HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/23/1988 TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 23, 1988
Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding
1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2] Res. No. 2940, Declaring the Cost to be Assessed and Setting
A Public Hearing for the 1987-13 VIP Sanitary
Sewer
3] Worksession on Housing Code Enforcement
4] Other Business:
a] Bob Tomczik would like to talk to Council about
a pull tab license for the Hockey Association at
the Pullman Club
ba C �� r- �
51 Recess for an Executive Session to discuss 1988/89 Police
Labor negotiations
6] Re-convene
7] Adjourn
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director
RE: Comprehensive Plan Task Force
DATE: August 23 , 1988
INTRODUCTION:
As a part of the comprehensive planning process the City
Council should appoint a Comprehensive Plan Task Force.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Shakopee is presently in the initial phases of
preparing a comprehensive update to the Shakopee Plan. In order
to obtain valid responses from a cross section of the community
and to guide the conduct of the study a Comprehensive Plan Task
Force needs to be appointed.
Attached please find a list of organizations or groups and a
list of people who represent these various organizations or
groups in the comprehensive planning process. In certain
instances. Council members and others have submitted more names
for various slots then there are slots available. In those
circumstances it will be necessary for the City Council to select
a limited number of these people. Those persons with asterisks
by their names have indicated a willingness to serve on this
committee. An attempt was made to contact all people who have
been nominated, however in some instances those people were not
able to be contacted as of this time. Certain names have been
deleted as requested by the individual. The numbers to the right
of the names of various people represent staff recommendations as
to persons who should serve on the Comprehensive Plan Task Force.
The City Council may either endorse these recommendations or they
may choose to place other people on the Committee.
It is essential that the City Council make a decision this
evening in that the agenda for the first meeting must be sent out
tomorrow. The first meeting will be held on Monday, August 29,
1988.
The Community Development Director will be available to
answer questions about this subject.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Endorse the staff recommendations for membership on the
Comprehensive Plan Task Force.
2. Modify---the list, if desired and make official the
appointments to the Task Force.
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternative #1 above is recommended.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to appoint the persons on the attached list to
membership on the Comprehensive Plan Task Force.
_ r %v
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TASK FORCE
Staff: ( 4)
John Anderson* - 1
Dave Hutton* - 2
Dennis Kraft* - 3
Douglas Wise* - 4
City Council: ( 3)
Gary Scott* - 1
Joe Zak* - 2
Gloria Vierling* - 3
Planning Commission: ( 2)
John Schmitt* - 1
Terry Forbord* - 2
Community Development Commission: ( 1)
Tim Keane* - 1
Jane DuBois*
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission (1)
Lou VanHout* - 1
Shakopee Community Services Commission (1)
Dean Roper* - 1
Industrial Representatives: (2)
Noreen Rachor (Certainteed) * - 1
Stan Neimeyer (Toro) - 2
Development Community: (2)
Clete Link* - 1
Zack Johnson, Scottland Co. * - 2
Entertainment Industry: (2)
Pat Dawson, Canterbury Downs* - 1
Linnea Stromberg-wise, Valleyfair* - 2
Shakopee Chamber of Commerce: ( 1)
Theresa Roehrich* - 1
Shakopee School District• (1)
Janet Wendt
James O'Brian - 1
Ron Ward
Downtown Business Community• (2)
Dave Brown* - 1
Bill Behrens or Anthony Berens
Pat Scherers* - 2
Dave Moonen
Non-Profit/Governmental Representatives (2)
Robin Ehlers (Murphy' s Landing)*
CA Council _ 1
St. Francis Hospital - 2
Financial Institutions• (1)
Community Residents• (6)
Donna Hyatt - 1
Judy Case - 2
Michael Beard - 3
Mitchel Dubois
Ray Siebenaler*
Willie Welter*
Joe Theis
Glenda Spiotta* - 4
Bruce Wiese* - 5
Glen Graber - 6
Harold Bohlen*
Jessica Gris
Senior Citizens: (2)
Joe Notermann Sr. - 1
Hospitality Industry• (1)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administra or
FROM: David Hutton, City Enginee
SUBJECT: Valley Industrial Park Interceptor
Sewer Extension, Project No. 1987-13
DATE: August 18, 1988
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is necessary to order the preparation of the
--assessor ort and set the assessment hearing for the Valley
Industrial Park InteYcept r Sewer Extension, Project No. 1987-13 .
BACKGROUND:
Construction of the V.I.P. Sewer Extension project from County
Road 17 to County Road 79 has been completed.
Because it is important that the hearing be held and assessments
certified to the County by October 10, 1988 staff is requesting
that the assessment report be prepared and the hearing held prior
to that date.
Based on the feasibility report for this project, as well as the
original feasibility report for portions of the interceptor that
were constructed in 1981, the assessments for this project will
h s_liohtly_Ai-fferent than the -norm.
As a trunk facility that travels across a large service area,
properties are assessed for lateral benefit, trunk benefit and
interceptor benefit. Since the service area for this project is
completely residential property and all lots will be served by
lateral mains located in the streets, there are no lateral
benefits for these properties. Therefore, all assessed costs
will be either trunk or interceptor costs to be assessed on an
acreage basis.
In addition a portion of the costs for this project that are
determined to be interceptor systems charges will be carried over
and assessed in the future to properties west of C.R. 79 (that
are currently in Jackson Township) at the time the system is
constructed through that area. This is the method that was used
in 1981 for assessing that project, i.e. a portion of the system
costs were carried over and are being added into the costs being
assessed for this year's project.
This methodology and associated feasibility reports will be
discussed in greater detail at the assessment hearing.
VIP Sewer Extension
August 18, 1988
Page 2
Attached is Resolution No. 2940 Ordering the Preparation of the
Proposed Assessment and Setting Public Hearing for the Proposed
Assessment for the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer
Extension Project No. 1987-13, for Council consideration.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve Resolution No. 2940. __-
2. Deny Resolution No. 2940.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
REQUESTED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 2940, A Resolution Declaring the Cost to be
Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for
the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer Project from C.R. 17
to C.R. 79, Project No. 1987-13 and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
MEM2940 --- --
v
RESOLUTION NO. 2940
A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And
Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessments for
the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer Project
from County Road 17 to County Road 79
Project No. 1987-13
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of:
the Valley Industrial Park Interceptor Sewer Project from County
Road 17 to County Road 79, Project No. 1987-13 and the contract
price for such improvements is $ 128 , 940. 00, the construction
contingency amounts to $ 3 , 052 . 00 and the expenses incurred or to
be incurred in the making of such improvements amounts to
$ 59,774 . 05 so that the total cost of the improvements will be
$ 191,766. 05 and of this cost the City will pay $ 0. 00 as its
share of the cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed is
hereby declared to be $ 191,766. 05.
2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer
shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially
assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece
or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to
cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file a copy of
such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection.
3 . That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such
proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1. That a hearing shall be held on the 20th day of
September, 1988, in the Council Chambers of City Hall at
7 : 30 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time
and place all persons owning property affected by such
improvements and proposed assessments will be given an
opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment.
2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice
of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in
the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two weeks
prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice the total
cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed notice of
such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel described in
the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing.
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
�3
MEMO TO: City Council
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official
V
-Ra—. -2egt_al Unit Inspection
central-Bus law`s District
DATE: August 11, 1988
INTRODUCTION
Beginning September 1, 1988, our new Housing Inspector will begin
his inspection program of the B-1, B-2 and B-3 (Central Business
District) areas, beginning with the B-3 District.
Attached you will find additional recommendations of Mr. Parker
to make the program more comprehensive and more supportive from a
legal standpoint. We are requesting you review these
recommendations and direct us.
INSPECTION PROCESS
Initially we are proceeding with existing laws and ordinances in
effect. Our estimated completion time is as originally stated,
two years. Our focus point will be nonhomestead rental units in
these three districts. Our existing laws and ordinances address
only life safety/health and structural integrity areas and will
not provide a "fix" for the general exterior appearances of these
buildings.
The document submitted by Mr. Parker for your approval is more in
depth and includes a long .term program which will result in a
better housing stock and will discourage absentee land/slum lords
from continuity 1.o-practice neglect and "milk" properties in the
Shakopee-area. I understand that you may want to wait on making
- ----long term decisions to see how well our first attempt at solving
housing deficiencies in the central business district works out.
SUPPORT FROM COUNCIL
I would like to remind Council that order to make this program
work due process will have to be strictly adhered to, both on
s and Council. If Councilmembers receives
part of the Inspector
complaints from "sacred cows", they must allow the appeal process
to run its course and not interfere. Inconsistent treatment will
result in the program going down the tubes. I am not saying that
you should not investigate complaints, as I fully believe as
elected officials you are obligated to investigate and make
program changes. However, I am saying Council must refrain from
interfering with the legal process, (Housing Board of Appeals,
District Court, etc. ) for individuals. I originally told Council
that this type of program historically is not popular and is not
a votegetter. I do believe if handled properly it will have
beneficial , results and will be accepted by those affected as a
way of life.
HANDLING COMPLAINTS
Should Council receive any complaints-regarding any work orders
on a specific property, please contact Cora or me to assist you
in pulling the property file so you may have all background data
on the property.
LH:cah
Attachment
MEMO TO: City Council
FROM: Newton Parker, Housing Inspector
RE: Housing Maintenance Program
DATE: August 17, 1988
INTRODUCTION
-City—Council has directed staff to develop and implement a
systematic code-enforcement program that would induce owners of
downtown rental hous-1bg- and -commercial structures to improve
their properties to meet City codes. In developing an
implementation plan for housing inspections, it became clear that
a more comprehensive approach was needed to achieve the Council's
objectives. Staff has put together for Council's approval a
proposal for a Housing Maintenance Program that more fully
addresses the problem.
BACKGROUND
The City Council has identified the problem that many of the
buildings in the downtown core show signs of deterioration.
Being concerned about the safety and welfare of the occupants of
those buildings, the City has hired a full time housing inspector
to implement a program to inspect all properties containing
rental housing units in this core area, requiring the owners to
make all necessary repairs as stipulated by the City Uniform
Housing Code and the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous
Buildings. Staff interprets the intent of the Council to be that
--- - -- -- -ALL owners in the City of Shakopee should maintain their property
in accordance with these City Codes.
The need for an enforcement program has been well documented.
The City Building Inspector has estimated that 60 buildings in
the B - 3 zone are code deficient. Of these, 2 are expected to
be demolished, and 40 will need substantial restoration (between
$3,000 and $30,000) . There are also a number of accessory
structures and non-conforming use situations that will require
demolitions.
The experience of cities like St. Louis Park and Bloomington has
shown that a one-time enforcement sweep is not enough. They have
found that an effective enforcement program is one where
inspections are required regularly and conducted in a consistent
manor. Periodic inspections provide a strong incentive for the
owner to invest in long term improvements instead of stop-gap
repairs. Unless a comprehensive enforcement program is in effect
before the inspections start, the owners will merely respond to
the specific demands of the inspector and do little toward
improving overall housing quality.
2 -
PROPOSAL
Staff believes that expanding the present Certificate of
Occupancy requirements to include all residences (insteadof just--
new construction) would best achieve Council0s--goal of improving
Shakopee's housing quality. Under this program, a certificate of
occupancy would be issued when the inspector is satisfied that
the property complies with the code, and that all fees and
penalties (where applicable) have been paid. Because high
density multiple housing is more prone to abuse, rental property
containing over 3 units would be inspected on a yearly basis,
while rental property with one, two or three units would be
inspected every two years. Homestead property, however, would
only be inspected at the time of sale or when the homestead
status changes (the program recognizes that homeowners are
generally more responsible caretakers) . (see attachment #1 for
program outline) .
The proposal will require several code changes (see attachment
#2) . It will be necessary to have a public hearing on these
changes.
PROGRAM BENEFITS
The Housing Maintenance Program will prompt all owners of
residential property to maintain a safe and healthful
environment. In doing so, the City can expect a number of
positive results:
- Reduced potential for disease, death, and injury.
- Increased property values.
- Lower property insurance rates.
- Fewer negligent landlords
3
3 -
- Improved street appearance.
- Increased confidence of potential home buyers in the
City's housing stock.
and, of course, better quality housing.
SUMMARY
The present housing inspection process is reactive and open to
potential abuse. Since established properties are inspected only
after a complaint is lodged or an injury sustained, tenants,and
on occasion landlords, often try to drag the inspections
department into housing disputes.
Attempts at improving, through inspections, isolated sections of
the city where housing deficiencies are most noticeable, would be
construed as either arbitrary or as selective enforcement. Any
-------- -such-attempt by the city to manipulate housing quality through
selected inspections, could also be construed as political
harassment and could meet with complaints and lawsuits. Such
turmoil would set back efforts to effectively improve housing
quality, and create opposition instead of cooperation for any
attempts at upgrading our housing stock.
Because the proposed program would be a periodic review process,
deficiencies would show up earlier when they are less serious and
therefore easier, and less costly to correct. The tremendous
long term benefits of such a program are obvious, but the
immediate returns would also be impressive. Within three years
most of the serious housing problems of the city would be
addressed by the program.
We should anticipate dissatisfaction from rental owners as the
costs of bringing older properties up to code sinks in. This
reaction will place a good deal of pressure on both staff and
council. In order to successfully meet this challenge it is
important that the program is well thought out and the objectives
well publicized. The owners and residents must understand that
this program impacts all housing and not any one segregated
subgroup. The issuance of the certificate of occupancy will
legitimize the inspection process, by giving cause other than
complaint for conducting inspections. Without this requirement,
we could never adequately answer charges of selectively enforcing
the code.
4 -
Because of the anticipated negative response to this program, the
procedures and capacity of the Board of Adiustment and Anneals
should be reviewed.
This body must be prepared to handle a
steadily increasing case load with consistency and efficiency.
Also of note is the strain that will be placed on the inspections
department clerical staff (Cora) . The paperwork involved with
issuing 300 - 400 additional certificates, dealing with 200% more
abatement proceedings, processing more building permits, and a
significant increase in the volume of calls and complaints may
require additional secretarial help. (See budget, attachment 41) .
This project will take a lot of effort, but the results should be
beneficial. Landlords will be on notice that Shakopee will not
tolerate negligent management practices. Home-buyers will be
more attracted to this community because of the improving housing
stock and because the houses they buy will have to meet healthful
standards. This project will isolate hazards that are at this
very moment waiting to cause injury to some unsuspecting citizen.
Staff would like to point out that this program is not directed
towards commercial or industrial properties, but rather to any
property containing, or abutting residential property. This may
affect commercial/industrial property if that property poses a
nuisance, health or safety problem for an inspected residence.
[Note: Council may wish to consider at a later time, the
requirement that all commercial and industrial properties must
have a similar occupancy certificate. ]
Staff recommends that the Housing Maintenance program as proposed
herein, be endorsed by City Council at this time. Staff would
also request that a public hearing on the proposed ordinance
changes be scheduled for September 20th.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Move to endorse the Housing Maintenance Program as
proposed.
2. Move to endorse the Housing Maintenance Program
INCLUDING commercial and industrial buildings in the
program.
3 . Make additions and/or changes to the proposed Housing
Maintenance Program.
4. Move to inspect only buildings in the B- 1,2 & 3 zones.
3
5 -
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to endorse the Housing Maintenance Program as proposed
and direct the appropriate City Officials to schedule a
public hearing on September 20th concerning the ordinance
amendments.
Attachment 41
HOUSING MAINTENANCE PROGRAM OUTLINE
Staff recommends that this program be called the Housing
Maintenance Program, which better describes the Council's
objectives. It requires all properties containing residential
units to obtain a certificate of occupancy from the City Building
Department. Certificates are divided into various
classifications as outlined herein. Fees are applied depending
on class and number of reinspections needed. Implementation
involves a few minor amendments to City Ordinances (see memo
attachment #2) . Once the expanded certificate of occupancy is
1 adopted, inspections will be scheduled by zoning districts as
follows (see map, exhibit #1) :
B-3 > B-1 > R-4 > R-3 > R-2 > R-1 > AG > all I and B-2 if
any housing exists in these zones.
This schedule will be phased in over a four year period, with a
majority of all multiple housing being inspected by the second
year as follows:
YEAR 1 -- All homestead transfers
All new construction **
1/2 of all multi-unit rental
1/2 of all single family rental
YEAR 2 -- All homestead transfers
All new construction **
Remaining 1/2 multi-unit rental
Remaining 1/2 single family rental
Reinspection of year 1 multi-unit rental
YEAR 3 -- All homestead transfers
All new construction **
Reinspect all multi-unit rental
Reinspect single family rental from year 1
YEAR 4 -- All homestead transfers
All new construction **
Reinspect all multi-unit rental
Reinspect single family rental from year 2
** existing program
3
Attachment 41 (cont. ) - 2 _
Note that this schedule is independent of inspections made though
the complaint process. Complaints will be handled as usual, and
in some cases will require the revocation of a certificate. As
the program continues, the time spent on reinspections is
expected to decrease as owners become more vigilant of their
property, resulting in fewer violations.
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
For the initial inspection round, staff will publicize the
program in local and area newspapers, and notify each owner of
property in a targeted zone by registered mail. The property
owner is given---a deadline to schedule an inspection with staff,
and will arrange to have all areas of the building accessible at
that time. Owners wishing to sell their homestead, must schedule
an inspection before ho the-- -property. To renew a
certificates- -the rental owner must schedule an inspection
b'erore the certificate expires (notices will be sent six weeks
prior to the expiration date) .
When code violations are discovered, a number of options should
be available to the inspector:
MINOR VIOLATIONS: (Example: Exterior paint peeling, cracked
switchplate, gaps in weatherstripping, holes in screen) .
Certificate issued if stipulation agreement is signed by the
owner agreeing to make the indicated repairs. A follow up
inspection is optional. If the same deficiency is found
during a future inspection, a fine may be levied and all
violations by that owner shall be subject to reinspection
thereafter. Expect 308 0£ residences inspected to fall into
this category at first inspection, 608 thereafter..
SERIOUS VIOLATIONS: (Example: missing switchplate, cracked
glass, interior peeling paint, loose railings, inoperative
smoke alarm, clogged burner on gas stove, no anti-syphon
valve on toilet tank) . Temporary Certificate may be issued
if the inspector feels occupant is in no immediate danger.
Reinspection required to obtain a regular certificate.
Deficiencies must be posted for tenants viewing, to alert
them to any potential dangers. Fines levied if repairs not
completed by expiration of temporary certificate. Expect
608 of residences to fall into this category at first
inspection, 308 thereafter.
HAZARDOUS VIOLATIONS: (Example: dangerous wiring, severe
rodent infestation, unhealthful plumbing, eminent fire
Attachment #1 (cont) _ 3 _
hazards, inoperative furnace in winter) . All occupants must
vacate the premises and notices posted until hazard is
corrected and inspected. Once the hazard has been corrected,
the occupants may move back in under a temporary certificate
until all serious violations are addressed. Fines and/or
demolition may result from this action. Up to 10% of the
structures will fall into this category during initial
inspection.
These options are necessary to assure that tenants are not
needlessly displaced, and to leverage the owners to make timely
repairs.
CLASSIFICATIONS. FEES AND FINES
Fees for a certificate of occupancy are a -cn the anticipated
amount of work needed to inspect and process. The initial
inspection fee includes the cost of one reinspection. Additional
reinspection are charged. These fees are determined by the
class of building as follows:
CLASS FEE
Class 1: all homestead property
Due at time of each sale
$30.00 initial inspection
00.00 1st reinspection
30. 00 ea. additional inspect.
Fine: $10. 00 each day for non-compliance.
Class 2: 1-3 units rental
Due every two years
$40.00 initial inspection
00.00 lst reinspection
30.00 ea. additional inspect
Fine: $10. 00 each day for expired certificate.
Attachment #1 (cont) - 4 FEE
Class 3: 4+ units rental ----
Due every year
q� 50.00 initial ea. building +
88 5.00 per unit over 3
00.00 1st reinspect
50.00 ea. additional inspect
Fine: $20.00 each day for expired certificate.
Class 4: Commercial plus
residential rental
$50.00 initial ea. building +
5.00 per unit
00.00 1st reinspect
40.00 ea. additional inspect
Fine: $20.00 each day for expired certificate
Failure to comply is a misdemeanor and subject to additional
fines and/or imprisonment.
-A- -non-refundable fee of $75.00 is required for any appeal
directed to the City Council.
Attachment $1 (cont. )
Code Enforcement Budget Estimates
(4 mos. )
1988 —
1. Salaries $ 8, 500 $26,260
2. Fringe Benefits -- _ 2,100 6,660
3. Supplies 500 650
4. Motor Pule and Lubricants 0 0
5. Equipment Maintenance 0 0
6. Professional Services 800 0
7. Postage 500 0
8. Telephone 100 250
9. Travel and Subsistence 200 800
10. Printing and Reproduction 4, 000 1, 000
11. Insurance 150 0
12. Conferences and Schools 150 180
13. Dues and Subscriptions 0 0
TOTAL SUPPLIES AND SERVICES $17,000 $35,800
Capital Equipment
0 0
TOTAL CAPITAL 0 0
DIVISION TOTAL $17,000 $35,800
PROJECTED REVENUES
300 inspections annually and an average fee _ o $50. 00 would
generate $15,000 a year in revenue. - - _
Notes:
1. One full time housing inspector.
2. $2,500 in first year for initial printing of inspection
forms.
A m \
_ t \
y `9
W
"I
a
rrl
s 'a
'sem Yrt- 7 rn
01� Z a pyTI P OER
2�C
_9 rr
aH
smi
y _ � O
A 4] F
--
m
4
>
i�
-
73.- -
no
N _
O
i
N
i
E
X
4�iLM LINE
l'-
t.
y
W
301 ABATE ENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS
16. Whone.e: ani building or suunur, because of obsolescenc, diizmomcd
condition.. onenoriant, damage, madeouaa osm, lack .f suf c'For Gm -revs -
sine eonswnion, faun, ciecuic Honing, gas connecu.s a: bersing am.nos. or
turn, cause. is oe Mrmmcd or the fir, marshal to be z f u1- nzard.
117 Wnmnncvcrabuiiomc or swnur is in such a Conditionsst. consticmea
public nuisance known to um comm.". ia. "no eomry iunspmoencc.
18 R vena" znp portion of a building or swcrure mains on z sic of io UMcmoliuon or dQw.YD. of the building or sw.mrc 11-J cncvc any building or
stiorwe is abandoned In, a pend in 's1-11 of six -onus so as to consow¢ such
building or pwu.n thc: eof an z=." noisancc or "L d to trc public.
RM
c
O
r
—
c
_
o _ ..
n
n —
�c
_
Om
— c
Y�
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrtor
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk ^C�
RE: Raffle License - Shakopee Ducks Unlimited
DATE: August 19, 1988
INTRODUCTION:
Shakopee Ducks Unlimited is asking the City Council to waive
the 60 day disapproval period that a municipality has prior to
the State Gambling Board approving an application for lawful
gambling exemption.
BACKGROUND:
On August 5th, Shakopee Ducks Unlimited provided me with a
copy of their application to the State Gambling Board for a
lawful gambling exemption to conduct a raffle at their September
13th banquet. Under the old law, a municipality had 30 in which
to notify the Gambling Board if they wished the exemption to be
denied. Under this law, the State Gambling Board would have been
able to approve the exemption effective September 4th if Shakopee
did not submit a request that the exemption be denied. Effective
August 1st that law was changed to require a 60 day disapproval
period for municipalities. If Shakopee Ducks Unlimited must wait
for 60 days beginning August 5th, they will not be able to
conduct a raffle at their banquet on September 13th.
Shakopee Ducks Unlimited meets the requirements of the City
Code and is asking Council to waive the 60 day disapproval
period.
ALTERNATIVES:
11 Waive 60 day disapproval period
21 Do not waive 60 day disapproval period
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 1, waive the 60 day disapproval
period.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Waive the 60 day disapproval period that the City has prior
to the State Gambling Board issuing a gambling exemption to
Shakopee Ducks Unlimited for a raffle to be conducted on
September 13, 1988.
August 19, 1988
To: Shakopee City Council
Re: Shakopee Ducks Unlimited
Lawful Gambling Exemption
Dear Council Members:
A recent law change now gives the local governing body
a 60 day disapproval period on applications for lawful
gambling exemptions (previously 30 days). Shakopee
Ducks Unlimited has planned a banquet for September
13, 1988 and have made application for an exemption.
The Charitable Gambling Control Board has returned our
application stating that we need the City of Shakopee
to waive the 60 day disapproval period. (Copies of
our application and their response are attached).
We respectfully request that you waive the 60 day
disapproval period and
notification to that effect
be greatly appreciated.
S(hae
,
GG. Hoehn, Treasurer
SDucks Unlimited
provide us with written
Your prompt response will
Charitable Gambling Control Board
Lawful Gambling Exemption Checklist
Your application/financial report for a lawful gambling exemption permit has Dean received.
Please provide the information requested below and resubmit the application/f:Lnancia1.
report to the board office within ten days for processing.
information. Return this checklist with the
Application: Complete the following sections.
Address _ Chief Executive Officer's
Name/Phone
Name of
Premises
Manager's Name/Phone Number
Premises
Address
Chief Executive Officer
Signature
Date(s)
of Activity
Type of Organization
If Other Nonprofit Organization (attach proof of nonprofit status)
YES and NO boxes to indicate games to be conducted and games not to be conducted.
Use of Profits
Acknowledgement of Notice by Local Governing Body (If premises is located within
city's jurisdiction, city must sign; if outside city's jurisdiction, county and
township must sign.) —
* # # * #
Provide the following information with the application.
Proof of three most recent years of existence. Submit either (1).a certificate i
of incorporation, (2) an IRS tax exemption letter, or (3) an organization charter.
A waiver from the local governing body
\ \\
Other
waiving the 6 a disapproval period.
\ c
Financial Report: Complete the following sections (shaded areas).
_ Gross Receipts
_ Expenses and Cost of Prizes
Profit
Market Value of Prizes
_ Distributor's Name
Distributor's License No.
Chief Executive Officer Signature
The Lawful Gambling ExemptioiTapp-II"ion cannot be processed for the following reason(s)
_ The application was not received by this office before the event occurred.
_ An organization may not have more than five days of gambling activity per
calendar year.
Other
F4(6/88)
j
�Minnesota Charitable Gambling Co
Room N475 Griggs -Midway Buil1821 University Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104-3383
(6121642-0555
of BoaEd-'" u A LAWFUL GAMBLING EXEMPTION
rtyjy ! n do i FORaOARDUSEONLY
INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Submit request for exemption at st i ys,prl othe occasion.
2. When completing form, do not comp - areas until after the activity.
3. Give the gold copy to the City or County. Send the remaining copies to the Board. The copies will be
returned with an exemption number added to the form. When your activity is concluded; complete
PLEASE TYPE the financial information. sion and date the formand return To the Rnard within 30 davc.
Ohyan =mern Name
NumOer of Mhorms.
license Num., lil curremp ar pevioualy
Shakopee Ducks Unlimited
l,overdl and., aenmm numb.,.
Aemess
oily
site
iio
county
P.O. Box 295
Shakopee
MN
55379
Scott
over Executive Officefa NamePnone
Mwgei. Name
Rene Numper
Mark Kuecherineister
( 612-445-7200
Greg Hoehn, Treasurer
1612,_ 445-6300
True ul Onalumpanon
.lchasteness,Olpola chasteness, 10 a'S QM and attxf,popdn .11ool of rl.
f7 Fraternal f7 Veterans _ ' ` "-- " "–'—' "
❑ IRS Designation ---' ' -
❑ Religion 35t Other Nonprofit Organization
0 Incorporate with Secretary of State
Attach proof of three years existence.
alrAffiliate of Parent Nonprofit Organization
Name of Premises What. Activity Will Occur
Depths) of Arrive,, drawings)
Knights of Columbus Nall
Premises Address
Cily State
Zip Coumy
1760 E. 4th Ave.,
Shakopee MN
55379 Scott
9-13-88
Expenses and .
-.. -
Market Value
Game
Yes
No
Gross Receipts -
I Cost of Prizes
Profit
of Prizes
Bingo
-
-
-`
X
Raffles
x
-
Paddlewheels
x
Tipboards
x
- -
Pull -Tabs
x
ses 01 rodn"
v Donation to Parent Nonprofit Organization
Diambirm, From Wpom Gambling Equipment Acquired "' - .. G=_ Dirniomme License No.
reassesses
I affirm all information submitted to the Board is true, actor- I affirm all financial information submitted to the Board is
ate, no complete. true, accurate, and complete.
e6af E ... utiveorcmarsigrmture Date I Lief E:ewnyE'omwrsignmure - - -'`Dn.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY
I hereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. By acknowledging receipt, I admit having been sewed with notice
that this application will be reviewed by the Charitable Gambling Control Board and will become effective 30 days from the
date of receipt (noted below) by the City or County, unless a resolution of the local governing body is passed which specifi-
cally disallows such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 30
days of the below noted date. _
CITY OR COUNTY TOWNSHIP
TownMig Name (Must be plunged when coumy is the approving trody)
t' &- 1 (41 q r - Datasaealyad I Tine Dare
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Employment of a Planning Firm to Evaluate the
Effects of a R -O -W Taking from Scherber/Clark
Property for Storm Drainage System
DATE: July 14, 1988
Introduction
The Shakopee City Council, at its regular July 5, 1988 meeting,
authorized staff to obtain proposals from three planning firms to
evaluate the effect of the proposed storm drainage/R-O-W taking
from the Scherber/Clark property.
Proposals
We requested and received three proposals. One proposal is from
the Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban firm. Mr. John Shardlow of that
firm is familiar with this portion of Shakopee because he worked
on the rezoning of the area after the awarding of the Racetrack.
The second proposal is from Hoisington Group Inc. Mr. Fred
Hoisington also has experience with this area because he firm did
the second land use analysis of property around the Racetrack.
The third proposal is from Yaggy Colby Associates. Yaggy Colby
Associates have no recent experience in Shakopee, however, Mr.
Ron Fiscus, their Planning Director, has made formal
presentations in court and has performed well in that capacity
according to Assistant City Attorney Rod Krass. The estimates
for the work and the hourly rates are similar for the report
phase. The hourly rates for expert testimony are significantly
higher for the Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban firm.
Alternatives
Employ Fred Hoisington of the Hoisington Group Inc. because
of his familiarity with the area, his familiarity with
Shakopee and his lower hourly rate for expert testimony.
Employ -the firm of Dahlgren Shardlow and Uban because they
are familiar with Shakopee and have a larger firm and more
experience in providing expert testimony in such cases.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 1 for the reasons listed above.
Action Requested
Direct the appropriate City officials to enter into an agreement
with Hoisington Group Inc. to provide an analysis and prepare a
report for the storm drainage/R-O-W taking- from Scherber/Clark
for the Upper Valley Drainage Project at a estimated rate not to
exceed $4,000.00, and to provide expert testimony (includes
meetings, etc.) at $80.00 per hour.
11a 14..,,.