HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 06, 2016
RESOLUTION NO. 7757
A RESOLUTION SETTING THE PUBLIC HEARING DATE TO CONSIDER THE
VACATION OF PUBLIC DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENTS
WHEREAS,
it has been made to appear to the Shakopee City Council thatpublic
drainage & utility easements located at 2400Jennifer Lane isno longer of public use or
interest; and
WHEREAS,
a public hearing must be held before an action to vacate can be taken
and two weeks published and posted notice thereof must be given.
WHEREAS,
two weeks published notice will be givenin the SHAKOPEE
VALLEY NEWS and posted notice will be given by posting such notice on the bulletin
board on the main floor of the Scott County Courthouse, the bulletin board at the U.S. Post
Office, the bulletin board at the Shakopee Public Library, and the bulletin board in the
Shakopee City Hall.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,
that a hearing be held in the Council
th
Chambers on the 18day of October, 2016, at 7:00 P.M. or thereafter, on the matterof
vacatingpublic drainage & utility easements at 2400 Jennifer Lane.
Adopted in ________ session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held the _____ day of ______________________, 2016.
_____________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
______________________________
Lori Hensen, City Clerk
August 31, 2016
SurplusEquipment
Vehicle #DescriptionVIN#
91142011 FORD CROWN VICTORIA2FABP7BV1BX128229
00572005 FORD F3501FTWW31Y75ED08064
7012002 FORD F3501FTSF31L82EC81195
17082008 FORD CROWN VICTORIA2FAHP71V08X163252
91122011 FORD CROWN VICTORIA2FABP7BV8BX128227
4002009 FORD CROWN VICTORIA2FAHP71VX9X126789
21052005 CHEVROLET TRAILBLAZER1GNDT135152224683
61022002 FORD EXPLORER1FMDU74W82ZA87072
95922006 FORD F2501FTSW21556EC75047
95912007 FORD F1501FTRW14W07FB11908
01141993 CHEVROLET 35001GBKC34NOPJ107002
18991999 FORD RANGER1FTZR15V5XPB57614
01972002 GMC SONOMA1GTDT19WX28230042
RESOLUTION NO.7764
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
ACCEPTING MULTIPLE DONATIONSOF $1,000.00 OR MORE FOR THE
SHAKOPEE FUN FOR ALL PLAYGROUND.
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 5794, which established procedure relating to the receipt of gifts and
donations by the City;and
WHEREAS, Resolution No.5794specifies that donations or gifts shall be
accepted by resolution of the City Council, and shall require a two-thirds majority
of the Council for acceptance;and
WHEREAS, avid supportersof the City of Shakopee havegenerously
donated$1,000or moretothe Shakopee Fun For All Inclusive Playground; and
WHEREAS, the donators include St. Francis Regional Medical Center,
Canterbury Park, Mike Luce and Warners Stellian, Co.; and
WHEREAS, donationswillassist in constructing aunique playground that
will provide a positive playing experience for all community members, young to
old and of all abilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that thedonations aregratefully
accepted; and
FURTHER, the City staff is directed to send a letter to the donors,
acknowledging receipt of the giftsand expressing the appreciation of the City
Council.
Adopted inregular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
th
Minnesotaheld this6day of September, 2016.
______________________________
William Mars
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
___________________________________
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO.7763
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
ACCEPTING IN-KIND DONATIONSFOR THE SHAKOPEE FUN FOR ALL
PLAYGROUND.
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution
No. 5794, which established procedure relating to the receipt of gifts and
donations by the City;and
WHEREAS, Resolution No.5794specifies that donations or gifts shall be
accepted by resolution of the City Council, and shall require a two-thirds majority
of the Council for acceptance;and
WHEREAS, avid supportersof the City of Shakopee havegenerously
provided in-kind donations tothe Shakopee Fun For All Inclusive Playground;
and
WHEREAS, the in-kind donations have been provided by Bryan Rock
Products and Berg Brothers Trucking; and
WHEREAS, donationswillassist in constructing aunique playground that
will provide a positive playing experience for all community members, young to
old and of all abilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that thedonations aregratefully
accepted; and
FURTHER, the City staff is directed to send a letter to the donors,
acknowledging receipt of the giftsand expressing the appreciation of the City
Council.
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
th
Minnesotaheld this6day of September, 2016.
______________________________
William Mars
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
___________________________________
City Clerk
FundstransferredelectronicallyAugust17,2016toSeptember6,2016
PAYROLL
$ 322,708.94
FIT/FICA92,029.86$
STATEINCOMETAX18,733.03$
PERA81,462.22$
HEALTHCARESAVINGS8,300.51$
HEALTHSAVINGSACC
T
$5,320.78
NATIONWIDEDEFCOMP12,405.36$
ICMADEFERREDCOMP2,004.02$
MSRS3,071.96$
FSA5,019.44$
MNWAGELEVY144.23$
Total551,200.35$
Page 1 of 1
9/1/2016 11:24:53 AM
ORDINANCE NO. 938
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,
AMENDING THE CITY’S ADOPTED 2016 FEE SCHEDULE
_____________________________________________________________________________________
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOT, ORDAINS:
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 924, the City Council established a fee schedule effective January 1,
2016; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is desirable to modify the 2016 Fee Schedule.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee that the adopted
2016 City Fee Schedule is amended as follows:
Additions and Remodels
I.J.2.A. Residential Water Heater –Gas $55 + $1 state surcharge
Building Inspections Fees will add the following section:
IV. Changing Building Use
If you intend to change the tenant or use of a commercial property, you must notify the City of
Shakopee to ensure that the new use complies with zoning regulations. This requirement applies
whether the usage change applies to one tenant (i.e. office space to physician’s practice) or the
entire building (i.e. retail to restaurant)
A.If no change to occupancy classification $50
B.If there is a change to occupancy classification
Area (Square Feet)Fee
Up to 5,000 sq. ft.$450.00
5,001 to 25, 00 sq. ft. $750.00
25,001 to 75,000 sq. ft. $950.00
75,001 to 100,000 sq. ft.$1,250.00
100,001 to 200,000 sq. ft.$1,550.00
Above 200,000 sq. ft.$1,950.00
th
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this 6day of
September, 2016.
____________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST: _______________________
City Clerk
City of Shakopee SAC Credits - Economic Development
Additional
Incentive Units Paid Met Council Balance (400 for
Credits Council approval date or SAC Credit By Value Per City Value of Value of Met Value of Economic
YearBusiness NameAwardedResolution #DeterminationDeveloperCity CreditIncentiveCouncil CreditIncentiveTotal ValueDevelopment)
NotesTotal Project CostsNew FTRetained
2013Rosemount Emerson1257288 and 2013-213914$475.00$59,375.00$2,435.00$304,375.00$363,750.00
125Economic Development$72,000,000.00400
2013Shutterfly607337500$475.00$23,750.00$2,435.00$121,750.00$145,500.00
50Economic Development$60,000,000.00329
2014Badger Hill Brewing1010/7/2014100$475.00$4,750.00$2,485.00$24,850.00$29,600.00
10Economic Development$1,500,000.00120
2015Amazon626/16/2015186124$475.00$29,450.00$2,485.00$154,070.00$183,520.00
62Economic Development$225,000,000.001000
13 credits remaining $38,480 - economic
development (13 credits returned to the city
2015Rahr556/16/2015290$475.00$19,950.00$2,485.00$104,370.00$124,320.00
42for reuse $38,480)$68,302,125.0028154
The Franklin, LLC (Public
2015House)197/21/2015190$475.00$9,025.00$2,485.00$47,215.00$56,240.00
19Economic Development$3,500,000.00300
2015Elander Mechanical, Inc.68/18/201560$475.00$2,850.00$2,485.00$14,910.00$17,760.00
6Economic Development$2,500,000.001070
2015Midas Auto Service38/12/201530$475.00$1,425.00$300.00$900.00$2,325.00
3Economic Development
2015Munkabeans110/20/201510$475.00$475.00$2,485.00$2,485.00$2,960.00
1Economic Development
2015Duke Properties1912/1/20153819$475.00$9,025.00$2,485.00$47,215.00$56,240.00
19Economic Development$16,500,000.004035
2016MWF Properties57 Res. No. 7656: 3/2/201657$475.00$27,075.00$2,485.00$141,645.00$168,720.00
57Workforce Housing
Total417$160,075.00$822,140.00$1,150,935.00
394Total$449,302,125.001849259
Original
$1,338,000.00
Allocation
$1,150,935.00
Allocated
$187,065.00
Balance
City of Shakopee SAC Credits - City Sewer Project
Additional
Incentive Units Paid Met Council
Credits Council approval date or SAC Credit By Value Per City Value of Value of Met Value of Total Credits
YearBusiness NameAwardedResolution #DeterminationDeveloperCity CreditIncentiveCouncil CreditIncentiveTotal ValueIssued
Notes
2014Ziegler459/16/2014450$475.00$21,375.00$2,485.00$111,825.00$133,200.00
45City Sewer Project
2014Gavilon119/16/2014110$475.00$5,225.00$2,485.00$27,335.00$32,560.00
11City Sewer Project
2016Bethesda Properties, LLC.66$475.00$2,850.00$2,485.00$14,910.00$17,760.00
6City Sewer Project
Total56$26,600.00$139,160.00$183,520.00
62Total
Original
$1,993,620.00
Allocation
$183,520.00
Allocated
$1,810,100.00
Balance
456Total Credits Issued
RESOLUTION NO.7762
A Resolution Adopting Assessments
For Hilldale Drive Improvements
Project No. 2014-3
WHEREAS,
pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council of
the City of Shakopeemet and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments of:
Properties adjacent to Hilldale Drive.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1.
That such proposed assessment together with any amendments thereof, a copy of which
is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is hereby accepted and shall constitute the special
assessment against the lands named herein and each tract therein included is hereby found to be
benefitted by the proposed improvements in the amount of the assessments levied against it.
2.
Such assessments shall be payable over a period of fifteenyears, the first installment to
be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 2017, and shall bear interest at the rate of 5.00
percent per annum from the date of the adoption of this assessment resolution.To the first
installment shall be added the interest on the entire assessment from the date of this resolution until
December 31, 2017and to each subsequent installment when due shall be added the interest for one
year on all unpaid installments.
3.
The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time prior to certification of the
assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment on such property, with interest
accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the
entire assessment is paid within thirty (30) days from the adoption of this resolution; the owner may
thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of collection on the
current tax list, and may pay the remaining principal balance of the assessment to the City
Treasurer.
4.
The Clerk shall file the assessment rolls pertaining to this assessment in her office and
shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before November 30th of each year the total
amount of installments and interest on assessments on each parcel of land which are to become due
in the following year.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 2016.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ENGR/2014-PROJECTS/HILLDALEDRIVE/WORD/RES7762-ADOPT-ASSESSMENTS
HILLDALE DRIVE ASSESSMENT AND FEE CHARGESPublic Hearing Sept. 6, 2016
Assessment
Waiver
PIDAddressEasementAssessmentHook up fee
11975$6,500.00$17,674.32$3,825.68Yes
270490040
22055$600.00$23,574.32$3,825.68Yes
270590060
32075$2,300.00$21,874.32$3,825.68Yes
270590070
41970$0.00$24,174.32$12,687.89No
270490030
52013$0.00$24,174.32$3,825.68Yes
270590030
62027$0.00$24,174.32$3,825.68Yes
270590040
72041$0.00$24,174.32$3,825.68Yes
270590050
82056$0.00$24,174.32$3,825.68Yes
270490020
92068$0.00$24,174.32$3,825.68Yes
270590010
102080$0.00$24,174.32$3,825.68Yes
270590020
* 15 Year assessment
* 5 Years to hook up
* Council capped assessment and hook up charges at $28,000 per parcel with assessment waivers, minus any easement agreements
H:Eng/2014Projects/HilldaleDrive/Excel/Assessment&HookUpFees
CITY OF SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.7767
RESOLUTION REGUARDING THE AUTHORIZATION AND APPROVAL FOR A MINNESOTA
INVESTMENT FUND APPLICATION, GRANT AGREEMENT AND FORGIVEABLE
LOAN IN CONNECTION WITH ANCHOR GLASS CONTAINER CORPORATION
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, desires to assist Anchor Glass Container Corporation, a
corporation chartered in the State of Delaware to rehab and modernize its current location manufacturing
facility located at 4108 Valley Industrial Blvd. North, Shakopee, Minnesota (the “project”), and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee(the “City”) will actasthelegalsponsorforthe Minnesota Investment Fund
Application tobesubmitted on or after September 6, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the Mayorandthe City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, areherebyauthorizedtoapply
totheDepartmentofEmploymentandEconomicDevelopmentforfundingofthisprojectonbehalfofthe City
of Shakopee; and
WHEREAS,the Cityhasthelegalauthoritytoapplyforfinancialassistance,and hastheinstitutional,
managerial,andfinancialcapabilitytoensureadequateconstruction,operation,maintenance,andreplacement
oftheproposedprojectforitsdesignlife; and
WHEREAS, the City hasnotincurredanycosts, nor has itenteredintoanywrittenagreementstopurchase
property on behalf of the project; and
the City hasnotviolatedanyFederal,State,orlocallawspertainingtofraud,bribery,
WHEREAS,
kickbacks,collusion,conflictofinterestorotherunlawfulorcorruptpractice relating to this project;
and
WHEREAS, the City has called for a Public Hearing to consider application for a Minnesota
Investment Fund application, and grant agreement, and forgivable loan, all in connection with Anchor
Glass Container Corporation; and
WHEREAS, upon approvalofitsapplicationby theState of Minnesota,the City mayenterintoagrant
agreementwith theStateDepartment of Employmentand Economic Developmentfortheabove-referenced
project; and
WHEREAS,the City certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws, statutes, regulations, and rules as
stated in the Grant Contract and described in the Project Compliance Certification of the Application; and
WHEREAS,the City and Kennedy and Graven, Chartered, the City’s legal counsel, hasobtainedcredit
reportsandcreditinformation regardingAnchor Glass Container Corporation, and uponreview, has found
noadversefindingsorconcernsregarding,butnotlimitedto,taxliens,judgments,courtactions,and
filingswithstate,federalandotherregulatoryagencies, the failure of Anchor Glass Container
Corporation, todiscloseanyadverseinformationcouldresultinrevocationorotherlegalaction; and
WHEREAS,the City Council of the City of Shakopee held a duly noticed public hearing on September 6, 2016,
related to the submission of a grant application to the Department of Employment and Economic Development
and the business subsidy of approximately $1,000,000 to be granted to Anchor Glass Container Corporation,if
the City receives the grant, and that all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEDthat, as a result of this action, the Mayor, and the City
Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, are hereby authorized to execute such agreements and amendments
thereto, as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant.
Sworn and Executed Under My Hand this 6 Day of September, 2016.
__________________________________
William Mars, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Lori Hensen, City Clerk
Springsted Incorporated
380 Jackson Street, Suite 300
Saint Paul, MN 55101-2887
Tel: 651-223-3000
Fax: 651-223-3002
www.springsted.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Samantha DiMaggio, Economic Development Coordinator
FROM: Tom Denaway, Assistant Vice President
Jennifer Russell, Analyst
DATE: August 31, 2016
SUBJECT: Anchor Glass Container Corporation– MIF Application
Summary
At the request of the City of Shakopee, Springsted has undertaken a financial review of Anchor Glass Container
Corporation per the application requirements for the Minnesota Investment Fund (MIF). Anchor Glass Container
Corporation is headquartered in Tampa, Florida and is comprised of six glass container manufacturing plants located
in Elmira, New York; Henryetta, Oklahoma; Jacksonville, Florida; Lawrenceburg, Indiana; Shakopee, Minnesota, and
Warner Robins, Georgia; along with an engineering and spare parts facility in Streator, Illinois; and a mold
manufacturing facility in Zanesville, Ohio.
According to the Company, The majority of Anchor Glass’s sales are made to the fast growing premium glass end
markets (e.g., craftbeer, liquor, food, ready-to-drink, and specialty beverage). The Company has focused its strategy
to be the leader in the premium glass packaging market, and management is focused on continuing to gain share in
the craft beer and liquor segments. The Shakopee Plant annually purchases significant amounts of cullet (recycled
glass) from Minnesota suppliers.
This proposed project would require a capital investment of approximately $16 million over the next year. The funds
will be used to re-brick Furnace 1 and its bottle forming equipment modernized in order to keep the plant competitive.
In addition, this project will create approximately 4-8 new full time jobs as well as protecting the 300 current full time
employees.
Springsted has reviewed the following materials with regard to the above referenced project:
Dun & Bradstreet Report for Anchor Glass
Financial Statements from 12-31-2012 through 12-31-2015
Minnesota Investment Fund Application
Proposed Incentive
The Company has requested the following incentives to support the proposed expansion in Shakopee, MN:
Minnesota Investment Fund Loan
Amount: $1,000,000
-
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Anchor Glass
August 31, 2016
Page 2
Financial Analysis Approach
Anchor Glass provided Springsted with corporate financial statements for the years 2012– 2015. Annual financial
statements provided by Anchor Glass are reported using a year ending on December 31. Springsted has compiled
this information into a financial overview. Springsted is not offering an opinion on the applicant’s intent to proceed with
the project or honor any commitment made to the City of Shakopee. The following is meant to provide a snapshot of
the above referenced financial information and in combination with the Dun & Bradstreet report should be used as one
tool to enable the City to form an opinion as to the applicant’s financial capacity. As we were not provided with the
detailed terms of the MIF loan (interest rates, years) we have analyzed financial aspects of the company to illustrate
the ability to take on increased debt.
Project Financing
The applicant has estimated that the cost of the project including machinery and equipment costs is approximately
$16 million. Anchor Glass expects to complete the project by May 4, 2017. According to the MIF application, Anchor
Glass intends to finance an estimated $15,308,397 of the project costs with equity and finance the remaining
$1,000,000 with a MIF loan. According to the applicant, should the company fail to meet negotiated job creation
metrics, the loan would be repaid utilizing revenues from operations. Please see sources and uses below:
ESTIMATED SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Anchor Glass
August 31, 2016
Page 3
Analysis
The summary information outlined below is included to provide a limited overview of the financial health of the
Applicant. The information provided is provided in summary form in order to maintain confidentiality. Additionally, the
comparisons provided reference the change in performance from 2014 to 2015 only, as the company underwent a
series of acquisitions and transformations from 2012 through 2014, making comparison between each year’s financial
statements difficult.
Cash and Cash Equivalents:
Cash and cash equivalents are the most liquid assets represented on a company’s balance sheet. Liquidity refers to
an assets availability to be converted into cash to pay current debts. Changes in a company’s cash reserves occur for
a number of reasons and should not be utilized exclusively as an indicator of financial strength.
The Applicant increased their cash position by 8.6% from 2014 to 2015, and as of 12/31/2015 had a cash position
significantly in excess of the proposed project amount. Since the Applicant is proposing the funding of the project
from internally available funds this is the greatest indicator of their capacity to undertake the proposed project.
Gross Profit:
Gross profit is net sales less costs of goods sold. Cost of goods sold is the cost of the productive input to manufacture
and distribute a product. Gross profit is a snapshot of a company’s revenue stream and is indicative of the efficiency
and profitably of generating a product line. Anchor Glass’s gross profit dollars increased approximately 50% from
2014 to 2015.
Current Ratio:
Current Ratio is a measure of a company’s ability to pay short term debt. In general, a higher current ratio is the
preferred result (varies by industry). A current ratio below one is a sign that a company may have trouble paying its
current debts and is generally a negative indicator of financial health.
The current ratio of approximately 1.91 for Anchor Glass (as of December 31, 2015) indicates that for approximately
every dollar of current liabilities, they have approximately 1.91 dollars of current assets. The ratio is below the industry
median of 2.3 (Industry median provided by Dun & Bradstreet and includes 20 firms that they deem comparable).
Quick Ratio:
Quick Ratio is a measure of a company’s ability to pay short term debt with its most liquid assets. Like the current
ratio, a higher quick ratio is generally the preferred result (varies by industry). A high ratio is indicative of the
company’s ability to utilize its liquid assets to meet its current debt obligations.
Anchor Glass is showing an approximate quick ratio of 0.82 (as of December 31, 2015), meaning they have
approximately 0.82 dollars of liquid assets for each dollar of current liabilities. This ratio is below the industry median
of 1.3 (Industry median provided by Dun & Bradstreet and includes 20 firms that they deem comparable).
City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Anchor Glass
August 31, 2016
Page 4
Debt Ratio:
Debt Ratio is a measure of a company’s liabilities relative to its assets. The debt ratio can be an indicator of the level
of financial leverage a company has endured. Unlike the current and quick ratios, a debt ratio below one is the
generally preferred result. A debt ratio below one indicates that a company has more assets than debt.
The ratio of approximately 1.01 for Anchor Glass indicates that for approximately every dollar in assets they have just
over one dollar in liabilities (Industry median unavailable for this ratio).
Operating Profit Margin/Return on Sales
Return on sales is a profitability measure that calculates net profit (before interest and taxes) as a percentage of sales.
This percentage correlates to the estimated amount of dollars of profit that a firm generates for every dollar of sales.
Anchor Glass’s operating profit margin was above the industry median as of December 31, 2015. This industry
median is 5.4% (Industry median provided by Dun & Bradstreet and includes 20 firms that they deem comparable).
Conclusion
The information gathered, as described above, indicates that Anchor Glass Corporation has access to the financial
assets necessary to undertake the proposed project, within the City of Shakopee.
GREATER MSP`
Minneapolis Saint Paul Regional Economic Development Partnership
ECONOMIC IMPACT - ANCHOR GLASS FACILITY
OVERVIEW
As requested, economic impact estimates have been compiled for the Anchor Glass Manufacturing
Facility. This analysis enumerates the total (direct, indirect and induced)'economic impact on Scott
County for employment and Minnesota for purchasing supplies for operations. The facility employs 300
people with a $27 million payroll.The facility purchases materials and services in Minnesota,totaling
$17 million per year.
Overall:
For every job at the Anchor Manufacturing facility, another 2.2 jobs are created elsewhere in the
Scott County economy—mainly in Wholesale Trade, Marketing Research and Other Local
Government Enterprises.
The wages indirect or induced jobs pay average over$51,000 per job.
Potential loss of tax revenues from the closing of the facility could total $7 million.
The loss of supply purchases to operate the facility could result in the loss of 177 employees
overall, including 71 jobs directly,totaling a loss of over$12 million in wages and over$19
million in GDP.
The potential impact of the Anchor facility closing could total 656 full and part-time jobs and a loss of
over$45 million dollars in wages overall.The county could lose up to$73 million in gross domestic
product (GDP) due to the exit of Anchor.The loss of total economic output, which includes GDP and the
inter-industry purchases required for production, could be up to over$198 million overall.This is based
on 300 employees employed at the facility with a payroll of$27 million.
Economic Impact of Employment -Anchor Glass
Impact Type Employment Employee Gross Domestic Output
Wages/Salaries Product
Direct Effect 300 $27,000,000 $40,950,972 $132,648,923
Indirect Effect 224 $13,295,311 $22,364,724 $47,706,903
Induced Effect 132 $4,971,928 $9,901,945 $17,666,160
Total Effect 656 $45,267,240 $73,217,641 $198,021,986
Dollars are not adjusted for inflation.This analysis excludes changes in government spending from reduced revenue
collections.
Source:Analysis conducted with IMPLAN Online
Prepared by:Research&Analysis,Minneapolis Saint Paul Regional Economic Development Partnership(GREATER MSP).
Analysis dated:Sept.1,2016
1 In what is often called either a ripple effect or multiplier effect,increased economic activity triggers additional spending. The total economic
impact of the economic activity is the sum of three effects: The direct effect(the change in activity that stimulates other activity,in this case
employment),the indirect effect(resulting from industries purchasing from other industries due to increased demand)and induced effects
(resulting from the expenditure of new household income generated by the direct and indirect effects).
GREATER MSP
Minneapolis Saint Paul Regional Economic Development Partnership
The closing of the facility could indirectly impact up to 356 jobs totaling over$18 million in wages and
over$32 million in GDP due to lost purchases by the facility and lost employee spending in the broader
economy.This would affect the Wholesale Trade, Sand and Gravel Mining, Rail Transport, and Truck
Transportation significantly
The possible impact of the loss of materials purchased from the facility in Minnesota could be a loss of
71 direct jobs and overall 177 jobs paying a total of$12 million in wages. $20 million in GDP could be
impacted by the loss of sales. The 71 jobs directly tied to supply purchases for the facility supported an
additional 105 indirect and induced jobs,which for every direct job created almost an additional 11/2
jobs in the state.
For every one dollar of spending by the facility contributed an estimated $1.16 of GDP to the Minnesota
economy and $1.38 in wages to employees.
Impact Summary of Goods/Services Purchased Statewide
Employee Gross Domestic
Impact Type Employment
Wages/Salaries Product
Direct Effect 71 $6,667,633 $10,830,784 $16882738
Indirect Effect 44 $2,744,515_
._.__ $2,744,515__p $4,061,734 $7,088,37799
Induced Effect 61 $2,886,679 $4,880,383 $8,642,944
Total Effect 177 $12,298,827 $19,772,901 $32,614,061
Dollars are not adjusted for inflation.This analysis excludes changes in government spendingfrom reduced revenue
collections.
Source:Analysis conducted with IMPLAN Online
Prepared by:Research&Analysis,Minneapolis Saint Paul Regional Economic Development Partnership(GREATER MSP).
Analysis dated:Sept.1,2016
TAX IMPACT OF CLOSURE OF ANCHOR FACILITY
The potential impact to Estimated Tax Impact of Anchor Manufacturing Facility-State/Local
tax revenue to Scott Tax Employment at Facility Supply Total
County and Minnesota if Facility Purchases
the facility close could be
over$7 million to Scott Property Tax $1,750,573 $81,388 $1,831,961
County and Minnesota. Sales Tax $1,236,165 $975,415 $2,211,580
Scott County could lose Income Tax $1,335,163 $365,282 $1,700,445
over$1.8 million in Other Taxes $1,024,164 $241,302 $1,265,466
property tax revenues, Total Estimated Tax Impact $5,346,065 $1,663,387 $7,009,452
while the state could Dollars are not adjusted for inflation.This analysis excludes changes in government spendingfrom reduced
revenue collections.
lose over$2.2 million in Source:Analysis conducted with IMPLAN Online
sales tax revenues and Prepared by:Research&Analysis,Minneapolis Saint Paul Regional Economic Development Partnership
$1.7 million in income (GREATER MSP).Analysis dated:Sept.1,2016
tax revenues.
RESOLUTION NO. 7765
A ResolutionAccepting Bids for Construction of
The Lions Park Warming House/Shelter
Project No. PR2016-2
WHEREAS,pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Construction of the Lions Park Warming
House/ShelterProject No.PR2016-2,bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the
following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
Kue Contractors$519,348.00
Ebert Construction$618,300.00
Karkela Construction$547,900.00
RAM General Contracting$605,000.00
Erickson Builders & Company, Inc.$712,090.00
A & L Construction$688,000.00
Weber, Inc.$587,000.00
JT Egner Construction, LLC.$506,500.00
Terranova, LLC$694,000.00
AND WHEREAS,
the contract shall include the alternatesas listed;
Alternate 1;Asphalt Shingles on 8/12 Pitch
Alternate 3; Low pitch roof (shingle roof)
AND WHEREAS,
it appears thatJT Egner Construction, LLC,17595 Kenwood Trail, Suite 250,
Lakeville, MN 55044is the lowest responsible bidderwith a bid of $482,218.00.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA:
1.
The appropriate City officials are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with
JT Egner Construction, LLC.in the name of the Cityof Shakopee for the Construction of Lions Park
Warming House/Shelter, Project No. PR2016-2according to the plans and specifications ordered by the City
Council.
2.
The consultant, 292 Design Group, is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all
bidders the deposits made with their bids, exceptthe deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest
bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
Adopted inregular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, held this
th
6day of August, 2016.
__________________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
__________________________
City Clerk
RESOLUTION NO. 7765
A ResolutionRejectingBids for Construction of
The Lions Park Warming House/Shelter
Project No. PR2016-2
WHEREAS,pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Construction of the Lions Park Warming
House/ShelterProject No.PR2016-2,bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the
following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
Kue Contractors$519,348.00
Ebert Construction$618,300.00
Karkela Construction$547,900.00
RAM General Contracting$605,000.00
Erickson Builders & Company, Inc.$712,090.00
A & L Construction$688,000.00
Weber, Inc.$587,000.00
JT Egner Construction, LLC.$506,500.00
Terranova, LLC$694,000.00
AND WHEREAS,
the bids are all higher than the budgetedamount.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA:
1.That all bids for the construction of the Lions Park Warming House/Shelter, Project No.
PR2016-2, be and are hereby rejected.
2.
The consultant, 292 Design Group, is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all
bidders the deposits made with their bids.
Adopted inregular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,Minnesota, held this
th
6day of August, 2016.
__________________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
__________________________
City Clerk
To:Mayor and City Council
CC:Bill Reynolds, City Administrator
From:Darin Nelson, Finance Director
Joy Sutton, Grants & Special Projects Coordinator
Date:May 27, 2016
Re:Franchise Fees
Franchise Fee Analysis
Several questions were asked by council members at the May 17public hearing regarding
th
franchise fees which garner additional explanation and research. Franchise fees are a complicated
topic; I will recap and expand upon the slide presentation that Mr. Reynolds provided that evening,
making sure to address council’s specific questions.
What are franchise fees?
Minnesota Statutes, section 216B.36 grants cities the authority to impose a fee for use of public
right-of-ways. The utility companies collect the fee from their customers and remit collected fees to
the city on a set schedule, typically every quarter. Cities have the right to determine the amount,
structure, and use of the fee. As of 2014, 101 cities in the seven county metro have instituted
franchise fees. This number has grown to 357 state-wide.
A common question regarding franchise fees is if it is the same as a tax. This topic is always
debatable, but what is not debatable is that fees are spread across all users. Property taxes are not
paid by tax exempt properties, such as schools, churches, governments, etc. The franchise fee is
essentially spread out over a larger base of actual users of utility services.
What can franchise fees be used for?
Franchise fees can be used for any public purpose. Staff suggests the fees be dedicated to future
capital improvements such as pavement management, road maintenance, and construction
projects. Gas and electric utilities are paying for the use of the city’s right-of-ways, so it only makes
sense that these dollars be directed towards the costs most closely associated with the right-of-
ways.
How is the franchise fee structured?
The franchise fee can be structured in a few different ways. The two most common are a fixed
monthly fee per account or a percentage of energy usage. Both flat fees and percentage fees can be
set up with parameters based on the type of customer, such as residential and small or large
commercial/industrial users. The city has the discretion on how the fee is to be applied.
COMMUNITY PRIDE SINCE 1857
129 Holmes Street South · Shakopee, Minnesota · 55379-1351 · 952-233-9300 · FAX952-233-3801 · www.ShakopeeMN.gov
What utilities would a franchise fee applied to?
The utility franchise fee would apply to all utilities currently utilizing the city’s right-of-ways: Xcel
Energy (gas and electric); CenterPoint (gas); and Minnesota Valley Electric Co-op (MVEC) (electric).
Shakopee Public Utilities (SPUC) currently pays a quasi-franchise fee in the form of a Payment in
Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) that equates to 2.71% of gross sales. In addition, SPUC contributes the
energy for the city’s street lights which amounts to approximately 0.42% of gross electric sales.
SPUC’s total city contribution was 3.13% of their gross sales for 2015, which amounted to just over
$1.3 million.
The implementation of a franchise fee provides equity among all the utilities for use of the city’s
right-of-ways. Currently, only SPUC is paying the city for that use which puts them at a competitive
disadvantage. A franchise fee at a rate similar to SPUC’s current contribution would put all the
utilities on an equal level.
What impact would the franchise fee have on residents and businesses?
It depends on the rate and structure of the fee. Staff is recommending a 3 percent franchise fee,
which approximates to SPUC’s current contribution. The advantage of a percentage fee is that all
users pay the same fee based on a percentage of their bill no matter the type or amount of energy
consumed. If the City were to implement a standard flat fee for all users who generated the same
amount of revenue as the percentage fee, a flat fee of approximately $3.00 per month per utility
would have to be implemented. However, a constant flat fee across all customer types tends to
create a regressive fee structure, meaning that the small energy user ends up paying a higher fee
percentage compared to the high energy user.
The chart below compares the impacts of a flat fee to a percentage fee for both natural gas and
electricity customers. According to CenterPoint Energy, the 2015 average residential gas bill was
$57 per month. A 3 percent franchise fee on a $57 bill equates to $1.70 per month. Whereas, a $3
dollar per month flat fee on that same $57 bill equates to over 5 percent. The $3 flat fee becomes an
increasingly smaller percentage as the size of the natural gasbill increases. The second column on
the chart below provides the monthly dollar value impact for average natural gas users for each
customer classification.
Natural Gas - Natural Gas - Electricity - Electricity -
Natural Gas - Estimated % Estimated dollar Electricity - Estimated % Estimated dollar
Average impact of a flat impact of a 3% Average impact of a flat impact of a 3%
Customer Type Monthly Bill$3.00 monthly fee monthly feeMonthly Bill$3.00 monthly feemonthly fee
Residential$575.19%$1.70$883.35%$2.64
Com - Small$515.75%$1.54N/AN/AN/A
Com/Ind - Med$1491.98%$4.47N/AN/AN/A
Com/Ind - Large$1,1260.26%$33.79N/AN/AN/A
Dual Fuel-Small Volume$1,4340.21%$43.01---
Dual Fuel-Large Volume$8,5600.03%$256.79---
The residential impact of the electrical franchise fee will impact only those residents that are
customers of MVEC. SPUC customers are already paying the electric franchise fee through
increased rates. The estimated impact of a 3% fee would be $2.64 per month based on a monthly
electrical bill of $88 for MVEC customers. MVEC has 88 customers in Shakopee’s city limits.
In the chart above, electricity comparisons are not available for commercial/industrial users. Xcel
Energy has no residential customers in Shakopee, and a total of approximately 160
commercial/industrial accounts between their natural gas and electric customers.
2
Electric bills are private information compared to a city’s water and sewer bills which are public
information. I was able to calculate an average residential electric bill based off of SPUC’s total
customer count divided by their residential electric revenue. Since commercial/industrial
customers vary so much, trying to determine an average bill tends to be difficult and usuallydoesn’t
provide good data for comparison purposes.
CenterPoint was gracious enough to provide the city with a breakdown of their customer types and
number of customers in each type. Xcel is unable to share this information to maintain customer
privacy. Xcel was able to provide an estimated total franchise fee amount of $416,000 at the 3%
rate. This is a combined amount between their two utilities.
City Revenue Estimates
The addition of franchise fees creates another revenue stream that allows the city to diversify its
revenues more. Property tax is the main revenue source for most Minnesota cities, and Shakopee is
no exception. As noted earlier, franchise fees are spread across all users, including tax exempt
properties. Preliminary estimates project approximately $920,000 of new revenue based on a 3%
franchise fee. SPUC’s annual contribution of approximately $1.3 million is excluded from this new
revenue, since they have been contributing their PILOT for many years. The chart below provides a
breakdown of the estimated franchise fees generated from each utility.
Combined Franchise Fees across all Utilities
UtilityGas or ElectricEstimated Annual
Revenue
SPUCElectric$1,313,996
Xcel EnergyBoth$416,000
$920,775
CenterPointGas$503,000
of new
revenue
MVECElectric$1,775
Total$2,234,771
Future Years
Part of the rational for recommending a percentage franchise fee is it mirrors the current practice
of SPUC. The other part of the rational is a percentage fee should generally increase over time as
both expansion and utility rates increase. The expansion or growth of the city would positively
affect franchise fee revenue no matter if the fee was a percentage or a flat fee. However, as utility
rates increase over time, a flat fee would remain constant but a percentage fee would garner
additional revenue. A number of cities with flat rates find themselves renegotiating flat fees on a
3
more frequent basis, since their revenue projections are not necessarily growing at the same rate as
inflation.
The downside to percentage rates fees is if there are warm winters or cool summers, utility usage
can fluctuate and not generate as much revenue as initially intended. A flat fee takes this risk out of
the equation, but a flat fee does not keep up with inflation. By using a percentage of the bill,
franchise fees would be expected to keep pace with inflation through the combination of utility rate
increases and customer growth.
In regards to growth in Shakopee and based on the average residential gas and electric bills, new
development would provide approximately $52 per year per residence. So, for every 100 new
residential properties the city would expect to collect just over $5,000 annually.
CenterPoint Energy Analysis
The next chart is a franchise fee analysis that CenterPoint Energy provided to the city. The box on
the top of the chart details the number and type of customers within the city, along with annual
revenue amounts, and average annual and monthly customer bills. The annual and monthly
customer bills are also adjusted to mirror a “weather normal” year.
The next two boxes on the chart provide “what-if” scenarios based on funding levels. The middle
box estimates total revenue based on a percentage fee and an equal per meter fee without taking
the customer classification into account. The third box on the chart provides information on what
a graduated flat rate per meter would need to generate an amount equal to a 3 percent fee.
CenterPoint’s information was extremely beneficial in developing revenue and impact estimates.
CenterPoint representative Ms. Nicko Spehn, who attended the last council meeting, has been
gracious in supporting this process.
4
CenterPoint Energy Franchise Fee Analysis DATE Analysis was done: 3.18.2016
City of: Shakopee
Data: 12 months ended December 2015
Weather NormalWeather NormalWeather Normal
Rate Class*CustomersVolume RevenueRevenue Annual BillMonthly Average
(meter)(In Therms)EstimatePer CustomerBill Per
(a)(b)(c)(d)(f)Customer
Residential13,0139,596,344 THM$ 8,105,010.00$8,869,974.53$682$56.80
Com - A408253,318 THM$ 229,656.00$251,331.32$616$51.33
Com/Ind-B320708,664 THM$ 522,738.00$572,074.90$1,788$148.98
Com/Ind-C3366,231,948 THM$ 4,149,726.00$4,541,384.15$13,516$1,126.34
SVDF - A291,151,474 THM$ 455,914.00$498,943.93$17,205$1,433.75
SVDF - B & LV 2017,268,085 THM$ 1,877,131.00$2,054,297.79$102,715$8,559.57
14,12635,209,833 THM$ 15,340,175.00$16,788,006.62
TOTAL
Heating Degree Days-Actual6,728
Heating Degree Days-Normal7,363$16,788,007Weather Normal
Revenue Estimate
REVENUE PREDICTION MODEL # 1
Assumes each meter is assessed fee equally -either by % or flat fee per meter
% of Franchise Meter Fee By
Franchise Fee NeededMonth
Revenue
(e)(f)(g)
$100,0000.60%$ 0.59
$200,0001.19%$ 1.18
$300,0001.79%$ 1.77
$400,0002.38%$ 2.36
$503,0003.00%$ 2.97
REVENUE PREDICTION MODEL # 2
Allows for a different flat fee to be assessed by each rate class (per meter)
Weather Normal
Average annual
Flat Rate Fee Franchise Fee percent for each
Rate Class# of metersper Month # monthsRevenue (Yearly)rate class
1.70$265,465
Residential13,01312 2.99%
1.54$7,540
Com - A40812 3.00%
4.47$17,165
Com/Ind-B32012 3.00%
33.79$136,241
Com/Ind-C33612 3.00%
43.01$14,967
SVDF - A2912 3.00%
256.79$61,630
SVDF - B & LG2012 3.00%
$503,008
TOTAL14,126 3.00%
* Rate Class Key:
SVDF = Small Volume Dual FuelCom=Commercial
LVDF = Large Volume Dual FuelCom/Ind = Commercial/Industrial
5
Xcel Energy Analysis
The next graph is a listing from Xcel Energy of their current city-by-city electric franchise fee
schedules. I did an analysis on the information to determine some averages.
Residential flat fees average (62 cities) $2.22 per month
Residential percentage fee average (9 cities)3.67% per month
Large C&I flat fee average$82.42 per month
Large C&I percentage fee average3.67% per month
The Large C&I percentage fee group did have a couple cities that varied on the percentage based on
the consumption levels, but for the most part percentage fees are the same across all customer
types. Xcel Energy has indicated that they are not in favor of a percentage fee, but according to the
dates of their current franchise fee agreements, Xcel has cities with a percentage fee enacted in
recent history.
6
7
8
9
10
Financial Assistance
A concern was brought forward by council members regarding how franchise fees may affect
residents in need and what avenues of help are available to them. The following graph outlines the
current programs of Shakopee’s four utility companies offered to residents who seek financial
Energy Assistance Available to Households in Shakopee
Low Income
Energy Gas
Payment Assistance Energy Low Reach Weatherization ColdAffordability Extreme
Plan or Refer to Programs Heat CENTS Income Out for Assistance Weather Program Military Heat
Utility CompanyExtensionCAP(LIHEAP)ShareCoalitionDiscountWarmthProgramRule(GAP)AssistanceLaw
CenterPoint Energy
MVEC
SPUC
Xcel Energy
CAP offers: 1. Energy Assistance Program (EAP). Households must apply by July 1 to receive assistance and meet household income guidelines.
2. Energy Related Repair (ERR). Funds are available to households experiencing no heat or malfunctioning heating systems.
Owner-occupied and eligible for EPA required.
3. Energy Crisis Assistance. Available only for those households on the EAP and for emergency situations only.
Low Income Energy
Assistance
Programs (LIHEAP):Federally funded to states. Available to households who are at or below 50% of the state medium income level.
HeatShare:Funded by Xcel Energy, CenterPoint and Salvation Army. Aid to primarily low income households with bill payment or equipment repairs.
Energy CENTS
Coalition:Combination of the GAP and former PowerOn programs. This non-profit agency gives lower income households discounts on their energy bills.
Low Income
Discount:Discounted rates for people over 62 years old and disabled.
Reach Out for
Warmth:Aids moderate income MN families who's income is too high for federal aid or don't qualify for non-profit programs.
Weatherization
Assistance
Program:Offers free energy saving and conservation techniques to reduce the cost of home energy and heathing bills to qualified MN households.
Cold Weather Rule:Households are protected form having their heat or power turned off annually from October 15 through April 15.
Gas Affordability
Program:Helps qualifying households lower their monthly gas bills and pay past due balances. Must receive LIHEAP to qualify for GAP.
Military Assistance: When a household member has been ordered to active duty, deployment or a change of duty station, assistance for the family is available to pay
their utility bills. Minnesota law protects military personnel from shut-off if they can’t pay their bill when certain conditions are met.
Extreme Heat Law:MN State law does not allow utility cooperatives to disconnect electric service to residential members if one of the following conditions is issued
by the National Weather Service in their county:
1. Excessive heat watch
2. Heat advisory
3. Excessive heat warning
assistance:
11
Next Steps
If the Council agrees to continue pursuing franchise fees, staff will finalize proposed franchise fee
ordinances which will be sent to CenterPoint Energy, Xcel Energy, and MVEC. The city currently
has franchise agreements with these three utilities except for a franchise agreement with Xcel for
their natural gas utility. The existing franchise agreements have a fee reservation clause that
stipulate a separate fee ordinance not be adopted until at least a 60-day notice has been served to
the companies by certified mail.
Staff and our city attorney will continue to work on a franchise agreement for natural gas with Xcel.
In the meantime, the proposed franchise fee ordinances will be sent to the appropriate parties. In
addition to the 60-day notification to the utility companies and once the ordinances have passed, an
additional 90-day notice from the utilities to the Minnesota Public Utility Commission is required.
After the 90-day expiration, the city’s tentative timeline would be for an effective date of around
mid-November. In reality, an effective start date of January 1, 2017 would work well from the city’s
standpoint. January 1 aligns with the beginning of the city’s fiscal year and would provide an
opportunity to budget for franchise feesin this upcoming budget cycle.
Summary
The implementation of franchise fees not only diversifies the city’s revenue streams, but also
equalizes the playing field for utilities within the City of Shakopee. SPUC has been providing the
city with a quasi-franchise fee for years which a majority of the city’s residents and businesses have
been supporting. It’s only fair business practice all utilities who benefit from the use of the city’s
right-of-ways be required to pay for that benefit.
Staff is seeking approval from council to officially notify utility franchisees of a proposed franchise
fee ordinance.
12
Gas Franchise Fee Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.______.
AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A GAS ENERGYSERVICE
FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY RESOURCES CORP.
d/b/a CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS, A DELAWARE
CORPORATION,ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING
GASENERGYSERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE.
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA, DOES ORDAIN:
Section1Purpose
. . The Shakopee City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of
the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide natural gasand
electric services within the City of Shakopee. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 606, a Franchise
Agreement between the City of Shakopeeand CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. d/b/a
CenterPoint Energy Minnesota Gas, a Delawarecorporation, its successors and assigns,
(“Company”)the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on the Company.
Section2. Terms
. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on the Company under its gasfranchise in
accordance with the amount and fee design set forth in the fee schedule attached as Exhibit Ato
this Ordinance commencing with the Company’s January, 2017billing month.
This fee is an account-based fee on each premise and not a meter-based fee. In the event
that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only
one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters
being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification,
which will result in more than one franchise fee assessment for gasservice to that premise. If the
Company combines the rate classifications into a single account, the franchise fee assessed to the
account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy
delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one
premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee.
Section 3. Paymentand Fee Modification
. Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company,
consistent with the Minnesota Public Utility Commission’s March 23, 2011 Order establishing
franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-09-970. The franchise fee shall be
payable quarterly and shall be based on the amount collected by Company during complete billing
months during the period for which payment is to be made. The payment shall be due the last
business day of the month following the period for which the payment is made. Such fee shall not
exceed any amount that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the
City by imposing a surcharge equivalent to such fee in its rates for gasservice. The franchise fee
may be increased or decreased by ordinance from time to time,howeverany such change may not
occur more often than annually. No franchise fee shall be payable by Company if Company is
unable to first collect an amount equal to the franchise fee from its customers in each applicable
class of customers by imposing a surcharge in Company’s applicable rates for gasservice.
Company may pay the City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions
to account for uncollectibles, refunds and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to
make its records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and
its designated representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate
the amount paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding
identified customers.
Section 4. Surcharge
. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
may allow the Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of city residents to reimburse the
Company for the cost of the fee, consistent with the Minnesota Public Utility Commission’s
March 23, 2011 Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-
09-970.
Section 5. Equivalent Fee Requirement
. This Ordinance shall not be effective against Company
unlessthe City lawfully imposes a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the
receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier, provided that, as to such
a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The “same or
greater equivalent amount” shall be measured, if practicable, by comparing amounts collected as a
franchise fee from each similar customer, or by comparing, as to similar customers the percentage
of the annual bill represented by the amount collected for franchise fee purposes. The franchise fee
or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use related to heating, cooling or lighting,
or to run machinery and appliances, but shall not apply to energy sales for the purpose of providing
fuel for vehicles.
Section 6. Enforcement
. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this
ordinance will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 ofthe Franchise Agreement.
Section 7. Effective Date of Franchise Fee
. The effective date of fee collection shall be
January 1, 2017 andninety (90) days after the City sends written notice enclosing a copy of this
adopted Ordinance to the Company by certified mail, whichever date is later.
Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication.
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this __
day of______, 2016.
___________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Attest:
_________________________,
City Clerk
Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the ______ day of _____________, 2016.
2
EXHIBIT A
CENTERPOINTENERGY GASFRANCHISE
FEE SCHEDULE
ClassFee Per Customer
*
Residential3%
Commercial -Small3%
Commercial/Industrial –Medium3%
Commercial/Industrial –Large3%
SVDF –A3%
SVDF –B & LV3%
*The fee collected shall total three percent (3%)of the Company’s gross revenuesfrom its
operations within the City collected from each customer of each class.
“Gross Revenues”means all gas distribution revenues received by the Company from retail
customers of the Company who purchase, receive, or transport Gas Energyfrom or through the
Company’s Gas Facilities within the City.For GasEnergy transported but not sold by the
Company, gross revenues shall include only the revenues for the Company’s transportation of gas
energy and not the revenues for a third party’s sale of gas energy to customers within the City.
Gross revenues shall exclude any surcharge, sales tax, miscellaneous tariff charges or any similar
addition to Company’s charges to customers for the purpose of reimbursing Company for the fee,
sales tax, or similar fee.Gross revenuesshall also exclude all revenues received by Company from
the sale of gasservice provided under its separate rate schedules, if any, solely for highway
lighting, municipal street lighting, municipal water pumping, municipal traffic signals, municipal
fire sirens, and municipal sewage disposal services.
Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company in the amounts set forth in the above schedule,
and remitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows:
January –March collections due by April 30.
April –June collections due by July 31.
July –September collections due by October 31.
October –December collections due by January 31.
ElectricFranchise Fee Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO.______.
ANORDINANCEIMPLEMENTINGANELECTRICSERVICE
FRANCHISEFEEONMINNESOTAVALLEYELECTRIC
COOPERATIVE, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS
AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA,ORDAINS:
Section1Purpose
. . The Shakopee City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of
the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide electric and gas
services within the City of Shakopee. Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 605, a Franchise
Agreement between the City of Shakopeeand Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative, a
Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns, (“Company”)the City has the right to impose
a franchise fee on the Company.
Section2. Terms
. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on the Company under its electric
franchise in accordance with the amount and fee design set forth in the fee schedule attached as
Exhibit Ato this Ordinance commencing with the Company’s January, 2017billing month.
This fee is an account-based fee on each premise and not a meter-based fee. In the event
that an entity covered by this ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only
one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters
being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification,
which will result in more than one franchise feeassessment for electric service to that premise.
If the Company combines the rate classifications into a single account, the franchise fee assessed
to the account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy
delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this ordinance have more than one
premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question
arises as to the proper fee amount for any premise, the Company’s manner of billing for energy
used at all similar premises in the city will control.
Section 3. Paymentand Fee Modification
. The franchise fee shall be payable quarterly and
shall be based on the amount collected by Company during complete billing months during the
period for which payment is to be made. The payment shall be due the last business day of the
month following the period for which the payment is made. Such fee shall not exceed any amount
that the Company may legally charge to its customers prior to payment to the City by imposing a
surcharge equivalent to such fee in its rates for electric service. The franchise fee may be increased
or decreased by ordinance from time to time,howeverany such change may not occur more often
than annually. No franchise fee shall be payable by Company if Company is unable to first collect
an amount equal to the franchise fee from its customers in each applicable class of customers by
imposing a surcharge in Company’s applicable rates for electric service. Company may pay the
City the fee based upon the surcharge billed subject to subsequent reductions to account for
uncollectibles, refunds and correction of erroneous billings. Company agrees to make its records
available for inspection by the City at reasonable times provided that the City and its designated
representative agree in writing not to disclose any information which would indicate the amount
paid by any identifiable customer or customers or any other information regarding identified
customers.
Section 4. Surcharge
. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
may allow the Company to add a surcharge to customer rates of city residents to reimburse the
Company for the cost of the fee, consistent with the Minnesota Public Utility Commission’s
March 23, 2011 Order establishing franchise fee filing requirements in Docket No. E,G999/CI-
09-970.
Section 5. Equivalent Fee Requirement
. This Ordinance shall not be effective against Company
unlessthe City lawfully imposes a fee or tax of the same or greater equivalent amount on the
receipts from sales of energy within the City by any other energy supplier, provided that, as to such
a supplier, the City has the authority to require a franchise fee or to impose a tax. The “same or
greater equivalent amount” shall be measured, if practicable, by comparing amounts collected as a
franchise fee from each similar customer, or by comparing, as to similar customers the percentage
of the annual bill represented by the amount collected for franchise fee purposes. The franchise fee
or tax shall be applicable to energy sales for any energy use related to heating, cooling or lighting,
or to run machinery and appliances, but shall not apply to energy sales for the purpose of providing
fuel for vehicles. If the Company specifically consents in writing to a franchise or separate
ordinance collecting or failing to collect a fee from another energy supplier in contravention of this
section, the foregoing conditions will be waived to the extent ofsuch written consent.
Section 6. Enforcement
. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this
ordinance will be resolved in accordance with Section 2.5 of the Franchise Agreement.
Section 7. Effective Date of Franchise Fee
. The effective date of fee collection shall be
January 1, 2017 andninety (90) days after the City sends written notice enclosing a copy of this
adopted Ordinance to the Company by certified mail, whichever date is later.
Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective from and after its passage and publication.
Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this __
day of______, 2016.
___________________________________
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
Attest:
_________________________,
City Clerk
2
Published in the Shakopee Valley News on the ______ day of _____________, 2016.
3
EXHIBIT A
MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVEELECTRIC FRANCHISE
FEE SCHEDULE
ClassFee Per Customer
*
Residential3%
Sm C & I –Non-Dem3%
Sm C & I –Demand3%
Large C & I3%
*The fee collected shall total three percent (3%)of the Company’s gross revenues from its
operations within the City collected from each customer of each class.
“Gross Revenues” means all electric distribution revenues received by the Company from retail
customers of the Company who purchase, receive, or transport electric energy from or through the
Company’s electric facilities within the City.For electric energy transported but not soldby the
Company, gross revenues shall include only the revenues for the Company’s transportation of
electric energy and not the revenues for a third party’s sale of electric energy to customers within
the City. Gross revenues shall exclude any surcharge, sales tax, miscellaneous tariff charges or any
similar addition to Company’s charges to customers for the purpose of reimbursing Company for
the fee, sales tax, or similar fee.“Gross Revenues’ shall also exclude all revenues received by
Company from the sale of electric service provided under its separate rate schedules, if any, solely
for highway lighting, municipal street lighting, municipal water pumping, municipal traffic signals,
municipal fire sirens, and municipal sewage disposal services.
Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company in the amounts set forth in the above schedule,
and remitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows:
January –March collections due by April 30.
April –June collections due by July 31.
July –September collections due by October 31.
October –December collections due by January 31.
A-1
To Darin Nelson, Finance Director,&the City of Shakopee: 9/06/16
We have received your plans to institute a 3%franchise fee on electric and gas utility bills not serviced
by the Shakopee Public Utility. It is understandable that you want to raise revenue for the city, and
"level the playing field" as your announcement states since your SPU charges their customers a 2.7%
franchise fee,which is then paid to the city.
However, a 3%franchise fee on all commercial& industrial electric and natural gas invoices is another
form of taxation and not a "fee for service", which is the normal use of a state or local fee charge, and
several orders of magnitude higher than the residential customers are charged.
We understand from your reply to Jay McKinney's letter dated 9/01/16 that the City is actually
considering a two tiered fee structure wherein the first $950,000 of utility costs would be charged at the
3% rate and anything above this total would be charged at a 0.5% rate. While this revised rate structure
does reduce the total expense from the original plan, the fee remains extremely high,and when added
together with the natural gas fee,will add over$60,000 to our costs for a reason we cannot understand
or agree with.
This fee will impose a substantial added cost to our business at a time when it will not likely be passed
on to our customers.
CertainTeed Roofing has 14 large industrial manufacturing sites, including Shakopee, across the country,
most of which are in suburban areas near major cities,such as Minneapolis, Boston,Atlanta, Dallas, L.A.,
San Francisco, Cleveland and St Louis.
As a result of your planned action,as Energy Champion for this Division, I have conducted a review of all
these sites' utility invoices to see if such a fee is charged elsewhere.There are no
municipalities/communities where we live and work that charge a fee or tax on the utilities that
service our sites. It is true that many states add a sales(& sometimes local)tax on these utilities, but in
such cases the monthly invoice costs for such a tax are on the order of$50.00 to several hundred
$/month.We often successfully are granted tax exempt status on these utility taxes since our product is
a consumer product whose customers are charged the allowable state sales tax.As you can see from the
invoice example Jay provided in his letter, the total state & local taxes for Minnesota on this April 2015
invoice were$522.00, or 0.41%of the total invoice.
While we do not believe any additional utility fees are a justified expense,if the City were to impose a
0.4%to 0.5%/month fee/tax on these non-SPU utilities, I expect that you would not be hearing so
much negative feedback from ourselves and others in the industrial community located in the great
city of Shakopee.
[Also, if the City hod wanted to ask for a one-time fee from the Industrial& Commercial community of
Shakopee for some specific need(and used our utility invoices as a way to calculate this one-time fee), I
believe the request would be more readily accepted.]
Thank you for your consideration in this matter which we hope can be resolved in an equitable and fair
manner for all involved.
John F. Hardy
Master Black Belt/Operational Excellence Mgr
Cet ainTeecl
Roofing
cell phone' 781-856-4809
office phone 781-278-0427
john.Chard y(&saint-qobain.com
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Monthly Financial Report
Di
YTDAugustYTDBudget Cumulative 8
vis
201620162016Balance Percent 2015
io
BudgetActualActualRemainingUsedActual
n
01000 - GENERAL FUND
REVENUES:
* - TAXES(17,150,900)(18,938)(9,018,821)(8,132,079)53%(8,514,603)
* - SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS(11,500)06,025(17,525)(52)%8,717
* - LICENSES AND PERMITS(1,504,100)(80,538)(1,892,406)388,306126%(1,236,342)
* - INTERGOVERNMENTAL(1,108,500)(26,961)(548,294)(560,206)49%(599,243)
* - CHARGES FOR SERVICES(4,235,775)(334,343)(3,090,740)(1,145,035)73%(2,754,801)
* - FINES AND FORFEITS(1,500)(200)(2,618)1,118175%(6,038)
* - MISCELLANEOUS(215,748)1,601(115,149)(100,599)53%(121,720)
TOTAL REVENUES(24,228,023)(459,379)(14,662,002)(9,566,021)61%(13,224,030)
EXPENDITURES:
11 - MAYOR & COUNCIL185,2605,644112,37972,88161%138,627
12 - ADMINISTRATION1,555,53095,097796,672758,85851%651,697
13 - CITY CLERK399,17029,357189,073210,09747%184,785
15 - FINANCE1,243,70080,007815,765427,93566%810,445
17 - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT674,90552,311275,642399,26341%411,120
18 - FACILITIES408,98619,393211,505197,48152%225,532
31 - POLICE DEPARTMENT7,625,014564,4644,739,2052,885,80962%4,605,423
32 - FIRE2,079,78595,4991,137,035942,75055%1,152,263
33 - INSPECTION-BLDG-PLMBG-HTG669,96746,765425,435244,53264%395,439
41 - ENGINEERING739,17840,516394,842344,33653%379,742
42 - STREET MAINTENANCE2,225,11674,8761,075,0841,150,03248%1,373,718
44 - FLEET429,59528,488255,047174,54859%244,830
46 - PARK MAINTENANCE1,644,596146,341918,405726,19156%915,290
66 - NATURAL RESOURCES198,0923,659110,47087,62256%78,207
67 - RECREATION2,529,679205,4041,498,8401,030,83959%1,468,528
91 - UNALLOCATED218,4508823,430215,0202%32,343
TOTAL EXPENDITURES22,827,0231,488,70412,958,8289,868,19557%13,067,989
OTHER FINANCING
* - TRANSFERS IN(250,000)0(250,000)0100%(250,000)
* - TRANSFERS OUT2,100,00002,100,0000100%1,900,000
OTHER FINANCING TOTAL1,850,00001,850,0000100%1,650,000
FUND TOTAL449,0001,029,325146,826302,1741,493,959
Key
Varies more than 10% than budget positively
Varies more than 10% than budget negatively
Within 10% of budget
Cash Balances
COMPANIES: All Company
OBJECT: CASH IN BANK, RESTRICTED CASH/INVESTMENTS, FUND INVESTMENTS
Dec YTD, August, Aug YTD-2016, 2015
Dec YTDAug YTDAug YTD
Company
201520152016
01000
9,629,384.218,133,859.589,282,414.62
General Fund9,629,384.218,133,859.589,282,414.62
02120 - FORFEITURE
209,549.17190,745.96187,713.83
02130 - DARE FINES
-1,772.76-1,761.73-3,754.50
02140 - TRANSIT
0.001.000.00
02150 - TELECOMMUNICATION
100,740.4992,432.4795,135.14
02161 - SCDP GRANT
4,681.834,652.714,715.75
02170 - REVOLVING LOAN
260,828.88259,206.87262,718.35
02190 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
984,070.231,011,418.621,630,348.07
Special Revenue Funds1,558,097.841,556,695.902,176,876.64
03035 - 2004B BLDG REFUNDING BONDS
222,193.02121,352.47107,159.37
03036 - 2004C GO IMP BONDS
0.00330,989.640.00
03037 - 2004D PW BLDG BONDS
0.00633,199.740.00
03038 - 2006A GO IMP BONDS
455,472.81256,867.36219,489.12
03039 - 2007A GO IMP BONDS
297,158.5666,761.63149,160.58
03040 - 2007B GO IMP BONDS
212,126.7785,608.2299,274.21
03041 - 2008A GO IMP BONDS
401,193.68189,704.64207,792.83
03042 - 2010A GO IMP BONDS
207,259.20192,526.19117,515.09
03043 - 2012A GO REFUNDING BOND
1,289,502.89351,468.081,121,162.10
03044 - 2016A GO TAX ABATEMENT BOND
544,487.08
Debt Service Funds3,084,906.932,228,477.972,566,040.38
04018 - PROPERTY ACQUISITION FUND
312,095.23348,943.32263,455.78
04020 - PARK RESERVE
1,477,489.762,337,270.531,354,296.22
04021 - CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
6,422,299.696,424,650.864,285,654.17
04047 - TIF DISTRICT #10
22,665.56-5,146.98-7,806.71
04058 - TIF DIST #12 CHALLENGE PRINTNG
1,750.232,196.530.00
04062 - TIF DIST #13 OPEN SYSTEMS
500.0011,705.270.00
04070 - TIF DIST #14 J&J / SANMAR
27,130.2913,434.6641,056.60
04071 - TIF DIST#15 ALL SAINTS/TRIDENT
7,074.721,979.9413,837.65
04072 - DATACARD ABATEMENT
11,919.9911,845.8612,061.31
04073 - COMMUNITY CENTER & ICE ARENA
-900,985.90-2,240.0421,254,435.82
04074 - CITY HALL 2015
1,183,654.350.00342,968.04
04077 - EMERSON ABATEMENT
80.63
04078 - SHUTTERFLY ABATEMENT
53,101.10
04200 - ROAD EXPANSION DEDICATION
93,530.0392,948.3994,207.58
04300 - LIONS PARK
9,926.5110,862.500.00
04400 - TREE REPLACEMENT
208,009.49207,590.67198,932.77
04500 - SEALCOAT
33,554.9533,346.2837,046.38
Capital Project Funds8,910,614.909,489,387.7927,943,327.34
07100 - SEWER FUND
11,261,152.3112,404,381.6710,486,959.95
07300 - SURFACE WATER FUND
15,434,353.8715,755,889.4914,426,326.56
07400 - REFUSE FUND
-47,523.90-108,011.15-111,727.82
Enterprise Funds26,647,982.2828,052,260.0124,801,558.69
07800 - EQUIPMENT I.S. FUND
4,920,715.724,805,040.164,464,683.75
07805 - PARK ASSET I.S. FUND
2,090,185.762,159,300.532,221,199.30
07806 - INFO TECH I.S. FUND
624,667.78452,205.41599,687.14
07810 - BUILDING I.S. FUND
5,714,487.225,614,059.775,564,702.19
07850 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS I.S. FUND
843,976.95878,190.06850,090.81
Internal Service Funds14,194,033.4313,908,795.9313,700,363.19
08025 - SW METRO DRUG TASK FORCE
555,555.20611,632.38454,116.95
08040 - ESCROW FUND
2,293,484.752,384,341.732,471,120.17
08050 - INVESTMENT TRUST FUND
0.000.00-112.34
Other2,849,039.952,995,974.112,925,124.78
Grand Total66,874,059.5466,365,451.2983,395,705.64
Cash Balance Comparison -August 2016
$30,000,000
$25,000,000
$20,000,000
$15,000,000
$10,000,000
$5,000,000
$-
General FundSpecial Revenue FundsDebt Service FundsCapital Project FundsEnterprise FundsInternal Service FundsOther
Dec YTDAug YTDAug YTD
201520152016