman Associates , Inc. 1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis , MN 55454 Dear Mr. Warzala: Thank you for your letter of October 23, 1985 regarding the street improvements on Fourth Avenue in the City of Shakopee. The electric line in question is a three-phase overhead distribu- tion line located on the north side of Fourth Avenue and extending westerly from County Road 83. Our records indicate that the first poles were installed in 1947 to serve a few residential customers and the line was upgraded and reconductered in 1973 to serve the B . F. Nelson Mfg. Co. (Certain-Teed Products Corp. ) . The poles are located approximately seventeen feet from the edge of the driven roadway and are in the same location as the original installation. Northern States Power has , at the City of Shakopee' s request , designed a project to relocate the poles to private right of way within a utility easement to be acquired by the City. We have submitted construction permits to the City which have been approved. In general , NSP will relocate its facilities situated in public right of way when it is reasonably necessary for the public' s health, safety, and welfare. For instance, NSP usually bears the cost of relocations when its facilities are in the way of a public improvement such as water and sewer installations , curb and gutter installations , or widening of driven roadways . Based on our understanding of the Fourth Avenue project , it does not meet a test of reasonableness for the relocation of facilities at NSP expense. This was communicated to the City staff after we were first informed of the project . NSP' s poles and overhead lines in no way obstruct the construction improvements . NSP' s facilities are in the same basic relation- ship to the driven roadway as they were when first installed. To our knowledge their location has not affected past roadway surface improvements or caused any difficulties for the traveling public. We are aware of the City' s desire to have the State participate in financing of the project , and that the State has made up some requirements or guidelines for participation. However, NSP does ®t o. 331?3`I Z not believe ratepayers should bear the financial burden of relocating facilities to accommodate the City of Shakopee' s request for state aid when our facilities in no way obstruct the planned improvement . We do not believe that the State standards for financial participation meet the test of reasonableness as applied to NSP facilities in general or to this particular case . We are prepared to relocate our facilities within a reasonable time frame if the City reimburses us for the cost , a sum of $18, 297. 00 . To accomplish this we request that the City sign the previously submitted contracts and return them so we can expedite this project . Please contact me if there are additional questions . Sincerely, Stuart E . Fraser Staff Assistant "` cc: John Anderson , City of Shakopee a� 1986 LMC Annual Spend an exciting two or three s da in Duluth this J y June and put your time to practical use, too! June 17_ The 198LMC Annual Conference will be in 20 Duluth June 17-20, a week later than the original plans for June 10-13 in Rochester. The 1987 conference will be in Rochester. The League thanks the City of Duluth for its willingness to host the League's annual event. City officials always enjoy their stay in that I i city. t And, the League looks forward to the 1987 conference in Rochester when new convention facilities will enhance Rochester's hosting of the session. m Mark your calendars--June 17-20 and plan on meeting in Duluth for another educational and enjoyable LMC Annual Conference. l` �•n� I � / IIIIII�I���II I ���II��I�I ��������I�� i���ll Illlillllltllllll iii�tit III I i����ii�, f i � .,, � �Il�lllrlllll►� � . ...l,j III►,�Il�lhllllllll � I��iii���►������I���I � ��� �J.III II � f � II � I Ilula��r„r„ IIII11����1�1111rlull,t�lllll�,�l�►tillll�ll,llttuiitluti IIIII�I����������IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII������II���IIlillll�������� CITY OF SHAKOPEE INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379-1376 (612) 445.3650 f^ t F. February 18, 1986 Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board 900 Summit State Bank Building 310 4th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 Attn. Mr. Roger Swanson Dear Mr. Swanson: The City of Shakopee has no objections to the Minnesota River Valley Chapter of the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, 734 Minnesota Street , Shakopee , Minnesota, conducting gambling at the K of C Hall in Shakopee provided it is done in conformance with State Law and is licensed by the Charitable Gambling Control Board. The City of Shakopee does object to the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, P.O . Box 413, Grand Rapids, Minnesota, conducting gambling at the K of C Hall in Shakopee because they do not meet the requirements of the Shakopee City Code . Sincerely, )- 1 / Judith S . Cox C`�i-ty Clerk CC : City Council The Heart of Progress Valley AN EQUAL OPPOPTUNITv EMPLOvPP MUR©POLITAn WAJTE conTR©L Cofnmiff14n Twin cwsRrea February 10, 1986 To: All Waste Transport Haulers From: Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) Subject: Reporting Reminder and Disposal Site Information As required, most permitted Waste Transport Haulers have submitted the discharge report for the July 1 to December 31, 1985 period. Please be aware that this is an ongoing requirement, and that you should be keeping accurate records now for the report due on July 15, 1986 for the January 1 to June 30 period. Regarding disposal sites, two existing disposal sites will be closed as of February 17, 1986. The two sites are: 1. Shorewood - Covington Road west of Vinehill Road South 2. Prior Lake - Pike Lake Trail N.E. (by the lake) After February 17, 1986, Waste Transport Haulers shall not utilize the above two sites for disposal purposes. Also on February 17, 1986, a disposal site at the MWCC Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant will be opened for use. The treatment plant is located in Shakopee, on the north side of Highway 101, about 1J miles east of the Valley Fair Amusement Park (the address is 6957 Highway 101) . Use of this site is subject to the following conditions: 1. The site will be open for use between the hours of 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM, seven days per week. 2. On the first occasion of use, you must go into the front door of the treatment plant administration building during the office hours of 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM. Identify yourself, and plant personnel will show you the disposal site location and where the sign-in sheet is. 3. You must sign in each time you use the disposal site. A sign-in sheet will be located in the Screen Building (plant personnel will show you this on the first ocassion of use) . 350 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 612-222-8423 Waste Transport Haulers 2 February 10, 1986 4. When discharging loads of septage, be sure to avoid any spillage and keep the area clean. This disposal site is to be used for septic tank wastes or domestic holding tank wastes only (any industrial or hazardous wastes are prohibited). 5. Since no Load Charges will be assessed by the MWCC during 1986 (as explained in the January 6, 1986, letter sent to Waste Transport Haulers) , volume charges must be paid to the City of Shakopee by Waste Transport Haulers using the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant disposal site. This will be for 1986 only, and you must contact Eileen in the City of Shakopee Finance Department (City Hall , 129 E. First Avenue) to make arrangements for payments. If you have questions about the above matters, please call me at 772-7108. The MWCC Septage Management Program was adopted by the Commission during November, 1985. Final copies of the program document will be sent to you in the near future, and implementation activities will occur soon. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely yours, Leo H. Hermes, P.E. Industrial Waste Manager MWCC Industrial Waste Section LHH:pf CC: City of Shorewood City of Prior Lake City of Shakopee 13 LeFc1 c•r� . Let Icl, Int►t►it((k r I )'I;ric►� it I)►awz 1 1'udr..i�rnal CITY 07 2000 First Bank Place Voest February 10 1986 MirrnearyAs Minnesota 55402 e ephone(612)333-0543 l elecopier(612)333-0540 Clayton L. LeFevere Herbert Lefler J Dennis O'Brien Senator Neil Dieterich John E. Drawz Chairman David J Kennedy Senate Committee on Public Utilities John B Dean g Glenn E. Purdue and State Regulated Industries Richard J. Schieffer 2171 Knapp Street Charles L. LeFevere S t. Paul , MN 55108 Herbert P. Lefler III James J. Thornson, J Thomas R. Galt Representative Elton Redalen Dayle Nolan Chairman Brian G Rice House Committee on Regulated John G. Kressel g Lorraine S. Clugg Industries and Energy James M. Strommen 591 State Office Building Ronald H. Batty S t. Paul, MN 55155 William P. Jordan � Susan Dickel Minsberg Kurt J. Erickson Dear Senator Dieterich and Representative Redalen: William R. Skallerud Rodney D. Anderson Corrine A. Heine I am contacting you on behalf of the Suburban Rate John R. McDonald, Jr. Authority, which is an association of 37 metropolitan area cities organized under the Minnesota Joint Powers act. The Suburban Rate Authority has been in existence for over 20 years. It was originally formed to negotiate and administer a uniform gas franchise with the Minneapo- lis Gas Company (now Minnegasco) . Until that authority was transferred to the Public Service Commission in 1974, the Suburban Rate Authority was the body with regulatory authority over gas service in member cities. Following the 1974 transfer of this authority to the PSC , the SRA has intervened in various gas, electric and telephone proceedings before the MPUC for the purpose of assisting in the establishment of reasonable rates and conditions of service . The Board of Directors of the SRA is comprised of one director from each of the member cities . At its January quarterly meeting, the Board considered the revelations concerning the Leo Adams case. Subsequently, the Execu— tive Committee of the Board has directed me to express its concerns regarding the various suggestions which have been made concerning legislation affecting the MPUC. February 10 , 1986 Page 2 We feel that the proper course of action to be taken at this time is the creation of a study commission, which would be directed to obtain the comments of those who practice before the MPUC and others and to make a recom- mendation to the Governor and to the next Legislature, as appropriate. There is precedent for this course of action. Recently, following a series of newspaper articles , a special oversight commission prepared a report as to the structure and management practices of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. The Suburban Rate Authority participated in that effort, with two members on the task force . That task force has made various recommendations, and it is our view that the reforms recommended by the task force have defused a potentially disruptive situation. We believe there is wide acceptance of those reform recommendations , and the SRA Board recently endorsed them. A study commission on the MPUC should be directed to review at least the following matters : -The appointment process . -Restriction of employment of commissioners and staff. -The procedures followed by the MPUC in utility rate cases . The study commission will require funding. This is most properly done by assessing the utilities regulated by the MPUC which, in turn, would be authorized to pass the cost along in the rates . The cost of such a study is a very insignificant factor when one considers that in the current NSP electric date case , the companv` s requested rates will produce over $1 billion of retail electric bills per year. Investigation by at least two agencies is underway. Very recent revelatio��s concerning a 't-'tMPUC commissioner and the actions of a regulated utility indicate the problems may not be fully explored at this time. A mechanism for study between sessions is desirable so that the legislature can be prepared to take appropriate action in the next session. We believe that the concern created by recent revelations concerning former PUC commissioners may result in re- sponses which may be either too Draconian or merely a band-aid. The regulation of public utilities is a complex and extremely important matter. We think is very likely that insufficient time remains in the current session to devise a proper response to the problems which have surfaced to date. February 10 , 1986 Page 3 The Suburban Rate Authority would like to assist in this effort on behalf of its constituents . A list of SRA members is attached. Very truly yours, LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY O' BRIEN & DRAWZ Glenn E . Purdu6 Counsel for the SRA GEP/sbp cc: Graydon Boeck, SRA Chairman_ Enclosure Members Bloomington Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Burnsville Champlin Circle Pines Columbia Heights Deephaven Eden Prairie Edina Fridley Greenwood Hastings Hopkins Lauderdale Maple Plain Maplewood Minnetonka Minnetrista New Brighton North St. Paul Orono Osseo Plymouth Richfield Robbinsdale Roseville Savage St. Louis Park Shakopee Shoreview Spring Park Vadnais Heights Victoria Wayzata Woodland �- - - - ORR•SCHELEN•MAYERON ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers Land Surveyors { C'-FY O January 31, 1986 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 EAst First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: At the beginning of this new year, we at Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. wish to express our sincere appreciation for the opportunity to be of service to you. In acknowledging 1985 as a successful year for OSM, we are mindful that progress is a direct reflection upon our relationships with our valued clients. We hold our relationship with you in high esteem, and trust that our association is also rewarding to you. We offer our thanks and extend our best wishes for 1986. With warmest regards, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2021 East Hennepin Avenue - Suite 238 - Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 - 6121331-8660 ROBERT J. SCHMITZ Senator 36th District 6730 Old Hwy. 169 Blvd. n Jordan, Minnesota 55352 Senate Phone:492-2182 Office: 235 State Capitol State of Minnesota St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Phone: 296-7157 February 17 , 1986 L; ? Mr. John Anderson, Administrator 19108 City of Shakopee 129 East lst Avenue OP Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 " "" Dear John: Thank you for your letter in which you expressed the Shakopee City Council ' s position on the suggested local government aid cuts and the possibility of a one-year delay in the transfer of the motor vehicle excise tax from the general fund. I can agree with the council ' s position on both of these issues, however, at the time being there is a Finance Department forecast that by the end of this biennium, June 30, 1987 , there will be a $284 million shortage. As I pointed out in a news column, that amounts to a 2 . 6 percent error by the Legislature in its calculation of a revenue balance during the 1985 session. Key component of this error is that the national economy failed to live up to expectations . Wisconsin just recently called a Special Session to deal with a $350 million revenue shortfall . Other states are experiencing similar problems . How do we deal with our dilemma? It has become very clear at the Capitol that the Governor, as well as nearly all of the legislators do not want to raise taxes , do not want to borrow money and that we should avoid the shifts in bookkeeping mischief that we did during the 1981-82 crisis. The House of Representative' s Appropriation Committee passed a resolution last week that $384 million of shortage ( $284 million plus $100 million reserve) would have to be made up in spending cuts. We are at work in the Senate Finance Committee cutting wherever we can in an effort to meet that budget short- fall . COMMITTEES • Chairman, Local and Urban Government • Rules and Administration • Finance • Transportation • Veterans and General Legislation /-2 2 . There will be arguments galore about priorities as to which commitments should be preserved more than others . Where this will take us I would not begin to guess at this point. I have hope that our shortfall will not be as severe as expected. We have more people working in Minnesota than last year. The drop in fuel costs will help and we hear from the experts that the GNP will be higher than anticipated earlier. All of this will help. Thank you again for your letter. You will note I am a bit reluctant to promise anything. I think the last thing you folks need is more promises from the Legislature. We have not lived up to our commitments very well during the last few years . Sincerely, ROBERT J. SCHMITZ State Senator -- District 36 RJS/st Chuck Dimler Minnesota District Carver-Scott Counties House of Committees: Representatives General Legislation and Veterans Affairs - Taxes Vice Chairman, Local Government Finance David M.Jennings,Speaker Division Transportation Multi-State Tax Compact Advisory Committee February 10, 1986 Mr. John Anderson, City Admr. City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: (Please share this letter with your colleagues on the County Board.) It was recently announced that our DFL governor, Rudy Perpich, has underesti- mated state revenue collections by $734 million. To make up for this error, Governor Perpich has proposed cutting state aid payments to local units of govenmient, including aid to counties. Your county's finances would be seriously impaired if the DFL governor's plans are adopted. Not only would you see your state-aid payments reduced, but homestead credits as well. Governor Perpich is leaving locally-elected officials such as yourself with little choice but to raise local real estate taxes. That may solve the state's fiscal dilemma, but it does so by transferring the problem to you at the local level. The IR House majority intends to fight to protect our counties from bearing the burden of the state's fiscal mismanagement. Your assistance is necessary if we are to persuade the DFL governor and Senate liberals that counties should be spared from cuts. Please take a few minutes to call or write the DFL governor and our local senator, and ask them to support the efforts of House Independent-Republicans to balance the state budget by cutting areas other than state aid to local units of govermnent. We're going to fight to try and come through this current budget problem without impairing the ability of local governemnts to serve their citizens. Sincerely, Chuck Dimler State Representative CD:cl Reply to: ❑539 State Office Building,St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Office: (612)296-1072 0 7203 Kiowa Circle, Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317 Home: (612)934-8974 17 W "E 'IN E E YO O THE LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES NEEDS YOUR HELP Governor Perpich has recommended a $23.1 million cut in local government aid. This is an 8.1 percent cut in LGA in 1986. On top of that, the governor's budget proposal suggests an 8.78 percent cut in homestead credit payments to cities, about 9.1 million, for a total cut to cities of over $32 million. We need your help in convincing the Legislature of the severity of these recommended cuts. We need your help to educate the citizens in the state of how these cuts could affect services in your city and what the impact could be on future property taxes. The League Board of Directors at its February 4 meeting directed the LMC staff to begin an aggressive public relations campaign on the effects of budget cuts on cities, but success depends on you, and all city officials. HERE'S WHAT YOU CAN DO READ the enclosed material. We have included: * a copy of the League's policy on budget cuts * an explanation of how the governor's 3.5 percent cut really equals eight to nine percent for cities, and how the governor's proposal differs from the League's policy on state budget cuts * a crib sheet summarizing budget cut facts * a pledge sheet, for your city to volunteer to work on this issue * a printout city-by-city of the dollar figure of the governor's recommended budget cuts TALK to your legislators and explain what the effects of the budget cuts would be on your city. PLEDGE a couple of hours of your time and/or that of your city staff to help the League's lobbying effort in reducing budget cuts to cities. CONTACT the League. Let us know if you've talked with legislators, and what the effects of the cuts would be on your city. FOR MORE INFORMATION On the budget cuts: Contact Diane Loeffler or Jeff Van Wychen. On the public relations effort: Contact Donald Slater or Jean Mehle at the League office: League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55101 (612) 227-5600. j ? STATE BUDGET CRISIS AT A GLANCE THE SITUATION The state is facing a $700 million shortfall in revenues this biennium. As a result it is proposed that budgets approved last spring be cut $380 million and most of the budget reserve be used. THE GOVERNOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS Cut LGA to cities by $23.1 million (8.1%) in 1986 Cut homestead credit to cities $9.3 million (8.78%) in 1986 Change state payment schedule Freeze the homestead credit appropriation in 1987 and grant only a 3% increase to LGA in 1987 Restore education cuts and the budget reserve if additional revenue is received Abolish levy limits WHAT LEGISLATORS NEED TO KNOW The basics: Cities are required to budget on a calendar year. Because cities can not increase levies for 1986 or pass the cuts on to a lower level of government, they would have to make significant budget cuts in the next nine months. The impact these cuts will have on your city. Will you be laying off staff, increasing your short term borrowing? Your city's current fiscal situation. How are you dealing with the major (and unpredictable) cuts in federal revenue sharing? Is your assessed value increasing or decreasing? Are you subject to levy limits? If so, have levy limits prevented you from planning for this sort of budget problem? Ask that levy limits be repealed. Do you currently do short-term borrowing to pay your costs until you receive property tax and state payments in the second half of the year? If, as proposed by the governor, the state changed to two payments of LGA and homestead credit in July and December, would you need to do further short-term borrowing? 1987 will be a very tough year for cities in general, given the complete elimination of federal revenue sharing, delayed necessary costs due to 1986 cuts, costs of implementing comparable worth, and inflation. The governor has recommended only a three percent increase in local government aid and no increase in homestead credit funding. Is your assessed value growing? Do you anticipate having to seriously consider significant property tax increases? Your legislators are not all-knowing. They need to hear from you on these issues. For the addresses and phone numbers of your legislators, see the Legislative Bulletin No. 1, Feb. 7, 1986. Or call House information, (612) 296-2146, or Senate information, (612) 296-0504. SIGN UP ! ,T The League of Minnesota Cities needs the help of city officials in communicating to the Legislature and to the public what the serious effects of the large proposed budget cuts would be. The Legislature is already in its second week of the session. Time is short. Legislative leaders want to complete the session by March 17, leaving them four weeks to finish their work. The League is working hard to convince the Legislature to reduce the recommended budget cuts to cities. Our success depends on cities. Fiease pledge some time to this effort. We realize how busy things get in cities, and how elected officials and city employees often say, "I should call my legislator," but other commitments need attention first. We hope this pledge sheet will encourage you to make this a priority. Within the next few days, the League will send you a press release about how the budget cuts affect cities statewide. We would like you to add information about your city and forward the release to your paper. Because things are happening so fast, we want to be sure that when legislators actually vote on budget cuts, cities are able to respond immediately. To do this we will set up a phone tree, where each city would call three to five cities about what's happening, and then call their local legislators. All city employees should be aware of the effects of the proposed budget cuts. Please consider sending them-a brief explanation with their paychecks. The League will send you a sample. Please fill out the form below and send it to the League office. We feel that calculating the number of hours city officials are willing to commit to this effort and reporting that to the Legislature will make an impact. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Our city will pledge the following number of hours to helping to limit budget cuts to cities. 2 hours (1/2 hour per week for the next four weeks) 4 hours (1 hour per week for the next four weeks) 8 hours (2 hours per week for the next four weeks) pledge hours over the next four weeks Areas our city would help with: Calling/writing my legislators Working with the press in my area (forwarding press releases) Informing city employees of the problem Working with the phone tree (3-5 phone calls on short notice) Testifying at legislative committee hearings Attending legislative committee hearings Name Title City home phone office phone Send to Jean Mehle, League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul 55101, (612) 227-5600. Fiscal stress continues Governor's budget reduction recommendations Revised state revenue and expenditure forecasts indicate a $720 million shortfall. This is the result of a lagging economy and some underestimating of the cost of the large income tax cut the state approved last spring. As a result, Governor Perpich has proposed reductions in the state budget. The proposal would use all but $100 million of the budget reserve to offset the deficit, and would cut the budget by $380 million. State taxes would not increase. The following questions and answers highlight the impact on cities. How much money would cities lose under the governor's recommendations? Local government aid (LGA) to cities would be cut $23. 1 million. . a total funding level of $262.7 million. This represents an 8.1 percent cut from the original LGA appropriation for 1986. Homestead credit payments to cities would decrease 8.78 percent for 1986. Early projections indicate a loss in this program of $9.3 million. In addition, the budget proposal suggests reductions in other grant programs that benefit cities. How come the reductions are eight to nine percent? The papers indicated cuts to cities were 3.5 percent. There has been much confusion on this point. The governor's budget address framed the budget crisis on the basis of the state's biennium (a biennium being the two-year state budget period) . The governor recommended 3.5 percent biennial reductions on most programs in order to balance the budget. However, because cities are already through the first year of the biennium, the practical reality is a seven percent cut in the last year of the biennium for most programs. But, cities' cuts equal more than seven percent because they would absorb the cuts of other programs. An additional $4.2 million would come out of LGA to cover the 3.5 percent biennial cuts of miscellaneous credit and expenditure programs (wetlands credit, enterprise zone credits, pension amortization aid, etc.) . The governor's proposal would cut homestead credit more than seven percent, too. The additional two percent reduction is due to this program being expected to absorb the 3.5 percent biennial reduction in the circuit breaker program of property tax refunds. Because the tax forms and tables have already gone out, the governor looked for alternative places to cut these funds and decided on the homestead payments to local governments. How will these cuts apply to individual cities? The governor recommended that each city's LGA payments for 1986 decrease 8. 1 percent from the level that the state certified to the city in August. One - 1 - impact of this is to remove the "grandfather" provision which provided that no city could get less LGA than it had received in the previous year. Each city's homestead credit payments from the state would decrease by 8.78 percent. While cities will not receive full reimbursement, individual property tax bills will not change in 1986. When will the cuts be effective? Unfortunately, they would be effective for the current calendar year, 1986. This makes it very difficult for cities to absorb these cuts. We are already well into the budget year and do not have the option to levy additional taxes to offset this decrease in revenue. Doesn't the state realize that cities are experiencing tough times and that any cuts in the current year will be very difficult? Unfortunately many state decision makers do not have a good unc-__,sanding of city finances or the fiscal stress that cities have been experiencing year after year. Cities have tended to do what they had to to cut budgets without keeping the public or legislators informed. Cities have been very creative in making efficiency improvements and very frugal in salary settlements, particularly when compared with other units of local government. Unfortunately, many state lawmakers hold wrong impressions. Many legislators do not realize that cities would have to make the cuts in 1986, the calendar year we are already partly through. They tend to think in terms of the state's fiscal year which runs from July 1 to June 30. While state agencies and others will be able to stretch their cuts through June 30, 1987, cities must balance the books as of Dec. 31, 1986. Many state decision makers do not realize how dependent cities are on state funds. On average, local government aid and homestead credit combined account for one-half of cities' total current expenditures. While cities vary widely from that average, state funding is very important to almost all cities. Enclosed is a printout of projections, by city, of the amount of funds they would lose under the governor's recommendations. Communicate those amounts to your legislators and let them know if the cuts will be forcing you to lay off staff or cut services. Cities are under tremendous fiscal stress right now. This is the result of cuts in federal revenue sharing of one-third to one-half in the current year, other federal cutbacks, skyrocketing insurance rates, declining tax base, the costs of complying with mandates such as comparable worth, and inflation. While the consumer price index (CPI) is near three percent, actual inflation for local government purchases is about six percent according to the implicit price deflator for state and local government purchases. This is because cities do not purchase housing or food, two significant components of the consumer price index that are declining or showing no significant increase. Legislators must understand that for most cities, not a single major source of revenue (federal funds, the local taxbase, or state funding) is growing at the rate of inflation. And, worse yet, most are declining. - 2 - How would the proposed League policy on state funding differ from the governor's recommendations? The League policy asks that all components of the state budget receive cuts equally. The governor made several exceptions: education would receive only a 2.5 percent cut on a biennial basis, and some welfare programs were exempt from cuts. The League feels that all programs should share cuts equally. The result of this is a lesser reduction for all. While the governor's budget would cut approximately $32.5 million from cities in LGA and homestead credit, the League proposal of applying an equal cut to all state budget items would reduce the cut for cities to a total of approximately $22.2 million. While that is still a major cut, it is a much more equitable and manageable one. For local government aid, the League proposal would result in a cut of about 5.2 percent as opposed to 8.1 percent. What if the projections are wrong and state revenues come in higher than projected? The governor has recommended that the state would restore funds to education (public schools and post-secondary institutions) first if the state projections are overly pessimistic. Only after restoring all education funds would any other cut program be eligible for funds restoration. The League recommends that cities have equal access to restoration funds. If we must share in the shortfall, we should also share in any unexpected windfalls. What about the state payment schedule? Can we count on being paid on time? Once again the state is looking to local governments to solve its cash flow problems. Currently cities receive six equal payments of LGA and homestead credit during the months of July to December. The governor has recommended that cities receive two equal payments; one in July and one in December. In theory, interest earnings on the larger first payment would balance out any borrowing costs cities would incur waiting for the second payment. The state should not solve its cash flow problems by causing local units of government to do short-term borrowing. The current payment schedule should remain. If the state makes changes, it should work toward getting funds to cities earlier in the year, not later. What are the implications of this for 1987 and future years? Unfortunately, 1987 will also be a very difficult budget year for the state. Last year the state passed a $900 million tax cut which the state only began to implement in the first year of the biennium. Some phased-in provisions will have a larger impact in the next biennium. The governor has recommended that local government aid increase only three percent for 1987. That would hardly begin to restore the funds cities would lose in 1986. The proposal further recommends that the state freeze the homestead credit appropriation at its reduced 1986 level. Cities will find it very difficult to balance their 1987 budgets without tax increases. Even without any increase in levy, many communities will see - 3 - their mill rates increase as the result of declining assessed value. Very few cities are seeing their taxbases increase at the rate of inflation and over half are experiencing real declines. Cities will experience further budget pressure in 1987 because of the complete elimination of federal revenue sharing (historically about five percent of cities' budgets) , costs of implementing comparable worth plans, and other state and federal cutbacks. Unfortunately for taxpayers, the governor doesn't even propose an inflation increase in property tax relief programs that could help temper the impact of this on individuals. State lawmakers are beginning to talk of further income tax reductions in 1987 . State leaders should first consider the public service consequences. What can city officials do to help the League in urging the state to minimize cuts to cities? Cities' success in this effort depends on city officials throughout the state contacting their legislators. You don't need to be familiar with the homestead credit or local government aid formulas. Few legislators know the details of these programs either. What you do need to tell them is what your budget situation is now and how difficult it will be for you to absorb state cuts in the current fiscal year. It is also important that you stress the need for increased funding for 1987. Share your concerns about increased property taxes next year and how few alternatives are available. Unlike the state or federal government, cities cannot balance their budget by reducing payments to others. The streets still need plowing. Make sure the people in your city understand the implications of the state cuts through articles in your local newspaper. The League will help draft press releases. Some cities are preparing special information pieces on the state budget and its implications for city services and giving them to each employee The League will help cities with this if your wish. Our success depends on city officials throughout the state taking the time to talk to their legislators. Legislators like to hear from local officials and value their input. You can make a difference. For further information, contact Diane Loeffler of the League staff, who is leading the League's lobbying efforts on budget cuts and can respond to individual questions. She is assisted in this by Legislative Assistant Jeff Van Wychen. - 4 - RS-1 State Funding to Cities (A) (cont'd) The Governor has recommended that the cuts in wetlands credit, native prairie credits, pension amortization aid, and other miscellaneous programs be deducted from local government aid for administrative simplicity. That is very unfair, particularly since cities willabsorb the majority of those cuts even though there are very few prairies or wetlands within cities. The cuts should be applied against each program separately. If that is found unfeasible for some programs, the cuts should be shared with all taxing jurisdictions through the homestead credit program. In the last state budget crisis, many accounting shifts were made which have created numerous cash flow problems at the local level. The Governor again recommends that the schedule for state payments to cities be changed in order to ease state cash flow problems. The League is opposed to any further changes in the state payment schedule. The League is prepared to analyze and respond to individual budget issues as they arise and encourages the legislature to work with the League Board of Directors and its staff. Adopted by the LMC Board of Directors on February 4, 1986. Adopted by the League membership on February 5, 1986. BUDGET POLICY RS-1. State Funding to Cities (A) Cities are heavily dependent on state funding. On average, homestead credit and local government aid together account for over two-thirds of the expenditures of cities. It will be very difficult for cities to absorb cuts in the current budget year. Economic challenges facing cities include a declining tax base, cuts in federal support, costs growing faster than the general inflation rate, and the need to implement additional mandates While a good case can be made for exempting cities from state budget cuts, equality is a compelling value. The League recommends that all components of the state budget be treated equally. That is: 1 . All components of the state budget should be cut by an equal percentage without exception. 2. Cities should have equal access to restoration of funds if revenues come in greater than projected. 3. Each program should be cut individually and not shifted onto all cities through the local government aid program as recommended by the Governor. 4. The state should not shift its cash flow problems onto local governments by changing the payment schedule 5. While many systems are available for allocating the cuts by city, given that the cuts impact a budget year already begun, each city should be cut an equal percentage of the funds they were certified to receive in 1986 6. The Legislature and the Governor should work with the League Board of Directors in developing and analyzing more detailed budget provisions The League feels strongly that property tax relief should continue to be a high priority. Any budget cuts to cities will likely have some impact on future property tax levels. That fact should be acknowledged by state decision makers and the public. By fairly and equally reducing all components of the state budget, the impact on cities and property tax relief can be held to a more reasonable level. If all components of the budget are included equally in the cuts (including welfare and education) , the percentage reduction each must endure will be reduced. Preliminary projections indicate that the overall percentage cut on a biennial (two year) basis would be approximately 2.7 percent. For cities that would mean a cut of 5.2 percent in local government aid in 1986 because our payments for the first year of the biennium have already been received. That is significantly less than the 8. 1 percent reduction recommended by the Governor. Just as all components of the budget should share equally in reductions that are based on projected revenue shortfalls, all components should also have funds restored on an equal basis if actual revenue receipts are higher than those currently projected. x�•• nrFrmMetropolitan Area (lana ement Affociation � of the Twin City Area January 30 , 1986 TO: ORGANIZATIONS PARTICIPATING IN JOINT COMPENSATION STUDY FROM: William S. Joynes, Chairman MAMA General Labor Relations Committee SUBJECT: UPDATE ON JOINT COMPENSATON STUDY Enclosed is a copy of a letter sent to Nina Rothchild , Minnesota Department of Employee Relations on behalf of participating jurisdictions. Please note the time frame . In the near future you will be receiving a STATUS REPORT on the Joint Compensation Study. WSJ : hf c Encl . 15 01 City of Golden Valley January 23, 1986 Ms. Nina Rothchild Department of Employee Relations 444 Lafayette Road Space Center Building St. Paul , Minnesota 55101 Dear Commissioner Rothchild: I am writing to inform you of a further delay in our ability to report the results of our Comparable Worth project. After consultation with representatives of Control Data Corporation Business Advisors, it appears that the completion of the study for the 140 various political subdivisions will occur in the first week of May this year. While we obviously are not pleased with having to postpone the final report, it is certainly preferable to providing you and our employees with inaccurate information. Our Joint Study efforts began immediately after passage of the Pay Equity Act by the 1984 Legislature. We continue our best efforts to meet the intent of the legislation. The task has been much more difficult and complex than the original time frame envisioned. I have attached, for your convenience, a list of those jurisdictions covered by our study. We apologize for the inconvenience and continue to appreciate the support of your office during this project. Sinc r William S. J yn Chair, MAM Gen r Labor Relations Committee City Mana r, i ty of Golden Valley WSJ :pb Civic Center,7800 Golden Valley Rd.,Golden Valley Minnesota,55427, (612) 545-3781 MINNESOTA CITIES PARTICIPATING IN JOINT COMPENSATION STUDY Albert Lea Forest Lake Pipestone Alexandria Fridley Plymouth Anoka Golden Valley Preston Apple Valley Harmony Prior Lake Arden Hills Hastings Ramsey Austin Hibbing Red Wing Bemidji Hopkins Redwood Falls Benson International Falls Richfield Blaine Inver Grove Heights Robbinsdale Bloomington Jackson Rosemount Brainerd Lakeville Roseville Breckenridge Lino Lakes St. Anthony Brooklyn Center Litchfield St. Cloud Brooklyn Park Little Falls St. James Burnsville Mankato St. Louis Park Champlin Maple Grove St. Paul Park Chaska Maplewood St. Peter Circle Pines Mendota Heights Sartell Cloquet Minnetonka Sauk Rapids Cold Spring Minnetrista Savage Coon Rapids Monticello Shakopee Cottage Grove Moorhead Shoreview Crookston Mora Spring Valley Crystal Morris Stillwater Delano Mound Thief River Falls Detroit Lakes Mounds View Virginia Eagan New Brighton Waconia East Grand Forks New Hope Waseca Eden Prairie New Ulm Wayzata Edina North Mankato West St. Paul Elk River North St. Paul White Bear Lake Excelsior Northfield White Bear Township Fairmont Oakdale Willmar Faribault Orono Winona Fergus Falls Pine Island Woodbury Total Cities : 105 1/23/86 MINNESOTA UTILITIES PARTICIPATING IN JOINT COMPENSATION STUDY Alexandria Litchfield Anoka Marshall Austin Moorhead Brainerd New Ulm Detroit Lakes North St. Paul East Grand Forks Sauk Center Elk River Spring Valley Glencoe Thief River Falls Hibbing Virginia Hutchinson Willmar Total Utilities : 20 1/23/86 1 � OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS PARTICIPATING IN JOINT COMPENSATION STUDY Metropolitan Airports Commission Libraries Minnesota Valley Regional Library (Mankato) Traverse des Sioux Library (Mankato) Lake Agassir Regional Library (Moorhead) Northwest Regional Library (Thief River Falls) Washington County Library (Lake Elmo) Other Jurisdictions : 6 1/23/86 v nTflmMetropolitan Area Management Affociation of the Twin City Area February 18 , 1986 TO: ORGANIZATIONS PARTICIPATING IN JOINT COMPENSATION STUDY FROM: William S. Joynes , Chairman MAMA General Labor Relations Committee SUBJECT : JOINT COMPENSATION STUDY STATUS REPORT Progress on the Joint Compensation Study has been made in a number of areas. First , Business Advisors is conducting a detailed analysis of task values across the seven occupational groups. This analysis is being conducted to identify value relationships by factor of both identical and similar tasks in each questionnaire . Following this analysis, results will be presented in March to Occupational Advisory Groups and the Personnel Committee in order to finalize task values for the Study. Second , a quality review of TIME SPENT PROFILES is in process by Business Advisors. An optional revision process is under development and will be made available to participating jurisdictions , to be communicated in a later letter . Finally, Business Advisors is continuing work on the market study and the benchmark job study. WSJ : hfc NORTHWESTERN BELL RATE CHANGE NOTICE JAN Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Docket P-421/M -53 As required by Minnesota Statute Section 237.075, Subd. 1 , Northwestern Bell Telephone Company is notifying the governing body of each municipality and county in the area affected, of a change in rates for special access service. Special access service involves the provision by Northwestern Bell of dedicated communication channels to primarily interexchange carriers such as AT&T, MCI, and SPRINT, for their use in providing longer dedicated rnmmi_�niration channels (private lines) to their customers . Special access channels do not make use of or involve the local Northwestern Bell end office switches . Under Northwestern Bell 's proposed tariff, the present special access rate structure has been completely revised . The proposed tariff mirrors the rate structure of Northwestern Bell ' s present Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved interstate special access tariff . The rate levels of the proposed filing are not identical to Northwestern Bell ' s interstate tariff, but are rates developed by considering Minnesota' s specific costs. Northwestern Bell estimates that the revenue from the proposed rates will be the same as the revenue from present rates . A copy of Northwestern Bell 's requested rates is on file and is open to public inspection during normal business hours at the offices of the Minnesota Department of Public Service, 790 American Center Building, 160 East Kellogg Boulevard, St. Paul , Minnesota. A copy is also available for public inspection at the Company' s office located at 200 South 5th Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Persons wishing to inspect the Company ' s requested rates at the Company' s office other than Minneapolis, may make arrangements to do so by contacting the Company at 612-344-6383. If you is i t„ - the �'n r,an�, at the same number. liave any questions, P ease contac,c. �i+, vvii�N t:.�i � i1e _.e The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission has indicated that it may require hearings before the proposed rates are allowed to go in effect. If hearings are required, you will receive notice of them and information on how to participate. You should be aware that you may be able to petition for a hearing on this matter. Minnesota Statute Section 237.075, Subd. 2 states the requirements that affected customers must follow to petition the Commission for a public hearing as a contested case. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company O( CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT JANUARY, 1986 PERMITS ISSUED Yr. to Date Previous Year 6956 - 6968 Number Number Valuation Number Valuation Mo. Ytd. Single Fam-Sewered 1 1 67 , 500 Single Fam-Septic 53 , 000 - Multiple Dwellings 1 1 _ ( # Units) (YTD Units) ( 2 ) ( 2 ) _ _ _ _ Dwelling Additions - - _ Other ' Comm New Bldgs 2 2 700 , 000 3 3 1 , 439 ,781 Comm Bldg. Addns - - - 1 1 2 , 136 ,788 Industrial-Sewered - _ _ _ _ Ind-Sewered Addns - _ _ _ _ Industrial-Septic - _ _ _ _ Ind-Septic Addns - Accessory/Garages 750 2 2 2 ,145 1, 500 Signs & Fences 3 3 6 , 500 Fireplaces/Wood Stove 1 1 2 2 _ 1 1 11,000 Grading/Foundation - - 2 2 2 ,145 Remodeling (Res) _ _ _ - Remodeling (Inst) - _ _ - Remodeling (Comm/Ind) 3 3 169 , 880 TOTAL TAXABLE 12 12 932 , 630 11 11 3 , 611 , 464 TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - GRAND TOTAL 12 12 932 , 630 11 11 3 ,622 , 464 No. Ytd. No. Ytd. 14 7 Variances 1 20 Conditional Use 1 35 1 3 Rezoning _ 6 - 1 Moving 20 275 12 268 Electric 7 251 16 280 Plbg & Htg Razing Permits - 1 - 1 Residential _ - - Commercial Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted to date. . . . . . . 3 , 832 Cora Hullander Bldg. Dept. Secretary CITY OF SHAKOPEE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN JANUARY, 1986 6956 Scott Builders 1147 Co. Rd. 83 Comm New $350 , 000 6957 Mark Kuechenmeister 123 E. 1st Ave. Sign 400 6958 Cancelled 6959 Wes Hukriede 825 E. 4th Ave. Duplex 26 , 500 ( 1 unit) 6960 Wes Hukriede 827 E. 4th Ave. Duplex 26 , 500 ( 1 unit) 6961 LeRoy Menke 640 Hennes Ave. House 67 , 500 6962 Superamerica 1155 E. 1st Ave. Comm New 350 , 000 6963 Tom Nygaard 1221 E. 4th Ave. Sign 200 6964 Kraus Anderson Racetrack Addn 123 , 000 5965 Sigmas of Quality 576 Pfarschal3 Rd. Sign 200 6966 James Zoschke 8065 Eagle Crk B. Fireplace 1, 500 6967 Ostman Const. 1221 E. 4th Ave. Alt. 1 , 880 6968 Friedges Drywall 5244 Valley Ind. B Alt. 45 , 000 $992, 630 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 27, 1986 Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with Commissioners Harrison and Moonen present. Commissioners Abeln and Davis were absent. Barry Stock, Administrative Intern, was also present at the meeting as was Mr. Bill Lepley, the Studio manager, and Mr. Bob Ziegler of the Access Corporation. Harrison/Moonen moved to approve the minutes of December 23, 1985, as kept. Motion carried unanimously. CABLE FRANCHISE MODIFICATIONS Barry Stock presented a set of proposed franchise modifications which Staff developed to provide both financial relief for the cable company and a better public access form for Shakopee residents. Mr. Stock explained that at this time, Zylstra-United's (ZU) understanding of the franchise modifications that the City may be in favor of are as follows: *In terms of public access, Shakopee has tentatively agreed to take over the public access function with the exception of studio rental and maintenance. *ZU has agreed to provide access studio equipment that has not been provided, up to $5,000. *ZU will also provide joint playback capability from either the Chaska or Shakopee public access studio. This will eliminate the need for one playback operator in either Shakopee or Chaska. *In terms of public access, ZU -has agreed to pay the City a monthly fee of 25 cents per subscriber (approximately $3,600 annually). This charge will appear as a separate item on the consumer's billing. Mr. Stock noted that the City of Chaska has agreed to waive the utility pole rental in their community ($2, 100 annually) for a five year period. ZU requested Shakopee do the same. In Shakopee, ZU has never been charged for pole rental. However, Mr. Stock learned in talking with Mr. Lou VanHout that when an accurate number of poles being used by ZU can be determined, ZU will be retroactively billed. In order for Shakopee to pursue relieving ZU of the pole rental charge, the City Council requested on January 21 , 1986, that the Shakopee Public Utility Commission take action in regard to this issue at their February 3, 1986, meeting. ZU has agreed to provide the equipment requested by the Institutional Network (I-Net) users, Mr. Stock said. In return, the I-Net users will be charged a maintenance cost for each activated channel. ZU has proposed that this fee be Shakopee Cable Commission January 27, 1986 Page 2 permanent; however, Staff proposed that the fee be dropped in five years. ZU has agreed to provide a character generator for government access to be located at Shakopee Community Services, Barry Stock continued. Shakopee tentatively agreed to extend ZU's franchise term five years. In addition, Mr. Stock explained, all other capital item commitments not addressed, with the exception of plant extensions, will be deferred five years. Staff also requested the following changes to ZU's proposals: *Shakopee will receive free studio space including utilities for a guaranteed five year period. *ZU will provide $2,000 in cash on the first of each year for studio/equipment maintenance. *The five percent franchise fee and monthly 25 cent subscriber fee shall be paid to the City on a quarterly basis. *The pole rental fee shall be waived for a five year period. *The I-Net equipment requested by the school and correctional institution shall be provided within 30 days of the agreement of these modifications. *The character generator and the necessary equipment to activate the character generator will be provided with no set dollar limit within 30 days of the agreement of these modifications. *ZU will be required to post a $25,000 performance bond. The Commissioners discussed the proposed cable franchise modifications and developed the following: I. Public Access A. Shakopee will take over operation of the public access studio effective April 1 , 1986. B. All equipment owned by ZU and presently being used for public access programing pursuant to the equipment list as provided by ZU and including equipment dedicated to the computer and viewing centers shall become the property of the City of Shakopee effective April 1 , 1986. (In connection with this, the Commissioners directed Mr. Stock to take an inventory of the public access studio equipment with serial numbers and model numbers. ) C. ZU agrees to provide existing studio space at its existing location for the City's use, rent and utility free for a five year period commencing April 1 , 1986. Shakopee Cable Commission January 27, 1986 / Page 3 -z-/ D. ZU agrees to pay the City $2,000 per year for studio equipment maintenance on April first of each year for the remainder of this franchise commencing April 1 , 1986. E. ZU 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. G. ZU agrees to provide and install the necessary equipment for joint playback by April 1 , 1986, at a cost not to exceed $2,000. H. ZU shall assess a subscriber fee of 25 cents per subscriber per month. This financial support shall be increased by three percent per year. This fee shall be turned over to the City on a semi- annual basis by ZU with the exact dates to be determined by the City. II. Institutional Network (I-Net) A. ZU agrees to provide $8,000 by April 1, 1986, for equipment to activate Shakopee and Chaska's I-Net. B. ZU shall be allowed to charge I-Net 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. On April 1 , 1991 , the fee shall cease to be charged. III. Pole Rental A. Shakopee agrees to defer ZU's annual pole rental fee for a five year period commencing January 1 , 1986. IV. Franchise Term A. Shakopee agrees to extend ZU's franchise term for a five year period (i.e. until 2002). V. Character Generator A. ZU agrees to provide $4,000 by April 1 , 1986, for character generator equipment not provided plus install any equipment purchased by the City. This does not relinquish the City's control of the existing character generator system. VI. Franchise Fee A. ZU agrees to pay the five percent franchise fee to the City on a semi-annual basis with the exact dates to be determined by the City. VII. Management Fee A. ZU agrees to reduce their management fee from seven percent to four percent for the remainder of the franchise. Shakopee Cable Commission January 27, 1986 Page 4 VIII. Capital Deferrals A. The City agrees that any and all other capital commitments required by the franchise not addressed in their modifications effective April 1 , 1986, with the exception of new plant extensions, shall be deferred until April 1 , 1991 . IX. Non-Compliance A. ZU agrees that failure to comply with these modifications shall subject them to the non-compliance fines and forfeitures as specified in the franchise ordinance. Commissioner Anderson asked that Mr. Stock obtain legal clarification on the proposed modifications and extension of the franchise agreement to be sure the changes are not so major that they will null and void the original franchise agreement. Discussion followed on who would be responsible for public access equipment maintenance and upgrade after the five year deferrment, if the cable franchise agreement should be extended another five years, if equipment given to the City should be up to specifications and in working condition, and who would monitor the programming while yet preventing censorship. The Commissioners also agreed there should be no lapse in insurance coverage upon the City's takeover of the public access studio. Commissioner Harrison moved to recommend to City Council that the cable franchise modifications as suggested by Staff and modified by the Cable Commission be approved as an amendment to the cable franchise ordinance. Commissioner Harrison withdrew his motion to allow further discussion on whether the cable franchise agreement should be extended another five years. Harrison/Moonen moved to recommend to City Council that the cable franchise modifications as suggested by Staff and modified by the Cable Commission be approved as an amendment to the cable franchise ordinance barring agreement to extend ZU's franchise term for another five year period which should be negotiated and determined to the best of Staff's ability. Motion carried unanimously. 1985 CABLE COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT Mr. Stock presented the Shakopee Cable Communication Commission's 1985 Annual Report as prepared by Staff for the Commissioners to review. Harrison/Moonen moved to submit the 1985 Annual Report of the Shakopee Cable Communication Commission as prepared by Staff to the City Council. Motion carried unanimously. The Commissioners also reviewed the December Public Access Report, the December Cable Television Report, and the December Cable Television Service Report. Shakopee Cable Commission January 27, 1986 Page 5 Mr. Stock distributed copies of a letter he had received from the Chaska Cable Commission which suggested that a joint Cable Commission be established with Shakopee. He noted that with the City's impending takeover of the Public Access studio, the Cable Commission would need to change directions and among the many options are the option of establishing a joint commission with Chaska, to merge with the Access Corporation with the Access Corporation being in charge, to have the City in charge with an Access/Cable Commission, to contract for services, et cetera. Discussion on the various options followed. Mr. Stock will set a special meeting date in February with the Public Access Corporation and will notify everyone as to the date and time. Moonen/Harrison moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock Judy Hughes Administrative Intern Recording Secretary SHAKOPEE COALITION FEBRUARY 6, 1986 MEETING MINTUES The meeting was called to order at 7:00 A.M. by Chairman Brian Norris in the Citizens State Bank Community Room. Members Present: John K.Anderson City of Shakopee Jim Streefland Lions Club Jerry Knutson M.C.I.W. J. Kleve SACS Claude Kolb Knights of Columbus Kay Louis Extension Service Eileen Moran Scott County Human Services Joan Salter Food Shelf Jackie Kes Scott/Carver Economic Council Brian Norris Citizens State Bank George Muenchow Shakopee Community Services Chairman Norris reviewed the subjects discussed at the last meeting which he admitted probably were a little bit too extensive in view of the limitations. The presenters, Gene Skalsky and Gary Laurent, were sent a letter of appreciation. Joan Salter was nominated to be the first recipient of this group's "Volunteer of the Month" program. Citizens State Bank is providing the Monetary Award. MSP that Joan be the March honoree. Jackie Kes gave the Food Shelf Report. 265 families were served in. January. This is an increase of 94 from December. 71 of these families are from Shakopee. Food Shelf Staff is exhausted and getting "burnt out". Food Shelf space needs were discussed. This is urgent for storage for food coming in on the annual Minnesota Foodshare Program. Letters have been sent to churches, etc. requesting help in the annual drive. John Anderson gave a report on the city' s Economic Development Program. This thrust is spearheaded through th ICC Committee which makes recommendations to the City Council. A computerized list of vacant properties in the community is being created to assist developers. Shakopee' s sewered part of the community's residential districts is pretty much filled up. If the community is to add more homes, this problem must be overcome. Industrial Development Bonds and Tax Increment Financing are tools that currently are used to enhance industrial development. Chairman Norris stated that perhaps Coalition Co-ordinators might be appointed to facilitate the workings of this group. Meeting dates for the year were distributed: March 6, April 3, May 1, June 5, July 10, August 7, September 4, October 2, November 6, and December 4. Members were urged to mark these on their calendars. Members were reminded that when they miss a meeting they should have a representative attending in their place. Eileen Moran suggested that Goals for the year should include the general subjects of Food, Housing, and Jobs plus the previously discussed Coordination System. The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 AM. Next meeting March 6, 1986. Respectfully Submitted, George F. Muenchow Acting Secretary O23 PROCEEDINGS OF THE DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JANUARY 29 , 1986 Chrm. Laurent called the meeting to order at 7: 40 a.m. with the following members present: Gary Laurent, Mike Sortum, Jim Stillman and Bill Wermerskirchen. Absent: Steve Clay, Terry Forbord, Don Martin, Dan Stiel, Joe Topic, Peter Sames and Tim Keane. Also present: Jerry Wampach, Liaison; Jeanne Andre, Community Development Director; John Anderson, City Administrator; Tim Erkkila, Westwood Planning and Beth Moe, Shakopee Valley News. An update on the January 28th City Hall Siting Comittee was given by Gary Laurent. He feels most of the Siting Committee still favors the site near the Public Works building. The Downtown Committee feels it would be easier to find another Developer for that property. They also feel it would be feasible to acquire the three homes on the South half of Block 47 or to use the Library site as a second choice. Tim Erkkila presented Exhibit #2 showing downtown block face designation consisting of blocks designated as #1 , #2 and #3 . Blocks designated #1 will receive new streets, utilities , sidewalks and amenities. Blocks designated #2 will receive new streets, utilities, sidewalks, amenities and special railroad treatment. Blocks designated #3 will receive new streets, utilities and sidewalks with the same curbs and street widths as #1 . The area under discussion included 1st, 2nd and 3rd Avenue from Atwood to Sommerville, Atwood, Fuller, Holmes, Lewis and Sommerville between 1st and 3rd Avenue. The members present agreed with these designations except for extending 1st Avenue to Spencer on both sides, changing Atwood between 1st and 2nd to be designated as #1 and eliminating the insitutional area South of 3rd Avenue. Mr. Erkkila reviewed streetscape fixtures with the following recommendations: There would be nine fixtures on seven poles per block. The double fixtures would be placed on the corners to provide better lighting. Sidewalks would be exposed aggregate with either smooth or brush finish concrete. Benches would be cast iron with wood slats. Bill Wermerskirchen and Mike Sortum left at 8 : 30 a.m. The streetscape summary also included five foot square Neenah tree grates and pre-cast planters of aggregate and smooth finish. Planters would occur basically at the nodes. Trees that might be used include honey locust, green ash, linden and hackberry which are about 3 1/2 inches in diameter and 10 to 15 feet tall. Conduit would run along each side of the block and at mid-block. The City Engineer feels that we should have an electrical planner check out the existing streets to see how extensive this installation should be. He indicated that he has undertaken more detailed analysis of the storm sewer work and has concluded that $130 , 000 would be general storm sewer requirements and $147 , 000 would be attributable to the mid-block nodes. Issues raised regarding the streetscape by members present included: is all the conduit necessary, will freestanding planters freeze, were fixed planters considered, are there phone booths that go with these fixtures, could red brick pavers be added, could concrete benches be used? Mr. Erkkila indicated that planters of the size indicated can generally withstand freezing; he had not selected fixed planters because of limited space - but they could possibly be installed in larger plaza areas if any are established; brick pavers are more expensive, especially if used in a linear manner along the sidewalk, but could be used at corner nodes and at a plaza- which types of use would be less expensive and easier to match; phone booths of brown aluminum or aggregate materials are available; and concrete benches are very indestructible. Diagrams showing how much of each construction dollar is spent for each item of streetscape planning were reviewed. A cost estimate summary sheet showing potential cost cutting options and a new pie chart with potential saving options on streetscape were studied. Major savings could be achieved through volume purchase of the lights, use of concrete rather than aluminum poles, and use of concuit only at the alleys where existing electrical lines are placed. Members present felt the streetscape construction was a major issue and agreed it would be wise to meet once more before decisions are finalized. Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will be asked to meet with the Committee the week of February 17th to discuss lighting on the downtown area. The next Downtown Ad Hoc Committee was tentatively set for February 12 , 1986 . The meeting adjourned at 9 : 30 a.m. Darleen Schesso MINUTES OF THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on Janaury 6, 1986 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. Commissioner Cook offered a prayer for divine guidance in the deliberations of the Commission. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Cook, Kirchmeier and Kephart. Also Manager Van Hout and Secretary Menden. Liaison Wampach was absent. BILLS READ: City of Shakopee 20,032.00 A T and T Information Systems 18.19 Auto Central Supply 121.96 Battery and Tire Warehouse, Inc. 77.97 Border States Electric Supply Co. 43.20 Burmeister Electric Co. 118.54 Burroughs Corporation 3,263.40 Carlson Equipment Company 15.90 Carlson Hardware Company 13.94 Champion Auto of Shakopee 78.12 Chanhassen Lawn and Sports 351.98 Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Co. 340.00 City of Shakopee 755.73 Clay's Printing Service 138.70 Cy's Standard Service Center 92.28 Eagan Office Products, Inc. 32.66 Feed Rite Controls, Inc. 559.27 Graybar Electric Company, Inc. 12.25 H & C Electric Supply 35.95 Harmons Hardware 129.35 Mary Henderson 29.83 Henningson, Durham and Richardson 2,054.51 Ken's Steel Door Repair Service 222.50 Leef Bros. , Inc. 20.00 Metro Sales, Inc. 215.00 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board 224.44 Motor Parts Service Co. , Inc. 10.98 Northern States Power Co. 317.97 Northern States Power Co. 244,451.39 Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 249.84 Gene Pass 86.00 United States Post Office 50.00 Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 3.98 Ron's Shakopee Cleaners 20.50 Terrill Roquette 83.00 Kent Sanders 80.00 Schoell and Madson, Inc. 2,352.60 Scott County Sheriff Communications 350.60 Serco 64.00 Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. 667.50 Shakopee Public Utilities (Petty Cash) 148.95 Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 211.04 Starks Cleaning Service 78.10 Suel Business Equipment 124.45 T and R Service 75.00 TMI Construction Services, Inc. 5,806.50 Total Tool 143.40 Truck Utilities and Mfg, Inc. 11.96 Twin City Testing 105.00 United Compucred Collections, Inc. 79.20 Valley Industrial Propane, Inc. 9.89 Valley Locksmithing 26.74 Voss Electric Supply Co. 59.16 Wilensky Truck and Equipment Co. 83.65 Water Products, Inc. 1,862.99 Wesco 2,359.00 Bills Toggery, Inc. 59.94 City of Shakopee 918.70 Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the bills be allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried. Motion by Kirchmeier,seconded by Kephart that the minutes of the December 5, 1985 regular meeting and the December 16, 1985 special meeting be approved as kept. Motion carried. Mr. Jim Weeks from Citizens State Bank requested the Commission consider having Citizens State Bank a drop off for payment of the electric bills. The Commission declined at this time. A communication from the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association regarding an upcoming meeting for a MMUA sponsored insurance program was acknowledged. Repre- sentatives from the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will attend the meeting scheduled for January 29, 1986. Manager Van Hout reported to the Commission on the promotion of Marvin Athmann to crew foreman effective Janaury 1, 1986. Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to offer Resolution #301, A Resolution Designating Official Depositories. Ayes: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Cook and Kephart. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried. Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to offer Resolution #302, A Resolution Designating an Official Means of Publication. Ayes: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Kephart and Cook. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried. Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to offer Resolution #303, A Resolution Authorizing Water Service to a Part of Prairie House lst Addition. Ayes: Commissioners Cook, Kirchmeier and Kephart. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried. Some of the finished job descriptions were presented to the Commission. The Commission expressed a desire for the employees to peruse their job descriptions for input. An outline for an employment agreement was presented by Manager Van Hout. A discussion followed. An updating of the five year budget plan is scheduled for March, 1986. Some upcoming plats were discussed. There were 7 fire calls for a total man hours of 5 hours and 35 minutes. There were no lost time accidents for December, 1985. Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried. The next regular meeting will be held on February 3, 1986 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room. Barbara Menden, Commission Secretary F F • A F F F A F F F A F -00 A F F F A F F F A F F R F F F F F F F F -n r UI U1 R t F L1 G+ W N+ LM W W W WL,, W W W w NN v 1V IV,V N r r r rr r r ) C W R R co ! 1,- R r r R W r W tiU tip W -)0l vt W N N r,-+ W A W W W IV r r R UI UI UI W r 0 f) C W R r R N R O R u) r R �r UIr p000001-Im Lr ar NFN O rN0 R Nr OrOO NO nO U, U n n dV --I -1 'U n O n V) Z C7 S O n A C -. 'L-1" -u 'V r'U H N C m L= S V)V) 'O C C 2 L 'D V) 0 W C m O. O m D ;u m p:. -+a C .-Cm COm-12 wi."ti+m0 zm PW zm-447C OCC m z0mmm aC p zO z- z S x D p 'U2 "0 r7 fn .X Xm ZZ r-, V) .,pr z mPua z2rmr -yr -1 m z S m .-+ -0 n2n0 -n"r CzC m-4I Dm prr 1- r Om -P Ll) 3Ar ND D .'UD \ V 0 N D -'1 70 -4 r mmZ ri V)r, Z -1 rT!mp Orr) r • 'Q0 ;Qar O ZT -ir .'a -1X C: Z: z J - -n .z a D .y rz pW A -1 p1•••.r 2Oti N1-,nN " n" z rmxv ►+o-i " m0 O m m r r-ir m r -1z M rzz Gm- 000-< zT (rim D Oz z mSm Gl) m -n m' m z .m z = f V) A OU,z "11 n0 z O �+r; r.. 3. C C V) r -t0 rel Lim (+ !7z z z n 0 m mm 2C1-� Cn V) m m zr C, O---� �-" m m m 1 11 a+ m Cl) n Cl) m x :00 a m (n V) x Ro O -Zm .,mz3r3- to mnrT 1 -n -n M 2 -K K N -1 -0 GC omm V,,0 C zACz3 -iD0-i ZC' -- ;u m CN C (� -p G G. r r r r 1 1� rel X -1 S TiTI C-) -0 -1 A a z m ; m Nn x4� cv n c -0mX. r- r- H c z C) 3 S 2 Z H C .r T1 N-1 D -ti wr .1 n • O -1 -V U .-: r. M, C D '� N r V: mri - � . rD n O)-•Ir -I -4 -1 z C m n -i zz 1-4 ;;D -,n .+-, m ;u Z7 Cr m 3zz ,- r z m m C' -1r n C) r = V) m Ll MLo N r") U) -+ 3s G z z V) m m 00 xz 1 .. • a z CC ►+In V) m N V, z O 1-1 n m r) r-, rd .O A 2 V) V) r 2:m 1 I'1, w G') Caw a � z • �: z n n r1 z Ln n V. v v M p y 0 Z m i I i i i i i X r �� y. N• 'r I,,.. V F Wr.1 O.. ' CpI 'D' W I -P ,d O' ' .J O! W I OMAN WCD m I'D W W. co %D r%D r w O 3w iC .00 o 0: ¢' '.LII ,r N LD Z-P ON CO n z G0; m 0000 UA OO OTC), F-O OO w OOO-0000 F 00 JV-4%D Ln�1 C: O O. O O O: O O O' G O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W 4;2 =0 Ol-O C 0 N 0 0l 0 0 W G O W.P 0 0 T F ➢'. 1 t 1 I i m i i i i i i I i ni m I 1 t i 1 1 I 1 I I I I m t7+i LL i A w► W; G i N ! 'r N W ir, V N! r... ' F! LD !T W F'.N T O Ln O Ln,%D r F w Ln, 1.n 'fy r; 67 :UI O%I LT F L7ti N r N O r F -i.D Oti 17ti V 4-r O 1 Ir r W w W LA 'N O J w W T r w A' -L V Ln N• G 'O .1•' F' %D :W G7 Lr;0 Iz O N W UI TJ W 'D 0 W 17,; O ,� tib F.G%D r Ai+W W N-. (I," L; O' O 'O - O' O 'O O� O Co G o o-y W N GQ O.ti F -C. O 0 CD .V U)F G:V. r .0 0 Wl>,D O F-i x -- o. o 0Z O 'CD- O! O O O O O a O O CD O O UI O Un O o O) O :Ln o o-O Ln �o LII ti0 O VI 0 W 0 ►y; G;' D 'O O, .O C2 00; O .000000.000000000000000 D 0 O 00000000 -9' O 1 O :O O 0 'O O! 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 C) O O O O O O O a M: z a �D; w w or �Ulwm_ D W W I N f Ln O':%D W O Oti! J N >p ti0 r 40 r F O 0I O T F A O O A! Ln J N CD%D-+T T CO n o, O o o, O a o, Oo� m a000 Ln In CD oTPr oa 0L M 00 4� 0 -)Jv w0J.. C: �1 O' O 0 0; C a. o; 00l tiD O o oa O oa o O.0 w o o OT o o O N O T 00 W Ga w.000T0 )' i r f+ r W ,• r -i .+ r r K)j N io N r r T r r r 1 co- Lb A ,o CO• m- N ! N N LN 17, J N; r O 0 m FW:, O >T F�NT N LII r F J m cc I.. Ln: CP `r ri W ;Ut r{ r, Oti N -+NOr PV �TiP O� Nr+ Ov r W WF WOE OW OV +OO (IN + r + � + + + + + + + r r + + r + + r r + s • + r + r r .• r r + + r + + r C Ji J ILII NI O 'o .R' ♦! T w Zn t'W r ON W�D W'>Itr WJ' o N tiDF O%D J IN No ►�rr D, 0; o :a o.. O -0 OOJJNo aQ:Po -lo Or; o 00T.O to W .a- w= MWLT ;ID; t - GI o 0 o O �o - of o! tip a 00o L4 OO o.0%DU1a 0.6 o oOJ'OV LT 0 0 W W CoM ►1 i.... •Oi •O •O •O • �•O •O i •O•Oj • • • 00• •N • • •OT�• r`• •O'0 • • IO• • • • • •O•O • • •O• •N • • • • D I ' O '. i r 000O.O OD .O OW O Or 00 N ONWrFN Z! 0 O; CDi r.. a 00a 0 0G 00:0-10:0 0cr, 0 ON o0:00 J OOr TO OFOti'- n: ) W r-+LfI O. N N: i wLlINNWF.. .D 1 , I I � ! - r S L W n o m a o ct \ K O M c, o N rr T r-, T PO M N T D A O z C rIl -/ 2 r� a' r: rq N D T O .Q ry a '-1 a r . .. .. Z W: C O i i i i i o -� a rI l .D I r , a O. o; r j • -i o 0 Wi c N D a i W' W co of s! rl i W W LI W W W W L1 GW W rt W L1 W W G+ W W W W W R W W W L1 L1 W W LI W W W GN 41 W W W rt W W R W W T i- UI UI UI UI UI UI UI UI UI UI rt W W W W W W W W W W R r"-r-r- r- r r-.)- r-- r-r- n-r-1-+f- R L--1 O R 0 0 Y c K! r►•-4--1--N1-+0 00 O R 4. r W W N N NN N rt LnP UI(.W W W W L1 W L'iI F-. rI-+rO R W W R Nr C)C L70 0)F WNa"-O i.DW V 0 R I•-- CV 0NrW NrO Ir U1kW NUIF W NI-- w 0 PI) rt N♦+ n0 T O Tvya vmml-IaC I-1 Dn 3n V) IP VS r- Ito r 2G Stn mtn z :=v wvnww r- " V) v1n -1 -n 0 c n ., ratnrzzzoa Z C OO - -100001 - r-`Or•I-Irmrimr co-- m-.+t v m y A -m z O ►+ rarV) nG: oo Sr -i 17 C Car rS na n 0C) 0 x me r, n 1-400zm Ja m z x Viz -Ir -1 M -1 mm z• 1-1 • Mr m wz1-1 -m n-1 rl n mmn mr cz rr ac = c n n nn m n . -c z (n 0 zXzm z 71 m n n 0 r m z • r • m aUo ;Qc cx - r- -1 0 A o c, l Q 4 na)mrlr--c 0 m m-i 0 - -i z vz1•"11-,1rn r, ;u a -•1a rr mm o �T3 2xm <yT c D O2 mC 0 m zna) .+ Iao r": ►+z zz- -1 W.. T r -( r m V r' T rD ;o r!-iD C -i ."1•'2^7 =-'ti G^. acx 0 O^I. ccn Z' nC` 0C -i C-1 r-;v C nz m NOz no -` zz1-1 r. r1GO T -cS-iO <a z2 yvAIF Sa rr1 G) m-+A A Q. ..J .'fir 0 m 00 -ixmz CD = z D Sm • a D -iz W I tn• mra►+rvvm D z z N cr N ►+ x 2 2 fS 0 rl-1 S -1 z x--.-•I -i o m z - -i m m r 3 N m n 0 1--I 0 v l v D D I -n Ti r•1 m r- v,D2m A.- LO -0C V, Sh-I v m0 M X x r .. mcg 1'1 tri I- mmo mmo m< 2 XR m1----` ti ,m 0 mzm ,T, mSSHnr00 --1 V: -1 C^ Xn � G arl Amm rl Om -i zz D O 70 . - ;D0Z M �•`--+mm �-` mV) 0 m0 r� C 0 -n •D Xzw ;c D "' -G) .. V. 3 S s2 xti -iI Zz 0m S ;Ix -` z z C rl c 0 T r x . o r ..-0 .+�, V,,.Z 0 C' r, rq ri •-- z z r'; z V' z mm C O m C7 Tm: O D N n. Liw h3 .ln m0 r. -i -•I-,1 w u Ln m m m o y • m < m z c m c U1 0- V! o D; J-I OD O N'J O c% 0.: ' Ul W V m LII: r r: Ar i P P. 0i1 -R U7 C) N N LD I r V ►+W S w . O Nty'i %D Vr(A 0s; A w' V' tT W N LA o-W o V U7 0; L71 F N w n C O C UN O O =.,L O O C 0,� O O LI O O O w O 0 0 Ul 0 0 0 0 0 V J.O M O O C 0M O O W .D O c m OaOOOO+ OOO fn: O �L7OO o'O OO ON O OG CO GOLJON W:0000 OO O OO LP ON o- I r x z c Z, m IM i 1 i 1 j � i r11 fr N ,yy' r o r1 lDi Lfij ►-i A m." %[j w+ ori real I NW!N VI N•O LPw 1-•I it T!I- Ln; -R O0.., •+ rNW IDO N, ;d WO; w NV • r r r • •r r r r r i r r r r l • • r r , • r r r r i r r • r r r 00.000 O O O N... O; 00'" FF0W O O 01,01 V N 000; VI 0V1 wI GOD oOO OC i- F 00'O G7 Q: ooC a Ln a G o 0 o c o 0 O'O W O O c o' o cc m' -- CO'O O OO O O O- U1' 0000Ul1 000 O 00 O O O O 000 O'0 0 0 0 0 0 N ON < r• • t • • • f • • • • ; • • • • • i• • • f • f • • • • • • • • • t • • • • t • • • • • • f m 00 z. :O C(D CD O O.o O O.O. co 00'00000000 'O 0000000000:000'000; O OO O 00 C' , ;r D! 0)i .A A Y t+ .UI N N O. J! 1-+ 'N ♦•- W i I i.- + i0 _I N Y-I'N J f.J 1 fs A O t0 J i co vT Vi Q 0 W O,N i N! H F #j 1 r L i•+ F JI to N J O N U, •0 U,,L-I TI d O' J, T W N%.M O,O O --i LT O: Ln , ? N W n :11 i 11-1,0-- OUf.O 000a O O010O O O CIO_ -.4 OO O•O 00• O CO W : C O.O co, O O;O UI; O Z,O O O.O O O O 0) O O O O Q,= O C O U7 UI,O O O O o 0 O O O O) O N r G %D N r/A�D m U1 i - A to I V F N f"1 C, f i r N*- W-•,A- N U1 t0 co i r 4..- V j r o O N Ln I P N Q� Lp �D, ♦ W O i J W�D C- r r r r r r r • r r r • • • r • r r r + r • r • . r r + <' i r07JINIM,'Nm 0, F' %D -4- J M= CO N,w W6DW LAO,U,NO CO �D 0)N nl V1 J O O..> 0 co A,O 1T1 F MCD O-S w LP W O 01.A -111, O F J O:O-.4O O O O W O A A L- I pJ? 1--Ln!0)o o O WI 0Coto O J' OOOT J owvt ONC OW•a 1D':oU 010 OO! it 0 J W H i• • • s • • r :..O OTO 00 •0 W• %•D •0 N• •�0 •0 0• 60 D N 0 10 00,0• OOs 0 •T •T Of z 'O v GOO 00:0100 O Ln O w.00 OA 00O0� O 00 OOD O OON 01:000 O 00, O X00 N ON n n ;1 m;. 0 r+ 0+C r LII!Ln •+; o�'I o f N II� o O N W tT CP o d ^1 i • • • t :• • • • • • • •0 •o• • • • • • • • t •'0 or•wu1W•., rD o' - omo NW r: o r ►+N n ` I bit -i I 1 • W W R W W W W R W 4 W W W LN W W W W W W co W W W W U+ T ►+ R r R W w w w R k^ R U, V,Ui U. U, N til UI U, N U, U. VI U;UI a L w R o-+ O R tii fV N N • V• R U- r A A w W W W N N N N N N- up W R O C R O Nh+O R o R Oto N n+ OZ W NF+1i CTA W NO V nv LP ' O -/ V7 H :L x n x M n n n ix x In a N C -n 'U S n T VS :9 L V)A C n %U L z - ,•+ Ore O O x m►+=o m3. f-r Ofr r) -4- mz m Z O ►+ D CD N 0 ;z z-1 C c D T V)" 3D -L .17 C N z 0 m0 -.1 Z nz n n " -Lm .L m A CC'S Zf.r Nm rzn nf-,mn O•C➢ \ K V) N m !'iZ A --, ..1 C: 'V: • YV) Gx O • rr2m • - O n n T r r f-i m m m -N Z n to 0-1 z m 0 O m0 m r r x V, -n T v, z T"0 V) m rn 0 ri T Z7 zz s i c -f " " %' GC G.•arr rGrrz 7.7 • -+30 Ciz T Z Z "y Z z T rr OaIn N C z m m .+ m m o LnrrLnnoLnLnf-fzzv7Cf-+ CT ►, z S O V! V, ."O CZ Gf-+V)Trf W Rrl 1 mrm -tir X C N N(n N J :17 C -i T x V, LO H -a m TV: V. 00Ln V, c mT n ov G .. z rczr- 1 -, - r o zx z r: G c s n nazr cD z rl D z - r - cmc ., z V) m m rn ti M L.1 z C m n I I N N! co t 0 r W . O O O O O ' r D o' o' �1 'V J• t' s :O V Ln t0 m w P v o .0 v R LSD s w 'V N N' tD; A U7 a, 0': A :N w o GO tI Ulo OD OD CO o r.t, OO OO OOOO 0 fj w o V'O C: m - r o D D W- U,o p o 4 r iV -4 o 0 0 0 0 o v o 0 o L9 •* o o v a 1 L 1 1 r's z i o c i y t m. I I tO m N i Lr+ o r N IT r A Ln UI, 1- !0% j F+WIN A rl Jot w !P Un w w N , ; , •r V1"0 A O N i • 1 N ID C' O C O -G O o to IG UI G o G G C G c p c O v 0 m' -- - - A A A O O O :O O O O O :O O O O O O-O O 0 00 0 O'= < O O 0 0 O, O 0.0 0 O O. O .O O G O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 Z ` ! O O OO O O CD 0 O O. O ;OO OO OO OO OO 0000 00 C' rn co LAI. > O i L Ln; N y r r r r • .• o o' o+ Ln t0 s W L. N L7` L.+ .A A- .1 :D A 0 A co a-1 V) of W A - n t i 1 • • • • • • • • • • • • ♦ • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .1 O O W 0 OO v. V) COD LD m o •� o Oo Oo OOO D ONCD O O O 0 Ln LL O p O .R A N D 1 w i W i i i i 1+ LII N W to Ln N A tD A -0 A Co Ln r W N _ I•'I W 1..... F i ID ►+ A V .R W VI LII �1 V: N N I./1♦D A o O W A N .1 `V O N UI �7 IR> V L71 O O N QI *0 V1-4,%o tD N D UI N Ln o N LT P o Ln N r n0 CA C 0 0 0 P O D O LT N N O t0' A N O W W I LII --I D 0 0 0 0 O O D O N Im V7 O H j j m o 0o Ln Lr opo �+ ►.; t0 Do0Doo0oo400NmowD z; v m t I 0 00 Ln Ln O0 0 PN 97,; LD :W000 DOODOD 0 L P C) n� a t , i f N, N r h+, CII t0 i • Y • • • • • • • ♦ • • . • j '9 t0 w ✓t P :tD N Cl) MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: Public Access Manager Non-Compliance ( Informational) DATE: February 19, 1986 Introduction On February 5 , 1986 , one day after the City Council gave preliminary approval to the cable franchise modifications proposed by Zylstra- United, United officials laid off Shakopee ' s public access manager. Having received no formal notification of the company' s action, the cable company is now in non-compliance with the cable franchise ordinance. Background In our negotiation sessions with the cable company, the subject of studio usage was brought up on several occasions. City of Shakopee staff commented to Zylstra-United officials that the public access studio was not being used by the public to any great extent. City officials also stated that the studio manager had not been performing up to his ability. On February 5 , 1986 the cable company laid off their employees in charge of public access in both Shakopee and Chaska with the exception of playback operators. In talking with Zylstra-United Division Manager, Mr. Jim Clark, their rational for this course of action stemmed from the comments that they had received from City staff and the disruptiveness that the studio managers were causing in their respective studios. City staff had no intention of portraying to Zylstra-United officials that a studio manager was not needed in Shakopee. However, the cable company has construed our comments in this fashion. Because the City of Shakopee did not receive prior notification and give formal approval to Zylstra-United' s staffing reduction plan, the company is in non-compliance with the franchise ordinance at this time. The City therefore, does have the option of fining the company for non-compliance ( $100. 00 per day) . Since the lay-off of the Shakopee Access Coordinator, staff has received no calls from individuals requesting use of the studio or equipment. In light of the fact that the City intends on hiring an access person in early April, staff is not recommending any recourse against the company. Staff is also concerned about the ramifications that a fine may have on the modifications agreed to at this time. Finally, the cable company has stated that they are willing to extend the playback operators hours if we do desire. They are also going to provide someone to train in the person that we hire as access manager. On February 18 , 1986 the Shakopee Cable Communications Committee met to consider what action to take in regard to this issue. At that time the Commission moved to inform the cable company of their dissatisfaction with company' s action in regard to Shakopee ' s studio manager. The Commission also moved to inform the cable company that they are in non-compliance with the franchise ordinance and subject to fine by the City at a later date. The fining of cable company will be contingent on the orderly transition of the studio to the City and the company' s fulfillment of the modifications agreed to earlier by the City. BAS/jms MM V L-J T�T^ V< H-3 d ci K W N I—+ O W Ol lO N �1 C] oo J C) C ro W t3- (D Fl W WF-'• Z: ON c) (D O 9 C) H (D ro dro ro rt � ro (D � ( rt n (n K • C � J O O rt •• O FJ O �C O �C CZ CZ � � F-'• 'LS N• CT.I K ul co �] (] d lTi H •• O O C� O n �3 O N• rt w rrtt E b b N :� (D co 00 K Ol to N UP �1 F3 M O rt W W (D W Sv H OO �l " O (n U) P to P. r o � H.� rn N. rt K N N N• N F ' �] O O W 61 C] C] n'J G) rH " O O H P. O r K r N N F� 00 tj �3 �o a N L 1 ± 00 H TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 25 , 1986 Mayor Reinke presiding 11 Roll Call at 7 : 00 P .M. 21 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 3] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 4] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterick are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) *51 Approval of Minutes of February 4, 1986 6] Communications: a] Glenda Spiotta re : appointment of managers for Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District b] Virgil Mears re : city logo c] Connie Morrison re : fiscal disparities formula d] League of Mn. Cities re : federal tax reform restrictions e] Lee Stoltzman re : resignation from Planning Commission - Res. #2522 7] Public Hearings: None 8] Boards and Commissions : Planning Commission: *a] Annual Report b] Preliminary Plat of Garden Villa 1st Add 'n. , lying W of Marschall Road and N of abandoned RR tracks c] Rezoning Request by Ackerberg Companies Ltd. for 6 .5 ac at 1267 Marschall Road (So of Ken Theis property) d] Shakopee Valley Square 1st Add ' n. , lying E of Marschall Rd and N of Hwy 101 - Archeaological information e] Fuel Tanks - informational f] Racetrack Study - informational Energy and Transportation Study: g] Transit Joint Powers Agreement Cable Communications Commission: h] Public Access Studio Staffing Plan 9] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 :00 PM] a] Engineering Inspection Personnel Needs b] Designation of Members to Shakopee Basin Watershed *c] Dental Bid Follow-up d] Scott County Transportation Coalition TENTATIVE AGENDA February 25 , 1986 Page -2- 9] Reports from Staff continued: e] Approval of the bills in amount of $473 ,092. 90 f] Application for Taxicab License by Yellow Taxi Service Corp . - memo on table g] City Code 6. 41 Masseur and Masseuce Registration h] Street Lighting in Horizon Heights i] Acquisition of Old Women' s Correctional Facility Site j ] Policy and Program Issues Involving Shakopee Use of Tax Increment Financing k] Hiring Temporary Employee for Police Department 101 Resolutions and Ordinances : a] Res . No . 2519 , Ordering Feasibility Report on Monticeto Heights Street Preservation b] Res . No. 2520, Ordering Feasibility Report on Deerview Acres Street Preservation *c] Res. No. 2521 , Amending Res . No. 1514 and Revising the City of Shakopee ' s Standard Specifications *d] Res . No. 2516, Initiating the Vacation of the Public Alley in Block 30, ESP - reconsider and table *e] Res . No. 2518, Accepting Work on the 1985-3 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement Program *f] Res. No. 2525 , Approving Specs and Ordering Ad for Bids for 1986-2 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement Program *g] Res . No . 2524, Requesting Abatement of Special Assessments and Reclassification for Property Taxes of Various Parcels *h] Res . No. 2523 , Amending Res . No . 2479 Adopting the 1986 Fee Schedule i] Ord. No. 189 , Amending the City Code Relative to Gambling j ] Ord. No. 184, Establishing A Moratorium on Development 11] Other business : a] March meeting dates b] c] 121 Five Minute Recess 131 Convene in Executive Session: a] Labor Negotiations b] NSP Pole Relocation Along 4th Avenue Improvement Project 14] Reconvene as City Council 15] Adjourn John K. Anderson City Administrator OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR SESSTION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 4, 1986 Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Leroux, Colligan, Vierling, and Wampach present. Cncl Lebens was absent. Also present were John K. Anderson, City Admr. ; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; and Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney. Colligan/Leroux moved to recess for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority Meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Leroux moved to reconvene at 7:10 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Liaison reports were given by councilmembers. Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the minutes of January 21, 1986. Motion carried with Cncl. Colligan abstaining. Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the minutes of January 28, 1986. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Tom Worthington and Ed Crozier, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Mn. Valley National Wildlife Refuge, gave a 20 minute slide and tape presentation on the progress of the refuge development. Wampachi'Vie'-'ling moved to accept and place on file the letter from Minnesota Department of Jobs and Training on their move to a new location. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to direct the staff to write to the Governor regarding the specific impact that the Governor's Budget Proposal will have on the City of Shakopee. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to receive and place on file the letter from the Legislative Commission on Mn. Resources re: natural resource opportunities. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2517, A Resolution on Tax Exempt Bonds, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Wampach moved to accept the letter from the City of Prior Lake dated 1/31/86 and also from Canterbury Downs dated 1/30/86 on the renaming of County Road 83 to Canterbury Road. Motion carried unanimously. (Canterbury Downs to pay reasonable costs of name change to residents as well as street sign at Jct. of CR-42 and CR-83. Leroux/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on the Vacation of drainage and utility easements within the plat of Halo 2nd Addition. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council February 4, 1986 Page -2- The City Clerk explained that this is a request by the current developer of Shakopee Valley Square for platting over Halo 2nd Addition and also in the plat is land to the north of Halo 2nd addition. Staff is recommending that if Council concurs with the request by the developer that they direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution coming back at a later time. The City Clerk recommended that Council defer adopting the resolution vacating the easements until the final plat is actually ready for recording and is brought back to the Council in proper order. Mayor Reinke asked if any councilpersons had questions and if there were any questions 6r comments from members of the audience. There was no response. Colligan/Leroux moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling directed the staff prepare a proper resolution for vacating various easements involved and that said resolution will not take affect until final replatting of this development with relocation of any easements to be part of the developers agreement relocation of any actual utilities to be part of that developers agreement. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Wampach/Colligan moved 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. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Leroux/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on the Cable Franchise Modifications. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock, Administrative Intern, gave a brief review of the modifications requested by Zylstra-United. The primary area of modification being requested at this time is in- the area of public access. The Company is proposing that the City of Shakopee take over the public access function. Jim Clark, Zvlstra-United, and Ron Ward, Independent School District 720 were present. Discussion followed. Mr. Ward explained potential uses of the institutional network by the school. Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone else in the audience who wished to speak and there was no response. Colligan/Leroux moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved that the Cable Franchise modifications as outlined in Attachment 2 of the memo from Barry Stock, Administrative Intern, dated January 30, 1986, along with additional modifications: 1) the transfer ability of any agreed to modifications be subject to prior approval of the City, and 2) that the $12,400 security fund on deposit with the CIty may be exchanged for a $25,000 letter of credit, be drafted into ordinance fashion to amend the Cable Franchise Ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. icc Doc. No. 108) Leroux/Vierling moved to 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, with costs to be paid for by Zylstra-United. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved that the staffcome up with a proposed method of staffing the public access studio for consideration prior to the ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. Shakopee City Council February 4, 1986 Page -3- Barry Stock, Administrative Intern gave a brief review of the Dial-a-Ride bid specifications. Colligan/Vierling moved to approve the Dial-a-Ride bid specifica- tions as recommended by the Energy and Transportation Committee and authorize the appropriate City officials to proceed with the bidding process. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Leroux moved 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. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to take a 15 minute recess 9:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Leroux moved to reconvene at 9: 10 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. John Anderson, City Administrator gave a review of his memo dated January 30, 1986, regarding the City Hall Siting Committee Report. Vierling/Colligan moved that we authorize the appropriate City officials to advertise for architectural firms interested in submitting an RFP to the City for final site selection and construction of a new City Hall utilizing the list of architectural firms and the drart RFP supplied by the City Hall Siting Committee and approved at their January 28, 1986 meeting, and that we take a look at all three of the alternative sites listed in John K. Anderson, City Administrator, memo dated January 30, 1986 and the cost to study each. (cc Doc. No. 109) Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Wampach/Leroux moved to direct staff to not proceed with an amendment which would allow fuel storage in the Ag or R-1 districts. Discussion ensued on the process of monitoring fuel storage tanks in the rural area. Leroy Houser, Building Inspector for City of Shakopee stated that as of January 1, 1986, EPA and MPCA both have reporting requirements for anyone having an underground gas tank. Leroux/Vierling moved to table the action on this as moved and direct it back to staff for further consideration. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved to table the Dental Insurance Bids until next meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to maintain the present utility billing system to pay for the cost of garbage service. Leroux/Colligan moved to direct staff to write a letter to the State Board of Electricity confirming their appointment as the Shakopee Electrical Inspector authority for 1986 at 857 of the electrical permit fees collected, at such time as it is stated by the present assignee that he cannot complete assignments or in the judgment of the City he cannot complete assignments. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to pass a motion approving the League of Minnesota Cities proposed LegiAlative Policies for 1986 as mailed. Motion carried unanimously. Colligan/Vierling moved to reimburse Scott County in the amount of $5,462.63 for work ordered by the City in conjunction with the CR-17 1974-1 County State Aid.-.Project (SP 70-617-04) . Roll call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Shakopee City Council February 4, 1986 Page -4- Vierling/Leroux moved to authorize payment of Semi-Final Estimate No. 2 for 1985-3 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement Program, in the amount of $626.52, to Siehndel Construction, 210 Elmwood, LeSuer, MN 56058. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion Carried. Vierling/Wampach moved to approve bills in the amount of $853,946. 10. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion Carried. Colligan/Vierling moved to 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 75% of the cities in the state choose to participate. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion Carried. Vierling/Wampach moved to publish condensed version of official proceedings at a cost of $250/month. Leroux stated that he agrees with the motion made, however he would like to have two conditions on it. Number one being that for at least one month we continue as we are and publish a notice that the minutes are going to be shortened to a condensed version and secondly that is be reviewed after 6 months. Colligan/Wampach moved that the above amendments stated by Cncl. Leroux be added to the above motion. Motion carried unanimously. :Roll Call on main motion as amended: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. r Vierling/Leroux moved to expand the 1985 Shakopee Municipal Home Mortgage Program to include existing housing. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Colligan/Wampach moved to authorize staff to purchase three Alco-Senser Intoximeter units at a cost of $1,335.00 ($445.00 each) using general contingency funds. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Colligan moved to direct Susan Estill from Krass & Monroe to accept the $2,000 settlement offered by Detroit Diesel Allison and Hendrickson Manufacturing Company for repairs to the City's ladder truck. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux moved to 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. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2515, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2457 Adopting the 1986 Budget, and move its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the Shakopee City Council Goals and Objectives for 1986 as outlined on pages 1-18 on the attachment dated February 4, 1986, of the Council Worksession Goals and Objectives 1986. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Leroux moved 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, and that staff negotiate a sale to Malkerson's with the tax figured into the settlement. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Shakopee City Council February 4, 1986 Page -5- Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2516, A Resolution Initiating the Vacation of the Public Alley in Block 30, According to the Plat of East Shakopee, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Colligan moved to 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. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Wampach moved that staff make note on Planning Commission Agenda that the Council is concerned with the request by Scottland Companies to exceed the height limitations by fourteen feet to construct a Class II Restaurant and that it be considered in conjunction with the needs assessment study. Motion carried unanimously. John Anderson discussed the upcoming proposed event scheduled March 5th for Shakopee booth at the Taste of Minnesota Festival in July. Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer, stated that Mr. Dressen of the Dresser Oil Company has asked his assistance to sketch up a site plan and do a spill prevention control and counter measure and certify it. Colligan/Leroux moved that Ken Ashfeld work with Mr. Dresen for inspectional purposes only and authorizing approval of his design. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Vierling moved to recess for Executive Session at 11:28 p.m. to discuss 1986 labor negotiations. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to reconvene at 11:58 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Leroux/Colligan moved to adjourn to Tuesday February 25, 1986 at 7:00 p.m. Judith S. Cox City Clerk Carol Schultz Recording Secretary MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk 1 RE: Mn Deer Hunters Association/Mn River Valley Chapter DATE: February 26 , 1986 Introduction: Mn River Valley Chapter of Mn Deer Hunters Association is holding a banquet at the K of C Hall on March 14 as well as a raffle. In order to conduct a raffle they need a gambling license and at this point it is to late to obtain a license because the State Gambling Board meets once a month, only on the 4th Monday of the month: Background: Under the State Gambling Law, the Minnesota Deer Hunters Association, Grand Rapids, Minnesota, can conduct raffles in other municipalities under their license, if the municipalities have no objection. Other local chapters of the Mn Deer Hunters Association have been conducting banquets and raffles under the gambling license of the State Organization. Shakopee City Code precludes the Mn Deer Hunters Association from gambling (raffles ) because it is not an organization which carries on activities and is located and based in the city (its local chapter, Mn River Valley Chapter is not precluded) . When the State Gambling Board took over licensing gambling, as a result of a new gambling law, the City Council made a conscious decision to limit gambling to local servicecrganizations for two reasons : 1 ) to keep the gambling proceeds within the community and 2 ) keep the policing problems at a minimum. All the proceeds of the raffle conducted by the Mn River Valley Chapter of the Mn Deer Hunters Association remain for the local chapter except one-half of the proceeds over $500 . 00 . The policing problems created by one raffle conducted by a local chapter would most likely be minimal, if at all. Mn River Valley Chapter first communicated with the City of Shakopee on February 11th, assuming that there would be no problem as has been the case in other communities . Application in the name of MDHA Minnesota River Valley Chapter , 734 Minnesota Street , was denied by the State Gambling Board under the Mn Deer Hunters Association License on February 24th. Alternatives : 1 ) Make no change to the City Code. 2 ) Amend the Code to permit the Council to make exceptions and specify conditins - City Attorney and Clerk advise against. 3 ) Amend the Code permitting any gambling by local chapters of state organizations. 4 ) Amend the Code permitting raffles by local chapters of state organizations . 5 ) Amend the Code permitting raffles by local chapters of state organizatins in conjunctin with a banquet and/or dance. 6 ) Amend the code permitting raffles by anyone eligible for a state gambling license when in conjunction with a banquet and/or dance. 7 ) Amend the Code permitting raffles by anyone eligible for a state gambling license. 8 ) Repeal the Code altogether and make no restrictions over and above the state law. Recommendation: Number 6 to be amended at October 4th Council -meeting and publica- tion on March 12th. This will meet the March 14th banquet date. ► Action Requested: Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for r 4 , 1986 , amending the City Code to permit raffles to be conducted by any fraternal, religious, veterans or other non-p,,rofit organization, which does not carry on its activities in and iso°located and based in the City of Shakopee, when held in conjunction with a banquet or dance. L JSC:cah E 6J SCOTT COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS i° 7; or COURT HOUSE 109 SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379.1382 (612)-445-7750, Ext.105 ;g 61985 R.E.MERTZ,District 3,Chairman SHAK0,1E MARK H.STROMWALL,District 4,Vice-Chairman WM.KONIARSKI,District 1 ANTHONY WORM,District 2 JOHN F.CASEY,District 5 February 5, 1986 To: All Government Jurisdictions in the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District From: Glenda D. Spiotta Recording Secretary Subject: Appointment of Managers Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 112.42, the Board of Commissioners for Scott County will be making appointments for two Managers of the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District prior to the expiration of the terms of Harold Gustafson and Marvin Oldenburg on March 3, 1986. The Board of Commissioners requests that you submit your recommendations for appointments for Manager as soon as possible. Please contact your Commissioner, or submit your recommendation to the County Administrator's Office. Thank you. cc: Chairman of the Board PL/SL Watershed District Liaison Co. Attorney Co. Administrator File: PL/SL Watershed District An Equal Opportunity Employer DISTRICT OFFICES INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 720 505 SOUTH HOLMES JAMES STILLMAN,Chairperson SCOTT COUNTY GAYDEN F.CARRUTH,Ph.D. JOAN LYNCH, Vice-Chairperson SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 Superintendent o7 Schools GAIL REBECCA KELSO,Clerk TELEPHONE: 445-4884 VIRGIL S.MEARS JOHN GOIHL. Treasurer Assistant Superintendent JAMES SORENSEN,Director SUZANNE VANHOUT,Director JANET WENDT,Director 2-17-86 Mr . John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 E. lst Ave . Shakopee , MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson : ` In an effort to keep you up-dated about the involvement of the Tourism Committee with regard to the official city logo and its development I submit the following information. The Tourism Sub-Committee on Signs/Banners/Flags has been meeting with the Chamber Retail Committee on Banners in an effort to come up with an attractive display for Main Street which will also have the effect of advertising the six larger tourist attractions in our community and to give directions to tourists looking for the attractions through directional signs . One of the items we would like to have on these banners/ flags and signs is the official city logo. We are aware that the City is in the process of developing a logo and the committee felt it might be of some help. The final design will be that of the City ' s choice . Therefore , an ad will appear in the Shakopee Valley News requesting suggestions from citizens . The high school art classes will also address this issue . There will be three prizes offered for submitted ideas but it will be a random drawing award - not a winning logo award . These ideas will be shared with those who are developing the city logo. That will be the extent of our involvement . We trust that this is acceptable to the City Council . We would appreciate a decision and the final product soon in order that the finished product could be placed on the banners and directional signs which we would like to have in place by mid to late April 1986 . Thank you for your help. Si cerely, Vir 1 S . Mears M/d AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER �O C City of BU RNSVI LLE 1313 East Highway 13, Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 612/890-4100 February 19 , 1986 FEB 2 Mayor Eldon Reinke 129 E. First Avenue CITY " Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mayor Reinke: Representative Bill Schreiber is considering two proposals to modify the fiscal disparities formula. There are two options , one which would be implemented immediately and one which would be phased in over five years . The five year phased proposal appears to be the most likely for consideration. This proposal would eliminate the 1971 base year for calculating the formula and other existing exemptions and establish a graduated contribution rate of 20/40% and a redistribution rate of 100% of the contribution value . The proposal and its effect on com- munities is attached. As you can see, this proposal would result in an additional fiscal disparity burden in your community. I have personally discussed this proposal with Representative Schreiber and feel that he is not totally aware of the impact it will have on the growing, developing communities . We are the communities who are bringing new industry and new dollars into the State of Minnesota. However, our ability to continue to improve the economic outlook for the State could be severely affected by this proposal. i strongly encourage you to contact Representative Schreiber and express the impact this proposal will have on your community and your concern about the long term effect of the legislation. Since Rep. Schreiber has not yet introduced specific legislation, it is important to express your concerns to him immediately. Thank you for your help and support on this important issue. Sincerely, CITY OF BURNSVI LE _ Connie Morrison Mayor CM/dj CC: John Anderson, City Administrator ' k � l !' jn EFFECT OF REPRESENTATIVE SCHREIBER' S FIVE YEAR lY/ PHASED PROPOSAL X SIMULATION #8 Modified Version of #7 which phases-out the 1971 4 base year exemption and the other existing exemptions over a 5-year period. It also changes the graduated rate to a 20/40% schedule and redistributes 100% of the contribution value. This simulation is the first of the 5-year phase-in. Simulation #8 is a modified version of Representative Bill Schreiber's proposal which is described in #7. The differences between the two simulations are as follows : 1. Only 20% of the 1971 base value exemption is eliminated. That is, one-fifth of the 1971 C/I base assessed value is included in determining the contribution value. 2. Only 20% of the other existing exemptions are eliminated (i.e. , the pre-1979 TIF districts, and South St. Paul). As with (1) above, one-fifth of the assessed value which has been excluded as a result of the current exemptions is included in determining the contribution value. 3. The graduated rate schedule is 20% to 40%. 4. The entire contribution value is redistributed. No value is subtracted for the Metro Highway Fur;d. House Research 1/30/86 Minnesota House Research Department, ,Jan 28. 1986. 1 Fiscal Disparities Contr/Distr with 20% 1971 Base Eliminated, Adjusted For County-wide Sales Ratios, Using 20-40% Contribution Schedule, 20% TIF exemption elimiated, Factor of 2 Eliminated, 100% Pool Distributed, Personal Public Utility Excluded, Payable 1985 (thousands of dollars). CURRENT CURRENT CURRENT ADJUST ADJUST ADJUST NEW EFFECT DISTR CONTE GAIN/ DISTR CONTR GAIN/ CONTR ON TAX LOSS LOSS RATIO VALUE ANOKA COUNTY CITIES ANDOVER 8286 1697 6590 8398 472 7926 0.24 0.030 ANOKA 11923 7064 4859 11927 6465 5462 0.26 0.008 BETHEL 332 69 263 314 40 275 0.20 0.017 _ '. BLAINE (ANOKA) 29109 14883 14227 29037 10241 18795 0.24 0.035 CENTERVILLE 752 196 557 766 122 644 0.25 0.021 CIRCLE PINES 3374 425 2950 3790 280 3510 0.22 0.034 COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 13665 4695 8970 13669 4815 8853 0.27 -0.001 COON RAPIDS 32578 12435 20144 33028 8452 24575 0.25 0.023 EAST BETHEL 6174 786 5388 6262 351 5911 0.23 0.019 FRIDLEY 18144 29836 -11691 17995 29467 -11472 0.30 0.001 -. ----.--HAM LAKE -- -- -7039 --1704 5335 7081 966 6116 0.24 0.023 - HILLTOP 1276 299 977 1223 213 1009 0.20 0.012 LEXINGTON 2576 364 2212 2602 221 2381 0.20 0.025 LINO LAKES 4567 885 3681 4806 346 4460 0.25 0.031 RAMSEY 9077 3043 6034 9146 1718 7428 0.24 0.032 SPRNG LK PRK (ANOKA) 5359 2122 3237 5344 1578 3765 0.24 0.020 ST FRANCIS 1137 570 567 1152 438 714 0.27 0.021 TOWNS: BURNS 1320 32 1288 1345 2 1343 0.28 0.007 COLUMBUS 2564 319 2245 2622 159 2463 0.25 0.016 LINWOOD 2461 168 2293 2519 42 2476 0.24 0.016 OAK GROVE 3018 180 2838 3101 142 2959 0.26 0.006 CARVER COUNTY CITIES: s CARVER 577 117 461 567 34 534 0.24 0.030 CHANHASSEN (CARVER) 3522 1032 2490 3463 1457 2006 0.31 -0.010 CHASKA 7187 6296 892 7063 5226 1837 0.26 0.021 COLOGNE 489 226 262 483 175 308 0.25 0.022 HAMBURG 455 50 405 454 30 425 0.22 0.013 j MAYER 353 62 291 342 39 303 0.23 0.009 NEW GERMANY 404 35 370 404 21 383 0.21 0.013 NORWOOD 1255 411 844 1235 283 952 0.22 0.027 i VICTORIA 817 526 291 822 468 355 0.32 0.004 WACONIA 1736 1116 620 1783 1114 665 0.28 0.O03 WATERTOWN 2333 561 1772 2379 339 2040 0.20 0.047 YOUNG AMERICA 1271 249 1023 1282 149 1133 0.22 0.027 TOWNS: BENTON 278 692 -415 232 842 -610 0.40 -0.018 CAMDEN 266 82 183 249 -3 252 0.40 0.008 CHASKA 121 17 104 122 8 114 0.30 0.009 DAHLGRSN 433 280 153 435 231 204 0.36 0.005 HANCOCK 1i9 25 94 93 13 80 0.40 -0.003 HOLLYWOOD 413 81 332 415 41 374 0.35 0.005 LAKETOWN 1262 175 1087 1267 108 1159 0.30 0.006 SAN FRANCISCO 227 54 173 228 57 171 0.36 -0.000 WACONIA 577 141 436 579 62 517 0. 33 0.009 WATERTOWN 637 1215 -578 634 940 -306 0.33 0.028 YOUNG AMERICA 286 224 62 285 248 37 0.39 -0.003 r t ; Minnesota House Research Department, Jan 28, 1986. 2 CURRENT CURRENT CURRENT ADJUST ADJUST ADJUST NEW EFFECT DISTR CONTR GAIN/ DISTR CONTR GAIN/ CONTR ON TAX LOSS LOSS RATIO VALUE DAKOTA COUNTY CITIES: APPLE VALLEY 16703 5604 11100 17152 4217 12934 0.27 0.015 BURNSVILLE 19795 33616 -13821 20188 41337 -21149 0.31 -0.024 COATES 136 115 21 128 131 -3 0.29 -0.025 FAGAN 12706 27660 -14954 13204 34962 -21758 0.32 -0.034 FARMINGTON 3179 1428 1751 3228 1247 1982 0.27 0.011 HAMPTON 214 98 116 214 123 91 0.27 -0.019 ,HASTINGS (DAKOTA) 9699 3435 6263 9782 3916 5866 0.26 -0.007 INVER GROVE HT 12472 13369 -897 12449 11684 764 0.28 0.018 LAKEVILLE 10728 7743 2985 10771 7817 2954 0.28 -0.000 LILYDALE 121 407 -285 77 684 -607 0.40 -0.048 ''ENDOTA 149 94 55 149 112 37 0.28 -0.017 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 2929 5494 -2565 2976 7109 -4133 0.34 -0.023 MIESVILLE 104 63 41 104 81 24 0.30 -0.019 NEW TRIER 4 139 12 127 138 10 128 0.20 0.003 RANDOLPH - - --359 37 322 359 26 332 0.21 0.010 ROSEMOUNT 3375 4338 -963 3437 5066 -1628 0.30 -0.017 SO ST PAUL 15464 0 15464 15770 3349 12421 0.25 -0.036 SUNFISH LAKE 98 34 64 70 -12 82 0.40 0.003 VERMILLION 466 79 387 473 68 405 0.23 0.011 WEST ST PAUL 10551 8143 2408 10263 10504 -241 0.30 -0.026 i TOWNS: 4 ----- CASTLE ROCK 566 330 236 572 406 166 0.33 -0.008 DOUGLAS 179 76 104 167 -3 169 0.40 0.011 EMPIRE 583 238 344 607 31 575 0.31 0.028 EUREKA 465 221 244 468 -119 588 0.35 0.033 GREENVALE 192 192 0 195 -84 279 0.38 0.046 HAMPTON 317 98 219 322 112 210 0.35 -0.001 MARSHAN 844 508 336 849 487 361 0.31 0.003 NININGER 390 44 345 388 -106 494 0.31 0.032 g RANDOLPH 159 137 22 160 104 56 0.34 0.010 RAVENNA 1297 116 1181 1317 19 1299 0.25 0.017 SCIOTA 72 9 64 64 -8 72 0.40 0.003 VERMILLION 451 230 221 456 109 347 0.33 0.017 WATERFORD 162 163 -0 163 210 -47 0.36 -0.012 - f HENNEPIN COUNTY --------------- CITIES: BLOOMINGTON 37483 73161 -35678 37613 82936 -45323 0.33 -0.013 q BROOKLYN CENTER 20275 22407 -2132 19973 20834 -862 0.29 0.007 BROOKLYN PARK 36671 16667 20004 37726 11296 26430 0.25 0.027 CHAMPLIN 8407 1210 7197 8962 672 8290 0.23 0.024 CHANHASSEN (HENN) 3 1359 -1356 3 1274 -1270 0.31 0. 194 CORCORAN 2823 825 1998 2903 243 2660 0.28 0.026 CRYSTAL 17729 5430 12299 17518 4826 12691 0.27 0.003 DAYTON (HENN) 3370 623 2747 3381 298 3082 0.24 0.020 DEEPHAVEN 1272 794 478 1273 712 561 0.36 0.002 EDEN PRAIRIE 7951 40692 -32741 8472 41554 -33082 0.35 -0.001 EDINA 14325 46434 -32108 14426 61210 -46784 0.38 -0.023 EXCELSIOR 1268 1258 9 1313 1387 -73 0.31 -0.004 GOLDEN VALLEY 8859 26937 -18078 8889 33412 -24523 0.35 -0.027 GREaNFI-IF LD 777 473 304 782 196 586 0.30 0.032 GREENWOOD 213 231 -18 211 249 -39 0.37 -0.002 HANOVEER (HENN) 171 14 157 171 -1 172 0.27 0.013 HOPKINS 8288 10893 -2605 8388 12138 -3750 0.30 -0.010 c Minnesota House Research Department, Jan 28, 1986. 4 CURRENT CURRENT CURRENT ADJUST ADJUST ADJUST NEW EFFECT DISTR CONTR GAIN/ DISTR CONTR GAIN/ CONTR ON TAX LOSS LOSS RATIO VALUE SCOTT COUNTY CITIES BELLE PLAINS 2765 495 2271 2733 398 2335 0.23 0.007 ! ELKO 265 33 232 273 26 247 0.23 0.018 JORDAN 3239 713 2526 3207 489 2718 0.21 0.025 NEW MARKET 285 34 251 284 25 260 0.23 0.010 PRIOR LAKE 4843 1614 3229 5177 1419 3758 0.29 0.011 SAVAGE 2772 3726 -954 3025 4287 -1262 0.30 -0.010 SHAKOPEE 5274 15083 -9809 5180 18064 -12884 0.32 -0.042 TOWNS: BELLE PLAINE 225 57 169 223 21 201 0.39 0.005 BLAKELEY 174 45 129 175 55 120 0.36 -0.002 CEDAR LAKE 660 69 590 667 27 640 0.33 0.005 CREDIT RIVER 1512 136 1376 1537 74 1462 0.29 0.008 HELENA 460 154 306 462 112 350 0.34 0.005 JACKSON 1708 413 1295 1669 215 1455 0.21 0.036 LOUISVILLE 446 695 -250 441 691 -251 0.31 -0.000 NEW MARKET 752 248 504 764 155 608 0.32 0.010 SAND CREEK ---" ----- 764 172 592 762 100 662 0.31 0.008 SPRING LAKE 1425 141 1284 1436 57 1379 0.30 0.007 ST LAWRENCE 146 135 12 146 165 -19 0.34 -0.011-- WASHINGTON COUNTY ----------------- CITIES: AFTON 1158 825 333 1151 555 596 0.32 0.014 BAYPORT 2204 1951 253 2170 2615 -445 0.27 -0.046 BIRCHWOOD 483 17 466 480 -19 499 0. 31 0.004 COTTAGE GROVE 14467 5198 9269 14573 5294 9279 0.26 0.000 DELLWOOD 225 200 25 172 301 -129 0.40 -0.012 FOREST LAKE 3539 3546 -7 3647 3859 -212 0.27 -0.007 HASTINGS (WASH) 18 50 -32 20 52 -32 0.26 0.000 g HUGO 2533 1511 1022 2554 995 1558 0.28 0.027 I LAKE ELMO 3589 1477 2112 3625 1169 2456 0.28 0.011 j LAKE ST CROIX BEACH 889 42 847 893 30 863 0.25 0.003 LAKELAND 1243 210 1033 1260 210 1050 0.28 0.002 LAKELAND SHORE 80 19 61 81 18 62 0.32 0.001 LANDFALL 2799 36 2763 2815 45 2770 0.20 0.008 MAHTOMEDI 2258 433 1825 2300 348 1952 0.30 0.005 MARINE-ON-ST CROIX 215 60 155 216 64 152 0.34 -0.001 NEWPORT 2218 1505 713 2258 1681 577 0.28 -0.006 OAK PARK HEIGHTS 1106 2115 -1009 1165 3991 -2826 0.36 -0.038 . OAKDALE 10405 1525 8881 10499 1203 9296 0.24 0.007 PINE SPRINGS 134 26 107 147 -26 173 0. 31 0.020 ST MARYS POINT 213 16 197 213 -5 219 0.29 0.009 j ST PAUL PARK 4167 1570 2597 4086 1525 2561 0.24 -0.002 STILLWATER 8529 4415 4114 8547 5141 3406 0.28 -0.010 WET BEAR LK (WASH) 68 22 46 66 47 20 0.26 -0.023 a WILLERNIE 761 74 686 771 73 698 0.20 0.005 WOODBURY 5510 8414 -2904 5965 10038 -4073 0.32 -0.012 TOWNS: BAYTOWN 439 303 136 442 261 181 0.30 0.008 DENMARK 371 456 -85 377 485 -108 0.37 -0.002 FCREST LAKE 3274 544 2730 3368 306 3062 0.29 0.011 GRANT 1481 721 760 1515 495 1020 0.31 0.011 ' GREY CLOUD ISLAND 146 172 -26 142 168 -26 0.33 0.000 MAY 887 70 817 899 35 864 0.33 0.003 NEW SCANDIA 1582 361 1222 1625 176 1449 0.30 0.013 STILLWA;ER 675 8 667 692 36 655 0.33 -0.001 WEST LAKELAND 667 273 394 668 200 468 0.31 0.008 Minnesota House Research Department, Jan 28, 1986. 5 Fiscal Disparities Contr/Distr with 20% 1971 Base Eliminated, Adjusted For County-wide Sales Ratios, Using 20-40% Contribution Schedule, 20% TIF exemption elimiated, Factor of 2 Eliminated, 100% Pool Distributed, Personal Public Utility Excluded, Payable 1985 (thousands of dollars). CURRENT CURRENT CURRENT ADJUST ADJUST ADJUST EFFECT COUNTY DISTR CONTR GAIN/ DISTR CONTR GAIN/ ON TAX LOSS LOSS VALUE ANOKA 164731 81769 82962 166126 66531 98595 0.017 CARVER 25018 13666 11352 24817 11879 12938 0.007 DAKOTA 125067 114132 10934 126660 133589 -6929 -0.014 HENNEPIN 528814 679094 -150280 531231 708824 -177593 -0.004 RAMSEY 313838 312727 1111 312925 280751 32173 0.011 SCOTT 27717 23964 3753 28161 26379 1782 -0.008 0 WASHINGTON 78332 38165 40167 79402 41368 38034 -0.003 Metro Total: 1263517 1263517 0 1269322 1269322 0 Ratio of Adjust/Current Contribution = 1.005 1 Ratio of Adjust/Current Distribution = 1.005 Metro Average Fiscal Capacity = 30596. 1 Metro Average Contribution Ratio = 0.29 Total Metro Population = 2054830 Pool/Total Metro real CI and TIF (real)= 0.30 Coef of Variation Without FD = 1.75885 Coef of Variation With Current FD = 0.61299 Coef of Variation wlth New FD = 0.66224 Gini Coef without FD = 0. 18954 I Gini Coef with Current FD = 0.16873 Gini Coef with New FD = 0. 16244 i i i i i d t i i Minnesota House Research Department, Jan 28, 1986. 3 CURRENT CURRENT CURRENT ADJUST ADJUST ADJUST NEW EFFECT DISTR CONTR GAIN/ DISTR CONTR GAIN/ CONTR ON TALC LOSS LOSS RATIO VALUE 1 INDEPENDENCE 1235 282 953 1235 146 1089 0.32 0.007 LONG LAKE 1049 1425 -376 1046 1295 -249 0.30 0.010 LORETTO 253 212 41 249 174 74 0.27 0.019 MAPLE GROVE 14896 9765 5131 15734 6730 9004 0.29 0.024 MAPLE PLAIN 947 933 14 948 856 92 0.29 0.009 MEDICINE LAKE 179 33 146 180 26 154 0.32 0.002 MEDINA 1075 1582 -507 1082 1543 -461 0.34 0.002 MINNEAPOLIS 215587 237992 -22405 214207 244909 -30702 0.30 -0.003 MINNETONKA 17158 53938 -36780 17431 55162 -37731 0.34 -0.002 MINNETONKA BEACH 165 203 -39 126 240 -114 0.40 -0.007 MINNETRISTA 1252 226 1026 1272 86 1186 0.34 0.005 MOUND 5974 1175 4799 6084 1004 5081 0.28 0.005 NEW HOPE 15501 18075 -2574 15391 15941 -549 0.28 0.014 ORONO 2043 1711332 2053 1766 287 0.38 -0.000 OSSEO 2197 1430 767 2152 1212 939 0.26 0.011- - PLYMOUTH 16708 45561. 28853 17209 43363 26154 0.32 0.008 RICHFIELD 23472 5488 17984 23524 6194 17330 0.28 -0.003 ROBBINSDALE 9256 2290 6966 9276 2253 7024 0.28 0.001 ROCKFORD (HENN) 564 204 360 532 125 407 0.20 0.046 ROGERS 365 1426 -1061 350 1355 -1005 0.32 0.010 SHOREWOOD 1919 1355 563 1934 1159 775 0.33 0.004 _ SPRING PARK 662 1444 -781 751 1463 -712 0.31 01305 - ---- ST ANTHONY (HENN) 2938 2752 185 2912. 2718 193 0.30 0.000 ST BONIFACIUS 677 430 247 711 313 397 0.26 0.030 ST LOUIS PARK 20054 35171 -15118 20080 40001 -19921 0.32 -0.013 g TONKA BAY 470 301 169 482 312 170 0.36 0.000 WAYZATA 1098 3514 -2416 1121 4700 -3579 0.38 -0.023 WOODLAND 150 7 143 87 -18 105 0.40 -0.003 TOWN: HASSAN 1087 762 326 1069 559 511 0.30 0,018 RAMSEY COUNTY CITIES: ARDEN HILLS 4211 18541 -14331 4155 18414 -14259 0.33 0.001 BLAINE (RAMSEY) 0 126 -126 0 97 -97 0.24 0.052 f FALCON HEIGHTS 3759 1303 2457 3810 1016 2794 0.26 0.012 GEM LAKE 133 934 -801 133 1084 -951 0.38 -0.028 LAUDERDALE 1539 760 779 1519 562 957 0.27 0.013 LITTLE CANADA 5015 7697 -2681 4929 6292 -1363 0.29 0.027 MAPLEWOOD 15332 41436 -26104 15018 40414 -25397 0.31 0.003 MOUNDS VIEW 11809 4193 7616 11725 2593 9132 0.23 0.028 NEW BRIGHTON 16399 10738 5660 16340 8339 8001 0.27 0.017 NO OAKS 864 477 388 833 354 479 0.39 0.002 NO ST PAUL 9954 3598 6356 9925 2600 7325 0.2-i 0.018 ROSEVILLE 18267 47738 -29471 18078 46065 -27987 0.31 0.005 SHOREVIEW 11586 11476 110 12065 9236 2778 0.22 0.019 SPRNG LK PRK (RAMSY) 78 21 56 76 16 60 0.24 0.007 ST ANTHONY (RAMSY) 1276 2690 -1414 1266 2636 -1371 0. 30 0.002 ST PAUL 188333 146400 41933 187301 129871 57430 0.27 0.010 VADNAIS HEIGHTS 4505 7203 -2698 4767 5746 -978 0.29 0.039 WHT BEAR LK (RAMSY) 16515 6348 10167 16547 4636 11911 0.26 0.016 TOWN: WHITE BEAR 4262 1048 3214 4438 731 3707 0.28 0.012 Ioaguo Of minne c L ...r S O�� �..�i�to S FEDERAL TAX REFORM RESTRICTIONS THREATEIN CITIES: CONTACT SENATORS DURENBERGER AND BOSCHWITZ DURING CONGRESSIONAL RECESS ACTION NEEDED Action taken by the U.S. House of Representatives in late December has effectively shut down the authority of cities to issue municipal bonds. Passage by the House of H .R. 3838 , Federal Tax Reform, made restrictions on tax-exempt financing effective January 1 , a little over a month ago. As a result , cities have been prevented from issuing even traditional public purpose bonds as well as those issued for economic development and redevelopment activities , housing, wastewater treatment , etc. tT ITY OFFICIALS MUST ACT NOW TO URGE SENATORS BOSCHWITZ AND DURENBERGER O REMOVE TAX-EXEMPT FINANCE RESTRICTIONS DURING SENATE CONSIDERATION F TAX REFORM LEGISLATION . AS IMPORTANT , URGE SENATORS TO SUPPORT MMEDIATE ACTION ON A RESOLUTION TO DELAY THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THOSE ESTRICTIONS (UNTIL JANUARY 1 , 1987 ) . Members of Congress , particularly U .S. Senators , need to hear from elected oficials on the proposed tax reform act, H.R . 3838 . Senator Durenberger , or a member of the Senate Finance Committee , has an especially critical role in tax legislation. IT IS ALSO I1,2 ORTANT TO INSIST THAT FULL DEDUCTIBILITY OF STATE AND LOCAL TAXES BE RETAINED AND NOT SACRIFICED TO LOWER FEDERAL INCOME TAX RATES . H .R . 3838 retained deductibility as a vital ingredient in federal tax policy . There are indications that the Senate Finance Committee will attempt to reduce or eliminate recognition of taxpayers ' local tax obligations in an effort to bring in more federal revenue to produce substantially greater federal tax cuts at a time when federal aid to cities is being eliminated or greatly reduced. Congress will be in recess for one week , beginning February 10 . It is an important opportunity to get in touch with both Senators Boschwitz, and Durenberger to explain the ways in which proposed federal tax reform is affecting your city. - I BO university avenue east, st. pau!, minnesots 551. 01 (01 2) 2 27-5000 KEY INFORMATION For Minnesota, the effects of tax reform are already obvious . Preliminary analysis indicates that state and local government issued at least $2 billion in tax-exempt bonds in 1985 . Tax reform restrictions will leave state and local uses only $725 million in the volume cap limit for 186 , divided 50/50 between state and local uses . In 1985 , IDB authority alone was $620 million. Tax increment financing totalled about $300 million. Housing bonds for multifamily rental units totalled $ 1 . 3 billion, while allocation of single-family owner-occupied housing bonds was $200 million. In 1986 , then , state and local government would be left with as little as $620 million in bonding authority to do what took $2 billion to do in 1985 , less than one-third the capacity used per year. H.R . 3838 (tax reform legislation approved by the U .S. House ) substantially alters and restricts the definition of public purpose bonds, designating a 10 and 5 percent use and benefit test for all municipal bonds and determining that bond issues failing either of those tests will lose their tax-exempt status. What that means This new definition curtails the authority of cities to issue traditional general obligation, revenue and tax increment financing bonds. Bonds can only retain tax-exempt status if no more than the lower of 10 percent or $10 million is used in trade or business by a private person, including 501 (c) ( 3) organizations effectively prevents private management or financing of governmental facilities or operations . The 5 percent test requires that no more than 5 percent or $ 5million of bond proceeds (over the life of the bond) be loaned to a non- governmental entity in order for the tax-exempt status to be retained . In many instances , these restrictions make it impossible to undertake extensions of sewer or water lines to areas where a single private user would receive more than 10 percent of the use of that service. Another example of the difficulties caused is the effective halting of many management contracts for the operation of governmentally owned facilities . NEW DEFINITION OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL PURPOSE BONDS H.R . 3838 arbitrarily determines that projects previously considered public in nature and benefit are now to be considered "nonessential" and therefore provided limited or even denied tax-exempt financing. Activities that fall into this category include sewage and solid waste facilities , multifamily rental housing , mass commuting facilities , facilities for furnishing water, small issue IDBs, and tax increment � d financing bonds. Student loan bonds as well as those for 501 (c( 3 ) organizations such as universities and non-profit hospitals are also included. Purposes denied tax-exempt status under H .R . 3838 are the following: local electric and gas furnishing plants (serving areas less tan 2 contiguous counties) ; parking facilities (except those at airports) ; district heating and cooling systems; air or water pollution control equipment for private facilities ; and industrial parks. Tax increment financing bonds for redevelopment are termed "qualified redevelopment bonds" under H.R . 3838, and could only be issued if they meet new tests and have sufficient authority under the volume cap (see below) . Such bonds could only be used for the cost of acquiring land to be redeveloped and for relocation costs . New more restrictive definitions of blight , plus a district size requirement of 1/4 square mile would effectively eliminate the use of TIF bonds for at least 85-90 percent of the currently existing TIF projects in the state. NEW VOLUME LIMITS A single statewide and state by state volume limitation of $175 per capita (and $125 after 1987 ) would apply to non-governmental bonds and to the "non-governmental" portion of any governmental (public purpose) bond of as little as $1 million. In other words , where as little as 1 percent of the benefit of a street improvement , sewer , or other public purpose, G.O. , bond could be shown to benefit a private user, that portion of local bond authority would have to receive an allocation under this new volume limitation. In addition, at least $25 per capita would be reserved for 501 ( c) (3) organization use of such bond authority. (The legislature or the governor could raise that limit. ) At least 50 percent of non-governmental bond proceeds would have to be used for single and multifamily housing bonds, unless overridden by the governor or legislature. ) F Allocation for tax increment financing bonds limits volume to $6 per capita under a new restricted definition (see below) . City authority for issuing tax-exempt bonds would be further limited by designating 50 percent of the volume limit to the State. OTHER TAX REFORM ISSUES FOR CITIES Limits on advance refunding of bonds will prevent cities from making interest savings when interest rates drop . The bill also does not permit cities to recoup costs of issuing bonds, thereby driving up the cost of tax-exempt financing. H .R. 3838 says nothing about the tax-exempt status of bonds issued for certain facilities when those bonds cannot meet the 5 or 10 percent tests mentioned above . Those purposes include: public hospitals , highways , jails and prisons , dog pounds , city halls , city recreational facilities , elementary and secondary schools. Finally , banks and financial institutions could no longer deduct interest costs incurred in carrying short-term notes or tax-exempt bonds (except in very limited circumstances in the latter case) . Because of the provisions of the bill place increased financial burdens on cities , it clearly is not revenue neutral for local taxpayers . The bill also reduces financial flexibility for cities and increases borrowing costs . Taken as a whole , tax reform provisions effectively reduce cities' ability to maintain and improve local infrastructure and provide for renewal and development needs. February 13 , 1986 Mayor and City Council: Due to extended long hours I have been putting in at my regular job I feel I have not been able to make my commitment to the Planning Commistion, therefore I am resigning as of February 13 , 1986 . The past 6 years have been very enjoyable and if anything should change I will stay in contact. Thank you again. Sinc rely, FeeStoltzman RESOLUTION NO. 2522 A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO LEE STOLTZMAN WHEREAS, Lee Stoltzman served on the Shakopee Planning Commission from February 14 , 1980 to February 13 , 1986 , and WHEREAS, Lee Stoltzman served as Chairman of the Planning Commission from September, 1984 to February, 1985 and as Vice Chairman from April, 1984 to September, 1984 and from February, 1985 to February, 1986 , and WHEREAS, Lee Stoltzman has unselfishly contributed many hours of service to the City of Shakopee during his six years on the Shakopee Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Shakopee City Council on behalf of the residents of Shakopee and on behalf of the City Planning Commission and the City Staff, that the Shakopee City Council does hereby extend to Lee Stoltzman the deep apprecia- tion of the City for his years of civic interest and dedicated service to the community. 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 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson City Administrator FROM Judi Simac City Planner DATE February 19, 1986 RE 1985 Annual Report of the Planning Commission Background: At their February 13, 1986 meeting, the Planning Commission approved a motion to accept the 1985 Annual Report and forward the E report to the City Council for review. Please find enclosed a copy of the subject report. Action Requested: Motion to accept the 1985 Annual Report of the Board of Ad- justment and Appeals and Planning Commission, and move for its adoption. Attachment JS/dd 1986 ANNUAL REPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS Shakopee , Minnesota DATE ACTION Jan. 10th Variance Resolution No. 382 : Request from the front yard setback of 6 . 5 ft. to construct a seating addition on Lot 2 , Block 1, Furries 1st Addn. Pizza Huts of the Northwest Inc . Public Hearing Held. Denied. Jan. 10th Variance Resolution No. 385 : Request for a 10 ' variance from the rear yard setback requirements in order to construct a new two-family home on Outlot B, Long View Estates Addition. Joseph Link Homes, Inc. Public Hearing Held. Approved with one condition of record. Feb. 74C_h Appeal Resolution No. 388 : The decision that said appellant may not use property at 981 Bluff Avenue as a storage area for impounded vehicles. Les Koehnen' s Standard. Public Hearing Held. Denied. Approved by City Council March 19th. Feb. 7th A-oDeal Resolution No. 389: The decision that said appellant may not increase the number of dwelling units of a non-conforming multiple dwelling located in the R-2 District. Wayne Stockman. Public Hearing Held. Denied. City Council denied 2/7/85 . March 7th Variance Resolution No. 393 : Request to consider a variance from the sign ordinance in order to erect a temporary free standing advertising sign. Minnesota Racetrack Inc. Public Hearing Held. Withdrawn. March 14th Anveal Resolution. No. 395 : The administrative decision of the City Planner that the appellant may not increase the bulk of a non-conforming multiple dwelling located in the R-2 District. Wayne Stockman. Public Hearing Held. Approved/ April 4th Variance Resolution No. 396 : Request to consider a variance from the minimum lot size requirement in the I-1 District. Bankers Life Company. Public Hearing Held. Approved. 1985 BOAA Annual Report Page two DATE ACTION April 4th Appeal Resolution No. 397 : The decision that said appellant may not operate a deli and catering business at 537 Sommerville in the R-2 District. Joseph Stocker. Public Hearing Held. Denied. Appeal approved by City Council May 7th. April 4th Appeal Resolution No. 402 : The decision that said appellant may not increase the bulk of the non-conforming residential structure by constructing a three season porch. Charles Pass. Denied. Appeal approved by City Council May 7th. May 9th Variance Resolution No. 403 : Request to consider a variance from the one acre minimum lot size requirement in the I-2 District. Duane Gust. Public Hearing Held. Approved. May 9th Variance Resolution No. 404 : Request to consider a ill . variance from the South lot line ( 10th Ave. ) and a 8 ' variance from the West lot line ( CR 17) to construct a four unit townhouse. Cletus Link. Public Hearing Held. Approved. May 9th Variance Resolution No. 405 : Request to consider a 25 ' front yard and a 25 ' rear yard variance X Lot 2 , Blk 2 and a 25 ' front yard and 10 ' side yard variance for Lot 1, Blk 2 , MN Valley 5th Addn. in order to construct two, 4-unit apartment buildings . David Wiggin. Public Hearing Held. Approved. June 6th Variance Resolution No. 408 : Reauest to consider a variance from code requirements to place more than one principal building on a lot located at 1725 West Third Avenue. Lon Carnahan. Public Hearing Held. Denied. City Council denied 7/2/85 . June 6th Variance Resolution No. 409: Request to consider a variance from the side yard setback requirements to construct a new single family dwelling on Lot 5 , Block 1, Hauer 2nd Addition. Scott Gratz . Public Hearing Held. Approved by City Council 7/2/86 . July 11th Variance Resolution No. 415 : Reauest for a variance from the front yard setback requirements to erect a 4 ' fence in the front yard setback at 1037 Bluff. Ron Scherer. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. 1985 BOAA Annual Report Page three DATE AC7TON July 11th Variance Resolution No. 416 : Request for a 6 ' variance from the west lot line to create a legal conforming lot and thus allowing lot 10 to be developed by removing existing garage which crosses the lot line on Lots 9 and 10 , Blk 43 , City of Shakopee. Claude Casman. Approved with conditions of record. July 11th Variance Resolution No. 417 : Request for a 3 1/2 ft. side yard variance and a 2 ft. rear yard variance to construct a two-car garage at 319 East Shakopee Avenue. John E. Ploof. Approved with condition of record. July 11th Appeal Resolution No. 418 : The decision that said appellant may not construct a second floor apartment addition to the existing legal non-con- forming used car lot at 114 North Holmes, located in a B-3 District. Jack Brambilla. Public hearing held. Approved. Sept. 5th Variance Resolution No. 425 : Request for a 19 ' variance from minor arterial front setback requirement of 50 ' which would place building 31' from street surface, in order to construct a solarium on the property located on the E 15 ' of Lot 4 and all of Lot 5 , Blk 9 , East Shakopee Plat. Kentucky Fried Chicken. Public Hearing Heid. Denied. Nov. 7th Variance Resolution No. 432 : Request for a variance of 40 feet from the front yard setback requirements and building materials , in order to construct new grandstand type seating for the Amphitheater, at Valieyfair. Valleyfair. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions on record. Nov. 7th Variance Resolution No. 433 : Request for a variance to construct a pole barn without a principal building on the property located on Boiling Springs Lane. William Franck. Public Hearing Held. Denied. Nov. 7th Variance Resolution No. 434 : Request for a variance of 40 feet from the rear yard setback requirements in order to construct a strip shopping center on Lots 1 & 2 , Century Plaza Square 3rd Addition. J.O.N. Investment Co. Public Hearing Heid. Approved with a condition of record. 1985 ANNUAL REPORT SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION Shakopee, Minnesota CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS DATE ACTION Jan. 10th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 375 : Request to enlarge a mining extraction facility upon property located at SE 1/4 of Section 3 , East Hwy 101. J.L. Shiely Co. Continuation of Public Hearing. Approved with conditions of record. Jan. 10th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 376 : Request to remove sand and gravel aggregate upon property located at SE 1/4 of NE 1/4 of Sect. 17 , NE 1/4 E of NW 1/4 of Sect. 16 , W 1/2 of NW 1/4 of Sect. 16 , CR 83 . Scott County Lumber Cc. & Bert Noterman Continuation of Public Hearing. Denied. Council Action 6/20/85 . City Council Resolution #2427 . Denied 8/20/85. Jan. 10th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 386 : Request to raise horses , not to exceed the 2 horses per 2 1/2 acre requirement at the property located at 2300 Marschall Road. Steven & Dianne Fischer. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. Jan. 10th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 387 : Request to conduct a T-Shirt Screen Printing business with one employee at the property located at 1830 Marschall Road. Christopher Barlow. Public Hearing Heid. Approved with conditions of record. Feb. 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 390 : Request to establish a Bed and Breakfast facility at 134 4th Avenue. J. Lynch, J. McNearney, M. Spagnolo. Public hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. Feb. 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 391: Request to construct a mill building of which portion will exceed the 45 foot height limit by 45 feet. J.L. Shiely Co. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. Feb. 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 392 : Request to move-in a single family home an 400 block of 2nd Avenue. James Hauer. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. 1985 Annual Report Paae two DATE ACTION March 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 394 : Request to assemble and store transportation equipment at 2888 E. 4th Ave. Walter Thomas . Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. April 4th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 398 : Request to install an eight foot chain link fence with one foot of barbed wire upon the property known as the Canterbury Downs Racetrack site. Minnesota Racetrack Inc. Public Hearing Heid. Approved. April 4th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 399 : Request to construct a hotel upon the property described as Lot 4 , Bl, Canterbury Plaza Square 3rd. Addn. Murray R. Williamson. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. April 4th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 400 : Request to operate a veterinary clinic at 4110 valley Industrial Blvd. S. MN Valley Equine Veterinary Clinic. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. April 4th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 401: Request to convert the loft of a barn to living space in order to provide a second 'home in the Ag District upon the property located at 1830 Marschall Road. Janet and Kevin Winter. Public Hearing Held. Denied. Appeal denied by City Council 5/2/85 . May 9th Conditional -Use Permit Resolution No. 406 : Request to install two _fiberglass fuel tanks upon the property known as the Canterbury Downs Racetrack site. MN Racetrack Inc. Public Hearing Held. Approved. May 9th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 407 : Reauest to operate an open sales lot upon the property located at 8522 East Hwy 101. Angelrock Enterprises. Public Hearing Held. Approved with conditions of record. June 6th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 410 : Reauest to operate a nursery and landscape service as a home occupation upon the property located at 2355 Marschall Road. Wallace Lureen. Ar)proved with condition of record. g � 1985 Annual Report Page three DATE ACTION June 6th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 411: Request to construct a dwelling unit on the 2nd floor of a permitted business use upon the property located at 220 South Atwood. John Ries Jr. Denied. June 6th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 412 : Request to construct a new VFW Post 4046 upon the property located at Lots 2, 3 & 4 , Blk 1, Furrie 1st Addn. Shakopee VFW Post 4046. Approved with conditions of record. June 6th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 413 : Request to move-in a single family dwelling unit upon the property located at the NE corner of intersection CR 17 and CR 81. Don McKush. Approved with conditions of record. June 6th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 352 : An amendment to a CUP to construct a outdoor patio upon the property located at 1135 First Ave. Steve Frisard, Granny' s Restuarant. Approved with conditions of record. June 6th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 414 : Request for a Class Two Restaurant upon the property located at 1561 - lst Ave. E. Rock Spring Supper Club. Approved with conditions of record. July 11th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 419 : Request to _permit retail sales in an I-2 zone , limited to 15% floor area upon the property located in the Valley Industrial Park. Equine Dynamics , LTD. Approved with conditions of record. July 11th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 420 : Request to construct a Class II restaurant having a Class B Liquor License on the property lying South of State Highway 101 and lying Northerly of the Northerly r-c-w of the Chicago, St. Paul, Mpls. & Omaha Railroad. Sandra Rosenberg/Richard Brandl. Approved with conditions of record. July 11th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 377 : An amendment to CUP 0377 for an extension to operate a temporary asphalt plant for an additional 90 days upon the property located at CR 83 and 4th Ave. C. S. McCrossan Inc. Denied. 1985 Annual Report Paae four DATE ANNUAL Aug. 8th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 421 : Request to conduct retail sales in the principal building in 150 or less of floor area upon the property located on Lot 1, Canterbury Park lst Addition. Landscape Junction, Inc. Approved with conditions of record. Aug. 8th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 422 : Request to operate as a color consultant out of her home located at 673 Monroe St. S. Linda Mary Lund. Approved with conditions of record. Aug. 8th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 423 : Request to move-in a principal building to be used as a classroom upon the property located in the NW 1/4 of Section 12 , Township 115 , Range 23 . Independent School District #720 . Approved with conditions of record. Aug. 8th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 424 : Request to construct a building addition in a B-1 District upon the property lcoated at 1266 E. 1st Ave. American Legion. Approved with conditions of record. Sept. 5th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 426 : Reauest to construct 62 units of residential rental on a single lot upon the property located on Lot 2 , Blk 1, Canterbury Village 1st. INCA Development. Approved with conditions of record. Sept. 5th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 427 : Request to move-in a single family dwelling upon the property located on Lot 2 , Bik 4 , Killarney Hills Addn. Jim Hauer. Approved with conditions of record. Sept. 5th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 428 : Request to move-in a single family dwelling upon the property located on Lot 3 , Blk 4 , Killarney Hills Addn. Jim Hauer. Approved with conditions of record. Oct. 3rd Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 429 : Request to maintain a commercial dog kennel upon the property locataed at 9186 Boiling Springs Lane. Reed Otterblad. Approved with conditions of record. 1985 Annual Report Page five DATE ACTION Oct. 3rd Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 430: Request for a seasonal recreational vehicle campsite upon the property located on Part of Tract A, R.L.S. 099 . John DuBois. Approved with conditions of record. Oct. 3rd Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 431: Request to develop a 92 unit planned unit development multi-family apartment building on the property described as the NE 1/4 of Section 7 . Scottland Inc. Approved with conditions of record. Nov. 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 435 : Request to conduct a home occupation of the sale of firewood from his property located at 1424 Heron Court. Peter N. Shutrop. Denied. Appeal to City Council 12/17/85 Denied. t Nov. 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 436 : _ Request to construct a concrete and ready mix plant upon the property located at E. Highway 101, SW 1/4 of Section 2 , Township 115 , Range 22. William G. Pearson, Model Stone Inc. Approved with conditions of record. Nov. 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 437 : Request to operate motor fuel sales as part of a retail grocery store upon property located at the NE corner of C.R. 83 and 12th Avenue. Scottland Inc. Approved with conditions of record. Nov. 7th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 438 : Request to construet a convenience type food store with self service gasoline upon the property located at 1155 East First Avenue. SuperAmerica Stations , Inc. Approved with conditions of record. Dec. 2nd Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 439 : Request to construct 44 units of multi-family housing for senior citizens upon property located on Lot 8 and the east 38 ' of Lot 9 , Blk 32 and Lots 4 , 5 , 6 and 7 , B1k 32 , City of Shakopee. The Housing Allilance, Inc. Approved with conditions. Appealed to City Council. Withdrawn. Dec. 5th Conditional Use Permit Resolution. No. 440 : Request to construct a shop/warehouse and conduct outside storage of equipment upon the property located on Lot 1, Blit 1, Superior Supply 1st Addn. Cherne Contracting Corp. Approved with conditions of record. 1985 Annual Report Page Six DATE ACTION Dec. 5th Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 441 : Request to construct a horse boarding and training facility upon property located on the West 43 . 98 acres of the South lit of Southwest quarter of Section 31, Township 115 , Range 22 . Gregory Kaasa. Approved with conditions of record. ccU 1985 Annual Report PLATS - DATE ACTION Jan. 10th Preliminary Plat of Della ' s 1st Addition, lying in the NW 1/4 of Section 8 , East of 11th & Shakopee Ave. intersection. Cecil Clay. Public Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. (Residential Subdivision) . Council approved. Resolution #2400. March 14th Final Plat of South Park View 1st Addition, lying in the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 except 12 ac. of Section 11. Cletus Link. Public Hearing Held. Cont. from 1984 . Recommended approval with conditions of record. (Residential Subdivision) . Council approved 3/19/85. Resolution #2389 . May 9th Preliminary Plat of Notermann' s 2nd Addition, Replat of Lots 1-12, B8, Koeper Addn. Joe Notermann. Public Hearing. Recommended approval with conditions of record. (Residential Subdivision) May 16th Final Plat of Century Plaza Square 3rd Addition, Replat of Outlot B, Century Plaza Square 2nd. Recommended approval with conditions of record. ( Commercial Subdivision) . Council approved 5/21/85. Resolution #2401. July 11th Preliminary Plat of Shakopee Valley Square 1st Addition, Replat of Halo 2nd Addition. Wallace Bakken. Public Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. July 11th Preliminary and Final Plat of Palace Addition, lying south of State Highway No. 101 & lying northerly of the Northerly r-o-w of the Chicago, St. Paul, Mpls & Omaha Railroad, in the SW 1/4 of Sec. 2 , T 115 , R 22. Rosenberg/Brand!. Public ` Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. ( Commercial Subdivision) . Council Approved 7/16/85 . Resolution #2417 . July 11th Preliminary Plat of Hentges First Addition lying in the SE 1/4 SE 1/4 of Sec. 2 , T 115 , R 23 . Steven Hentges. Public Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. ( Commercial Subdivision) Final continued to 1/9/86 . 1985 Annual Report Page two PLATS - DATE ACTION July 18th Preliminary and Final Plat of Eagle Creek Junction, lying South of County Road 16 and East of County Road 17 . INCA Development. Public Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. ( Commercial Subdivision) . City Council approved 8/13/85 . Resolution 02420 . July 18th Preliminary Plat of Canterbury Village lying South of County Road 16 and East of County Road 17 . INCA Development. Public Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. ( Commercial Subdivision) Aug. 8th Preliminary and Final Plat of Canterbury Park 1st Addition, a replat of Lot 2, Block 3 , Valley Park First Addition. Scottland Inc. Public Hearing Heid. Recommended approval with conditions of record. (Industrial Subdivision) . Council Aapproved. Resolution #2440. Aug. 8th Final Plat of Hauer ' s 3rd Addition, lying in the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 8 , CR 16 and 13th Ave. Recommended approval with conditions of record. (Residential Subdivision) . Council Approved 8/20/85 . Resolution x2426 . Sept. 5th Preliminary and Final Plat of Meriden Addition, a replat of Outlot A, Prahmcoll Addition. Meriden Corporation. Public Hearing Held. Continued to 2/6/86 . Oct. 3rd Preliminary Plat of Prairie House Addition, lying in Section 3 , Township 115N, Range 22W. Curtis Bradford. Public Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. Oct. 3rd Preliminary and Final Plat of Canterbury Apartments , located in the NE 1/4 of Section 7. Scottland Inc. Public Hearing Held. Recommended approval with conditions of record. (Residential Subdivision) City Council Resolution #2459 . Oct. 3rd Final Plat of Fox Run, parcel lying on the Easterly and Northerly boundaries of Prior Lake, So. Horizon Heights and W. of Muhlenhardt Road. Fred Corrigan and John Biwer. Recommended approval with conditions of record. (Residential Subdivision) . City Council Resolution 02458 . 1985 Annual Report PLATS - DATE ACTION Nov. 7th Preliminary and Final Plat of Canterbury Park 2nd Addition, located in that part of the East Half of the NE 1/4 of Section 8 ,Township 115 , Range 22 . Scottland, Inc. Public Hearing Held. Recommend approval with conditions of record. ( Commercial Subdivision) . Council Resolution x2474 . Dec. 5th Final Plat of Prairie House. Recommended anvroval with conditions of record 12/5/85 . ( Commercial Subdivision. Council Resolution #2494 . 1985 Annual Report REZONING- DATE ACTION Jan. 10th Request for rezoning of Lots 6 and 7 , Block 56 from R-2 to B-3 . J. Lynch, J. McNearney, M. Spagnolo. Public Hearing Held. Redirected application for rezoning to application for Conditional Use Permit. April 4th Request for rezoning a 9 . 123 ac. parcel, L2 B1 Hall ' s 1st Addition from B-1 to I-1. Bankers Life Company. Public Hearing Held. Recommendation to Deny. Council Action 4/16/85 . Ordinance #167 . June 6th Request for rezoning a 10 acre parcel from I-2 to B-2 located at the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 4 , Township 115 , Range 22. Baron Development Corp. /Cecil Behringer. Public Hearing Held. Recommendation to Deny. Council Action: Withdrawn. June 6th Request for rezoning a 30 acre parcel from I-2 to B-1 located on Block 1, Lot 3 , Valley Park 1st Addition. Standard Development Corporation. Public Hearing Held. Request withdrawn. Aug. 8th Request for rezoning the NE 1/4 of the S 1/2 of Section 12 , Township 115 , Range 22 from I-1 to R-1. City of Shakopee. Public Hearing Held. Recommendation to approve. Council Action 9/3/85 . Ordinance =184 . Sept. 5th Request from Meriden Corporation for rezoning this property from I-1 , Light Industrial to B-2 , Community Business. Continued into 1986 . 1985 Annual Report AMENDMENTS- DATE ACTION Jan. 10th Section 11. 22 and 11. 29: Change the boundaries of the B-3 zone and amend the text of the B-3 District in order to further implement the Downtown Revitalization Project. Public hearing Held. Recommendation to hold an additional public hearing with individual notices sent to each affected landowner. Feb. 7th Section 11. 26 , Subd. 3 ; 11. 27, Subd. 3 ; 11. 28 , Subd. 3 ; 11. 29 , Subd. 3 ; 11. 31, Subd. 3 : To classify Bed and Breakfast Inns as a conditional use in the R-2, R-3 , R-4, B-1 and B-3 Districts. r Public Hearing Held. Recommendation to amend. Council Action 2/19/83 . Ordinance #159 . March 7th Section 11. 21 and 11. 35 , Subd. 2: To remove the Shakopee Mill Pond, Minnesota River, Blue, Fischer and Rice Lakes from the Shoreland Zoning Districts. Public Hearing Held. Recommendation to amend. Council Action 3/18/85 . Ordinance -#162 . Oct. 3rd Chapter 11, Land Use Regulation (Zoning) : To establish a recreational vehicle ordinance which designates specific areas and criteria for the development of a recreational vehicle park as a conditional use. Public Hearing Held. Council Action 12/17/85 . Ordinance tt18� . 1985 Special Actions DATE: ACTION: Jan. 10th Moved to accept staff review & direct that another staff review be conducted in December, 1986 on the CUP for Dorothy' s Daily Discovery. Moved to accept staff approval on the review of the CUP #204 for St. Regis Paper Co. Jan. 24th Moved to direct the City Planner to strongly discourage any rezoning which seek to change the commercial zoning along CR 17 & the by-pass , as it will be the important interchange for the City. Feb. 7th Moved to direct staff to send a letter to Beverly Koehnen expressing appreciation for her service. Moved to adopt 1984 Annual Report and forward it to the City Council. Moved to direct staff to request from the racetrack an updated status report. March 14th Moved to recommend to City Council to revoke conditional use permit #367 due to non-conformance with the conditions relative to on site storage of materials and noise limits, and direct staff to send a certified letter to Mr. Hall with this information. Moved to accept the staff review of conditional use permit #271 for the operation of a nursery school in an R-2 zone. April 9th Moved to direct staff to operate on the premise of considering each rezoning request independently and individually, and to rely on the findings and code applicable. Moved to let the minutes of this meeting be the administrative comment to serve staff for use in dealing with various applications for rezoning. May 91--h Moved to direct the City Engineer to send his handout regarding the proposed storm sewer policy to the Commissioners , have the Commissioners attend the public hearing on May 28th to hear the presentation and make a recommendation on June 6th, 1985 . 1985 Special Actions Page two DATE ACTION May 9th-Cont. Moved to direct staff to draft a memo on behalf of the Planning Commission that the City storage facility south of the Public Works Building is not in conformance with the ordinance regarding exterior storage adjacent to residential neighbor- hoods. Moved to direct staff to work with the Public Works and SPUC to review the new ordinance regarding plantings and bring those two buildings into conformance. June 6th Moved to approve the annual review of Conditional Use Permit #366. Moved to refer to City Council management of CUP 0367. July 18th Moved to direct staff to schedule a public hearing to consider the request for rezoning this portion of 13th Avenue from I-1 to R-1. Moved to direct staff to seek legal opinion regarding the vacant lots within the area that wishes to rezone as far as how the future development would be affected, and how to best define the boundary of the area that wishes to be rezoned. ( 13th Avenue residential) . Moved to direct staff to give the Commissioners an over-all objective on the land use, ownership and structures as one document before consideration of the request for mini-storage and direct staff to research the application and platting of the John Clay property on CR 16 which has mini-storage to find out the zoning applications used. Moved to recommend to City Council that an indemni- fication agreement become a standard requirement of the City of Shakopee for all variance applications going to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Moved to affirm staff ' s interpretation of the ordinance in the case of non-compliance with the subdivision ordinance and encourage the City Planner to continue her judicious interpretation Special Actions-1985 Page three DATE ACTION Cont. of the ordinance. Commissioner Schmitt commented that if someone feels staff has not made a correct interpretation, there is a procedure to follow to get it on the agenda. Aug. 8th Proved to accept the staff recommendation to determine a mini-storage facility is not a permitted or conditional use in the B-1 zoning district, because the industrial zoning districts adequately address the proposed type of use. Moved to recommend to City Council inclusion of the following projects in the Capital Improvement Plan: 1. Dean' s Lake Outlet control to be done soon. 2. Valley Industrial Blvd. North 3 . Construction of a frontage road from Howe chemical to Cretex Drive. Moved to recommend to City Council the consideration of the addition of a full-time staff person to assist the City Planner in dealing with the sub- stantial increase in workload that has been evidenced in the last year. Sept. 5th Moved to support the staff interpretation that an auction is a retail activity to be conducted on land zoned for business activity. Moved to concur with staff that peddlers should be required to obtain a conditional use permit prior to the issuance of a peddler ' s license. Sept. l9th Moved to direct a memo to City Council advising them that the majority of Planning Commissioners are concerned relative to development in the immediate vicinity of the racetrack, and they request City Council concurrence and direction to proceed with the examination of zoning districts which could lead to a planned development in the racetrack area. Special Actions-1985 Page four DATE ACTION: Cont. Moved to direct the City Planner to put together a list of various developments in the form of a questionaire to indicate which types would be appropriate in the racetrack development area. Oct. i3th Moved to direct staff to look into a requirement that existing wetlands be dedicated on all plats as drainage and utility easements. Moved to accept the staff review of CUP 0374 , Brooks Superette, with the requirement that the following conditions be met by December 31, 1985 : 1. The applicant shall petition for sidewalks along CR 17 & waive all rights to a hearing and appeal to the assessments. 2 . The applicant shall agree to dedicate the necessary r-o-w along CR 16 if and when CR 16 is realigned to the south; and to place the annual review on the January meeting agenda. Nov. 7th Moved to adopt the 1986 schedule of meetings. Moved to direct staff to follow closely the scheduled deadlines for developer ' s submittals. Dec. 2nd Moved to direct staff to begin an immediate invest- igation of the retail business being conducted in the Bankers Life building in an 1-1 zone, in violation of the ordinance. Dec. 5th Moved to accept the staff interpretation that forklift sales business is a retail business , with a conditional use permit being required for the exterior storage. Moved to direct staff to draw up a draft ordinance requiring more detailing and submittal information to meet the landscape requirements of the ordinance and seek ICC comments. Special Actions-1985 Page five DATE: ACTION• Cont. Moved to approve the annual staff review of CUP #383 , to keep horses on the Buchhol.:/Vogel property. Moved to direct staff to prepare a letter of commendation to the Recording Secretary, specifically addressing her patience in dealing with the long and tedius meetings , for the Chairman' s signature. Moved to approve the annual staff review of C.U.P. 0384 , to allow the construction of stables and a riding arena to raise and breed horses. Moved to request that City Council take steps to indemnify adjoining property owners within Block 32 from the tax impact of the sale of Lots 1 through 5 only, within Block 32. Moved to direct staff to seek a legal opinion on whether or not financial impacts can be considered in granting a conditional use permit. Respectfully submitted, Dave Czaja, Chairman Lee Stoltzman, Vice-Chairman David Pomerenke Dave Rockne John Lane Jane VanMaldeghem John Schmitt MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Preliminary Plat - Gardenvilla 1st Addn. DATE: February 21, 1986 Introduction• At their February 13 , 1986 meeting the Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend to the City Council preliminary plat approval of Gardenvilla 1st Addition, subject to conditions. Background: The recommended conditions of approval include: 1. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney. 2. Recording of the Declaration of Covenants , Conditions and Restrictions, the By-Laws and the Articles of Incorporation. 3 . Payment of 54, 113 . 65 Park Dedication prior to filing of the plat. 4. Location of utility easements as required by SPUC. 5 . Dedication of Outlot D as an open space area. 6 . Revision of the driveway access on to CSAH 17 . The proposed plat is an replat of Lot 7 , Nehl ' s Addition and the abandoned railroad property. The applicant B.V. C. Partner- ship is proposing the plat in order to assign a legal description to each existing building and to establish a common ownership area. The intent is to be able to sell the buildings to different owners for investment purposes. (See attached case report) . Action Reauested: a Offer a motion to approve the preliminary plat of GardenVilla 1st Addition subject to the six conditions recommended by the Planning Commission, and move for its adoption. tw MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission -ROM: Judi Simac, City Planner DATE: January 7 , 1986 APPLICANT: B.V. C. Partnership LOCATION: W. of CR 17 , S. of Gorman St. ; Lot 7 , Ne'rl ' s Addn. and abandoned railroad property. Garden Villa Apts . ZONING: R-4 Multi--amity Residential LAND USE: 6 existing 4-unit apartment bldgs. and garages APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Section 12 . 11 -INDINGS REQUIRED: Section 12. 01, Subd. 4 PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval of a replat of Lot 7 , Nehl ' s Addn. and the abandoned railroad property. Presently existing on the site are six Four-unit apartment buildings and six garages. SURROUNDING LAND USES: North - Apartment building R-4 East - CR 17 , vacant R-4 South - Apartment building - R-4 West - Eastview Addn, R-2 UTILITIES: Existing sewer and storm sewer are private. Water is public. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The six apartment buildings and 24 car garage were constructed in the fall of 1977. The land was not platted, nor was a conditional_ use permit reauired. 2. The applicant, B.V. C. Partnership, is proposing the plat in order to assign a legal description to each building and establish a "common ownership" area. The intent is to be able to Sell the buildings to different owners for investment purposes. 3 . Each of the apartment buildings is described as a block and a lot. The garage bu:'_lding is subdivided into six outlots. The following is a breakdown on the use of the outlOtS: Ou_lct A - -utt:re apartment buildings and parking 0t1..t B - Ri M+.t --f waV Cut lot C - Future apartment building and garage Outlot D - Open Space rrea Outlot E - Circulation Drive 0utlot r - Parking and setback Outlot G, u, IT , J, R, L - 4 parking spaces with_n garage 4 . The existing uses are perm-4 --ted in the F- 4 . Before an additional building permits are issued, a cc)nd_t_onal use permit will be requ_rec. Pcss_b_ e future un-_s are shoe._ - 'n On the si :e plan, in the northern area of the D at. 5 . Required parking for the development is 48 spaces. Parking which is not within the garages should be delineated on the pavement. 6 . A Homeowner ' s Association agreement will be required to declare the shared ownership and maintenance of the common areas such as parking, utility connections , park area, etc. The developer has submitted the following documents , proposed to be recorded with the plat, for review: 1 . Articles of Incorporation of GardenVilla Home Owner ' s Associ- ation, 2. By-laws of GardenVi lla Homeowner ' s Association, 3 . Declaration cf Covenants , Conditions and Restrictions. 7 . Normally 200 of the plat of a residential PUD is required open space. Outiot D, 57 , 923 sq. ft. , is approximately 250 of the plat area. S. The existing private road which serves the development is approximately 720 feet in length, which exceeds the normal cul de sac length of 500 feet. The :ire Chief has reviewed the plat and has indicated that the buildings are accessable, however since there is no constructed cul- de-sac the driveway should be constructed in a loop to connect back to CR 17. 9 . The Utility Manager has indicated that there is an existing water line easement along Outict E, just north of the outlots G through L, which is not identified on the -lat. in addition, the easement for an existing electric line which runs through outiot A should be dedicated at th.is time. Also, water service to part C-' Outict A, B, C, D and y =s dependent upon thepayment of the trunk water charge that wi 11 be calculated when the water service is requested. 10 . The County Zngineer has indicated that no addition=al access onto CR 17 will be r)ermltted. 1l. The site pian does not show the s;ze of the storm sewer , or the point of d_sCharge from the s=te. The City Engineer requests that the plan be revised and drainage Calculations 5 ►h.,,itted, which address rate of run off to the north now and "'af _-eY -ne a^.Q=tic.-ial units are Cevel=ped. The street and L'tlllt_es should relma"gin :vat=. 12. When the apartment buildings were constructed, park dedication Z ees were ✓aid. YJ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Shakopee Valley Square lst Addn. - Archaeological Report DATE: February 21, 1986 Introduction: At the January 9 , 1986 meeting the City Council approved the preliminary plat of Shakopee Valley Square 1st Addition subject to conditions. One of the conditions included the review of the purported Indian burial sites by the State Archaeologist and relocation, if found necessary. Background: The State Archaeologist, Christy Hohman-Caine, has reported that area of the proposed development once contained 28 burial mounds, however they have been destroyed by development and the construction of the sewer line. (See attached map for location of mounds ) . There is a possibility that fragmented skeletal remains could be encountered during construction in the vicinity of Mound 28 . Should such remains be found the office of the State Archaeologist should be contacted to come out and collect the remains. The Archaeologist is recommending an archaeological survey be conducted to determine if there is any evidence of the indian village in the floodplain area. Although this is a strong recom- mendation there is no State law which requires the survey as in the case of the protection of the Burial Mounds. The Minnesota Historical Society had previously recommended the survey of the campground area prior to construction. Whether or not the survev is conducted is up to the regulating government unit - the City of Shakopee. The developer' s attorney, Mr. Manahan, has requested that the survey not be required for the -following reasons: 1. Because the site is located in the flood plain, there is a good chance that significant artifacts have already been washed away or buried very deep under the silt; 2 . Even if there are artifacts located in the area, before it could ever be declared a site which cannot be developed, it is my understanding that it , must include "significant" deposits , which can only be determined after further archae- ological work beyond the initial survey, resulting in further delay and expense; 3 . A preliminary estimate of expenses has been obtained and the cost for the initial survey is estimated to be between $1, 000 . 00 and 53 , 000 . 00; 4 . As an alternative to the archaeological work, Mr. Bakken is prepared to agree to erect an appropriate monument or other marking indicating the significance of the site; 5 . Except for the installation of some utilities , virtually no significant disruption of the site is going to occur as a result of Mr. Bakken' s development, and, therefore, the archaeological significance of the site will not in any way be appreciably disturbed. Mr. Manahan further states that in the event that the City elects to require the archaeological survey, it is requested that the City be responsible for the cost. The reason for this is that the property was formerly owned by the City and when Mr. Bakken purchased it, he assumed it could be developed within the limitations of the zoning laws. Alternatives: 1. Do not reauire the archaelogical survey of the campground area. 2. Require the archaelogical survey of the campground area. 3 . Do not reauire the survey, but require the developer to erect an appropriate monument or other marking to recognize the significance fo the site. 4. Require the survey be done as part of the tax increment financing aspect of the project. 5 . Other Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative No. 3 . Action Reauested: Motion to determine that an archaeological survey of the proposed campground facility not be required and 'hereby direct the developer to provide an on-site designption of the historical significance of the site. tw ° 07 w 7- 7- YIN -r �f g89•p •n Z o m N Z pO N -1 N rrn V G o -,n -1 :s CD m Ir c ti ✓' y o � N Co C4 o Ct)� 141.08 106.02 \ INA = N E La - gyp ------------, r--------=\ O 1 1Lo10 m T [}, i� 1 O , r- 1C +% 1 fn in 10 ' y Z I LT �e /�' y I A p. ol LAI CD ce 071 ICA) 1� tn �Q NLo L ' Q ell" ;; ' m b \ H I CL 60 Zq_p1. y` �� tz c m Icz C) Kl m , p �_ -� ,' f i UU t , +v i� + 11r Z 11 II "Au+ C 1O Dol ,0) A + + 1 A lc)t-1 Zg fm / 1 _ , tt`Olm 1 DO 11l 1 i p� D 1 1 {I, o C) DNS N ; t o ti t o 1 z� ® ,Cl p t + r OOCyZ�p,� 1 kco�' o`r ,CD rr,m Tt1 T 1I tt+t t ttD_ D D UO � � ;gam S�y4q a6 l t \ 1 C� y \sJ Y .`a t N D \ \�- Ee' MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Full Storage Tanks DATE: February 21, 1986 Introduction: At the February 4 , 1986 meeting the City Council directed staff to give further consideration to the placement of fuel storage tanks in the Ag and R-1 Districts. Backaround• The legislature has passed a law to create new regulations regarding underground fuel tanks in order to further prevent contamination of ground water in the state. Leaking underground storage tanks are increasingly becoming a problem. Residents in the Ag and R-1 can have fuel storage tanks up to 1100 gallons if they are above ground. The most important issue is that if an above-ground tank is leaking one can see it and correct the problem, whereas if an underground tank leaks it can go undetected for years. Recommendation: Based upon State Building, Pollution Control and Fire Prevention Codes , both the Building Official and I recommend strongly against the placement of underground fuel storage tanks in the Ag and R-1 districts. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judi Simac, City Planner RE: Update on Racetrack District Land Use Study DATE: February 21, 1986 On February 11, 1986 the Racetrack Consultant Committee met to discuss the February 5th dinner meeting with the landowners and the preliminary reaction to the Needs Assessment. The committee also accomplished the review and amendments to the objectives and compatible uses list. The main focus of the meeting was to begin discussions of planning of the land around the track and what parcels should be included in a special development district. Hoisington group Inc. is currently preparing "the plan" which will be discussed by the Committee at their next meeting on March 8 , 1986 . -Meeting Dates Coming Up: March 8th - 9 : 00 A.M. Racetrack Committee March 17th - 7 : 30 P.M. Plan review with landowners and Committee March 18th - 7: 30 P.M. Joint Public Hearing: City Council/ Planning Commission tw MEMO TO: John A. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: Transit Joint Power Agreement DATE: February 21, 1986 Introduction- Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie have agreed to pursue opt-out status. This action necessitates that they enter into some kind of joint powers agreement. If Shakopee wishes to continue to play an active role in the development of this sub- regional system, we may wish to become a part of the joint powers agreement. Background- Since early last year, the City of Shakopee has been involved in a transit feasibility study with the communities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. On January 7 , 1986 staff presented the findings of the study to City Council. At that time, Council moved to contact the cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie to inform them that the City of Shakopee was interested in continuing it ' s involvement with them in developing a subregional transit system for the four cities. Since that time, the Mayor and I have met with officials from the communities involved and have discussed Shakopee ' s inclusion as a member of the Southwest Area Transit Commission and subsequent joint powers agreement. (See Attachment #1) . Because of Shakopee ' s limited role in this system it would be appropriate for us to be a non-voting member of the commission. Staff has informed the other communities that Shakopee does not want to have any monetary obligation or liability for anything that happens with the Southwest Area Transit Commission. In fact, if we cannot get language in the joint powers agreement that protects us from any liability and/or financial obligation, staff would not recommend Shakopee ' s participation in the joint powers agreement. In attachment #2 I have drafted the type of language that Shakopee should have included in the joint powers agreement prior to our signing of the agreement. Alternatives : 1. Do not become a party to the Chaska, Chanhassen, Eden Prairie transit joint powers agreement. 2 . Authorize the appropriate city officials to enter into the transit joint powers agreement with the cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie. 3 . Authorize the appropriate city officials to enter into the joint powers agreement with the cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie when language is included in the agreement that eliminates any liability and/or financial responsibility to the City of Shakopee. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends alternative #3 . Action Requested: Move to authorize the appropriate city officials to enter into the joint powers agreement with the cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie when language is included in the agreement that eliminates any liability and/or financial responsibility to the City of Shakopee. tw fi -Attachment #1- JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING A SOUTHWEST AREA TRANSIT COMMISSION This Joint Powers Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 1986, by and between the cities of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen , Chaska and Shakopee, all being municipal corporations organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, pursuant to an authority conferred upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes , Section 471 .59 and Minnesota Statutes , Section 174.265. WHEREAS, the cities of Eden Prairie, Chaska, Chanhassen and Shakopee have completed an Opt Out Study under the Metropolitan Transit Service Demonostration Program, commonly known as Opt Out, which was established in 1981 by the Minnesota Legislature under Section 174.265; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this study was to test efficiency and effectiveness of alternative methods of providing public transit service for communities that are within the metropolitan transit taxing district, but that are not adequately served by existing regular route transit; and r WHEREAS, each of the parties hereto desires to enter into this Joint Powers Agreement and has through the actions of its respective governing bodies been duly authorized to enter into this Joint Powers Agreement for the purposes hereinafter stated. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein it is hereby agreed by and between the cities of Eden Prairie, Chaska, Chanhassen and Shakopee through their respective City Councils that: 1 . NAME. The parties hereto hereby create and establish the SOUTHWEST AREA TRANSIT COMMISSION. 2. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Agreement and the Southwest Area Transit Commission is to provide alternative methods of providing public transit service for the cities of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, Chaska and Shakopee. 3. DEFINITIONS. a) "Commission" means the organization created by this agreement the full name of which is the "SOUTHWEST AREA TRANSIT COMMISSION". It shall be a public agency of its members. b) "Board" means the Board of Commissioners of the SOUTHWEST AREA TRANSIT COMMISSION. c) "Council " means the governing body of a governmental unit which is a member of this commission. d) "Governmental Unit" means any city. e) "Member" means any government unit is a party to this agreement. f ) "Regional Transit Board" (RTB) will be the regional transit board as established by the Metropolitan Transit Commission. g) "Advising Management Board" means the Advising Management Board (AMB) and shall consist of the City Administrator or City Manager of each Member and which Board shall act as an advisory body of the Commission. 4. MEMBERSHIP. The membership of the commission shall consist of the governmental units of the cities of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, Chaska and Shakopee. No change in governmental boundaries , structure, organizational status or character shall affect the eligibility of any governmental unit listed above to be represented on the Commission so long as such governmental unit continues to exist as a separate political subdivision. 5. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. a) The governing body of the Commission shall be its Board which will consist of commissioners. The City of Eden Prairie shall appoint commissioners. The City of Chanhassen shall appoint commissioners. The City of Chaska shall appoint commissioners. The City of Shakopee shall appoint commissioners. b) The term of each commissioner shall be years and until their successors are selected and quali ie it shall commence on January 1 , except that the terms of the commissioners first appointed shall commence from the date of their appointment and shall terminate as follows: ( i ) ( It must be determined how to stagger the Commission so there is always continuing representation of experienced commissioners. How the terms are staggered would depend upon how many commissioners are appointed from each respective member. ) ( ii ) The commissioners shall serve without compensation from the Commission but this shall not prevent a governmental unit from providing compensation for a commissioner for serving on the board. ( iii ) At the first meeting of the Board and in January of each year thereafter , the Board shall elect from its Commission a chairperson , a vice-chairperson , a secretary, a treasurer and such other officers as it deems necessary to conduct its meetings and affairs. At the organizational meeting or as soon thereafter as it may be reasonably done , the Commission may adopt rules and regulations governing its meetings. -2- � r Such rules and regulations may be amended from time to time at either a regular or special meeting of the Commission provided that at least ten ( 10) days prior to notice of the proposed amendment has been furnished to each person to whom notice of board meetings is required to be sent. A majority vote of all eligible votes of the then existing members of the Commission shall be sufficient to adopt any proposed amendment to such rules and regulations. 6. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION. a) To establish a program pursuant to and as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 174.265, methods or methods of providing public transit service to serve the cities of Eden Prairie, Chanhassen, Chaska and Shakopee. b) The Commission may acquire, hold, operate and maintain such equipment as deemed necessary to carry out the purposes of the Commission. c) The Commission may enter into such contracts with such persons or corporations, public or private, to carry out the purpose of the Commission. d) The Commission may, if deemed necessary, contract for and purchase such concerns as the board deems necessary for the protection of the Commission and the Members. The Commission shall provide any Member or governmental unit with such data and information as requested by the Members. The Commission shall , in the development of the program and implementation thereof, prepare such reports , either financial or management, as required by the Regional Transit Board. e) The Commission shall cause to be made an annual audit of the books and accounts of the Commission and shall make and file the report to its members at least once each year , which report shall contain such information as good accounting practices require and such further information as required by the Regional Transit Board. f) The Commission's books , reports and records shall be available for and open to inspection by its members at all reasonable times. g) The Commission shall employ the services of a project manager whose duty shall be to administer policies as established by the Commission. Said project manager shall be an employee of the Commission. Compensation paid said project manager shall be established by the Commission, which compensation shall be only with the advice and consent of the Members. -3- 10. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect from and after the date of passage, adoption by the governing body of each member. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned governmental units by action of their governing bodies , have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minnesota Statutes , Section 471.59. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By Attest: Approved by the City Council of Eden Prairie this day of 1986. CITY OF CHANHASSEN By Attest: Approved by the City Council of Chanhassen this day of 1986. CITY OF CHASKA By Attest; Approved by the City Council of Chaska this day of 1986. -4- CITY OF SHAKOPEE By Attest: Approved by the City Council of Shakopee this day of 1986. -5- -Attachment #2- JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT SOUTHWEST AREA TRANSIT COMMISSION Liability The cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prarie shall be jointly accountable for the ongoing operation of the Southwest Area Transit System. Representing these communities , the Southwest Area Transit Commission shall obtain adequate liability insurance coverage and shall be named as a co-insured in any contract to which they may become a part. Additionally, it is understood that the City of Shakopee shall only be held accountable for those instances in which a liability situation arises as a result of the direct operation of the Shakopee Area Transit System. Financial Responsibility The cities of Chaska, Chanhassen and Eden Prairie agree to contribute 900 of their Metropolitan Transit Commission tax levied dollars in accordance with the Metropolitan Transit Service Demonstration Program to the Southwest Area Transit Commission for the implementation and operation of a transit service program which embodies the transit service goals and objectives of the cities related to this joint powers agreement. Furthermore, the funding of the transit service program under the guidance of the Southwest Area Transit Commission is contingent upon the availability of dollars from the Regional Transit Board. Finally, it is understood by all parties that the City of Shakopee shall have no financial obligation to the Southwest Area Transit System unless otherwise approved by the common council of the City of Shakopee and the Southwest Area Transit Commission. �h MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Aide RE: Public Access Studio Staffing Plan DATE: February 21 , 1986 Introduction On February 4 , 1986 the Shakopee City Council authorized staff to proceed with the development of the appropriate amending ordinance incorporating those elements of the cable franchise modifications as discussed at that time. As a condition of final amending ordinance approval, the Council has requested staff to investigate and develop a public access staffing plan. Background In analyzing the staffing needs of the public access studio, staff has been in contact with representatives from several organizations to ascertain the possibility of joint staffing or reciprocal funding. At this time the Shakopee Public School District has hired their own person to supervise the operation of the institutional network. This person has been made available through a grant that was obtained by the school district. The grant will fund this person' s time through October of this year and has the possibility of being funded for one additional year. Because their granting authority may be subjected to potential cuts this year, the school district is interested in investigating some kind of joint staffing arrangement. However, in lieu of potential budget cuts this fall, they are unable to make any firm commitments at this time. The Shakopee Access Corporation has been contacted and has informed the City that they may be interested in providing an annual grant to the City for the purpose of hiring a public access studio manager. The Access Corporation has also stated that they have a willingness to cooperate with the City in any way that they can to insure that their is adequate funding available for the successful operation of the public access studio. In my conversations with the City of Chaska, the possibility of combining the City of Shakopee and the City of Chaska ' s Cable Communication Commissions has been discussed. This would allow for the elimination of one staff person from either Chaska or Shakopee. In attachment number one, scenario number one, staff has developed a preliminary budget in which several joint staffing arrangements with Chaska are assumed. First, a joint city cable administrator would be hired. The principal job responsibilities of this staff person would be to monitor the company' s compliance with the franchise ordinance, solicit funding sources for the operation of the public access studios in Shakopee and Chaska and to serve as staff liaison to the joint cable commission. This person would allocate 1/3 of his/her work week to cable. Chaska would contribute money to Shakopee to pay for approximately one-half of joint cable administrators wages. Second, joint playback wouuld be run out of the Chaska studio. Shakopee would dedicate $2 , 000 to Chaska to assist in the funding of the playback operator. In attachment number one, scenario two, staff has developed a budget in which no joint staffing arrangements are assumed. Shakopee would simply be in control of hiring a studio manager ( 3/5 time ) , playback operator and cable administrator ( 1/5 time) . The Women' s Correctional Facility in Shakopee has expressed an interest to provide joint playback from their location. They have stated that they would pay an inmate to run joint playback for the communities of Shakopee and Chaska. This would save both Shakopee and Chaska approximately $3 , 000 . 00 per year each. The one flaw in this concept is that the necessary equipment to run playback from the Women' s Correctional Facility is estimated to cost between $10 , 000 and $12 , 000. The cable company has agreed to provide $2, 000 for joint playback equipment. This leaves approximately $10 , 000 which would have to be contributed by Shakopee and Chaska. The savings over the long run would seem to indicate that this could be a viable approach for running joint playback. The Scott-Carver Cooperative ( Co-op) has also expressed an interest in the possibility of joint staffing. However, at this time they do not have adequate funds to make this a viable alternative. Mr. Don Leon from the Hennepin County Vo-Tech has informed staff that we can expect an intern sometime in June to serve for a three month period. Interns from their program usually receive no compensation. However, staff would recommend that this person be paid a small stipend. In addition to any interns that we can obtain from Hennepin County Vo-Tech, money is budgeted in each scenario that could be used to hire additional part time studio help. Please note that in each budget scenario there are no projected revenues for character generator advertising, studio rental or film slide chain productions. Staff believes this is a very conservative approach. Contracting with someone to run the studio is a third alternative for staffing. City staff has received a proposal for this type of arrangement with an estimated cost to the City of $16 , 000. Pursuing this type of arrangement would leave additional funds for a cable administrator. In attachment No. 2 staff has developed a preliminary budget for this alternative. � h On February 18 , 1986 the Shakopee Cable Commission moved to recommend to the City that contracting for service be pursued for staffing the access studio. Because of the nature of this alternative our City Attorney has recommended that we issue a notice of Request for Proposals. Staff has therefore drafted a set of Request for Proposal specifications for staffing the public access studio ( see attachment No. 3 ) . Alternatives 1. Move that scenario #1 in Attachment No. 1 be pursued by the City of Shakopee for staffing public access. ( Shared staffing arrangements with Chaska. ) 2 . Move that scenario #2 in Attachment No. 2 be pursued by the City of Shakopee for staffing public access. (City in complete control of public access staffing. ) 3 . Move to advertise the Request for Proposal Notice for staffing of the Shakopee public access studio. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends alternative No. 3 . (The recommendation of the Shakopee Cable Commission. ) Action Requested Move to authorize staff to proceed with advertising the Request for Proposal notice for staffing of the Shakopee public access studio. BAS/jms Attachment No. 1 Cable Budget Analysis EXPENDITURES Scenario #1 Scenario #2 with Chaska w/o Chaska Object Description 4100 Salaries-Full Time 4 , 394(A) 2 ,704 (C) 4130 Salaries-Part Time Studio Manager 8 ,736 (B) * 8 ,736 (B) * Playback Operator 2 , 000 3 , 000 Other ( Interns) 2, 500 2 , 500 4140 PERA 4 . 2% 551 480 4141 Pensions-FICA 7. 2% 945 823 4150 Health & Life Ins. 215/mo. - 2 , 399 2 , 064 4151 Work Comp 1% 130 114 **** TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 21 , 655 20 , 421 4210 Supplies 1, 000 1,000 4232 Equipment Maint. & Repairs 2 , 000 2 , 000 4310 Professional Services 250 250 4319 Promotions 1 , 000 1 , 000 4320 Postage 75 75 4321 Telephone 50 50 4350 Printing & Publishing 150 150 4330 Travel & Subsistence 100 100 4360 Insurance (D) (D) 4390 Conferences & Schools 100 100 **** TOTAL SUPPLIES & SERVICES 4 , 725 4, 725 TOTAL EXPENSES 26 , 380 25 , 146 REVENUES Cable Franchise Fee 18 , 000 18 , 000 Maintenance Grant 2 , 000 2 , 000 Subscriber Fee 3 , 600 3 , 600 Access Corp. Grant -- 1 , 546 Chaska ' s Share of Joint Staffing 2,780 0 Character Generator Advertising -- -- Studio Rental -- -- Film Slide Chain Productions -- TOTAL REVENUES 26 ,380 25 , 146 (A) City Cable Admin. - 1/3 time - 13 hrs. /wk. @ $6 . 50/hr. plus benefits. (B) Studio Manager - 3/5 time - 24 hrs. /wk. @ $7 . 00/hr. plus pro-rated benefits. (C) City Cable Admin. - 1/5 time - 8 hrs. /wk. @ $6 . 50/hr. plus benefits. (D) The Cable Company has agreed to keep their existing insurance in place at their expense. * Studio Manager would be a permanent part-time employee of the City. Attachment No. 2 Cable Budget Analysis Contracting for Service Scenario EXPENDITURES Object Description 4100 Salaries-Full Time 2 ,704 (A) 4130 Salaries-Part Time Studio Manager N/A Playback Operator N/A Other ( Interns ) N/A 4140 PERA 4 . 20 114 4141 Pensions-FICA 7 . 20 195 4150 Health & Life Ins. 215/mo. 516 4151 Work Comp 1% 27 **** TOTAL PERSONAL SERVICES 3 , 556 4210 Supplies 1 , 000 a 4232 Equipment Maint. & Repairs 2 , 000 4310 Professional Services 250 4319 Promotions 239 4320 Postage 75 4321 Telephone 50 4350 Printing & Publishing 230 4330 Travel & Subsistence 100 4360 Insurance (B) 4370 Purchase of Services 16 , 000( C) 4390 Conferences & Schools 100 **** TOTAL SUPPLIES & SERVICES 20 , 044 TOTAL EXPENSES 23 , 600 REVENUES Cable Franchise Fee 18 , 000 Maintenance Grant 2 , 000 Subscriber Fee 3 , 600 Access Corp. Grant -- �. Character Generator Advertising -- Studio Rental -- Film Slide Chain Productions-- TOTAL REVENUES 23 , 600 (A) City Cable Admin. - 1/5 time - 8 hrs. /wk. @ $6 . 50/hr. plus benefits. (B) The cable company has agreed to keep their existing insurance in place at their expense. ( C) Projected purchase of service cost. Attachment No. 3 City of Shakopee Notice of Request for Proposals The City of Shakopee is seeking a qualified supplier to provide staffing, technical support and marketing of the Shakopee Public Access Studio. The contractor, under the direction of the City Administrator will manage and perform the duties of all aspects of public access program production. It is anticipated that the services requested will be for approx- imately a 12 month period starting approximately April 1 , 1986 . The City is interested in the possibility of a longer contract term if so desired by the supplier. Requirements to be included in the proposal may be obtained from the City of Shakopee, 129 East 1st Avenue, Shakopee, MN 55379 on March 5 , 1986 . The deadline for submission of completed proposals is March 18 , 1986 . Questions regarding the request for proposals should be directed to Barry Stock, 445-3650 . This request for proposals does not obligate the City of Shakopee to proceed with the contract and the City reserves the right to cancel the solicitation if it is considered to be in the best interest of the City. /s/ Judith S. Cox City Clerk City of Shakopee Published in the Shakopee Valley News on March 5 , 1986 City of Shakopee Public Access Studio 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 Public Access plan being implemented and managed by the City of Shakopee. Principle elements of the plan include but are not limited to: A. A public access service contract to provide studio staffing, technical support, and promotional services. B. The provision for managing all aspects of public access television programming, including video production activities and facilities , program planning and develop- ment, distribution of public information, press releases and program scheduling. C. To act as the focus and contact for public access related concerns of the public, the City of Shakopee, the Shakopee Access Corporation and public and private institutions. 2. Proposal Requirements A. Project organization and staffing 1 . Names of project personnel and job responsibilities. 2 . Organization of project personnel and corporate lines of authority. 3 . Professional and education qualifications of key personnel. 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. Breakdown of the annual administrative costs for the program. 2. Written policy statement regarding Affirmative Action/Equal Employment Opportunity. 3 . Contract Requirements A. Public Access Studio Activities The contractor will set up a program for meeting the needs of public access users , cable subscribers and public and private institutions or corporations in Shakopee. The following are some elements of -`his activity: 1 . Identify a studio staffing plan and hours of operation including playback capabilities. The studio should be staffed by qualified personnel at a minimum of 32 hours per week. The playback operators hours shall be at a minimum, Monday thru Friday, 6 : 00 p.m. to 8 : 30 p.m. 2 . The contractor shall agree to follow all Federal and State regulations as well as any operational rules set forth by the City of Shakopee and the Public Access Corporation. 3 . Identify an equipment maintenance program and schedule. Equipment maintenance shall be done on weekly basis with a monthly report of such maintenance to be submitted to the City. Addition- ally, specify a procedure for repairs that cannot be done "in house" as well as the cost responsi- bilities of the contractor and the City. 4 . Identify the promotional activities to be supplied by the contractor including but not limited to: a) a monthly time schedule of public appearances before local social and/or civic organizations, b) a monthly time schedule of proposed workshops and a preliminary outline of the topics to be covered in each workshop, c) a plan indicating how the contractor will promote the workshops. 5 . Identify the type and format of any reports to be submitted to the City and the frequency of such reports . At a minimum the following reports should be submitted on a monthly basis: a) monthly programming report, b) monthly equipment checkout report. 6 . Identify a procedure for the submission of community announcements by the general public. 7. Identify a plan for the censorship of public access programming submitted for public broadcast. 8 . Identify a procedure for checking in and out equipment to the general public that will be followed by the contractor. 9 . Describe the contractor ' s role in leasing out equipment for non-public access related activities g `L and how any revenues from this concept would be collected by the contractor and returned to the City or Access Corporation. 10 . Describe the contractor ' s role in working with the Access Corporation to achieve those goals established by the Access Corporation. B. Contractors Business Activities If the contractor intends on utilizing equipment being leased by the City of Shakopee for his/her own personal benefit. The following elements should be discussed in the proposal. 1. Identify any advertising revenues which the contractor may hope to gain through the operation of alpha- numeric advertising on the public access channel during non-programming hours. Develop a plan of proposed rates and the amount and frequency of character generated advertisements. Additionally, identify if revenues derived from this source are to be the sole property of the contractor or shared with the City. 2. Identify what equipment the contractor desires to use for his/her own personal use, a schedule of when such equipment shall be available to the contractor and the liability of such equipment while in the possession of the contractor. 4. Insurance A. Liability Insurance 1. The contractor shall be responsible for all claims which may arise as a result of the business activities of the contractor and shall obtain insurance in the amount of to protect himself and the City from such claims. The City of Shakopee shall be named as an additional insured on all policies obtained by the contractor. 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 harmless and indemnify the City for any and all laws , claims, suits , judgements and recoveries which may be asserted, made or may 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 his own cost or expense. 3 . Prior to the effective date of the contract the contractor shall provide a certificate of insurance verifying the aforementioned coverage. B. Worker ' s Compensation 1 . The Contractor will at all times keep fully insured at his own expense all persons employed by him in connection with performance of this contract as required by the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to Worker ' s Compensation Insurance and shall hold the City harmless from liability from any cause that may arise by reason of injuries 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 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 provide a certificate of insurance verifying the aforementioned coverage. 5 . 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 surety company and shall be in the amount of $5 , 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 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 these specifications, 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 thereof shall be forfeited upon contractors failure to comply therein. 6 . Contract A. Award Y h- The award of the contract by the City of Shakopee shall be subject to the approval of the Shakopee City Council. 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 becomes unavailable through Zylstra-United Cable Television Corporation, prior to the expiration of the contract. C. Duration The contract will be 12 months in length with a second year renewable upon the mutual agreement of the City and the contractor. k. MEMO TO: John K. Andersen, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer _X% SUBJECT: Engineering Inspection Personnel Needs DATE: February 20, 1986 INTRODUCTION: It has become apparent that additional engineering_ inspection personnel needs will exist during the 198E construc- tion onstruc- tion season. The purpose of this memo is to address those needs. The reason for addressing these projected needs new, versus awaiting the results of the Ernst & Whiney management study is that a mater market of temporary engineering aids will be soliciting employment during the last week of February for employment in the spring. BACKGROUND: To this date, seventeen capital improvement projects have beer, identified for the 1986 construction season as well as recog- nizing engineering assistance to the Building Department and daily permits monitoring. The anticipated scheduling_ and man- power needs are tracked on the attached Figure 1. The estimated hours on Figure 1 accounts for inspection and project management (reports, diaries, etc. ) only and does not account for design and bid document preparation. As Figure 1 indicates, required time is tracked on a smooth, daily basis as if the "world was perfect ". Construction ex- perience clearly indicates otherwise. Various factors that affect inspection time requirements are: 1. Quality of contractor and ethics of contractor. 2. Weather conditions; periods of inclement weat her cre- ates chaotic schedules to catch up. 3. Critical phases of a protect. 4. Unforeseen site conditions, etc. In retrospect, the manpower needs indicated is an estimate of the minimum level of comfort of inspection coverage. Since inspection requirements on a daily basis vary, Figure c attempts to analyze requirements on a monthly basis to level out the peaks and valleys. Figure 2 indicates a straight line availability of permanent full time manpower. In reality, this is not fully achieved due to vacation time, sick time, or other priority related duties that arise. Personnel Needs February 20, 198E Page S Assuming Figure S is a close approximation of manpower needs, those needs are in excess of the permanent manpower available. Compensatory time or over-time is not the solution since project progress does not wait for the inspector. In lieu of decreasing inspection coverage, the manpower needed can be provided by either temporary employees or consultant services. Erased on current fee rates, temporary employees appear to be most cost effective. TEMPORARY STAFFING OPTIONS: If it is desired to add temporary staff, various options are available for recruitment of personnel : 1. Regional and local advertising_ ; this option would attract trade school students looking for summer em- ployment and seasonal technicians. S. Solicit applications from students in the University of Minnesota internship program. The spring/summer program runs from March SOth to September 20th and the summer/fall program runs from June Stith to December 20th. This time frame can be varied somewhat but a student is required to work a minimum of 5 months to earn credits. Each option has its pros and cons. Trade school students in all probability would not be available until June. Referencing Figure 2, it would be difficult to train and insert an inspector in mid-stream of a project. Seasonal technicians normally select this seasonal work as a vocation and would result in unemployment compensation responsibilities by the City. Figure S is indicative of a normal bell shaped curve (somewhat transfigured) and the needs could best be provided by a spring/ summer intern and a summer/fall intern with the overlap during the peak period. The problem with this approach is the declining manpower needs during November and the implied obligation to continue employment until December. Personnel Needs February 20, 138E Page RECOMMENDATION: Two fold recommendation: 1. Consider the need for temporary inspection personnel, and ; C. Direct the City Engineer to solicit temporary inspec- tion personnel for the 198E construction season through the University of Minnesota internship program and area trade scho=ols. REQUESTED ACTION: Offer a motion to direct the City Engineer to solicit temporary inspection personnel for the 198E construction season through the University of Minnesota internship program and area trade schools. KA/pmp INTERNS o- a 3 —1 1 _ � y it ^ O •1 a a '_. .� d 1 1 CC) c-, .... y .� «. .. Q W O N m 1 N 10 1 Z 1•' I rt C T S C < p ••. CI G CI'J rc a 10 A 1 T CD " -oft,0 Ip S-I T n m r 1 O T m A N T a a N N ID D p = 1 Ln .n o -0 c 10 ` a � Unj `< � •S y G G r N N 1 1 y y ^ p I Ul Ir O N 1 N 1 7 rt 1 1 I _ I x I ^ I K I D 1 x 1 S v 1 x x I x I x x 1 x I x x x I _ x __ __ __ 1 x ]x•[ 1 I x x x I T i X 1 x x x x x x x X I I x x x x __ ____ __ __ - ___ ",XXXxXX•[ xxXXx» xxKxxx Xaxa•c[ XxXXX xxXXX xxxXaxc xXXX% 11IIII1I1 TO__ 1 x x x x x x x 1 1 X ]X[ x K x x X X X x 1 v V G 1 x x x x x x 1 I x x x x I X X X X X x X X X X X 1 = x 1 x» x »x x x x x ac x l a I x x x X X x x x x l V n'1 a 1 x x O axe x x x x x I X x x x X x x x x% i l r O x x x 1 x x x x x X x � I x x x x X x X axc 1 I x x x x x x x X x x l x I D T W I x x x x x x axc x x I C T -10 _ I axe x x axe % I n 1 x x x x x X x x x l ^ __ __ __ _ _ __ 1_ x 1 I X X X X X X 1 N w I x x x x x l m G 1 K x x x x x I I X K ]x•C ]x•[ I I X X X x 1 x » » 1 x x Jxc 1 I x K x i N I x x 1 n x x x - j x x x ax•[ x � i x x x x x 1 x x x __ _ »»»__»»»__ » __» I ae x I I x x x 1 m X 1 x 1 X I I 1 a I I O I i �•• i 1 x I 1 I I .J 1 ^ N ^N N N d GI 1 3 N i 1 1 1 1 1 3 I I ID 1 1 » 1 _ c a a �.y P7 1 1 O I P 1 J I L^. OL7 •O P O a P .a+ a N _ m -0 m W m C_• 1 3 N I — O O C• G I _ O I 1 1 t 1 1 _ I I -ti L I I 1 B i I � i I I 1 1 c�. l"I AN Power, N W o Ir LA 3 �o x m� 0 Jo r � i Opv � ' r v MEMO TO: Jahn K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Shakopee Basin Water Management Organization DATE: February 21, 1986 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: The City of Shakopee needs to appoint a Commissioner to the Shakopee Basin Water Management Organization (WMO) to a term that expires December 31, 1986. It has been suggested to appoint an Alternate Co mmmissio mer to the WMO. Names will be provided Tuesday night. RECOMMENDATION: Appoint to serve as Commissioner and as Alternate Commissioner of the Shakopee Basin WMO by adoption of Resolution No2526. REQUESTED ACTION : Move for the adoption of Resolution No. 2526, A Resolution Desig- nating esig- nating Commissioner to Shakopee Basin Watershed. KA/pmp WMO RESOLUTION NO. 2526 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING COMMISSIONER AND ALTERNATE COMMISSIONER TO THE SHAKOPEE BASIN WATERSHED WHEREAS, the Shakopee Basin Watershed has been established by Joint Powers Agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1932 471 .59 and 473.875, and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee is to appoint a Commissioner to the Board of Commissioners of the Shakopee Basin Watershed, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: —.1 is hereby designated to serve as Commissioner to the Shakopee Basin Watershed and is to serve as Alternate Commissioner to the Shakopee Basin Watershed until December 31, 1986 or until their successors are appointed. 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 Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator n From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director 9 cJ Re: Dental Bid Follow-up Date: February 20, 1986 Introduction & Background Council has previously received information on the dental insurance bids. Minimum participation requirements are 756 of an employee group. There are less than 75% of the non-union and public works employees interested in dental insurance at the rates which were bid. This is according to an informal poll I conducted. The Police union has a clause for dental insurance in their contract. They have not, in accordance with the contract, unanimously requested the coverage. Officer Poole has informed me that there are only about two officers interested at the rates which were bid. Obviously, this is less than the required 75%. Action Requested Move to reject all bids for employee dental insurance due to insufficient interest by employees. GV:mmr MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Adminl= ator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer; SUBJECT: Scott County Transportation Coalition DATE: February 13, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The Scott County Transportation coalition was farmed and adapted by the Scott County Board of Ccomm i ss i oners. The overall Durpose of the Coalition is to seek betterment of highways to, from, and through Scott County. Membership on this Committee consists of Scott County, all Cities and Townships in Scott County, Chambers of Commerce, Industrial Commissions and recreational attractions. For the most part, individual members of the Committee have now been established. The City of Shakopee is represented by Mayor Eldon Reinke with Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer as an alternate member. A list of members is attached and since the printing of this list, the following members have been appointed : Townships Norbert Theis Industrial Commissions Tim Keane Recreational Attractions Fred Corrigan BACKGROUND: The first official meeting of the Overall and Executive Committees was held February 5, 1986. The attendance and acceptance of the goals of the Coalition was enthusiastic with practically all members represented. The Coalition bylaws was adopted, a copy of which is attached. The Coalition has identified three major projects to implement as its objectives: 1. T. H. 169/T. H. 101 intersection and bridge improvements. L. T. H. 101 Shakopee By-pass. 3. C. R. 18 Bloomington-Ferry Bridge. To accomplish this, the Coalition sees the following issues as the major tasks at hand : 1. Market the need for these projects as a public awareness effort. Scott Ct y. Coalition February 1.3, 1586 Page 2 2. protect the status of the 165/101 intersection and bridge project and the 101 Shakopee Bypass project through the current state budget problems. 3. Secure funding for C. R. 18 from the Federal Highway Administration, also under pressure of budget cuts. 4. Track and monitor the progress of the three projects to assure that all planning and transportation issues are properly addressed by the Met Council, Mn/DOT, and FHWA, particularly at decision points. 5. provide staffing and lobbying efforts to accomplish aforementioned ioned tasks. An annual budget of at least $100, 000. 00 has been estimated to initiate the identified tasks. The following breakdown of contribution was suggested at the February 5, 1986 meeting : $25, 000. 00 Scott County $25, 000. 00 Cities in Scott County $50, 000. 00 Industry & Commerce Canterbury Industrial park has established a goal of $25, 000. 00 contributions from within the park and an additional $25, 000. 00 from industry and commerce outside the park. Scott County has committed $25, 000. 00 to the Coalition if the Cities contribute $25, 000. 00. It has been suggested that each City contribute to the $25, 000. 00 pool based upon the percentage of Refundment to Municipalities from the Road And Bridge Fund. This is perceived to be an equitable distribution. Based upon that method, Shaky epee' s contribution would be $101 500. 00. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Contribute $10, 500. 00 to the Coalition Budget. 2. Contribute $10, 500. 00 to the Coalition Budget contingent upon an established participation from the other Cities in Scott county. 3. Do Nothing. Scott Ct y. Coalition February 13, 1986 Page RECOMMENDATION: Alternative No. ` is recommended. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer a motion to contribute $10, 500. 00 to the Scott County Transportation Coalition operating budget contingent upon ___% of a $25, 000. 00 target amount is committed by all Cities within Scott County. KA/pmp COALITION CO Cour,^V —IPANSDOrTh 10N roAI !710N kEMMERS ryecu ive Ccmmittee_Members Member Alternate Commissioner Mark Stromwall Brandt Richardson, Deputy Administrator Scott County Courthouse Scctt County Courthouse 428 S. Holmes 428 S. Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Brad Larson, County Highway Engineer Joseph F. Ries, County Administrator Scott County Courthouse Scott County Courthouse 428 S. Holmes 428 S. Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Lee Andren, Mayor Dave Unmacht 4629 Dakota St. S.E. Economic Development Director/Adm.Asst. Prior Lake, MN 55372 4629 Dakota St. Prior Lake, MN 55372 Rod Hopp, Mayor City Engineer (vacant) Donut Paradise 123rd St. b Ottawa Avenue Savage, MN 55378 Eldon Reinke, Maycr Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer 3071 Hauer Trail 129 E. 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN :5379 Vern 7. uenzlinoer Associate County Ad^inis-ratcr Bureau of Public Service A2307 Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487-U^237 Bill Crawford Minnesota Department of Transportation Townships Chambers ct Commerce Industrial Commercial .....,fissions Recreational Attractions Metropolitan Council SCO COUN77Y RANfSDOPTAT ON COA1 !TION, M^Mn-qS 9vere! ! Comr.!ttee MoTho-c (V4crn r A.te^n=_-e Commissioner Mark StromwalI Brandt Richardson, Deputy Administrator Sco; County Courthouse Scott County Courthouse 428 S. Holmes 428 S. Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Brad Larson, County Highway Engineer Joseph F. Ries, County Administrator Scott County Courthouse Scott County Courthouse 428 S. Holmes 428 S. Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Mike McGuire, City Administrator Dave Unmacht Box 359 Economic Development Director/Adm. Asst. Prior Lake, MN 55372 4629 Dakota St. Prior Lake, MN 55372 Mark McNeill , City Administrator City Engineer (vacant) 12305 Quentin Avenue Se. Savage, MN 55378 Honorable Eldon Reinke Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 E. 1st Avenue 3071 Hauer Trail Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Herbert Klossner, Director Hennepin County Department of Transportation 320 Washington Avenue South Hopkins, MN 55343 * Sandra S. Gardebring, Chairman MetroDolitan Council of Twin Cities Area 300 Metro Square Building St. Pau l , MN 55101 Duane Brown Minnesota Department of Transportation * Honorable Frances Schuman 311 South Willow Belle Plaine, MN 56011 * Honorable Donald Tillman 205 Russell Road Jordan, MN 5_27352- Honorable 5352Honorable Raymond Schoenecker Peter Milinkovich 118 North Central 205 2nd St.N.W. New Prague, MN 56071 New Prague, MN 56071 Donnie- nn response +n a?t Jean Benci David Lambert Elko, MN 55020 Elko, MN 55020 Honorable Jim Marsh New Market, MN 55054 Brian Norris Shakopee Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 203 Shakopee, MN 55379 Connie Larson, Secretary Savage Chamber of Commerce P.O. Box 71 Savage, MN 55378 Jack Ludascher, President Prior Lake Chamber of Commerce 16280 Creekwood Drive Prior Lake, MN 55372 John Manahan Marjorie Henderson Murphy's Landing 905 S. Holmes 2187 012 Hwy 101 Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Dave Paradeau, Operations Manager Linnea Stromberg0 ise 1 Valleytair Drive 1 Valleytair Drive Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Jim Peterson Renaissance Festival 3525 145th St. Shakopee, MN 55379 Fred Corrigan, Operations Manager Liz Anderson Canterbury Downs Canterbury Downs 4248 Valley View Industrial Blvd. 4248 Valley View Industrial Blvd. Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee MN 5379 Mr. Norbert Theis, Chairman Jackson Township Board 12466 Marystown Road Shakopee, Mn 55379 Robert Koenig Carol Jean Bauer Belle Plaine Township Board 7880 W 255th St. 25140 Hickory Blvd. Belle Plaine, MN 55011 Belle Plaine, MN 56011 Orville Renneke Blakeley Township Board 13220 Pony Rd. Belle Pialne, MN 56011 Roland Ryan, Chairman Cedar Lake Township Board 23126 Langford Ave. Jordan, MN 55352 * William Casey, Chairman Credit River Township Board 17526 Murphy Lake Blvd. Prior Lake, MN 55372 * LeRoy Schmitz, Chairman Helena Township Board 25025 Aberdeen Avenue New Prague, MN 55372 * 'earl Lenzmeier, Chairman Louisville Township board 14720 Old Brick Yard Road Shakopee, MN 55379 Ray Jabs Sand Creek Township Board 3550 W. 220th St. . Jordan, MN 55352 * Allan Quatman, Chairman St. Lawrence Township Board 6171 190th St.w. Jordan, MN 55352 Sidney Mohn, Chairman New Market Township Board 27601 Pillsbury Ave. Lakeville, MN 55044 Donald Beuch, Chairman Spring Lake Township Board 1375 B. 205th St. Jordan, MN 55352 James Hill Prior Lake industrial Commission 4629 Dakota S.E. Prior Lake, MN 55372 Tim Keane Shakopee Industrial Commercial Commission 129 1st Ave. E. Shakopee, MN 55379 BYLAWS OF THE SCOTT COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COALITION ART 1 CLF I Name and Definitions Section 1 . Nam This committee shall be known as the "Scott County Transportation Coalition". Section 2. Definitions The terms defined in this section shall have the meanings given to them unless otherwise provided by the context. (1 ) "County Board" or "Board" means the Scott County Board of Commissioners. (2) "Coalition" means the Scott County Transportation Coalition. (3) "Townships" shall mean all and only those townships within Scott County. (4) "Chamber of Commerce" shall mean all and only those chambers of commerce organized and operating within Scott County. (5) "industrial Commissions" shall mean all and only those industrial commissions organized and operating within Scott County. (6) "Recreational Attractions" shall mean all and only those recreation attractions such as including, but not limited to Valleyfair, Canterbury Downs, Murphy's Landing and the Renaissance Festival , operating within Scott County. (7) "Cities within Scott County" shall mean all and only those within Scott County. ARTICLE II L2ct i on 1 . Purpose Purpose and Authority The overall purpose of-the Coalition is to seek betterment of highways to, from and through Scott County. In fulfilling their purpose, Coalition activities shall include the following: (1 ) Seek passage of legislation at the state and federal level authorizing and providing for betterment of hicnways To, frog, and through Scott County. ( 1 ) Scott County shall have two voting members consisting of the County Board Chairman and the Scott County Highway Engineer, (2) The Mayor of the City of Prior Lake who shall be a voting member, (3) The Mayor of Savage who shall be a voting member, (4) The Mayor of Shakopee who shall be a voting member, (5) Townships which shall have one voting member, (6) Chambers of Commerce which shall have one voting member, (7) IndusTrial Commissions which shall have one voting member, (8) Recreational Attractions which shall have one voting member, (9) Hennepin County which shall have one ex-officio non-voting member, (10) The Metropolitan Council which shall have one ex-officio non-voting member, and (11 ) The Minnesota Department of Transportation which shall have one ex-officio non-voting member. Except for Scott County, each of the foregoing appointments shall be made by the action of the governing body and such action shall be reduced to writing. The Overall Committee may add additional non-voting members by majority vote, but such additional members shall be non-voting unless voting rights shall be later conferred upon such non-voting member by the County Board. Section 3. Terms. Members appointed to the Overall and executive Committees shall serve indefinite terms which shall continue until a successor shall be appointed or until the Overall and "Executive Committees shall terminate. 1000C 4-. R i Snat i on Any member may resign, from the Overall or Executive Committee by written notice to the Chairman of the Overall or Executive Committee. F Sec+ion Removal . The absence of any member of the Overall or Executive Committee from three meetings during a calendar year may be grounds for removal of the member by the County Board. -3- Section F Treasure The Executive Committee shall select from among its voting members a person to serve as its Treasurer. Section F Duties of _Treasurer. The Treasurer small be responsible for the proper receipt and expenditure of all moneys of the Coalition and shall make and keep all books and records for the proper accounting for these funds. The accountina records shall be maintained within Scott County's accounting system and shall be subject to internal audit by Scott County's Internal Auditor and to post-audit by the State Auditor. ART I CL'=_Y Meetings Section 2. Recular Meetings. Regular meetings of the Overall and Executive Committee shall be held on a quarterly or more frequent basis at such time as determined by the Overall and Executive Committee. Members are to be sent notification of the agenda, together with appropriate materials, by the Executive Secretary at least five (5) calendar days prior to the meeting. Section 3. Speciai Meetings- Special meetings of the Overall and Executive Committees may be held upon the callofthe Chairman in consultation with the Executive Secretary. Special meetings shall also be called whenever three members request the same in writinc delivered to the Executive Secretary. Notice of a special meeting shall include the date, time, place, and agenda for that meeting. Section 4. Order of Business. The order of business snail be decided by the Chairman of the Overall and Executive Cv=Ii Tee in consultations with the Recording Secretary and snail be set forth in the acenaa. Section 5. Open 'lee+inc. All meetings shall be open to the public. -5- Section ?_ Amendment to Bylaws_ These Bylaws may be amended by a three-flfths vote of the County Board. Members of the Overall and Executive Committee shall be given ten days prior notice before consideration by the Board of any amenament to these Bylaws. Section 4 Annrova l of Bylaws, These Bylaws are hereby approved by resolution -number 85112 of the County Board dated December 10, 1985. 0 -7- Nr, WPI H N N O r —4 1C 01 r7 O ca u) vi .1 r r o rn Lr)co o O, ►n ,n o m c O� m C) -4 Q ►n E-4 'I N m C) rN m WD O m � V.D r r o m r Ln O rn CC) iK * \D lD r-i m LP1 r-I N 01 m Co m O r1 f't r toLO Lr) c4 m aN m01 �D r rl O Q' m O% Ln CN D tr1 ON to .a z o rn ., m ►ri �r o 0 do cn m o LL G. vy N H ZJ} U W Z 'J � C %D ON V) r q' N c 1D N %D ul \D N O 1-4 rn E-4 CD z c� c qe N .--i m H m %D y %D m u'1 rn sn �D c Go m o ON r �D N G O � � o � m •� N r o z, rn w V} ri In 1C m N N ri L i, m O, to M •--I 0 °� 0 ro Y r-I �+ 3 3 .4 > rs Lr)rt .eG m V] Y Y Y Y Y Y U U U U U U W 1 1 I 1 1 I p y • . • a Q N d W C r O • N if1 I17 1 1 N �1 G N N d O Pf o a o ti r N �0 m O 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1.14 1 • r N r r ... r O O N N f9 N O Z N N ••� �0 r1 O� M r O . 1 ( 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 f• O O O O O O O O M r7 N N N M N n C O P P d P P P 4 M - U Q \0 O O O O Z O _ r Q CA M!r fA r IY r uOi. W W W Q W Q W Q W O N to S r S N J O N IL ta U. Ill S u W O O D 1 O O C O N rr T J -3 J K J w r r ILC ... N m a m d S CDO.zrM�Lr'N W I r \,Occ rI SIO. N M i.:t co m c+7 t-- En H W + U Y K x -epi' �FfrFt� U .6 W O W u O 2 = u W L] > s J W t) T C a Q W 3 - = O •r-I 1''1 W - O ul W U U 2. N fA r O O 7. 1 1 W 2 C N r W Z t7 O O S C O W W Q _ _ y . • a • • . . 3 Z; an+ n: NN oa co �+h o0 0010 .•+ S tP N N N N O O tL .G QI cc O O co w0 r C N N N^ O O N N lA I, O M M N N M M m C ro O {{} CO Id •r-I H S O (1) S. CN 4-) E-4 0 H f-i U] Q I I I I a c m W o x c c m \ C= O r I L y N ^! N N N N (•! N N N N ^I N N N N N N Q O O O O O `-• O O ujO W C O s Z U Y N N20 • T r a a M a U iff .� • O . o O O .^ :7 1.1 P d . a s 2` . at O 0 • O • O . O • O O • O O _ U U Y Y Y U W 1 1 U U 0 y r 1 1 1 W c + ♦ r y + 0 y + y • Q N N y r a W S w a N O I a N O 7S 2 r 0000 0 0 d N N •+NNSN Fl-mO+ T ON codN N M..1 N M 000 000 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • r - O O O o o O .y �D „+N .+w .r,,,• N .D r•.� O r 000000 d r N N ."y NN q.n POs a, O1 ON co 4. N z M O o 0 O O o a J ,� d In M-' d',D .-/.•1.y r .�1 r d d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 F- rl o..1N o.4N O p N ONNNNN 00000 OON 2 .� .�.��- .J.•1..1 w.1 M M .r M M w) M M M.+N M M M M M M N N 7 Ln Ow a wIn a N %� N NNNNNN In NMMM N N N M M M O J d a J d d d d J d d d d d d d d d d J d J S d J S d U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I U .+ LM to 1^ .-1..+r ..r r .a to too to d O a -r IT Ln 117 Ln O O O Oo m OO 0 .-+,-+r .r o 00 0 00 Z W Wt- O F WFC W N N NN N W n. ►• Q�..- Q Y K O O-W n.W N 2 ZZ2ZZZ N OW z N U W J J (z rl►+w.l .-I►+y 2 Z" W W rn a1.QfM. r rn M f of eQ r m!n mm ...a m 22 " W J d N dN W S YSS>eSS W W Q4 S 00 - O f 1.1 1 1 C9 rr u0j. 1-1 J J►'1 R9 J J S = J I- S V UKT L.I K7 J W n.. dC.1d a. FLIJJQW 1.1 1 W FLCL►+ 2 1.1 M.1 2 Wh.1 d 'j y 1.M u r1 ►r r• z,f L I,,.= 7 LL En - m.. W d `.•4..Y Ir 1� Y d Q > 77 '7777 Q 2 G1 .9 d 007 Q JJ , Q K z 4 7 K 0 O 0 O a 0 0 [Y 7 0 K K J J 0 K 1.1 111 I-+ U : a- D. CL 91. N Y . W W W W W W W !-N 0. DO S W C W N f.7 Y Y Y Y Y Y W Y Y Y Y Y Y J J J J J J • • • z L) zzzzzz daasac.a u u u z ddaQaQ dao_aae_ z z Y F+ 09CD© Q]cn K 7777 77 HNIr O U W NNNN (A U) \ \\ N W N • • • • • • r. p„Y Y Q. S Y N.r-f-HH U z JJ JJ JJ W W W W W z 2 2 W u �n eefeee p ,_, feffff KIVKKLY nno n zz2z2Z r - J cc a' YC' OOOCC UUU Z O d W O 1-NF F- 1-r- z z z z z \\\ Q H Z 2 z z z z O LL C Z z 2 2 z z d 4 4 4 Q S Z Z z a d a d d a Q in S O W W W W W W U U U W C U U U U U U r N LL U U U U U U W W W W W W W W Y cc cct-cr Me Of - J. CD OOOO Z27 Z2 \\ \ 2 mm W W W W W W Li I^+ 2 M- H�- NNHF- QQQdQ N N N S i S SSSSfS S W N » 7 7 7 7 W W W W W NNN O - Y►. Q Q 4 r y 41 r r r r r y r OO oOOOO Oo 0 0 N N rnCIN 0O0ON. OO 117 M 1�Ln NM N Ln OI` r nl N n 1n n O In in O O m cn r al o ti.p t► -Ln M .r c: m O O In fD M ; C1 ON49 Ln to 9 5O 54 1n 44\ M9m to N4M n N .r.-! M.00 - MM oMInow I.-N NN NN NM co MdN N d aID .gym .+.-• M d z c7 C N N r M ..+ .•+ Z M to to to N N D T O N m + E .r d W W ID .D W v7�O 10 .D D w w n O w w •O w I!) In.O ID W tD •J w O a. 1» Om commm co m 2 nococomem-O mcoccno 'Cmc) !'c cc co Y N N NNN C! N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N P: N N N 14 2 W \ \\ \\\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\\ \\\ \ \\ N N N'V N N N N N N N N N NN fv N NN N N N N C! N N a O o 0 o p o cD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 o C 0 o n 7 L1_ C O >. O H Z 1-. U Y M a a a J a s In.f. in d In In \ Ln to In In 0 • V r1.� ... .40 • N r CI N N N N N N fV N c4 N IV r M M 0 M Y a r ,e Ll 0 00070 c y o y o 0000 00 0 o00a r 000 0 • c3 r Q7 T M M M M M M M M y M y M In M M M N1 M M M M M M y M M M M r M M i T tf a a s is _� s ♦ a r a as as as s as a� • w� a ♦ a r r .� O O O O=3 O O O • O i O O O 7 0 0 0 p 0 0 0 0 i O M O O r O O 0 Ny y y y y LA C7 y y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y U U U U U U U V V 1 I I 1 1 1 I Li 1 I ( i a a a * :1 • a i • b w Q * a i • ( y i r i b 4 i • Q y d w w I0 st co 1 rO 00 • N I• 1 a O co M N M r O a N O N • N � ? •� Z .y 1 N r1 N ..� .�N N .� IQ M .- �O eH 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 t 1 t c0 .r�O •. �D .r .�r .� d d rl N N 10 .� 2 M M M M M lf7 :f'I i 1 11 I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I 1 O O O O O O N O cn O O 10 O z M .r N...1 M .+r M M In r r• �+r M N N N N - M M M N N M N N M M M o e U ( I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 U .r r+ .-+.. ..+ ..f Q O O O O O N N O O O N O 00 O cm O y W N ILL fr a m > t9 2 7 K - U 73.7 z- a 'S. J N eof rn y .a ow K rr t r rn ft' aa W S W W W W 41 Q S m h+ 1.1 W w O W y w nr y J a J J J W a S r fL a D. `J t1 LL t➢ w -1 a a s a c o C3 0 ,. m a o m a N Q m =m K_ C' K J O 7 K W /I H w y y y H a s m W a O N d J F- O W y H U U ~ LU z f"1 y r O C2 J W W • d 5 Y Y W K of - V W W U Uf O z z z Q 6 O w O 7t Q 4 3 7 z y ►n J J O 2 O lY O S Y O O z O O y t j T n N 2 T N N !r • (1 t) J ft w m U U Q Q z 5 C z O D U. . (n W Z Z .. r ►. . • Q O H w - tD -C-C Z O I 1 2 z a lr. O W M y y y z z O O O W y cm - O %- 7 7 Q Cf O f/1 N P10 K W W w F.H J J w Y H►+ Y x s cc o z z of z a S CL z Q Q W W S "Q Q -Q Q -J O O » O v m mm r- mm u U u r i Y r r b i a i r i OO OO dA O 0 m (U 1- co co 10 �o.0 MOM OO M M n. T M O O I\ OP- In N N V1 In .-+r m O m `O • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1: O 1: 1: N` M (t r T O to .I NN r - M 1n c0 M - p-r` r .r OO m •+O ID O M M N N .r r .-f N z -a r • • O C N N A r_ a w w I0 10 -O 10 10 10 O ID a x m m co co m In x m In m m m m m Y N N N N N N N N C: c! N N N N N $ \ \ \\ \ \\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ N N N !�! N N N N N N N N N CJ N a= O o .7 v O O O 0 0 O o Co 0 0 0 11 O O f. O 1- z tr U �! T O a M M a 5b � O ♦ u1 -n r r r 2 i N r •n .D a m U a• I r Ln in r •.0 b m m r m m a T r r a o ♦ m 0 b o In 1.1 O O • O O a O r 0 C3 i n 0 Y ^] r o b .-1 a .r.ti a .+ M T M M T t 1 S � r f t► r S Y J � • J b a J r d Y d a A J i A �.• O O b O O b O b O O 4 0 0 a O 4 O a O 4 0 O 41 O M y N y ti to ti to cn c� _ Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y U U U U U U U U U W 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 1 l.7 y t Y t t ♦ y Y a W Q •f t t _ t t a y LD t 0 t Y H i t i i i • Q d W S ID tt to N O N O it 2 .ti N co M N CIO N O N N .+T 0 0 0 .+ .r,..r N N ►� �D ti M �D 'D O d d M H O O O M M M >D J 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I f l 1 1 1 1 1 • "I .� .+� .rN OO �D vO r.lN OOO N NN C3 10 N coM IN co MO NN Q+ OCD MN 2 .r ID .r M tD�- .p O d d M 0 0 0 M M M 1D d - H O O O O O O O T N N O O O.4 rV N O O O N M N N N N N N N IDI N N N N Z ID.O N N N N N U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 11 M N N .d 1.7 Q O O O O O O O N O O O Ln LO to O O O O O Z W O >' W u S v W O F- M Q Z Ind 2 QW J h-Z U ZZC. W " J U W Z 2 ti rn rn N M (AM`.I we_ Ma (A(a .9 X "5 rn►e .ra W W W W W WGQH LL W W D_ H IL Wa ax n Fr I-I •r H re S S `d H H I.I f,D — = S J J J J J re C d. J J U C 2 re J d = n_ d n. fL ti 0 to W O •+ n_ n: 2 t.l.+ O w & d d a a 0 o x " m a s a o o n m m 7 »J J1� Oa mm e! 2G O =J JO ►+ N N N N N m m O 2 W N H d w d S N m m W C W r N U J J J W > >> Y Y Y cc cc GaQ U 22 w M D_D. n G a Y m s x S w Li!ti! wWWW WW ►- rte . . _ J 335 32 (n to (D0 NNN W W W V n n 4 n n n rn N n n f. 7 2 R'f n x . x x x = z x w w z cc . . . a o n u u 0 0 D. Cx o0 rr-►- r O U m h N N N N N - 0 0 Q G Q N 2 ., -tCD ID V C7 O C7 . • 2 2• Z Z 2! N N W 2 "U ZZ2222 IIL Get w ZZ 22 M�-+ �+t-+►+N _ S= F- F.1- W O 0 W W •r • ZZZ27Z JJ HH N to fn 2 TS 2T ZZZz Z2 CC - Into CIL'C D_ COC ZZ • �> >> >> QQ G Q Nwra O QQ W hJ . .. 7 U 000000 WW WW WWW a a Y Y a In ID t►r OM •D dO zfT 1►mN as co A C3 In 100 co co Nom... ON in In .r ..+ O N O 11 O 0 d O O H to In O N N to T T M T M try ...I N N M d 0 M• iiD T N A O -I O M M• A• d NN DI a, N ..rd to to MNN ..a N O (vLnn NN .-1r t0m F M M .y M ry 6) O T) tP1 z _ O O r Q t.l .D •D IO D .O :O�O u7 W D .D.D ID D �D Q .G .D CL CO m oO cc m x cc cc m co in an ^cc 'o cc m cc cc m Y C: N N N Cl N N N N N N N N N N N N N W \ \ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ NN NN 'V N NN NN C1NN N CJN NN Q O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 O O O O O L Q O O F. 2 ti u V i N y In Y Q t» 0 0 0 y to y d d M w7 M M M Y M M y tf d i A A A y ef! y O O y .y ,p I,.i N N a N N r±f T Y M a M Y M M M M M M Y M M i M M y M M M a .-t a O y O a O 0 O O O O y O 0 i O O Y O O O a O a O O y O O N N Go Y 0 N N d Y Y Y Y Y Y Y U U U U U U U - U W 1 1 I I i i Y W ¢ i y + y r a i • 0 N i Q to CL W E .p a a N O O .r • ^ � ra 1 d N 0 In N In T ON O 3L r+ In D\ O d z .J d M M N a, O -4 c0 N 1 N M J H M M d ey.4 r H O d J d d M "1 M 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 4.(NJ Nung u o M0 d.e .-1 p P.J Al. M M M N'+ M .-1 In D% O d J O 0 N co N z w.�.-1 N In M d n In Ln In M H M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.. 0000 co O NN N N 000 00 00 O O rl N N z ..1.r.+ r to .• M M7 M In •-1 u� ;. .+-7 r �+ .-i M M , M N M In M N N N N N M M M M In M M M In In N N p d d d d d J d d d d d d J d d d J d d d d d U 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l t l I I I I t l l l l 1 I I („) ..1 d d�0 ..1 ..1 .r PI- CD O O O O O O o u N N N In ID O O O z O rr I_ a a. O z z O U > » a -I.q F.I.. 9 ?a ?a » » W fn fY fn er K N a a ee N fig m K K K z a a W LJ 1,1 W IJ dl W Y 2 T S W W W W W W W W W J S Z O N�+ yIn NN(A yN CA(A NN e J H J R. d fl. D_ a a LL LL U_ LL LL IL It IL Il U_ H Fr u W fLaa .. D_ m MM aa00a a000 d > F. zazfr z a DO n KKK cc KLY YK Q O O ., D_cnaa d N WW W W aaa an. aD_ aa U W W z W N I,y - OD 000000 O 0 W O u 0000 S22S SSS „' S K K K K U U U U U U U U U U y In 6 Q d ¢ 2 U W 0 0 0 0 W W W W W W W W W L.0 W J z z z z a 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 a U = d Q ¢¢d � �orzzczo z 1- z (� en nfn (A en �� 77 7T T7 s 7 7 LL Fr 5 W W W W Ncq LO (11) 00070000 p W 17 O 2 2 2 2 2 f S x= x S S S m J T _ U- 0 to o c9 0 U N N N N W h+ Z 2 :7 :3 7 F- z z 2 z as w of as-J •d Q oa Ia d W S S S S Q W W W W = (A S 7 7 7 7 fA t7 fA fn V] N N to N O J N 0 0 0 0 d S - W W W W ¢¢ ¢¢ Q Q ¢Q Q to ed x 07p ] i.J u 0000 !LK w= m www K 0 ¢ r i r i i r r t i N LM NO OI, OO m R) OO mO 00000 m 1^ m m d d .n M N T N 'D fT T KS ID O N ll'1 O A O N r In In n N N T N t*m-1 T 4 M M Ln 'll M O lD.* T .fl � -0 .: O y' to M N N In M M N N N O O T IT,T to o, 1.- 0 -1 a, T N-i N -M u7 T cob M M z O S Q W W �D .D O .D .D lD 10 u'7'D u7 O LLi 0 'o a 0 ID d 0 10 cr 'b b S \ \\ \ \ \ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Y N N N N N ^J N N N N N N N N N N C!N N N N N Q -1 Z\ 2 W \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ NNNN fU ^J ^1 N N N N N N N 11 N N N N �! Oc700 0 0 ca ID o0 00000007 0 .0 0 0 U- O O N O H 2 F.1 u v a In stn In In f 1 a N N N N cm C r In IJ r N N N N a N i N a N N N ml i N n1 N N N N cel N N r N N N r In T r M M a Y 0 0 0 O a O i O i O C 0 0 a 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 U O Y O O Y (n y N N N N N U U U U U U u W 1 1 I 1 I ( 1 W Q • r i r • r LD N r # ♦ ♦ i a Q Q7 CL W ID a M N O .y • I d N p O it N rl • M J z N O M d N v1N Mo7�4N rQ N NPN• N N .r !. O rt rl O MC M M.1 M d �D O 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I l l t l l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • rl O r N .� r ti r N �N.� e-•N O N o Md N to N MM .A NN rIN NPN.- N M .r\ O Z .y P MP rsyMMd �D �D dP �CM PSD W) 4 O H O d O T O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O O O N N O Oz CV �D O M CV M M ...I n ^ F. -^\ F--I- N --" M M MN N N - M M M M M M M M M N N N N N N N M D• O P P dP d dP .laPPd dP PPPd Pd P+! U t f 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 'a O co O•y O OO 0 17000 00 O O CD C3 O O (] o M N O W Z O p F- o o_ f+ z co 1- 1- W d' O J ffl Q z z F- U U CL - W NN (n VlNyN (/fN Z- ! Z7 z U1 K a O W W W dl W W W W W UI U1 M F+ r Q r rY. Q W LJ --I Mir J `r r~ tr---- HH W W W QY Z QW U SN F. L..O 1� •rr HHwNw vH JJ J d IL {� = 11 •r ?S w J J J J J J J J J n. n.n tD lr M CD t1 •r W O r r O d tr Fy - ---- -p• tld d C» CO S 1. K IJ tY K Q H " 4..v H H 7 7 m J O d J!Y IW w D_. C as U 7C OC »» tnNNcow W ma. Y W N H tD N W W Y n• N • W W U V M 1 J J W a ►+ W W 2 z v r a n y y (A U-)M'A f^ M O {L ►+ ZZ - - JJ UUUUUUU 1' Scr y' "Y u O O z •.1H Z JJ 0 w 0000 QQQQQa 11 z o cr ne W QQ QaQ aQ QQ aaeLCLai _JJ W W CL CL W L9CDv tD000 W W > > J n • • W W W W W W W re 0!IY IY K K !-.I- eD Q - Y Y O - 2 2 2 2 z 2 z 2 z 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Q u z z - u z z z z z z W o m J J JJ Z Sf _ SSSSS SS SSfSSS SE Z -. i r i r r r i r r OO OO ON In OO aN /n P-O mw 1- F.- .J M .-11O d'OJ N Otn to CCM e"f O O O O 1` � O O b T M A cD .-1 to T N t• a '] N N o ul • • .n• om PP• Nd W Mx MOto 4 • 1•-• 1• ON N O•O• OO OO TMN r- Odr• . to MM %D **Oto to LM 14 fl - 1• 0 L In dd t- f• !� tot^• �+ m T .+ Pr TM MNM o P to N N r.r z t^ In .r to O S Q W W D ID O. In ID 10 Q 10 In 10 w 'D .0 D 'D 10 .0 O D D_ co co co cc co Mx 237 Ta, xMM Mxcc cc M Y N N NN N NN NN f`±N NN NN N N CJ N N N N N N N N N N N N N a o rJ' 0 0 O 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tL O O > O H Z r U Y - O i r r -1 r 4.'r In In W1 In ID ID as U ON r i O O i .+ r M M i M M IM o,,) M !M r d b d b d 1 b b r to 10 W N i M r M M i M i M M i M M M M M M M a t l M N'1 M M N1 M M i M M M M M r g M M M M M M M i M ..I O i O r O G a O i O 7 r O O O O O O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O r O Y Y Y Y Y Y- u U U U U U U W fD # i i # • # # Q N CL W x ID sx m N O .r • O 1 fl N N ti O a O J Z � .�N MIA tiONNM ;A •rNmM N N NNbbb fp M 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I • r ..�.-1 N.N.y N rf.-0 rl N N .-1.q r .r •- rl CD ti N..r .y N cc MUII CO .ti NMIA rI NmM N N N4. 7b r+ .rN M m z M .� -i��+1'+ .�'olMMM b dr1 N M J a.Y' aab rl Md I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1- OrI.M.-1 Nrl rlN..yN N N r1.� w.l N O 000 00 O N N O O ZM N NNNN NNN NNN NN N M ...I.r !A r N M M M M M M M M M M M In M M NNN N N N M N N M M O J y a a a a a P a a a a a a d a J d d d d a d d a d d U I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I,1 .+.� .r er .-1 - -- 1-d - .r .-I N IA �j` .+ .+ -4 .+ N Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C, O O o C o 0 0 0 0 0 o O z O .-1 H CL r- m r 1- m }- z z z � U Z W W W W W W W W W W W W W W I-+ ]' 1-0- (A -1-N rzZzZMZtz22z222a fn (AN f/1N(A fY Q ar W W x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 S W W W W W W Id S S f� SSSS2SSSS S2T_ TZS rrrrr N H CL CL aaaa aaaa ad CL d J JJJJJ d2 ► ►+ S 1.5 W 1.1 W 1.1 W L.J W W W W 10 1.1 W I.1 r (1 n d IZ d A W r r T... J W o J J J J J J J J J J J J J J m 2 ddd Ila. O "] n r r ♦•. J W W IJ 1.1 W lu 1.1 W 1.1 W I.1 1.1 W IJ O > >= m n m K O f3 .f a1- 1- H1-H 1- F-1-� F- r rJ- r W N NN N NN 6. w W 1 7 Lie UA N I-0 Uf U W Z z K • 4 N \ 0 V1 Lo 0 L a W 2 Z Z Z z fY U U co 1-0 r r r r W 0 0 0 0 0 N O O 5 ? Z. 0 JJJ JJ F 1% Q' 0 U V 1.1 LI 1.1 ILI LI 1 O In N W K \ U 33333 0 U. U- N p 2 d 2 H p fY = N(ANNN U W W N W z - J J J J J J J J J J J J J J ! N 0 0 0 0 O N W W W W W J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J U J J J J J d 0_ 3 Il M. 1.1 IJ tj w 1.1 W IJ Ld IJ W 1..1 I.1 Id Id W 11 O O O 0 C 0 J C O 2 O m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m a ►+ Z z 2 z z C5 o > >r > > z Q Q a 3 7 m 3 m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 of Q ,bI WLI w 1.1 4 22 O S zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz a z5m u NN N 0 • + r . . i # 1 t�lA OO NN OO CD CD 00 mm A P.- F_ O u7 x m r w m m m d f7 O M. x nl N — q O .-+ .-+M • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • N J N M 0 M P S -.O 10 m 0 0 P b O 1A M M M O d P 1-N m N N N mMMOM Nb IA M ..I 10(71 cc NN in no IA Mm NN N H N 'r .r M IA N z O S Q W w '0 41,0 0 'D Z O X0 0 '2 0,0 0 "o W lz 10 I0 O CL mmccmccmxxxmxmxxlx x m xx00xx co xx x x 0 11\ \\ 11\ \\ \\ \\ 11\ 11 \ 11 11 11 \ \\ \ \ \ \ 11 Y (`l N N ni N N N N N N N N n.!N N N N CJ N N N N N N N N N S w \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\\ \ \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ N N N N N NN N N N N N N N N N 'V N N N N N ^J N N N N N Q V O O o U 0 o O U O 0 0 0 0 O O o O O O q 0 O 0 0 o O IL O O > O N U Y ♦ 1�\ v ti \ "'-\ A \\ ^ i S a A a .-+.-1 ti N N O # N N # tY1 m U a C N x T cm x x ^ K: ff fZ T m m a O O a O O 17 W . M M M M M M M M M M M M N7 M M • J r P . P P P P P a P i L'9 IA # IA IA Im M M M1 M M M # M i M ♦ M M M M M • M . M M a M M f f ♦ P J P P d d P P P J P P P J C3 r J P r P P P P d a P P ♦ +1• O O O O O • f'7 # O Y n O O O o 0 # 0 # O O • f 0> o 0 A N N N Y Y Y - U U U W 1 1 1 c0 • • W Q • - • M c9 N r t Q N d W S .D a O 1 N O .r 1 a m N M O R ti N J • M > r 2 9.-•NNN OCC -+ N0N NNNN N0000 .rN C000 co 4NN V1 ANN w NMMJ In fy.-1 M MM st 4. ID-0 �D %D 0000 MM MM d MM N N.rr -+M .t 1 1 t 1 1 I a• N%D w O O O O N.-1 ..N a --1.-1 .r N N r -.+f- --1-r.y O co-I N N N O O -N N N N N .-/N N N 0 0 0 0 r N CO CC 00 N N 14.-1 -M v+ A N N z .r 1n MM 4. p ID p o OOOO MM M4. MM II. .+.rr .ti M .7 H O 000 O 00 000 O CI In O.d•. .-1 N 00 00000 0 CD O 000 00 0 Z p-A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A M M M M r m n M M n In M -1-1 r -I-1...- .-1 N...� S MMMMM MMMnM M In to Nln MCC 000 NM NNNNNN Nll9 M NNNNNN d In M M M o-4 J O O J d o- Ir U I t l l l 11 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I i t I i t M N N .-1 --I .N -• .--1 N r 11—r -;N N i ¢ 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O Q CO 0 W O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O (� O O Q O O O Z O C7 LD fL U N O ►� W W W 5 O D-' N N 2 W U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N m 2 f- U Z?Z ZZ z W CA W W 1..1 W III W W W I J 41 W W W IJ W W O W N N - -- - - N M N'A N N N N 10 -1 H H►•r-1 -n.1 H v w N 1-y►+ v-1 H H 1--1.. U w W Q ¢ ¢ ¢Q Q W J W W w W W W W N ad Z S Z T w t H¢ N -N H 1--1 H H H 1--1►+"♦ H l..r r-•H v�+1..1 H H N H N 1.1 1.I K me J J F- J J J J J J Z J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J N K w W d II.. tD LO 0 C-3 0 un a- 1.1 IL Il G M. d. 2 2 W r•rlrrlr o-r �+o-+ "�rrw+►+lrw+ `-I►arrYMe CLT_ 0im0000 as O aaaft. da O C Q O 0 J J J J J J O¢ K » 0 0 0 0 ►+ » 3 » »» m mm ODU33 NU 0 mOm070] NU 0_ NNNNNN W F- N W O O N N N N N N N W W 2 Z >> >0 7 W W W W W S S mM U O p O p 0 C Y UUUUU OQ] m C70 UI 0O z W W W W W W U ►+1-.r•Ir ti UCO Z zz zz z H W »>7 W W H.-..-1 1-r-- = C' xce x OO zzzz22 Ww O NNNNNN U 1.1 IJ 0 ISI W Q C C w C Q T 7 I.1 1.1 1.1 W til a N N N N N N N W W W W W W w U U W z Z Z 2 2 2 2 O W W W W W U U U U U U U U W W 2 N N N N N N Z W W 1.J W w 2 2 - K 1" ¢ O> w aaaa D- ¢ ¢ NNNNNN NN m Manm man LC 00000 tY 1- Y YY Y Y ]C NN K Y Y Y Y Y U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U LL LL K K K M 1' e 7 J J J J J J ¢ ¢ ¢ Q ¢ S0 » » 7 » » » » ¢¢ ¢Q ¢Q z cL W W W W W W SSSS S as ao-MCL m CL (Ld- n- aaa -1-1 1-o-- 1-1-1- 1- 00 mm7 = 77 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O N N N N N N N r r r r r r 1 0 00000 r m O A0 C3 V.- ON OM OO OO A O OO 0 0000 00 OO 0 OO ACRO 'DmO O O O O O O m n N N to .-1 .D In.O Lr O O C7 O O 'D r 0 -r 11. A In A M N fr Ln O In O O m m ID d In A 4 NNNNm NA .D 1O O1D 1D � T .-+r -r MO MOM T� cD .D 1h M.-. NtnA NN Ir 4 N4: r4 NNNN-1 NLA %Dr 4rIn MN IA 000 -•m In am MN Nr NC Onm CQ- N4.LM W. .--1 J M .-+ A.-! N N .r A\ A N n r N M z � N T ¢ J W �D .D 0 '0 D �O ID �D 10,0 ID \D •.0 'D V.7 D'D .D 'D Q I0 0 1.010 IO 0 'D D .0 D D D d O 17 n7 n7 c0 no O m 00 co co S c0 00 m c0 In W cc cO co CD 4^ co O 5 CJ e7 07 S q N N O O Y NNNNN NN NNNNN CJ NNNNNNN NN NNCV NN N NN N Cy nI NNNN % .r -r -.n-r.-I - -r --r N -y H N-ti .--I 2 W \ \ \\ \ \\ \\\\\ \ \\\ \\\\ \\ \ \\ \\ \ \\ \ \ \\\\ \ PI N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N',4 N N N N N N N N N N a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n o 0 0 0 0 o O o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL O 0 � z U v m m m m i A A A A +A A A A A A A + ► A m m • 0 0 0 0 in 'D i0 .n 'D C 'D t I [ 0 0 0 0 .-I.-I .-+ N--•-- ..1 --•--I-J -I -y—--1 --1 --1 H } N N N N N N r N N CM N N N N N N I0 IJ Lm In In IA!A i In:n Ln Lm LIM In In I.n Im In In In In .1 Ln In lA r N In Ln in'11 -n r Ln Ln In Ln In In Ln Im in S T M M n M M r M M M M M n M In M In M M M M M M n ,T f. .f d d d J ♦ R G' d d d d d d d d .� d d d d A d i f d d d.! t i t d d .t d d d d d -+ O O O O O t O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O Y 0 O O O', O Il O O O 0 0 0^. O O CIO N N 0 c N N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y U U U U U U U U W I 1 1 I I 1 I I q41 t • i t i t # . W i • r i i Q N d W m 1 N O � • O 1 a o N u N q LO C3 O s! T Z .- MM MN .IdT d NM ti M -1 N N N N N er ..-1 N O .AMM MfV -4 dT d NMS M 1.1 N N N N .+ N z T .-1-1 -1 J M u.[ d .-i•r rl M M d d M M d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .� O N N N N .4 O O O O O o O O o N N O O N 1 z r M M M rn -1...N w+ .r r...1 -1 h - M n"1 N N M N NN Nmi If7NN N MM M M N M N N N N N O J d d d J d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 t 1 t 1 1 C3 .-1 Q p 0 0 0 0 O u.+ O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 2 O u CL z z0 z z z 1-1 N [A Q N N Q [A N EM N 7 N N N Ll Q d N Uf d 1.1 W-W W S J W W W III W W W W Ir S Z W W S O 1-1 I.w N d l-.1 1..1 I-r N to N N JG. -j o- 1- JJ J J — 1 S d ud CLu ud IN d IL 11. 11 IL d J u u tl fl u W 2 = ddndf.Ld d COO O d u > m S m n u O O CMO dOC m Iv m IN M -3 1- O Om O C9 u N Li (A N W U N N N O.d d IL N W W N N W q W N W a a a a a n d a W W .+......., .....» a tY > >> M O > > > m J 00000000 0 a Y W W W W W W W W t..t W Z- d U J W m W 00000000 N J S N 1' = 00000000 J 4 W W N [.9 I.11.11.1111.11.1 W 1.1 P1 A n At (N f7 N A s z z z z z z z z 0 m x z w v a z z z m Q u +` u.-1 r-1-u H I- w W W J z z M !- O Cl N N N en(A Y 1-1 Q z m 7 mm 7 m z U S OC d' U Y W m f9 KIm[G 5m O YYY u N W W z _ J O 1 W W IJ N K W J J H d W JJ JJ J J JJ 1 JJJ W F- - t9 [7 m W W W W W W W W Q J J J z CD N W W d O z Q tN u S J W N N N N N N N N N } >> } 3 3 N N W C7 Y a i r r i i 1 In 000000s C3 ca mmMT .ru 00 .d .+ .o.D dd dd Tm o .000003. D stn mm OmJ dd oo ... Jd MM mm o0 0 M d 1 d n N d N In 19 14 T m M— M M O O T T N N M M m q N N O d M M M .-1 M '.1 r1.-1 -[-1 O d T IA O O d d IA N .-- .-1 In N M z T M N N .-1 N N N O O C 1/� %D N S d W •D'O 10 Z .D ID lD L0 10 ID iD lD ALJ .D ID 2 mCID mmm T IT q gccm q m m q q C) \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Y N N N N N N N, N N N N GJ N N N N N N N N Q W \ \\ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N F- NNNNNNNN N NNCJ N N N ..^J N ^J N N Q o O O O O p 0 0 O O O U o 0 o O o O o 0 lL O O )- C z N U Y lG d ID In 1 N'1 a In . O a U1 ell . ;!') 10 U N N N N N'Ni N nl i d t T T T i O rti Y M a ,M IA t O . O O 10 W IC!In 17 In 1.7 to U1 In t 1A t 1l] '.11 S a U • 'D a .A t .O IM a CA . CO m 1'1 T_ M M M M M M M M . M a M M M a M a M . M • M M a M Y M M - f 1 d J M X d�1 d d a d a J d d i d i d a .� • .1 d i a a ri t► r O O 0 0 0 0 O O a O • 0 0 0 i O . O i O i "7 f9 a O i O O T N N N Y Y Y U U U W i 1 1 + i i W r Q N W a s O I • N O .r • I d Ln a N N N O 0 o cD d • .y N .-1 t\1 Z N S .4 N M H M S M M 1• N M M N 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 • .l• 4. O N S .-j N M 2 M d M M (� .-r M M +moi 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 z N O .-I N O r• N N O Z r 7 N N M N N M N N N O d d a a a d a a a U 1 1 1 1 I t 1 1 1 U Q o F. _O 2 J w �r o r_ N Z ~ 2 W1- WF- 1- 7 :3 z z z LL h W O W W W a c c rxzs = c2l- �- U U O W W W 6.W W Q N N D: z D] z 07 Z Z 02' WO -00 a— U LLw Y > K 1, ::z .9 h� fn d fn U7 d V1 rn d Q NV1 U r7 n. •d p, 7 N IJ S W = W S x W J W •� d N S N S W LL O J }. C1 H eE — d cc I-r V N fL w.l N —r• J F. d. J d J D_ d J Y N W re 1� = re SO N z 1N d N ►+ n. N hr Y.1 d W 1[ z J d W V.A U d�D W d!K J W IL 1.1 O G_ W n O n. z s d d M Z U A I1 M 70 Y r 1. O O ' O > > o A O W d K tr d I d N cm 1� O M W 4- % M. I-r W N O W N O W W N Lo CL SUYK P.. aO.+N Nd � K L1 N w LD 2 W p ce 1.1 N V Y 7_ U 2 Q J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J J i..1 U IJ z rl a Q Q d Q a Q a Q a Q Q a a a a w z > -r w r- u2 r. 1-r 1-1- 1- •- 1-I-I-- " 1- 1-•-1- = rr W O !- N Z U O O O O O O O O O 0000000 U N V [/ d I i I v d /� 1..1-.1� I-. 1-.1� FF. 1-.M.•� i.. s w r- a aL z 3 a O Y N Q J O O x r-•M SIn AD1-- 0 \D Nr+M r1M O - N H W = 2 r J Q O.-1 .+N.r NN dNV+ N �DP-I\O C10 z r- o z v w Q x w 0] ►r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J U U N m W N ee m m m n 7»m 7» > F. 0] K N Y D] O Q w W y w W LL LL LL IL LL LL W LL LL U.W LL. O o a I. Q m a W � co x 2 _ x W N 7 7 i i t r a r r r r • O D� T 00 00 In Ill N N O o OO OO OO d 10 h01-O Ln C5 oO In ID ON co O M O N Cn rn O O O m IT N N O O O O O O 0 0 d In d M .r LM In O IP:I'1 N N 4l O Ot�ti O O to In .r ti : A O O U7 LP t* T 01 M d O N �D a .� O In r �D .r N\ a d '+ M '.1ti N Ln ..+N M M MM O O+ MA. r O aMS .-+ co 07 -+ti N in O M<n M 'D .-I.T 0 M 9% • O N S J' N•- N lJ7 O ID S M Q W w .D .o .D ,o .D .n o a cc no x ao m w no m o Y N N N N N N N N N Li N N N ^1 N N 4 O O O O o O O O LL O Y O F- Z w U !G r m O .- N M r r iD 1� • U O r f] .+ ..r ..r ...1 r ...1 r i� W m i an Q! m Q1 O en r e++ Ql dl T M r M M M M M M r M M Y T r r O ♦ p O ',] O O 13 i O O i M N O co \10 O O O\ \-O O O O O N O O O O 0 u � O\ O N O O -q O O O O b N �O O CO O O O \O O N u\ r\ 1r\ OZ \10 N \0 M ir\ O D\ O\ N N O > c N ON 0 + \.O O\ r-i r-I O O O r-♦ N r I d\ M r i N 6 u\ M [ L r-I N c U U N N N _ O U O N U O > cd co cxd S-4 � U) U2 r°1 >> -P S-4 c Cly U I Q N Q •3 c Q U � N � .a. x � 00fs w Q U U U 3 +? Q a>i m " W 4-+ Q) tw Cd b � � 4U+ L., U N 3 w . 4-4 -P -P bD CO .. (1) o 4-4 ~ o zy E aD O C U (Ij O a >> (1) E 4-) c < 0 W O z •r+ z U c 4-) C: ;_q +-� E -i M r-4 3Z m +U-)+ U) co O N "b -P O •r•I co E +) .Q +j PQ +3 cd P. ;:� cd cd Cl1 > U -H •r+ N c (z O m _: M W cd ,c N S-4 +-) +•1 Q E Cl) Cl) M: M: = QF-4 U r- a -4 P-r z U) Q 0 F' CO Q\ O r I N M -:I- 1.r\ `O ti c O> O r-i CU N N CU CU N ClI N N M _:t U\ \D N u\ Ir\ \.O \O \,O \O \,O \�O \,O \'O \,O \0 \-O (` [ ( C <` [ C [ N [ lam- C [ L` ti O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 000000000 O O O O O O O O 00 O O O O O O O O O O 000000000 O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N CU N cU CU CV N CU N N N N N N N c r.. C °' E U) E w a a U) E U) .c O O r-I H r-1 O H C: r U E U r-i U O U1 4 O U G O O N O F-q O C: F, N U : w N < 41 U < F N U x .Q U N U U ✓ 4D U •r'1 4-t E-4 E-+ ' _ N E CA �-4 H c N F••1 H W cd N cd cd CO N m bD ~ -) cd w J Q CO r=r a a Q Pa 08 Q U +1 Q) 41 rl •r-I •r+ 4•4 rl� •ri •rl U) C+ •rl •rl U E E E E E E E E r E N r. E E ci O +D O Q N N N N U N N N O O V N z O N N ' U O U U co G w w w w w w w U > W = C U U U Qi L - r p M N O M u\ �10 O O O\ \-O O O O O L\ Lr\ O u\ 0 0 0 u\ L\ \,O O O O O \,O U\ O [-- co N O O. r-1 O 0 . 0 O rd N N lr\ U\ O O CV N O O O O L� H 1, N O a\CO O O O \O O CV u\ U\ 1r\ O NM\O a\ M M M M .� u\ O O � \O N \,O M D\ ---t u\ O O\ O\ ti N0 O\ > ON ri\ O\� M M M M CO N N O M �O O\_ O\ r-I r-i O O O r-I N r-♦ M H H M r-I N 0 u\ CC) N � M N l rI N c C Lf\ r I O O O 00 O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O ri r-1 rj r-1 r1 rl r-1 r1 r-♦ r1 r I r-1 r-i r-I r-1 r-i r-I r 4 r r-1 r-1 r-i ri r-i r-1 r-I r-i r I r-I O O O 00 O O O O O O O O O 000000000 O O O O O r-i ri -4 r I -4 r-1 r-I r-♦ r-♦ r-i H r I r-I -{ b -4 -1.r-I r•i r-i r-I r-i -A r-♦ r-I r-i r-i r� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U i ri rl r-i r1 rl rl r4 r4 ri r-♦ r-I r-4 r� O r1 r-i r-I r-I r i r I r1 ri r4 r i r i r-♦ r� U d O N -O N l-- co co CO oO cc co cc) co O > 0 0 0 0 0 0 r— 0 0 co O O co 00 V O r N r-i O O O O O O O O O r-I N N M -- -7 N r-I Com" r-i O N N C O O _:t <- O O O O O O O O O r-{ .� M M S :' \10. t- r-i M O _:I- r.1 O O O r4 r-4. O O O O O O O O O r- . r4 r-I r-I r4 ri rr-4 r-4 O ri C. O >n O M N r-I O O O O O O O O O ri N CU M r-I--zt N r-I L r-I O N N O O O u\ -� ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 r1 . M. M. . . . . O -� ri 0 0ro 01 O. r4 . N N [-. r4 O . C-� O CU N N CV CV N CU N N L\ r. O [` . �O S-+ O\ r-i O\ ri M N M N N N N M N O\ MMMMMMMMM N O\ O\ N N o Gl 11\ M OO O\ O\ O\ O\ O\ O\ O\ Cl) M N N N N N N N N N ON M M O\ O\ r4 r-ir1 r1 ri r1 r1 r4r1 r4 r1 ri ri ri 0 rl r-i rl r4rl ri r4 r1 ri r1 -� r-4ri r-40 N 0 ti N co co co CO CO CO OO co 1 0 > Coco O 0 ti 0 0 co 0 0� CO OO r-i D\ N -:' 0 0 0 OI\ 0 OIO N N O co 0 O N r-i �O 0 _::I � O� � co I th L N 01 O\ 00 N ri i �O N N U a) Q) W > a) O C!) a) O 4d Z cd U) (1) cd co > 4-) N r-i 0 cd O W O 4D cd E-4 H Z E 0 < C + MI] O•) z 63 co C 4-3 E _ i-) r-i O > m O W W m E - - - - - - cd cc) D\ O --i N (Y,) -:t u1 u\ u\tri u\ u1 u\u1 u•\ \,O ti I— N CO Co co co co CO Co CO 00 co 00 cc 00 co co Co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N cc 4-) z > C E Cd SV, W r� N_-rNComl0 G. C: p cd r-I O -�0,7 tri-�' o\I N L` M SE-I � I) O r-4 CN r-- ~ Ei H U ¢ Q) 4-4 L4 e� U� ti \-O � IO� H H HW a) G cd G a) �O r i 01\ICO (nw ca a QZ� a o E08 ti u,lM �. -r-I -r1 -ri -rl -r•I -rl -r•i Q) a) T Q) Q) ai ai Q aa) ai � ul o z O U U u r rb � C f� r-i O\ N -? 0 0 0 r-I N CO.� Com- 0 0\,O r-1 0 010 N ti 0 0 N 0 rn__:r O\CC) rn tom- a\ -1 N 0 O I CV ; :1 u1 0 N u\ 0 0 r-1 \10 _:t u> N C7�\ \�o u\I r I O +� -A \.O O --t .� U1 -:t r-1 N N o [ 0"� O\ CO l`-- r-I r I c E Ic 6 \,D N -:t \O N r- w H Crn [- 1� co I cd c`cd W � QI N —1 -tea N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 0 0 OI N � cid cdw d r i r-1 r I r-1 ri r-i -1 r-1 r-i -I r-1 —i r-1 r-i r-1 r-i rj Ei 0 M M CI) a N f u 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 000000000 0 0 II U -{ ri rI rI rI rI rI I rI rI ri 1 I rI rI ri rI ri Z1 I I I I I U r-I r I r-� r� ri r-i r I r-1 U(\ r-i\O r-I r-i —4 �A r-i r-{ r-1 Zd I r-1 Q r-I r-i r-i <I CO CO to CO 00 00 Go 0 —1 0 —1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �T+1 0 r-I r-i CU N CO L; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U\ O'\ N rn N CJ N N r-1 O ri 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r i r-1 r-1 N r-i ry -zr m M O -7 O O O O O. O. O r-.i ra, r. r- rN. r- r-.i _; O . r-1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 uN (71 N(n NCC) N N r-i 0 r-1 >> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r-1 r-I -l N -- -i M rn 0 --t Cd O r-I N M [l- N 1-1 r4 r4 r4 4 4 r-i rl ri r-4 N O �:5 N N N N N rn M N CU N CSI CV CV CV CV CV -1 0\ 01 01 01 O-\ Q\ c)-, O'\ m M ff)M M (-) m M rn U1 rn ro I � -zr _:t -:I- � � � � -:t - _:I--7 M _zt G=+ I <i r i r i r i r I r ri r� u1 r�Q* r I r I r- r-4 rl r-i cc Co co CO co 00 cc 0 -1 0 r-1 0 0 0 co 0 0 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Application for Taxicab License by Yellow Taxi Service Corp. DATE: February 19 , 1986 Introduction and Background: On January 21,1986 an application for a taxicab license from Yellow Taxi Service Corp. was tabled because the certificate of insurance was not in order. The ordinance permitting that the certificate of insurance need not cover the licensing period has been published, and is now in effect. The certificate of insurance for the Yellow Taxi is now in order. Yellow Taxi had a license in 1985 and they are the only taxi, thus far, applying for a license in 1986 . Alternatives: 1) Approve 2 ) Deny Recommendation: Alternative number 1 Action Recommended: i 11 Remove from the table the application of Yellow Taxi Service Corp . for a taxicab license 2] Approve the application and grant a 1986 taxicab license to Yellow Taxi Service Corp . , 127 1st Avenue N.E . ,' Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 . 9�- MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: City Code 6 . 41 Masseur and Masseuce Registration DATE: February 19, 1986 Introduction• Ms.Susan Cieslowski is requesting that the City of Shakopee recognize therapeutic massage as a healing art and dispense with masseur and masseuse registration, which carries an annual fee of $100 . 00 . Ms . Cieslowski is licensed by the State of Minnesota as a practical nurse. Background: The City code currently exempts the following from masseur and masseuse registration: medical doctor, chiropractor, osteopath, podiatrist, nurse who works solely under the direction of such person, physical therapist, athletic director or trainer, or beautician and barber who confine their treatments to the scalp, face and neck. This is the first Masseur and Masseuce registration filed with the City of Shakopee. Alternatives: 1) Exempt nurses licensed by the State of Minnesota 2 ) Exempt licensed nurses 3 ) Exempt therapeutic massage 4) Require registration, but reduce fee 5 ) Delete registration requirements Recomendation: Alternative No. 1. The application from Ms . Cieslowski was also forwarded to the Chief of Police. Both the Chief of Poice and the Clerk recommend exempting nurses licensed by the State of Minnesota from registration. Action Recommended: Direct staff to prepare the proper ordinance exempting nurses , licensed by the State of Minnesota, from Masseur and Masseuce Registration. CITY OF SHAKOPEE G I Masseur and Masseuse Registration Directions: This form must be filled out in duplicate with typewriter or by printing in ink by the sole owner, by each partner, by each officer, or director, by each manager, proprietor or other agent in charge of the licensed premises, by each person who by combined ownership or control has an interest in a corporation or association in excess of 50, or by any masseur or masseuse practicing within the City of Shakopee. Date 1 1 a5` lot SG Susan rn i-th C es lows u TRUE NAME: (First) (Full Middle) (Maiden Name) (Last) AbSE rd +'• k-o ee Mn. 5S3 la-445- 18x3 RESIDENCE ADDRESS: (Street, City, State) PHONE NUMBER: No WAmF ' 'N o ApARE-s3 BUSINESS NAME. BUSINESS ADDRESS: (Street, City, State) PHONE NUMBER: 3-14-55 PLACE OF BIRTH: (City, County, State) DATE OF BIRTH: (Month, Day, Year) HEIGHT: 15-8/ .1GHTZ: ! COLOR OF HAIR:'B W\k)U COLOR OF EYES: B LZ U.S. Citizen? Yes V/ Naturalized? Yes If Yes, give date and place: No No MARITAL STATUS: Married Single Divorced ✓ I. Is the applicant licensed in any other community? Yes No If Yes, where Bur ns vi U rs-cju�ro MV huhsr PYiOr Lao - apPVLaTtcn ' l I ftjityh RL c. Ce Ld a&rt crftwj� 2. Has the applicant been denied a massage 9nd escort license by any licensing authority? Yes NoX - 3. Does the applicant have any training or experience in performing massage or escort service? Yes _ No 4. If you have ever used or been known by a name or names other than the true name given above, list such name(s) and information concerning dates and places used. rsan .mel�Atr- -- '115t Oka rnJ Na 0a around 1 0 `1 eqV- 5. Address(es) at which you have lived during preceding five years. (Begin with present or last address and work back. ) NO. AND STREET CITY AND STREET DATES 438E 3tJ St Sa k rw t , h1 n 1914 oshorL -TtrLil 5. Co�� vivo . s�-t lgF0 - bet S3 a AR r S 6. Kind, name and location of every business or occupation you have been engaged in during preceding five vears. (Begin with present or last occupation and work back:. ) �iT �+ 7, A_ BUS. NESS OF In CIi TP TIOA STREET ADLRESS CIM ,V1 , 1L 1i �a I LPN cha r N r n I 's oajco nar h. aQL 6 ,+ I `7 r Names and addresses of your employers and partners, if any, for the preceding five years. (Begin with present or last one first and work back. ) NA.*1ES E PLOYEP.S R PARTI ERS STREET ADDRESS CIT ', STATE L G mom_ 8. Have you ever been convicted of any felony, crime or violation of any ordinance, other than traffic? yes No_ if yes, give information as to the time, place and offense nor which convictions were nad. 9. List the names, residences, and business addresses of three residents of Scott County, of good moral character, not related to the applicant or financially interested in the premises or business, who may be referred to as to the applicant's )pplicant's character. t E.Ic6h ��C IQrA '; st FruhS1T � 6�, Y2!}i�.DttG Sug.-Darz cJr,.a. f i ` o • ; rZt40h Ze r lC tghd Name SA4 (o A JE. 11J. 5 Lo e.2 film, Business Address Residence Address S Phone Name m(ir�-S ,I! Residence Address 0 6 AVE ha.k..►�.Qo �m n , Business Address Phone_ Name S p��_ Residence Address Business Address Phone I hereby understand and agree that; 1. Information revealed by an applicant for a certificate of registration in the City of Shakopee will be used by the City in accordance with federal and state laws regarding privacy of criminal records. 2. A criminal conviction will not bar an applicant from obtaining a certificant of registration with the City of Shakopee unless such conviction is directly related to the occupation for which the certificate of registration is sought, according to Minnesota statutes S364.03. 3. However, failure to reveal a criminal conviction will be considered falsifi- cation of the application and may be used as grounds for denial of the certificate of registration. I declare that the information I have provided on this application is truthful, and I authorize the City of Shakopee to investigate the information and contact the persons named on the application. �-Pn Signature of Applicant Subscribed and sworn to before me a Pu lic on his day of f mar SPEIKER / NOTARY PUSLIC—MINNESOTA, SCOTT COUNTY Commission-spires on My commission expires July 12,1991 Location of where practice will be conducted, if other than business address :' dt hts E- pm.� S _ -kabl t5 ort'ac �. Cll2h QYQ2 4t i So --- Sa tYi¢ t o . 'ts Corr iaa-h�t 4 S i s f u w -Phys<«4 h Pa�4-►.Q:f,t' r.a. 4LD I1 0 Ntit, 0`T' !Nbo aver (%=sts SerU16'- C .moo J` g ` r' � � �� " �" ,�.�i �► �._' .tit • !� � � �� Awe �, jE a'° . _ tp LP w 1) 1 t�ttttr of 4-EinnFsoia MIw4ES-)TA 99 APD r;: NUP7ING 717 nELA44PF ST S= "IIlNEAROLIS M11 95440 HAS ISSUED LICENSED PRACTICAL NUPE To: SUSAN ocLLA ? E EE ECT IVE 017E EI►I II ATIOM DATE 01-01-89 12-31 -96 LICENSE N9 034421 h , I 0000-0000 00-00-00 'Ovarb jai'. eo,►un M Know all Persons by these Presents, That SUSAN SITITH CIESLOVTSKI! I has fulfilled the requirements of the Minnesota law governing the licensing of practical nurses and is hereby licensed as a I IF'— and is now entitled to be known as such and to practice as a licensed practical nurse in accordance with the law. . e In Testimony Whereof, we hereunder subscribe our names and affix the Seal of the Minnesota Board of Nursing on this .,. - . 7TH day of NOVEMBER 79 83 t� i License o. 34421 resident of Me Board Secretary of the Board P � v 9 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk(-.,\ RE: Street Lighting in Horizon Heights DATE: February 19 , 1986 Introduction• On January 21, 1986 Council directed staff to meet with the property owners in the Horizon Heights Additions to determine whether or not they wish the installation of street lights which would be installed as a MSA 429 special assessment improvement and report back to the Council. Background: As a result of a neighborhood meeting on February 12 , 1986 , consensus of property owners was a desire to have only two street lights installed, one at the intersection of Foothill Trail and CR-16 and one at Horizon Drive and Muhlenhardt Road. Shakopee Public Utilities standards for street lights includes 10 lights, nine of which are at intersections , cul-de-sacs, and parks . Because the area is not completely developed at this time, SPUC Manager believes that it wouldn' t be necessary to install all 10 lights at this time. He believes six, or so, would be more appropriate. Horizon Heights is served by Minnesota Valley Coop, not SPUC. The SPUC Manager has no problem if only two lights are installed at this time. The June, 1985 estimate for installation of 10 lights was $5 , 704 . A more accurate cost for installation of two lights at the intersections at CR-16 and Muhlenhardt Road will have to be obtained. Alternatives: Installation of Street Lights 1. Do nothing - Release developers agreements and ignore addressing street lights at this time. No one is asking for them at this time and assessing the cost would be subject to the benefit test. However, ignoring the developers agreement is misleading to new property owners because street lights are to be built by the City and assessed according to the developers agreement. 2. Install and assess street lights to property owners. This would complete what the City determined desireable when the area was platted. Again, no one is requesting the improvement and it would be subject to the benefit test. Street Lighting in Horizon Heights Page Two February 19 , 1986 3 . Install only two lights, one on CR-16 and one on Muhlenhardt Drive, release developers agreements , and consider the developers agreement satisfied. This would satisfy the property owners today. As for future desires and needs, that would be addressed when the need arises . 4. Install only six lights now and consider the developers agreement satisfied. This is more than the property owners desire today and may or may not satisfy property owners after the area is fully developed. This would come closer to what the City determined desireable when the area was platted. Alternatives: Payment of Street Lights The City Engineer checked with the County Engineer and although county and/or state aid is available for lights on county/state aid streets, the intersections must meet warrants similar to intersection signalization and thisis not likely. City Cost Assess to Property Owners Alternative 1 00 . 00 00 . 00 Alternative 2 +$6000. 00 +$6000 50 lots = $120 . 00 Alternative 3 +$2000 . 00 +$2000 50 lots = $40. 00 Alternative 4 +$4000 . 00 +$4000 50 lots = $80 . 00 These are rough estimates and do not include administrative costs for an assessment project. After bonds are paid for the Horizon Heights improvements, there will be funds available to be transferred from the Debt Service Fund into the Capital Improvement Fund sufficient to cover up to $10 , 000 for street lighting. Operating Costs : The City pays for the operating costs for street lights. The estimated operating cost for 10 lights is $1 , 000/year. Had the street lights been installed when the development was platted the City would have paid operating costs for the past eight to ten years. If all the lights are not installed today, the City will save additional operating costs until the lights are installed. Recommendation: Alternative number 3 , with the CIty paying installation cost. If Couincil concurs, more accurate figures could be obtained for the two lights and be brought back to Council for final approval. I would also recommend that the City pay for installation of the additional street lights in the subdivisions in later years , when it is deemed appropriate, with the cost to come from the operating costs that are not occurring as the result of delaying installation. Street Lighting in Horizon Heights Page Three February 19 , 1986 Recommended Action: Direct staff to obtain a cost estimate from Minnesota Valley Coop for the installation and operating costs for two street lights, one at CR-16 and Foothill Trail and one at Muhlenhardt Road and Horizon Drive. JSC/jms MEMO TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John K. Anderson RE: Acquisition of the Old Women' s Correctional Facility Site DATE: February 19, 1986 Introduction The Mayor has been contacted by Senator Bob Schmitz regarding the State ' s desire to expedite the transfer of the old correctional facility site to a local government. The State has indicated that they would like to make the transfer in 1986 so that they do not have to provide any maintenance to the structures on the site during the winter of 1986-87 . The purpose of this memo is to provide City Council with background information that will enable it to make a decision about possibly acquiring the site. Background Senator Bob Schmitz has indicated that the site contains 10. 98 acres. If the State sells the site after it has removed the buildings the asking price is $245, 000. This equals $22 , 313 per acre which, accord- ing to one local developer, is too expensive for both single family and multi-family residential development. If the City acquired the site prior to the buildings being removed the State will reduce the acquisition cost to $145, 000 . This is $13 , 206 per acre which is low enough to allow a developer to develop single and multi-family residential units on the site. The total site is presently zoned R3 which allows up to ten units per acre. The State has also contacted School District 720 and Scott County. The School District is not interested in acquiring the site and Scott County had not made a decision as of February 18 , 1986 . I have sent a letter to Scott County explaining the City' s actions to date regarding the site (copy attached) . Senator Bob Schmitz has introduced a Bill this legislative session which would expedite the State ' s normal surplus land disposition procedures and allow the site to be acquired by a local government this summer. To expedite the sale Bob has not specified which local government would acquire the property in the Bill. In addition, Bob has left the acquistion price blank thus allowing some room for negotiation. The prices discussed above were established by the State ' s Real Estate and Building Department. Development Proposals The City has not received any specific development proposals for the site. Staff has been showing the site to various developers since the ground breaking on the new facility. We will be meeting with one of Page 2 - Acquisition of the old Women' s Correctional Facility Site the developers who viewed the site earlier on Monday, February 24 . If it becomes clear that the site is attractive to developers either at the $245,000 price tag or the $145, 000 price tag then the City could seriously entertain aquiring the site. Senator Bob Schmitz has indicated that he needs a formal resolution from Council requesting that the State sell the site to Shakopee if he is to proceed with the legislation he has introduced (draft resolution attached) . Should the City find that the site is attractive to developers the City can either put the site up for competitive development bids , or it can discuss the potential -development with a limited number of developers and offer the project to whichever developer provides the best overall package. Under either alternative the City should establish a development schedule that it can hold the selected developer to. If the developer does not meet this schedule the City can void the contract and select another developer. Alternatives 1. Pass draft Resolution No. 2527 as attached. This will allow the City to place its bid with the State for acquisition of the site, and assist the State in expediting the transfer of the site to a local government prior to the winter of 1986-87. If the City did not have a developer signed to a contract by the time the State transferred the site the City might be stuck with the expense of holding the site until a developer picks it up. In addition, the City might be required to use a financing tool such as tax increment financing to reduce the site costs to a per acre cost that would be realistic for development. The City might also be required to address rezoning questions if part of the parcel were to be changed to R2 , the zoning designation of most of the adjacent property. 2. Do not pass a resolution requesting sale of the property to Shakopee at the price indicated, but negotiate a lower price. The pros and cons with this alternative are similar to alternative 1, plus it might reduce any and write down costs the City would incur to make redevelopment happen. 3 . Reject the State ' s proposal to expedite the site transfer and allow them to go through the normal procedures making the site available sometime in 1987. This alternative would give the City more time to line up a developer and have them signed to a development contract when the property is finally transferred to the City. Recommendation I recommend alterntive No. 2 with the caution that we may not be able to negotiate a much lower price. In addition, I recommend that we acquire the site without requesting State demolition and site clearance. This will also allow us the possibility of completing the site clearance cost for less than the $100, 000 estimated by the State. Page 3 - Acquisition of the old Women' s Correctional Facility Site Furthermore, it allows us an opportunity to make the site available to a developer who may wish to rehabilitate some of the structures rather than clear the total site. Finally, I am recommending alternative No. 2 because our tentative collector street plans call for the connection of Fourth Avenue and Adams Street to serve the institutional and downtown portions of our City. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 2527 , A Resolution Requesting That The State of Minnesota Sell the Old Minnesota Correctional Facility in Shakopee to the City of Shakopee, and move its adoption. dbs CITY OF SHAKOPEE j INCORPORATED 1870 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE, SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379.1376 (612) 4453650 Y 1 February 18 , 1986 Mr. Mark Stromwall, Chairman Scott County Board of Commissioners 428 South Holmes Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Commissioner Stromwall: The City of Shakopee has been contacted by Senator Robert Schmitz ' s office regarding the State ' s interest in expediting the transfer of the old Womens Correctional Facility to an interested local government. It is my understanding from Senator Schmitz that Scott County has also been notified by the State. Apparently Senator Schmitz will be submitting legislation this session to expedite the transfer to an interested local government. The Shakopee City Council has included the redevelopment of the old Womens Correction Facility site in its five year Capital Improvement Plan the past two years. In addition, the Mayor has talked to the Governor and other State officials respon- sible for the prison about the possibility of Shakopee acquiring the site. We have been periodically showing the site to major developers over the past year in hopes that private redevelopment would put the site back on the tax roles. We have also identified the site in a preliminary traffic analysis as the key to connecting Adams Street ( County Road 15 ) and Fourth Avenue to facilitate the flow of traffic to and from the Hospital, Courthouse and downtown. If the City can identify a developer and obtain the necessary commitments we feel it would be in the best interest of the City and County to put the site back on the tax roles. The City Council will be discussing this item at its February 25 , 1986 meeting. If the Council chooses to move ahead we will be sending a resolution to the State indicating our interest :. in acquiring the site. We would like to coordinate our efforts with those of the County. We would be interested in hearing from you about your interest in acquiring the site as early as possible. Sincerely, John K. Anderson City Administrator JKA/jms cc: Joe Ries Superinnnaen, euaFuth b District �7e 0 s Valley RESOLUTION NO. 2527 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SELL THE OLD MINNESOTA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY IN SHAKOPEE TO THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE WHEREAS, since 1923 , when the original facility was constructed in Shakopee, the Shakopee community and the Minnesota Correctional Facility at Shakopee have co-existed as good neighbors with a minimum of problems; and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee, Shakopee League of Women Voters and citizens of Shakopee worked hand in hand with the State to see that the new facility now under construction was built, and WHEREAS, the new facility being erected in Shakopee will permanently remove 42 acres of taxable land from the City of Shakopee, Scott County and School District 720 , and t WHEREAS, the physical location of the new facility near Hennepin County, Carver County, Ramsey County and the cities in those counties is important to the continuation of valuable family visitation opportunities for the women at the facility, and WHEREAS, the State has indicated that it would like "fast track" disposal of the old facility and its 10. 98 acre site to avoid the expense of maintaining it through 1986 and 1987 , and WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee in interested in the private redevelopment of the site to place the 10 . 98 acres back on the tax rolls and thereby increase the total number of housing units available in Shakopee. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA strongly requests the old Minnesota Correctional Facility for Women be sold to the City of Shakopee at the earliest possible date. . 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: Approved as to form this City Clerk day of 1986 . City Attorney 1 ' - y QWF .�.. .. ...r.-- .. r A. -4 _. ... � .. _.-. _. • +. ,fir:. :3��,.. ..,.- _.. � >s,.�3,.} � 'K _r x" ,,j..: .='w. .a rl ^ { Oil 4z _ ~ YY f f r I i MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Policy and Program Issues Involving Shakopee ' s Use of Tax Increment Financing DATE: February 17 , 1986 Introduction• Several issues involving the use of tax increment financing during 1985 led City Council to include a review of tax increment financing policies in the City Council ' s goals and objectives for 1986 . Part I of this memo will identify specific policy questions, review the history of tax increment financing (TIF) use in Shakopee, review the impact of TIF on taxes and services. Part II of this memo will discuss specific program issues. PART I: BROAD POLICY ISSUES A. Policy Questions: Based upon the City Council ' s discussion at the 1986 goals and objectives session and questions regarding overall policy that were raised during 1985 the following policy questions have been identified: 1. What amount of the City' s total assessed valuation is captured � } by increments today, and what total amount is deemed desirable by the City? 2 . What impact does the City' s use of TIF districts have on local taxes ( City, county and school district) ? 3 . What impact does the use of TIF districts have on the cost of City and county services? 4 . Just what does the "but for" test mean, and how has it been applied to the City' s TIF districts? ri 5. When, where and under what conditions ( circumstances ) will the City consider doing a TIF project? 6 . Will the City use eminent domain for privately initiated TIF projects? If so, under what circumstances will the City use eminent domain and with what effect? B. History and Policy: State Law - This summary is from the January 186 Legistative Auditor ' s Report on TIF: The Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act of 1979 must be used to establish a tax increment district and its financing plan. According to the act, districts may be one of three types: ( 1 ) a redevelopment district, which is designed to induce development on blighted land; ( 2 ) a housing district, which is intended to encourage housing development for low and moderate income individuals and families ; or ( 3 ) an economic development district, designed to increase cities ' tax base and employment, as well as to discourage Minnesota businesses from moving to other states. Districts established prior to August 1, 1979 are a fourth type of district. These districts are not subject to the most of the 1979 law' s provisions. The 1979 law placed additional restrictions on new tax increment districts and modifications of existing districts. For example, the Legislature established blight criteria for cities to use when establishing redevelopment districts. Also, the Legislature placed restrictions on "excess increments" , or those tax increments in excess of the amount required to finance project costs in a district ' s financing plan. One of the important components of the 1979 law was the distinction between a "tax increment district" and its "project area" . In general, a tax increment district consists of those parcels which generate tax increment revenue. The district ' s project area consists of those parcels on which tax increments may be spent. Prior to 1982 , cities could not spend tax increments outside of the district in which those increments were generated. However, 1982 amendments loosened this restriction. The changes permitted cities to spend increments anywhere in the project area, even outside the tax increment district. The creation of a tax increment district and the expenditure of tax increments are city actions. The county and school district are given the opportunity to comment on TIF plans prior to imple- mentation. However, it appears that the state finances more TIF costs than these other taxing jurisdictions. This occurs indirectly, primarily through increases in state education aids. A forthcoming report by the Minnesota House Research Department estimates total state costs for 1985 to be more than $22 million. State Policy Issues - From the January ' 86 Legislative Auditor ' s Report on TIF: Tax increment financing has been used productively by many cities in Minnesota to induce commercial and retail development of blighted areas and to help stimulate the construction of housing for low and moderate income persons. In addition, some cities have used TIF to promote the expansion of manufacturing businesses. However, not all uses of tax increment financing have been successful in reducing blight, stimulating needed housing construction, or increasing employment in the state. At times , TIF has been used in ways that are inconsistent with the basic intent behind TIF. Among the major problems with tax increment financing are: -2- r • In some instances, cities have established tax increment districts that intentionally caputure taxes from development that is already occurring rather than induce new development. This practice prevents other taxing jurisdictions from collecting taxes they would otherwise receive. • The "but for" test, which many view as sufficient evidence of the need for a tax increment district, is interpreted by cities in many different ways. The test does not ensure that the public benefits of a project exceed the public costs. • The statutory restrictions on the types of expenditures that can be financed with tax increments do not prevent a city from using tax increments to pay for general public improvements that are normally financed by special assessments or a city' s own funds. • Increasingly, cities are pooling tax increments among districts or establishing large project areas in which tax increments can be spent. These practices enable a city to spend excess tax increments from an existing district rather than decer- tifying the district. This weakens the statutory restrictions on the use of excess increments that apply to districts established after August 1 , 1979 . Furthermore, pooling and the creation of large project areas may encourage cities with pre-1979 districts to use tax increments for new expen- ditures rather than to retire the districts before August 1 , 2009 . • Existing statutes do not require that the tax increments generated within a redevelopment district must be used to correct the blighted conditions that permit the district to be established. As a result, some cities have established redevelopment districts that have done little or nothing to improve the blighted conditions cited as reasons for establishing the districts. Some cities: 1 ) have established a redevelopment district on the basis of blighted conditions existing on certain parcels within the city, 2 ) are generating tax increments from other parcels where private development is occurring anyway, and 3 ) are spending the increments on projects unrelated to the blighted conditions. The permitted use of noncontiguous districts , the lack of an effective "but for" clause, and the fact that not all parcels in a district must be blighted permit tax increment financing to be used in these ways. • The existing blight criteria that a redevelopment district must meet have been generously interpreted by some cities. As a result, the criteria have not provided a good mechanism for the state to target public subsidies to those areas most in need of redevelopment. • Several cities have established housing districts to capture tax increments from a housing project being undertaken without assistance from tax increment financing and have not used the increments to induce the construction of low/ moderate income housing. • Some compliance problems exist because there is little state oversight of tax increment financing and because it is not clear who has the responsibility to ensure that cities and counties comply with key provisions of the statutes relating to tax increment financing. In addition, there is the question of whether tax increment financing results in an excess public investment in development activities. To the extent that cities use tax increment financing to induce retail and commercial development, TIF may only succeed in shifting where that development occurs within the state. This is particularly true in the Twin Cities metropolian area. A subsidized development that brings more jobs and tax base to one city may ultimately result in fewer jobs and decreased tax base elsewhere in the metropolitan area. Because the direct effects of tax increment financing (more jobs and tax base in the city using TIF) are easier to see and measure than its indirect effects ( fewer jobs and decreased tax base elsewhere in the area) , TIF may appear to be creating jobs and increasing the state ' s tax base when it is not. There is reason to be concerned about this problem. Cities have used redevelopment districts primarily, though not exclusively, to induce retail and commercial development. • To the extent that TIF' s primary effect is simply to shift the location of jobs and tax base, it is important to ask whether TIF targets the redevelopment of those areas that need it the most. The last of adequate criteria defining blight and the lack of a requirement that tax increments generated within redevelopment districts be used to address blighted conditions are impediments to a reasonable targeting of the use of tax increment financing. It is also worth considering whether local incentives are an impediment to effective targeting. For example, small suburbs may have a greater ability than large central cities to shift the costs of public redevelopment activity to taxpayers outside the municipality. This may be inconsistent with the goal of encouraging TIF use in those areas most in need of redevelopment. • The purpose of economic development districts can also be called into question. According to law, a municipality can create an economic development district consisting of any parcel or parcels of property as long as the district meets one of three criteria: 1 ) it will discourage commerce, industry or manufacturing from moving to another state, or 2 ) it will increase employment in the municipality, or 3 ) it will preserve or enhance the municipality' s tax base. The majority of the economic development districts we examined r (a 1 probably could not have qualified under the first criterion. Most of the districts involved retail, commercial, and other development that would qualify under the second and third criteria. The effect of using tax increment financing for these latter types of development may only be to determine where development occurs , not to cause any significant increase in jobs or tax base within the state. As a result, the use of economic development districts involving retail and commercial development that does not create jobs for the state and does not take place in blighted areas can be questioned. While there clearly is a role for TIF in attracting new businesses to Minnesota and keeping existing businesses in the state, it is worth asking whether the state should encourage ( and financially support) districts that do not result in statewide benefits. (See table I titled "League/NAHRO TIF Survey Findings . ) Local History of TIF - As of 1984 , all of Shakopee ' s tax increment districts are in a single project area. This area encompasses about one-third of the city, including downtown Shakopee. The summary that follows is from the January 186 Legislative Auditor' s Report on Tax Increment Financing. • K-Mart Distribution Center TID (pre-1979 , 1979 ) . This 29-acre site houses K-Mart ' s regional distribution center, which serves nine states. Prior to creation of the TID, the site was primarily vacant industrial land with soil problems. The city issued a $3 . 5 million bond to finance a land write-down, site development (grading, drainage improvements ) , widen County Road 83 , and build a water well. Shakopee refinanced its bonds in 1984 and issued an additional $2. 4 million in bonds to make off-site roadway improvements near the racetrack site ( a portion of which is in this TID) and the distribution center. The district is generating surplus tax increments, which Shakopee hopes to use for storm sewers and downtown improvements. • Senior High-rise TID (redevelopment, 1979 ) . The city issued a $365, 000 tax increment bond to subsidize 66 units of Section 8 housing for seniors on land that previously had one home and two vacant parcels. The primary uses of TIF in the district were land write-down and provision of water service through a limestone bed. • Downtown TID ( redevelopment, 1982 ) . The district contains four properties , each containing a business that planned expansion prior to creation of the district. The four businesses (bank, grocery, realty firm, abstract company) all expanded without TIF assistance. No bonds have been issued. To date, tax increments have funded a planning consultant and construction of a parking lot next to the abstract company' s building. Shakopee also planned to use TIF to fund interest write-downs on commercial rehabili- tation loans downtown, but no write-downs have been done to date. -5- P Racetrack TID (economic development, 1984 ) . Shakopee issued $4. 2 million in tax increment bonds to assist development of the Canterbury Downs horse-racing track. The primary uses of TIF were land write-down and grading. Previously, this site was vacant industrial land. The city thinks tax increments may be higher than expected, in which case the excess will probably be used for storm sewers and downtown improvements. • Family Chow Mein TID (redevelopment, 1984 ) . This one-parcel site was a gas station before being placed in a TID. Developers converted the station into a Chinese restaurant without TIF assistance. Shakopee hoped to use tax increments for downtown improvements, but the restaurant is currently generating fewer taxes than the gas station did. C. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Impact on Taxes and Services• This section of the memo focuses on the total amount of tax increment captured to-date, its impact on the City and county mill rates and its impact on the five homes we have been following as a part of our annual budget process. In reading the following tables the reader must decide how he/she will interpret the "but for" test on each of the City' s existing tax increment projects. If you agree the project would not have occurred in Shakopee "but for" the TIF assistance, then a stable City mill rate would indicate the projects have not detrimentally affected other property taxpayers in the City or County. If, after you answer the "but for" question, you believe that the projects would have occurred in Shakopee without TIF, the inter- pretation of the graphs should be that the City and county mill rates should have dropped substantially since 1981-82 when the first tax increment district came on line. Please review Tables III , IV and V. The City and county have no specific accounting of the service impacts of the five Shakopee tax increment districts. Subjectively we know that there has been little impact on City services from all of the districts except the Racetrack. Table No. VI is an attempt to take what little we know regarding service impacts and clearly outline them. PART II : SPECIFIC PROGRAM ISSUES Introduction: The City has generally received benefits in the form of street and/or utility improvements from its TIF projects that fall outside of the specific benefits accrued to the private devel- oper( s) . These benefits have enabled the City to keep one of the lowest monthly water rates in the metropolitan area, make county roadway improvements much sooner than improvements have been scheduled in the county' s CIP, and develop the financial -0- � J resources to do detailed planning for downtown redevelopment. As noted in Part I under Policy Issues Identified by the Legislative Auditor these and similar uses of TIF may be eliminated or curtailed by legislation passed in the 186 legislative session. While the legislation will not affect the past projects the City benefitted from, it may affect projects that the City has programmed for the future. TIF Proceeds Committed to Future Programs: The City has made tentatively commitments to use excess TIF from K-Mart and the Racetrack on its master storm sewer construction program, the detailed design for the Trunk Highway 101 By-pass , design and construction of the Trunk Highway 169 and 101 Junction improvement and streetscaping improvements as part of the downtown redevelopment plan. The available increments and project options were discussed in my memorandum of May 15 , 1985 which is attached. The financial analysis supporting my memorandum was provided by Bob Pulscher of Springsted, Inc. in a letter dated July 12 , 1985 which is also attached. Revised Analysis of Increment Available Through Existing TIF Districts : City staff met with staff from Springsted, Inc. and O' Connor Hannan on February 13 , 1986 to pull together information that would allow us to accurately update revenue forecasts from our existing TIF districts. The revised revenue estimates from Springsted, Inc. will be available at Council ' s March 11th meeting. Implications of Pending State and Federal Legislation: The tax reform package passed by the U.S. House of Representatives prior to the end of 1985 , while yet to receive approval from the Senate and President, has had the effect of law because of its implementation date of January 1 , 1986 . This law has placed private purpose industrial development bonds, bonds sold for non-essential municipal services, under a new cap that includes bonds sold by 501C-3 institutions (private non-profit colleges, etc. ) and non-essential TIF bonds under one state-wide per capita limitation. This means that non-essential IDBS ( these are the type we have always used) , non-essential 501C-3 bonds and non-essential TIF bonds will all be competing for the same limited pot of money controlled by the State under an allocation system. In addition, new processing requirements require that 50 of the bond issue be expended within 30 days of the bond sale and that the project be completed within 3 years. These and numerous other regulations imposed by the bill that passed the House of Representatives will require significantly more work by our Finance Department when and if we are able to sell any non-essential bonds. The sale of essential purpose bonds for tradition municipal projects that have less than a 10o benefit flowing to a private developer are not subject to the state-wide per capita pot limit- -7- ation. They must however, meet the other regulations including the requirement to expend 50 of the proceeds within 30 days and all of the bond proceeds within 3 years. Proposed State legislation resulting from the 1986 legislative auditor ' s report sited in Part I of this memorandum could have an affect that interestingly contradicts the direction taken by the Federal legislation. The Legislative Auditor has called into question the use of TIF bond proceeds (captured increment) for projects that fall into the essential municipal services category and which lay outside the TIF district but within the described redevelopment plan area. Thus while the Feds are clamping down on non-essential private purpose uses of IDBs and TIFs , the State is clamping down on essential uses of TIF. The affect of the two legislative proposals together could mean the elimination of 750 of the financing tools Shakopee and other cities have used to remove blight, initiate low and moderate income housing projects and create jobs and tax base through industrial development. Options for Program Implementation for Committed Programs: The City has two options available if it chooses to finance the three programs for which commitments have been made. 1 . Sell taxable bonds. This option has been discussed by Miller and Schroeder but has not yet been implemented in the state of Minnesota. Miller and Schroeder are investigating this option for a number of cities. They are looking at this option in conjunction with the application for TIF from Wally Bakken. The latest word from Miller and Schroeder is that state legislation maybe required for this to be a viable option. In addition, use of taxable bonds will increase project costs, thereby extending the term of the bonds and the loss of general taxes to the City. 2 . Sell non-taxable essential purpose TIF/GO bonds prior to August 1 , 1986 . This option assumes that the federal government will not change the implementation date on the House of Representatives proposed tax reform bill, and that the Minnesota State Legislature will make significant amendments to the present tax increment financing laws effective August 1 , 1986 . If this option is pursued the City will need to work closely with Springsted, Inc. and O' Conner Hannan to specifically delineate the programs, analyze their financial viability and pass the necessary resolutions to implement the projects prior to August 1 , 1986 . In selecting one of the options listed above Council will want to review the six policy questions outlined in Part I of this memo. I propose a thorough discussion of the six policy questions and possible implementation of committed projects through use of 1 ) taxable bonds or 2 ) non-taxable essential purpose TIF/GO bonds prior to August 1st. The purpose of the discussion would be to 1) assist staff in drafting addition background/position -8- meriios regarding the City' s position on use of TIF for new projects in the future so that staff understands the parameters for an "acceptable" project when discussing tax increment with future developers and 2 ) insure financing for implementing committed future tax-increment improvements. Proposed Guidelines for Policy Question Discussion: The following guidelines are listed to assist and guide Council ' s discussion of the key policy questions listed in Part I of this memo. 1. What amount of the City' s total assessed valuation is captured by increments today and what total amount is deemed desirable by the City? For 1985-86 8 . 310 of the City' s total assessed value ( see Table III ) is captured for tax increment purposes. When the Racetrack comes on line we expect the percentage of captured increment to increase. At the present time I have found no accepted standard for total captured assessed valuation used by other cities. Council could establish a value such as 10o as a guideline. This would force more selectively in use of tax increment financing, but Council might find itself amending the guideline much as it amended the guideline for the total value of Industrial Development Bonds ( IDBs ) that could be outstanding at any one time. The other approach to limiting TIF usage is specifically stating what types of projects will be eligible. This will be discussed under policy question No. 5 below. 2. What impact does the City' s use of TIF districts have on local taxes ( City, county and school district) ? Table III clearly demonstrates the impact TIF districts have on City and county taxes. It is clear that TIF districts have not increased the City' s or county' s mill rates. On the other hand, if one does not subscribe to the "but for" test and believes the additional tax base would have been added any way, then the City and county mill rates would have been lower than they currently are. School district tax rates are not affected by TIF districts; however, the State ' s per pupil aid formula picks up the difference. This currently amounts to $17-20 million state-wide. Here again, one must decide how you answer the "but for" question. Not shown on Table VI are spin off benefits from the TIF districts the City has created. Those statistics are impressive in terms of the number of jobs created through the K-Mart and Canterbury Downs projects. They are also impressive in terms of the tax base those two projects will add to the City, county and school district when the TIF districts are terminated. The highrise project created 66 new section 8 subsidized rental units for elderly in Shakopee. The project has been a success under almost any measurement one would choose to use. Additionally, the project has provided spin off benefit to downtown merchants who do business with the elderly who live in the project. -9- We are just now beginning to see the spin off development benefits from the Racetrack. The Shakopee House remodeled, the Rock Spring expanded, Superamerica is expanding, Super 8 is building a new motel, Suite Quarters Inc. has received approval for a new motel, Scottland has broken ground on new commercial development and a new 1st class hotel, a new veterinary clinic has been built, and numerous projects are waiting to commence development this spring. None of these projects have utilized tax increment subsidies and only one has utilized Industrial Development Bonds. If proper use of tax increment by a City dictates that the City use tax increment sparingly as a "lost leader" to trigger additional development, then Shakopee ' s use of TIF for the Racetrack has certainly accomplished that goal. It is possible that public subsidies such as tax increment and industrial development bonds can be used so widely that they lose their effectiveness as a tool for cities to target development or redevelopment. City Council, under its discussion of policy question No. 5 below, has the opportunity to target the use of tax increment financing in Shakopee in the future. 3 . What impact does the use of TIF districts have on the cost of City and county services? Table VI can be used to guide Council ' s discussion on this item. It is my conclusion that the impact has been minimal and in the case of most TIF districts service benefits received such as lower water rates have out weighted service costs. 4 . Just what does the "but for" test mean, and how has it been applied to the City' s TIF districts? Council can best answer this question for itself by reviewing each project and asking, would the project exist in Shakopee without the provided subsidy? This is a policy area that Council can address by requiring more "proof" that a financial deal is not possible without the TIF subsidy. Some cities require letters from two or more banks stating that they will not conventionally finance the project unless a subsidy is involved to lower cost and better insure profitability of the venture. Cities requiring written "proof" find that it is easy for a developer to get such letters from banking institutions. 5. When, where and under what conditions (circumstances) will the City consider a TIF project? The best example of a clear answer to this auestion is on Table II entitled local policies guiding use of TIF. The guidelines for low and moderate income housing project were drafted most recently and were drafted to target specific types of projects. Council should review these guidelines and if they are adequate consider the possibility of making the guidelines for redevelopment projects and economic development projects equally specific. The guidelines for low and moderate income housing projects enable staff members to tell the developers of multi-family projects that they will not -10- � J be considered unless they meet redevelopment project guide- lines. We can also tell developers that there are seven very specific program characteristics that must be met before Council will consider a low and moderate income housing project. Tightening up the guidelines listed on Table II , I feel, will be a much more effective way of limiting the use of TIF than trying to limit its use through added criteria under policy question 1 or 4 above. 6 . Will the City use eminent domain for privately initiated TIF projects? If so, under what circumstances will the City use eminent domain and with what effect? This question, as stated, assumes that City Council would be willing to use eminent domain for a project or project elements that benefit the City not the specific developer. Examples of this include construction of roadways, utilities and storm sewer projects. Councilmembers who are not comfortable with this assumption should plan to discuss it at the Council meeting. The City has used or threatened to use eminent domain for the Senior Highrise, the Housing Alliance project, the County/Hospital parking lot, and roadway extensions for plats such as Hauer' s 3rd Addition, Prairie House 1st Addition and the 4th and Minnesota Project. Not all of these examples are TIF projects or projects benefiting private developers. Council needs to discuss the pros and cons of completely eliminating the possibility of the use of eminent domain in negotiating acquisitions for private development purposes. Summary This memorandum is exceeding long and includes many policy issues. The Council should plan to discuss the issues involved thoroughly with the goal of arriving at conclusions on key issues no later than its March 25th meeting. JKA/jms r -11- TABLE I �( LEAGUE/NAHRO TIF SURVEY FINDINGS League/NAHRO TIF survey was sent out to 180 local governments that were identified as using TIF. To date, 108 local governments have returned their completed surveys for 265 TIF districts. The following graphs depict some of the data developed through the survey. CITIES USING TIF 1981-1985 U 188 ..................._.......�...................................................................__._. ..... 168 ............._..._...._...-.........................._........ ..................._.. = 140 _. .......................................................................... 120 ................... .._................ .... .......... ... _ 1 _ ... $0 -I .... .... ... .... U 68 .... ... ... .... 48 .... ... .... 20 .... ... .... 9 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 STATEWIDE DATABASE CITIES USING TIF METROPOLITAN/NON-METROPOLITAN USE OF TIF Of the 2S5 TTF di, trintg in the survey data base, 1.1 or 5711 are Outs.'& U, ule metropolitan area while 114 or 43% are in the metropolitan area. The graph demonstrates which of these districts were established before the 1979 TIF law and which were established after the law. 209 188 .............................................................. ....................................._........... LU 16 @ .............................................................. .............................................. cn140 ................................................................. .................................................. r � 120 ................................................................. .................................................. 100 ................................................................ ................ .................. SO ................................................. .............. . .......... PRE 1979 DIST. F<157 1911,j DIST. %,T`P I_ OF 26! DISTRICTS SThTE WIDE METRO ONLY ❑ NON-METRO 1)NLY Copyright, Holmes & Graven, Chartered 1986. 'Ihe Public Issues Update is a periodic service provided to clients and friends of Holmes & Graven. It is intended to highlight important legal and policy developments. The Public Issues Update is not comprehensive and should not be relied on as substitute for the services that are tailored to the particular needs of our clients. • Cities are using pooling techniques to prolong the lives of districts otherwise eligible for decertification. • Existing statutes do not require that increments generated by a redevelopment district be spent for blight correction within the district. • General compliance problems have resulted from the absence of uniform state oversight over tax increment financing. The report also recommends that the Legislature consider amending the TIF law. Suggested amendments include: • eliminating the 90 day window period; • increasing the percentage of parcels needed to meet the blight definition; • generally strengthening the "but for" test; • requiring that tax increments generated by redevelopment districts be used exclusively to induce redevelopment of blighted parcels; • restricting the use of increments for various types of general public improvements normally financed by other sources, such as special assessments; • clarifying the permitted uses of pooling techniques. The report was presented to the House Fiscal Disparities and Tax Increment Subcommittee on Friday, January 31, 1986. Subcommittee members supported many of the Auditor's recommendations. The report was also reviewed at a briefing hearing for legislative staff on Wednesday, February 5, 1986. LOCAL GOVERNMENT RECREATIONAL LIABILITY LEGISLATION Sen. Luther and Rep. Halberg are authoring legislation that will grant limited tort immunity to local governments for providing park and recreation services (S.F. 1727, H.F. xxxx). The legislation is one of several bills being considered to confront the local government "insurance crisis." Although municipalities provide recreational activities which involve a risk of iniury assumed by individuals voluntarily, current law provides that local ?overnments and hence taxDave*s, pay the cost of assuminz those risks. The legislation proposed by Sen. Luther and Rep. Halberg would remedy this problem by Droviding local z'overnments the same limited immunitv now available to state government and certain orivate landowners. Specifically, the iegisiation would: • Provide limited immunity for claims based on the construction, operation, or maintenance of parks and recreation areas and for the provisions of recreational services. • Provide limited immunity for claims based on the clearing of land, removal of refuse, or the creation of trails without artificiai surfaces. • Hold municipalities liable for certain conduct -- for example, creating dangerous artificial conditions without warnings. o w ri DQ r( (D b ri w �h o w n r U) rt rt (D .. (D .. ri rt 0 0 � n r• rt A- W N -- W N0-- C tY w H fD O E w E rt w E £ G E G C S to trJ H G UQ O 3 X r r• (D n r• :3rt r• (D ri fD •C (D =11 C r• H w H .a I-' fD r• H w ri r• n Vi rt w In H a0 H O G !- C H H a CS• C (D rt rt (D C r• r• (D G C w r• (D w rt It ;rJ r w w w U1 w rt rt w a r• (D a o w G O •C rt (D G in o in H r• (A Z" W. V) H w (n a rt o a DQ (n rh N rt w (D tD to In a a rt (D b fD (D H. r• o r• r• (n r• (D r• (D fD rt rt C fD C (n (n w (n �-h O (n n In ri G rt w w 0 (D n (D rt rt R G rt 0 w rt C aQ ri Q (n x rt G rt F r( a cr`• (n C r• fn r• H In fD rt In O (D £ cD £ G £ rt a £ n r• (D cr n b (D (n w fD c (D aQ (n W rt O rt rt H R H (D rt W rt rt G N (n rt (D (n :71 r• a H ::r Co r• rt rt (D (D b G G r• 0 ri rt b w a Pi rt rt w rt r• n C o b (D w (n rt H O o (D o (D Z o aQ w ri rt o rt C b a a w aQ ar to rt 0 (D •C pi C H w (D G t- rt r••C X rt (D r• w (n H ri n G r• w c fD rt (D (D a o rt G rt (D r rt ao rt rt G rt rt 'C rt w a O w 0 r• G (D 0 rt w w (n C rt n H r• w Co o o ri w G r• w r G n G ri w (n r• 0 H rt aQ ? a a rt (D rt G r• w r• r (n (n O � ww Z O N -- C O µ. w m b w E G to w xJ n CEJ rt M C H a O O w x G to r G (D rt O w X C X w r• G rt G C y b rt a, En H r' ri n .0 •C w w H Q n w a1 (D G7 a G ri O H (D C G rt rt g G r• r( x G H r 3 G V7 w r• n (n r r G r :7r (D (D ti O H r• C H o n r• o (n n b ri ri G (D Gw Q• (D OTJ a C7 r rt w G (D H (D (D (D (D a- w w 8 r' n CL r• rt £ m G w a w kC m w W m m o H w 51 (D w m rt B rt r• (D rt G n 70H o Z 1 a r• a -- H =' o =' w Q w w rt 0 fD w rt w C " b w H o G CD n (n C✓ G C G i O £ (n fD r't w G rJ G rt ri (n H rC 0 (n (D '-C C r Vi a a H rt rf w (D (D (D rt (D r h (D rt r• G r (D w rt w w O r r w B En t7 aQ C a G O rt r• (n (n (D n O rt G fD rt M o = I-h r O (D (D (D I h Q G r R a rt O a b n b Vrti (A £. ^rtr fD O n � yi O Ooh 0 C 0 o a w� f D n n rwr °, "-t ff r S ri* H C c H r w n It r• (D n r•b r• O rt C I rt w G a g r• O rt rt rt G - C i•- x rt rt r• (D G Ln (n N N fD r. Ia.aQ R rt 0 U l W N r+ lrl r.- W N •• G p n ri C a c n £ (D b G n C- Z G (D X w O C O G G 0 rr fD (D C G x O n Pi G fD rt n H a S b ti G G r• r• Ir•aQ w C w G n (D n pi fD w ri rt o (D fD R r• o rt I R R F- rt aD rt H N Vi O w rt rt En G C r• rt Q G ri r• N• ri r• to a r• ? fD G (n r r• ri rt (D 1.4 I-h fD n C r• w O (D (D In r• n C r• rt rt fD fD w rt G G a n w w rt o a G a rte a r• rt fD r• n C w O rt 5 O aQ w (n C O r• fD G w w aQ ri G b ri G fD (D C ri rt (D (D G G o w Fr• rt O b y rt rt ::r w n a) m rt tr o rt r• o o C a n (D a H H G rt µ• w r• 0 cr rt tD rt p (D rt "o rt O G O rr rt In O w G r• ::r` O G C rt F•-' O fD a r• (D (D ao a0 £ C (n G' (n a w O fD O UQ rt 7Q (D �C a' rt a 0 G rt cr n V, rt o fD r £ Vi N (n G rf rt fD 0 �r a G rt O 14 r•lC w n w rt r• ri (n r• W N (D w rt �-t ^ r; p „p (p rh �+• n R: G R rt o fD w rt r• G' O ri t'" fD tD O G C C (n rt w r w rt ? C b w O' G ) G o C w u m O G O a w (D o :7 "C O b r• r H o G G N y au aQ � rt rt G O b rfD o R' H H a'C G (D n H C' n rt. • w n r• O V1 rt F- H (n O rt C r' O C G a rt G r h O ri n (D C rt 'C (D n £ r• G r Cn a w (D r o DQ w n o w rt w rt .� rt 5 C (D rt n 0 n a b (n a n b C k ri rt G rt to •C (n -V ri (D W r• w w G r• fD x ri n r• w fD a w r a w 0 fn pi R C G n rt w 0 r• G H cr w t" o r• rt rh w (D R O R O rt r• R G aQ rt G w (n V•b w H a H) b w rt O a ri `C w (n fD 9r (D cr G O rt rt (D rt r w - rt (D n C r G £ O C (D (D O rt 'C (n r• 3 rt w r G (n G G" r( o m r• rt (D r• G rt (n h, G r• C � O m G w rwr g � fD b b w w w N( mD Eg w rtIliw w w m O. w w m H Do rt W. h, rt rt a G (A m w n r• n -- m H ~d w O n z U) n rt m o •• O r• 5 rt o Iml (D r m G CD c n n m rt (D rt O m to •• �,, $4 t•+ W N r+ O\ Vt z- W N r+ to A W N �--• Ln C) rt 0 o w z z z G) C n H a £ n n n o E b w z tr 3 n £ n x G o m m to (D rt n r• m o w n =' n r• O O m O O m •3 N a rt DO r• O (D .0 PI n H ri B b n (D O — Z O H O C " G n H In r G DO G (D m H rt 10 w G G b O r O b n to r 7P• C G � n n H Z' O r• C b Cu r•r n rt m I `• " r• 9 G (D w (D -- 0 O m w t7' W r•h rt O rt V' r• (D r• rt ri O O rt - H £ tT G n b 7d m G n O O m n w m o rt rt O' rt o rt H rt (D ri m w o rt n O y a w tT rt m 1-d m 14 rt o �-n w w Cr m r to o a n rt O n G' a H V, H rt .< w to O 'c G m In 14 r• O to 03d H m m rt O a rt r• r( •c rt b m C En rt O m n rt :71 1-h m n m n �< a z a• m e m a o m z w w r• H o rt m H (D r• w a m x w r rt to O o oci C m C C rt b m H m w.'i7 B to MO-h b O G m m rt m m n C O rt Gn O r• r• O HCr' (D rt Hart O m °c n 0 w "rJ n m H rt G m 0 :7'L— H m C n "• b H r w a G d r• r• m Pt 'c m m o m w m m b n ° w rt r• n G m n •c G H w n rt O r• w n W DO W O rt r• rr m rt G to rt 0 v M G r• to rt O•' O i••h w rt m m (n L-. m n G ::r ri m O n £ to m n n r• Dv O r• w a n w n rt r• r• n n rt m w £ n rt to K DO m O H G m rt rt r• m n 3 H .0 G O G O C a m (D G m m rt Do DO to r• m G r• r• to • rt g rt n N rt m m m m z a rt to En to En cu Lrl rt 5 s d 0 o m m m m m o 00 m 10oH H � to w � r rr O n � m ~d o n n � O w mn• n x 'c rt to m •fA •v Ln ON W Cf] CA V 01 H t" o w w w o 0 O (D r• aH (�D (�D ((D m Har O £ " r o Z (D r• = sr rt K n h n c(DD M CD N rt x 0 (D r* rt m o m o a. rn w ° rt B a m n PI rt to £ rt O O O rt rt O £ G w rt m (D £ r rmt CDD n "t En ~i r+ w *t t" £ rt o rt rt o n rt sr O m C rt r• m m c a m rt n n n o G a m m rt �. C a a to rt � w m O to 0 a o Z rt rt b m rt m m n r• G' H a 90-3 o m n r• b x1 8 n rr m w w m .a rt rt a. C r• r• m O O cn O rt rt •• O (n �O 00 011 LTI W N t•-• W N b w z w w n o-3 w �- I'd 0.3 n r rt Vi m n C 0 " C B C r w In r• O r C •� (n (D z H,° .w m CD w rt — m (n C r• rt rh O n r• O (D rt n rt �-h r n (n r• rt rt n M r• C1 O It �c rt w o rr b •. n = •• o O m n m C r; r• w •• (D r• C G C O O. £ n (D n rt n L— g C (D . (D O (D b (n rt n b o b n m C t C w i cr Cr n r• O n (D x rt v O h O m 0 O H "d rt H O H C r••n L• C - a (D v, o �• r• m m (D n b w n x n rt N W (DD (n (D Ps' H. F•h m rt H C C CD r• to R• (n C rr rt rr O w (n rt w r• £ C r+ � : m r• m n oo b C" O r• H w � w w n m Ln W D) w El 5 d m m m C CD - H O H m trJ C n rt O "1 O n 3 O r- • n m n rt cn cn H r z o m m O � tr m 3 xo o a C m � n r• w rt 70 m b • n r 0 (D n rt� N TABLE III �bruary 19, 1986 Lty of Shakopee s,sessed Value per County Tax Rate Chart NET TAX FISCAL FISCAL INCREMENT TAX CITY :AR ASSESSED DISPARITIES DISPARITIES AMOUNT INCREMENT TAXABLE TAXABLE MILL VALUE (LOSS) X of VALUE (LOSS) X of VALUE VALUE X of VALUE RATE --------------------I------------------------- I------------------------- I---------------------------- I---------- 186 $107,300,152 I ($11,675,265) -10.88% I ($8,914,900) -8.31% I $86,709,987 80.81% I 17.426 -/85 91,336,579 I (9,807,378) -10.74% I (7,559,129) -8.28% I 73,970,072 80.99% 18.190 ;184 96,443,444 I (6,827,279) -7.08% (7,677,125) -7.96%. I 81,939,040 84.96% I 17.465 1_183 89,424,033 I (12,650,525) -14.15X I (7,706,378) -8.62% I 69,067,130 77.24% I 18.770 _/82 87,284,602 I (11,100,359) -12.72% I (2,229,054) -2.55% ( 73,955,189 84.73% I 19.145 )/81 76,816,153 I (8,364,698) -10.89% I 0 0.00% I 68,451,455 89.11% I 15.631 d/80 59,618,887 ( (7,935,961) -13.31% I 0 0.00% I 51,682,926 86.69% I 18.323 ,/79 53,577,360 I (7,242,957) -13.52% I 0 0.00% I 46,334,403 86.48% I 17.076 '/78 48,409,27: I (6,729,407) -13.90% I 0 0.00% I 41,679,864 86.10% I 20.470 ,/77 45,980,488 I (5,992,118) -13.03% I 0 0.00% I 39,988,370 86.97% I 20.180 Cott County ssessed Value per County Tax Rate Chart NET TAX FISCAL FISCAL INCREMENT TAX County ,EAR ASSESSED DISPARITIES DISPARITIES AMOUNT INCREMENT TAXABLE TAXABLE MILL VALUE (LOSS) X of VALUE (LOSS) % of VALUE VALUE % of VALUE RATE -------------------- ------------------------- ------------------------- I---------------------------- ---------- -5/86 $332,036,148 I $2,890,125 0.87X I ($14,460,662) -4.362 I 5320,465,611 96.52% I 35.833 ;/85 301,981,108 3,765,887 1.25X I (11,280,096) -3.74% I 294,466,899 97.51% 34.865 3/84 293,671,922 I 2,894,450 0.99% I (11,217,992) -3.82X I 285,348,380 97.17% I 33.004 2/83 274,146,477 I (6,507,005) -2.37% I (9,972,904) -3.64% ( 257,666,568 93.99% I 36.736 1/82 261,818,019 I (8,545,209) -3.26X I (8,525,294) -3.26% I 244,747,516 93.48% I 39.046 =/81 237,154,496 I (5,453,538) -2.30% I (2,451,432) -1.03% I 229,249,526 96.67X I 36.252 ?/80 179,474,975 (6,424,464) -3.58% I 0 O.00X I 173,050,511 96.42% 42.961 179 163,280,902 I (6,304,222) -3.86% I 0 0.00% I 156,976,680 96.14X I 41.089 '/78 149,052,289 I (6,270,459) -4.21% I 0 0.00% I 142,781,830 95.79% I 40.270 z/77 141,990,570 I (5,412,374) -3.81% I 0 0.00% I 136,578,196 96.19% I 35.470 TABLE IV Dollars (Tlaous a nds 1 CO 4F CQ Z-0 TQ fx f-Q Z-0 11 J I J I F7 419 F-71 7-1 L Y I i -1'_ -A co TABLE V Dollar—s w I - � 77 I � raffi � I I I W � I 77 CD o.+ I ar ly> Ze � r� I � y � I Cn i Y' _ I I �'✓ I J C� r 1 J TABLE VI TIF DISTRICT IMPACT ON CITY AND COUNTY SERVICES CITY COUNTY DISTRICT 1) K-Mart Water rates kept Decrease in low thru construc- direct cost tion of a well, of county water tower and roadway water mains improvements for CR 83 2 ) Senior High Rise Administration of Added second Congregate dining senior citizen space & related club ( staffed issues exp.parking by County) Increase No. r of Human Services clients 3 ) Downtown Redevelopment Significant None increase in planning time for over all downtown projects Improved parking lot downtown 4 ) Racetrack Increase Police Increased Activities. In- Jail usage creased staff time Ave. 1. 3 on related plan- people per ning & zoning day questions. City receives 10 cent ticket to cover these & other service costs 5) Family Chow Mein None *See 3 None above MEMO TO: Mayor and Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: -'ax Increment Financing (TIF) Projects DATE: May 15 , 1985 INTRODUCTION The City of Shakopee has received a significant amount of TIF for municipal projects from the K-Mart project. There are St411 proceeds from the K-Mart TIF project that have not been earmarked for specific projects. In addition, initial computer runs estimating the TIF proceeds from the racetrack project indicate a significant amount of money available for needed nunicipal projects for this tax increment district. The proceeds from the racetrack TIF will be available for an eight year priod beginning in 1987 which means the City should decide upon the needed nunicipal projects it wishes to undertake in 1986 at the very latest. POTENTIAL PROJECTS The City Department heads, at their last regular staff meeting, ' listed four major projects that needed additional revenue support. Those projects were as follows: PROJECTS PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE 1. Downtown Streetscape S3 , 000 , 000 2. 169/101 Junction and 101 Bypass (local contribution) 52 , 0.00 ,000 3 . Storm Sewer Construction 54 , 200, 000 4. Street Reconstruction 75% x S-5-7 ,000 , 000* *The City share, 75% of the Cost, has been discussed previoL'sly by Council as coming ad valorem levies for these projec-s. City Council should discuss the four projects listed above and any additions presented at Tuesday' s meeting with the intent cf establishing a definitive list of major municipal projects to receive F assistance from tax increment financing The purposee for establishing a definitive list 15 to prevent the over COm'ilittment of taX ?nCrement monies to major municipal projects during the next several years. Council can also approach this whole subject by establishing a policy that would Set parameters for the uses of tax =ncrement proceeds. Such a p0l i cy would =-r V fa_1 to anti.._Date all fuiture needs for tax Increment, but would have the effect of preventing Staff and/or Council making tax incrementfinancing the Cityfs "Sugar daddy" for solving all tough project financing issues. AL T E RNA TIVE-S 1. Arrive at a definitive list of projects to be =rogrammed by the CJ-Y's flSCal consultant t0 insure that we use Our TIF proceeds w se v and do not exceed our presen`. --_ Capab=l-ties. -- Pane 2 2 . Discuss a broadly based TI_ policy that sets priorities for the }rinds of projects TIF proceeds can be used for. ? . Do nothing. ?.E�On?^'iFNDA'^I ON At the very minimum, City Council needs to respond to Alternative No. 1 within the next few months so that we can effecively have out fiscal consultant schedule the use of tax increment proceeds. At the Present time all discussions have focused on using TIF for storm sewer (this .includes the upper valley) and local contributions to highway. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Establish a definitive list of projects to be programmed for financing with tax increment funds, including at a minimum $4 . 200 , 000 X or the storm sewer construction policy/plan and 52 , 000 , 000 for local contributions to highway projects. 2. Direct staff and fiscal consultants to provide Council with TIF programming alternatives for these projects in June. dbs I 1 � SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS 12 July 1985 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee City Hall 129 East I st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: You have asked us to examine your current and proposed debt service requirements which are to be paid wholly or partially by tax increment, for the purpose of developing a projection of future debt capacity which might be paid from current increment revenues. Because of the uncertainty of the schedule of future expenditures for storm sewer purposes to be paid partially by tax increments, and because of the uncertainty as to the schedule of income from storm sewer user charges, the development of a total new debt capacity is a difficult one. We have attached four schedules which indicate the scope of the analysis performed for the purpose you requested. Exhibit l attached represents a projection of the tax increment which may be available to pay future debt service, after allowing for full payment of current tax increment aeneral obligation and revenue bonds, and for partial payment of the general obligation bonds which will be required to fund the proposed $7,2-58,0-00 storm sewer improvement program. We have shown in column 1 of Exhibit 1 the total debt service which must be paid solely from tax increment income. This includes the $3,100,000 K-Mart Revenue Refunding Bonds of 1984, the $4,200,000 of Tax Increment Revenue Bonds for Canterbury Downs and the City's $2,490,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds of 1984 which financed the City's off-site track improvements. Column 2 represents the total projected tax increment revenues from current development each year from 1986 through 2004. The total revenues include a projected constant $800,000 tax increment from the K-Mart properties, with F the balance between 1987 and 1994 coming from the Canterbury Downs property. Column 3 represents the annual projected surplus of tax increments each year after full payment of debt service. Columns 4, 5 and 6 represent the impact of the proposed $7,258,000 storm sewer improvement program. Column W shows the annual projected debt service from 1980' through 2002, while column 5 represents the total anticipated revenues from special benefit and City-wide user fees from current development. Column 6 represents the annual projected 6eficit between payment of debt service for the storm sewer obligations and that revenue stream. Column 7 represents the residual tax increment which is available for the payment of additional obligations. 800 Osborn Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 (612) 222-4241 250 North Sunnysiope Road, Brookfield, Wisconsin 53005 (414) 782-8222 City of Shakopee, Minnesota 12 July 1985 Page 2 Exhibit II attached is a summary of the combined revenue and general obligation debt service which has been included in column I of Exhibit 1. Exhibit III attached represents the summary of projected storm sewer user fees as provided by Mr. Spurrier. This income stream represents only the user fees from current properties which total 4,814 current units. The financing program prepared by Mr. Spurrier had a projected total number of units upon full development within the storm sewer drainage area of 7,409 units. -(t (s antiC(pated that upon full development, the additional_future_units_would_pay an , estimated $384,000 annual) if altdevelopment came on line at the some We hhave�no�ssume� any�ncome from those additional developed units, and ' 4 accor_ind gly any such income would ercni ase-the aebf capacity 5eytnd-the leve J~'' yrs;. �.. ; : -•i b rC�j Exhibit 1V represents the projected level of additional debt which could be incurred using the available tax increment as shown in Exhibit I from 1986 through 1994. We believe the City could issue an additional $3,500,000 of bonds within this perio ou will note in the cumulative surplus column a total~ projected balance of $1,561,863 which would be available after the final debt service payment on the proposed additional debt. That amount of money is required to pay the potential projected deficit in 1995 through 1997 resulting from the insufficiency of storm sewer revenues to pay storm sewer debt service, which deficit is also shown in Exhibit I, column 7. You will also note upon examination of Exhibit I that additional annual surpluses e u(d.be available fo�he City between-1.998- an2 004,w ih ouId support addifiional_debt._ We chose not to attempt a_project�on:_of�tat additional debt capacity since it wifein large_. partw_on�whatever additions user charges the C��might-be able,to _generate from new deve opment within the storm sewer improvement area. However, yo' u should be aware that any additions( deb;-incurred 5etween--"1985 and 1994 beyond the iw,#�1:^`rr„r•. level forecast for the storm sewer improvements and the additional 3'h millionv ' dollars, would require additional interest payments which would have to be paid t -�, from the some available tax increment income shown in column 7 of Exhibit 1. ,��`,�'�, That would reduce the total principal which could be paid on new debt, and might accelerate both the timing and size of the cumulative deficit which could fix` occur. The projection of additional bonding capacity is subject to a number of assumptions including but not limited to the following: 1. That the current tax increment from the K-Mart and Canterbury Downs project will not fall below the forecast levels made at the time bonds were issued last year. 2. The storm sewer improvement bonds will be structured over a IS- year even principal payment term, at rates available under current market conditions. 3. That the tax increment currently available can be combined and utilized for both the storm sewer debt service payments and City of Shakopee, Minnesota 12 July 1985 Wage 3 additional debt which might be incurred for furtherance of the downtown redevelopment program. 4. The total level of bonds required for the storm sewer improvement will not exceed the cost levels assumed by Mr. Spurrier in his initial planning. 5. That storm sewer revenues projected by Mr. Spurrier will be equal in value, and available upon the some schedule, as assumed herein. 6. That no new tax increment revenues beyond current projected levels will be available. Any additional increment from the downtown project or from other portions of the tax increment financing districts would increase the debt capacity. Because of some recent changes in Minnecto law affecting the financing of public improvements, the City may have some unique opportunities available to it in financing the storm sewer projects. We would like to discuss those possibilities with you at an early date. If you have any questions concerning this analysis please feel free to contact us at your convenience. R-espectfully submitted Robert D. Pulscher r EXHIBIT 1 N m %Dn Cn— �O r� N "Dnr-t r- I%-1- 0 0 O [ IV Ln O COr- Ln� t` n N-- - Oon- _-Clio C %Z O 0) CC) .OHMS ►nC qtC C. 00doo Ln m %.OSv-) oM %z cr\Q\-NCNO o [ U O >. D� i NgONgrV r� N �D%.D rQaNLn�DNr- C) C) M O O G? > U S n r`fl- r\ n n CN C% M V1 Ln — ♦D q d M - `.- L v v�. i .. U O < [ t: CO D U U {fT L71 E [ N v \ p C •v Li d %DC,— C,. SDC% dCt"IMMMM c� t` _-r m0mNC, MP--•C\MC',FMLnr- M U L V ^_ f` q— ►n CD n %D— ►n O N— Lri C� C.— r [ D = -7 .. .. .. .. .. ` Z ►n \D \.D N r- r- %D %D S N o o n t--C S m E >� Z r-- `— %DNr� Nr- N r-tnSMrl- NN - C rl- r- r` %D %�D to V) S-- Ln\.D r-I` '�C —\.D— S Y O 3 ------v--——————— cn C� >` o C:v L C D O �- • y ►n \D CYN C\ C. o\ CN C\ CN m N M o kn •cqn U o NN %,D------- COC, ln n LL .� L Z 4', ? O oSCNC\ mC. ma\CN C)M.= M V) D a LyJ v [ 0 N---- ---- MC. o L U O OLn dN �DOC000C0 or� S O > Ln eh N � }.� 0 Ln ►n L-) Ln u1 Ln►n ►n Ln M- � O d O E � X - _ W U cn C tlT irr - N E c✓ [ O o 0 0 o L -0y N N C N rr N M0 MLn 0M►nn OMMMMMM \S L AV> C. U - r` O N0 - - to C\ M gt-- S— n Ln r-- .._ < W _ C� n %OSns \DC S Cr\ Moo0C\ C,— _ 3. 3 m o O O •> oM \DCOco CN CNnr� I--t'V- Onr--o +- .� 0 %DO— SDN r- fVI-Nfl-MgMrl- fVN r S U ` D U Ln O � ) SNNN- - ooU., \ COcor-r'. \D \D- .. o — E [ v Z U o a>i 0- L W 0 1 ^ F o o �! Li N r-4 LnC� C� SNOMr- NNo0000Co %D >` Q\ y y C L n S C\ s ►n o— Ln C\ Ln q r. o o o o o o o Cr. L p SON Cry MLnr- NinLnNc00CCO0 NC) � � p Y U •uI.. r,- aio:=r%-Lno:Sw-.D\.D r.;,n00000OO �o .5 u, S►n ►n►n000a000 V) I -- > C H r L v N C N V CN—N N r- Ln M M o 00 000 0 C 0 O f` U `' N ` L [ U < Z i y NMO r n- N \DV' C OOOCOCOoo N U D n t" U J p cid ).CN CN %D- ►ngC. gCO CC CCCOOC o n C r` U D cr - MNOq %Z r-j0000000000 M r O% ? L ,• i `p v N \-D Ln ntnLn - � OC .� OCCCC C �D ��- ^ p _ L) E. U > unD\ C� Q\ D\ m �II� mq dggqqqqqq O w i\ _[ - L RU — V V U — NNNNNNNfV M " Ln Fit� X z ` X C M 'n ` Ln rv[ v Z < tJ> VT L —q'. r-4 - f- v > ; y 'X o - C\• D 0 O p a r. U .j C 0 6 Q) 0\ O Q\ C� — — r` —N M irn o W _ U o C Sw- r��w�wr� +n CL) O p p C N v > - U r _CO O - _ L _ r-,, Lf., - OMMr� CtnMI�S +� D CO O O .. S OO- OCa\ C� m - n gn C\ v irY f- rn - ►n �nL'iIri nS ` Sri �n - M U C i i N U LI - ----- --- t11 i O C.> O - _ V /c�� v> yr U = v— J v °' L N a � = y N C N n i cr\ •a \-Dr- gO, o— NM -tn ,Dr-, m \ O—NM -` , ^ V = U C O nngdD\ C\ CNC\ CNC\ C�\ Ol\ mONCOC OO J C\ C\ mmO\ C% C\ mC�\ C\ mC\ C\C\ CooOO —N N N N N G1 U U U U O to lDI� nC� C — NMS Ln*lDrl- dC� O— N M p ' ._ D � �� } r q gggnC\ CNC\ C\CN C\C'\ MC7\C\ CCC o > y rnC% C. C. C. C� C\ C. rnC. CN o. D. mCN 0000 O U N y y - --- -- ---- ---`_— c1, r14r�4 v }- y rJ < > L a� 0 �. .� EXHIBIT 11 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA COMBINED DEBT SERVICE OF EXISTENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PROJECTS $4,200,000 - 1985 G.O. TIP Collect-Pay $3,100,000 - 1984 $2,490,000 Total Year Combined Series 1984A Debt Service (1) (2) (3) 1986 $ 848,620 $ 293,623 $ 1 , 142,243 1987 1 ,210, 145 295,853 1 ,505,998 1988 1 ,207, 108 296,998 1 ,504, 106 1989 1 ,213, 195 296,998 1 ,510, 193 1990 1 ,207,233 295,860 1 ,503,093 1991 1 ,204,478 298,535 1 ,403,013 1002 1 , 1107,878 200,535 1 ,497,413 1003 1 , 191 ,328 298,785 1 ,400, 113 1994 1 , 194,465 301 ,305 1 ,495,770 1995 446,878 296,565 743,443 1996 447,228 300, 190 747,418 1,1097 448,538 296. 190 744.728 Total $11 ,817,094 $3,570,437 $15,387,531 Prepared By: SPRINCSTED Incorporated 12 July 1985 r EXHIBIT III CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA USER FEE ANNUAL REVENUE PROJECTION Collect Special Citywide Year Benefit Revenue User lee Total (1) (2) (3) 1986 $ 46,802 $ 152,035 $ 198,837 1987 75,798 246,228 322,026 11,188 108,620 352,849 461 ,469 1969 118, 141 383,778 501 ,019 1990 118, 141 383,778 501 ,919 1991 118, 141 383,778 501 ,919 1992 118, 141 383,778 501 ,919 1993 118, 141 383,778 501 ,919 1994 118, 141 383,778 501 ,919 1905 118, 141 383,778 501 ,919 1996 71 ,339 231 ,743 303,082 1997 42,343 137,550 179,893 1998 9,521 30,929 40,400 1 0 0 0 Total $1 , 181 ,410 $3,837,780 $5,019, 190 ;' Prepared By: SPRINCSTED Incorporated 12 July 1985 EXHIBIT IV ] H Ln N O O\ O\ O\ N \D C)co D U ^ LnO rn„ SO\ O -- NOM i ] N M Ln r- D\ Ml Ln - \D Ln G ] - - G ") U cn utl- N — y Ln O\ Ln tr1 +T O\ CV \.O — \D r� Q\ C Q\ M — N \D O 1*- Ln Ln N— mom— OO O\ — \D M �L/]j -- -- N NN MLnLn r F- N M \D CJ O b— \D t-- N \D b Ln 'D OD r- Ln � hN —— \D — O nLLJ C) Z W Q) \D CJ M =I U') N CJ \C _-r C\ N i ^ t: \D dLr) OM— nO\ O\ — %1 O\ O N b O N G N f� r\l \D \D N O\ N NL. r- CD CO O\ O\ M Ln Ln \D L Z �> trr Q W ~ J C) N � J C) Ln" —v — \D d Ln CO QU NO MLn r- nCJ OO\ O\ L \D Ln O\ Ln O\ \O r-Q\ `w Q tr) C) ^ N— — M O co O \D b Ln W G N N Q\ —L7 CD N r` N \D Ln L:� Z — \D Lr)Ln Ln \D \D t\ Ln r Lr o N Q dr> ir? v � Ln LnLf) V O Ln Ln Ln n 0 L1)L 0 Ln O L � Of\ Nt` N CN Ln O^ Ln t-- N O\ m N N O O Ln Q N Ln O\ M c\ M O\ _ \D „Ln Ln Ln\D \D t\ N Ln U u p <n i G Ln Ln Ln LnLn ^.> G Ln G p o rl- N rl- N N Ln o fl- Ln N �, \ Ln L' — LnClO^r, —M O\ C) Ln u CJ .Ni O\ C Ln M — G Ln O\ N N N N N-- — f� ir) ir} � 0000000� G o0Gc000co 0 o c o Ln C Ln Ln C MO'. � — Q\ =)I-- O ^�li-- — M N N Mv Ln\D Ln M irr i!T L_I \D f` d O\ O—N M = Ln \D t\ D D D b m m m ON O\c\ O\O\ O\ O\ O\ C O\ O\ O\O\ O\ C\c\ D\ ON O\ O\ O\ O r SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED Public Finance Advisors � MN Municipality Srzn ste ett e Volume III, Issue I r Winter, 1986 OVERVIEW OF HR 3838 - TAX REFORM ACT OF 19851S IMPACT ON TAX-EXEMPT BONDS If the prospect of Gramm-Rudman, elimination of federal revenue sharing, reduced State-aids and the deepening problem within our agricultural economy is not enough bad news, please finish reading this letter to see what else a "higher" level of government has in store for you. HR 3838, the U.S. House of Representatives Tax Reform Act of 1985, contained a number of adverse restrictions on the issuance of tax-exempt bonds which will have a collective impact on: I. Increasing interest rates on most issues. 2. Increasing the administrative, legal and fiscal costs of issuance, and post-sale monitoring of issues. 3. Increasing project costs by eliminating nearly all arbitrage profits. 4. Restricting or eliminating the historic authority of local units of government to issue many types of public purpose obligations. HR 3838 is not law and may not become law. It must be approved or modified by the U.S. Senate, and must then undergo the veto scrutiny of President Reagan. However, since the House Bill has an effective date of January 1, 1986, bond attorneys nationally are taking the position that all tax-exempt financing must meet the requirements of HR 3838 until something more definitive is passed, or "the Tax Reform" effort dies. Therefore this letter attempts to outline the major changes which will impact your normal borrowing, categorized as "Essential purpose" obligations under the Act, as opposed to "Non-essential purpose" obligations. Arbitrage No arbitrage earnings, except as indicated hereafter, can be retained by the Issuer. Retained earnings will be computed at a restricted yield, which in summary is the initial interest rate of the bonds, less purchaser's discount and issuance costs. Therefore, depending upon the length and maturity schedule of an issue, if your net interest rate cost for borrowing is 8.50%, your permitted reinvestment rate might be closer to 8%. You will be required to reinvest bond proceeds at the highest possible rate, but you will only be able to retain the earnings computed at the restricted yield. The balance of real earnings must be repaid to the U.S. Treasury at five-year intervals over the life of the bond issue, and you will be required to file an annual report with the Treasury Department showing the results of your actual investment experience. The only exception to this rule will permit Issuers to retain arbitrage earnings of less than $100,000 annually from certain defined bona fide sinking funds after construction is completed. Also, arbitrage earned on issues in which all net proceeds are fully expended within six months of issuance may be retained by the Issuer. These arbitrage restrictions will increase the construction costs of projects for which the money is borrowed since excess investment earnings historically have been used to reduce the size of bond issues. 85 East Seventh Place,Suite 100 250 North Sunnyslope Road Saint Paul,Minnesota 55101.2143 Brookfield,Wisconsin 53005.6218 612.223.3000 414.782.8222 Use and Loan Test No bonds for any purpose can be considered an Essential purpose bond if 5% or more of net proceeds are loaned to, or 10% or more are "used" by a person other than a governmental unit. Any bond issue exceeding these limits on loans or uses is considered a Non-essential issue, and could be issued only if the Issuer is entitled to, and does receive, an industrial development bond allocation from the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development. Under HR 3838 DEED will be restricted in its approval for all Non-essential bonds to an amount not to exceed $175 per capita. This will permit only an estimated $680 million of bonds for the entire State, and that limit must include all housing bonds, bonds issued on behalf of 501(3)(C) organizations which include hospitals and universities, and all other qualifying Non-essential function bonds including, among others, small issue IDB's, qualified redevelopment bonds and bonds issued for solid waste resource recovery obligations. This requirement will eliminate any tax increment issue from an Essential qualification if more than 5% of the proceeds are loaned to a developer in the form of land acquisition and development cost write-downs. Some additional examples of "uses" by non-governmental parties could be construed to include: a. Leases to private parties of more than 10% of the bond financed facility, b. Operating or management contracts of a public facility longer than one year, C. "Take or pay" or "output" contracts for major users of revenue supported facilities, d. The reservation of parking spaces for customers or employees of a commercial entity, or a private nonprofit organization, e. A developer's guarantee of debt service payments, or minimum tax increment payments, in excess of 10% of debt service. If you are considering any tax increment project which will involve the use of development agreements requiring financial commitments on behalf of your community, we recommend you discuss these commitments with your public financial advisor or bond counsel to be sure you can finance those commitments. Expenditure Test A signficant new restriction is the requirement that an amount equal to at least 5% of net bond proceeds, excluding issuance costs and discount, must be expended for the purpose of the borrowing within 30 days after settlement. Failure to comply with this requirement renders interest on the bonds taxable retroactive to date of issuance. This will require the Issuer in many cases to enter into a contract for a project prior to the issuance of the bonds, or the prepayment of engineering or architectural expenses on a project in advance of completion of that design work. Either of these commitments may be a risk many units are not willing to take. In addition, the 5% expenditure test will eliminate much of the flexibility in scheduling bond sales to take advantage of receptive market conditions as issuance will have to be delayed until the 5% requirement can be met. It may also increase the number of times an Issuer comes to market since most Issuers have grouped multiple projects within a single issue on an annual basis. This may no longer be possible depending on the type and timing of projects. The Act may also be construed to require that any bonds in excess of actual requirements must be retired within 30 days after completion of the project financed by the bonds. If required, this will involve a partial mandatory redemption, adding additional uncertainty to a bondholder as to the term for which he may expect to hold his bond. The partial redemption requirement will mandate a premium to be paid for the bondholder's risk in having his obligations retired in advance of its normal maturity. The expenditure test, and the need to size issues for only actual net requirements after deduction of investment earnings through construction, will require a furnishing by engineers and architects of an estimated construction fund cash flow for each project to be included in a bond issue. While a projection of expenditure requirements often has been used in the past, the accuracy of those projections now is more critical to insure that excess bonds will not be issued, thus requiring the Issuer to pay a premium for mandatory early redemption. Potential Loss of Future Tax Exemption The potential loss of tax exemption is perhaps the most onerous aspect of the Act. Since arbitrage regulations were first issued in 1969, bond Issuers have been required to have "reasonable expectations," at the time of issuance that the conditions of the issue met and would meet all applicable federal requirements. Thereafter, loss of tax exemption was not a likely occurrence if the "reasonable expectations" at the time of issuance were valid. On the date of issuance a bond purchaser, for his tax exemption, could rely upon an unqualified legal opinion by bond counsel. The Tax Reform Act retains the reasonable expectation tests, but adds a host of other absolute requirements, both for initial issuance and for future expenditure of proceeds and reinvestment restrictions. A violation of any of these added requirements during any time the bonds are outstanding can cause loss of tax exemption retroactively to date of issuance, with obvious consequences to the bondholder and to the Issuer. Since the bondholder will have no control over this potential hazard, the respective purchaser probably will require some protection which may take the form of one or more of the following: a. Higher required yields on bonds issued after January I, 1986. b. An agreement by the Issuer to pay taxable rates in the event exemption is lost. C. Agreement for mandatory redemption of all bonds in the event of a determination of taxability. d. Absolute covenants on the part of the Issuer to do all that is required to maintain tax exemption under HR 3838 or successor legislation. Monitoring Problem If HR 3838's restrictive requirements remain in effect, each Issuer will have to institute a rigid monitoring system to insure that necessary reports are filed with the Treasury and that no violations of the federal regulations inadvertently occur. Springsted Incorporated is in the process of developing such a monitoring system and we plan to provide that service to Minnesota Issuers. If you are interested in talking with us about that system, or about any of your 1986 financing requirements, please feel free to contact us at your convenience. What To Do As indicated previously, the U.S. Senate is currently considering its own Tax Reform Act, which may take significant different directions from the House Bill in certain key areas. if you feel it advisable, we recommend you contact Senators David Durenberger and Rudy Boschwitz to express your concern about some of the matters discussed herein. The mailing address of both senators is shown below. Senator David Durenberger Senator Rudy Boschwitz SR-154 Russell Senate Office Building SR-225 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Washington, D.C. 20510 OTHER MATTERS OF INTEREST S-I's Relocation After an eighteen-year tenancy in the Osborn Building, S-1 moved its corporate offices in January. Our new address is 85 East Seventh Place, Saint Paul, 55101. We occupy the first floor of the HEMAR Building which some of you may remember as the old Donaldson's store. The building has been attractively renovated and is one block east of Town Square. If you are in Saint Paul, we invite you to stop in for a cup of coffee and a short tour of our new and expanded quarters. Privatization The potential loss of some bonding authority, combined with federal reduction in grants and aids, will not cause any reduction in the demand for major new capital projects. Some units of government may wish to examine more closely the possibility of cooperation with the private sector in constructing and operating capital intensive facilities. S-1 has been involved in a number of privatization projects involving solid waste and mass transit. We feel the public-private concept could be extended to several other critical areas including: Waste Water Treatment Water Supply and Treatment Hospitals Recreation Facilities Public Buildings Robert Pulscher, S-1 President, recently participated in a privatization seminar sponsored by the Advanced Legal Education Department of Hamline University School of Law. Mr. Pulscher discussed the financing of privatization projects. A text of his comments will be made available to interested parties who contact S-I. K TO: Mayor, Council Members FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Hiring Temporary employee DATE: February 18 , 1986 INTRODUCTION The police department would like to complete the microfilming of documents prior to the opening of Canterbury Downs . BACKGROUND The Consultants preliminary staffing study indicates the department' s clerical staff is functioning at 100% on a twelve month basis. Tim Nelson has been employed on a parttime basis by the planning department and has completed his employment. The department would like to hire Tim Nelson on a parttime basis at his current hourly rate of $6 . 00 per hour until the microfilming is completed, not to exceed sixty working days. RECOMMENDATION Hire Tim Nelson to microfilm police department documents . COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Authorize the police department to hire Tim Nelson as a temporary employee at an hourly rate of $6 . 00 , for sixty days using contingency funding not to exceed $2 , 880 . 00 . C T TY _ CD F- S._HAKO.,F'E INCORPORATED 1870 * ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Admini trator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Enginee SUBJECT: Monticeto Heights Feasibi ity Report BATE: February 11, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The Engineering Department needs a Council Resolution ordering a feasibility report for the subject project. BACKGROUND: This project is identified as a priority project in the 1986- 1990 Capital Improvement Program. This project is proposed to improve and preserve the investment in the existing roadway system. Attached is Resolution No. 2519, directing the Engineering Department to prepare a feasibility report for Monticeto Heights. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2519, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Report on an Improvement, Monticeto Heights Street Preservation. KAlpmp MEMHTS RESOLUTION NO. 2519 A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On An Improvement Monticeto Heights Street Preservation WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Monticeto Heights Street Preservation by street improvements and to assess the benefited propert_y for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 459. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be referred to the City Engineer for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether , the proposed . improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some nether improvement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended Adopted in session of the City_ Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of i � y Mayer of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk. Approved as to form this day of i9 City Attorney C = TY _OF- E3H18. KOI?H�a._ INCORPORATED 1870 * ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 (612) 445-3650 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Admin trator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Deerview Acres Feasibility Report DATE: February 11, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The Engineering Department needs a Council resolution ordering a feasibility report far the subject project. BACKGROUND: This project is identified as a priority project in the 1986- 1990 Capital Improvement Program. This project is proposed to improve and preserve the investment in the existing road- way system. Attached is Resolution No. 8520, directing the Engineering Department to prepare a feasibility report for Deerview Acres. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to adopt Resolution No. 2520, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation of a Report on an Improvement, Deerview Acres Street Preservation. KA/pmp MEMDEER RESOLUTION NO. 2520 A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A Report On An Improvement Deerview Acres Street Preservation WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Deerview Acres Addition by street improvement and to assess the benefited property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to M i inesot a Statutes, Chapter 409. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be referred to the City Engineer for study and that he is instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other imorovement, and the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk. Approved as to form this day of City Attorney CC- MEMO TO: Jahn K. Andersen, City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer SUBJECT: Resolution No. c521, Revision to the City' s Standard Specifications DATE: February 19, 1986 INTRODUCTION: The existin❑_ Shakopee Standard Specificatic,ns establish a Parti- cular catch basin to be used. It is the intent of this merno and ResoILit ion N c-. 252_'1 to revise the standard specification to allow added flexibility in design concepts. BACKGROUND: The existing Standard Specifications are quite rigid in the type of catch basin to be used within the City. The current type used in the City is referred to as the LG Catch Basin with a precast curb ooenirig. Resolution No. 25221 essentially adopts tw,D catch basin standards and allows differentiation based upon use. The resolution refers to i t we i types: Tvpe i Catch Basin: LR Type Type 2' Catch Basin: Precast with curb box and orated cast in0. Each tvpe has its own advantages and disadvantages. TYRE 1 CATCH BASIN Advantages 1. Laroe stormwater inlet capacity. c. The large inlet USUa11Y prevents debris from hanging up and blacking the opening (self- cleaning) . Disadvantages 1. more cost 1y to adjust to vertical changes in grade as streets are reconstructed. c. Higher initial construction cost attributable to higher material cost and labor cost than the type 22 catch basin. Revision to Standard Specifications February 19, 198E Page c .3. The structure and casting opening is behind the curb. The placement of this structure within the CED redevelopment will interfere with the flexibility for locating light standards, conduit, furniture, etc. and will be aesthetically unappealing in contrast to the more decorative sidewa1k. pavements. 4. Advantage No. 2 can become a disadvantage if larger debris is allowed to accumulate within the piping system. TYPE L CATCH BASIN Advantages 1. Easily adjusted vertically and allows minimal horizontal adjustment during street reconstruction. c. Lower Cost. 3. No structure behind the curb. 4. Screens out larger debris from entering the storm sewer system. Disadvantages 1. Less inlet capacity than the type 1 . 2. Debris collects on the grate which effects the inlet capacity further. In the design of storm sewers within business areas, normal design criteria requires placement of catch basins to provide clear paths for pedestrians and to provide flexibility for multiple grade changes. This placement usually provides inlet capacity in excess of that required. Public works has indicated that the type i catch basin is excel- lent for remaining clean and that the type 2 has minimal prob- lems with debris. Jim Karkenan did indicate that the elder castings without a curb box are a real problem keeping clean. Revision to Standard Specifications February 19, 1986 Page Regarding cost differences, the initial cost of the type 1 catch basin can be as high as $400. 00 per structure more than the type L. In addition, reconstruction of type 1 basins will vary between $150. 00 and $254 . 00 during street reconstruction assuming major horizontal ad1ustments are not necessary. Adjustment of type 2 basins are incidental and not usually included as a bid item. The Holmes Street Lateral feasibility study estimated the need for 105 catch basins. These catch basins will be affected by the following circumstances: 1. CBD redevelopment (4 intersections) . 2. Street reconstruction over time. 3. Initial cost of system. 4. Deposition of leaves K debris. Although initial cost difference is substantial between the two types, there is added maintenance for the type 2. Considering the life expectancy of storm sewers, the initial cast benefit of the type 2 may diminish with time. It is the intent to continue to use the type 1 catch basin for most applications, particularly in new development areas but to use the type 2 where practical to accommodate redevelopment and pending street reconstruction. SUMMARY: In summary, adoption of Resolution No. 2521 will allow flexibi- lity of design to meet the needs of the storm sewer system. Application of type is proposed as follows: Type 1 : City-wide except where type 2 is allowed. Type 2: In the CBD redevelopment area as defined by the Downtown committee deliberations and areas of pending street reconstruction. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Adapt Resolution No. 2521. 2. Do no adopt Resolution No. 2521. Revision to Standard Specifications February 19, 198E Fuge 4 J• Discuss merits of Resolution No. 2521 and direct City Engineer to make revisions and resubmit for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 2521. REQUESTED ACTION: Move the adoption of Resolution No. 2521, A Resolution Revising the Shakopee Standard Specifications. N.A/prnp CATBASIN RESOLUTION NO. 2521 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 1514 REVISING THE CITY OF 5HAKOPEE'5 STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS WHEREAS, it is proposed to revise the City of Shakopee's Standard Specifications to include the specification of an additional catch basin type. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that Resolution No. 1514 is hereby amended as follows and that the STORM SEWER DETAILS, sheet 1 of 1 , drawing no. 1 will be revised to include the statement: 1 . The type 1 catch basin as following described shall be used in all areas of the City except where the type 2 is allowed by the City Engineer. Mn/DOT Standard Plate No. 4021C. 2. The type 2 catch basin as following described shall be used only as allowed by the City Engineer as an alternate. Structure: Mn/DOT Standard Plate No. 4006K (outlet only) , or Mn/Dot Standard Plate No. 4005K (outlet & inlet) with type C cone section. Frame Costing: Mn/DOT St. Plate 4126E Grate Casting: Mn/DOT St. Plate 4149C Curb Box Casting: Mn/DOT St. Plate 4160D Install Rebar according to: Mn/DOT St. Plate 7111G 3. All others may be used only with prior approval of the City Engineer. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 19 %J Iry. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson lb City Administrator ` FROM: Judith S. Cox C City Clerk 'v RE: Vacation of alley in Block 30 , ESP DATE: February 13 , 1986 Introduction and Background: The vacation of the alley in Block 30 , ESP would land lock the city property behind Malkersons. Staff recommends post- poning the public hearing set for March 4th, indefinitely. Alternatives: 1) Hold hearing. 2 ) Delay public hearing until adjacent property has been sold and if keeping it open is of no value to the new owner. Action Recommended: Reconsider Resolution No. 2516 , A Resolution Initiating The Vacation Of The Public Alley in Block 30 , According To The Plat Of East Shakopee, and place it on the table. JAC/dd RES101=10N 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 S:.akopee; 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, 1980' at 7 : 35 p.m. , or there- after, on the matter cf vacating the 16 foot alley lying within Block 30 of the pial 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 Natio2l: Bankand One on the bulletin board in the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse. Adopted in nR�tit-� �� sMISS= of the Shakopee City Council held this 4J* day of 1986. Mawr c the C_tv of Shakopee , 1 City ;Clerk Appe rovas to form th=s day of C_tv Attcrnev C I TY CD F- SHPiKCDPIFH;F 1� INCORPORATED 1870 +� ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 129 E. 1st Avenue - Shakopee, Minnesota 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: February 20, 1986 INTRODUCTION: Council action is required for a resolution accepting work and making final payment on the 1985 Sidewalk Project. BACKGROUND: All of the work for this project has been completed in accord- ance with the contract documents. The certificate of completion is attached. Because all individual property owners involved in this year' s project paid in full prior to the prescribed deadline, the assessment process was not required. ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. 2518, A Resolution Accepting Work on 1985 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement Program, Contract No. 1985-3. r: This Resolution directs the appropriate City officials to make final payment to Siehndel Construction, 210 Elmwood, LeSuer, MN 56058, in the amount of $100. 00. pproved forubmittal Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer FS/pmp MEM CERTIFICATE Or COMPLETION CONTRACT NO , : 1985-3 DATE: February 20, 1986 PROJECT DESCRIPTION : 1985 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement CONTRACTOR: Siehndel Construction 210 Elmwood LeSuer, MN 56058 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT , , , , , , , , , , , , $ 7,285.00 QUANTITY CHANGE AMOUNT , , , , , , , , , , $ 643.06 CHANGE ORDER NO . -- THRU NO. -- AMOUNT , , $ —0— FINAL 0— FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT , , , , , , , , , , , , , , $ 7,928.06 LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS , , , , , , , , , , , , , $ 7,828.06 FINAL PAYMENT , , , , , , , , o , . , , , , , , , $ 100.00 I, hereby certify that the above described work was inspected under my direct supervision and that, to the best of my belief and knowledge, I find that the same has been fully completed in all respects according to the contract, together with any modifications approved by City Council . I, therefore, recommend above specified final payment be made to the above named Contractor. Professions Engineer RESOLUTION NO. 2018 A Resolution Acceptinp Werk Or, The 1985 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement Pronram Contract No. 19E5-3 WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract sinned with the City of Shakopee on May 21, 1985, Siehridel Construction, '10 Elmwood, LeSuer, MN 560-58 has satisfactorily completed the Sidewalk Construction, in accordance with such contract. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL Or THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the work. completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk and Mayor are hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of S 100. 00, taking the contractor' s receipt in full. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 19 Mayer of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form '.his Ga_y of , 19 City Attorney t e r n MEMO T0: John K. Anderson, City Administrator l� FROM: Fulton Schleisman, Engineering Inspector SUBJECT : 1986 Curb K Gutter. Sidewalk., and Driveway Apron Replacement Ftrtgram DATE: February 19, 1986 INTRODUCTION: Council Action is required to initiate pr•tceedir,gs f_tr the 1986 Sidewalk Program. BACKGROUND: If ordered, this will be the fourth year of the concrete replacement program. The previous years and approximate contract amounts were: 1pp 7 7 0 83 ---- �LL9 000. 0 1984 ---- $18, 000. 00 1985 ---- $ 8, 000. 00 The contract amount fell of f subst ant i al l y i n 1985. However, the City' s Contractor- also performed w_trk on private property, work in right-c-If-way under street cut permits, and work for Shakopee Public Utilities which is not reflected in the year' s totals. The concrete replacement work. associated with this year' s strum sewer project ect may be i nc 1 Uded in this contract, cant i nflent uc)on an analysis of the unit prices. ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. >=Jt=S, A Resolution Approving the Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for the 1986 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement Program, Public Improvement 1986 Approved ftr^ ubrni ttal Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer FS/pmp MEM21525 RESOLU71ON NO. 2525 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For The 1986 Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, And Driveway Apron Replacement Program Public Improvement 1986-2 WHEREAS, Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer, has prepared plans and specifications for Curb & Gutter, Sidewalk, and Driveway Apron Replacement Program, ProDect No. 1986-2 and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNE50TA: 1 . Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertise- ment for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids shall be published for ten days and shall specify the work to be done and shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk until 10:00 A.M. , on March 24, 1986, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, or their designated party, will then be tabulated, and will be considered by the Council at 8:00 P.M. , or thereafter on March 25, 1986, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for not less than 55, 000. 00. 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 Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Abatements C Date: February 20, 1986 Introduction & Background Staff is requesting Council approval of the request to Scott County for abatement of special assessments and taxes as outlined below. 1. Special assessments for parcel no. 27-062-014-0, code 44 were paid 11/22/85 but not removed for the tax rolls. 2. Special assessments for parcel no. 27-931-003-0 are discussed in the attached memo on Eaglewood special assessments. 3 . Property taxes on parcel no. 27-093-003-0, Outlot A Valley Mall lst F addition are larger than expected. The City owns the parcel and leases it out for farming pending bypass construction. Taxes on the farmed areas were expected to be about $1,500. Taxes on this parcel are $5,053 .42. The parcel is classified as residential. The City is asking for reclassification to agricultural since that is its use and the taxes are lower. See attached application forms. Alternatives 1. Approve request. 2. Approve part of request. 3. Do not approve. Action Requested Offer Resolution No. 2524. GV:mmr e TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Eaglewood Special Assessments DATE: February 20, 1986 Introduction and Background The City has levied special assessments against benefited property for Eaglewood road reconstruction. The assessments were for 20% of the project cost . The assessments were not appealed within the time frame of the Chapter 429 process. The City needed to assess at least 20% of the project in order to issue improvement bonds without going to the voters for appro- val. Claude Friendshuh (parcel #27-931003-0) was assessed for one lot on the assessment roll. Based on the half section maps used at the time, it appeared that he abutted Bridge Crossing. Mr. Friendshuh stopped in City Hall to question the assessment. Engineering obtained updated half section maps from the County and from the new maps it is clear that Mr. Friendshuh does not abut Bridge Crossing and therefore does not benefit from the road. The situation appears to be as follows: 1) The City did assess 20% of the project, 2) the amount involved for the assessment on one lot is $1,354.19, 3) a reassessment for that amount is not practical, 4) if staff had known ahead of time that Mr. Friendshuh did not abut the road, the assessments for the other lots would have been higher to make the 20% mark of the the total project cost, 5) the most practical way to resolve the situation is for the City to abate the assessment on Mr. Friendshuh' s parcel. The amount is not material to the project cost. If there is a reduction in the assessments due to a final cost less than the estimates that were used for making the assessments, then the City can recoup the $1,354.19 by making the reduction to the assessments that much less. Alternatives 1. Reassess 2. Abate this assessment 3 . Let the assessment run Recommendation Alternative number two is recommended by staff. Action Requested See cover memo for resolution. GV:mmr RESOLUTION NO. 2524 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING ABATEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND RECLASSIFICATION FOR PROPERTY TAXES OF VARIOUS PARCELS WHEREAS, certification of special assessments was made to Scott County October 10, 1985; and WHEREAS, changes and adjustments are necessary which require an abatement procedure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that the Board of Commissioners of Scott County is requested to approve special assessment abatements and reduction in assessed value for various parcels within the City of Shakopee in accordance with the attached application forms. 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 E Form 1273 - Pouci er, Moll. O Commissioner of Revenue Abatement Form 7 (Rev.3/74) APPLICATION FOR ABATEMENT — GENERAL FORM For Taxes Assessed in Year 1985 Q o Complete in triplicate if rax reduction and Payable in Year 1986 j I Z U exceeds 5300;otherwise complete in duplicate.Please print or type. ,icant's Name School District No. Date of APPh CaTiOn City of Shakopee 720 2/26/86 of Address City or Township Zip Code 129 East First Ave. Shakopee I 55379 'LICANT'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: Special Assessment was paid on 11/22/85 but not removed from tax rolls for pay 1986. DLICANT'S REQUEST- Abatement of $263.05 balance and pay 1986 principle and interest of $263.05 and $42.09 respectively--for special assessments against parcel 27-062014-0 - code 44. Applicant's Sionature Date 'TE: Minnesota Statutes 1971, Section 609.41 "Whoever in making any statement,oral or written, which is reouired or authorized by law to be made as a s of imposing, reducing or abating any tax or assessment, intentionally makes any statement as to any material matter which he knows is false may be .enced,unless otherwise provided by law,to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than S1,000,or both. PORT OF INVESTIGATION (by County Assessor or City Assessor in certain cities) ,hereby report that I have investigated the statements made in the foregoing application and find the facts to be as follows: Form 1273 - Fouener, Mbis- O r•�— Commissioner of Revenue Abatement Form 7 (Rev.3174) APPLICATION FOR ABATEMENT — GENERAL FORM 0 m For Taxes Assessed in Year 1985 o I` o c If c ? Gompiere in triplicate if tax reduction and Payable in Year 1986 o Z l o exceeds S300;otherwise complete in L` Z)U Z (� duplicate.Please print or rvpe. Applicant's Name School District No. Date of ADoitcatnon City of Shakopee 720 2,/26/86 Street Aooress City or Township Zip Coos 129 East First Ave. Shakopee 55379 APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF FACTS: Parcel no. 27-931-003-0 was assessed for roadway benefits in 1985. It was discovered later by an updated map that the parcel did not front the road and therefore had no benefit. APPLICANT'S REQUEST---__ '—l-Abatemen - 0T-11,?_x.77 balance and pay 1986 Dri nci pl e and interest of $135.42 and ,$165.32__respectively for Special Assessments against parcel no. 27-931-003-0 - code 61. AciDlieant s Signature Late NOTE: Minnesota Statutes 1971, Section 609.41 "Whoever in making any statement, ora; or written, which is reouired or authorized by law to be mace as a basis of imposing, reaucing or abating any tax or assessment, intentionally makes any statement as to any material matter which he knows is false may be sentenced,uniess otherwise provided by law,to imprisonment for not more than one year or to oavment of a fine of no,more than•S1,000,or bcth. REPORT OF INVESTIGATION (by County Assessor or City Assessor in certain cities) ),hereby report that I have investigated the statements made in the foregoing application and find the facts to be as follows: Fom, No. 1149 — Pouc6*r Commissiona.of Rwenue Aoeterrlant Form 3 (tormerly Forms 3 end 41 APPLICATION FOR REDUCTION IN ASSESSED VALUATION OF REAL ESTATE For Taxes Assessed in Yea-1985 and Payable in Year 1986 C p Complete in triplicate if tax reduction exceeds 4500; Z �j otherwise compiere in duplicate.Please print or type. ADolicant s Meiling AOoress is Name ity of Shakopee 129 East pir�t �o iPTION OF PROPERTY I City or Township IScnool District No. noress (if different than above) Shakopee 720 i Parcel no. 27-093-003-0, Outlot 3, Valley Mall First Addition i 'SMENT DATA (on Jan. 2 of year of assessment) j Ket Value Exclusive of Structures and Improvements S 107 ,100 Ket Value of All Structures and Improvements S --- al Market Value (line 1 + line 2) S 107 ,100S S 42,840 essed Value R'S DATA (on Jan. 2 of year of assessment) S 71,500 ner's Estimated Market Value S -- al Fire Insurance Carried on Said Property 71,500 e Property Acquired Dorpmhor , 19 84, Purchase price S I of Additions and Improvements since purchase S __ -iis property applicant's homestead? ❑Yes )e of instrument used to convey title: policant's opinion the excessive assessment was due to: property bei ng c a s s i f ed as resi denti al when i t shoul d classified as agricultural . City owns the land pending construction of highway and is .asing it out for farming in the interim. miscommunication iiicant did not secure a correction of said excessive assessment before it had beer, finally equalized because: �tween City and Assessor' s Office CANT'S REQUEST �licant affirms no proceedings of any kind for correct o`the assessment against said property are now Pendine in any court. Applicant eves that this property is assessed hicner than property in the same class and of the same value in this assessment district and therefore jests tnat the assessed valuation be reduced and that the 1arke00value of said property for said year be reduced and that the market value ;aid property for said year be reduced to and fixed at S 7 I Dote Applicants Signature Minnesota Statutes 1971, Section 609.41 Whoever in making^any state ns 2":, Or21 or written,wri ten,EhvCh�i�stf�e OUim�Oo authorized he mows is false may ne Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director h p� Re: Fee Schedule for Scavengers Date: February 20, 1986 Introduction & Background The City has adopted a fee schedule for scavengers (dumping or discharge of waste) of $1 .19/100 gallons for sources within the City and $5 .36/100 gallons for sources outside the City. The designated dumping point was by Public Works. MWCC has gotten involved and is now providing a dumping point in the Blue Lake plant. They have notified haulers where to dump. The dumping point is upstream of the City' s meter and MWCC will adjust our bill for the dumping. The City will need to bill the haulers for dumping for 1986. MWCC will bill in 1987 and thereafter. The cost to the City will be the MWCC rate plus the billing cost. MWCC charges the City $.98/1,000 gallons. The City charges customers @1.22/1,000 gallons plus $3 .00/month. The only effect on the City is the billing process for 1986. Since our lines are not involved and there is a substantial difference between our scavengers rate and what MWCC charges us currently and will charge haulers for 1987, it appears appropriate to adopt a uniform rate closer to what MWCC charges the City. A monthly processing fee also seems appropriate. Alternatives Set rate at: A. Status Quo B. Volume charge of 1. $1.22/1,000 gallons 2. $1 .19/1,000 gallons 3. $ .98/1,000 gallons 4. Other C. Processing (billing) fee 1. $5 .00 per bill 2. $3.00 per bill 3. Other Recommendation Alternative B3 and Cl. Action Requested Move Resolution No. 2523. Gy:mmr RESOLUTION N0. 2523 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2479 ADOPTING THE 1986 FEE SCHEDULE WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has adopted a fee schedule for licenses, permits, services and documents; and WHEREAS, a change in conditions warrant modifying the fee schedule. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that the 1986 Fee Schedule for Scavengers is amended to reflect a change of $.98/1 ,000 gallons or any part thereof plus $5.00 per billing. 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 cJULIUS A. COLLER, II JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT LAW .612-445-12{4 -. 1859-1940 211 WEST FIRST AVENUE SHAHOPEE, MINNESOTA 553Z9 n IDS Memo to: Shakopee City Council and Shakopee Staff From: Julius A. Coller, II,City Attorney Re: Section 10. 61 of the Shakopee City Code entitled "Gambling" Date: February 12, 1986 INTRODUCTION and BACKGROUND Last fall Section 10.61 of the City Code entitled "Gambling" was modified by requiring that licensees of the Charitable Gambling Control Board carry on their activities in Shakopee and are based in the City of Shakopee. However, Subdivision 2 of Section 10.61 of the City Code is still vague in its reference to Service Organizations which are not defined and it does not exactly conform to the State Law. The alternatives are 1. Do nothing 2. Amend Section 10.61 by adopting the attached proposed Ordinance, which I recommend you do. RECOMMENDED ACTION Offer Ordinance No. 189, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 10 entitled "Public Protection, Crimes and Offenses" by Repealing Subdivision 2, Section 10.61 and enacting a new Subdivision 2 as herein Provided and by Adopting by reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 10.99, which among other things, contain penalty provisions, and move its adoption. ORDINANCE NO.-_ 89 Fourth Series An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 10 entitled "Public Protection, Crimes and Offenses" by Repealing Subdivision 2, Section 10.61 and enacting a new Subdivision 2 as herein Provided and by Adopting by reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 10.99, which amoung other things, contain penalty provisions. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I: REPEAL Shakopee City Code Section 10.61 entitled "Gambling" is hereby amended by repealing Subdivision 2 thereof. SECTION II: Shakopee City Code Chapter 1.0 is hereby amended by adding a new subdivision 2 to Section 10.61 entitled "Gambling" as follows: Subd 2 Unlawful act - It is unlawful to operate, conduct or sell gambling unless it is lawful gambling and then only if it is operated, conducted or sold by any fraternal, religious, veterans or other non-profit organization, which carries on its activities in and is located and based in the City of Shakopee. SECTION III: Adopted by reference Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code including Penalty for Violation" and Section 10.99 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 adoptiong, signing and attestation of this Ordinance it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in session of the Shakopee City Council held this day of , 1986. Mayor of The City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 12th day of February, 1986. City Attorney DISCUSSION MARCH AND APRIL MEETINGS FOR 1986 Marc4 1986 Regular Session March 20, 1986 Joint Meeting With Planning Commission re : Racetrack Study r Marc ,� 25, 1986 Regular Session (instead of March 18th) Apri" 1986 Regular Session April 8 -1986 Joint Meeting with ICC Apri 15 , 1986 Regular Session OR April 1 , 1986 No meeting April 8, 1986 Regular Meeting April 15 , 1986 Joint Meeting with ICC April 22 , 1986 Regular Meeting NOTE : April has five Tuesdays! /10.) DISCUSSION MARCH AND APRIL MEETINGS FOR 1986 March 4, 1986 Regular Session March 20, 1986 Joint Meeting With Planning Commission re : Racetrack Study March 25, 1986 Regular Session (instead of March 18th) April 1 , 1986 Regular Session April 8, 1986 Joint Meeting with ICC April 15, 1986 Regular Session OR April 1 , 1986 No meeting April 8, 1986 Regular Meeting April 15 , 1986 Joint Meeting with ICC April 22, 1986 Regular Meeting NOTE : April has five Tuesdays!