HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/17/1987 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: February 12 , 1987
1. The VFW has provided the City with a new American flag to
replace the one outside of City Hall.
2 . The American Legion is applying for renewal of their
gambling license for 1987 . They meet the requirements of
the Shakopee City Code.
3 . Tom Brownell, Scott County Attorney Jim Terwedo and I meet
with staff at St. Francis Regional Medical Center to review
their new policy requiring police officers to assume
responsibility for charges incurred for patients they bring
to the emergency room who don' t sign the proper
authorization form. At the meeting the hospital staff
clarified that they would drop police officers and have
Scott County Human Services assume responsibility for the
charges . They also clarified that their policy applied to
non-life threatening cases only. Tom and I will bring back
a final draft policy for Council as an informational item.
4. Attached is an update from the City Attorney on the status
of the Halo 2nd Addition default of the developers agreement
regarding the park dedication. There is currently a
judgment against the two parcels which will have to be
satisfied prior to replatting. Also any lending institution
would require it to be satisfied if money were ever borrowed
to acquire it. Mr. Coller suggests that a second
alternative would be for the City to force payment which
would likely mean we would become part owner of the
property. He does not recommend this action and it does not
provide the City any additional security that the judgment
against the parcels already provide.
5 . Attached is a memorandum from Rod Krass updating the City on
the status of the right-of-way acquisition from Valleyfair
for the improvement of the intersection of Valley Park Drive
and the new service road.
6 . Attached is a letter from Allen Frechette, Environmental
Health Manager, regarding old dumps located on property in
Shakopee.
7 . Attached is a response from the Highway Department turning
down our suggestion that the traffic lights at Highway 101
and Valley Park Drive be put in a flashing mode during the
off season. I also asked Ken if Mn/DOT had reviewed the
possibility of covering the traffic signals. He said Mn/DOT
would be more opposed to covering the signals than allowing
them to flash. If any Councilmember wishes to pursue this
idea please contact me.
8 . Attached are the Summary of Findings of the League of
Minnesota Cities City Budget Survey.
9 . Attached is the building activity report for the month
ending January 31 , 1987 .
10 . Attached are the minutes of the February 5 , 1987 meeting of
the Shakopee Coalition.
11 . Attached are the minutes of the November 12, 1986 meeting of
the Industrial Commercial Commission.
12 . Attached are the minutes of the January 5 , 1987 meeting of
the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
13 . Attached is the Revenue and Expenditure report as of January
31 , 1987 .
14 . Please read the underlined portion of the attached New
Housing Update Newsletter.
15 . I will discuss this fiscal disparities information at the
meeting Tuesday. The AMM Revenue Committee has approved a
new fiscal disparities formula that benefits 10 members of
the Municipal Caucus and is neutral or slightly detrimental
to 8 members.
16 . Attached is an informational memo from Barry Stock regarding
the Scott County Solid Waste Master Plan.
JKA/jms
JULIus A. COLLER, II
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT I.AW 612-445-1244
1869-1940 211 WEST FIRST AVENUE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA. ;
55329
February 9, 1987 Y 10,
r
v
Mr. John K. Anderson, City Administrator
and
Members of the Shakopee City Council
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Gentlemen:
In re: District Court File 83-06169
City of Shakopee vs
Halo Development, Burmahi Inc. ,
Halo Investment, and Countryside
Recreation
Pursuant to authority and direction of the Shakopee City Council the above
was instituted in District Court. The above matter came on for hearing January
17, 1986. The action was dismissed as to Countryside Recreation but as to
the other three defendants judgment was entered on January 17, 1986 in the
sum and amount of $4,314.98 against all of the defendants except Countryside
Recreation. This defendant was dismissed.
No effort has been made to pay off the judgment by Halo or Burmahi and the
purpose of this letter is to inquire whether the Council wishes this matter
to ride or should the lien the judgment gives us on Lots 2 and 3, Block 1,
Halo 2nd Addition, be levied on forcing payment or the City could bid in
defendants interest in the two lots in question. Please advise.
Just to refresh your memory, the action was based upon the default/Refendant
to live up to the Developer's Agreement whish they signed with the City.
Very truly yours,
Ju s A. Coller, II
Shakopee City Attorney
JAC/nh. '2
LAW OFFICES
KID RASS & MONROE
CHARTERED
Phillip R. Krmss
Dennis L. Monroe Marschall Road Business Center
Barry K. Meyer 327 Marschall Road
Trevor R. Walsten P.O. Box 216
Elizabeth B. McLaughlin
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Bryan Wm. Huber
Susan L. Estill Telephone 445.5080
Diane M. Carlson
February 4, 1987
Kent A. Carlson. CPA
RECEIVED
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator FEB 5 1987
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue CITY OF SMAKOPEE
Shakopee, MN 55379
RE: Valley Fair Evaluation
Our File No. 1- 1373-184
Dear John:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Appraisal done for Valley Fair by
Pete Patchin. I did not include the Addenda which was rather long and consisted
of documents we already have including our feasibility report for this project.
As you can see, the numbers done by Pete and Bob Strachota are not that
exceedingly different but for the alleged severance damages. This is especially
true when you consider that Pete valued the marquee as a total loss whereas Bob
simply included the costs of moving it. Valley Fair has apparenty decided they
do not want the marquee moved but rather wish to have compensation for its
loss.
At my meeting Friday with Larry Griffith, Valley Fair' s attorney, he
mentioned the fact that Valley Fair had applied for a variance to place their
new neon sign along the highway. I know nothing about that variance but reading
between the lines, I got the distinct impression that Valley Fair believes that
their ability to place such a sign near the highway will in some respects
diminish the severance loss they allege due to the marquee being taken.
Quite frankly, I think the severance damages are nonsense, and I think
Pete Patchin is going to have an exceedingly difficult time supporting an
assumption that one percent of Valley Fair's customers are going to turn around
and go home because the marquee is missing or because there is a traffic jam in
front of their entrance. No one gears up for the "biggest day around" and then
goes home because of a line of cars or because they cannot find the place.
At any rate, I am recommending that Bob Strachota and his team take a
look at Patchin' s numbers assuming the total loss of the marquee and
surrounding blacktop and such and see if Pete is in the ballpark. If you do not
think this is appropriate please let Bob and I know right away, as I am copying
him with this letter. I am also copying Thomas W. Lyons , President of Prairie
House Restaurants so that he knows what is happening.
Mr. John Anderson
Page —2—
February 4, 1987
Mr. Griffith informed me he would be meeting with Walt Wittmer of
Valley Fair this week to try and come up with a realistic number as I indicated
to him that the severance damage number was simply not going to fly. Mr. Griffith
informed me they would be happy to send us a new temporary easement as the one
we received last year expired December 31, and I told him we would appreciate
that. The 90 days has expired however and we need merely deposit 3/4 of the
amount set forth in our appraisal with the district court to have rights to
proceed even if we did not receive another temporary easement. By copy of this
letter, I am suggesting that Ken Ashfeld, the City Engineer, proceed with his
plans this spring including the demolition of the marquee. I would let Walt
Wittmer know ahead of time when we are coming in to remove the marquee.
Please call should you have any questions.
Very truly your.&,
KRASS &%MONROf HARTERED
"hi -Ip R. Krass
PRK:jl
Enclosure
cc: Robert J. Strachota w/enclosure
Thomas W. Lyons w/enclosure
Ken Ashfeld
SCOTT COUNTY
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FtEC�IVa
COURT HOUSE A102
SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1393 (612)-445-7750. Ext.177 EB 4 19��
. January 27, 1987 Y o� SNAKQpE�
Mr. Wil Meierhofer CST
ERA Preferred Realty
213 SE First Street
Little Falls, MN 56345
Dear Mr. Meierhofer:
This letter is in response to your request for an evaluation of
the old dumps located on property leased by Mr. Verlin Hanson
(Hanson' s Ranch) in Sections 12 and 13 of Township 115 N, Range 22
West. On January 20 , 1987, I inspected three old dump locations on
this property with Mr. Verlin Hanson (who accompanied me at my
request) . According to Mr. Hanson, these dumps were filled by a Mr.
Ed Drury in the 1950s and early 1960s. Apparently Mr. Drury ran a
fleet of garbage trucks in this area and disposed of the waste he
collected on this property. I do not know how much waste was
collected or what it consisted of. Mr. Drury should be , contacted for
more information on this.
I have contacted the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
and notified them of these dumps. I will be arranging a second
inspection of the dumps with an MPCA official this spring. At that
time we will determine what remedial action needs to be taken. I did
notice that some waste had not been covered, and that those areas
which were covered may need additional soil and grading . Monitoring
wells may need to be installed to determine if there has been any
impact on ground water.
Under no circumstances should the dump areas be considered for
building construction, at least not until more is known about the
waste in them. Old dumps often result in ground water contamination
and generation of methane and other gasses. Construction in the
vicinity of these dump sites should, therefore, also be avoided.
I have enclosed two aerial photographs. The one taken in 1964
shows (highlighted) those areas I believe from my inspection to have
been dump sites. A comparison of the 1951 aerial shows that these
areas were wet and grassy. It was impossible from the brief
investigation I made to accurately delineate the location of the dump
sites. Test borings and surveys would provide more accurate
locational information.
I would appreciate it if you would pass this information on to
your client (s) should they decide to purchase this property. I have
also copied the current owners on this to inform them that I will be
investigating further this spring as stated above.
Sincerely,
Allen Frechette
Environmental Health Manager
cc: Larry Christiansen, MPCA
Wickes Co. Inc.
John Anderson, Shakopee Administrator
An Equal Opportunity Employer
e��NN�rq
'i
o 1 Minnesota
Department of Transportation
'° e District 5
sy(�. P� Golden Vall11P2055 No. ey, Drive
of Ta Y, Minnesota 55422
(613) x�t5a�3x4a1
593-8544
January 2, 1987
Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: C.S. 7005 (T.H. 101)
Valley Park Drive
Dear Mr. Ashfeld:
We have reviewed your request of December 22 to place the traffic signal
on T.H. 101 at Valley Park Drive in the flashing mode when Valleyfair and
Canterbury Downs are closed. Although we realize that cross traffic and
turning volumes are very light at this time of year, we believe that the
signal should be operated in the normal mode for the following reasons:
The signal is fully traffic actuated and rests on green for the
mainline in the absence of traffic on the cross street or left
turn lanes. Green time for the cross street and left turn lanes
is set to correspond to the amount of traffic in those lanes, e.g.,
if there is only one vehicle waiting to make a left turn, only a
few seconds of green time will be displayed for that movement.
Furthermore, if mainline traffic volume is heavy, the mainline
green will always be extended to its maximum programmed time limit
before the green phases for the cross street and turn lanes are
actuated. It should also be noted that the mainline green will be
displayed immediately with the left turn arrow in one direction if
there is no traffic in the left turn lane for the other direction.
While some delay in mainline flow will occur because of cross and
left turn traffic, all measures to minimize this delay have been
taken as explained above.
[I should point out that there may be occasional instances where
the mainline is stopped even when there are no vehicles in the
turn lanes or on the cross street. Because the railroad track
parallel to T.H. 101 is so close to the intersection, a preemption
device has been built into the signal system. The preemption is
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Ken Ashfeld
January 2, 1987
Page Two
activated when a train approaches and it automatically provides a
green light for Valley Park Drive (whether or not any vehicles have
been detected) to help assure that no vehicles are stopped on the
track.
Another situation which we have observed that causes the mainline
to be stopped in one (or possibly in both) directions is the failure
of some drivers to wait for the green arrow in the left turn lane.
These drivers make their turn when a gap occurs in the traffic flow
in the other direction. However, since the vehicle was detected,
the green arrow is eventually displayed which requires stopping
traffic flow in the other direction. It is quite likely that many
of the drivers in that flow will have arrived well after the left-
turning vehicle is out of sight thus implying that their red light
is being displayed for no reason. The city may wish to consider
enforcement to address this situation. The State Patrol has already
been informed by this office. ]
- Driver expectation is a major consideration in traffic engineering.
Changing traffic control modes at an intersection is not consistent
with the driver expectation premise. Violation of expectation can
lead to erractic maneuvers such as sudden stops and lane changes
which, in turn, increase the potential for accidents.
- There has been a trend to eliminate the flashing of signal systems
at night. Although some of the same justifications used for
seasonal flashing, e.g. , light volumes, can be argued for night
flashing, our district does not flash any of our systems at night.
- The westbound double left turn lane would be expected to be a
problem in the flashing mode. In effect, the left turn operation
in the flashing mode would be equivalent to the "permissive" left
turn used at many intersections on divided highways where the
left turn is permitted on the through green (in the absence of a
separate left turn signal) or on the through green after the green
arrow phase has been terminated. (The latter is often covered by
a sign stating "LEFT TURN ON GREEN MUST YIELD.") Our district
used to have several permissive double left turn installations;
however, they proved to be very accident prone and we have been
converting them all to protected left turns only.
Therefore, we believe it would be necessary to close the inside
left turn lane on the westbound roadway at Valley Park Drive
when the signal was placed in the flashing mode. This would
require the placement of barricades or other devices.
While this is certainly feasible, these devices do cause problems
during snow and ice removal operations and our maintenance office
prefers that we avoid their use during the winter. However,
based on our accident experience, we do not feel that we could
allow the turn to operate in the double quasi permissive con-
figuration.
Ken Ashfeld
January 2, 1987
Page Three
- There would be a number of calls from the public asking why we
have not "repaired" the signal. While we could easily explain
why the signal was placed in the flashing mode, we believe that
the general public perception is that a flashing signal indicates
a malfunction.
- There may also be some negative reaction to the expenditure of
public funds for a traffic signal that is used only part time.
There are a number of locations throughout our district where
local governments and citizens are urgently requesting the in-
stallation of signals. We have had to deny many of these re-
quests because of our limited funding situation. We would, of
course, be able to explain to those who ask the justification
for the installation and the seasonal flashing mode as well as
the fact that local funding was used for the signal.
While we do not necessarily totally reject the seasonal flashing mode,
we do not believe it is necessary or appropriate at Valley Park Drive
given the above. Perhaps you may wish to consider an independent study
that would more specifically identify the impacts based on actual opera-
tional characteristics and traffic volumes. We would be willing to re-
view our decision if such additional information were submitted.
Sincerely,
J. S. Katz,
District Traffic Engineer
JSK:pl
3
January 22, 1987
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES
CITY BUDGET SURVEY
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
* According to League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) City Budget Survey findings, city property taxes will
rise more rapidly in 1987 than city spending, reflecting mainly the loss of $40 million in federal general
revenue sharing funds and insufficient state aid.
In 1987,average city spending will rise a modest 3.9% (compared to 1986), while average city tax levies will
rise 7.9%, more than double the spending rate. City tax levies are rising more rapidly than spending because
cities are being forced to raise their property taxes in order to make up for cuts in federal aid and for
insufficient state aid. Any future reductions in state property tax relief programs, particularly local govern-
ment aid (LGA) will worsen this trend. The trend toward greater reliance on property taxes by cities began
in 1980, intensified in 1981-82 with the sharp cuts in state aid to local governments,and has continued in
recent years with the state's continued economic and budgetary problems and federal cutbacks.
CHART A
CITY SPENDING AND TAXING INCREASES,
1986-1987
10
7.9%
PERCENT
INCREASE
5-
3.9%
0
FL--
CITY CITY
SPENDING PROPERTY
TAXES
SOURCE: LMC CIT7 BUDGET SURVEY, JANUARY, 1987.
SEE APPENDIX TABLES 2 AND 6 FOR DATA.
W-4
Among the cities surveyed, 68% cited the loss of federal general revenue sharing as one of the top reasons ~
for increasing their levies; 35% also identified an insufficient amount of local government aid (LGA) to
cover their rising costs.
CHART B
FACTORS* CONTRIBUTING TO LEVY INCREASES FOR ALL CITIES
1986-1987
75
68%
50
PERCENT
OF
CITIES
SELECTING 35%
FACTOR
25
0
LOSS OF LGA NOT
FEDERAL SUFFICIENT
REVENUE TO COVER
SHARING RISING COSTS
* SELECTED BY CITIES AS ONE OF TOP THREE FACTORS.
SOURCE: LMC CITY BUDGET SURVEY, JANUARY, 1987.
SEE APPENDI%.TABLE 7 FOR DATA.
f�
W-5 (>
* City spending is not rising because of decisions for major expansion of services or programs; less than
8% of the cities surveyed cited this factor as contributing to their spending increase. On average, 1987 city
spending will rise a modest 3.9% according to the LMC City Budget Survey.
The rising costs of delivering the same services was identified as increasing the budgets of 58% of the cities
surveyed; 56% cited rising liability insurance premiums, which rose an average 163% over the 1984-86
period.
CHART C
FACTORS* CONTRIBUTING TO SPENDING INCREASES
FOR ALL CITIES, 1986-1987
60
58% 56%
PERCENT
OF 40
CITIES
SELECTING
FACTOR
20
8%
O RISING SERVICE/
INSURANCE
COSTS, SAME COSTS PROGRAM
SERVICES EXPANSION
* SELECTED BY CITIES AS ONE OF TOP THREE FACTORS.
SOURCE: LMC CITY BUDGET SURVEY, JANUARY, 1987.
SEE APPENDIX TABLE 3 FOR DATA.
W-6
* Cities are accountable for their spending and taxing decisions.
Some people have asserted that the state's property tax relief programs (LGA and homestead credit) have
stimulated local government spending by lessening the local tax increases necessary to support such spend-
ing. The LMC City Budget Survey sheds some light on this so-called "accountability" issue.
1. City property taxes are rising twice as fast as city spending. In fact, according to State Auditor's data,
city taxes have outpaced spending in the last several years. The loss of federal general revenue sharing and
the failure of LGA to keep pace with cities' rising costs are contributing to this trend. For the "account-
ability"argument to have any factual basis, city spending should be rising faster than taxes.
2. City spending is not rising due to expansion of services or programs. Less than 8% of all cities and only
13% of cities with large (over 15%) spending increases cited such expansion of services and programs as a
factor in their spending increases.
3. State property tax relief programs (LGA and homestead credit) do not seem to stimulate city spending
or taxing. Only 3% of cities surveyed indicated that higher homestead credit amounts was a factor in
their levy increases and less than 4% cited increased LGA or property tax revenue as factors in their
spending increases.
CHART D
FACTORS* INFLUENCING LEVY OR SPENDING INCREASES
-----LEVY INCREASES------- -----SPENDING INCREASES-----
75
68%
58%
PERCENT
OF 50
CITIES
SELECTING
FACTOR
25
42
31
0
LOSS OF INCREASED RISING MORE LGA
FEDERAL HOMESTEAD COSTS, OR PROPERTY
REVENUE CREDIT FROM SAME TAX REVENUE
SHARING LEVY RISE SERVICES
* SELECTED AS ONE OF TOP THREE FACTORS.
SOURCE: LMC CITY BUDGET SURVEY, JANUARY, 1987.
SEE APPENDIX TABLES 3 6 7 FOR DATA.
W-7
4. Over half (53%) of the cities surveyed cited a concern about tax burdens on homeowners, suggesting that
this is an important factor when cities decide their spending and taxing levels. A significant portion
�— (41%) of the cities surveyed indicated that both meeting the community's needs and the burden of taxes
on homeowners were among the top three factors influencing their budget and levy decisionmaking.This
was the most prevalent combination of factors chosen by the cities surveyed. Selection of this combina-
tion of factors demonstrates that while cities strive to meet their communities' needs, they are also
conscious of the tax burdens being imposed on their residents.
The total amount of LGA provided a city is also significant in city budget/levy decisionmaking because
LGA can be a large portion of a city's total revenue stream. About 48% of the cities surveyed indicated
the amount of LGA was an important revenue factor in setting their levy and budget.
CHART E
FACTORS* INFLUENCING CITY BUDGET & LEVY DECISIONS
75 741
�- PERCENT 531
481
OF 50
CITIES
SELECTING 411
FACTOR
25 241
0
PROVIDE TAX TAX COMMUNITY AMOUNT
SERVICES BURDEN BURDEN NEEDS OF LGA
COMMUNITY ON ON & TAX PROVIDED
NEEDS HOMES BUSINESS BURDEN
* SELECTED AS ONE OF TOP THREE FACTORS.
SOURCE: LMC CITY BUDGET SURVEY, JANUARY, 1987.
SEE APPENDIX TABLE 10 FOR DATA.
W-8
How Cities would Cope with a Loss of LGA
Cities were also questioned about the effect of a potential loss of state LGA payments. Over 82% of the
cities surveyed indicated that LGA was such a significant portion of their revenue bases that they would
have to both cut city services and raise taxes in order to make up for a loss of LGA. Only 10% indicated
that they received such a small amount of that it would have little or no effect on their budgets and taxes.
CHART F
HOW CITIES WOULD COPE WITH LOSS OF LGA
100
827
75
PERCENT
OF
CITIES
SELECTING
OPTION
50
25
102
0
BOTH CUT LITTLE OR
SERVICES NO EFFECT
AND RAISE
TARES
W-9
* Large spending increases are more a problem for smaller cities. For the 13% of cities experiencing large
spending increases of 15% or more, 98% are smaller cities with populations under 10,000. Their large
spending increases have less effect on total statewide city spending since they account for only 24%of the
spending of all cities in the state.
Smaller cities, given their relatively limited budgets and revenue bases often experience large year-to-year
increases in expenditures, particularly if they must finance an infrastructure project, capital improvement
or incur an unexpected and large expense in one year. Among cities with 15% or more spending increases,
53% cited the increased costs of a new infrastructure project, new development, or newly-issued bonds as
contributing to their above average increases.
* Approximately one-fourth (24%) of the cities surveyed are experiencing either a decline or no change
in their expenditures.
Over half (53%) of the cities with spending decreases cited the decision to delay an improvement project or
capital expenditure as one of the top three reasons for their spending decline. Over one-third (39%) cited a
decision to reduce city services or programs and over one-quarter (27%) were sensitive to a decline in their
revenue sources, either a decline in their property tax base or insufficient local government aid.
CHART G
FACTORS* CONTRIBUTING TO SPENDING DECREASES
1986-1987
60
531
40 391
PERCENT
OF
CITIES
SELECTING
FACTOR 271
20
0
DELAY REDUCTION IN DECLINE IN
IMPROVEMENT, SERVICES/ REVENUE
CAPITAL ERP. PROGRAMS SOURCES
* SELECTED BY CITIES AS ONE OF TOP THREE FACTORS.
SOURCE: LMC CITY BUDGET SURVEY, JANUARY, 1987.
SEE APPENDIX TABLE 5 FOR DATA.
SHAKOPEE COALMON
I l X) Fast Fourth Avenue • Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
lollild`d(N 19h? SHAKOPEE COALITION
Meeting - February 5, 1987
The meeting was called to order at 7:05 a.m. in Citizens State Bank Community Room.
Members present: George Muenchow (Shakopee Community Services) , Joan Salter (Food Shelf) ,
Brian Norris (Citizens State Bank) , Mary Sullivan (Community Action) , Jerry Knutson
(MCF/SHK) , Barry Stock (City Of Shakopee) , Barbara Colhapp (Area Learning Center) ,
Kay Fiedler (VFW 4046 Auxiliary) , John Anderson (City of Shakopee) , Claude Kolb (Knights
of Columbus) , Duane Wermerskirchen (Shakopee Jaycees) , Sr Jo Lambert (St. Francis Regional
Medical Center) , Karen Martin (Chamber of Commerce) and Barb Richardson (St. Francis
Regional Medical Center.
Food Shelf Report - Joan Salter
Jan. 87 - 305 families
Scott County - 197 families - 22,869 meals
Carver County - 108 families - 14,089 meals
over 43,000 lbs of food
Food Share is coming up in the month of March. This should help replenish food supplies.
They are expecting a big turnout. Volunteers are needed to pick up food from the various
food drop off sites. Drop off sites will be at the three major grocery stores and
at the two major banks. There will also be money cans in three locations and hopefully
many others. Flyers advertising the Food Share program will be distributed at the
March Coalition meeting.
Joan also mentioned that many corporations or organizations offer to match the amount
of food collected or some dollar amount.
Volunteer Issue - Brian Norris distributed a copy of the news story that ,appeared
in the Shakopee Valley News announcing our volunteer column. The first column is
scheduled to appear Feb. 11. If anyone has any suggestions for stories or information
on their organization they should get the facts to Joan Salter at 445-6324.
Economic Development - John Anderson mentioned three possible new residential projects:
1. County Rd 16 - Sr Citizen Community - One story 4-plex format.
2. Residential Subdivision in former Roberts Pit Area - Approximately 400 lots.
3. O'Dowd Lake Golf Course Residential
Chamber Of Commerce passed the Hotel/Motel Tax.
Planning two events - (April) Log Rolling/Chain Saw Sculpture
Constructing new building - completion date targeted for June 1.
Chamber is also working on a Major Winter Sporting Activity for 1987/1988.
Community Leadership Workshop on February 10, 1987. Reservations are appreciated.
Volunteer Of The Month - (February) Lois Weckman
(March) Bill Jellison
Coordinator still needed for - Family Needs
Community Needs
Mr. Anderson questioned how the residents in Scott County felt about the Racetracks
position with the legislature and their request to reduce the tax on the betting handle.
Several people stated that most people are not very sympathetic with the Racetracks
position, but the facts need to be known. Mr. Norris suggested that a spokesman from
the racetrack would be welcome to appear at our next meeting to explain the Racetracks
position.
Barb Richardson from St. Francis mentioned that there were still Minnesota Valley Games
available for purchase. She also mentioned that the games were available wholesale to
other organizations who may be interested in selling them for fundraising purposes.
Mr. Stock gave a report on the local Dial-A-Ride Service. Over 3000 riders in January.
Service continues to grow. Possibly expanding service to weekends.
Joan Salter requested that if there are changes in the leadership of the organization
to please let her know. Mailing becomes costly when many of the addresses are wrong.
Duane Wermerskirchen suggested that perhaps a directory listing the phone number of
the various organizations could be put in the paper on a regular basis.
Mary Sullivan stated that she contacted the newspaper on their type of idea. The paper
responded stating an interest if funding sources could be found. Discussion ensued.
Norris stated that he would get some prices on what it would cost to do this type of
program.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 A.M.
Respectfully Submitted,
Barry Stock, Acting Secty.
i
L
Page 6 Shakopee Valley News February 4,7987
So, you Want to learp about..
Volunteer column, offering chances
PRECOLLEGE CAREER CHOICES:"Tb First Step"worl
to help, will debut next week INTERVIEWING,
College;Feb.12,6-HELP: $1
0;call 830 9350.
INTERVIEWING, RESUME HELP: Two classes on job
Palms? The
rtunities for resents to volunteer. Normandale Community College —"Sweaty Resume,"Fel
Volunteers are essential to many' Po idFeb. 11,6:30-9 m., and Writing a Winning
Shakopee-area organizations. Without Agencies and organizations which are each;call 830-9350.
much necessary week class for 1
them, ary work would looking for volunteers will submit their ADULT CHILDREN OF ALCOHOLICS: -
never get done and countless numbers requirements to a coordinator who will �
have the traits of adult children of alcoholics sponsored by r I
of people would be without essential gather all of that information and Center in Burnsville; Wednesdays, Feb.;ll-March 18, 7-9
services.
prepare the column. Center,Burnsville;$25;call 892-2660 by Feb.4 to register.
Almost always, residents of the That coordinator is Cleo Dockin, an PERSONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL. OBJECTIVES:
community offer their services on a inmate at the women's prison in Workshop"; Feb.9,6:30-9:30 p.m.; Hennepin Technical Ce
voluntary basis to make -sure the Shakopee.She volunteered for the duty. Eden prairie;$30 fee;call 553-5653 or 940150. resusc
various agencies which require their All requests for information to be in- CPR: ThrQe-session course on cardiopulmonary
help are able to accomplish their im- eluded in the "Helping Hands" column Fairview Ridges Hospital and the American Red Cross;F
portant tasks. should be mailed to Dockin in care of 9:30 p.m; Ridges Education Center,Burnsville; $23; g :
The Shakopee Coalition, in con- the Minnesota Correctional Facility- 9;call 892-2135. f
Valley Shakopee, P.O. Box 7,Shakopee, MN SMALL BUSINESS TAXES: Two-session class; starts FE
junction with the Shakopee
News, next week will initiate a new 55379. Hennepin Technical Centers South Campus,Eden Prairie;$
column with a single focus — volun- Anyone who has questions about the SMALL BUSINESS ADVERTISING: Two-evening semina:
teers. The column will be titled project or suggestions for the column 9:30 m.; Hennepin Technical Centers South Camp
"Helping Hands"and will be published should not call Dockin, but rather 5653.P A
every other week. contact Joan Salter of the Shakopee WOMEN IN BUSINESS: Five-part series for women who
The column will primarily list op- Coalition at 445-6324. businesses and are interested in learning and understands
p, <
analyze and operate a business to be successful;Feb.18,6:
Technical Centers South Campus,
Eden Prairie;$44;call 55
Ii 1;
GOING INTO BUSINESS: Feb.17,8:30 am.-3 p.m.; Amer
max ;'
Paul; $9 in advance,$10 at the door,including all materia
< . 5000 �,
M FINANCIAL PLANNING: Course designed to enable
financial objectives and maintain their standard of living
Tuesdays,Feb.17-March 10; Normandale Community Coll
call 830.9350.
<
People
"V Piano students Kristin Beise, Mat- Teachers o
thew Beise,Beth Crider,Kristy Crider, community Co
Feb. 7. Winne
Tammy Dahlke, Mary Melchior,
Heather Giesen Anthony Kuczynski Jannie Mertz, Mark Muenzhuber and contest finals a
Ashlee Thornton will compete in the 14. The Studer
District Preliminary Piano Contest Philipp of Shak
Eleymentarstudents win sponsored by the Minnesota Music
recentpatriotism contest
Two Shakopee elementary school Pearson. Each of these students won Give blood to Red cross nE
students not only won their respective $10. __
m art and In addition, Giesen won $7.50 for her blood," said .
local contests in a patriotism
essay contest,both went on m place at first at district and$5 for her second at Superstitions notwithstanding, Scott Scott County l
the district level of competition and one state. Kuczynski received $5 for his County officials are hoping that Friday the thirteenth of February "In Scott Cc
placed at the state level. . second at district. is a lucky a donor in or
Heather Giesen, a third-grader at Editor's Note: The following is the day can only comt
Sweeney Elementary School, won the winning essay submitted by Anthony That's when the Red Cross Blood- Y
,--I ,,,,i,,..,.,rt ,.,,,,tort fnr kinrjerearten v..,,.,..-AA
mobile will make its next visit to _ .The goal fog
,
Minutes
Industrial Commercial Commission
Shakopee, Minnesota November 12, 1986
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bud Berens
Jane DuBois
Al Furrie, Chairman
Donald Koopman
Jim O'Neill
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Keane
John Manahan
STAFF PRESENT: Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director
Chairman Al Furrie called the meeting to order at 5: 37 p.m. and
the roll call was taken.
Minutes
On a motion by Jane DuBois, seconded by Donald Koopman, the
minutes of the September 10 , 1986 meeting were approved.
Star Cities Program Update
Mr. Kraft presented an update on the Star Cities Program
application. Specific comments related to both the industrial
visitation program and the labor survey segments of the Star
Cities Program.
Mr. O'Neill indicated that the members of the ICC visited every
industry in Shakopee two years ago,and he questioned whether
there was a summary available on this. Mr. Kraft indicated he
would look into this matter.
ICC Reorganization
The ICC questioned what the Councils response was to the
potential reorganization of the Industrial Commercial Commission.
Mr. Kraft indicated that his opinion that the Council was
supportive of the reorganization concept of the ICC.
Chairman Furrie questioned whether the City Council had done any
thing to solicit new members for the ICC. It was the general
consensus of the ICC that it was time to facilitate the
reorganization of the commission and to move ahead with the
establishment of new programs.
Mr. O'Neill questioned whether the various committees of the ICC
would be needed for the Star Cities Program and the Chairman
indicated that the committee structure, as proposed, would not be
necessary. Commission members also discussed the five year plans
and the actions taken by the City Council on them. The ICC also
indicated they would like to have input on the appointment of new
members to their group. Mr. Kraft indicated that this was
consistent with the City Council' s wishes on this particular
subject.
Potential new ICC members include the following:
Wally Bishop
Frank Reid
Lee Hennen
Gary Laurent
Dave Moonen
Mark Kuchenmeister
Jack Hanson
Terry O'Toole
Bob Loonan
Pete Kroyer
Dick Stoks
Chairman Furrie indicated that it was appropriate for the
committee' s to be established at this time and that the roles
needed to be clarified. Mr. Kraft indicated that the City
Council had approved the hiring of a new staff planner effective
March 1, 1987, and that this person would have some
responsibility for working on various ICC programs.
Shakopee Development Corporation
Mr. Berens commented on the recent activities of the Shakopee
Development Commission. At this point the commission is "cashing
out the outstanding stock of it ' s members. The commission also
discussed the positive and negative aspects of establishing a 501
(C) 3 non profit organization. Chairman Furrie indicated that
all that would be needed for the existing group to achieve 501
( C) 3 status would be to have the legal papers filed for tax
exempt status of the existing group. If this were to be done
there would then not be a need to incur significant legal
expenses. If a new corporation where to be formed legal costs
would be much higher. It would then be possible for the ICC to
replace the members of the Board of Directors of the current
Shakopee Development Commission.
Industrial Visitation Program Summary
Mr. Kraft indicated that the Industrial Visitation Program
Summary, when completed would be sent all members of the ICC.
Ms. DuBois then questioned whether ICC members could receive
copies of the City Council minutes. Mr. Kraft indicated that he
would look into this question.
The meeting adjourned at 7: 01 p.m.
Dennis R. Kraft
Recording Secretary
MINUTES
OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular session on
January 5, 1987 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room.
Members present: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Cook and Kephart. Also Manager
Van Hout and Secretary Menden. Liaison Wampach was absent.
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the minutes of the December 1, 1986
regular meeting and the December 8, 1986 special meeting be approved as kept.
Motion carried.
City Treasurer, Greg Voxland was present to discuss a change in the investment
policy for the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. A discussion followed.
The Commission decided to remain with the existing investment policy established by
Resolution each year. Mr. Voxland will provide a report annually on the investment
status.
BILLS READ:
City of Shakopee 20,032.00 i
American Water Works Association 15.00
Athmann Industrial Medical Supply 106.66
A T & T 18.57
Auto Central Supply 85.62
Battery and Tire Warehouse 221.33
B & B Transformer, Inc. 375.00
Burmeister Electric Company 94.56
Burroughs 3,970.26
Carlson Hardware Company 54.10
Champion Auto of Shakopee 25.94
C & H Carpenter 97.95
City of Shakopee 100.00
City of Shakopee 686.16
Clay's Printing Service, Inc. 113.00
Dicks Conoco Station 20.00
Dunnings Hardware, Inc. 10.11
Electronic Center, Inc. 20.83
Environmental Quality Board 184.02
Excel Office Products 34.02
Fargo Manufacturing Company, Inc. 84.90
Glenwood Inglewood 8.95
Goodin Company 47.75
Graybar Electric Co. , Inc. 167.51
Hayden Murphy Equipment Company 693.23
Mary Henderson 28.31
Hennens ICO 13.25
Instrumentation Services, Inc. 158.59
Johnson-Bigler Company, Inc. 383.25
Krass & Monroe Chartered Law Office 87.50
Leef Bros. , Inc. 20.00
Metro Sales, Inc. 302.39
Minnesota Valley Testing Lab, Inc. 34.00
R E Mooney and Associates, Inc. 260.66
Motor Parts Service of Shakopee 20.78
Northern States Power Co. 322,736.67
Northern States Power Co. 332.32
Northern States Power Co. 761.00
Northern Sanitary Supply Co. , Inc. 114.46
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 251.69
Otter Tail Power Company 67.12
E. H Renner Co. 1,107.50
Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 3.30
Rybak Digging and Trenching 375.00
Schoell and Madsen, Inc. 2,896.58
Scott County, Registrar of Titles 60.00
Shakopee Ford 199.43
Shakopee Postmaster 2,500.00
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 375.85
Shakopee Services 22.00
Dean Smith Trenching, Inc. 360.00
Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 218.64
Starks Cleaning Services 80.10
Stemmer Farm and Garden Supply 168.00
Suel Business Equipment 73.88
Total Tool 55.12
Valley Industrial Propane 10.53
Lou Van Hout 74.56
Voss Electric Supply Company 163.20
Jerry Wampach 22.10
Water Products Company 446.74
Winnebago Concrete Products 1,670.00
Woodhill Business Products 754.43
ABM Equipment 27,846.00
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the bills be allowed and ordered
paid. Motion carried.
Mr. Thomas Edman, Edman Builders and Mr. J. O'Brien were present regarding
water service to property at 104 West 3rd Avenue. A discussion followed on the
options available. A letter will be drafted by Manager Van Hout to the planning j
Commission stating the options available to Mr. Edman within the guidelines of the
Shakopee Public Utilities and our recommendations as to the best procedures to
make water available.
A letter from the Shakopee Banj thanking the Shakopee Public Utilities for use
of the building for their fruit storage was acknowledged.
A letter from the American Public Power Association regarding a new advertising
promotion will be perused by Manager Van Hout with a recommendation to follow.
A communication from the American Public Power Association Power Pac Group
was acknowledged. The letter will be placed on file.
A communication from the Riverside community Church was acknowledged and will
be responded to by Secretary Menden.
A letter from Schoell and Madson regarding the remodeling of the Pumphouses
i
#2 and #3 was acknowledged.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook to reject the roof hatches for Pumphouses
#2 and #3 as recommended by Schoell and Madson. A payment to E.L. Prahm Builders
in the amount of $14,247.50 will be made with the payment reflecting a 5% contingency
withholding and $1,000.00 for replacement of the roof hatches. Motion carried.
Manager Van Hout presented the background information regarding the water
service availability for an area East of Co. Rd 83. A discussion followed.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Cook to offer Resolution #311, A Resolution
to Repeal Resolution #300 and Adopt New Personnel Policies for Employees of the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. Ayes: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Kephart,
and Cook. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried.
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kirchmeier to offer Resolution #312, A Resolution
Designating an Official Means of Publication. Ayes: Commissioners Kirchmeier,
Cook and Kephart. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to offer Resolution #313 A
Resolution to Adopt Customer Service Policies for Water. Ayes: Commissioners
Cook, Kephart, and Kirchmeier. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried.
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kirchmeier to offer Resolution #314 A Resolution
to Adopt Watermain and Service Line Specifications. Ayes: Commissioners Kephart,
Kirchmeier and Cook. Nayes: none. Resolution passed. Motion carried.
There were three fire calls for December for a total of 1� man hours.
Commission Secretary Menden reported on a loss time occurance due to a
previous knee injury to Gene Pass now requiring surgery.
The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will
be held on February 2, 1987 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting room.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the meeting be adjourned.
Motion carried.
rbara Menden: o sion Secretary
U o F-ID NFPhM Ln M M N - No co NF
a_ . . . . . . .
co NP Lna+ LU W •a Ln - - o - NP') F0 F
Ln CO - - M
W
U W 1 I I 11 I 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I
< U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N o N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0. Zo0 0 000000hNNll10 o 0000 h 0000000000 0 000Ln000vMO000Po
.<. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ln Ln Oo 0000FP co - ON UI OT F IT Ln 000 co 000 oOhPPW 00 To
No N 000Nc+ oP- NU) PONOW M cd P - 000 h 0m 0MFNN W Foo No
¢ Mo M ooLn T W MPvPM - a+ - h W - oo U) N00 a+ (Uh0oa+ F V OMo co N
F Mll) W lnLn,P FPo Nh- o - hoa F ^- P P oPU1N- - NN N
co w - o o U1 Ln F - - M - co P - P a+ - F N
I o M Ln -- F M -
M - -
1 Q
- O J
0 o C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LL 3 oo 0 ooOooONW hi) OooOoO M 0000000000 0 oo0U)000 'ah000C. 0Q
O O U 0 Ntn - W W UN O 1 - � ooM ID ln - o .
W F- Q 10 In W F P Io 0 r- 10 a+ U) P 10 M N h - N r-
<
Q - %a U) %a M co G+ co a+ N Ln 0
¢ N
W
W
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d? o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a
Z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tt
> Ln In Ln In 000 o 0000000000 o Poo UI coo a+ oo .0 In In 00000 00
W No Cu oOO Ln In o o 0o 000000 In Noo a+ 000 - oi) o0oLo000o0 00
x Mo M 00tH - FP000lnLnoNTN - 00 P Noo W Nh000 ,;000MO o (U
MN W Ln Ln C;U) N W - Ln ho0 N ^- P P oPLn cu N m m N
In W - - M - W P - - P o - F M
00 0 - - M Ln - W M
W -
F-
U
F-
ix
W
O U
Z
a <
w w
Q
x >
F-
w z
D o
z L J
< o o 0 o o o o o o N o w o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W ❑ 00 0 00o00 oNa) FU) Ooo000 M 0000000000 0 oo0Ul000 'aF000000
F- H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . oof") u lll -
o
> U o NU) - WO WU) - N - o
Z6 u W 0FPa OF - ID 0+ Ln MNh - N F
w Ul ID M aD G+ W a+ - N N a+
W
IxN P - h G• F
x
x
D
U W
D
Z
w
W
a!
F-
N
W
p w
U)
� ¢ 2
Un F' ill U') in
V 1_ i. O W w w ❑
F- .n � - V (Jl W W J W LU
Zrn J4) W 0 £ U) x (n U Un ¢ ❑ wLL U w O < UU
❑ w W U) xF- W r- w ., SrnV F- x —
w z ... V' U) N U) �+ W - a_ •+ J O x J LL La > U r- I < >
w d Z x F- W V) Z T w H F•- £ a_ L L L (D !- W < x x Y W S x
a LL Z) — caw - W U X Q� cDz z ❑ < z z w0www ¢ w ¢ sUw
O r.
UX - U) U) JU - L £ W x W Z W U) W - W -ox z > wO W W W L > N illy
Y JF- < ST W M — Jxxa (n w (L — a- U) d a. ifi < W Z < U) < W LL U- U) 7 I W JUI0
< 6a.. 1 a_ U W U) £ J w F- F- Z w (n F F- - £ Z W OF- L I- W C9 UW < YZiIYQ
2 x - U) Z U Z < W W S J < J W • (0 1 -a Z F- << W L < Z m ¢ O Z w " �- 0 0 LL > x - Y a_
U) W x W V W J < L � < a. rjjZ Z < > ❑ �• Ix U. 0 W w - xZ - Q UZ ❑ N O OF- 3 W
U > ❑ x J U F- m V' r9 V x V O 7 w O 0 x O < 0 F- 3 w S x F- > ¢ F- W ¢ < W W W ❑ L 3 D x
LL W U) W LL — - F- < Z Z - W -a - m U Z W c C7 W 2 0 < O LL D > w x 2 L LL x W WD
O 0 W J J x J W - Z x J a_ x F- - U) F- W W w >- V V' >- - W W V 0 0 0 i Z x0 V 2 W
❑ < U) Y O O x 0 ❑ < x f- W - J Z W J 0 U V W J J F- w x w Z x Z 2 W W H < 3 J ❑ . W
>- \ U w U d 0 Q J J L S W V W U U W F- < W - - H - - Z x W J -
F- F- Z U) X ¢ O W Z ca O - O V J 3 W x U) V u7 V < U E J J < > an O (a r J £ ❑ c7 ca < U) J < F- O 0 W u) a:
0 Z WJ- < x — w - - OD J w w w F- - O - - F- 0000 W ZD W - F-
V d r9 LL F- f- J M W U D_ M a_ L 3 0 W 0 £ 0 £ J 0 J S a. 0- 0 U £ V < - > < - w W a_ < 0 a_ X N a_ -3 E U)
O
F ❑ U - �L r - iUM � tnNMPln � tiaJ o o - + o nJ AlM 'a' � t`- o �aF U) a+ 0 - NMPNo - N v
O ZU - N O - - MMMN) MMnwo10 iF NNNNNMf'1Mvv 0.000 - - - - - - NNNiJN
a, d <
ID In * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - t MMMMMMMMMM # NVI UI V) ln W W NUI In V) U) ln In Ll
- LL MM 7F I'1MMMM1'11') MMMMMMMMM • MMMMMMMMMM + h'1 f•1 I"1MM1"11'11") 1") MMMMMM
N H
U o o N N N 0 o, N M ^ co
a
o W M M M In v m N M
w ^ ^ ^
0 w I I I I I t l l l I I I I t I I I I I I
Q U o o o o o o o o o M M N N 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 In
O. Z O00000000F M o O 000 ^ r- OO O F
Q . . . . . . . . . .
0 0 o O o o v F v It o N co, M O N N r-
-
.- o 0 o o to o W N N O M 0 0 0{n In r-
0 o F M ^ v N O O o ^ F T M M w co
aD v v aD F
co W F F in N N
1 ^ F M N �o F
F-
M I+1
I Q
^ D J
Q o0000000oF F aD CD 0000 0 00 0 LA
O GF N
o00000000N �o M M 0000 o+ 00 0
U o N N to N N ^ �o N N o
t-Q 0 0 F F %0 M (r• M M o
Q ^ In %o o o M N ul o o to
N M of .o 1 ai a o o m
Q ^ N N N o
W
w 4 A
o 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
> 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 Q 0 0 0 o o 0 o 'OTO
v
W o000000ino p o 0 0 00 0 oC0 O
C o0OoFIA ^ o �o0 0 o Ino (n MM o
-^ NtDa] vo• a0 -� M M o �oU1 - vv O - ^5
N ^ - - w u) %a CO F r-
0)
0) M N o 00
w
M
U
CL
z
w
O U
z
CL ¢
M
w x
>
w z
M o
Z f J
Q O O O O O O O O O F F m CO 00 O O O O O O Ln
W m o00000000N �o M M O000 o. 00 O {u
. . . . . . . .
> L) o If1 N In w In - vo N N o
Z Q o+ o e• F F 'V M o. M M o
w M N In o o to
W
a: (Xi N N o 0 a•
w ^ N N N 10
C
D
U W
J
Z
W
W
C
F-
co
W
W
W
LL
m J w D (n
V7 Q O U w
W Z O W �+ D_ J
W Z J Z ¢ d N £ > O O F¢-
W O Z O �-+ H i -1 -j O
D. LL O O IL u) fA 0 0 U ¢ W D_
Oa F- O 0 Z G7 N U) 7 - -
1 �b tl W G. U)
¢ ¢ IL U' 0) W Y I LLi a ]z 0) U) F- O O Z
_ X �+ ZZNoOUtoJJw O W W W W KD
u) W 0: Q O W J - - Z O - LL Z Z UZ 0 HU) LL
Z U M - W J J F- 0 (9 0 0 �-. �-. 1- q Q' M z a:
LL W N i!) LL Q N - Z G. U) LL LL to LL J J W O W
O 0 W u (n U Z to - W W W O J J LL U LL
O Z W O S O N E u) (9 F- H K W W ui U
- U ' W W o - ruO Ix a� x W W HU U ZU Z
mZ7x H ¢ L - 0U. ¢ O 7 FJZ u) N ¢ O ¢
oz - 00 " Q W 03 " w 2 O O Z ¢ W -
U O LLU LLu- 30 < 0rx U U U .. toM r L Fu) !-
O
F DU � FNMc� o � NMo s o :t oo ^ o • oo
O ZU NNMMMvvvvl!) s o * OA fu o, r o ^
m 7 ¢ to Ul ul Ul U) ut Ill ul u) m a .o * (ID OOO r am
LL I"1MMMMMMMMM i► M • MMM M f► MM #
iF A M A i A (( A A iF A AA A A A A AA A AA A A A A A A A A A f AAAAAAAAA -n
0 s -J t Ln UI A A A W W W W W W W W W W W W W N N N N N N * -- - - a c 10
a� w * (D a - * w -- 1710 a0 -10+ ln W N rL,- - - A W L4 ro i 00 VIAAA W o fiZ W
0 00000 -- o a co o fJN otti lli o * N - o W - ooNo 0a -J
O
00 (n 3 n 3 O n � C `+ '0 -+ -i "0 '0 r '0 O m m 3 (n to -0 C £ S R M T O O (n c 0
O O m D ro m a -ia c - CmCOm -IZAxmOMMMMOCOCC m ZOmmmmD < a ZO
Z Z 3 x D ;u -0 :c -u -u wMMMZZ - O -> r0000ac - -IM V ;D mm > zzmrmr -I - -I
-1 -( m Z 3 m -+ -0 0 ;V 0 (A T -4r CZ < m -13a -n r - r- O -n 'D 0 3T. r (n (n Daxa \ -<
-( (n U) D -1 ;D -q r mmS m (n - ;D -am v aorm -00Aar O -03 -4 -+ M -I ;V O
Z Z -1 -n Z D D rZDam -lay-+ r20 -i 00 Z rmS00 - - - M0 O
0 0 a m m r - r m r -az m - ZZ om - ,noo3zmmm D oz zz m3m (nm -n
m m Z M z 3 1 W a Ooz mooaz O - «- D D0C N r -( to w0N N m to 0Z
z Z 0 cn -( m Nm Z c - C 0 (nm m Zr 0 -I m3 3 1 I 11 mm (0
n 0 m x MO a m (n (nmm 0. 0 0 — Z— Z3ra 0 m 0 r 3 "n i TTI - ;u S
-i ro O C O m m cn 0 c z D z -I D to -1 m z p -, m - c c -C D D
M m < - (n c 0 '0m aro «+ m z -13 -I o 10rr -( r T.
a z m -0 m (nn mo. c0 aza- M < om .- a arr O
z C7 3 3 i1 SW w TI w -I w 0 . 0 X O -(I TO
U) mm < a -o (o r0r- 0 mm ;vra 0 o -•� -� a- I -I -( z m
m 1 ZZ M � C) - -4 mz m c m 3zzmz m
m c -( -4 0 o — S 0m (n < v mU) (n -o () Nm -133 0
;D X N m m 00 S z f - a M cc -+ m m
(n m (n (n z -r0 m0 ►. M 3
w (nr z -Im z 0 as m
w 0 O N Z (z-� (z-�
-1 m m
a
v
A
O
-0
M
a
-1
M
O
Z A
C
z
m
x
OD c 0 01 0
N ro 10 W OD -W -J A W UI - N 10
m
n Zn A A .! n 10 01 10 0 OD 01 0 10 0 A UI Zn 4'.o Uf m
0 T .1 -1 N W U' Aa0UIW10En ANON -1 owU10 WUIO az
-1 -1 UI (71 ro 0 W AID N dNN .IA -- - Ao W UIPO 0 z
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . -4 --1
0 o W W O o Ui oUl -1 0 o 00 o o o oal lU o o O -Io W oUI - Ui m c, C, D -1 -- W UI -4 c C7
0 o OD OD o 0 o 00 000000No ,Io W 000 -- ONO W W �I oo X10 N10 Ja 010 a
I I I 1 1 i l r 3 ►�
O -i
Z c
� M
< x m
a
M
a ;a
z
0 m
m
v
O
n z
1
-i
a
w w w w o ro w v
A A A A N N -4 -- N W -I 10N - a, wOWANd W o+ Rt 0- o Uf A OD
�a0 � 101a ,10� � WOO� � -0� w o W 010 w 10-+
0 0 0 0 N N -4 W .1 W o -4A O UIro W 00AW0 W-1 N ww o - -JUIOA N
0 0 0 o m w m UI N oo 0 OD - 000mc4L M
O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0.O O U I U I O U I U I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U I U I O O U l O O O U 7 -•'1
. . . . . . . . . a
0 0 0 O 0 0 0 00 C. 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 -i
O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 0 -
O
Z{
m
0 o OD °'
a
N N 10 - -• W O W 4 A W Ui N 10
Ut U1 A A -J Ut 10 V+ 10 O OD G+ OD 10 a, A W M -1 0 W -- D
O+ 0 -4 N W a I UI W 10 Ln ANoro •d Owwo W mm a-( N
-4 -J UI TN 10 W A10 N 10 U1 UI -1A - Ao W UI 0110 CD
-(O O
0 o W W o o 'U1 'c,'Ln �.I 0000oo0o - o, N000 .lo WO U1- U1 m c- c0 �t � W 0 -4 c
O o 0 OD O o 0 00 00oo0oro o -J 00C.0 0 --ONO W W �1 0 0 {OrowAQ� 10 a
i I 1 1 I r O
a i
w
W W w W 10 N 0 W 1
A A A A N N 10 roW -1NN o1W0W W W0 UI m .4 - m co
O o W W A A - --
w W O+ 10 N1o0 � 1D 10m W- Qc. QW--UI 010 c;, ro -I
<
0 o N Ln -1 4 QUI -- w - o, oo, A ao -4 n) wro OW Uf -o ro W oD 1000 UI O o, ro D
O O m 01 U1 Ut -1 -4 10 Q -1 O U10D 040 - Noo4o 1010 WO U1 - ODoa U10 -- AM X
Cl 0 o O 0 OD N 00W UIOo+ W M W oo� oo -jc>C,mA-1A W wow -bTA W m -
0 o W W o o UI oUI N o0000o0o0 V� -I o0oN0 ill 'c, 'h U1 W o o o w N0 VAN Z ro
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 a0 000000No W oN00010o0Do10 W W W o WoO -- O+ A 0 D
m 0
m
-I -J N W N
OD 0 -4 A o+ 01 w N o+ A A W W UI UI M U1
-d - .1 W ro ro A A W N 'm Ln o1 Oo 10 N W N 0 0
m
a c 4^
0 z x
0 o
0
c cs
Z G
' O
m0 0
(n m -n
ri z
-n X m to
c - ;D _
z T D D
0
-+ o m T
j 0 zc m
1z m
D p
r
N
D
T
'O
M
0
M
N
9
1
I p
Z o
c
z
m
a z
x
m m
o az
.o z
in c v
o a
r x .�
0 -�
z c
-a z
cx m
a
M
a z
0 m
m
O
n M
4
D
OD -D
N
d �
O
a z
UI ..
. a
o �
O M
0
Z -C
m
o+
a
,o z
a
Q a -i co
� n
rn c 0 -0n
o a
ro
a i
W w
1
o+ �
m m m
o �
N D
d M
U1 ►.
D
U1 Z -v
C> 0 D
m c)
m
n
a n
1 ro
t
f
` I COO u
A Monthly Newsletter for Housing Leaders February 1987
MARKETING
A study by the National Association of Home Builders, entitled the "Builders Cost of Doing Business,"
found that: Seventy-four percent of surveyed home builders use outside brokers to sell their homes (up from
58 percent in 1984); they pay those brokers a mean commission of 4 percent (up from 3.5 percent in 1984).
Nationally, 56 percent of all builders sell using model homes. As in years past, this varies widely by size of
builder, witF 23 percent of smaller(under $1 million in sales) 15uifclers and all the larger (more than $10 million
in sales) selling from models Sixty-eight percent classify their business as presold as opposed to speculative.
41% of all buyers in the 1986 Professional Builder Magazine survey, say that seeing a furnished model does
have a significant influence on the uying ecision. 71.9% o etac e builders and 82.3% o attac e
builders furnish their model omes, at an average costo 20,331.
LEGISLATIVE
President Reagan's proposed 1988 budget proposal could nearly double closing costs on FHA mortgages
and boost VA mortgage closing costs 250%. On an $80,000 home, closing costs - including points -could go
from $3,500 to more than $6,500. More than 90% of people applying for these government backed mortgage
loans make less than $40,000 a year, and most put up less than 5% of the purchase price as a down payment,
so the plan could put homes out of reach for many.
Some Specifics:
The up-front administrative cost on a VA loan, paid by the buyer, would go from 1% to 2.5% of the loan
amount. Mortgage payment insurance - currently $3,240 on an $80,000 house - can now be financed with an
FHA loan. Reagan's budget would require an increase in the insurance to $4,000 on an $80,000 house, and
would require that you pay that amount in cash at closing.
The National Association of Home Builders opposes a new rule restricting the assumability of mortgages
insured by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). Minnesota homebuyers are one of the biggest users of
FHA insured mortgages, and the new rule could have a dramatic impact on home sales in future years.
Begining Dec. 1, 1986, all FHA insured mortgages will include a clause specifying that if the property is sold
within 24 months,the full loan' is due upon sale, unless the new buyer submits to a full credit check by the FHA.
Home mortgage interest rates continued to decline in December and early January, and are now at their
lowest points since April, 1978. Both government and conventional fixed rate loans are 150 basis points below
levels in the first week in June. Adjustable rate mortgage rates also declined from mid-year levels, but a
smaller 125 basis points. In January, the Veterans Administration lowered the maximum VA rate from 9
percent to 8.5 percent, the lowest level since May 22, 1978.
ENVIRONMENT
The New Jersey Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act, the first of its kind in the nation, holds the
mortgage lender totally and singularly responsible for all cleanup costs in the event of toxic waste being
discovered on any property financed, regardless of when the discovery is made - 10, 20 or 30 years after the
origination. According to Jud Berstein, Senior Vice President of EMJ Consultants, New York, as noted in
Whirlpool Commentary, lenders will require builders developers and owners to provide environmental audits
of the property and a "Toxic Waste Clearance Certification." "However, no one knows exactly what
constitutes a valid Toxic Waste Clearance Certification; few, if any, underwriters are prepared to insure any
professional consultant willing to attempt such a certification; few such Toxic Waste Certification companies
even exist today; without the certification, major insurance companies are beginning to curtail their real
estate lending," he says.
LIFESTYLES
Until recently, many forecasters expected the economy to rebound strongly this quarter. But consumers
have cut back on their spending, especially for automobiles, and many analysts expect the economy to grow
at an even slower pace for at least the next six months. As a result, most forecasters contend the Federal
Reserve System will push down interest rates early this year. Many predict the Fed will cut its discount rate to
5% by late February, according to the Wall Street Journal.
LOOKING INTO THE CRYSTAL BALL
Most forecasters expect housing starts
-oma
to fall around 10 percent this year, with i0
the bulk of the drop-off occurring in
the multifamily sector. 1987 housing starts forecasts
I Percent
Total change' Single-fonw7y Multifamily
National Association 1,630,000 -11% 1,150,000 480,000
of Home Builders
National Associafion 1,650,000 -10 1,140,000 512,000
of Realtors
I McGraw-Hill 1,750,000 -5 1,150,000 600,000
Information Systems
Chose Econometric 1,650,000 -10 1,250,000 400,000
Associates
/ Ken Rosen,economist 1,650,000 -10 1,200,000 450,000
'From 1986 esmoted stats of 1,840,000
Nilllllllllllll(1111f11►IIIIIBillllll/l1/IIIIIIIIIIIjIflllilmm�U
NAHB's sttxts forecast by region
Nor0wast Midwest South West
Total 281,000 269,000 623,000 458,000
Percent change -8.8% -12.5% -15.5% -5.2%
i
SOURCE: NAHB
Fifth Consecutive Year of Growth Is Predicted.
Economists See Lower Rates in First Half Wall Street journal
Twin Cities Housing Council
2905 Northwest Boulevard BULK RATE
Total housing starts for 1987 are projected at 1.6 million Suite 50 U.S. POSTAGE
units.This rate is down 12 percent from our estimate for Minneapolis, MN 55441 PAID
1986,but is equal to our figure for the fourth quarter of 1986.
Thus,the slide from the high levels in early 1986 is largely 612-559-4122 Permit No. 3652
behind us. MPLS., MN
Multifamily starts for 1987 are expected to slide an
additional 5 percent from the pace late in 1986,while singles
are expected to pick up a bit.The further decline in multis
will be in the rental component,still refelcting very high (' � } = S fJJN
vacancy rates in many markets and the impact of tax reform € Y OF.- t7�F11✓
in all markets
Major geographic disparities in housing activity will persist (-r
in 1987,assuming that the federal government does not ^ `
�.N
c.•�,__.
ntervene to prop up our petroleum,agricultural and basic — —_ f �_,
manufacturing sectors.We expect the share of national �-- --
housing activity to increase in the Northwest and West and to
- ----------
------------
fall in the South and Midwest.Weakness concentrated in ------
Texas,Louisiana and Oklahoma will pull the South's share of
national housing activity below 40 percent in 1987,down
from a high of 67 percent as recently as 1983.
Carla Roehl,E 11tor
I �
c-
.n VJ CJf 2 t- 4 2 T n m m_ N
S a � T Com• � �\ �' D 2 S C � r T C-J a r ti Z ,
1
1
1
I. n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
a.- '--• - - ---1 -J -1 ---I --I - -I -1 --`I ---I --'r] f•D O
Y U .D Cwr• � O P r (..
r •.O W W T U V .b 1
1
I A I
O
a V V I A N U N Ya �J •D N O O �O V I r Q
`D W O �• m (.J P. U O V O N
•.O ! N GJ O U- O ^C• P. O.. . -_ - i N _
_-
1
1
n.. � U N � •-
IV tJi a U a � U OC• r V A OJ O.• O ;
N 1
G ' � r: � U c�nJ `ai o �' v sm.. m m m o s. � .�.• I
1 �
r P. A N N �--• .--+ r .� i
V P D,O a V i O W •� V W O O O � N O O
R• N N U O` O rn I
v'� �. U r U � O O•. � G y` � N � WI r�6J mV
=-
�
O �
U r r r j W O. N �-• 1
► �. A r o C.J D n •b � � �i O Or O-.. COC• a U T _
O I U Q+- - O a 0 `D ,O P. ,O U -J r W •D -
. �, N O'_, O'• C m V v � TJ `i7 J O L' `J �
1
I VI
�• U R. W W r r r A, ' r� C
_
Q. W N U O• P• N O'• N V . r . I "'
r V O,, r J O P• A W W V 1
,Yid P. V 1
i
I
N N I -
r
pJ. a P• a O 0 a 0a V b O ,O __
O V
r m � � N w CI O m W •L U r O P W
� n
' U O• A A m O, J A �D V � CO O m A `o I O i
4
I I
W N r r W N r •,.
CJI i O U C� �J r• W V O 4'J N A t ~ ` �
A fT 4�i! r O
-
c
m
O A W N
,OL i t O m J Y y N a ,O a N O vJ [�Jr pUj O L N N 1 N �
r V lVjl O V O� P m W N U O � b ,VO O b OJI VJ I -_.
a1
1 n
N N N N rNr N rNr N - - r r
6
JV r p 1
N U e Z ''•+ gym, m U N N z r J.r S n n m'm U
a moa � >nmrmn
-
c -� l i
1�1 rzn m A m
f
r r M c-J - — c-J c-J - — -. --1 — --a— --I -. — —
I o i
I
a
W � .--• V V U r 1N-• N O N N ^ M P Aa 1 16C. G 1 l > V 41 r 4 DG O C. VJ M
N
J W `O ^" W O. lP 1 1
pPe. V V v V� p •a i O I i � .p O A O O a p N A
I
! O 1
I N f
1 r _
i C N r
p i O P W O W U r a N O M 1 ^� �•
a l A P U U N ` rJ Y N � CU9 p a fWJI � O W 1 1
fX. a W N W P 1 I
1 I
1 2 I
W ! U N A A P V NP `8 •O N N 4J P O r p 1
W � U vJ V
N P �G
W r - p W u P P ? U P N v
p r
t U
N U N O V O D U •<� P'
1 M I
1 O I
41 O ti 1
pU. � N O P. V W V •O 4 y 0 Vi P a T I
cn r a W .o ¢• W a w_•-• o w W O w <n I
Z,l
V 1 r N O w O Vp a w W �p O O I
p� W O JOIJ CPII r O W W r W W +D` P. W W W - 1
1
v
i an 1
N 1 N P, V � �• ?` G C N
+ N U P U N W
G I r G W W W � r U N 0•O U U V 1
00. i r rW� W M P. a U LJ M r O p P U W I I
I I
N N N r 41 r N r 1 0 I I
�O vJ U �G W _ -1- -
W � U`--• r W N a_ a N 4 P A N a M 1 1
•,p r W N W U W T a �J
•d N W O C^ __
I 1
1 � 1
U l r V W V N N N V N W
P.•p r— A 1 C P
!W N
N JNN 4J V U Cwn L M �J M W P_�! O a. P ID w
A P a W N O M V r 0 _V W a DJ a A N I p' I
W
v.
I
1 K
w N .- .- r P r N r i o � •a
DUD � (OJ• V N a P P W �. v ` tWlr � 4 W W V Vi M I B C W
p Y � v N yJ_ W W R• W b �D N M N I = 1
vJ U 4J � N W U •a DM s 1 I
1 1
LJ � O• a A N �J r r ay 1 1
O r P •r O`• V � CWn N O G VI W_� N V r U U �J 1 N r 1
1
I � 1
' y � M W W j d r• 1
V
W �1 P• Gn O P W a W `G O r A a V r W W j 1
i I
C 1
N
p it M P r V U C. G_• U r a �f.+ � N 1 C C
r U W W W N a W U � tJr A rP..U U r4W+1 V.
U 1 1
1 1
W 1 O a V V �D U �r O� P O O •L �D 1 W I '.
A r r O r N �L D ✓ N V W N a 6On P M M fi` O 1 N ✓ 1
V P �O V a 1 41 O
�J C
FISCAL DISPARITIES OPTIONS
A B C D
Formula Modification
1994 28 Step- Difference
Present Present Law down to 308, by changing
formula
1987 if no change 1994 from present
CARVER COUNTY
Chaska 142,672 5,601,174 800,850 + 4,800,324
DAKOTA COUNTY
Burnsville (24,956,024) (128,702,499) (108,628,493) +20,074,006
Eagan (11,772,561) ( 8,443,225) ( 13,331,411) 4,888,186
Rosemount ( 969,673) ( 1,700,326) ( 2,194,265) - 493,939
HENNEPIN COUNTY
Bloomington (57,188,072) (161,692,532) (128,015,905) +33,676,627
Eden Prairie (51,990,460) (250,623,701) (201,200,913) +49,422,788
Edina (42,013,740) ( 87,423,252) ( 75,847,696) +11,575,556
Hopkins ( 3,324,407) ( 7,278,515) ( 6,172,301) + 1,106,214
<Minneapolis> (96,128,492) (212,009,051) (175,809,250) +36,198,801
Minnetonka (56,917,095) (210,024,749) (156,626,330) +53,398,419
Richfield 19,504,626 ( 36,693,152) ( 31,277,843) + 5,415,309
RAMSEY COUNTY
Arden Hills (12,339,578) ( 8,534,660) ( 5,491,587) + 3,043,073
Maplewood (20,988,308) 7,712,995 7,936,624 - 223,629
New Brighton 7,231,390 16,609,093 15,841,444 + 767,649
Roseville (21,969,714) 3,435,522 ( 5,101,292) - 8,536,814
SCOTT COUNTY
Prior Lake 3,930,749 5,596,231 4,611,344 + 986,867
Savage ( 793,399) 274,925 ( 369,007) - 643,932
Shakopee (14,072,673) ( 38,156,325) ( 30,751,159) + 7,405,166
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Lake Elmo 2,398,570 4,387,000 3,914,647 + 472,353
Oakdale 9,780,005 7,805,580 8,460,279 - 654,699
02/12/87
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Scott County Solid Waste Master Plan
DATE: February 13 , 1987
Introduction and Background:
For the past 2 1/2 years, I have represented the City of
Shakopee on the Scott County Solid Waste Advisory Committee. The
committee was formed by Scott County in response to the mandates
set forth in the Waste Management Act and the Metropolitan
Council' s Solid Waste Development Guide/Policy Plan. Both of
these documents mandate the selection of a solid waste management
system which focuses on landfill abatement. Concerns regarding
potential environmental contamination caused by sanitary
landfills have prompted increasing specific guidelines aimed at
the implementation of alternative waste processing technologies .
The master plan addresses those concerns.
The Metropolitan Council Development Guide/Policy Plan
identifies specific percentage goals to be obtained by Scott
County Solid Waste Management Programs. To achieve those goals,
Scott County is presently working together with neighboring
Carver County to implement the construction of an integrated
type of central waste processing facility which would include
refuse derived fuel, composting and recycling. The two counties
are selecting a consultant to assist them in evaluating vendor
proposes for the construction of such a facility. These
proposals were received in response to a request for proposals
issued in the Spring of 1986 .
The master plan presents a guide for the development of a
waste management system to handle Scott County' s municipal solid
waste through the year 2000 . It describes the present waste
management system, including some of the opportunities/problems
which are unique to Scott County. Among these are the presence
of several major tourist attractions which cause large seasonal
changes in the amount and types of waste generated, and the
presence of both Anchor Glass ( the regions major glass recycler)
and the Blue Lake Sewage Treatment Plant (a source of nitrogen
for composting) within the county. It then goes on to offer a
process for changing the system to meet the waste abatement goals
which the Metropolitan Council has set for the county. In
addition it notes the steps already taken toward transition from
landfill to alternative technologies.
A final configuration of the final components of Scott
County' s Waste Management System have not been determined.
However, it is likely that the core of the program will be the
centralized processing facility, with waste reduction and source
separation strategies planned to support it' s design. The master
plan identifies the steps being taken or planned by Scott County,
in conjunction with Carver County, to determine and implement a
1�
waste management system. Policies, goals, objectives and
specific tasks have also been identified to achieve the mandates
of the Waste Management Act and the Metropolitan Council.
Regardless of the blend of methods chosen, the County' s goal will
be environmentally sound procedures which will eliminate the
landfilling of unprocessed waste in Scott County by 1990 .
What does this mean for the residents of Shakopee? The most
significant impact will occur in the area of garbage hauling
costs . Within the next three to five years , garbage rates are
likely to double or even triple.
Early this month, the Scott County Board approved a
preliminary draft of the Scott County Solid Waste Master Plan and
extended the comment period to February 19 , 1987 . If any of the
Council members are interested in reviewing the plan, a copy of
it is available in my office.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 17 , 1987
Mayor Reinke presiding
1] Roll Call at 7 :00 P .M.
21 Liaison Reports from Councilmempers
3] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
4] Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk
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 3 , 1987
6] Communications : (Items noted for consent will be received and filed)
tea] Members of the 10th and Dakota Neighborhood re : proposed develop-
So. of 10th Ave . , E of CR-79 and W of CR-17
#b] Action Alert re : proposed cut in 1987 Local Government Aid
allocation
#c] League of Mn. Human Rights Commissions re : membership invitation
d] Todd Schwartz re : resignation from Energy and Transportation Comm.
7] Public Hearings : None
81 Boards and Commissions : None
9] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 : 00]
a] Update on Canterbury Downs ' Legislative Program
#b] Approval of Shakopee Fire Department By-Laws
#c] Tank Truck Body Apparatus
*d] Captain Pay Schedule Amendment - Res. No . 2692
#e] Speed Zoning Along County Road 83 - Res . No. 2689
f] Upper Valley Basin Project 2690
g] 13th Ave . Right-of-Way Acquisition (CR-89 - East) Res . No .
h] Purchase of Computer Aided Drafting System
i] Purchase of Public Works Computer Equipment
#j ] Abatement of Special Assessment
k] Approve the Bills in Amount of $ 299 , 431 . 66
10] Resolutions and Ordinances :
*a] Res . No . 2688 , Amending 1987 Budget
#b] Res . No . 2687 , Accepting Work on 1982 Pavement Preservation
11] Other Business :
121 Adjourn to Tuesday, February 24, 1987 at 7 :00 P .M.
John K. Anderson. City Administrator
w
Llr'GU L"1\ 37
,Tn^y JM^f._Ca�' .l, P-7, YITI?.TJJ✓TA FEBR kR 3, 1987
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with =11 . Leroux,
Vierling, T:ebens, Clay and 'gampach present. Also present were John .. II
Anderson, City Administrator; Kenneth Ashfeld, Citysineer; Dennis 'raft,
Community Development Director; Barry 'tock, 'administrative assistant;
Judith 73. Cox, 7ity Clerk; and Julius A. 'oiler II, City Attorney.
Wampach/Lebens moved to recess for H r, meeting. "lotion carried unanimously.
^lay/Lebens moved to reconvene. ',lotion carried unanimously.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers.
Mayor Reinke asked if there was anyone from audience who wished to address
anything not on the agenda. There was no response.
Leroux/Clay moved to approve the minutes of January 13, 16, and 21st, 1987.
Voll Call: Ayes: UnaniTous does: None Tiotion carried.
Vierling/Leroux moved to approve the minutes of January 20, 1987. Motion
carried with Cncl. Lebens abstaining.
Leroux/Clay moved to receive and file the letter from Secretary of State
Joan Anderson Growe referencing openings on three state agencies.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous woes: None Motion carried.
Leroux/Clay moved to receive and file the letter from Beverly Koehnen,
regarding expenses incurred from change of address for residents on
County Road 83.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None motion carried.
Discussion ensued on the Minnesota Valley Trail Extension. The City
Administrator said that the D.17-,q is interested in extending their Minnesota
Talley River mail east from its present terminus at the Community
Services Building to i-urphy's Landing. Bruce 7liason, %Manager of the
IMinnesota "Talley Trail, 19825 Park Blvd. Jordan, said that because of
the highwater level in Mr. Sweeney's marina it would not be feasible
to build a bridge that would fall into the river due to highwater in
that area. It was their opinion that it would be more feasible to go
around the marina. 'They are proposing to go through the City property
which is an old rodeo ground, on the north side of Bluff Avenue then
going north from Minnesota back onto State property. The long range
plans of the DUR is for a continuous non-stop trail from LeSueur all the
way to rt. Snelling State Park. They are not looking at having a
continuous snowmobile trail all the way because of some opposition by
Murphy's landing. It would ultimately be a biking and hiking trail.
Discussion ensued on fencing behind :sir. Sweeney's property, and any other
residential property bordering the trail.
Wanpach/Lebens moved to direct the appropriate City officials to meet with
the property owners along Bluff Avenue to secure an acceptable alignment
for the completion of the I111innesota 'Talley Trail through Shakopee.
?Motion carried unanimously.
City Council
February 3, 187
Page -2-
Discussion Pnsued on the proposed residential development of the Roberts Pit
area by Meritor DPvelopment Corporation. Larry Frank, Meritor DPvPlopmPnt
Corporation addrPssed the Council saying that their Company has bPPn developing
single family lots in the Twin City area for 12 years. The total area they are
considering is 162 acres currently calling for 346 lots. ThP City would have to
commit to the PxtPnsion of the sanitary sPwPr main from Past property line to
west property line; watermain PxtPnsion south to the 1st intersection, the upgrad-
ing of 11th AvPnue, the lots abutting collector strPPts would have PntrancPs
onto collector strPPts with turn arounds on the lots, and cul-de-sacs would bp
longer than permitted. Mayor RPinkP Pxpressed concern over the Pxtensive
looping that would be involvPd with the watermain PxtPnsion. Cncl. Leroux
said that they would be creating another collector strPPt being 11th AvPnue
and that the Council would prefer 11th AvPnue not bp complPtPd. Council would
like 13th AvPnue and 10th AvPnue to take all the traffic and 11th AvPnue only
bp used to actually sPrvP the homes and not go all the way through. Mr. Gerald
Poole, 1077 Dakota, asked whPrP the other half of 11th AvPnue would come from
and if the water would be coming from a lack of storm sPwPr in the addition.
Mayor RPinkP said that if 11th AvPnue will bp put in then thPrP will be a public
hearing and assessmPnts of which the dPvPlopPr will be responsiblP for paying
for at least 50 percent of the total cost of the raodway and adjoining properties
along the north side will receive an assessmPnt. Cncl. Clay said hP does not
like the wording done in the Market Analysis and Site Evaluation regarding pol-
itical factors. Cncl. Wampach said hP thought the Market Analysis was well
done and one of the factors against ShakopPP is the lack of accessibility to
highways which is why houses are not selling in ShakopPP.
Wampach/Vierling moved to rPcPivP and file the proposed residential dPvPlopmPnt
by Meritor DPvPlopmPnt Corporation with the inclusion of comments by Council
and audience. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/ViPlring moved for a 5 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved to reconvPnP at 8:45 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant, addrPssed the concerns brought up by the
Council at their worksession on the Downtown RPdPvPlopmPnt project. HP said
Phase I consists of a 1987 and 1988 construction season and Phase II would be
1991 First AvPnue. HP said that they are proposing that 3rd AvPnue be taken out
of the Downtown project and done as a separate Council initiated project in
1988, and that the north south strPPts between 3rd and 4th bp done at that
time also. Cncl. LPbPns said that a nPw petition should bp initiated before
this project is started. ThP question was asked that on the construction proposed
for 1987 will anybody besides the abutting property owners rPcPivP any
assessmPnt. ThP City EnginPPr said that assuming the project is ordered thPrP
is an option of ordering Phase I, Part 1 or Phase I Part 1 and 2. If both are
ordPrPd then assessmPnts are put on the PntirP area. Cncl. LPbPns said she
fPPls Atwood StrPPt should bp Pliminated from this project all together.
Functional strPPt lighting, which is strictly the high level, would add about
$381.00 to Pach assessmPnt, the City is recommPnding against this issue bPcausP
it has not bPPn done in the past.
City Council
February 3, 1987
Page -3-
The City is recommending against the assessment credit to residential properties
for Pxtra cost of a 9-ton design versus a 7-ton design because it has not been
the policy followed in the past for rehabilitation of streets.
An Pstimated typical assessment is $3,393.00, if Third Avenue is deleted.
Clay/Vierling moved to direct staff to proceed in preparing the materials for
the public hearing with the assumption that City Council is in agreement
with the recommendations in Barry Stock's memo of 1/26/87: 1) credit for
Pxtra curb required for strPetscape , 2) credit for Pxtra width sidewalk,
3) no credit to rPsidPntial properties for Pxtra road width and strength,
4) credit for Pnterprise fund work, 5) , no additional assessment for functional
street lighting, and 6) Phase I of the Downtown Redevelopment project completed
in two construction seasons; and Council has yet to decide on whether or not to
delete Third AvPnuP from the project.
Cncl. ViPrling asked if it would bp possible for the City to send a letter to
the residents along 3rd AvPnuP stating that it is being considered removing
3rd AvPnuP from the project and if they would like to speak on this issue to
attend the upcoming public hearing. ThP AdminstrativP Assistant said hp will
include a separate letter to those residents with the notice of the public hearing.
Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens opposed.
Leroux/Vielring moved to reset the public hearing date on the continuation 7-2 toof
the public hearing on the Downtown StrPPtscapP Improvement Proj
pct March 10, 1987 , at 7:00 p.m. at the Citizens State Bank, 1100 East 4th AvPnuP.
Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion Pnsued on having the Downtown Committee circulate a new petition to
the property owners. ThP City Administrator said that PveryonP will bp getting
the new information in their notices. Cncl. Lebens said it would bp only fair
to circulate a new petition. Cncl. Leroux said that thPcil cannot initiatp
Consensus
a petition and it is not our prProgativP to suggest a ptitio
was to bring the issue of a new petition up to the Downtown committee and let
them make the decision.
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2684, A Resolution RPcpiving a Report
and Calling a Hearing on Improvement of Watermain Facilities Adjacent and/or
Parallel to Marschall Road from 11th AvPnuP to the South Approximately 1250 feet
1987-4, and moved its adoption. Motion carried with Cncl. ViPrling abstaining.
Leroux/Clay moved to receive and place on file the memo from Kenneth Ashfeld,
City Engineer, regarding 2nd AvPnuP Parking Lot Lighting Project.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
Mayor Reinke said hp has a concern with the outlet work that has not been done
in regards to the Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District 509 Plan. HP said
the outflow in Deans Lake has not been completed. ThP City Engineer said that
they did a complete walk of the channel and within the next couple of months will
have some options available for the City.
Leroux/Lebens moved to direct staff to respond to the PLSLWD 509 Water Management
Plan with the following comments:
1. That Shakopee requests certain outfall channel improvements
be included in the plan's 1987 captial improvement program.
,-L LIj' 'ouncil
'ebruary 3, , '97
Page -4-
2. That ,Shakopee will not be completing a comprehensive drainage
plan for the area _of Shakopee within the P.=L 0 as required
within the Municipal .T,:anajement section of the plan.
7l,otian carried unanimously.
The City Clerk reviewed the request by .Tack Brambilla for 12 off street
parking spaces in Municipal Parking Lot. He is asking if he could rent
12 parking spaces at no charge. Jack Brambilla said that he owns 6
apartment buildings, two of which are very old and will qualify for
perm.its. The parking lot in question is not being used at all except
by myself and the adjoining buildings. ''e does the plowing in the
winter time and some mowing in summer. .r. Brambiila is leasing 37 spaces
and is asking that 12 be at no charge,
Lebens/Warpach moved that Mr. Brambilla rent 25 spaces and the City allow him
an additional 12 at no- chargp. Cncl. Vierling said she is concerned about setting
a precedent with this motion, and will the City have to provide free
parking for everyone downtown as buildings are remodeled.
T,ebens/'.'a ipach moved to amend the motion to make it temporary and he
arrange with his tenants to jet 12 parking permits. ^lotion carried
unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to approve the employment of Douglas Hise as
Planner II effective February 17, 1987 at a salary of .29,315 per year
which is step 3 in the pay plan with an increase to step d of the pay
plan provided that the 6 month probationary period is satisfactorily
completed. „ncl. Wampach and Lebens questioned the need for another
Planner II, they felt that the Planning Department was already
sufficiently staffed. 'ane City Administrator said that this is a
replacement position for Judi Simac not a new position.
Roll ^all: ares: Cr�cl. Leroux, 7 erling, Ciay, Eayor Reinke
foes: Cncl. Lebens and ,;ampach
' otion carried.
Hr. Joseph Ries, Fire Chief, said the original specifications on the
tank truck chassis called for was too small. A test on the 250 hp
engine was given in Alexandria, 71innesota, and determined it to be
too small for Shakopee needs.
Vierling/Leroux moved to reject chassis bids received December 31, 1986,
and advertise specifications for chassis with larger engine.
Roll Call: Ayes: unanimous :does: done IMotion carried.
Ieroax/':'ierling moved that the amendments to the by-laws of the Tire
Department as proposed in Mr. Ries' memo be included in the by-laws.
Cncl. j'ierling questioned the possible restriction of smoking by fire
protectors. Motion carried una_ni-.ously.
City vouncil
7ebruary 3, 1987
page -5-
7ierling/Lebens moved to direct staff to investioate the possibility of
incorporating some sort of smoke free environment for the fire department
as related to health and safety factor. Motion carried with Cncl. 71ay
opposed.
Leroux "lay moved to purchase a Chevrolet 7-20906 as per Yennepin 'county
No. 7504-7, at a cost of ';16,672.00 from ' Vaaie Tawlins Polar Shevrclet
Inc.
Call: Ayes: T7nanimouS Noes: ':'TO'".e ?'otlon carried.
poll .�ay l:
Taroux/^lay moved to approve the hiring of one police officer march 1, 1987.
Roll ^all• Ayes: UnanimousToes: None Motion carried.
Lebens "ierling moved to approve the bills in the amount of 01959,010.74•
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous foes: Tone ?lotion carried.
Discussion ensued on hiring a full-time temporary clerical person or a
permanent part-time clerical person for the police department.
L:erousWampach moved to hire a full-time temporary clerical person for
ninety days using an agency at a cost of 37,380.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Potion carried.
Lebens/Clay moved to remove from the table the Sanitary Sewer Plan Within
the MUSA. Notion carried unanimously.
Lebens/clay offered Resolution No. 2655, A Resolution adopting a Sanitary
Sewer Plan for Land Within the ?'Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA)
'T'hereby Establishing a Tradeable Area, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Leroux, Clay, Lebens, Wampach and Mayor Reinke
Foes: incl. `.'ierling
Notion carried.
leroux/Ilay moved that the names of Fred Corrigan: and Dill Henning be
submitted to the Scott County Board of Commissioners as candidates for
appointment for Manager of the Prior Lake spring Lake watershed District.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None I%otion carried.
leroux/Ilay offered Resolution No. 2685, A Resolution Accepting ':fork on
the 1985-1 Public Improvement Program 4th avenue Reconstruction County
Road 83 to Shenandoah Drive State Aid Project 70. 166-108-01 and moved
its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: done Motion carried.
Leroux/Lebens offered Resolution No. 2683, A Resolution Initiating the
71cation of Public Right-of-':Jay Within the Plat of xillarney Hills,
Scott County, Minnesota, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
City Council
February 3, 1987
Page -6-
Leroux/Clay offered Resolution No. 2686, A Resolution Approving Plans and
Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for Valley Park Drive
from T.H. 101 to the North Approximately 350 feet Project No. 1986-11, and
moved its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried.
The City Clerk said a while ago she got an inquiry from someone on permission
to have a horse drawn carriage within t he City of Shakopee . It was the
consensus of the Council that it would be difficult to cross Hwy. 101, except
at CR-17 and would not b, .d,-sir,-abl-- along CR-16 where there is no shoulder.
It may be okay along the trail system, from Canterbury Inn to the track along
their own property or along less traveled streets.
Clay/Wampach moved to direct City Attorney to draft an Ordinance as described
by Council. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Lebens moved to accept a letter of credit in lieu of a performance bond
from R.G. Compress Air in the amount of $36,874.00 for the breathing air
compressor. Motion carried unanimously.
Cncl. Wampach asked about the possibility of installing handrails on 4th and
Fuller, 4th and Atwood and 4th and Lewis, sidewalks. The City Engineer will
look into this matter further.
Wampach/Clay moved to adjourn to Tuesday, February 17th, 1987 at 7:00 P.M.
Motion carried unanimously. Mpeting adjourned at 11:15 P.M.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
{
Ken Ashf e ld
City Engineer
Citv of Shakopee
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
Dear Mr. Ashfeld;
We are writing this letter as a group of concerned parents, neighbors and city
residents loose focus is the development of the property south of 10th Ave. ,east of
C.R.79 and west of C.R. 17. Our specific concern is the platting of streets on any
future development that is submitted for your approval and how that platting may or
may not affect traffic at the already busy intersection of 10th Ave. and Dakota St. .
As you know,10th and Dakota is a very busy intersection at almost any hour of
the day and at this intersection is where our children along with hundreds of others
must cross to get to school. It is already difficult to cross 10 Ave. with or with-
out crossing guards due to the volume of traffic and we anticipate that will only
worsen as our community grows. To add another stream of cars corning from the south
on Dakota St. or turning off of 10th Ave. onto Dakota St. would add even more burden
on these young children. There would seem to be little point in making Dakota an ex-
tension street or turn off from 11th Ave because it does no go through but runs into
the Pearson School property.
We can appreciate the difficulty in platting new roads for development and we
realize that this progress will hopefully reduce our taxes, however our first and
foremost concern is the safety of our children and we feel this should remain of
utmost concern in your minds as you continue to aid in the growth of our community.
We would appreciate you weighing our concerns before making your final decision.
Sincerely; Members of
The 10th and Dakota
'ghborhood
19
__ �: �✓�� //U�%��%,i;dam
/ W
Week in review
Action Alert
SOVERNOR CA-:-S FOR $4 . 7 MILLION CUT IN CURRENT YEAR ( 1987 ) LGA
The governor ' s budget proposal recommends a cut of $4 . 75 million
in the current year ' s ( 1987) LGA allocation. This represents a
1 . 5 percent reduction in 1987 LGA payments . Under current law,
the 1987 LGA allocation is supposed to be $324 million, up 4.2
percent from the previous year ' s allocation. The governor ' s
proposal would reduce it to $319 million and freeze it at that
lower level for 1988 .
If the Legislature accepts this recommendation, the LGA payments
initially affected by the reduction would be those due to be paid
cities on July 15 , 1987 and December 15 , 1987 . The intention of
the proposal is to uniformly reduce LGA payments to cities and
other units of local government . In other words, each
city, county, or township receiving LGA would have their total
1987 LGA allocation cut by 1 . 5 percent .
The LGA amounts to be paid each local unit of government were
certified in an August 8 , 1986 letter sent to municipalities from
the Revenue Department . Cities planned their 1987 budgets. and
levies based on this commitment of funds. Considering levy
l limits and their lack of revenue-raising ability, most cities
will not have the resources to make up for this LGA reduction.
The League opposes this cut. Please contact your senators and
representatives and urge them to reject this cut in LGA. Also
�'--- .urge them to oppose the governor ' s proposal to freeze LGA at the
reduced level of $�19 million for 1988 .
TRANSFER OF PEACE OFFICERS' TRAINING FUNDS
On Tuesday, February 2, the Senate Judiciary heard S.F. 152
(Lantry) which would take money from the peace officers training
account and use it to fund grants to local law enforcement agencies
for the purpose of providing emergency assistance to crime victims .
The bill was not voted out and is scheduled for further hearings .
The League has not taken a position on this bill which is
apparently supported by the law enforcement community . The
question in our minds is whether our member cities are receiving
sufficient state financial assistance for peace officer training.
If cities are having problems getting or keeping their officers
trained it would seem that the amount of aid should be increased
rather than divert those funds to a new program. If, however , the
state financial assistance has been adequate , there doesn' t appear
to be any reason for the League to oppose the creation of the crime
victims fund.
Please contact Stan Peskar or Joel Jamnik at the League if your
city has experienced financial difficulty in the area of peace
officer training.
J
�v.��, ,
The I-E 1AM SOMA
k"C HUX&N GNM COONS
February 2, 1987 FEE) 9 1981
City of Shakopee:
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Your support of the League of Minnesota Human Rights
Commissions is greatly appreciated. The League has been
active in human rights' concerns since 1971 . In June , 1986,
the League received tax-exempt status under section
501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code . We are optimistic
that this will enable us to receive funding from various
foundations and agencies, and will allow us to expand our
activities and staff .
The existence of a Human Rights Commission provides an
avenue for your community to serve the needs of its
citizens. It shows your community that its city officials
care about human rights--as covered under Minnesota Statute
363, which includes the elderly , disabled persons, single
parents, minorities, religious freedom, and employee/
employer rights.
The League will continue providing technical assistance on
human rights issues, legislative updates, quarterly
newsletters, educational workshops, an annual conference ,
and annual human rights' awards, in addition to other
special projects, for member cities. For information or
assistance , contact your League office at (612) 788-5500 .
Enclosed is your city's annual dues statement for 1987. We
request that you return payment as soon as possible .
Presently , we have thirty-four dues-paying members. In
order to keep our records current , would you please submit a
current roster of your Commission members/contact people
with addresses and telephones, with your dues payment .
Your cooperation and assistance will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely ,
(� \\
�
Patricia A. Wiiliamson
Treasurer
(612) 625-4044
enc .
Action Rec_uested: Move that the City of Shakopee join the League
Of Minnesota Human Rights Commissions .
L/nL -�''
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk��
RE: League of Minnesota Human /Rights Commissions
DATE: February 12, 1987
Introduction
The City has been invited to become a member of the League of
Minnesota Human Rights Commissions.
The Commission has been in existence for about 16 years. This
mailing has been sent to all municipalities with a population
over 5,000 who may not have an active commission. There are
currently 38 dues paying municipalities .
They produce a quarterly newsletter, advise of statutory changes,
.conduct workshops (with a reduced fee to members) , provide
technical assistance to cities interested in establishing a
Human Rights Commission, serve as a resource to municipalities,
and will become involved in mediation for cities.
Alternatives
1. Join the League of Minnesota Human Rights Commissions.
2. Do not join.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1 , join the League of Minnesota Human Rights
Commissions. This is recommended since there is no local Human
Rights Commission and this would be a good resource if the need
did arise.
Recommended Action
Move that the City of Shakopee join the League of Minnesota
Human Rights Commissions.
JSC/jms
icl-
LEAGUE
OF MINNESOTA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONS
ANNUAL DUES STATEMENT - 1987
CITY SHAKOPEE
POPULATION* 9,941
DUES** $50.00
*Based on the 1980 Census final count , per League of Cities.
**Dues are assessed at $4 . 25 per 1 ,000 population rounded to
the nearest 1 ,000 with minimum $50 .00 and maximum $375.00 .
Check should be made payble to:
LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONS
and mailed to :
Patricia A . Williamson
Treasurer , LMHRC
c/o 521 Ferndale St
Maplewood MN 55119
i
37
— �pPc2Cc�wAw\_kssto� wv\ S
FV
�SSION
Y-Vvu n N -----
W CXZ
-------------
RECEIVED__
-- EEB-._21967
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
�-��._,=
9�
CANTLF11DURY
D O W N 5
February 12, 1987
Mr. John Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 First Avenue East
Shakopee, MN 55379
1
Dear John,
Canterbury Downs, in conjunction with Thoroughbred horsemen
and the Minnesota Quarter Horse Racing Association, will be
pursuing statutory changes in the existing pari-mutuel tax law
this legislative session. we are currently forming a coalition
of constituent groups which support our legislation. Following
is a synopsis of our initiative with the request that the
S a opea Citi Cs�u toil wil1 consider endorsement of our of forts
and membership in our coalition.
The current pari-mutuel tax was based on certain wagering
patterns and information from other states long before the
opening of Canterbury in 1985. Under the current statute, the
State of Minnesota receives a blended average of 5. 1% of the
money wagered -- the third-highest rate in the country and more
than 10 times greater than the rate in some states!
DUSC SC'1TttCS L:itnZYTJcu ilct.vZ$$it 07ac �ii3`�SFf��ia�. >j.
opening day of racing in Minnesota. Other states in fhe
Midwest were experiencing difficult times with the horses
racing in their states and changed their takeouts to provide
more money for purses and the tracks.
Canterbury experienced nearly an t8 million operating loss
in 1986. That loss occurred in large part because of our need
to be competitive with these other states and to pay a purse
structure to horsemen which surpassed the minimum required by
law. we enhanced the purse schedule by over t3 million in 1986
and $2-3 million in 1985 in order to present first-class racing
and insure the stability of the industry by drawing large
crowds, which we, in fact, achieved.
Now that projections have been replaced by experience, we
are asking that the State amend the pari-mutuel law to insure
the survival and growth of the racing industry. Specifically,
Canterbury Downs/1100 Canterbury Road/P.O. Box 508/Shakopee, Minnesota 55379/(612) 445-7223
Mr . John Anderson
February 11, 1987
Page Two
we are asking the State to re-appropriate approximately 60% of
the tax dollars it collects back to the industry through purses
paid to horsemen and 5% into a Breeders fund. This will enable
the industry to grow, adding to the thousands of jobs it
already has created. The industry further stimulates the
agricultural economy through increasing consumption of
commodities . Canterbury, too, will become more competitive
with other tracks in attracting quality horses, thereby
promoting tourism and insuring larger crowds and increased
wagering.
We also are asking that the State re-appropriate 20% of its
share of the wagering to Canterbury Downs, which must be
allowed to operate within reasonable taxation in order to
insure the future of the racing industry which revolves around
, the track. The wagering tax is a tax on gross revenues . It
comes in addition to sales tax, admission tax, property tax,
payroll tax and all other normal business taxes which
Canterbury will continue to pay. However, for the track to
approach the break-even mark in 1987, the pari-mutuel tax law
requires significant restructuring.
I trust your organization will concur that Canterbury, and
the overall racing industry has contributed to and complemented
the Shakopee area economy.
We are anxious to receive your support and wish to include
your organization in a list of constituents and friends . If
you should wish further details on the proposed legislation,
please feel free to contact our Public Relations Director,
Shannon Riley at 937-7783. We would greatly appreciate your
affirmative response through an official resolution or letter
of support. A sample resolution is attached, should you choose
to adopt it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sin erely,
W. Brooks Fields
President & Chief Executive Officer
WBF/mjh
Enclosure
T OL/
RESOLUTION NO. 2691
A RESOLUTION URGING THE MINNESOTA STATE LEGISLATURE TO
REDUCE THE PARI-MUTUEL TAX TO THE COST OF REGULATION
WHEREAS, the racing industry provides thousands of jobs in horse breeding
and training, tourism, hospitality, track operations and the agricultural
sector of our economy that have benefited residents of the State and the
citizens of Shakopee, and
WHEREAS, the growth of this promising industry means the development of
valuable economic resources and revenue for the State of Minnesota and the City
of Shakopee, and
WHEREAS, Canterbury Downs provides high quality racing and entertainment
attracting thousands of tourists to Minnesota with a facility we are proud to
have in Shakopee, and
WHEREAS, Canterbury Downs and the breeding and racing industry are
shouldering additional taxes through a pari-mutuel tax on gross receipts while
other state businesses are only taxed on their earnings (Canterbury Downs is
taxed on first its gross receipts and then again on its earnings), and
WHEREAS, Minnesota's pari-mutuel tax is one of the highest in the nation,
and .
WHEREAS, other states have recognized that the racing industry should pay
the cost of its regulation and have reduced their pari-mutuel taxes to the cost
of regulation so racing is taxed like other industries, and
WHEREAS, most of the reduction in the pari-mutuel tax will be passed
through to the persons who are employed in the industry or who provide feed and
other supplies and services to the industry.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota does hereby urge the Minnesota State Legislature to take
immediate steps to reduce the pari-mutuel tax to the cost of regulation and to
provide fair and equitable taxation and supportive recognition to a vital
Minnesota industry.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,
1987.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST: Approved as to form this
day of 1987.
City Clerk City Attorney
, \4 STATEMENT OF CANTERBURY DOWNS IN SUPPORT OF
LEGISLATION TO CHANGE PARI-MUTUEL TAX
February 10, 1987
INTRODUCTION
There may have been more misstatements and
misunderstandings about the proposed legislation to change the
pari-mutuel tax than there have been about any other bill in
recent memory.
People have been led to believe that Canterbury Downs
wants the state to reimburse it for its losses, or wants the
state to pay part of its bill . In essence, Canterbury Downs
supposedly wants special treatment.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. This statement
explains the actual intent and scope of the legislation. Your
time-spent in reviewing it is greatly appreciated.
I,
-r
I . THE PARI-MUTUEL TAX IS A TAX OF 25% ON RECEIPTS
The Current Tax
The pari-mutuel tax takes 1 3/4% of the first $48 million
wagered and 6% of all remaining amounts wagered during a racing
season. This amounts to an average of 5 . 1% of all amounts
wagered during the year . The tax is computed on the total
amount wagered and not on the net amount actually received by
the racetrack.
The Tax Takes 25% Of Receipts
Although the maximum statutory rate is 6%, the tax takes
approximately 25% of the pari-mutuel receipts actually
available to Canterbury Downs to cover its operating expenses .
Of the total amount wagered at a licensed racetrack, an average
of approximately 80% is paid back to patrons in winnings,
leaving approximately 20% that is actually received by the
racetrack and known as takeout .
Thus , when the track "handles" $100 . 0 million of wagers,
it only retains approximately $20 . 0 million as its revenues .
The $80 . 0 million is comparable to the $8 .00 in change that a
sales clerk gives back to a customer who pays for a $2 . 00
purchase with a $10 . 00 bill . In the example, $2 . 00 constitutes
the revenues of the store. The 6% tax is actually 25% of the
portion of the total wagers which are received by the track or
25% of the takeout . The tax takes 25% of the pari-mutuel
receipts of the track.
-2-
II . THE LEGISLATURE HAS RECOGNIZED THAT BUSINESS MUST BE
TAXED EQUALLY, AND HAS ELIMINATED OTHER GROSS RECEIPTS TAX
The legislature has previously responded to other
situations where a gross receipts tax imposed against companies
resulted in an unfair tax burden.
1 . Prior to 1981 , Minnesota imposed a gross receipts
tax on railroad companies equal to 5% of the gross
earnings derived from operations within the state.
In 1980 , the gross receipts tax on railroads was
repealed. Railroads had a significant volume of
receipts , but limited earnings . This distorted the
true economic earnings of the industry. In
recognition of this disparity, the legislature acted
to change the method by which. railroads are taxed.
Now railroads are taxed like other businesses in
Minnesota . The termination of this gross receipts
tax involved a reduction in revenue of approximately
$20 . 0 million per biennium.
2 . Telephone companies were previously subject to a
gross receipts tax on the revenues derived from
providing telephone service. The 1985 legislature
reconsidered this tax and determined that telephone
companies should be taxed as other Minnesota
corporations .
In both instances , one group of taxpayers was not favored over
another group. There were no concessions made to the railroad
company or to the telephone company. Instead, they were made
subject to the same taxes imposed against other corporate
taxpayers .
Currently, the Governor is recommending a change in the
taconite tax so that the mining industry will be taxed like
other businesses .
-3-
III . THE GROSS RECEIPTS TAX ON CANTERBURY DOWNS IS
DISCRIMINATORY AND UNFAIR
Operation Of The Tax
Unlike other Minnesota businesses , Canterbury Downs is
subject both to the corporate income tax and also a tax on its
income and on its gross receipts . This double taxation is
discriminatory and unfair . A comparison of the taxation of
Canterbury Downs with another business having identical
revenues and expenses illustrates the heavy impact of the
pari-mutuel tax on the gross receipts of Canterbury Downs .
Example Of Unfair Tax Impact
Business A Canterbury Downs
Revenue 20, 000 , 000 20 , 000 , 000
Tax on Receipts -0- 5 , 100 , 000
20 , 000, 000 14 , 900 , 000
Expenses 16, 000, 000 16 , 000 , 000
Profit 4 , 000, 000 -1 , 100 , 000
The two companies in this hypothetical, which have
identical revenues and expenses, and which should be taxed
equally, have a radically different profit and loss statement
because of the pari-mutuel tax on gross receipts .
The impropriety of the pari-mutuel tax is independent of
the fact that Canterbury Downs made money or lost money in
1986 . The need to remove the discriminatory tax is unrelated
to the profit or loss of the track. It is a matter of
fairness . As a practical matter, it would be simpler if
Canterbury Downs had made a profit in 1986 . Then the request
to remove a discriminatory tax would not be subject to a
reaction that the removal is a "bailout" or a "tax break. "
The impropriety of the Minnesota pari-mutuel tax is
compounded by the fact that it is one of the highest in the
country, more than ten times the rate of some racing states .
Canterbury Downs needs to have this gross receipts tax
removed, just as was necessary in the case of other
industries .
-4-
The Removal Of The Pari-Mutuel Tax Except For The Cost Of
Regulation Is Not A "Bailout" Of Canterbury Downs Nor A
"Tax Break"
Part of the misunderstanding about the legislation being
sought by the horse industry stems from references to a "tax
break" or a "bailout" in certain media coverage.
The change in taxation for railroads was not suggested to
be a "tax break. " It was conforming the taxation of railroads
to that of other businesses . The same is true of changes in
the taxes on mining . Likewise, removal of the pari-mutuel tax
merely places Canterbury Downs on an equal playing field with
other Minnesota businesses . It relieves Canterbury Downs of
what is now double taxation, once on gross receipts off the top
and again on profits at the bottom line.
Canterbury Downs is not asking the state to pick up its
past losses or to share in its losses . These losses are being
absorbed by the owners . If the state were coming in to make up
those losses , that would be a bailout .
If Canterbury Downs were asking for a special, lower real
estate classification, or if it were asking for a special
credit on its corporate income tax, it could be said that it
was requesting a "break" from the taxes paid by other
businesses . Conforming its taxes to those paid by other
businesses is not a tax break.
-5-
Removal Of The Pari-Mutuel Tax Is Not "Help" For
Canterbury Downs
If a taxpayer is found to have overpaid its taxes, the
state gives it a refund. In doing so, the state is not
"helping" the taxpayer to pay its expenses or doing it a
special favor . It is acting so that the taxpayer is paying its
proper portion of the total state revenues .
Similarly, requesting removal of the pari-mutuel tax is
not a request for state "help" in paying purses or otherwise
financing the operations of Canterbury Downs . Canterbury Downs
will finance its own operations with its own revenues upon
correction of this inequity in the tax situation.
-6-
Canterbury Downs Was Aware Of The Law When It Applied For
The License
The fact that Canterbury Downs is proposing changes in
taxes, purses and racing conditions has been objected to by
some as varying the conditions under which the license was
sought, i .e. , "they are trying to change the rules . "
It is true that Canterbury Downs and all other applicants
knew the amount of the pari-mutuel tax and the statutory purse
level when they applied for the racetrack license. It is also
true that in applying for the racetrack license Canterbury
Downs (and apparently the other applicants) was not thinking
about the validity of the pari-mutuel tax. In 1983, there was
not an awareness in the industry of the right and the need to
remove the pari-mutuel tax. That awareness has developed since
that time, with legislation subsequently following in such
states as Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and
Illinois .
However, it is not true that the application for a
license is ever granted on the condition that the 'applicant
waive its legal right to request change in an improper tag or
regulation.
In the case of the racing license, there was no
requirement that all applicants would have to commit to
operating the track on the then conditions, regardless of
future changes in the marketplace. Had there been such a
requirement , no one could have applied for the license. Every
business must constantly change to adapt to continuous economic
changes and changes in consumer habits . Regulated businesses
are not exempt from the need of all businesses to constantly
adapt to the desires of the marketplace. Whichever group
received the license would need to successfully provide an
entertainment that would appeal to the public. Accordingly,
whichever group received the license would expect that
reasonably necessary changes in the operations of the track to
meet conditions in the economy and the marketplace would be
approved by the state, which has reserved regulatory approval
over the operation of the track.
Whichever applicant had received the Minnesota Class A
license would have been confronted with the same changing
conditions in the racing industry. There would have been the
same need to reduce the pari-mutuel tax and to increase purses,
-7-
just as is happening in the other racing states . This
development is not peculiar to Minnesota and it is not peculiar
in Minnesota to Canterbury Downs .
If the tax is discriminatory and unfair, any holder of
the license would have the right to raise that fact, regardless
when it became aware of the impropriety of the tax.
Canterbury Downs Was Not Overbuilt, Thereby Requiring A
Tax Reduction
Some persons have formed an incorrect impression that the
removal of the pari-mutuel tax is being justified as assisting
financial problems of Canterbury Downs because it erroneously
constructed a facility that - is excessively large. The
assumption is that the facility is larger than necessary and
therefore too costly. The further assumption is that if the
state removes the tax it is to help pay for this supposed error
in judgment .
As has been shown, the reduction in the pari-mutuel tax
to the cost of regulation is required because of fairness, not
because of profits or losses at Canterbury Downs.
Nevertheless, the 1986 loss of Canterbury Downs was not due to
an excessively large facility, as is shown by the following.
1 . Four of the five applicants for the Minnesota Class
A license proposed to build a facility of the same general size
as Canterbury Downs . There was a strong consensus among all
parties as to the size of the facility necessary. Only one
applicant proposed to build a smaller facility that would be
used for three months of summer racing .
2 . After the first season of racing, Canterbury Downs
had to expand the original facility to add more seats and more
barns in response to demands of fans and horsemen.
3 . Garden State in New Jersey, which opened in 1984 ,
cost more than $100 . 0 million to build a grandstand and remodel
some of the stable area . Both the new track in Birmingham and
the new track in Oklahoma City are being constructed at a cost
of over $85 . 0 million.
4 . The owners of Canterbury Downs did not build the
facility with minimal equity and a large mortgage with
excessive interest costs. The owners put in an abnormally high
equity, almost $40.0 million of the total investment of $80 . 0
million. Thus, the debt service of Canterbury Downs is
actually substantially lower than would normally be true for a
facility of that magnitude.
-9-
The Need To Replace The Revenues From The Existing
Pari-Mutuel Tax Is Not Grounds For Failing To Correct This
Inequity
The need of the state for a certain level of revenue cannot
stand in the way of correcting a discriminatory tax. If a company
establishes a valid claim for a refund in its taxes, it is not
informed that the state does not have the money for a refund.
Viewed in another way, if the state determines that it has a
need for more revenue, a particular company is not designated to
pay another $10 . 0 million to the state general fund. If such a
revenue need is to be collected from business , it is spread across
the entire business community.
In this case, the inequity of the extra tax on gross
receipts must be terminated. The need for the revenues heretofore
provided by the pari-mutuel tax must be supplied by the state ' s
total revenue base.
-10-
IV. OTHER STATES HAVE ALREADY ACTED TO REDUCE THE PARI-MUTUEL
TAX TO THE COST OF REGULATION
If the racing industry in Minnesota were the first to
raise the propriety of a tax on racing ' s gross receipts, it
might cause questions about the validity of the request.
However, other states have already recognized the need to
eliminate the pari-mutuel tax except for the special costs
associated with regulation of the racing industry.
1 . New Jersey
In 1984 , New Jersey reduced its pari-mutuel tax to
. 5%. That change paved the way for construction of
new tracks at Meadowlands and Garden State, two of
the country' s most modern racing facilities.
E 2 . Maryland
In 1985, Maryland reduced its pari-mutuel tax from
4% to . 5%.
Three years ago the racing and concomittant breeding
industry in Maryland were in severe decline.
However, the action of the Maryland legislature has
generated new life into the industry. Attendance,
handle, and purses at the state' s tracks are all on
an upswing . Thoroughbred Times, January 30, 1987.
3 . Arizona
Arizona recently dropped. from 6% to I%.
New Hampshire is at a rate of 1%.
All racing states will be removing the pari-mutuel tax.
Even without the discriminatory nature of double taxation being
raised, several other states have made substantial reductions
in the pari-mutuel tax.
1 . In December, 1986 , Illinois reduced its pari-mutuel
tax from 7% to 2%.
2 . In 1984 , Pennsylvania reduced its pari-mutuel tax
from 4 . 5% to 1 . 5%. There is a provision for
reduction of the tax to 1% for new tracks.
Legislation is pending in other states that would reduce
-the pari-mutuel tax, including Nebraska and Arkansas .
-11-
V. A MAJORITY OF THE RELIEF FROM REMOVAL OF THE PARI-MUTUEL
TAX WILL GO TO INCREASE PURSES AND TO BENEFIT PERSONS
WORKING IN THE INDUSTRY OR SUPPLYING FEED TO THE INDUSTRY
Passage of this bill will make possible a badly needed
increase in purses .
A. Background Of The Original Law
When the Minnesota Legislature adopted the original
pari-mutuel racing act, it used existing standards for the
takeout tax and for purses . The tax was set at 1 .75% for the
first $48 . 0 million and then 6%. The amount for purses was set
at 5%.
When the original law was drafted establishing
pari-mutuel racing, the portion of the takeout to go to purses
was set at 5%. This was the best estimate of what would be
required for adequate purses when racing began in Minnesota.
B. Competition Requires An Increase In Purses
A 1985 study of trends in racing by Killingsworth
showed that purses increased between 1980 and 1985 at a much
faster pace than had been projected ten years earlier.
By the time that Minnesota reached its first racing
season in 1985, changing conditions in racing made it necessary
to supplement purses by $2 .2 million over the 5% in the
statute, in order to be competitive. That amount had to be
advanced by Canterbury Downs against purses in future years in
order to attract quality horses . After the 1986 Legislature
did not complete action on the proposed pari-mutuel takeout
distribution changes, Canterbury Downs again agreed to overpay
purses on the assumption that the Legislature would address the
reduction in the pari-mutuel tax in 1987 .
As a result of the increase in 1985 and 1986 purses,
the track was able to attract quality horses that were better
than most observers expected. This has contributed to the high
attendance.
-12-
The purse allotment needs to be raised from 5% to 8% to
maintain purses at a competitive level . Purses at other tracks
generally are at more than 5% without supplement from ownership:
Pennsylvania 9 .25
Maryland 9 . 00
Massachusetts 8 . 15
New Jersey 8 . 00
Ohio 8 . 00
Florida 7 . 50
New Hampshire 7 . 25
Louisiana 7 . 00
Kentucky 6 . 725
Nebraska 5 . 70
Minnesota 5 . 00
Canterbury Downs cannot supplement purses in 1987
without removal of the pari-mutuel tax. The severe past losses
make further purse supplements impossible. If the law is not
changed in 1987, Canterbury Downs will have no choice but to go to
the 5% statutory allowance for purses . The experience in 1986 ,
when the track was forced to reduce purse supplements for harness
racing, showed that when purses are reduced, owners of good horses
move to other tracks with higher purses .
A reduction to 5% in the purses and a resulting
lowering of the quality of racing would in turn reduce the
attendance and handle. In just its first two years of operation,
Canterbury Downs has ranked among the top dozen tracks in North
America in daily average attendance. In 1986, Canterbury Downs
produced more "major" crowds (20, 000 or more patrons) than all but
six tracks in the country, all of which are located in the
country' s six largest markets . This attendance indicates strong
roots for potential growth of the entire racing industry.
C. Competition From Tracks In Other States
Competition from other states is increasing in ways
other than increased purses . Other race tracks are improving
" their facilities, making them more competitive with Canterbury
Downs.
Arlington. Illinois has made changes in its tax
structure and Arlington will be rebuilt with a
state-of-the-art facility estimated to cost more than
$100 . 0 million.
Ak-Sar-Ben. This track has just spent $7. 5 million on
major improvements.
-13-
Churchill Downs . This track has installed a new turf
track and made other improvements .
Keeneland. Its upgrading featured the addition of a
new turf track and other remodeling .
Thistledown. The Cleveland track is spending $23 . 2
million on a major upgrading.
D. Competition From New Tracks In Other States
Other states are authorizing pari-mutuel racing and new
facilities will result, further increasing competition with
Minnesota.
1 . Alabama . A new $80-90 million track will open in
Birmingham in March, 1987.
2 . Oklahoma . A new $85 million track will open in
Oklahoma in 1988 .
3 . Wisconsin. A bill has apparently passed the
Wisconsin House and Senate for a constitutional
amendment that would allow pari-mutuel horse
racing and other forms of gambling . There will be
a special vote on this amendment in April of this
year .
4 . Iowa . In 1986, a license was issued to a group
proposing to build a track near Des Moines .
-14-
v
VI . REDUCTION OF THE TAX WILL INCREASE TOTAL STATE REVENUE
Appropriately enough, for doing justice in terminating the
pari-mutuel tax, the state will be ahead in terms of total tax
revenues .
From the time that racing was first brought before the
Minnesota Legislature, it was made clear by its proponents that
the major tax benefits to the state would not .be in the
pari-mutuel tax, but in the taxation on the total economic
activity in the state resulting from racing.
Writer Steve Davidowitz noted in the Minneapolis Star &
Tribune on December 21, 1986 :
"After decades of excessive taxation, most racing states
finally realize that it pays to keep the goose alive rather
than choke her at the neck while she spawns hundreds of
E millions of dollars in industrial development and tax-paying
jobs . "
"More than 3 , 000 people earned taxable income last summer at
Canterbury; in Shakopee, new hotels and restaurants have
been built; investments in horse breeding throughout the
state have boomed. "
High quality racing at Canterbury Downs will benefit the
Minnesota economy in many ways and will provide substantial growth
in the total economy and in total state tax revenues :
A. At Canterbury Downs
1 . Increased attendance and admission taxes .
2 . Expanded employment and income taxes .
3 . Expanded purchases of goods and services, with
growth in sales tax revenues .
4 . Growth in real estate taxes .
Canterbury Downs provides over 3 , 000 jobs and in 1986
paid over $5 . 0 million in property tax, sales tax, admission tax
and payroll tax, exclusive of the pari-mutuel tax.
-15-
B . Expanded Breeding Industry
1 . More employment .
2 . Consumption of hay and grain.
3 . Market for real estate.
4 . Market for breeding farm equipment .
5 . Payment of income and real estate tax.
6 . Purchase of retail goods and services .
The growth of the breeding industry in Minnesota is
dependent upon quality racing at Canterbury Downs . The higher the
purses, the more Minnesotans will invest in breeding, farms. This
local investment is estimated to produce 80% in the growth of the
Minnesota breeding industry. Some out-state operations will
relocate a part of their activities in Minnesota . This is
estimated to contribute 200 of the potential expansion.
Killingsworth projects that if 2 , 000 foals are born in
a year, an attainable figure in Minnesota, it will mean
$45, 000 , 000 to the economy. It will involve 925 jobs . These
figures involve direct expenditure for personnel, supplies and
facilities . Killingsworth multiplies direct expenditures by a
factor of 2 . 2 to derive the total benefit to the economy.
C. Feed Industry
The feed industry, which has the potential to be
extremely important to the suffering rural Minnesota economy, is
much more economically significant than many people realize. It
is estimated that nearly $1 . 8 million will be spent on feed at
Canterbury Downs alone in 1986 . As breeding and racing grow
within the state, this industry is capable of generating more than
$5 . 0 million in gross revenues .
D. Construction Industry
The construction industry will also reap significant
benefits as the racing and breeding industry expands . The
smallest breeding operations require about $100 , 000 in
construction costs . Full scale breeding and/or training
facilities can cost $500 , 000 to $2 , 000 , 000 to construct. In the
last three years (with racing on the horizon) it can be
conservatively estimated that over $6 . 0 million has been spent in
constructing breeding and training facilities . Much more will be
-16-
spent in the future, if the breeding and racing industry is
encouraged to grow. If purses at Canterbury Downs fall below
industry standards, there will be no incentive for investors to
consider becoming involved in this industry in Minnesota.
E. Expansion Of Total Pleasure Horse Industry
A high level of fan interest in racing will stimulate
some interest in the ownership of pleasure horses owned by
Minnesotans . This in turn means greater demand for hay and grain,
new jobs and a market for equipment and facilities.
F. Growth In Tourism
Successful tracks like Oaklawn at Hot Springs and
Ak-Sar-Ben in Omaha, which offer high quality racing, effectively
bring in visitors that contribute to the state ' s economy. This
result contrasts with tracks like Detroit, Michigan or the Fair
Grounds in Louisiana where the quality of racing does not attract
visitors to nearly the same extent.
a A survey of patrons on a day in September, 1985 ,
showed 22 states represented.
• The nationally televised St. Paul Derby, with its
extensive description of state activities,
provided the most "pro-Minnesota" telecast to a
national audience in 1986 of 1 .4 million viewers,
the highest rated show in ESPN' s Racing Across
America series .
• Canterbury Downs has a heavy advertising program
that represents a major contribution to
Minnesota ' s tourism effort and actively
participates in an associations of attractions ,
chambers and convention bureaus to cooperatively
promote Minnesota tourism.
G. Amount Of Economic Activity
Minnesota needs a study of the impact of the racing and
breeding industry on the Minnesota economy. Pending such a study,
it is possible to estimate the total economic benefit of horse
racing to the state of Minnesota by analysis of studies in other
states . A 1985 study in the state of Illinois shows that Illinois
had approximately 10 times the number of foals dropped and also
approximately 10 times the racing activity. Applying that ratio
to the estimated total value of the racing and breeding industry
in Illinois of $1. 0 billion provides a figure of $100 . 0 million
-17-
for the total economic benefit in the state of Minnesota, assuming
a similar very positive program.
Rapid growth in the Minnesota industry since 1984
indicates a total industry today that is substantially larger than
the estimated $150 . 0 million.
A recent study in the State of Maryland also indicated
a total value for the racing and breeding industry of
approximately $1 . 0 billion. That would reinforce an estimate of
approximately $150 . 0 million as the current economic value of the
industry in Minnesota .
Tom Aronson of the American Horse Council stated that
in a nationwide study by the American Horse Council, Canterbury
Downs was cited as having generated in "spectator economy"
approximately $50 . 0 million in 1985 . Aronson also stated that the
numbers are getting bigger faster in Minnesota than any other
state.
Clearly, Minnesota has the potential for a great deal
more economic growth from this industry, if the industry is given
a fair opportunity to compete and to prosper . The total tax
benefits to the State of Minnesota from a major horse industry
will far outshadow the collections from a pari-mutuel tax.
-18-
CONCLUSION
Termination of the pari-mutuel tax. will relieve Canterbury
Downs of what is now double taxation, once on gross receipts off
the top and again on profits at the bottom line. It will relieve
Canterbury Downs of an unequitable burden that no business in
Minnesota could carry and still be profitable .
Termination of the burden of the tax will free up the racing
and breeding industry for growth and realization of its full
potential as a major part of the Minnesota economy.
-19-
STATEMENT OF CANTERBURY DOWNS IN SUPPORT OF
LEGISLATION TO CHANGE PARI-MUTUEL TAX
February 15, 1987
INTRODUCTION
There may have been more misstatements and
misunderstandings about the proposed legislation to change the
pari-mutuel tax than about almost any other bill in recent
memory.
People have been led to believe that Canterbury Downs
wants the state to reimburse it for its losses, or wants the
state to subsidize it by paying part of its bills. In essence,
the rumor is that Canterbury Downs wants special treatment.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. The cause of
this misunderstanding begins with the fact that when the
Minnesota pari-mutuel tax law was passed, neither the
legislature, the industry, nor the general public considered
the tax as a tax on gross receipts. Probably this is because
the tax is not called a gross receipts tax or a gross earnings
tax. Without an understanding of the actual nature of the tax,
removal of the tax may be seen as favoritism or a tax break.
This memorandum illustrates the nature of the tax and the
effects of its removal and nonremoval . Your time spent in
reviewing it is greatly appreciated.
I . THE PARI-MUTUEL TAX IS A TAX OF 25% ON RECEIPTS
History Of The Pari-Mutuel Tax
The pari-mutuel tax began at a time when horse racing was
the only form of legalized wagering . The racetrack business
was so profitable that tracks were able to pay a gross receipts
tax and still have earnings . In recent years, the development
of other forms of gambling and the proliferation of new
entertainment forms all competing for the entertainment dollar
have progressively reduced the profitability of racetracks to
the point where they cannot pay a tax on gross receipts and
still be profitable. Hence, the movement all across the United
States to remove the pari-mutuel tax.
When the Minnesota pari-mutuel law was drafted, the other
racing states had a pari-mutuel tax. Those taxes were not
called a gross receipts tax. It was natural that Minnesota
would also have such a tax, the only decision considered being
the amount of the tax. ''-'
As enacted, the pari-mutuel tax takes 1 3/4% of the first
$48 million wagered and 6% of all remaining amounts wagered
during a racing season. In 1986, this amounted to an average
of 5 . 1% of all amounts wagered during the year .' The tax is
computed on the total amount wagered and not on the net amount
actually received by the racetrack.
I' At that time, there may have been some awareness that a
tax of 6% would be prohibitive. When the original
pari-mutuel tax law was enacted, certain racing
proponents suggested to the Legislature a tax rate
limited to only 1 3/4% up to $48 million with a rate of
6% beginning above $48 million. That suggestion was
accepted and became part of the eventual law. After the
law was passed, those proponents then filed an
application for the Class A racing license showing a
track that was designed for a projected handle in the
area of $48 million.
References in this memorandum to the pari-mutuel tax
include the total collections by the state from wagering
at Canterbury Downs .
-2-
The Tax Takes 25% Of Receipts
Although the maximum statutory rate is 6%, the tax takes
approximately 25% of the pari-mutuel receipts actually
available to Canterbury Downs to cover its operating expenses .
Of the total amount wagered at a licensed racetrack, an average
of approximately 80% is paid back to patrons in winnings,
leaving approximately 20% that is actually received by the
racetrack and known as takeout.
Thus, when the track "handles" $100 . 0 million of wagers,
it only retains approximately $20 . 0 million as its revenues .
The $80 . 0 million is comparable to the $8 . 00 in change that a
sales clerk gives back to a customer who pays for a $2 . 00
purchase with a $10. 00 bill . In the example, $2 . 00 constitutes
the revenues of the store.
The 6% tax is actually 25% of the portion of the total
wagers which are received by the track or 25% of the takeout .
The tax takes 25% of the pari-mutuel receipts of the track.
-3-
C�
II . THE LEGISLATURE HAS RECOGNIZED THAT BUSINESS MUST BE
TAXED EQUALLY, AND HAS ELIMINATED OTHER GROSS RECEIPTS
TAXES
The Legislature has previously responded to other
situations where a gross receipts tax imposed against companies
resulted in an unfair tax burden.
.1 . Prior to 1981, Minnesota imposed a gross receipts
tax on railroad companies equal to 5% of the gross
earnings derived from operations within the state.
In 1980, the gross receipts tax on railroads was
repealed. Railroads had a significant volume of
receipts, but limited earnings . This distorted the
true economic earnings of the industry. The
Legislature acted to change the method by which
railroads are taxed. Now railroads are taxed like
other businesses in Minnesota. The termination of
this gross receipts tax involved a reduction in
revenue of approximately $20 . 0 million per
biennium.
2 . Telephone companies were previously subject to a
gross receipts tax on the revenues derived from
providing telephone service. The 1985 Legislature
reconsidered this tax and determined that telephone
companies should be taxed as other Minnesota
corporations .
In both instances, one group of taxpayers was not favored over
another group. There were no concessions made to the railroad
company or to the telephone company. Instead, they were made
subject to the same taxes imposed against other corporate
- taxpayers .
Currently, the Governor is recommending a change in the
taconite tax so that the mining industry will be taxed like
other businesses .
-4-
a
i
III . THE GROSS RECEIPTS TAX ON CANTERBURY DOWNS IS
DISCRIMINATORY DOUBLE TAXATION
Operation Of The Tax
Unlike other Minnesota businesses, Canterbury Downs is
subject both to the corporate income tax and also a tax on its
pari-mutuel gross receipts. This double taxation is
discriminatory and unfair. A comparison of the taxation of
Canterbury Downs with another business having identical
revenues and expenses illustrates the heavy impact of the
pari-mutuel tax on the gross receipts of Canterbury Downs .
Example Of Unfair Tax Impact
Business A Racetrack
Revenue 20, 000,000 20, 000,000
Tax On Receipts -0- 5, 100 ,000
20, 000,000 14 , 900,000
Expenses 18, 500,000 18 , 500 ,000
Income 1 , 500,000 -3 , 600 , 000
The two companies in this hypothetical, which have
identical revenues and expenses, and which should be taxed
equally, have a radically different profit and loss statement
because of the pari-mutuel tax on gross receipts .
Application To Other Companies
To illustrate the enormous impact of this gross receipts
tax on a business, we have taken the earnings statements for a
recent year of two large well established, well managed
Minnesota companies:
Company A
Assuming 25%
Actual Earnings Gross Receipts
Revenue 5, 600 , 800, 000 5 , 600 , 800, 000
Tax On Receipts -0- 1,400,200, 000
5, 600, 800, 000 4 , 200 , 600, 000
Expenses 5,367,400, 000 5, 367,400,000
Income 233 ,400, 000 ( 1, 166, 800, 000)
-5-
I
Company B
Assuming 25%
Actual Earnings Gross Receipts
Revenue 6, 963 ,300, 000 6 , 963 ,300, 000
Tax On Receipts -0- 1 , 740, 825 , 000
6, 963 ,300, 000 5 , 222 ,475, 000
Expenses 6,720, 100, 000 6, 720, 100 ,000
Income 243 ,200, 000 ( 1,497, 625, 000)
Each of these very successful companies would have had
devastating losses over one billion under a gross receipts tax
of 25%. The examples demonstrate that the larger the revenues,
the larger the loss .
It is doubtful that any business in the State of
Minnesota could pay a tax of 25% of gross receipts and not have
prohibitive losses .
The impropriety of the pari-mutuel tax is independent of
the fact that Canterbury Downs made money or lost money in
1986 . The need to remove the discriminatory tax is unrelated
to the profit or loss of the track. It is a matter of
fairness .
The impropriety of the Minnesota pari-mutuel tax is
compounded by the fact that it is one of the highest in the
country, more than ten times the rate of some racing states .
Canterbury Downs and any other racetracks in the State of
Minnesota need to have this gross receipts tax removed, just as
was necessary in the case of the railroads and telephone
companies .
-6-
The Double Tax Represents The Maior Portion Of The 1986
Loss
In 1986, Canterbury Downs had a loss of $7 . 9 million.
Without the pari-mutuel tax, that loss is reduced substantially.
Actual Operations Tax Reduced To . 5%
Revenue 38,499,238 38,499 , 238
Less Tax 5, 908, 676 668, 500
32, 590,562 37, 830, 738
Expenses 40, 505,462 40, 505,402
Loss (7, 914 , 900) (2 , 684 , 724)
The adjusted loss would be consistent with the fact that in
1986, Canterbury Downs was experimenting with the racing of two
new breeds, quarter horse and harness. The loss at . 5% is of a
magnitude that can be managed by further adaptation of the
racing program to the desires of the racing fans . The loss
caused by the pari-mutuel tax is of a magnitude that cannot be
accommodated by changes in operations .
The Greater The Handle, The Greater The Loss
In addition to being discriminatory, the gross receipts
tax has another highly undesirable feature. The tax is
actually a tremendous negative incentive for Canterbury Downs
to promote the growth of, the racing industry. A business which
is subject to a gross receipts tax that causes it to operate at
a loss, will increase its losses if it increases its revenues .
Thus the present law, if continued in effect, would discourage
Canterbury Downs from efforts to promote racing and a higher
handle.
-8-
i
The Removal Of The Pari-Mutuel Tax Except For The Cost Of
Regulation Is Not A "Bailout" Of Canterbury Downs Nor A
"Tax Break"
Part of the misunderstanding about the legislation being
sought by the horse industry stems from references to a "tax
break" or a "bailout" in certain media coverage.
The change in taxation for railroads was not suggested to
be a "tax break. " It was conforming the taxation of railroads
to that of other businesses . The same is true of changes in
the taxes on mining. Likewise, removal of the pari-mutuel tax
merely makes Canterbury Downs subject to the same taxes as
other Minnesota businesses . It relieves Canterbury Downs of
what is now double taxation, once on gross receipts off the top
and again on profits at the bottom line.
This legislation does not ask the state to pick up past
losses or to share in the expenses of Canterbury Downs . If the
state were coming in to make up losses in excess of what was
caused by the double taxation, that would be a bailout .
If Canterbury Downs were asking for a special, lower real
estate classification, or if it were asking for a special
credit on its corporate income tax, it could be said that it
was requesting a "break" from the taxes paid by other
businesses . Conforming its taxes to those paid by other
businesses is not a tax break.
-9-
Removal Of The Pari-Mutuel Tax Is Not "Help" For
Canterbury Downs
If a taxpayer is found to have overpaid its taxes , the
state gives it a refund.- In doing so, the state is not
"helping" the taxpayer to pay its expenses or doing it a
special favor. It is acting so that the taxpayer is paying its
proper portion of the total state revenues .
Similarly, requesting removal of the pari-mutuel tax is
not a request for state "help" in paying purses or otherwise
financing the operations of Canterbury Downs . Canterbury Downs
will finance its own operations with its own revenues upon
correction of this inequity in the tax situation.
_J-
G�
Canterbury Downs Was Aware Of The Law When It Applied For
The License
The fact that Canterbury, Downs is proposing changes in
taxes, purses and racing conditions has been objected to by
some as varying the conditions under which the license was
sought, i .e. , "they are trying to change the rules . "
It is true that Canterbury Downs and all other applicants
knew the amount of the pari-mutuel tax and the statutory purse
level when they applied for the racetrack license. It is also
true that in applying for the racetrack license Canterbury
Downs (and apparently the other applicants) was not thinking
about the validity of the pari-mutuel tax as a gross receipts
tax. In 1983, there was not an awareness in the industry of
the right and the need to remove the pari-mutuel tax. That
awareness has developed since that time, with legislation
subsequently following in such states as Maryland, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Illinois.
However, it is not true that the application for the
racetrack license was granted or could be granted on the
condition that the successful applicant waive its legal right
to request change in an improper law or regulation.
In the case of the racing license, there was no
requirement that all applicants would have to commit to
operating the track on the then conditions, regardless of
future changes in the marketplace. Had there been such a
requirement, no one could have applied for the license. Every
business must constantly adapt to continuous economic
fluctuations and changes in consumer habits . Regulated
businesses are not exempt from the need of all businesses to
constantly adapt to the desires of the marketplace. Whichever
group received the license would need to successfully provide
an entertainment that would appeal to the public. Accordingly,
whichever group received the license would expect that
reasonably necessary changes in purses and other operations of
the track to meet conditions in racing and in the marketplace
would be approved by the state.
Whichever applicant had received the Minnesota Class A
license would have been confronted with the same changing .
conditions in the racing industry. There would have been the
same need to reduce the pari-mutuel tax and to increase purses,
-11-
4 ,C(,/
just as is happening in the other racing states . This
development is not peculiar to Minnesota and it is not peculiar
in Minnesota to Canterbury Downs .
If the tax is discriminatory and unfair, any holder of
the license would have the right and the need to raise that
fact, regardless when it became aware of the impropriety of the
tax.
-12-
Canterbury- Downs Was Not Overbuilt, Thereby Requiring A
Tax Reduction
Some persons have formed an incorrect impression that the
removal of the pari-mutuel tax is being justified as assisting
financial problems of Canterbury Downs because it erroneously
constructed a facility that is excessively large. The
assumption is that the facility is larger than necessary and
therefore too costly. The further assumption is that if the
state removes the tax it is to help pay for this supposed error
in judgment .
As has been shown, the reduction in the pari-mutuel tax
to the cost of regulation is required because of fairness, not
because of profits or losses at Canterbury Downs .
Nevertheless, the 1986 loss of Canterbury Downs was not due to
an excessively large facility, as is shown by the following .
1. After the first season of racing, Canterbury Downs
had to expand the original facility to add more seats and more
barns in response to demands of fans and horsemen.
2 . Four of the five applicants for the Minnesota Class
A license proposed to build a facility of the same general size
as Canterbury Downs . There was a strong consensus among all
parties as to the size of the facility necessary. Only one
applicant proposed to build a smaller facility with limited
seating that would be used for three months of summer racing .
3 . Four new racetracks, including Canterbury Downs,
,have been built or are being built in the United States .
Canterbury Downs is the least costly of the four racetracks .
Garden State in New Jersey, which opened in 1984, cost more
than $100 . 0 million to build a grandstand and remodel some of
the stable area . Both the new track in Birmingham and the new
track in Oklahoma City are being constructed at a cost of over
$85 .0 million.
4 . The owners of Canterbury Downs did not build the
facility with minimal equity and a large mortgage with
excessive interest costs . The owners put in an abnormally high
equity, almost $40 . 0 million of the total investment of
$80 .0 million. Thus, the debt service of Canterbury Downs is
actually substantially lower than would normally be true for a
development of that magnitude.
Visitors to Canterbury Downs know that it was built with
quality but not with luxury. Its size, as expanded, is now a
-13-
good fit for the fan attendance and provides only the functions
needed for any racing facility.
Canterbury Downs is the only major sports, convention or
entertainment facility in the metropolitan area that was built
by the owners .
-14-
IV. THE NEED TO REPLACE THE REVENUES FROM THE EXISTING
PARI-MUTUEL TAX IS NOT GROUNDS FOR DELAYING CORRECTION OF
THIS DISCRIMINATORY TAXATION
State Revenue Needs Do Not Justify A Discriminatory -Double
Tax
The need of the state for a certain level of revenue cannot
stand in the way of correcting a discriminatory tax. If a company
establishes a valid claim for a refund in its taxes, it is not
informed that the state does not have the money for a refund. Or,
if the state needs more revenue in a particular year it does not
cancel all tax refunds to balance the budget.
Viewed in another way, if the state determines that it has a
need for more revenue, a particular company is not designated to
pay another $10 . 0 million to the state general fund. If such a
revenue need is to be collected from business, it is spread across
the entire business community.
In this case, the inequity of the extra tax on gross
receipts must be terminated. The need for the revenues heretofore
provided by the pari-mutuel tax must be supplied by the state' s
total revenue base. In an $11 .2 billion budget, the 1985-87
pari-mutuel tax revenue is a small part of the projected budget .
The revenue change is approximately half of the revenue impact of
the recent removal of the gross receipts tax of the railroads .
-15-
Revenue Needs Cannot Delay Correction Of The Double
Taxation
As persons become aware that the pari-mutuel tax is
discriminatory double taxation, some consider the state budget
and wonder if the tax could be phased out . While this may be a
natural reaction to ordinary legislation having budget
implications, the result is not permissible in the case of an
improper tax.
If Minnesota did not already have such a tax, no one
would suggest imposing a gross receipts tax on just one
business in the state in addition to the corporate income tax
Thus, budget implications for the removal of the
pari-mutuel tax only exist because the state has collected a
discriminatory double tax in 1985-1987.
The fact that such a discriminatory tax was collected and
used in the state budget, creating the major portion of the
loss of Canterbury Downs in 1986, cannot be the justification
for continuing the improper tax, even temporarily on a reduced
basis . While the past use of the pari-mutuel tax revenue may
create "withdrawal symptoms" on its removal, the answer is not
to require one business alone to ease that problem.
To illustrate, if a company is found to have been paying
its employees less than the minimum wage or the overtime
required by law, it must correct that condition as soon as it
is determined. The state would not allow a delay in ending the
improper action or permit it to be phased out gradually on the
grounds that a gradual phasing out of the improper practice
would be more convenient for the employer ' s budget . Minimizing
- the budget impact cannot be done at the expense of another
party. The State of Minnesota must adhere to the same standard
to which it holds its citizens .
-16-
Partial Removal Of The Tax Would Continue A Prohibitive
Loss For Canterbury Downs
With the elimination of the tax on its gross receipts,
Canterbury Downs will eliminate the largest portion of its 1986
loss .
In 1987, it will be continuing to explore the potential
support for quarter horse racing in Minnesota . There is the
possibility of a lease of the facility for a harness meet.
With these and other uncertainties of racing, Canterbury Downs
only projects a break even year, assuming removal of the tax.
Anything less than full removal of the tax, would continue a
major loss for Canterbury Downs .
For example, if the tax were reduced to 2%, but not
removed to . 5%, Canterbury Downs ' 1987 projections show:
Earnings Statement Change in Earnings
With Tax At . 5% If Tax Removed To 2%
Total Revenue 44 , 609, 500 42 , 853 , 500
Total Expenses 44 ,461, 201 44 ,461,201
Income 148, 299 ( 1, 607, 701)
Thus, only partial removal in 1987 would penalize Canterbury
Downs by approximately $1, 755, 000, a tremendous burden not
required of any other corporation in this state.
-17-
V. OTHER STATES HAVE ALREADY ACTED TO REDUCE THE PARI-MUTUEL
TAX TO THE COST OF REGULATION
If the racing industry in Minnesota were the first to
raise the propriety of a tax on racing ' s gross receipts, it
might cause questions about the validity of the request.
However, other states have already recognized the need to
eliminate the pari-mutuel tax except for the special costs
associated with regulation of the racing industry.
1 . New Jersey
In 1984 , New Jersey reduced its pari-mutuel tax to a
flat . 5%. That change paved the way for
construction of the new track at Garden State, one
of the country' s most modern racing facilities .
2 . Maryland
In 1985, Maryland reduced its pari-mutuel tax from
4% to a flat . 5%.
Three years ago the racing and concomittant breeding
industry in Maryland were in severe decline.
However, the action of the Maryland Legislature has
generated new life into the industry. Attendance,
handle, and purses at the state' s tracks are all on
an upswing . Thoroughbred Times, January 30, 1987 .
3 . Delaware
Delaware has reduced its rate to a flat . 75%
4 . New Hampshire
New Hampshire is at a flat rate of 1%
A recent Chicago Tribune editorial stated, "In the last
12 years, 21 of 25 racing states have cut their pari-mutuel
taxes . Two that did not are now out of the racing business . "
QuarterWeek, November 21, 1986.
All racing states will be removing the pari-mutuel tax.
Even without the discriminatory nature of double taxation being
raised, almost every racing state has made substantial
reductions in the pari-mutuel tax.
-18-
VI . A MAJORITY OF THE RELIEF FROM REMOVAL OF THE PARI-MUTUEL
TAX WILL GO TO INCREASE PURSES AND TO BENEFIT PERSONS
WORKING IN THE INDUSTRY OR SUPPLYING FEED TO THE INDUSTRY
Passage of this bill will make possible a badly needed
increase in purses .
1 . Background Of The Original Law
When the Minnesota Legislature adopted the original
pari-mutuel racing act, it used existing standards for the
takeout tax and for purses. The tax was set at 1 . 75% for the
first $48 . 0 million and then 6%. The amount for purses was set
at 5%.
When the original law was drafted establishing
pari-mutuel racing, the portion of the takeout to go to purses
was set at 5%. This was the best estimate of what would be
required for adequate purses when racing began in Minnesota.
2 . Changing Conditions Require An Increase In Purses
A 1985 study of trends in racing by Killingsworth
showed that purses increased between 1980 and 1985 at a much
faster pace than had been projected ten years earlier .
By the time that Minnesota reached its first racing
season in 1985, changing conditions in racing made it necessary
to supplement purses by $2 . 2 million over the 5% in the
statute, in order to be competitive. That amount had to be
advanced by Canterbury Downs against purses in future years in
• order to attract quality horses . After the 1986 Legislature
did not complete action on the proposed pari-mutuel takeout
distribution changes, Canterbury Downs again agreed to overpay
purses on the assumption that the Legislature would address the
reduction in the pari-mutuel tax in 1987.
As a result of the increase in 1985 and 1986 purses,
the track was able to attract quality horses that were better
than most observers expected. This has contributed to the high
attendance.
-19-
CX/
The purse allotment needs to be raised from 5% to 8% to
maintain purses at a competitive level . Purses at other tracks
generally are at more than 5% without supplement from ownership:
Pennsylvania 9 .25
Maryland 9 .00
Massachusetts 8. 15
New Jersey 8 .00
Ohio 8 .00
Florida 7. 50
New Hampshire 7.25
Louisiana 7 .00
Kentucky 6 .725
Nebraska 5 . 70
Minnesota 5 .00
Canterbury Downs cannot supplement purses in 1987
without removal of the pari-mutuel tax. The severe past losses
make further purse supplements impossible. If the law is not
changed in 1987, Canterbury Downs will have no choice but to go to
the 5% statutory allowance for purses . The experience in 1986,
when the track was forced to reduce purse supplements for harness
racing, showed that when purses are reduced, owners of good horses
move to other tracks with higher purses .
A reduction to 5% in the purses and a resulting
lowering of the quality of racing would in turn reduce the
attendance and handle. In just its first two years of operation,
Canterbury Downs has ranked among the top dozen tracks in North
America in daily average attendance. In 1986, Canterbury Downs
produced more "major" crowds (20, OOO. or more patrons) than all but
six tracks in the country, all of which are located in the
country' s six largest markets . This attendance indicates strong
roots for potential growth of the entire racing industry.
3 . Competition From Tracks In Other States
Competition from other states is increasing in ways
other than increased purses . Other racetracks are improving their
facilities, making them more competitive With Canterbury Downs .
Arlington. Illinois has made changes in its tax
structure and Arlington will be rebuilt with a
state-of-the-art facility estimated to cost more than
$100. 0 million.
Ak-Sar-Ben. This track has just spent $7. 5 million on.
major improvements.
-20-
Churchill Downs . This track has installed a new turf
track and made other improvements .
Keeneland. Its upgrading featured the addition of a
new turf track and other remodeling.
Thistledown. The Cleveland track is spending $23 .2
million on a major upgrading of its facility.
4 . Competition From New Tracks In Other States
Other states are authorizing pari-mutuel racing and new
facilities will result, further increasing competition with
Minnesota .
Alabama. A new $80-90 million track will open in
Birmingham in March, 1987 .
Oklahoma. A new $85 million track will open in
Oklahoma in 1988.
Wisconsin. A bill has apparently passed the Wisconsin
House and Senate for a constitutional amendment that
would allow pari-mutuel horse racing and other forms of
gambling. There will be a special vote on this
amendment in April of this year.
Iowa. In 1986, a license was issued to a group
proposing to build a track near Des Moines .
-21-
� Ct/
VII . REDUCTION OF THE TAX WILL INCREASE TOTAL STATE REVENUE
Appropriately enough, for doing justice in removing above
the cost of regulation the pari-mutuel tax, the state will be
ahead in terms of total tax revenues .
Principal Tax Revenue Comes From The Total Industry
From the time that racing was first brought before the
Minnesota Legislature, it was made clear by its proponents that
the major tax benefits to the state would not be in the
pari-mutuel tax, but in the taxation on the total economic
activity in the state resulting from racing . Racing is
dramatically different from other major sports in the amount of
jobs and capital investment that can accompany racing .
A lengthy report on horse racing by the New Jersey State
Commission on Investigation acknowledges this fact, stating:
"Perhaps racing should no longer be regarded as a state
revenue source, but solely as the prime means of supporting
a horse industry overall that adds so significantly to the
state' s economy. " QuarterWeek, November 21, 1986 .
Writer Steve Davidowitz noted in the Minneapolis Star &
Tribune on December 21, 1986 :
"After decades of excessive taxation, most racing states
finally realize that it pays to keep the goose alive rather
than choke her at the neck while she spawns hundreds of
millions of dollars in industrial development and tax-paying
jobs . "
"More than 3 , 000 people earned taxable income last summer at
Canterbury; in Shakopee, new hotels and restaurants have
been built; investments in horse breeding throughout the
state have boomed. "
High quality racing at Canterbury Downs will cause continued
growth in the breeding part of the industry and will benefit the
Minnesota economy in many ways . It will provide substantial
growth in the total economy and in total state tax revenues :
1 . Jobs And Taxes At Canterbury Downs
a. Increased attendance and admission taxes.
b. Expanded employment and income taxes.
-22-
C. Expanded purchases of goods and services, with
growth in sales tax revenues .
d. Growth in real estate taxes .
Canterbury Downs provides over 3 , 000 jobs and in 1986
paid over $5 . 0 million in property tax, sales tax, admission tax
and payroll tax, exclusive of the pari-mutuel tax.
2 . Expanded Breeding Industry
a . More employment .
b. Consumption of hay and grain.
C. Market for real estate.
d. Market for breeding farm equipment .
e. Payment of income and real estate tax.
f . Purchase of retail goods and services.
The growth of the breeding industry in Minnesota is
dependent upon quality racing at Canterbury Downs . The higher the
purses, the more Minnesotans will invest in breeding, farms. This
local investment is estimated to produce 80% in the growth of the
Minnesota breeding industry. Some out-state operations will
relocate a part of their activities in Minnesota. This is
estimated to contribute 20% of the potential expansion.
Killingsworth projects that if 2 , 000 foals are born in
a year, an attainable figure in Minnesota, it will mean $45 . 0
million to the economy. It will involve 925 jobs . These figures
involve direct expenditure for personnel, supplies and
facilities . Killingsworth multiplies direct expenditures by a
factor of 2 . 2 to derive the total benefit to the economy.
3 . Feed Industry
The feed industry, which has the potential to be
extremely important to the suffering rural Minnesota economy, is
much more economically significant than many people realize. It
is estimated that nearly $1 . 8 million will be spent on feed at
Canterbury Downs alone in 1986. As breeding and racing grow
within the state, this industry is capable of generating more than
$5 .0 million in gross revenues .
-23-
4. Construction Industry
The construction industry will also reap significant
benefits as the racing and breeding industry expands. The
smallest breeding operations require about $100,000 in
construction costs. Full scale breeding and/or training
facilities can cost $500,000 to $2, 000, 000 to construct . In the
last three years (with racing on the horizon) it can be
conservatively estimated that over $6.0 million has been spent in
constructing breeding and training facilities. Much more will be
spent in the future, if the breeding and racing industry is
encouraged to grow. If purses at Canterbury Downs fall below
industry standards, there will be no incentive for investors to
consider becoming involved in this industry in Minnesota.
5. Expansion Of Total Pleasure Horse Industry
A high level of fan interest in racing will stimulate
some interest in the ownership of pleasure horses owned by
Minnesotans. This in turn means greater demand for hay and grain,
new jobs and a market for equipment and facilities .
6. Growth In Tourism
Successful tracks like Oaklawn at Hot Springs and
Ak-Sar-Ben in Omaha, which offer high quality racing, effectively
bring in visitors that contribute to the state' s economy. This
result contrasts with tracks like Detroit, Michigan or the Fair
Grounds in Louisiana where the quality of racing does not attract
visitors to nearly the same extent.
o A survey of patrons on a day in September, 1985,
showed 22 states represented.
o The nationally televised St . Paul Derby, with its
extensive description of state activities,
provided the most "pro-Minnesota" telecast to a
national audience in 1986 of 1 .4 million viewers, -
the highest rated show in ESPN' s Racing Across
America series .
o Canterbury Downs has a heavy advertising program
that represents a major contribution to
Minnesota' s tourism effort and actively
participates in an associations of attractions,
chambers and convention bureaus to cooperatively
promote Minnesota tourism.
7. Amount Of Economic Activity
Minnesota needs a complete study of the impact of the
racing and breeding industry on the Minnesota economy. Pending
such a study, it is possible to estimate the total economic
benefit of horse racing to the state of Minnesota by analysis of
studies in other states . A 1985 study in the state of Illinois
shows that Illinois had approximately 10 times the number of foals
dropped and also approximately 10 times the racing activity.
Applying that ratio to the estimated total value of the racing and
breeding industry in Illinois of $1. 0 billion provides a figure of
$100.0 million for the total economic benefit in the state of
Minnesota, assuming a similar very positive program.
Rapid growth in the Minnesota industry since 1984
indicates a total industry today that is substantially larger than
the estimated $150 .0 million.
A recent study in the State of Maryland also indicated
a total value for the racing and breeding industry of
approximately .$1 .0 billion. That would reinforce an estimate of
approximately $150.0 million as the current economic value of the
industry in Minnesota.
Tom Aronson of the American Horse Council stated that
in a nationwide study by the American Horse Council, Canterbury
Downs was cited as having generated in "spectator economy"
approximately $50.0 million in 1985. Aronson also stated that the
numbers are getting bigger faster in Minnesota than any other
state.
Clearly, Minnesota has the potential for a great deal
more economic growth from this industry, if the industry is given
� a fair opportunity to compete and to prosper. The total tax
benefits to the State of Minnesota from a major horse industry
will far outshadow the collections from a pari-mutuel tax.
-25-
Q�
Viability Of The Breeding Industry Depends Upon Quality
Racing At Canterbury Downs
The major investments that are taking place in costly horse
breeding farms in Minnesota is directly dependent upon an
expectation that racing with competitive purses will occur at
Canterbury Downs . Owners cannot afford such expensive breeding
operations to race horses of limited value for a low level of
purses .
If purse levels at Canterbury Downs drop back to a lower
level, there will still be racing at Canterbury Downs . However,
the lower quality of horses that can afford to run for reduced
level of purses will have an immediate adverse effect on the size
of the total horse industry in the State of Minnesota . The
experience in other states has demonstrated this fact . The strong
revival of the industry in Maryland after change of its
pari-mutuel tax followed years of decline. The decline resulted
from losses by the racetracks which resulted in lowered purses .
-26-
W
CONCLUSION
Termination of the pari-mutuel tax will relieve Canterbury
Downs of what is now double taxation, once on gross receipts off
the top and again on profits at the bottom line. It will relieve
Canterbury Downs of an unequitable burden that no business in
Minnesota could carry and still be profitable.
Termination of the burden of the tax will free up the racing
and breeding industry for growth and realization of its full
potential as a major part of the Minnesota economy.
I
-27-
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Joseph Ries, Shakopee Fire Dept.
RE: Fire Department Smoking Policy/By-Laws Approval
DATE : February 13, 1987
Introduction:
The Shakopee Fire Department has formulated the attached Fire
Department Smoking Policy in response to the request made by
Shakopee City Council on 2/3/87 . We feel this is a workable policy
which should meet the requirements which might be set forth in the
near future by various agencies .
Policy:
The policy outlines various locations to be NO SMOKING AREAS.
We will also encourage present members who smoke to quit
smoking. Finally, we stipulate that all new firefighters shall
be nonsmokers by the end of their probation period.
Consideration should also be given to the possibility of extend-
ing this or a similar policy to include all city employees.
These fulltime employees are covered by the City of Shakopee ' s
Health Care Benefit Package. The City' s cost for this package
might possibly be influenced by such a policy.
Recommendation:
Council approval of the attached Shakopee Fire Department Smoking
Policy will finalize the 2/3/87 approval of the Fire Department
Physical Examination Program. With this program finalized, the
remainder of the Shakopee Fire Department By-Laws may then be
approved.
Alternatives :
1 . Approve the policy as drafted.
2. Modify the policy.
3. Reject the policy and instruct the department to return
with a revised policy.
Action Requested:
1. Approve the proposed Shakopee Fire Department Smoking
Policy dated 2/6/87 .
2 . Move to approve the By-Laws of the Shakopee Fire Department
dated February 17 , 1987. (This includes the Physical
Examination Program )
JR:cah
Attachments
SHAKOPEE FIRE DEPARTMENT
SMOKING POLICY DATE 2/6/87
All members of The Shakopee Fire Department shall
adhere to the following smoking guidelines.
1 . The following locations shall be designated as NO
SMOKING AREAS.
A. The Shakopee Fire Station , except for designated
smoking areas.
B. All Shakopee Fire Department vehicles.
C. Any Fire or Rescue scene at which the Shakopee Fire
Department has been requested .
2. All members of the Shakopee Fire Department who are
smokers shall be strongly encouraged to quit smoking and
maintain non-smoking status.
3. All new firefighters from this date shall be non-smokers
by the end of their probationary period . The above
mentioned non-smoking status includes the firefighter ' s
time when he/she is not on Fire Department Duty.
BY-LAWS Or� THE SH4K0PEE FIRE DEPWTMENT
lndexFebruaryFebruaryI7, 1987 �
;
I . Definiticms
2,
ARTICLE I . Objectives
3, ARTICLE Il : Organization
4. ARTI[LE IIT, : Elections and Appointments
5. �RTI[LE IV: Duties and Responsibilities
�. ARTI [L-':: V: Qua lificat ions for Membership
7. ARTICLE VI ; ReiastatePPents, lmpeachmen+s,Dismzssals, Leaves
of 4bsencevamd Suspensions
B. ARTICLE VII . DrzIls, Training ano Meeting Proceedures
9. ARTICLE VIII : Convention Delegates
10. ARTICLE IX : By-Lams A) terations and Amendments
11 . 4RTICLE X : Disbandment
DEFlNITI0NS
1 . AS uSed in this document, "The Department" shall refer
to The Shakopee Fire Department.
2.
AS used in this Jocumeot, "The Chief" shall refer to The
Chief of The Shakopee Fire Department.
3. As used in this document, "Assistant Chief (s) " shall
refer to the Assistant Chiefs of the Shakopee Fire
Department.
4. 4\s used in this, diocmnent, " Captains" shall refer to toe
[aFtains of the Shakopee Fire Department.
5. *s used in this document, "Training Officer" shall refer
to the first ( 1st ) Captain on the Shakopee Fire
Department,
6. As used in this oocumentv "Safety Officer" shall refer
to the fourth (4th) Captain on the Shakopee Fire Department.
7. As used in this LJocument, "Fire Marshal " shall refer to
the Fire Marshal of the Shakopee Fire Department.
G. As used in this document, "The Secretary" shall refer to
the Secretary of the Shakopee Fire Department.
9~ As used :Ln this document, "The Treasurer~ shall refer to
the Treasurer of the Shaxmpee Fire Department.
10. As used in this do.7mment, "The Engineer" shall refer to
tme Engineer of the 51-oakopee Fire Departmwent.
11 As used in th"s documen�°
`AssEngzneer (�� " s�all
re�er to tne As��istan� Enpu �eer( s> of Shakopee Fire
Depar-�ntpr/t .
�2 �� u�e� zn t,zs document, "�irefighter(s/ " shall refer
~
any person serv�ng n othe Shakopee Fire Department as a
to
probatiuner or an active memner.
13 As msed �n t�is docun�nt, °Menooer" shall refer to any
^ F Department �irefighter who has compIeted tris
Shakopee ire
- -' t
probation-ry period and has been '/m ed t o membership
Fire Department membx?rs.
us�� in ti'zs document, " ProDationer" sha� I refer to
any Skakopee Fire Deparlmen-r firetigutFr who �s servinrz) his
first year with the Shekopee Fire Department and has not
oeen voted ro membersh�p status.
15 . As used in this oocument, "Hnnorarg Menober" 4FIl refer
to any Shi^kopee Fire Department memoer who has resiqned
according to the minimum servzce 'time and other stipulations
set b�4 these Dy-Lams.
16. As used in the mocument , °officers" refer to all elected
positions other than comqlittees.
ARTICLE J.
(0bJectiwes)
section I . This organization shall be known as the Shakopee
Vo}unteer Fire Department '
Section 2- Its objectives shall be:
A, Fire Preven-!:ion and Education toward sante.
B. Fire Supresszon.
[ . Preservation and protection of life and
prope—y againSt injury and camage at
1nLidents where the Shauopee Fire Department
'S'ervices are requested.
ARTICLE II
(0rganization
`
Section 1 . The Department shall be composed of not less
-five (35 ) active members and as many in excess
of thirty-tzve (35 ) as may, by the [itU Council , tie deemed
necessary for the adequate protection of the corDmunity.
Section 2. The cr.ain of command as it is defined -�or the
0peratzonal Officers ` befzned as numbers 1 trrough 12 listed
below) , and all o+h.er firefighters / number 13 below) in The
Department. shall be as follows in order of sunerimrity and
accountanility : `
1 . Chief
2. 1st Assistant Chief
3. 2nd Assistant Chief
4. 1st Captain (Training Officer)
5, 2nd Captain
6. 3rd Captain
7. 4th Captain (Safety Officer )
8' Fire Marshal
9' 5ecretary
10. Treasurer,
is . Engineer
12' Assistant Engineer
13. Firefighters by seniority
* Other officers shall be added as t4e 0epartment may
deem necessary for the effective operation of The
Department.
Section 7. There shall he an Executive Committee composed
of the Chief, the Assistant Chiefs, the Secretary and the
Treasurer.
Section 4, The Chief of The Department shall be accountable
to the Executive Committee; the City Administrator, and the
City Council . All other department and Operational Officers
shall be held accountable to the Chief of The Department
only.
Section 5 . The Nominating Committee is an elected committee
compof five (5 ) members.
Section 6. The Screening Committee is composed of the
Chief , 1st Assistant Chief , 2nd Assistant Chief, 1st
Captain, Treasurer, Secretary, and two (2) Firefighters'
Section 7. The Auditing Committee is an elected committee
composed of five (5 ) members.
Section 8. The Grievance Committee is an elected committee
composed of four (4) memoers and one ( 1 ) alternate.
Section 9. Special committees may be formed as deemed
necessary ny The Department.
ARTICLE III
(Elections, Appointments)
Section 1 . A person who has been properly qualified by the
Screening Committee shall be elected to prooationer status
during a regular Department business meeting with a maiority
vote of the voting members present at the meeting.
Section 2. Probationers shall be elected to Department
Kembership status during the regular business meeting
following their successful completion of the one( 1 ) Year
probationary period. Vo be so elected the probationer must
receive a two-thirds (2i3) vete of the Department members
present at the meet iDg.
Section ;. Regular elections shall take place during the
November business meeting each year.
Section 4. The Chief, Assistant Chiefs, Engineer, Captains,
Secretary, and Treasurer shall be elected to =nerve a one ( 1 )
year term with a majority vote by the voting members present
.at the election meeting. It more than two candidates are on
the ballot and a majority vote is not found, the candidate
with the lowest: number cf votes is dropped from the ballot
and the vote retaken.
;section 5. The non-officer members of the Screening
Committee shall be elected to serve a. one ( 1 ) year term with
each department member present voting for both positions.
The two (2) people with the highest number of votes obtain
the positions.
Section b. The Nominating Committee and Auditing Committee
are elected for a five (5 ) year term on a rotating basis one
l i rnEmber every year to each committee.
Section 7. The Grievance Committee is elected for a five
(5 ) year term on a rotating basis with he first year served
as an alternate.
Section B. The Fire Marshal is appointed by The Chief.
Section 9. Assistant: Engineers are appointed bq The
Eny i beer .
Section 1C. Other special committees shall be appointed by
The Chief. Members for special committees shall appointed
by The Chief .
Section 11 . All elected officers and committee members
sF,ai . i assume their respective positions, duties, and
responsmi 1 it ies on January t irst ( ist ) following their
election.
Section 12. In the event that an elected officer should
res. on from his/her office or The Department, retire, or ue
removed from his/her otfice, an election to refit the
position shall be veld at the neat regular business meeting
according to Article ill , Section 4.
ARTICLE IV
(DLit i es, Respons i b i l i ties)
Section 1 . The duties and responsibilities of the Chief
are: v
a) To call and r-reside at all regular Department meet`,ngs
to preserve ordery to decide all points of order that may
ar:rse ( Robers Rules of Order !newly Revised Shall Prevail ) .
His/Her decision_ are subject_ to an Appeal by the members of
The Department.
b ) To s+-?e that all subordinate officers e:.<ecute their
c)blipations and duties to the best of their abilities.
C.) To be Present at all Fire Department operations and
functions if Possible, and to assume full charge of all
Shakopee Fire Department operations and functions.
d) -,,yo call special meetings at the written request of five
(5) members of The Department, with such request stating the
subject c)f- the call .
e) To enforce the By-Laws of The Department to the best: Uf
his/her ability and to have a general 3upervis:ton over all
the affairs of The Department.
f) it shall be within his power to suspend any member for a
just caccse, subject_ to Article V1 , Section 7. Written
suspension notice must be given to such member by The Chief.
g ) To be responsible Tor the personnel , moral , and general
efficiency of The Department.
h ) TD, with the advice and consent of the Executive
Committee, :jet rules, regulations, and operating proceedures
governing The Department. These rules, regulations, and
proceedures shall be presented to The Department, Posted in
written form for thirty (:30) days- and ►;ept as permanent
record. These rLLles and regulations are Subject to appeal
bq the department membership.
i ) To preside at all Grievance Committee meetings and to
. provide the deciding vote in the event of a tie unless the
grievance at hand concerns The Chief.
j ) To see that all. appropriate department recorri, are kept.
k ) To approve schooling pertaining to the fire service for
all members and submit the bills for such F�chooling to The
City for payment .
1 ) To complete training curriculums as sept forth by the
department.
rection - he duties and responsibilities of the Assistant
Chiefs are:
a) To be present if possible, at all Fire Department
operations and functions.
b) To assist The Chief in the discharge of his/her duties,
and in the event of the absence of The Chief, they ;hall
assume his/her auties and responsibilities in accordance
with the chain of command specified in Article SI , suction
2.
_) The 1st Assistant Chief shalt oversee the functions of
all assigned committees. He/She shall also, i? necessary,
assume responsibility for the completion of these commi tees'
responsibilities.
d) All Assistant Chiefs shall aompl.ete training curriculums
as set forth by the department.
Section 3. The duties and responsibilities of The Captains
are
a) To be present if possible, at all Fire Department
operations and functions.
b) To mseiwt The Cnief and The Assistant Chiefs in the
discharge of their duties. In the event of the absence of
all Chiefs, they shall assume The Chief 's duties and
re popsibilities in accordance with the zhain of command
specifieo in Article 11 , section 2.
0 The ist Captain shah be 6esignated as Training Officer
and is responsible for all department drills, training
matt'erB, functions, materials, and records.
d) The ist Captain (Training officer) is responsible to
monitor and assess a probationers' progress and 6evelopment
and info'r'm the probationers of their progress and status.
e) The Ist Captain shall report to The Department at the
time of a probationer 's membership vote, the probationer 's
completion or non-completion of all eligability reRWrements
and general performance comments.
f) The fourth ( 4th ) Captain shall be aesi gnated as ;safety
Odicer. He/She shall monitor personal safety in all
Department operations and proceedures mailing sure all safety
guidelines are adhered to. In the event of a breech of
existing guidelines, the Safety Officer shall inform the
involved firefighterf a) of the violation (5) and inform them
of the guiaelines involved. In the event that disciplinary
action is to be taken the incident should be presented to
'
The Chief with r,vFciPlznar-,j procee:�u-�Ts foJIOWed as :,n ~A�^
/ w
Article- JV, Sec�-Lon e/ , f ) rq) and h } . The Safety
shall aIso Propose new safety qui delznes and proceec!xres to
the Chief as required for approva.� by the Executive {nuncil .
f ) It snall be the duty of all subseq�.tent to
assist the 1st Captain in his/her duties.
e ) All captains shall complete a 4.7raimzno currjculmn as set
+orth by the Training 0+ficer.
h ) Al Captains within the f--�rst ( lst ) year � n sa) d
capacity shall complete, if not already completed,
appropriate instructors training as reRuired to obtaz-n 5tate
Vocational Firefighter Instrucrors Licence ( Refe-once
requirements State of Minnesota, 1985) .
i ) The 1st Captain shall establish a train.,ing -urr ., culum
for a1l officers and keep it current and appropriate.
SEction 4. The duties and repmrsibilities of the Fire
Marshal are:
a) To be present if possible, at all Fi�-e Department
operations -And fumctionS.
b) To make Periodic inspecions of special hazards as
required, and keep a record there of.
c> Tc enforce applicable City 0rdinanceS and current
adopted or applicable Fire and Life Safety Codes specific to
his/her assigned authority through said oroinances.
d) To, in the absence of all superior officers, assurfe the
dutieS and responsibiIities of The Chief in accordance with
the chain of commxi�nd specified in Article II , section 2'
5ectinn 5. The duties and responsibilities of the Secretary
are:
a> To be present if possible, at all Fire Department
operations and functions~
b) To keep a record of all proceedings of The Department ;
to c--all -the roll ; to record all absences and to keep the
books and preserve the records of The Department.
C > To give each member at least one day's notice of any
special meeting.
d7 "a ncit-ify F>aCh person elected a. probationer on The
r,1ERctt"T:Srlent of SLACK election and fUrni5h him/her wi. -th all
appropriate L:`gLiiptment.
P) To keep a record of the department 's outstanding
propewty.
f ) To countersign al ; checks drawn on Department accounts.
g) To alert and notifq any firefa.ghter that has missed t;,►o
consea_LIt i ve meet i ngS-
h ) To, in the absence of all superior officersq assume the
duties and -esponsibilities of the Chief in accordance with
the chain of command specilt`i.ed in Article 11 , section 21.
Section 6. The duties and responsibilities of the
Treasurer are:
a) _-n be present if possible, at. all Fire Department
operations and functions.
b) io collect all dues and other monies. dile The Department
giving proper receipts tr,erefore.
C:) -to regular accoL',nts. of all moni.e5 as received and
to pay said money out ori t`te approval of The Department.
d) To give a rrionthl,d report of =_un►s received and balance on
hand; and to retake an annual itemized report of the sums
received and from what sources, the suras paid out and to
ws►om, and of the balance on hand or the deficiency due The
Department at the f%rst meeting in January.
r--) To submit his nooks and official documents for tete
e:-...amination by the auditing comn►ittee at the end of each
f:_scal year enabling there to make proper reports
X.) 'To, n the absence of all superior officers, zssu►ne the
duties and responsibilities of The Chief in accordance urith
the chair: of command specified in Article. 11 , section :C.
Section 7. The d►_eties land responsibilities of rhe Engineer
ars,".
a? `To be present if possible, at all Fire Department
operations and functions.
b) To be in c-targe of all maintenance and repairs of all
apparatus and equipment of t_he Fire Department.
:. i Ta be in r.harcje of aiairoaii g inventory of all
maintenance Equipment and maintenance tooi=s ct The
I)er,artu-ient . [[
d) To prppcire and maintain a Preventative maintenance
SC-hecdu_e c f all auparatus of `Fhe Department.
e) To ass-ire completion of required tests of fire apparatus
and c�uiptment and keeping records in accordance with
applicable standards:..
f ) 'To. in thtFi absence of all superior officers, assunre the
duties ano responsibilities of The Chief in accordance with
the r_h{loin of c.onsmand specified in Article II , suction
Section rt. The (JLLtie-s and responsibilities of the
Assistant Engineers are:
a) To be present if possible, at all fire department
operations and functions.
b) To, :in the absence of all superior officers, assume the
duties and responsibilities of The Chief in accordance with
the chain of command specified in Article II , section. 2.
r_) To assist The Engineer in the completion of his/her
dut i es.,
d) To, in t`,e absence of the engineer, perform the duties
of- the eingineer.
Section 9. The duties and responsibilities of all
Department ciref ighters are:
zi) 7o obey all commands of their officers while on duty+.
b) To be present if possible, at all fire department
operations and ;-unctions #ollowir"g established _roceedures.
C) To attend at least one ( 1 ) drill Per calander month.
Any member no+- l.ttending at least ona ( 1 ) drill per calander
month is: subject to the provisions in Article VI , Section 1.
d) To attend one business iTteeting per month. Any member
who is absent from three COr.Sectitive regular business
meetings shall be subject to Article Vi , Section 2.
e) To inves.t-:icy•_==tie the character and standing of an4 person
making application f-or probaticjn st-atus or, membership in
this departments or sUbjects vital to the department, and
repoe-t its findings to The Department.
f ) To necome tami liar with the-, handl y.nq and .operation of
,til art-Icles of equiptrnent.
rj ) To f,:*mi l iari ze them!�elves with the r'Ltles Set forth in
trkese By---Laws and conduct themselves accordir►yly. Conduct
i r conflict 1 i ci: with these rules i.S subject to Article VI ,
SC-c- ion 5.
h No member rhe?ll appear �.t meetxngs cf The Department or
on rie_kty under the irs�luence of crus or alchohol (,�s defined
lc:�:a.1 1. :' 1Tri.t�, presently ).n effect TIL shall he/she he
gt:ilty Of conouc.t Ltnbecrami.nq a gentleman/ lady, or --it}aerwi_i-e
be a di!-:-grace to The Department. Conduct ass 1 i Fted above in
this subsection is subJe'c-t to peTtalt1,4 Of se_ SPE—TISIOP, eY°
oT.sc�sar�3F as set forth in Article V? , Section ?.
ase-.1st new firefighters during thier probationary
period or,, the department.
j ) i o, in the a ,sence of all suPer~i or officers, ASSUME-- the
d%Aties and responsibilities of the Chief according to the
ct!atir, of command specified in Article II , section 2.
t, ;c
complete 7riaininq curriculums a4 set fc?rth by the
`Yrai.ninq otfic.er.
1. ) To, aI-t_er r:>ne yeai^ frram dare of entrr�rrcey as a requ'}.ar
member, port:has�e +hE� ojfi�ial. departrrez�t dr°ess un orrTr,. thi=
ie ng t ne approved chess un i Perm at tna -time ofi becomi res a
department member.
M) To anTrLeaIly take the department_ specified medical
examination. This examination shall be paid for by The
1 i.f any a.ct i ve memoer does not Pass try i
medical e:;arreanctt:iori f'or reasons or health
heisahe sfie,11 noi: be dropped from the
membership roll , but instead will be assigned
appropriate cioties by The Chief subject to
recommendations k+y� a Qual i f i.ed Medical
Physi ciaP-
) The Department specified reredi cal exami nat ion
steall consist of the following tests or proceedures and
interpretations by a qualified medical physician. These
tests or proceedures shall be performed at the intervals
specified in Parenthesis.
a) ) Respiratory Function Evaluation. (Annuall�=O
! ) ) Assesment of Lung Capacities.
D ) Assessment of Airflow Rates.
;) ? Int_erpretat4on by a Physician.
b) ) F-lood Profile: ( 12 firet-iahters per year on �% rotating
basi a) {I�
I ) ) Carbon Monoxicie
�.) ) Total Cholesterol
3) ) HDL-Cholesterol
4) i Glucose
5) ) 'Triglycerides
c) ) Cardin-vascular Evaluation: ( 12 firefighters per year
on a rotating hasis)
'i ) ) Resting Heart nate & Blood Pressure
') ) Re4tiTlq Electrocardiogram
-3J ) Exercise Heart Rate & Blood Pressure
4) ) Exercise Electrocardiogram
Vii ) ) Interpretation by a physician
n) To serve on committees as appointed or elected.
Section 10. The duties and responsibilitic:rs of department
prc�ba t i onerc a: re.:
a ) To follow and perform according to all items listed in
Article IV, Section 9. except iterrs c) , j ) , and item rrr) . To
mare all drills and meetings e-x.cept for masons of work,
tami :l�•�, etc or schooling.
b,) Tc.-), wi. thin the probationary Period, successfUlly
complete Firefighter I training (as required for
certification by the, State of Minnesota at time of the
Probationer 's training) , and mimintum medical training as
defined by The Department.
Section 11 . The duties and responsibilities of honorary
members are:
a) To be governed by the By-Laws of the Shakopee Firs
Department, but have no voice or vote in the business of the
Department.
b) To be subject to recall for duty in an emergency upon
-khe order of the Chief.
Section 1^. The duties and responsibility of the Executive
Committee are:
a) To take charge of the property of The Department and see
that it is: Properly maintained and utilized.
by To advise and give proper consent to the Chief in
`ormulating the rules and regulations governing The
Department not specified in these BY-Laws.
c) To hold formal hearing; which sroali be fair and
impartial before impeacr,ment of any officer anti/car
eissmissa:l of any member. If the officer (.) in question is
a roember t-aY the EXecutive Committee he/she stall stet.) down
during the hearing P—ocess. The neX-y ranking officer(s) not
involved in the hearing shall fill the vaca.ncy(s) .
Section 13. The duties and responsibil. ita.es of the
Noatir'lat ing Committee are:
a) 'To make a rec.cmmencatiorr to the department memberst-tip in
selecting the F=ire Department_ alerted positions.
Section 14. The dUties and responsibilities of the
Screening Committee are:
-0 To meet with allprospective members and their spouses
evaluating whether or not the prospective members; meet the
designated member=hip eligibility requirements.
b) To male recommendations to The Department as to the
eligabil ::ty of prospective members when a der-lrtment opening
r USA be f i 1 led.
Section 35. The duties and responsi.bi.lities of the Auditing
Committee are:
a) To examine the Treasurer ' s books within thirty (30) days
of the Treasurer ' s annual report. E:xaminarions may be made
mcv,,e often if deemed necessary.
b) 'o present an auditing committee report at the rte>;t
regular meeting following arty, examination by this committee..
Section 16. The dLgties. and responsibilities of the
Grievance Commttee are:
a) TO E?Xamine oral or written complaints as referred to it
by any department member or probationer. ? report and
recommendations regarding the findings of this committee
shall be given to The Department at. t,-,e next regular
business meeting.
b) It the grievance at hand involves a member( s) of the
Grievance Committee or The Chief , the involved committee
member (s) or The Chief shall step dawn from the committee
and the alternate shalt fill the vacancg.
'
Section 17. The duties and responsibi \ ities of Special
Conm,ir-�:ees re:
a) To perform duties and fumcticms as assigned.
b) Aoy appointed committee shall have the authority to
~equest assistance from other member( s) of The Department'
4RTI[LE V
(()ualificat-ions for Membership)
Section 1 . The Shakopee Fire Department shall not
dzscrimznate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex,
national origin, marital or veteran Status for the purpose
of membership on The Department.
Section 2, 0ualzftLaiions for application and service as a
probationer on the Shakopee Fire Department are:
a> Must be at least 16 �4ears o+ age and not yet reached
t`zs/her 3Oth bipthda�.
b/ Must be available for daYtzme duty with emplo!4ers
written permission for rselease from u/ork during these hoUrs.
1 > Daytime outy is oefined as between 8:00 a. m.
and 3:00 p. m.
�) Must uork mithin a mile radius of the Shakopee
Fire Station.
d> Must pass medical requirements as determined throuqh a
doctors physical examination. The tests to be performed
during this examznatior, are to be specified bLy the Executive
Committee of the Shakopee Fire Department.
1 > The pnysician performing tr,zs examination
is to be specified by tne Executi`/e Committee
of Tbe Shakopee Fire Department'
e) Must live within a four (4 ) nm�. le raoius of the Shakopee
. Fire Station and be mithir� tne Shakopee Fire District.
f ) All of these application r91-Au-2reMentS shall be enforced
by the Screening Committee at their discretion.
Section 3. Qlualzfications 'or Active Membership on The
Shakopee Fire Department are'.
a> Must live miihin a four (4) mile radius of the Shakopee
Fire Station or within the Sh,�ikopee City Limits.
o) Must be under tne age of {6O) the age of sixty
(60) any act., ve naenher rrruc;t from Active Membership
status.
C) Any prewiou� active member uno is. Presently in
non-member Ftatus, in order tc be retnstated must be able to
complete his/her requirenPT1tS l7or retirement m� age
sixt_y (6O) . Time s)y accrueud as an active member of
the Shakopee Fire Departmen+- s|/all apply toward accrued
service time upon reinstatpfnent'
Section 4' Qualif-ications for Honorary Membership on the
V-ire Department are:
a> /\ny retired firefzghter for The Shakopee Fire Department
yzll automaticalIy oecome an Honorary Member.
1 � Retirement is Oefined as any swember ' s
resigmati.on after at least twent�4 (2O)
years of servjce on 7-Ne Department.
b> Any active member resigning from The Department after
fifteen ( 15 ) gears of service on The Department.
C) Any active member, resignirg from The Department due to
medical reasons as specified by an accredited physiczan
after ten ( 10> 4r-ars of s;ervicee on The Department.
d) Any active member unable to continue ac�sve nennbership
due to an injury aqL(ired While on a-nd related to duty for
the Shakopee Fire Department.
e) Any active member drea+ted for service in the Arrmed
Services of the United Eitates of America, w:-, l } be carried on
as an Honorary Member nf The Department. Upon his/her
return, sazd member will, be re�nstated as a bona fide n,ember
with accrued =e-'vice time excluding any time served be!4ond
the cJrafted ter,o, counted as active [)e;aertment service
year�.
ARTICLE VI
(Reins+-atements, Impeachments, Dissmissals, Leaves of
Absence, Suspensions)
Section 11 . Any member not attend-ing at least one ( 1 ) drill
Per calander month for reason other than employment,
sickness, or family requirements wzt�, excuEe bezng presented
in advance of drill to chiefs, or training officer, shall
become a non-member and snall appear before the Executive
[�mm�ttee and the T�ainzng �fficer f�or a formal hearing. At
thi- time me-mbership or non-mev*bership status shall be
established for said member. This �.earing shall take place
S>PEL next
requ ar or spe01,11,. rqe'etlrg .
Be c:i_-i o n 1-2. Ar"I Py"nPOSIP0 a1terat:Lor1!=_ or ameridnients niay be
adapted by a % vo,t& cjrf ttlp vc,1:inc
13 DeF,,artrrteni- metribers
presf:?nt a{• a or Fpecial nis-f-t-ing f-ci lc)wing the
corrip I et 4.on of, rec:jUireirtents set forrh in ARTICLE IX,
Sr.?c.t i on I . These chan,'Oes shall be insiertf-d appropriately
ini.0 the E- fffr?c.tivu bY iawr-, of the departmerk., and each
department ;Tterr;ber sh,i-til be issued an t.,prAtEs :
. -�_j cc;:Py .
sect i on Af,�-er the Department approvai of alterzxtions or
aryicndnients.. Cit14 Council apprOVELl is re4u~ red for final
adopt ion.
AP'71 C'
I I L_E X
i.D .sbandwent
Section 1 , This Department shall
not be disbanded sxcept by
a 2/7_7 vote of the entire member�ihip. A Publis"ed or served
notice shall be gi-ven fnr a rrieeting orf- this ,uurpose to the
entire niembership at 1' east ore iTiorith Defore said vote Sha). 1
he +-al<en.
REVISED AND UPDATED THIS 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1987 BY THE
BYLAW COMMITTEE AND OFF'ICERS OF THIS DEPARTMENT.
Approved by the Shakopee Fire Department on June 16, 1986,
subject to approval by the City Council.
These By-Laws supersede any previous By-Laws in accordance
with Shakopee Fire Department Code.
�C'
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Joseph P. Ries, Fire Chief
RE: Tank Apparatus Body
DATE: February 13, 1987
Introduction:
The Shakopee Fire Department Tank Truck Committee requests the
Shakopee City Council to reject the bids received for the tank
apparatus body which were received December 31, 1986 , and
requests_permission toresubmitthe specifications for bid.- - -
Background:
The bid proposal received December 31, 1986 on the tank apparatus
body was good for 45 days from bid opening and expires on February
14 , 1987. We checked on an extension of the bid until March 3,
1987 and were told that some items were sub-bid, and it was
impossible to carry the proposal until then. Seeing that the
chassis was rejected we held up on sending them out so we
could combine them again, and come back with a complete program.
Some changes were made in the specifications, where they called
for a name brand item, it was changed to include an item of
equal quality to insure a competitive bid.
Action Requested:
Reject the tank apparatus body bid received December 31, 1986,
and re-advertise specifications for tank truck.
JPR:cah
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Joseph P. Ries, Fire Chief
RE : Captain Pay Schedule Amendment
DATE: February 13, 1987
INTRODUCTION
In regards to Resolution No. 2665, Adopting the 1987 Pay Schedule
for the Officers and Non-Union Employees of the City of Shakopee.
The pay schedule lists two captains as authorized positions , and
believe it should list three captains positions.
BACKGROUND
The Fire Department now has four captains positions, with the lst
Captain being designated training officer and is responsible for
all department drills, training matters, functions, materials and
records. The other three captains assist the training officer in
performing the duties of that office. Plus the captains assume the
duties of the Chiefs in their absence, and assist on the fire ground
command. The fourth Captain is also designated saftey officer, and
monitors safety in personnel, operations and equipment. The captains
are valuable to the Fire Department in exercising the many training
programs, and allowing the Fire Department to break down into smaller
groups for better personnel training. This position was paid in 1986,
due to the fact that it was assumed it was an approved position. The
amount paid was $500 . 00 a year, same as the other two captains positions.
This was budgeted for in 1986 and the Fire Department salaries budget
was raised to cover this .
ACTION REQUESTED
Offer Resolution No. 2692, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2665,
Adopting the 1987 Pay Schedule for the Officers and Non-Union Employees
of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, and move its adoption.
JPR/pss
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO. 2692
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2665 , ADOPTING
THE 1987 PAY SCHEDULE FOR THE OFFICERS AND
NON-UNION EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, that Resolution No. 2665 , Adopting the 1987 Pay
Schedule, be and hereby is amended by increasing the number of
Fire Captains, authorized, from two to three.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT this amendment shall be
retroactive to January 1 , 1987 .
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
1987 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1987 .
City Attorney
(1�
1987 PAY SCHEDULE
JANUARY 1, 1987
Positions
Elected Officials Salary Authorized
------------------
------ ----------
Mayor $4,200 /yr 1
Councilpersons 3,600 /yr 5
City Employees
---------------
See attached 1987 Pay Plan
City shall pay 1/10th of the amount shown on
the pay plan as its share for the
Community Services Director
Fire Chief 2,000 /yr 1
Assistant Fire Chief (1st) 1X 000 /yr 1
Assistant Fire Chief (2nd) 900 /yr 1
Fire Department Engineer 1, 650 /yr 1
1st Asst Fire Dept. Engineer 1,350 /yr 1
2nd Ass't Fire Dept. Engineer 700 /yr 1
Fire Training Officer 1,350 /yr 1
Fire Captain 500 /yr 2
Firemen 7.50 /hr 35
Misc. Temporary Employees from 3.62 /hr N/A
to 10.28 /hr
City Attorney - Retainer 27,080 /yr 1
ro
' E
' a)
c-i to
a) q
•rl CO I h0 UI Co •••d 3-1 UI •'•I a)
ro O% I G N (1)
W 1� , •'•I 'd S I a)
.^
4
to
O Q
w "7 U n H
ro
E
IZ en
p
(1) to ul
Co i u) UI GO N L 1 a) v1 •.-1 a)
;14 ''� .O.i a) U S-I a) (1) Co
•
0. R4 4)CG ►o � a) � 4
tq GY. H
,
b .t U 3
CY. R: Gi r-a ro CD .,..�
00
w
i O w
b to U.1 m C cOn p b
•� CO i y M UI N Y4 U •.i '7 S-I U •ro
m °D w w
a ? w bO
►� cv �: 4 w .4 eo y
w c 4
O •'d O
m G o ro ca
to
ro ON , U OQ� :J
P64 ro >, cid nOD aUi � i, i%, H
p
,
� m
'L7 n CD 0 3 ro 3 414 E
p 4 00 1 M UI W N O U) .,N.j O
O U �O
CZ U L
ON I a) I "0 m a) �
N a)
00 44
C% O
n U
ca
o cd O O O O O O O O O z L
o 00 c0 _ W m ro
rn rI
>, cn ro
En c3 , n ro
•.•1 '0 0.i , l0 co .Z.. G
w , 00 ON ro O
•.•a
a) Q~ •.•a co 44 44U U la .
O • 44 ,-•a ,
.L y O , -+ bD Co .i O (a uQ.
ro
a) • o w w w w
cn a 41 m Q) 4JO G a) o041 U 0
'.,
o U a •4 U U) U) a� w m a c. -.4 cc.a
c ca6 r. ro ro ro -,1 u � U
7, ro W Z •.•� , a) •.a ..•i U � O u 41 Cl)tU C
+� a a W u mss_ ao i., •ti ro co
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City AdministratorFROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer Aw
SUBJECT: Speed Zoning Along County Road 83
Resolution No . 2689
DATE: February 12, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
At the recommendation of the Planning Commission , Council
directed staff to pursue speed zone studies along County Road
( CR) 83 from T.H. 101 to CR 16 . Attached is Resolution No. 2689
requesting Mn/DOT to conduct a formal study .
BACKGROUND:
Since CR 83 is a Scott County facility , I requested the Scott
County Highway Department to conduct a preliminary analysis of
the speed zoning . That study has been completed ( refer to
attached correspondence) . Brad Larson indicated that he would
support a request to Mn/DOT requesting a speed zone study along
CR 83 • He recommended that the study be conducted from T.H . 101
to CR 42 .
The attached Resolution No. 2689 would provide for that request
to Mn/DOT.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution No . 2689 , A Resolution Requesting that the
Minnesota Department of Transportation Conduct a Study for the
Purpose of Determining the Proper Safe Speed Limits Along County
Road 83 from Trunk Highway 101 to County Road 42 .
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No . 2689 , A Resolution Requesting that the
Minnesota Department of Transportation Conduct a Study for the
Purpose of Determining the Proper Safe Speed Limits Along County
Road 83 from Trunk Highway 101 to County Road 42 and move for its
adoption.
KA/pmp
STUDY
SCOTT COUNTY
1117 HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST
JORDAN, MN 55352-9339 (612)937-6346
BRADLEY J.LARSON
Highway Engineer
DANIEL M.JOBE
Asst.Highway Engineer January 16 , 1987
Mr. Ken Ashfeld, P.E.
Shakopee City Engineer
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: CR 83 Speed Zoning
Dear Ken:
Speed studies on County Road No. 83 were taken at your
request on Tuesday and Wednesday, January 13-14 , 1987 . The
results of those studies are enclosed for your information.
Speeds were monitored along three segments of CR 83 between
1) CSAH 16 and 12th Avenue, 2) 12th Avenue and 4th Avenue,
and, 3) 4th Avenue and TH 101. The present speed limit for -
the entire roadway is 55 MPH.
A review of the studies indicate that the majority of the
traffic on the first two segments (CSAR 16 to 4th Avenue) are
travelling between 45 and 55 MPH. The 85th percentile speeds
range from 52 to 58 MPH, which would suggest that the current
speed zoning is probably appropriate. However , the majority
of speeds sampled between 4th Avenue and TH 101 fell in the
35 to 45 MPH range with 85% speeds 44 MPH southbound and 48
MPH northbound . This information would imply a possible
reduction in the speed limit to maybe 45 MPH.
An Equal Opportunity Employer-
Mr. Ren Ashfeld
January 16, 1987
Page 2
From this information I certainly could support requesting
Mn/DOT to evaluate the speed zoning on County Road No. 83
between 4th Avenue and TH 101. If you and the City Council
agree that speed zoning determinations should be made, I
would recommend that the Council Resolution request the
entire section from CR 42 to TH 101 be evaluated . This would
prevent a whole series of small segments being requested by
individuals along CR 83 . I believe that the majority of the
roadway will remain 55 rIPH but at least we will have
documentation supporting this zoning .
If you have any questions on this, please call .
Sincerely,
Bradley J rson, P.E.
County Hig Engineer
BJL/miv
Enc.
cc : Joe Ries, County Administrator
RESOLUTION NO. 2689
A Resolution Requesting that the Minnesota Department
of Transportation Conduct a Study for the Purpose
of Determining the Proper Safe Speed Limits Along
County Road 83 from Trunk Highway 101 to County Road 42
WHEREAS, Scott County Highway No . 83 is included in the
Scott County Highway System; and
WHEREAS, A preliminary speed study was complete by Scott
County that indicates that the current speed zoning may not be
appropriate for various areas ; and,
WHEREAS, this road is heavily traveled ; and,
WHEREAS, a considerable amount of development has occurred
along this road ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the Minnesota Department of
Transportation be requested to conduct a study for the purpose of
determing the proper safe speed limits along Scott County Road 83
from Trunk Highway 101 to Scott County Road 42 .
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
City Attorney
97c,
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Basin
DATE: February 13, 1987
INTRODUCTION:
A public meeting is scheduled for 7 : 00 P. M. , February 2.4 , 1987
for the purpose of discussing proposed storm drainage
improvements to the Upper Valley Basin. The purpose of this memo
is to address various issues that Council should discuss at their
February 17 , 1987 meeting, or be aware of going into the public
meeting. Those issues are :
Special Benefit Rates
Project Bonding
Drainage Way Easements
BACKGROUND:
Special Benefit Rates
The City has a policy of funding storm drainage improvements
utilizing the following cost participation :
City-Wide Charge 50% of Cost
Special Benefit Charge 25% of Cost
Tax Increment Financing 25% of Cost plus
Deferred & Credit Costs
Essentially , TIF finances the City-wide and special benefit
charges of undeveloped properties with deferred charges. As
these properties develop and utilize the utility system ( similar
to sanitary sewer) , those charges are applied and the TIF fund is
reimbursed. This is provided for in the storm drainage utility
ordinance . The ordinance also provides for credits to be applied
to properties that have storm water detention facilities.
For the management of the City ' s storm drainage utility , the
City-wide rate established in 1986 was based upon the expected
needed revenue to fund a two year period of improvements. The
rationale behind this was to eliminate the need for annual
increases to coincide with annual improvements. Credits applied
on a City-wide basis does not drastically affect the revenue
projections, therefore, it is anticipated that the 1987 City-wide
rate remain constant.
Upper Valley Drainage Basin
February 13 , 1987
Page 2
For the proposed improvements , the special benefit rate will
affect the Upper Valley Basin only . The Canterbury Downs
Racetrack has a credit applied to their charges as a result of
their extensive storm water detention system. Their credit is
61 .5% of their base charge based upon the ordinance . A previous
memo went to Council ( dated December 30 , 1986 ) indicating the
various estimated project costs and funding breakdowns. That
memo indicated that the anticipated special benefit rate to the
Upper Valley Basin would be $11 .09 per Residential Equivalency
Factor ( REF) per acre per quarter. That rate is still pertinent
when utilizing the entire Upper Valley data base without
considering credits. This was the method used in the Holmes
Street Basin where the basin is predominantly residential and no
detention credits were applied.
The Upper Valley Basin is unique in the sense that although there
is only one property with credits applied, it is a substantial
credit . The other unique feature of the basin is that it is
geographically long and relatively narrow. This is an important
feature when considering the merits of detention. The existing
detention at the track was required because of the absence of an
outlet facility. Theoretically, this detention should decrease
the storm sewer needs costs relative to the amount of the credit.
With the basin being long and narrow, detention at the downstream
end of the basin does not provide full realization of decreased
storm sewer cost . This is because normal flood routing would
indicate that runoff in the downstream area would be through the
facility and gone before the runoff from the higher reaches of
the basin arrives. In fact, the OSM Upper Valley Drainage Report
indicates that detention downstream of County Road 79 does not
provide a cost effective reduction of storm sewer needs cost.
If one considers the theoretical benefit of detention ( reduced
storm sewer needs cost) , the racetrack credits would result in a
reduced area to obtain the needed revenue . Under this scenario,
the special benefit rate would increase to $15 . 70 per REF per
acre per quarter .
If one considers that benefit of detention is not reducing the
storm sewer needs cost of the Upper Valley Basin ; the rate should
remain at $11 .08 . Assuming that the detention facilities remain
as same in the future, TIF funds will never be recovered because
of the credit to the racetrack.
I recommend that Council consider this unique feature of the
Upper Valley Basin. I further recommend that Council direct
staff to maintain the Upper Valley Basin data base as it actually
exists, thereby, establishing a special benefit rate of $11 .08 .
This recommendation is based upon the following :
Upper Valley Drainage Basin
February 13 , 1987
Page 3
1 . I believe this is consistently fair to all properties
within the basin.
2. The estimated $4 .2 million TIF cost of City-wide storm
sewer needs , and its availability . , assumed these
specific credit costs for retention facilities.
The public meeting notices indicated the higher rate of $15 .70 ,
thereby , allowing Council flexibility in this decision without
adverse surprises to the public.
Project Bonding
The total estimated TIF costs for the City-wide storm sewer needs
r (9 projects) is $4 .2 million. In 1986 , Council authorized the
selling of bonds for the Holmes Street Basin equaling $1 .2
million which financed the entire project. The estimated project
cost of this Upper Valley Basin improvements is $3 .6 million,
exclusive of drainage easement costs.
If Council is concerned that certain legislation in the future
may restrict the use of TIF funds, they may wish to fund $3 .0 of
the Upper Valley Project by a TIF bond issue . This action would
build the storm sewer fund which would finance the remaining
seven projects throughout the City .
I recommend that Council consider this financing option and
provide direction to staff, if and when, the project is ordered.
I further recommend that if Council orders the Upper Valley
improvement, staff be directed to have the City ' s Bond Council
provide a financial analysis and recommendation to Council .
Drainage Way Easements
It has been anticipated that drainage easements for the Upper
Valley project can be obtained through the platting process. It
appears that the timing of this project with that of the platting
process on the upper bluff area is very good as there are
numerous proposals in this area . The City has not been
approached with preliminary plats in that area between T.H. 101
and C. R. 16. The City will need to negotiate these easements.
The project will certainly be a benefit to the properties in this
area but at this time , I do not know if all easements can be
negotiated at no cost. It has been a City policy that if we must
pay for easements across one property , the City pays for all
easements. An alternative to this policy would be to pay for
Upper Valley Drainage Basin
February 13 , 1987
Page 14
easements where necessary and record this as a systems cost to
that property. That cost could either be assessed now through
the 1429 assessment process or recovered later through developers
agreement when the property is platted.
I recommend that staff attempts to negotiate all easements at no
cost. If the City is required to pay for a particular easement,
I further recommend that the cost be recorded as a systems
charge. This cost should then be recovered through a developers
agreement or assessed at the time of platting.
Another policy question concerns the entire project area , that
question being ; "Since the drainage corridor is proposed as a
multi-purpose utility/greenway/ trail corridor , should the
drainage easement be considered part of a development ' s park
dedication responsibilities?" This question becomes somewhat of
philosophical question. Typically, if a platted area requires
drainage easements due to its geographical location within
natural drainageways , one would not expect these drainage
easements to constitute park land. The attached map 33 of the
City ' s Comprehensive Parks System Plan would indicate that this
drainage corridor is also designated as local parkway .
The width of the multi-purpose corridor , based upon the
preliminary engineering, varies between 714 feet and 120 feet .
This width provides for relatively flat slopes associated with a
swale versus that of a ditch. The proposed drainageway should
provide for an attractive greenway and trail corridor. Based
upon this, I recommend that Council allow the drainage corridor
to satisfy its relative area requirements for park dedication of
plats containing this corridor.
REQUESTED ACTION:
1 . Move to direct staff to maintain the Upper Valley Basin data
base with its drainage characteristics prior to storm water
detention reductions and to fund detention credit costs by
Tax Increment Financing.
2. No action is being requested, at this time , relative to the
project bonding. Staff will request specific action of
Council if the project advances to the next phase which is
plan development.
3 . Move to direct staff to begin negotiations for the necessary
drainage easements of the Upper Valley Drainage Project with
the understanding that these drainage easements will satisfy
relative area of park dedication requirements for platted
areas.
KA/pmp
DRAINAGE
E
� U.S. Hlohwav101
J' x
� � l
■ Fourth Avenue -
ECentral Business Ile '
--District
t ■ Ed IP C�F,,`,`,,,�Jjl,o • c
111 111
r1p Ill sip
H N
f6
proposed highway (�
�� .. 101 bypass i
Ti
Parks System
CITYO f S H A K O P E E O NEIGHBORHOOD PARK TARGET AREAS
MINNESOTA 111111 PROPOSED DRAINAGE CORRIDOR
MIIIIIIII PROPOSED LOCAL PARKWAY
r MILE SERVICE AREA
PROPOSED COMMUNITY PARK
MEN PROPOSED REGIONAL TRAIL
t1ap i3 i 1 i URBAN SERVICE AREA
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineer)054-
SUBJECT: 13th Avenue Right-Of-Way
DATE: February 13 , 1987
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND:
At the completion of the public hearing of proposed improvements
to 13th Avenue east of C . R. 89 , Council directed staff to begin
negotiations for acquisition of a parcel of property that would
complete the necessary right-of-way for the improvements. It is
staff ' s understanding that the property owner has retained an
attorney for representation during these negotiations. Staff has
attempted repeatedly to communicate with the attorney with no
response .
Since there is a 90 day period after filing for condemnation
before the City can take access of the property , Engineering
proposes that the City take this action now . Hopefully ,
negotiations can continue once all parties communicate around the
negotiation table . Initiating condemnation now will assure that
construction can be accomplished in 1987 .
Attached is Resolution No . 2690 which begins condemnation
proceedings against the subject parcel of property ( Parcel A of
Registered Land Survey No. 24 of Scott County , Minnesota) .
RECOMMENDATION:
I recommend that Council adopt Resolution No . 2690 at this time .
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 2690 , A Resolution Determining the Necessity
for and Authorizing the Acquisition of Certain Property by
Proceeding in Eminent Domain for Purposes of Constructing a
Roadway and move its adoption .
KA/pmp
CONDEMN
REGISTERED LAND SURVEYN0. 2L1
SCOTT COUNTY MINNESOTA
SCALE I INCH = 200 FEET
-. PVt3 f 1640
546747'
E '/4 Cor Sec. /z
� Ss747
/00 /OJ /JO 00 50 /1747
B C D E F
11747 NOTE:
ivo.oz /oo ioo /00to
2/749 /82 53 zo07'
P Bearings on assumed datum
zv.o7. ._ 50
/50- Iron monument indicated thus s
H
G /50
o S o
h To ? N I
M
L K c
.2/7-56 /SU SJ /SC
567 56
rvf Sr
R
C
P
.pG �
tl� ti
1 n
T n
I /xiaby cei>ily thor in occo�d��7�r warn 'r;
�r7�tPllr 508, Al/nnPSora 5roru�rs of /949 os olnOn4Pd
frl! fv/7ow/n9 d(Sc�/bP,Y >�UC' C/ ,lo,?j /r7 'he Co-L,7'
%Q ""'r
RESOLUTION NO. 2690
RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR AND
AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY
BY PROCEEDING IN EMINENT DOMAIN FOR
PURPOSES OF CONSTRUCTING A ROADWAY
WHEREAS , the City council has heretofore determined that
the City of Shakopee should obtain right- of-way for the
construction of 13th Avenue between County Road 89 and the East
Corporate Limits of Shakopee ;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE AS FOLLOWS:
1 . Acquisition by the City of the following described
property is necessary for the purpose of providing right-of-way
for 13th Avenue between County Road 89 and the East Corporate
Limits of Shakopee ; said property described as Parcel A of
Registered Land Survey of Scott County which is attached and made
a part hereof and incorporated herein by reference .
2 . The City Attorney is authorized and directed on behalf
of the City to acquire the real estate above described by the
exercise of the power of eminent domain pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 117 , and is specifically authorized to notify
the owners of intent to take possession pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes , Section 117 . 042 . The City Attorney is further
authorized to take all actions necessary and desirable to carry
out the purposes of this resolution.
Adopted by the City council this day of ,
1987 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
' ATTEST :
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1987 .
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Stephen Hurley , MIS Coordinator �7
SUBJECT: Purchase of Computer Aided Drafting ( CAD) System
DATE: February 13 , 1987
INTRODUCTION:
The Engineering Department has $15 , 000 .00 in its 1987 Capital
Equipment budget for a Computer Aided Drafting ( CAD) System.
BACKGROUND:
The City ' s Computer Committee met Tuesday , February 3 , 1987 , and
approved the purchase of a CAD system.
Quotes have been requested from several vendors and the following
have been received.
1 . Computerland $12 ,988 .45
2. Quannon Computer Products $14 , 445 . 00
3. Datasource $141451 .00
While Computerland has the lowest quote there is one major
difference between it and the other quotes. Computerland is
quoting a plotter that handles only A & B size drafting media . A
plotter comparable to those quoted by the other vendors would add
$8 ,200 .00 to the quoted price .
The Quannon & Datasource quotes appear very close but several
major differences become apparent on further examination .
Datasource is quoting a dual screen configuration with higher
resolution on the color monitor than Quannon ' s monitor .
A dual screen would mean that a CAD drawing could be viewed on
one screen at the same time as a Lotus spreadsheet, for example ,
is displayed on the other .
On the other side , Quannon is quoting a Sperry IT computer with
44 megabytes of hard disk versus 30 megabytes on the Packard Bell
computer quoted by Datasource .
The major difference in quotes is in the support package .
Quannon includes testing, set-up , training , and phone support
while the support package is optional in the Datasource quote at
the cost of $750 .00 .
CAD System
February 13 , 1987
Page 2
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above information I am recommending that the City
accept the CAD system quote as proposed by Quannon Computer
Products, Inc. in the amount of $14 ,445 . 00.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to authorize purchase of a CAD system from Quannon Computer
Products, Inc. in the amount of $14 ,455 .00 .
SH/pmp
CAD
o
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: p Y,
Stephen Hurley, MIS Coordinator
SUBJECT: Purchase of Computer Equipment from Public Works
DATE: February 13 , 1987
INTRODUCTION:
Public Works has $5 , 000 .00 budgeted for computer system purchases
in its 1987 Capital Equipment budget.
BACKGROUND:
The addition of a CAD system in the Engineering department will
make available a Stearns 20 megabyte hard drive computer that
will be used by the Public Works Department.
Peripheral equipment, cables, furniture and supplies remain to be
purchased by Public Works.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the purchase of computer peripherals and equipment from
Office Products of Minnesota in the amount of $1 ,322 .00 , computer
supplies from Suels Business Equipment in the amount of $184.41 ,
and computer furniture from Barry Office Products in the amount
of $455 . 97 •
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Move to authorize the purchase of computer peripherals ,
equipment , furniture and supplies from Office Products of
Minnesota, Suels Business Equipment, and Barry Office Products in
the amount of $ 1 , 962 . 38 .
SH/pmp
EQUIP
177
—CNS'a.J
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Abatement of Special Assessment
DATE: February 17, 1987
Introduction
Council action is required to abate two special assessments that have been
already paid.
Background
The special assessment for parcel 27-001740-0 was paid off on 12/1/86 and
the assessment for parcel 27-906043-0 was paid on 9/3/86. The assessments were
not taken off the county records due to staff oversight.
The situation was not brought to light until after the county closed the
file for tax statements payable in 1987. Therefore, to get the assessments off
the tax statements for 1987 abatement forms have to be filed.
Action Requested
Move to approve the abatement of special assessment code 51 in the amount
of $80.30 and $99.32 for pay 1987 balances, $26.78 and $24.83 for pay 1987
principal, and $8.58 and $10.87 for pay 1987 interest for parcel 27-001740-0
and also to abate assessment code 54 in the amount of $2,300.00 for pay 1987
balance, $575.00 for pay 1987 principal and $230.00 for pay 1987 interest on
parcel 27-906043-0 due to prior payment.
ct
e
TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Abatement of Special Assessment
DATE: February 12, 1987
Introduction
Council action is required to abate a special assessment that has been
already paid.
Background
The special assessment for parcel 27-001740-0 was paid off on 12/1/86.
The assessment was not taken off the county records due to staff oversight.
The situation was not brought to light until after the county closed the file
for tax statements payable in 1987. Therefore, to get the assessment off the
tax statement for 1987 an abatement form has to be filed.
Action Requested
Move to approve the abatement of special assessment code 51 in the amount
of $107.09 and $124.15 (1986 balances) for parcel 27-001740-0 due to prior
payment.
9l�
#
00000000 0 # 0 0 # O # O O O O # O # 0 0 0 0 0 0 o C C O O
# a a a A A A A a a # A A A A n A a * a +1 A a A Ah a A A A A A n 10
it NNNNNNw R) >t NN * N # fONNN N * N NIUNNIY. Nft) N NN x OD
* o 0 0 0 0 o o o o ac + o o o o o * o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a m -J
# AAAAAAAAA 1i W W # N # NfV NN # N # n
#
0w00 w 0 w 0 # UI UI i1 10 # mal a 0• # w # AAAaaA W W W NN F n
Z i
O -C
O
O �1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O G D
NtDtUfUNR) ruru1U NN N NNNN N NtVNf1iNN NNN NN i Co
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ m x
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ♦ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ o
mwwwaDwmww CD CD w OOwOD00 w wwwwwOD www mm
,1 � � i .Iri -rte -r -4 -4 i -4 .Ii i -4 -4 -4i r -.1 -1 -J -J -4 -4 m
3
a N 0
o A Uf N N c
Z
- AA' W - W oo No 111 a,WW i
m w 10 UTA a+ m - 10 h AA 10 -4 UI0 000 f11 Ln b, W W--•
N TA - w -I- AN Durk) W WOTwUIo a010 0tn00 -1 .10 -J 00 - 101010
w UI OD dmO wA UI O1 W w In W w In UI A - A wUi 000 0 w 0 0 Ao fVN oU1 Ul
a, w 0701 til w OD C, -4 .40 OO A00 -1 -4 P01 0000000 OD U1 000
aDDDaDDDD Da m DDaa x aa > > > > Da > DD
i i i i i i i i i w w c c c c m 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 r r
ca -1 iiia z mmmmmm m m m r
Q. C'1PPti1 q1 R1P 00 0000 +11M ;Dmm5 :0m ;u - -
n n D D - - - - - -1 - - - m m <
iiii-aiii -I \ \ z 00 nn w nnnnon 0O0 00 m
33 o ITT rnmm x DDDDDD DDD z
000000000 mm m zzzz -1 zzzzzz iii ii o
000000000 0 0 M i i i a m D D D m m 0
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 \ \ w ;u a ;u z r zzzzzz cow M
3 33 3 3 3 3 3 3 00 O D D D D o D D D D D D w CO w i i 0
00 z rrrr iiiiii -( -c -C x
z z . . . . . . w w w 00 m
i i ap w w w w M M 0
\ \ cccc wwwwwm ►+ n• - x
.. ►. D DDDDDD zzz no
zz w zzzzzz 000 00 z
00 0 r r r r x x x F x x m
n -< -c -c -c 0
w
m
M
iiiii3 w w ITT mmm i 911-+ toT - W m m 0
mmmmmmmm «+ rr c 00 ,00 A DZODZO OCC z :v i
rrrrrrrrw oo cccc D -Ciz -Ciz cc -0 OO m
m mmmmmmmn 00 < - MO - MO - - -a n -n 3
mmmmmmmm r m zmwzzw u
x sx x x x x x 3m r Om cm Ow o
00000000 DD m 3333 WD w 'A 33m mm m
zzzzzzzz ►+ ►+ w DD D D o. DiDDiD DDw m ; w
mmmmmmmm zz ►r 000.11.1 0 -( m -C 1••11'•'1 < < n
-li zzzz w m -UDmND zz A
iii - C zDwzDw ii 1-1
w i -cri -tr N
w 3 m 3 m i
w m m o
i m m z
000000000 OO O o 000 O UI UI T .0 Aa OOo 010+ D
In Lnin ww n
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I fill 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
A A A A A AAA W a A a A A A A A A A N A n IU A A A A A O
wwwWww W W CD NN N NNNN W 0^ 01w0101w NNN W w c
N N N N N N N N IO W W W W.W W W 'r - m - " L W U - z
-- o 00 o NNNN o N-1oI*--O NNo C. C. i
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
If I fill I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
aa.ww�� o w - A o1A'A W A 0 0 0 0 0 C. AW W U1Ul z
C. w
UtN W W A1U NC. - _ _ a, W 0
Of
.� pNN
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 I I I I I t 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I
WPAA W A oo00po a W W Aa ►•1
tU ---N- 4 -4WMo -SOD N MANN z
01 '
CD
A i O
p, N
CD 91 1
O
I
OD
* -4
3
m n
w a
# # # # # # w 0
# # # # #
I I I 1 1 I m
n n n n n n
w w w w w w
O # O # O # O O co # CO # O # O # co # O # O
Al # A # A • A A A A • A A # A # A # A A # A • A
N # ro # N # N N N N # N N # ro +1 N + N N * N # N x OD
o 0 o o r o o o s o + o o iE o s o m -I
O iE O # O # 0 ,D OD OD # OD OD iF -4 i! -4 # P O, # T ! D, 0
OD # m # N # o .D ,D # to to # ,D # W + 00 OD # A # T. 0
r
z --I
O <
O
v m
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl Cl o D
N N N N ro N N ro ro N N N N N N -4 in
N m x
X
OD OD OD CD OD CO OD OD OD m CD 00 CD m m •U
-4 v v .I -4 -4 -j J m
m
a
3
NN, tAtn NN c
NN' _ _ .. � ry _ � _ W W Q -I
.1 UI UI oo W W W W o 1 NN AA wU1 C> CD J -4 o0
.D a, D, _ D+ Cn Ui to to ,o to CD N U1 .1 r to in o N OD N N
A U1 In OD OD -4 -4 A .D A 00 w .D •D O, N ro A A
A D• rr oo M NN -400W OD to W - oO toODr OD OD
M 4 A A A C1 Cr 0 0 to m
O c O D S S x D a O O 2 2
z r z a as zm a < oo c <
D .-. < m T 3 3 r r z 3 3 z a
-o ur w a o a s 0 z <
v m m w z •• 0 a n N(a o m
c oo z z o z :0 z
n a c •a 'a z z c cDo o 0
a ..
M � cm as as "� 1 arta z z m
r 0 to r c c M a Ma 0 n
co O O - � -i O a OD z O O -I '9 2
o r .. o 00 ss (a ss a z m
z r z N x as o z O 0
ma z n { -1 � mm N arm- o c
•• 0 00 m rr 0 m
�-• z z z -i m
►�, 0 m m 0D - o
M
to
'i
m
M
-4 ro OD m •v m to m to ro 3 -I ro to On ..
z z c o z 0c or a .. roa c c -I
a o c - c - co o w ao M m
m r o -r ror ro
m r a
r o .. .. z o rm ..
m m 3 o. s m 3 a m m m m m
P :0 N a D 0 a - m Q• A On N
< - ro w w z < < 3 CD
to z c z z -4 to a
cc 1 m -q -1 c .,
m
0 0 -4
w to 0
•i 1 z
0 0
C. o ro o 0 0 o N o 0 o O o a
I 1 1 I 1I I I I 1 0
A A A A A A A A A A W A A A A O
W w N N w N N N N W W W W N_ ro c
W _ W U1 w - w W .D W -� Z
0 0 o N o ro o N o 0 0 0 C. o to -i
W A m to W W A a N o w W A m z
N tt+ W m ro N .91 o ro O
N rr ro o
I 11 I 1 1 1 I I I 1 i I d
w o, ww AA ro o w� a o,
T rU ro - r) O ro z
C.
ro
� I
O ..
1
DD
i •.i
m 'D
CO a
# # # • # * # # # (n fi D
a m
I 1 I 1 1 I I I I m
x x x x x x x x x
N N to W y N to N to N
4' h
0 0 0 0 0 0 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
• A A a A A A A a A A A • A a A a A A A A A ;4 A A A A A A A • A • A �O
A NN 1i NNNN 4` NNNM # NNNNNNNNN N NNNNN NN IF N Z OD
• NN NR'. N N - * - + * m -j
0 0 It A A A A ii U W W W W W W W W t # 0
aaAa •1e -1 -1 J -4 o00000ao0 • In N UI UI Ln aA +F ro iF .71 Cl)
Z -i
O -C
O
O '1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p o D
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 -1 N
N, "I " � � 11 "1 "1N1� \ N111� \ N11N "I "111 "1 m 2
11 "1N11 1\ "IN "1 111� ♦ 11 \ \ NN11 � � � � o
OD OD oDoomro OmoDoD 0mm0oD W W 0m M0ooDoo ro co OD m 'D
-1 ,1 -1 .1 -4 -4 .I -J -4 .1 - - -1 .4 -4 -1 -4 -J -1 -4 .4 .4 --j --j ,+ m
D
3
0
c
z
N - W _ - A 1„1 - - -i
A -W aNA .D WA M - 0 -4- - '0 - AN W PP - - •J
UI W- NA - U1 -- oNtri UOD 0WNPNUI0 W CD OD U1NAOD - AP 0o .o
- SON 10 AA .00 Ui- ted•0P 0 %a UI UI AaNOPN UI AP - N - P Pao - A
vO A UI UI UI oD .I UI -I 10 APm -J Ln %D 0% - o0d UTA N c PO P P CD OD -4 -4 A
N iF i iG ' IF iF M i!
22 7: 22x mmmm 000000000 00000 on 4
mm DDDD DDDD ccccccccc Oo c
z2 ;aMAm (o (oNCO) Zzz ZZzZzZ 2 S22x 33 0
z 3333 -I -f-1 -q ZzzZzzzzz • • • • • 33 �•+
mm 0000 3333 .. .. - - - - - - -i <
zz zzzz DDDD zzzzzzzzz 00000 2 m
co co (n NO (0 Zzzz 000000000 D D D D D D D Z
000000 000 M ;amZ ;u cc C7 0
�••��•+ 2222 0000 'a -8 -0 -0 -0 0o O O
00 0013 0 z M m A 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 x
00 :cr_ LS cccc 000000000
mmmm 0000 scErccccc rrrrr oo x
• • • • mmmmmmmmm ccccc z ;o m
• 33333 (OW 0
SSSS OD WOmm T.
DDaD m m m m m
z z z z aa ;azA
xzzx m
M
m
mm mmwm O -Vmui mwmoommm (om mmmmw om co
or, or- cc cmcc crorrrccc orrrc Do c -+
co c0 -0 -0 -0o -V - coccoommm c000 "a -nc v m
T r r r a -0 r r r, o r 0
3 3 �+ �••� " a) - - 3 332 - - - 333 - D
3 D 3 D m m mmmm 3 D 3 D D D m m m 3 > > > M r 3 m m
Dw > - CDy NmN0 > - > - - w000 D . . . CO D (A U!
`+ Z - Z < - Z - ZZZ - ZZZ m •• 0
z -i z -! Ziz -4 -i -i z -i1 -1 oz M
-i -i 1 -4 c -4
w �
N
M
O
Z
0 0 0 Cl o O - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O p O D
A - C)
I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1
A A A A A A A A A A .0 a A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 0
N N N N N N NW NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N c
W W W _ _ _W - - U U U U W W - - - U U U U - - W - z
N 0 N o o 0 o 0 0 o N N N c o o 0 0 o - R1 o 0 o o - N o -1
i t I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
P P W A A W - W a a P P W P A - P P W P P P - A U W - z
W W ro aN - A -IU - W - N W A NN W UU - OD W -_ _ - O
- o - N W W -4 'o N - - - a -JN -
-
I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
P P W A a W - U A A P P W P A - P P W P P P - A W W
roN NAro —- h — N - NNAODroNW NN - 0l ro - - -
m o'
-4 -j
�k O
N N N
A A '0 I
O O
O
• I
OD
2
m v
tp D
iF i iE dF M A N M 0
a a +r « w * D m
x • * x x * ar 0
I 1 1 1 1 I 1 m
n n n n n n n
x x x x x x x
to O co to (n Co L7 W
O K O O O # O K O # 000000 K C2. 010 O # 00 i O a O
A # A A A # A a A K A A A A A A a A A A A # A A a A a A CD 0
ro # NMN # N # N # ro ro fV ro NN a roroN N # roM # N # N S co
W 4 W W W * W if fir # rt) ro ro ro fPN a NroN f0 # NN * f. rE N m �
W # O O O i O * -J ♦ N -j -4 -4 - # P C O, a, it O, a, k th # A 0
.1 # W W W # _ # W # 000000 a -1 -4 -4 O� # AA K A is O+ x n
z -I
O -C
O
p -7
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a
N Nroro N M Mro fV ro NN rofUN ro NN N N -1 0
NN m x
o
OD OD OD OD OD OD OD CO OD CO OD m OD co OD m OD OD co m
m
a
3
_ O
OD C
z
W A W NN NA W T O+ N O� �i �
W W ro-� OD mo• w W � 0w W Ulo -1 o o+ �1 �1 W N koro ODOR
i o .o OD W OD OD o� V+ o, O -d in OD o� a -d W _ W o % _w O O N N
In -4 in ro ro W W mwmw000 10o00 03 OD Ut.IOD W OD (n UI
— oo UtUI OD OD 0000000 NofDo 00 Inoue OD OD o0
a K a a K # a # #
° 3 rrr r 0 xxxxxx xxx x
.. ««., o m zzzmzz 000 a « « c z
z zzz 0 z aaaaaa m m m z yy m -i
z xxx a z (nyyy ()) y x x x m a r
m r « (nW (D (ACO) (D z z to co 0 <
0 ov D (D m m m x x x 3 m
a zzz c wwwwww z z z a as y a z
(D .. « .. z x yyy m x c « o
0 z z z « ;o 2323 = 2 y 00 'a r O
O -4-1 -I O a 000000 y 0) (A -D "D m « N
z M zzzzzz -a -q � mm z z 0
zzzMzM aaa mm 0 x
s 000000 zzz < m
w mmmmmm coo a W 0
N aaa xx r -c x
0 00000fD M m 00 c u)
xxxxxx 000 -1 -i m
zzzaaz 00 « m
-� -+ -i -i -1-1 z 0
y
m
c "Oyy z m m m c 'Dy (n z ..
4 zcc m z Mzzazz JOG -1 me c m -I
�. « ro-D 3 a 000000 c c c O -D I M z m
r z-O-0 .. < mmmmmm « « r 'Ti -i 3
-I r r -t m y r r to
-1 ►�►+ r yyyyyy
«. wmm c mmmmmm 333 .. mm m m
rmn y y z °- « « « a a a m < y y 0
y < M
c o y izz z
m z c
m �
o y �
C «
m (n 0
V) -i z
Cl 000 Oo o faro — 000 000 00 0 o a
-1 O+ N _ ... — _ _ _ A
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 0
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A O
W W NN 10 W W W W W W W ro1VN w WN N W C
-d Uf N W — W W W -4 OD z
0 0 0 0 A o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro N N o
t t e l I I 1 1 1 1 t l1 1 1 I 11 f 1
WW— ut Ul— _— — W W W W W Z
OD W WIn o -J AIn .00+ mo+ W — fU A _ W M W O
N o _ OD .o_ to W ro , N W _
I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 I 1 1 I 1
WW r O _ � _ _ _ _ w W _ W W W
N W WIn o -4 'o o+D1Cy, W _ N A W ro W z
* O
OD
N
� I
O _
s -4
3
m -v
to a
K a # # K K # a y c)
# a # # # # a # a m
# a # # # a # a cD
1 I 1 1 t i I I m
n n n n n n 0 clj
x x x x x x x x
y (n co y (A y y UD A
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 t C. t 0 t o 0 t o 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 C. o t o 0 o 0 0 C.
A A A AAA A A a AAAAA t d x a t a A t A A A d A A A A A AAA A A A a0 w
NNNNNNNNN NNNIT lU iF N i` N * NN t NN NITNmmmNN * N11iNNNN x m
wwwwwwwwwwwwww * w + w uW + wwwwwwwwww + wwwwwW m -4
m m m m m CO m m m m m m m m * N * UI * A A it A A A A A A a a a A t w W w W w W 0
.1-J .I .1 .1-J.1 .I .I J .1 .I •I -4 t .o t N t mm * 0 m O' O` 0 CIO, m 0 o+ t -4r -4 -d -4-4 x 0
z
O -C
O
D -1
Q o p 0 o o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O o 0 0 D
N NNW IU NNNNNNNN Rl N N NN NNNrt) NNNrt) NN NN IV N 110 -1 m
N, 1N11 "111111� NN11 ". 11 11 \ � " \ � \ N "11111 "1 � 11 " � N, 11 � m x
- - _ _ __ a
- - - - - - - - - - x
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m CO m m m m m -0
.I.I -4 -4 -4 -4 .I .I .4 .I .I .1 -J .4 .i J .Id -4 -4 .I -1 -1 -4 -4 -I .4 .I •I -J .I -J -Jd m
m
a
3
O
W c
z
p 4„1 - A N W ^1 O+ i
UI..•-dQ` W411 AN WOW-- W W W .1 W W u W - .I WA .I -JWOQ4mw
O•.1.I 0 m Ad T mAA UI A m A Ad WW W 10A DAA -+ -INN _ 00A Wmw J Www
o 0000 - omAm o v� 010 o CO CD NN -1 -� UI W mW 0 -- a U1 N In OD W C. MNA W .10
m-�� m AoNWAA NOO N SON W W mm 0 -0 W-1 N 01 N O• Q- 0Od W -J o+ a - W-
z Z z z z z z z z z z z z z 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
EEE£E E£ LE £ £ E £ £ w z V '0 0000000000 - - - - --
r, r,
-• •+ ^'• - --
rr 1 � --I -+ -4 -+ -4-� � -1 zzzzzz
W W494 www W W fO4Dwww 0 cow 0000000000 zzzzzz
mmmmmmmmmmmmmm m zzazmzzmzz mmmmmm <
rrrrrrrrrrrrrr r co (1) G) 00000 m
rrrrrrrrrrrrrr r -4 -1 '0 '0 "0 � � '� '0 'V � � > > > > > > z
c sD aaaaaaaaaa tnNmmmm o
r m ;v 000000 0
a -I --I _+ -I -+ -4 -I -1 000000 m
.� 4. 4. W W W mOOMWwm t7
S
-a -1 m
m ;u M 0
f-
m w 4S1
0 m
0 0
m
m
z
-4-I -1•..11 _q -4 -1-I -4 •41-1 � a -I vT mmMMITIM OOM CCCCCC -
mmmmmmmmmmmmmm mm ,za 0000001- CCC -4 -1 -4 -+ -+- -+
rrrrrrrrrrrrrr 3 1r ►• • ccccccommm •+ - ►+ -- -+ m
mmmmmmmmmmmmmm m zz - - - - - - rrrrrr 3
M -1 -i 'O r r r M M M w w M
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx x 3 •• •• ►� -+ -1 � � -I-i o
00000000000000 0 0 w a. 2332 = 3 > 171171171 - - - - - M
zzzzzzzzzzzzzz a z aaaaaa •+ cncncn mmmmmm m
mmmmm mmmm mmmm m z m '0 � .+ - - - - - Z O W 00OW 0
0 cc z z z z z z _ z
m w w -4 -i -4 -i -4 _q .+
1
H Iti
z 0
w Z
O o 0 C.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 a
I l l l i i l l l l l l l l I 1 I I IIIIIIIIII 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
A 4L4Addd AAAAAAA A A dA .AA AdAAAd4d AAA JL AA. O
W w W W W W W W W w W W W W .O W W W N N N N N N N N N N W W W W W W c
_N NNN_ N_ NNN_ NN_NN_N_ N N N WIn WW W WWW W - - - .I -J .1 .1'Jd z
O
o+ p N N N N N N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 4 1 1 1 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
N -- A A W W W W --.-.• .• O W o, A A W W F O. 0, .h d aul A W W Z
W.o N-- ui W N� m .1 U1W ro � o m -JW W AM W mm W Nwm N - ro ro-OD O
I I 1 1 1 1 1 701 7 r 1 1N1 1p,1 N N
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 rr1 1 1 1 1 1
N- AAW W W W- -- -" - 0 W O. AA W W - O. NAA O. O� AW W� �+
W.ON�.UI WN m -J UIWN p N .1W NdNWNmmm NN NNN OD z
�Ik o
N
O r
. I
CD
i v
3
m
y D
t t t t t (A O
t t * t t a m
t t t 0
1 1 1 1 1 m
Vi N 171 to N N
00 .000 0000 i1 0 it O 0 li co • 0 i 0 0 • 0 • 00 •
AAnnA aaAA 1F a * a d 1F An •t1 d t An x A x• nn
NNN IVN NNN rO iE N • N N ?F N N * N * NN + N i( ruN • x Co
(nto (ntom Ln In Ln Ln a N i A d i A d i A a A A # .4 i AA * m �1
o o 0 0 0 O O O o # o •r U' to + Is ID A 1t W W a n
.o Io .o .o Io O) O) OD OD # W • OD J 4 o o N * N N i 71 n
z 1
O C
O
D -n
0 o 0 0 o o o o Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 o o D
NNNNN NNNN N N N NN fU NN N fU Ri -I 0
NNN Nm x
NN N � o
r000mmcr, mm 00 m m w w m w mm m O) m v
-.i -I -4 -J � -4 -.4 -4 •d -4 i � m
m
a
3
O
c
OD m WW _ Z
W W i
NN NN — W mNOD mm -! W W - - In In c+ m N N
NN co NN CD OD OD W -4 -I -4 co O) mm Ri .1N .I W A nn AN -
00000 L,4 Wto OD -4 1 oo Ln to 7' IJIA W W A - W oo
C. 0 0 o o m O N o C. o o A O A - Ul O to o 0 O+ O m
I
(n (j) to 0 to OCn (D C!) < W N n n 4 X v 'O
xxxxx 0000 m n n aD o mm M xx
DDDDD cccc M o o X m -( -< m o0
x7: 771. -I iii z i -1 00 z z n ii
00000 xxxx m ii rr 00 00 <
ID v v c
v v s c s X r r u m
m m m m m mmmm n 0 () N m azo T -n z
m m m m m 0EnCl) (1) (n i i nn w Nv, o 0
-
-Iiia m -( xZ
( WWfn (n < c c c >= z � � A
m m m m m (0cr) (nco m n r- r- mm 3 (ri0 n
mm ;oMM cccc X O (n ii r- r- m xS x
« « < wWwtri co r x NN OO i m
� •• ••
c c c c o r m .. ., D n
m m 0 n n m m m m z m w z z r x
mmmmm ® miaow n 00
to cn co 0 () DDDD i -n M
z z z z D m
w 0
m
i
m
c c c c c -V -0 i v m vv to 0 m vLO ..
iii i -1 7a m m m 70 X D m c c c 0 .TJc i
0 - 0 D o c oo v vv c o o m
rrrrr zaz3 < m .. mm v vv m o 3
� � •» �+ � i0i0 m v r rr fl r
m 3 m m m m m 3 m m m
m m m m m 0 0 a m D z M fn 0 U) D s C4 W
W ()) (0 (00 vZvz < << < n
c () c (n 0 z Z 70
w w c i .i -
w v
(r) o
i z
0 0 0 o o N - o o o -4 0 0 0 C. o 0 0 0 o D
I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 t l I I I I I I n
n A O
W W W W W W W W W W W N W W N N N N W rU c
-1 -4 -4 -4 -4 Ln - VI - W W W - W z
0o000 0 .00 .0 0 o N oo N oo tV Oo i
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I
W W -...- N -- - m -4 W W A A W W W Z
N - 07O Co. AA w -1 Ln W - ,I N AN N - N O
- - AN - m W - OD N - -- m W -
I
W W ...... - A - - ... m .! W - W d A W W W
N - CDCO CD - N W - -4 N a N N - N z
yk o
Ili
� I
O -
W
v
S
m v
W D
* s * * D m
x ! iF iF * • s i( G1
I I i I I I 1 I m
n n n n n n n n
(n (n fn Cn N to N (n m
o ♦ 000000000 • Coco ♦ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 • o 0 r 00
-0 • AAAAA -AL AAA * AAA A AAAAA -0AA -0A -0A41 -0 1t -0 A t AA 0 •O
N x NNNNNNNNN ie IU NN n) mmmwmIUNNNNNNN N N fV if NN x m
Ln « to to to to to to to m N +r to to vl to r to to o to m to to to to to to in to to * to * to x Ln m m -4
W it NNIII) NNrt) NNN * Nro fU N * - - -- - tt +r * oo 0
O it PPPPPPPPP +k 0000 # �IJ -J �� d -JJ -J � � J � W df - it .o.O x 0
z -1
O <
D
O -n
O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 D
N fU N ro IU lU ro N (Uro NN fV IV N N R? N N N N ro N N ro N fU ro N N N N 1 m
1� N, N11 "111N, N, N, ♦ IN1111 N "I " " 1111N ♦ � 1% \ " \ 11 1� 11 "1 m x
- - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - .r a
- - - x
11 " "1111� N1� 1 \ \ \ "I 1� \ "I "I "I \ "I1� "I "I \ 11 o
OD mmmmmmmmm mmmm mmmmmmmmmmmmmm m m mm o
-d .I -4 -I -I -4 -I -4 -I -j -I -1 -1 -4 -I -4 -I -J -1 - -4 -4 -4 -J -I -1 -4 -1 -4 .I -4 -j m
a
3
O
-0 - - c
z
N N _._ m W m - -N - m N W W N N - 1
A to UIo UI - m - W oNOCID 00 1.11 Ln W N in Ln in Ln ANN
o AANpAUfAONOD - CD �awN poop -� P0AU .1, W %DN0UlA po oNN
o W -1NN.I .0rowM�D m W tnoo Utoo .omm 'M N UI UI o0 000
o W �oN - PA -JAm (U 00000 .noo - 0W017b - o -JP .400 00 00 000
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m to m m
�+
ccccccccc 1111 NN 'C 'U-0 '0 "n -O -nNN � N -C '•" x xx
0 m m m m m m m m m D D a D c c c C c c c c c c c c c c O m D a
z rrrrrrrrr ;0zaz 00000000000000 z z xT.
m x x x x a m 00 <
tatDtDlZ wwwww mmmm r 2 -U-0 m
o ccccccccc O mm z
-n mmmmmmmmm 1000 m z mm o
., ..«. .. .. .... .. .. rrrr -< O
o zzzzzzzzz m m m m m a. mm ;u
c mmmmmmmmm > Daa 1 mm 0
a mmmmmmmmm zzzz m a z; x
r mmmmmmmmm cc m
.. z z z z m m
1 m m m m m m m m m 0000 O on x
d 000000000 ►+ 0 mm
c c c c c c C C c z ►r m m m
M M H M H H M H H n
rovro v -oromro -o z a
• 0 1�1
m
..I
m
a
c mmmmmmmmm wwww cccccccccccccm m ro cc
z ccccccccc rrrr aa � -1-4 -111 -4 -+1 -i -fr O -4-1 -1
O "11 N N T m 11 T G O O D 1l - --- - - - - - - - O c O -- m
3 -0MMTTTMMM 0000 mmrrrrrrrrrrr fid rr 3
O rrrrrrrrr Mm ..«.«... .+ .+ .. ., - - - -q «+•-'
1 - - -- - -- 333 3 -111111111113 m 11 O
mmmmmmmmm > > > > 20 - -• `+`+ - - - - - - - > 3 m m
o m m m m m m m m m - • m O m m m m M m m m m m m - a M MITI m
z zzzz lzmmmmmmwwwoo z < mm 0
co 1 1 1 1 m z 1 z
M m 1
m C) 1
1
m 0O
z
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 00 a
A
- - - -- - - -- - - - - WW - --- -- - - - - - - -- A
1 I I 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 1 if 0
A A A A A A A A A A A A A A w w A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A O
W m N N N N N_N_ro N N ro N ro m m W W w w w W W W W w W ro ro W W W C
W W W W W W -1 -1 -d1 .4 -4 -J 1 .111 W W -1-4 z
0 0 o 0 o o N - o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N o 0 0 -i
I 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 1 1 1 11
W - - -- O O P P P P A A W W w - - P -0 - P A z
-0 - N- W --4W WN Nm mm oommm- NNUIN - mm W N NN O
W - - - - ----- - A N - o o m P N- ^I - - - - -
1 1 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 1 1 1
-0 -0 W W WA -� PA �-•
A - N - W- -J UI-W N N m CO m o o N N N- ro ro to N- m m-N ro -J N ro z
<
W t
ro
P s O
U7 N
O T 1
O -
. 1
OD
S -4
3
m ro
m a
* • « * « m
a m
• ,r �1 x * * m
• + x * O
I 1 I 1 I I m
x x x
m m m m m m ,I
a 0 a o a o a Coco a o a o a o f 0040 f 0 0 o a
# A a A f A i A A A A a A f A a A a A A A t AAA # t7 .o
# ru # N t N a N (U (II ro f N # ro f N t N N N t N N N a 2 OD
f o• t o. t N + in Ln In N t In f VI +t In t to UI in a In in In t m -1
t N t O t .o t CO OD OD O t UI t A f A a W W W f W W W a 0
a A f o f T a o Cl 0 o t A t th t W a Ch T to t W W W t x 0
M
Z "'I
0 -C
0
v M
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o D
N N N (U !U (U (U N N N N N N N N N -4 (n
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ m x
D
X
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O
CD 0 OD OD OD CO CD m OD OD OD O OD co W O ro
-4 -4 -4 -j .1 -4 m
m
D
3
O
c
Z
1n (U(U Ou OD W W A A o - m (U .N0.
N UI NUI OD OD am m UI N N OD O) N ro .A .o o OD W O) .o o
NN oo W W OD InUIm oo OD OD W W In T-dro -IAroo 0
0 0 A A tr a o UI N In N o 0 0 o N ro to o o. o o• .o A W o
£ O < c c c c 1 (A v n o n O w fm
D U ►. z Z z z .'D z D w H w D D D
2 m X - - - D D X
r c) •, -i-1 -4 -i < v r
G) z 0000 m I m <
w c) ciocio r o m 000 m
£ O to m X ;u M 0 z 2 '1 'I TI (ANN Z
1
D x 1 mmmm m -1 W (ANN 000 0 0 0
x r m zzzz (n o xxx 000 m
r D m -i 1 -1 1 0 to D D D X X X (�
_ z r D D D D 0 r x X X 2
v rrrr z to x 0O0 m
z to m '0IV *0 0
t7 NOto to 0 (A m m m X
mmmm O to mmm
zzzz z o z
<< << m
0
M
to
-i
m
z
to 1 to W w w m -i to -0 c c c -1 -(to w
c M c r r r r- z c z
o D v v v v v D v O M M M a s IV m
< V 0000 < '0 'r1 r r r «' 3
r m r m r .. .. ., m m r,
►• r .+
32 3 3 rrr
.. p
m m DaDD m m .- - — m m
to a to .. .. .. .. w to M m m m w q. to (A
z Z z z < 0 W O 0
C W to (o
cm c c ..
w 0
O w ro
w N to -I
M M H
to 0 N to O
0 0
C. 0 0 0 0 0 o ro o o - - D
rr tn� - rrAA 0
i 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 I I I I 0
A A A AAAA A A A A A A a A A O
ro w ro N m ro ro w ro w w w w w w ro c
w — w W W W w .1 .1 .t WW — z
0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 000 000 -1
I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 11 1
A AW.. .. ... A - .. plA z
In w ro-+ ODOD A .o .Dmro WAA O
-. N - +.J w
I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I
.. A A W- - - A .. -• O• A n).� w
Ln ro fu- 0 OD A .o -. .a N N W A.A. .. Z
# O
M
ro 1
O
. I
to
* -1
3
m o
a # f t a f a f t f
co
a a f f t # t f f t D m
f f f a a a a a a t 0
I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I m
X X X X X X
in (A y O y N to y V.+ to OD
�K
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
A d . d d d d d d A A A A A A A .a d
N N ro N ro N N N N N N ro N N N ro N N # N x OD
_W W m OD co o_o OD a+ m m m m OD OD m m m m x m m -1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 x W 0
Q% In A W N o 10 OD CD -J m UI A W N o x o x 0
z -4
O -<
O
O -n
0 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 C. o 0 0 0 0 0 o a
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ro ro N N N -i N
m s
o
OD OD OD OD m m CO CD CO W CD m OD CD OD OD N OD OD v
a
_ _ 3
O
N ro c
z
A AA W W -1 .1 NN OD OD NN OW -1
A UI UI mm Ul to 0 OO NN WW mUI - Nro UIN NN mm Ln to W W mm NCD 10 10
OD oo OD W OD 0o UI UI W W W o W co AA oo N N UI U1 .D .a o0 dA o0
to o0 00 00 0o a0 .0 0o NCD aDom W W � � 00 00 mm o0 0o W W .I ,i
W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 m m m o m -1 .1 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 co W o C. 0 0 0 o N ro
N z O Z r r 70 x «. w d t7 m a L
m m < N c a a s O m z O m w a
N [� O w -I < L x M w z � L C. m 3 N 3 N
-I x TI M c r z z m z m N -"1 - m <
z a -I o m -c A m m N m c
L o z N m n 'I m � o z m r -i a m
m r n a a r 3 3 -< a L m 0 3 z
r O a O z 3 0 r O O r -1 m Cl) z < a 0
O O z m O 00 a m r z m m z O
m N ;D x O 3 z z -4 ;v z L ;v a X
a a a m a m m N c ►+ N < O M 0 0
N r •i z z z X N z m m =
m a m m m a m x N M 0 r N 3 m
z -c x z 0 -I < O 0 •• m 0
.» z z x
< = o z -I 0 -t
z z
Am
3 m - ..
0
z
N
m
z
0 -ID .0 -1 - m O N m a N m c ••
c c M ro C c c z O z z C C r O c O --I m
v v O o m -D m o za a c m o c m o c
T '0 3 3 N '9 -N 'n -•n < < - co 0 •+ N 3 N r 3
r r O o r m m T O
.+ 4 -I wa.
m m ►+ .. m m 3 y N o a m N
N co O O N N co m N P. P w C Z > C Z > N C7
z Z c c < 0 0
vj N w w x N N z W -1 Z w N Z
N N O c c -i N � N '•"
N
r N N M x
w rn N w w w w w
N N N D O
Z
Cl 0 0 0 0 _o 0 C. 0 0 0 o o a
A A A m m d n
I I 1 I 1 i I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I i t7
d d d A AA A A A d A A d A d d A d d O
ro N W W W N W W W W W m W N ro W W ro W C
f 1 .r .o W W W 10 W W -- W -1 z
.o 0 0 0 C. o N O N d N 0 •�
1 1 I I i I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I i W -j z
A W d N N W A W W
N U1 A d N A W W ro N W N - UI A N N O
m N N N N N m d ro
1 1 1 1 I 1 I i i I I I 1 I I 1 I W M
tn 4 a d - N ro w A w W W
ro
N N A A ro A W W N N W N to A N N z
ik o
N
O
• 1
N
# -1
3
m -0
(n a
x N fid
# a m
# 0
1 m
x
N N
oo oo-J m V1 -p' N N N H F' h' O I =J
W HLA)W Hen D\H ON vi I Z
C 'dCI� I I- � W d 00 1-30 tzj
c+ W c+ \D \O N p O W W �o It (D I F-3
N <4 O OD 1 () £ 'd cr > 9) z O
N• O B B c+ c+ c+ (D (A �t a
c-F I-J �-iHb O w Fl• w r
tZI99 "1 £ H C+ � cn
�-t b O n ::1
C O < a x N '0
(n (n W (D (D (D a 't a
(DD
( (D( D cc+( C <
:5 z (D
C c+ c+ It H
c+ C O '=J
Fl. z ti C
PL s
Fl. (D CL
c+ z
C." C+
F, {
W OD N I— -p'
N N ]W D\N NviW I O\N�
vt \n0D\wNO\--jOD �\10 NF
C\O W Oo�D �n vi O\ -� N N O N
\nOOOO\n 0\0OD\0WI � -t=-
\0I0ODO000NNH MH Zvi
f
b
P)
O
I ~
O
O (O < O � 00000 cc) 0c) 0c) OD W OD OD Co 0 �rD p
F F O F- F N F- F✓ FJ H N H N H H F-' N N H F-' 1- =
r• r. C-
w W OD Co -p- N NW W N \10 �10 �10 \.D \10 \D \.D �o \.D
\D \D \D wF HF- NNF-' N N N W W N NNN
O O O W N 0 000 0 LO ----1 -' N F' aN-4 F4O n
F N O o l \D N F� W 0 O O O O O O O O Cr
F O O F' H \n W N F-' O O
FN✓ F✓ O O O O O O O
0 O F, N FJ F- H O O O O O O O Oo
F- 0 0 -3 \O F-' -p" o o o o o o o o 'sw✓i
o
N O O N F- \n w N F' O O O O O O O O cC
F Fes-' Fl C
1 I I t)
'd Cl) C) y O O• < O O O O 00 CO 00 CO CO CO CO OD OD CO
PO H H O F-' F, F-, H F-' F-' N F, F- N N H H N N H F-' ni p
£ (D
�i (D > F' F-' R• F-' H N H F' H I F' h F' N H N N N F-j F (D
O
o ~l 11 r o 0 0 00 00000 O o 0 0 0 0 000 a
I- p Co H Ff F' F� Ff F N H F-J Ff N N N N Ff F- H H N 7
F =J F o 0 0 00 00000 0 0 O 0 0 0 000
F-3 �:S "J ~
It P,
r_ z
m a
C+
rn
\n N \n N N w \n __4a
0 O
-_ N O w OD�,D FJ w N \n \n \n \n -F- O w
\n O < \D N O w OD \X \Jl N O w O � � � CO O
W O O O w \D O-\w F \n O FJ O O O OD W N o
O r• \n w -P-w D\O O O O O O w -P' N W a
� n
O
C
z
LA.)i� N n n < 3 (b n to m 'd rd CD w w x w w = W w W 'v
__4
-J N O O O H. a r_ s= C O OS= O N N O O CD (D CD O O 9
7 W -.1 r• En n "d 'd Cl Cl 'd R @ B B B s B W �<
10 "o CF CF 10 H. r• r• r• r• r• r• r• r• a
W N O O n (D F-' F' W P F" c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ c+ `j til
7 N 00 7 R° R° R cc+ N (D CSD ((DD (HD ''d ti t7 I'd C Co 3 It It � trsJ
CD Co (n ca cn t7d (D CD p z H (D H H
0 0 C Z ~fi ~fi C-9 r• y a n �-3 r
0 0 co n It 0 0 0 9 d
N N n n n N �7
to In o o (D
Gq 5 CD
'0 C I�
C+
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 tV N N N N N N N N N N N N N r'
Vl \n \n \n Vl \n VI \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \Jn \n \n Vl \n
W N f- O \D \D OO OO OJ OO W 01 \n .1- W N F-' Fl N O
t7
W
clrn
Co Co < t-J = 3 = _ _ = n rd H b F C n _ = F- <
c+ c+ O n (D (n O (n
r• c+ c+ CI1 td c+ r• c+ R
Q. r• It cC 9 co c+ 8
� Ft
�_3 W F- W FesJ
H.
r• c+ c+ - 1 �5 (D 1
N to (D W Co c+ C C!)
(D x �3 W (D
O P F� Z W
C14 04 CDOD '0 (( O
(D :K (D c (D
Q, (D
a �
x
a N F w N 9
F� F -P N °\ N F w \Jn ct
� N O w 1 D\ H \n \n \n \n -P- H
\n O \D w N N O w O -p' -pN
w
0 0 O w 0 F O O O Co w \D
l 0 0 fir,• OD 0 0 0 0 0 0 w \D
�(D 0
\n N \n 01 w \n W W \n c+
\10 O \~O O O \~O O O \~O H n 't
\n w \n .P- \n \n \n \n O cr
0
LA.) N W O H w \n w P- O K
\O H \O NO �
W O O
H N !- o N N P P N O �G
F-I
W 01\ N N N O It N O N o O cr\ N O\ N OJ �F-'0
C 4\
co
-p- N\O D\-J F-' � F-' 1 HN \O N -J -P-
d N F✓ N N H H H N I9 ao
t'J F- H W 0 C) �3 H O O O O O 0 0 o O
(D
n ��n 0(D X03 O O O O O O 00 O O n
*1 O\ �(D (D > c+
O bm cF c+ �-j r
£ H 1 O w U)
Fl-
0 c ((D �
s C (¢D a N
n O -F" N N N h-' a
c+ c+ H W -P- o O \n \O \n O W O
(n P. O \O N 01\ \n N N N \O N O -q z
0 10 0 OD O O"N \n \n \n N O O w Z5
c+
(D �1 o O 1 OJ O N \n O \n
z:s 0 0 O \n \n O v, o v, O o a
C+ o
n
0
c
z
a
0 0 ''d O 0
fR {Pr ((D n ((D C " (DD Ft ((D 0 (D a K
w
O N N N \p y CO �31 to
H P) H N H (D H w x `"y
W W O \O o P \n a H. 8 C7 co 3 11 s co [y
\D -J -P-\0 0 -J F- 'd :5 10 r n b C 10 Q4
—1 W O\N O -;= O 't c+ y m Fi �l (D t''
O O 10 O O O t7
00000\n � O0d
C C (n 1- C <
\O
07
O\
N fU N N N N N N N N 0
N N N N N N N N N N ^
\n \n Vl \n \n \n \n \n Vl \n
N O \O OJ a\D\ \ten
O
b
w
c+
n
r 0 r C (D z*z
F m N F M C m a
(D C7 O r• (D O
Z (D z x 04 c+
LTJ
H. z (n (D a (D
Fl 11 cr) ::s m td
(D Q. m (D c+ n �t
0 (D (D Z n �3O
U]
m( °C W
Cl)n
�S H
F-J 0
C]
.EP, x
N
O-J -P' N F✓ W F✓ a
L,) -p- O O \n \n O W B
\O FJ ON \n N N N F, 0 c-
-3 W O O-\ \n \n \n W o w
l 0 O co O N w O \n
0 0 0 \n \n 0 \.n \n 0 0
/Da-j
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Amending the 1987 Budget
DATE: February 11, 1987
Introduction
I have received a bill from the Scott County Auditor for the 1987
City' s cost for the Optical Scan Reader (election equipment) .
This is the second of five payments.
Background
Originally the County had planned on renting the election
equipment for a five year period at the end of which the
equipment would be owned by the County. This rental agreement
provided that the agreement could be terminated at certain
intervals during that five year period. The reason for this
approach is that it would have permitted the purchase of other
election equipment after one year if there was additional
equipment approved by the Secretary of State ' s Office that would
have been more desirable. As it turned out this arrangement with
the vendor was not possible and the County did in fact purchase
the AIS Optical Scanning Election Equipment.
If you will recall the purchase price for the Optical Scanning
Election Equipment was prorated against the governing bodies
within Scott County based on the number of registered voters in
each.
Anticipating that a purchase would be made in 1987 , I budgeted in
the Capital Equipment Budget for 1987 , elections division,
$10 , 500. Since the City will not actually be acquiring any
property, the election equipment will be owned and housed by the
County, the Finance Director has advised me that the City' s
portion for the 1987 Optical Scan Reader payment may not come out
of the Capital Equipment Budget, but must come out of a the
General Fund Rental Budget. Therefore, it is necessary to amend
the 1987 Budget for the City Clerk by reducing capital equipment
by $10 , 500 and increasing rentals by $2 ,420 .
Alternatives
1. Amend the 1987 Budget.
2. Do not amend the 1987 Budget.
Recommendation
Alternative No. 1 , amend the 1987 Budget.
Recommended Action
Offer Resolution No. 2688 , A Resolution Amending Resolution No.
2635 Adopting the 1987 Budget, and move its adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 2688
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2635
ADOPTING THE 1987 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a budget for the fiscal
year, and
WHEREAS, changing conditions and circumstances warrant amending
the budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the appropriations are increased as
follows:
Fund Account Division Amount
General 01-4380-132-13 Rents $2 , 450
and the increases are offset or funded by decreases in the following
accounts:
Fund Account Division Amount
General 01-4991-911-91 Contingency $ 2 ,450
General 01-4511-132-13 Capital Equipment 10 ,500
Capital Equipment 17-4710 None 10 , 500
General Fund 01-3900 Transfers In 10 ,500
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City cf Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,
1987 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of 1987.
City Attorney
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Ray G . Ruuska , Engineering Coordinator
SUBJECT: 1982 Pavement Preservation Program
DATE: February 12, 1987
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND:
On January 20 , 1987 City Council authorized final payment on the
above referenced project in the amount of $4 , 048 .50 . Attached is
Resolution No. 2687 , accepting work on this project .
RECOMMENDATION :
Adopt Resolution No. 2687 approving final payment in the amount
of $4 , 048 .50 to the contractor, Hardrives, Inc.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No . 2687 , A Resolution Accepting Work on the
1982 Pavement Preservation and Rehabilitation Program and move
its adoption.
RR/pmp
FINAL
RESOLUTION NO. 2687
A Resolution Accepting Work On The
1982 Pavement Preservation and Rehabilitation Program
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City
of Shakopee on September 14 , 1982 , Hardrives , Inc. , 7200 Hemlock
Lane N. , Maple Grove , MN 55369 has satisfactorily completed the
1982 Pavement Preservation and Rehabilitation Program , in
accordance with such contract .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF 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 $ i4 , 048 . 50 , taking the
contractor ' s receipt in full .
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota , held this 20th day of January , 1987 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 19
City Attorney