Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/01/1988 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Non—Agenda Informational Items DATE: October 26 , 1988 1 . The City Hall Receptionist will be changed from part time to full time within the next several weeks. The position has always been budgeted full time. We are making the change because Cora will be picking up a number of the Housing Inspector' s typing functions and relinquishing some of her cashier and front desk functions to the Receptionist. If you have any questions regarding this change please contact me or Judy Cox. 2. The VFW has submitted an application for renewal of their gambling license. They meet the requirements of the City Code. 3• The Shakopee Area Catholic Schools have applied for renewal of their raffle license. They meeting the requirements of the City Code. 4. The City has received a statement of claim and summons in Conciliation Court re: Al DuBois claim for reimbursement of restoration work in the amount of $800 .00 , Mr. Hauer for same in the amount of $663 .33 for trees. 5. The City has received a statement of claim and summons in Conciliation Court re: Craig Pietrowski claim for damage to his car at the intersection of 10th Avenue and Shumway during the 10th Avenue overlay project in the amount of $1200.00 . 6 . Attached is a memo from Gregg Voxland regarding Scott County' s 1988/89 tax levy which will increase $1 .9 million which equals a 12.5% increase or approximately 1 .5 to 2.5 mills . While the City has set a good example the one governmental agency that needed to follow our example the most hasn' t. 7. Attached is a letter from Rod Krass regarding the status of the title to the Murphy' s Landing property. 8. Attached is a memo from Dave Hutton regarding an informational meeting on the Blue Lake Treatment Plant. 9. Attached is a memo from the US Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, listing their concerns regarding the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant expansion. 10. Attached is a memo from Tom Brownell regarding a recent lawsuit affecting several Police Officers. 11 . Attached is a copy of the 10/20/88 Star and Tribune article regarding a recent data privacy lawsuit. 12. Attached is the monthly calendar for November. 13. Attached is a copy of the Business Update from City Hall for November. 14. Attached is a copy of Administrative Policy 178 regarding firearms on City property. This item was discussed at our October 26th staff meeting. 15. Attached is a copy of the Revised Recommendations for the $1 ,015 ,000 GO Bonds from Springsted. At the October 18th Council meeting Dave MacGillivray apologized for the errors and said he would send a corrected copy. 16. Attached is a memo from Eileen Klimek regarding a correction on the bill list of 10/18/88. 17. Attached is a memo from Barry Stock regarding a summary of the joint City Council/CDC/Downtown Committee meeting. 18. Attached is a memo from Barry Stock regarding the 1988 LANCON Grant Application (East Side Park) . 19. Attached is a letter from Bill Frenzel regarding opposition 'to legislation tnat woui6 limit "tine lawua ce cwAs on bunts. 22. 9r t,�rhsd !tn *JzP_ '�v: the Nnx-tmhPs 3, ?0}111 mP.P*tnR,s of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission. 21 . Attached are the minutes of the September 22 , 1988 meetings of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission. 22. Attached are the minutes of the October 6, 1988 meetings of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and Planning Commission. 23• Attached are the minutes of the October 4, 1988 meeting of the Shakopee Coalition. 24. At the 10/18/88 Council meeting Council moved to request three pieces of information from SPUC : pay schedule , expenses incurred for attorney fees for pursuit of the purchase of a utility line for the past 10 years, and a breakdown of total assets. Attached are two memos from Lou VanHout; ( 1 ) pay schedule and (2) assets. The information regarding attorney fees is forthcoming. 25. Attached is a memo from Gregg Voxland regarding SPUC contributions. Remo To: Sohn K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Financial Informational Items Date: October 24, 1988 The Resolution going to the County Board for adoption 10/25/88 sets the County levy at $16,686,000. This is an increase of $1,905,000 or 12.98, estimated to be a 1.5 to 2.5 mill increase. Included is $798,000 in debt service for an $8,500,000 bond issue for the County Capital Improvement Plan. The County Auditor and the Fiscal Disparities Administrator are reviewing the City's fiscal disparities contribution for the past three years. It appears that the County Auditor has over contributed to the pool for Shakopee. The result should be a correct contribution for payable 1989 and a possible one time correction or adjustment for payable 1990 to offset the three years of over contribution. Thus 1990 could see a lower "mill rate" for the City due to the correction. LAW OFFICES KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED Phillip R. Kral Marschall Road Has.Center Dennis L. Monroe 327 Marschall Road Barry K.Meyer P.O.Boz 216 Jay D.Goldberg Shakopee,Minnesom 55379 Trevor R. "late. Tei phone(612)445.5080 Mark J.Moxness Diane M.Carism FAX(612)445-7640 Robed J.Waller Lachlan B.Muir James B.Croft Colleen M.Trende Odin D.Te Slaa Patdda A.Weller Kent A.Carlson,CPA October 26, 1988 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 He: Status of Title to Murphy's Landing Our File No. 1-1373-201 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Ye have reviewed again the status of the title of the property covered by the City of Shakopee's quit Claim Deed of February 2, 1969, to the Scott County Historical Society, Inc. The most recent filing on this property was the resolution adopted by the City of Shakopee setting forth the reversion of this property to the City. That resolution was filed October 5, 1987, as Document No. 239666. As you are aware according to the original Quit Claim Deed, the City has the right to cause the property to revert to the City under Paragraph H of that deed. The City did so by properly adopting and filing the resolution in question. If the Historical Society disagreed with the City's determination that the property reverted, it was obligated to file an appeal of that determination in Scott County District Court within 30 days after the determination was made. The Historical Society did so file an appeal but later dismissed the appeal. Since more than 30 days has run, the Society has no right to refile the appeal and consequently the property is properly vested in and owned by the City of Shakopee. There will not be any additional filings needed to perfect the City's right and title, nor is the Historical Society obligated to give a Quit Claim Deed to the City under the terms of the original Ordinance. If the City desires, we can prepare and submit to the Historical Society a quit Claim Deed for the property in question so that the Society can acknowledge by deed the City's ownership of the property. Such action, however, is not required to give the City good title, the City in our opinion already has good title. The Honorable Mayor and City Council Page Two October 26, 1988 I hope this clarifies the situation for you. Very truly yours, 0ip0R TERED /ra� PRR:mly 8 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineern. al SUBJECT: Blue Lake Treatment Plant Ex ansion DATE: October 25, 1988 Attached is a letter I received notifying the City of an informational meeting to be held regarding the Blue Lake Treatment Plant Expansion. If any Council members or Planning Commission members wish to attend, they can notify the MWCC directly by calling the phone numbers in the last paragraph of the letter. I will be attending. DH/pmp cc: Doug Wise, City Planner Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Miam=m 55101 612 222-8423 October 20 , 1988 To Persons Interested in the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion and Upgrade: Commissioner JoEllen Hurr and I have scheduled a "Dutch treat" break- fast meeting on November 14, 1988 to explain the upgrade and expansion scheduled for the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant. We understand that there are questions regarding what improvements will be made in addition to what the time frame is for the plant expansion. Further discussion of the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant expan- sion and upgrade is on the agenda of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commissions (MWCC) Strategic Planning Committee of the Whole meeting of October 25, 1988. In order to keep you informed of the actions of the MWCC and the implications of how these actions may impact your community we are holding this meeting. We hope that you will be able to attend. Those invited are legisla- tors, mayors, city managers, and city engineers from the area served by the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant. We hope you will extend our invitation to attend to your city council members. INFORMATIONAL MEETING ON BLUE LAKE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION AND UPGRADE CANTERBURY INN SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA DATE: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 14 7:30 a.m. FOR RESERVATIONS FOR THIS MEETING PLEASE CALL Lou Anne Staeheli (229-2095) or Pauline Langsdorf ( 229-2110) . Sinorely, /' %� urline J Baker-Kent, Chair LJB/LS LB10 .20B 5 O years 1938 - 1988 HE NI @ ? \ " TAME� � United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE �., m ■ MINNESOTA VALLEY NATIONAL rH.DL4'E REFUGE 4101 East 3tre<t Watety arca to: Bloomington, Yinnsianespte 66426 October 6, 1988 Shakopee Planning Commission 129 East First Avenue ` Shakopee, Minnesota 55374 Dear Commission Members: I We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed expansion of the Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. We share property lines with the Treatment Plant on three sides of the plant, and we have a cooperative agreement with the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission that allows us to use portions of the Plant property as Refuge lands. We have just developed a major, new trailhead and parking lot next to the proposed expansion site. The trailhead is the primary access for recreationists to our Wilkie Unit. And, our long-term comprehensive plans call for this trailhead to be an access to the Minnesota Valley State Trail that will run from Fort Snelling to Le Sueur. Our concerns with the expansion deal chiefly with aesthetics and water quality of Blue Lake. We want to provide the best experience possible as visitors enter and leave the refuge at the Wilkie Trailhead. Our desire j is that, when the final grading and landscaping is done, visitors will not see the treatment plant expansion as intrusive. To further this desire, we plan to cooperate with the Waste Control Commission in planting native species of grasses and trees on disturbed areas. We think the area should be restored to native prairie grasses, a habitat that greatly needs to be expanded and is beneficial to many species of wildlife. Also, we think native species of trees that are beneficial to wildlife should be planted. The trees should be carefully placed to appear natural and provide screening of the plant facilities from the trail route. We will discourage planting of trees in straight rows. A chainlink fence will surround the proposed expansion site. Our desire is for that fence to be as unobtrusive as possible. Therefore, we will encourage the Waste Control Commission to keep the fence as far back and as screened as possible from the trail. In addition to our aesthetic concerns, we have a long-term interest and concern for the water quality in Blue Lake and how surface drainage affects it. It is our understanding that a temporary sedimentation pond will be constructed to ensure good water quality as it drains east from the site. We think the pond is a good idea and support its construction. After construction, surface water runoff will be pumped out the northwest corner of the site to eventually enter Blue Lake. We normally require sedimentation ponds for stormwater outfall before it enters the wetlands of the valley floor. However, a pond may not be necessary in this case if the water goes through a sediment trap before being pumped from the plant site. We plan to work with the watershed control district in ensuring that the water entering Blue Lake is of good quality. The Waste Control Commission will work with the watershed district and Department of Natural Resources in obtaining the necessary permits, we plan to participate in this process to ensure good water quality in Blue Lake. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has an on-going cooperative relationship with the Waste Control Commission. We expect that relationship to continue. We are reassured that the Commission will cooperate with us and address our aesthetic and water quality concerns. The Commission needs to acquire an easement from the Service to construct its expansion dike. It is our intention to formalize our recommendations and needs for final landscaping in the easement. We feel that our concerns about water quality will be adequately addressed as the Commission proceeds through the required permitting process. In conclusion, as a neighbor of the treatment plant and as a steward of public wildlife and recreational lands, we do have concerns about the expansion of the plant, but feel that they will be properly addressed through easement and permitting procedures. In addition, we would appreciate your support, as the Shakopee planning Commission, of our aesthetic and water quality goals. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, iN,�Terry M. Schreiner Acting Refuge Manager cc, lefty Manager, Shakopee Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Io To: Mayor, Councilmembers From: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police Ref: Litigation/Information Only Date: October 24, 1988 On October 18, 1988, the city attorney received a summons and complaint alleging injuries to plaintiff Scott R. Sheeley during a police response to Richard' s P• b April 3, 1988. This matter has been referred to our insurance carrier as per city policy. On September 5 , 1985, David Brotzler/Valley Auto Plaza brought suit against the city alleging various civil rights violations. On September 16, 1988, the State Supreme Court refused to review this matter and the suit is terminated we won. STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF SCOTT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Personal Injury Scott R. Sheeley, Plaintiff, VS. S U M M O N S City of Shakopee and Richard Hanover, d/b/a Richard's in Shakopee, Defendants. STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT: You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Plain- tiff's attorney a response to the Complaint, which is herewith served upon you, within twenty (20) days after the service of this Summons upon you exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint. RANDALL, PARMATER & NEVEAUX, LTD. Dated /0 Z l.Y/C�.)' g y ./ a,:i".F tJ PATRICK W. PARMATER - n84098 Attorney for Plaintiff 1421 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 475-2401 C!I, ( OF S;is VOPEE to STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF SCOTT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Personal Injury Scott R. Sheeley, Plaintiff, Vs. C O M P L A I N T City of Shakopee and Richard Hanover, d/b/a Richard's in Shakopee, Defendants. TO: DEFENDANTS ABOVE NAMED AND THEIR ATTORNEYS: Plaintiff, for his Complaint, states and alleges as follows: I. That plaintiff is a resident of Hennepin County and current- ly lives at 327 9th Avenue North, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343. II. That the City of Shakopee is a public municipal corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Minnesota. III. That at all times relevant hereto, officers Doyle, Raley, Poole and Scherer were employees of the Shakopee Police Department and thereby agents and/or employees of the City of Shakopee. lb IV. That upon information and belief Richard Hanover is the fee owner of Richard's in; Shakopee (herein Richard's) which is locat- ed at 911 1st Avenue East, Shakopee, County of Scott, Minnesota. V. That on April 3, 1988, at approximately 12:30AM, the plain- tiff was patronizing Richard's. That without provocation, prob- able cause or reason, the defendants, and each of them, through their employees and/or agents did commit an assault and battery upon the plaintiff by, among other things, punching and kicking the plaintiff. VI. That as a direct result of the assault and battery, plain- tiff was caused to sustain those damages as set forth in Para- graph XII of this Complaint. VII. That on April 3, 1988, at approximately 12: 30AM, while a pa- tron at Richard' s, the plaintiff was falsely imprisoned by the defendants, and each of them, by placing the plaintiff in hand- cuffs and placing him under arrest wherein plaintiff was not free to leave. VIII. That as a direct result of being falsely imprisoned, the plaintiff was caused to sustain those damages as set forth in Paragraph XII of this Complaint. 2 l� IX. That defendants, and each of them, did fail to exercise rea- sonable care in the discharge of their duties and, thereby, caused the plaintiff to sustain those damages as set forth in Paragraph XII of this Complaint. X. That defendants, and each of them, did, through their negli- gent acts, inflict upon plaintiff such emotional distress so as to cause those damages set forth in Paragraph XII. XI. That defendants, and each of them, did intentionally inflict upon the plaintiff such emotional distress so as to cause the plaintiff to sustain those damages as set forth in Paragraph XII of this Complaint. XII. That as a result of the above mentioned assault and battery, false imprisonment, negligence, and intentional infliction of emotional distress, the plaintiff was caused to sustain severe and permanent injuries which include, but are not limited to, cuts, contusions, abrasions, bruises, blurred vision, nausea, concussion, injury to his back, embarrassment, emotional dis- tress, diminution in earning capacity and hospital bills for the medical attention required as a result of said injuries. WHEREFORE, the plaintiff prays for judgment against the de- fendants, and each of them, in an amount in excess of Fifty Thou 3 sand Dollars ($50, 000. 00) together with his costs, pre-judgment interest and disbursements herein. RANDALL, PARMATER & NEVEAUX, LTD. Dated %:�/,'Y�.�h .. �- BY --- PATRZCK W. PARMATER — $84098 Attorney for Plaintiff 1421 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (612) 475-2401 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disburse- ments and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sect. 549.21, Subd. 2, to the party a- gainst whom the allegations in this pleading are asserted. 'V Dated i � � 'a_. 4A Patrick W. Parmater,. 4 .__-_____— --------------- ---- ._.------- 3 S' oTa c - o'-s cac- n ' .. `� w Am EQo o ; o 9 y SL OV1�p rt > swE ��83�9 Eby'. uoo Fz wE $ EY mEE0Acc tE-y 9Tv wEE� „Uw � u - ® �V ?arn ny OTE E $ m V O V V y c mm � 96C � FO'�. 3gm- OCU JVC9 N 97 ° 'CJ SLC 4_ CC .O.'O SAO w � O �UV O � O wC9 Vww i c m c -0=ao �m 'ice Yo os3 ° c oo� RoE F o0 o=UES�_ m°y'R.c quo os u O � Y=8E: i3_ w` c EaRWW= I c = c cyms»�orE � u cno c co CD o En icy ouzo- ooA$E= cel e 3 Uo�S 9u3 �e > n: OrvHm $ iO O y VY�Y00 i y]�� OL q - CO O CN O J L;7-CL ° ItoU UoE Ec� w ° EYr '�rygwo oz ��77��W �o°u VnE�9 :va 2.n"i�mUF ;'- yui°zRRE 9cSu 9903 vy�o3 :_�Lu Y-.E (7� c c W o c n u Y ?i L\. o- ° `� � ° E n-_ op9 pt nE .A -o oo9.E o9 +J TOL pp.09m_T 9 OC �'c9 � EA VIP cc LLJ("1 �� oca nnmoa ° FE3�3: Ey n"'Ov n' n E Tu°R W a O Y OO a� L v"R •, OS c ° o Oce-O5 2v 09% '6 C.0 Bhp�' OL > OOOW guUY = ono� w VIP y uOo � f'9 .� o o N--ouuw w O- n9 November 1988 UPCOMING MEETINGS SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SRT 1 2 3 4 5 7:u pm i=i ry_ 7:30pm C,uncll Planning Commission 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 4:30pm Election 7:454m Veterans Public Downtown Day-City Utilities Committee Hall 5:00pm CDC Closed 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 7:00pm City 7:00pm Council Erier'Gy Trary=.p. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 7:0t+prti Thanks- City H..11 COmmuni ty Giving - Cl ued Reereation City Hall Closed 27 28 29 30 October December S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 1 2 3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4 5 6 7 8 910 9 10 it 12 13 14 15 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 30 31 BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL 3 Vol. 2 No. 11 Dear Chamber Member: November 1, 1988 ADMINISTRATION Cly Council reconsidered its 1988/89 Levy Resolution on October 18th and decided to 1 y the $I 738729 it levied for 19870. This may result in the City not adding a Police Officer and Engineering Technician in 1989 and keeping vacant a position in the Street Department. This means the City pori on of t he 1989 tax bill will DECREASE beca,,e of yew giowth' ba se in 1988 BUILDING The Scenic Overlook is now complete and Dora Harbeck had the honor of cutting the ribbon on O t b 21st. Former Mayor Walt Harbeck had targeted the area north of the Highrise as an area of unlimited potential and that it should be developed for all citizens to use. The downtown S)5tematic'ns) r)P ion program is in full swing and positive resufts have been bt ' d so far Th City will continue to enforcethe City Code 1 tig to ice and snow removal from publicsidewalks this winter. We will not systematically inspect for violations of this code,but will respond to complaints of unshoveled walks. If the walks are not clewed within the specified time,the City will remove the ice or snow and bill the affected property owner. I On Sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor Licenses haveeBeen approved for I &D of Shakopee Inc.,911 East First Avenue, conditioned upon surrender of the existing licenses issued to R. Hanover Inc., dba/Richard's in Shakopee. The transfer f the bus' from Dick Hanover to Jerry & D Morehouse cheduled for November 1st. Council renewed the lease of the Ewgle Creek Town Hall(1'h 'ft Shop)with Scott-Carver-Dakota Com- munity Action Agenc) Inc for another five years with an additional five year option. Council appointed election judges, many experienced, for the upcoming election. REMEMBER TO VOTE NOVEMBER 8 1988 Polls 7.00 A M til 890 P.M. If possible, avoid the rush and vote early in the day. SlalQ law 12�rmitry employce whoeligible to votet astate general election the right to be absent from work( the f votingduring thof election d without pgally or kducdon from salaryor waves The purpose of this law is to help elevate congestion at the polls after working hours. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Planning Commission on November 3rd will be discussing amending the City Code regarding Day Care Centers. The initial focus will be new large employers in the Industrial Park. COMMUNITY RECREATION(SCR). Public/private partnerships are very important to SCR in this day and age of dimishing dollars. Excellent recent examples of meal corpuate participation include a generous cash donation from the Inland Con- tainer C=oration to enhance local youth projects; and Carson City Parlouq who for the second year, will be co-hosting the communities annual 7th and 8th grade Halloweeen Party.. fNC,INU INC,DFPARTMENT Thewntractor for the Downtown Streetscapeproject plans tohave all the trees and shrubs planted during the last week of October. _ _isnow entobafficfrumCO1lnlYROadl7tQCurnity Road 16 and 11 the to the Mpado,,is now paved. The contractor is working on cleanup. The Sixth Avenue Sanitary Sewer Project is now complete and the streets are open to traffic. Bidswere upcoed SCOL: b zOthf the tl 11D ingePr t The C'tviswa'ine( M fDOT approval before the contrast is awarded. The low bidder is Minnkota. City staff has drafted a resolution adopting an official map for the Highway 169 Bridge and Interchange Improvements(Mini By-Pus)for Council approval at their November 1st meeting. DN 1CF DFPARTMFNT TheCity mdll endmimf November 15th ualid Aptil 1 St calendar rk' t f ll tn w removal. Residents are permitted to park vehicles on the even side of the street on even calendar days,and on the odd side of the street on odd calendar days. The palling restrIUKIDwill be enfruced Letween(he hours f 2:00 a.m.and 6'00 a.m. No yebidt parking is permittQd in Litt rural Business D' t it between the hours of 2:00 a m and :00 a.rJr. No vehicle may be left upon any street for a continuous period in excess of 24 hours at any time and will be towed at the owners expense. Highlights from the September '88 issue of the Scott County Transportation CO21t glhe_- Downtown Bridge and Interchange(mini-bypass)_project. "So what are the reasons behind the need for anew bridge and the mini-bypass? Here area fele 1. The existing bridge on Highway 169 at Holmes Street was builtin 1927 and rehabilitated in 1969. High- way officials have termed the bridge"deficient"because its width is insufficient to handle traffic. 2. In the event the bridge was closed,a detour would take a driver 12 miles out of the way,which highway officials consider too long. 3. The Minnesota Department of Transportation conducted a three-year study of the accident rate at the intersection of Highways 169 and 101,and the number turned out to be five times greater than the state average for similar intersections. 4. The mini-bypass will reduce traffic congestion and heavy truck traffic downtown. 5. Air and noise pollution will be reduced in the downtown area. 6. Pedestrian safety will be enhanced. 7. The transportation problem in Shakopee affects not only Shakopee itself but the whole region. S. The problem of traffic safetyand congestion is a regional economicdevelopment issue and,in the words of one local lawmaker,hasbecame a"lifestyle issue." iy ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY NO. 178 Subject: Firearms on City Property Adopted: October 26, 1988 - Department Head Staff Meeting November 1, 1988 - Council Info Items Source of Authority: Staff Meeting A recent investigation into alleged violations of Administrative Policy No. 112, Use Of City Equipment, uncovered the casual and frequent showing of collector guns and guns for sale on City property. The investigation also uncovered some potentially dangerous situations because of the availability of these guns. I have reviewed with the Chief of Police the City's authority to regulate guns on City property and an recommending the following policy. No emnlovee of the City except a licensed peace officer is Permitted to Possess a firearm in City facilities or motorized vehicles Parked adjacent to City facilities 15 REVISED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA $1,015,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1988B Study No. 3433 October 24, 1988 SPRINGSTED Incorporated ® SPRINGSTED PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS 85 East Seventh Place.Suite 100 Saint Paul,Minnesota 55101 2143 612.2233000 FAX 612 2233002 October 24, 1988 Mayor Dolores Lebens Members, City Council Mr. John Anderson, Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Revised Recommendations for the Issuance of $1,015,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 19888 We respectfully request your consideration of our recommendations for the issuance of these bonds. Proceeds of the bond issue will finance the City's share of engineering costs for the Southerly Bypass Project. The City staff has advised us that the City desires a net amount of $1,000,000 at this time. The composition of the bond issue therefore consists of the following: Project Costs - Netto City $1 ,000,000 Bond Discount 0.5%) 15,225 Costs of Issuance/Miscellanous 18,525 Total Costs $1 ,033,750 Less: 3 Months' Investment Earnings 18,750 Net Bond Issue $1 ,015,000 The City proposes to finance these projects using excess tax increment income generated from the City's Housing and Redevelopment District I, supported from revenues from Tax Increment District No. I, K-Mart, and Tax Increment District No. 4, Canterbury Downs. Appendix I is our recommended repayment schedule for these bonds. The principal is amortized in the years 1990 through 2001, and we are recommending bonds maturing in the years 1996 through 2001, representing $610,000 or 60% of the issue, be callable as early as February 1, 1995 with no penalty. This will permit the City to call in outstanding bonds if the City wishes to terminate the District at an earlier date. Appendix 11 is an analysis of the cash-flow of the District including the revenues associated with the K-Mart Project, Canterbury Downs and Canterbury Inn as available for payment of the bonds. The City has also pledged these revenues to other bond issues which were associated with the K-Mart and Canterbury Downs Indiana Office: Wisconsin Office' 251 North Illinois Street,Suite 1510 500 Elm Grove Road,Suite 101 Indianapolis,Indiana 462041942 Elm Grove,Wisconsin 531220037 317237 3636 414 782 8222 Fax:3172373639 Fax 4147822904 City of Shakopee, Minnesota October 24, 1988 Projects, the Off-Track Project, the 1986 Storm Sewer, 1987A Downtown Street- Scope Project, and the 1987B Upper-Valley Storm Sewer Phase I Project. We have also made provision for a Phase II of Upper-Valley Storm Sewers and a future Downtown Bridge and Bypass Project. This new bond issue is shown in Column 7. Column 8 is a projected 1989 issue for the $1,900,000 Downtown Bridge and Bypass Project. Please notice that there is an annual and cumulative revenue surplus generated from these tax increments, assuming the revenues continue at the levels received in 1988. Any reduction or increase in tax increments from these sources will alter the amount of excess increment. Based upon this projection of cash-flow, it appears there will be sufficient additional revenues available to finance the remaining portion of the City's obligations regarding the Bridge and Bypass Project. We recommend the City continue to monitor the financial status of these tax increment districts by annually updating the increment income estimates based on actual collections. These bonds are subject to the Tax Reform Act of 1986 rebate and reporting requirements. There are exemptions from these requirements, one of which includes the "small issuer" exemption. The City does not reasonably expect to issue $5,000,000 of tax-exempt governmental purpose bonds during 1988 and therefore can qualify itself as a small issuer under the Act, exempting itself from any rebate and reporting requirements. This will permit the City to retain any arbitrage earnings which may accrue to the City from the investment of these bond proceeds. We are recommending the bonds be dated December I and mature on February I in the years 1990 through 2001. As stated previously, the bonds will be callable as of February I, 1995, without penalty to the City. The first interest payment on these bonds is August I, 1989, payable from incremental income to be received in 1989. A bond rating will again be required for this issue. The City is currently rated "A" by Moody's and we do not anticipate any change in this rating at this time. Springsted Incorporated will make the necessary applications on behalf of the City. We are recommending the bonds be offered for sale on Tuesday, November 15, with bids to be received in the offices of Springsted Incorporated at 12:00 Noon. The bids will be opened and tabulated and then presented to the City Council for action that same evening at your regular meeting. Proceeds of the issue will be available to the City approximately 30 days later, or in mid-December. �Respectfully �submitted,f' SPRINGSTED Incorporate mjt Page 2 P) APPENDIX I OFFICIAL TERMS OF OFFERING $1,015,000 CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1988B Sealed bids for the Bonds will be opened by the City on Tuesday, November 15, 1988, at 12:00 Noon, Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, 55101-2143. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:30 P.M., Central Time, of the some day. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated December 1, 1988, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February I and August I of each year, commencing August 1, 1989. Interest will be computed upon the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months and will be rounded pursuant to rules of the MSRB. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof as requested by the Purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the Registrar and interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the Registrar mailed to The registered holder thereof at his address as it appears on the books of the Registrar as of the 15th day of the calendar month next preceding the interest payment. The Bonds will mature February I in the amounts and years as follows: 50,000 1990 $75,000 1994 $ 90,000 1997 $110,000 2000 65,0001991-92 $80,000 1995 $100,000 1998 $120,000 2001 70,000 1993 $85,000 1996 $105,000 1999 OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February I, 1995, and on any interest payment date thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 1996. Redemption may be in whole or in part of the Bonds subject to prepayment. If redemption is in part, those Bonds remaining unpaid which have the latest maturity date will be prepaid first. If only part of the Bonds having a common maturity date are called for prepayment the specific Bonds to be prepaid will be chosen by lot by the Registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par and accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge tax increment income from the City's Housing and Redevelopment District #I. The proceeds will be used to finance eligible project costs within the City's Housing and Redevelopment District #I. TYPE OF BID A sealed bid for not less than $1,000,000 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds shall be filed with the undersigned prior to the time set for the opening of bids. Also prior to the time set for bid opening, a certified or cashier's check in the amount of 510,000, payable to the order of the City, shall have been filed with the undersigned or SPRINGSTED Incorporated, the City's Financial Advisor. No bid will be considered for which said check has not been filed. The check of the Purchaser will be retained by the City as liquidated damages in the event the Page 3 Purchaser fails to comply with the accepted bid. The City will deposit the check of the Purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement. No bid shall be withdrawn after the time set for opening bids unless the meeting of the City scheduled for consideration of the bids is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates offered by Bidders shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. No rate for any maturity shall be more than 1% lower than any prior rate. Bonds of the some maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded to the Bidder offering the lowest dollar interest cost to be determined by the deduction of the premium, if any, from, or the addition of any amount less than par, to the total dollar interest on the Bonds from their date to their final scheduled maturity. The City's computation of the total net dollar interest cost of each bid, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non-substantive informalities of any bid or of matters relating to the receipt of bids and award of the Bonds, 00 reject all bids without cause, and, (iii) reject any bid which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. REGISTRAR The City will name the Registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the Registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the Purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the Purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the Purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the Purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the Purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey and Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no-litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City, or its designee, not later than 1:00 P.M., Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the Purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the Purchaser's non-compliance with said terms for payment. OFFICIAL STATEMENT Underwriters may obtain a copy of the Official Statement by request to the City's Financial Advisor prior to the bid opening. The Purchaser will be provided with 50 copies of the Official Statement. Dated October 18, 1988 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Judith Cox Clerk Page 4 z/ APPENDIX 11 : i ` ■ � = ; ! ! 2l55 ! \ « # § # & § ! ! - - - - - - - - - - - \ ■ : ; : a _ ; ; ; 2 : » E ; : ; ; ! § ■ § ! ; ! ; ! � ) \ \ § § § ® ° ! \ ? § Le;o ) § \ \ / § § } { ! } ] § § ; . - - - - - - - - - . - . ! ) , § : / � ; ; . . . . � � � _ � � � � � � � � ! ■ ! § § � . .tc � c� - . o8 . . . . \ asa s2 ; ; Ji ; ; ; ; / 7 § - tt - cli -i \ \ � ` \ z1K \ ( \ } E § 3 m ! ! ! @lR ; ; ! ! \ ! r ! ! 7 ! ! ® - § ) § ) l - / § § � \ �ic / c7i1 \ ( � ( 2E § § ; ; ■ & � - J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ® _ § § \ \ § § ! ! § § § § ! § ! § ! § § § § § § § Page INFO ITEM MEMO TO: John Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Eileen Klimek, Accounting Clerk RE: Correction on bill list of 10/18/88 DATE: October 27, 1988 The check listed to Kress & Monroe Chartered on the bill list for council meeting of 10/18/88 in the amount of $15,159.74 was incorrect. The amount should have been $7,058.71. The check on the bill list of 11/01/88 is the corrected amount of $7,058.71 and will replace the check listed on 10/18/88. ill MEMO TO: Shakopee City Council FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Summary of the Joint City Council/CDC/Downtown Committee Meeting DATE: October 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION• On October 25, 1988 a joint meeting was held between the City Council, Downtown Committee and Community Development Commission. I have prepared a short summary of what I believe was the general consensus of City Council regarding the future direction of the Downtown Committee. BACKGROUND• At the meeting on October 25, 1988 there seemed to be consensus from the majority of Council members that the Downtown Committee should attempt to narrow its' focus. I believe it was suggested to maintain the Downtown Committee as it presently exists but to request them to prepare a focused list of two or three goals and submit them back to City Council for final approval prior to December 31, 1988. There also seemed to be consensus among the City Council members that staff time dedicated to the Downtown Committee should be kept at a minimum and that the Downtown Committee should try and limit their meetings to a monthly schedule. In terms of the possible plan action of the Downtown Committee, there seemed to be general consensus that something should be done to eliminate blight in the downtown area. I will be working with the Downtown Committee in the next two months to develop a focused plan of action for the Downtown Committee to work on in the next year. The plan will include projected completion dates and estimated costs. ACTION REODESTED: If any of the Council members feel that I have not accurately summarized the meeting, please call me immediately so that I can redefine my work plan in dealing with the Downtown Committee. 1 $� MEMO TO: Shakopee city Council FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: 1988 LAWCON Grant Application (East Side Park) DATE: October 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: In June of 1988 the Shakopee City Council authorized the appropriate City officials to submit a preliminary traditional and athletic grant application for LAWCON funding for park improvements to East Side Park for calendar year 1989. The proposed improvements to the park submitted in the grant application included grading, sodding and seeding. The grant application also requested funding for the relocation of an ice rink and the construction of a basketball court. Total estimated project costs for the aforementioned improvements was $55,000.00. I am pleased to report that I have received notification from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development stating that the City of Shakopee has received preliminary approval for the majority of the items submitted in our grant application request. Several of the items that we requested funding for were not eligible under the program. These elements included the construction of a trail through the park, an archery range and the relocation of a tot lot. The total project amount approved by the Department of Trade and Economic Development is in the amount of $43,800. Fifty-percent ($21,900) will be provided as the City of Shakopee's local match. The source for the City's match will be provided from the park reserve fund. Shown in attachment #1 is the approval letter that was received from the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development. I am confident that we will be able to complete the final design of the park this winter and construction is currently being proposed for next Spring. Office of the Commissioner Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development 900 American Center 150 East Kellogg Boulevard St. Paul, MN 55101-1421 612/296-6424 Fax: 612/296-1290 October 21, 1988 OCT2 71988 Mr. Barry Stock CITY Of City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: FY '89 Outdoor Recreation Grant Preliminary Application JEJ Park Dear Mr. Stock: I am pleased to inform you that your preliminary application for a FY 1989 Outdoor Recreation Grant ranks high enough to be programmed for funds. Late in September, Congress passed the appropriations bill for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LAWCON). Funding for both the LAWCON and state BONDED programs will be at essentially the same levels as FY 1988. Consistent with federal requirements, LAWCON funds will be distributed to the highest ranked projects first. Once the LAWCON funds have been exhausted, state BONDED funds will be distributed to the next group of projects. Please note that this letter does not constitute final approval of your project. Consequently, do not begin any spending on this project. ANY WORK DONE, MONEY SPENT, OR OBLIGnTIONS INCURRED FOR ACQUISITION OR DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES BEFORE APPROVAL OF THE FINAL APPLICATION CANNOT LEGALLY BE PAID WITH GRANT FUNDS OR USED AS THE LOCAL SHARE. The next step is for you to prepare a final application. State grants will be approved upon satifactory completion of the final application. Federal grants must receive further approval by the National Park Service (NPS). As soon as final application details have been determined, you will receive a notice of the date, time and location of our Final Application Workshop. If you have any questions on this matter, please call 612/296-5005 and ask for the Outdoor Recreation Grants Section of the Community Development Division. Sincerely, David J. Speer Commissioner DJS/km LAWCON XXII/15-1 M Equal Opponunu,Enaplwa BILL FRENZEL 6120111-A,;IKKUsomx 3xwO Ormin¢L M INLsm. &oowxOrox.MN 55431-1376 614881-4BW 1076 LoxOwOMx BUILDING /1ypy 202-22f,6,1 Congrm of the iNniteb ?B'tateg I joouge of Aepregeutatibrg ¢; .GE!R4 Washington, MIC 20515-2303 pC f 2 %19BB October 21, 1988 Mr. John Anderson CITY Or SHAKOt tt_ City of Shakopee - 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson: Thank you for contacting my office urging my opposition to legislation that would limit the issuance costs on bonds. Congressman Donnelly introduced this bill in an attempt to reduce the costs associated with issuing bonds. However, as you have pointed out, this legislation goes too far and would have a damaging impact on the ability of municipalities to issue bonds. It appears the issue is dead for this year since Congress is expected to adjourn shortly. However, if this issue reappears during the next Congress, your views will be extremely helpful. I appreciate your interest in this important matter. Yours ruly, Bill Frenzel Member of Congress BF:dw �b TENTATIVE AGENDA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, MN November 3, 1988 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M. 2. Approval of Agenda 3 . Approval of Sept. 22, & Oct. 6, 1988 Meeting Minutes 4 . 7: 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a variance request to place an accessory building nearer the front lot line than the principal building. APPlicant: Allstate Leasing Corporation Action: Variance Resolution No. 548 5. 7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an appeal of staff's interpretation of the City Zoning Ordinance regarding the definition of front yard as it applies to the property located at 1064 South Marschall Road. Applicant: Richard and Lora Fox Action: Appeal Resolution No. 549 6. 7:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an appeal of staff's interpretation of the City Zoning ordinance regarding the definitions for Class I & Class II Restaurants as they apply to the property located at 221 East First Ave. Applicant: Peter Haukoos Action: Appeal Resolution No. 550 7 . Other Business a. b. 8 . Adjourn Douglas K. Wise City Planner NOTE TO THE B.O.A.A. MEMBERS: 1. If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items, please call Doug Wise on the Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting. 2. If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. i -96 TENTATIVE AGENDA PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN November 3, 1988 Chairman Rockne Presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. 2 . Approval of Agenda 3 . Approval of the Sept. 22, & Oct. 6, 1988 Meeting Minutes 4. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a conditional use permit to operate a cabinet making business from the property located at 1850 County Road 89. Applicant: Dennis Fetzer I I Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution 4546 5. 8: 10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a conditional use permit to move-in a dwelling upon the property located East of C.R. #79 and North of C.R. 472. Applicant: Edward Jeurissen Action: Conditional Use Permit Resolution #547 6. 8:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider amending Shakopee City Code, Section 12. 07, Subd. 6 to increase the required cash contributions in lieu of land dedication for park purposes for new subdivisions. Action: Recommendation to City Council 7. Vacation of Minnesota & Market Streets North of Bluff Ave. Action: Recommendation to City Council 8. Discussion: a. Day Care Center b. Setbacks in Industrial Districts Abutting RR C. Floating Homes 9. other Business a. b. 10. Adjourn Douglas Wise City Planner NOTE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS• 1. If you have any questions or need additional information on any of the above items, please call Doug Wise on the Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting. 2 . If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the Planning Department prior to the meeting. I Board of Adjustments & Appeals September 22, 1988 Adj . Regular Session Page -2- Commission members raised concerns whether there was adequate stacking space for cars waiting to use the stalls. Dale Royer stated that another car wash would alleviate some of the pressures and stacking of the only other car wash and that the busiest car wash in the twin cities is on Lake Street on a smaller lot than what has been proposed for Mr. Link's car wash and that there have been no problems there. There were no additional comments from the audience. Schmitt/Czaja moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Czaja/Schmitt moved to deny Variance Resolution #537 for the following reason: The applicant can incorporate adjacent property into the project to eliminate the need for variances. If the adjacent 60' lot were not incorporated into the project its future use is extremely limited and would most likely necessitate additional variances for a future project. Motion carried. Vice Chrmn. Foudray advised the audience and applicant of the 7 ', day appeal period. Czaja/Schmitt moved to adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7: 55 P.M. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Adj . Reg. Session Shakopee, Minnesota September 22, 1988 Vice Chrm. Foudray called the meeting to order at 7: 30 P.M. , with Comm. Stafford, Schmitt, Forbord and Czaja present. Absent: Chrmn. Rockne and Comm. Allen. Also present: Doug Wise, City Planner. Czaja/Schmitt moved to approve the agenda. Motion carried. VARIANCE FOR PROPOSED CAR WASH Foudray/Czaja moved to reopen the public hearing to consider variances in order to construct a car wash at 612 E. 1st Avenue. Motion carried. City Planner stated that applicant Clete Link had originally requested four variances in order to construct a four bay car wash. The variances originally under consideration were: 1) A 5' front yard setback variance from the west property line for the building allowing a 25' setback instead of the required 30' setback; 2) A 1' side yard setback variance from the east property line for the building allowing a 19' setback instead of the required 20' setback; 3) A 7' front yard setback variance from the north property line for the parking lot allowing an 8' setback instead of the required 15' setback and 4) A 12' front yard setback variance from the west property line for the parking lot allowing a 3' setback instead of the required 15' setback. The applicant has now submitted a new drawing with; 1) No variance on the east side of the building allowing for the required 20' setback; and 2) A 6' front yard setback variance from the west property line for the building allowing a 24' setback instead of the required 30' setback, thus eliminating the need for two separate variances. The requests for variances for the parking lot remain unchanged. At the Sept. 8, 1988 meeting, staff requested additional documentation on 1) Traffic flow; 2) Blueprint of the building; and 3) If landscape is varied, a new landscape plan be submitted. Applicant provided City Planner with a site plan showing traffic flow to be vehicles entering off of 1st Avenue and stacking behind the individual stalls. The plan also provides for a one- way driveway around the building. Clete Link stated that the Highway Department had given him a 44 ' curb cut including the vacant lot east. He added that the one- way driveway around the building enables a vehicle to go around and come out if the car wash is stacked without backing up traffic on Hwy. 101. Mr Link feels the greatest problem is that the setback requirements on 60' lots are too great. SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION Adj . Reg. Session Shakopee, Minnesota September 22, 1988 Vice Chrmn. Foudray called the meeting to order at 8:03 P.M. , with Comm. Stafford, Schmitt, Forbord and Czaja present. Absent: Chrmn. Rockne and Comm. Allen. Also present: Doug Wise, City Planner. Stafford/Schmitt moved to approve the agenda with the addition of Blue Lake Treatment Tour under Other Business. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - BACKSTRETCH R.V. PARK City Planner stated that a public hearing on this request was held by the Commission at their September 8, 1988 meeting and action on the request was tabled. The City Planner reviewed the items of concern raised at the September 8th meeting. City Planner stated that there were not trees planted on the outside of the fence as shown on the landscaping plan. He talked to both the applicant and the power company and confirmed that the trees were placed on the inside of the fence at the request of the power company to avoid interference with the power line. Comm. Schmitt recommended that two further conditions be added to Staff's Recommendations; 1) To consider a monthly inspection so that set forth conditions are monitored and 2) Activity in proposed storage area be limited to RV's designed for temporary living (i.e. , no trucks, jeeps, trailers, etc. ) Discussion was held relating to the period of time for which the Conditional Use Permit is requested whether it is for year round outside storage or for the months of November through March. City Planner stated that the application is for no specified time period, but that the understanding is that it would be used for the off-season with the idea that some RV's could be stored prior to Nov. 1 and some could remain after March 31st as long as they complied with all the conditions of the permit. Discussion ensued regarding enforcement of the permit conditions. Mr. VanRemortel, owner of the RV Park, stated that enforcement is not a criteria for Conditional Use Permits and that he has taken the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit very seriously and thought that they were enforced. Czaja/Stafford moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution #540 subject to the following conditions: 1) That a full time attendant live on site. 2) That the stored RV's are locked and unhooked from all utilities and show no outward sign of occupancy. Shakopee Planning Commission Page -2- September 22, 1988 3) That all RV's in storage shall be placed on the pads identified for storage sites on the site plan submitted with the application, and shall not encroach on the drive-ways. 4) Immediately following the Labor Day weekend, the RV Park shall begin clearing the sites of occupied units beginning at the West end of the park. All areas designated for outdoor storage shall be cleared of occupied RV's by November 1. Following the clearing of occupied RV's the placement of units for winter storage shall begin at the Western end of the park and a clear space between stored units and occupied units at least 4 pads in width shall be kept until the areas designated for outdoor storage have been totally cleared of occupied units. Any winter camping or occupancy of units must occur in the shaded area on the plan immediately behind the main building which is not designated storage. - 5) During construction of the Highway 101 By-pass, the RV park shall submit a plan showing any additional screening required to comply with Section 11. 32, Subd 5.D. 3 . regarding screening from Highway #101. The plan must be approved by the City planner, and screening installed prior to the opening of this section of the highway. 6) Additional landscaping along the fence line to include shrubs. 7) Annual review by the Commission during the storage season. 8) Storage limited to RV's and attached jumpers only as described as units used for temporary living. 9) Storage plan to consist of what is to be stored, where and from what time period to what time period it is to be stored should be forwarded to the city prior to the annual review. Motion carried. AMENDMENT OF CITY CODE SECTION 11. 03 SUBD. 7 2 Forbord/Schmitt moved to recommend to the City Council the Amendment of City Code Section 11. 03, Subd. 7 I and Section 11.60, Subd. 19 A to read as follows: I. No building permits for a new principle structure or addition to a principle structure shall be issued for any lot or parcel which does not abut a dedicated public street except under the following conditions: Shakopee Planning Commission Page -3- September 22, 1988 1. Properties located within an approved Planned Unit Development where the streets are constructed and maintained by the Planned Unit Development Association. 2. Parcels of property being accessed by a private road or drive-way easement within the individual parcels being served were parcels of record prior to enactment of this Chapter (October 25, 1979) . Access drives and roads serving these parcels must comply with the requirements contained in Section 11.60, Subd 19 entitled "Access Drives and Access". AMENDMENT OF CITY CODE SECTION 11.60 SUBD. 19 A. 9. _ Private roadways serving more than two parcels of property shall be approved by the City Council. The City Council in approving said roadways shall require the following: a) A property owners association or maintenance agreement for the road must be executed granting the responsible party for maintaining the road the right to assess al properties benefiting from the roadway for the cost of the maintenance. The agreement shall also grant the City the right to enter and maintain the roadway when it deems necessary to maintain safe access and charge the cost of such maintenance back to the entity or property owners. b) In approving the roadway, if the City Council based upon current Mn\DOT and/or AASHTO Minimum street standards determines that the roadway must be upgraded to insure proper and safe access, the homeowners association or property owners will be required to execute a developer's agreement with the City of Shakopee for improvement of the roadway. The Council may stipulate in the developer's agreement that the road must be dedicated tot he City as a public street when a certain level of traffic volume and/or development occurs on the roadway. Discussion was held on the proposed wording. Dave Czaja questioned the no building permit requirement in Section 11. 03, Subd. 7. He feels there is no longer a need for it. City Planner stated that this proposal applies only to new principal structures or additions to principal structures and would allow a building permit to be automatically issued for interior improvements and necessary repairs without having to go through the roadway provision proposal. Shakopee Planning Commission Page -4- September 22, 1988 Comm. Schmitt supports staff recommendations as presented with one exception of wording in Section 11. 60, Subd. 19 A. The words "shall bell should be replaced by "may be" . Comm. Forbord accepts amendment by Comm. Schmitt to Section 11. 60, Subd. 19 A changing the word shall to may. Motion carried. OTHER BUSINESS City Planner stated that Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) staff called and thought it beneficial for the _Planning Commission staff to take a tour of the facility to show on site where proposed improvements are to occur. City Planner also stated that there is no record of any previous Conditional Use Permit issued for the plant or for any improvements for the plant. There is record of the building permit issued in 1986 for some improvements on the plant. The ordinance provided for a Conditional Use Permit at that time. Comm. Schmitt/Forbord moved to recommend that the MWCC be notified of that condition by memorandum or letter and that the changes that were made to thelant without approval P pp 1 should be incorporated into this review so that the proposed Conditional Use Permit properly reflects the operating conditions at MWCC. Motion carried. Foudray/Schmitt moved to direct staff to set up a tour of the plant prior to the Oct. 6, 1988 meeting. Motion carried. Interested commission members are to tour the MWCC facility on Weds. , Oct. 5, 1988 at 6: 30 P.M. City Planner will send notice of confirmation. Comm. Forbord requested home and work phone numbers of all commission members. Comm. Forbord asked City Planner to review the ordinance on floating homes by the Oct. 6, 1988 meeting. Comm. Forbord informed staff of an upcoming Housing Forum on Oct. 27, 1988 at the Holiday Inn International. It is a forum of housing through the year 2000 in metropolitan areas. Shakopee is to be included in that report. Foudray/Schmitt moved to adjourn meeting. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9: 35 P.M. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota October 6, 1988 Chrmn. Rockne called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p.m. with Vice Chrmn. Foudray, Comm. Allen, Schmitt and Czaja present. Also present: Doug Wise, City Planner and John Anderson, City Admn. Czaja/Foudray moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried. Foudray/Czaja moved to approve the June 9, 1988 meeting minutes with one word change of "reopen" to "continue" to read as follows: "Schmitt/Czaja moved to continue the public hearing to consider a variance request to allow a 10' rear yard setback instead of the required 30' setback for the property located on the proposed Lot 4 , Block 1, Hentges lst Addition (North of Hwy 169 and East of Third Avenue) . Motion carried unanimously. -- Motion nanimously. "Motion carried. Czaja/Allen moved to approve the September 8, 1988 meeting minutes. Motion carried with Chrmn. Rockne abstaining due to his absence. There was no other business. Foudray/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota October 6, 1988 Chrmn. Rockne called the meeting to order at 7: 35 p.m. with Vice Chrmn. Foudray, Comm. Allen, Schmitt and Czaja present. Also present: Doug Wise, City Planner and John Anderson, City Admn. Czaja/Foudray moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried. Czaja/Foudray moved to approve the June 9, 1988 meeting minutes with one word change of "reopen" to "continue" to read as follows: "Schmitt/Czaja moved to continue the public hearing to consider the preliminary plat approval of Hentges 1st Addition located upon the property North and West of Hwy 169 on both sides of 3rd Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. " Motion carried. Czaja/Allen moved to approve the September 8, 1988 meeting minutes. Motion carried with Chrmn. Rockne abstaining due to his absence. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ALLSTATE LEASING CORPORATION Schmitt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider the request for a conditional use permit to move in a temporary sales office upon the property located at 8050 E. Hwy 101. City Planner stated that the applicant had previously submitted a request that was denied. The applicant appealed to the City Council and was also denied due to 1) lack of compatibility with surrounding structures and 2) type of siding on the structure did not meet code. City Planner stated that the applicant has submitted a new application proposing a different building to be located in the middle of the rear of the parking lot behind the truck parking. The new building will have wood siding which complies with code requirements for material. Discussion was held on the temporary vs. permanent issue regarding the structure and the 5 year time limit recommended by staff. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Two Comm. Schmitt raised the question of whether or not a variance should be incorporated into the request that allows the structure to be sited ahead of the principal building. City ordinance provides that no accessory building may be constructed no closer to the front property line than the principal structure. There was discussion of the discrepancies in the code regarding this issue. Attorney representing the applicant stated that Allstate wants to be in full compliance with the city and questioned if a variance is required or not as this is the first time it was mentioned. She went on to state the applicant's concern regarding staff recommendation #1 which states that a culvert shall be installed j in the driveway as per City Engineer specifications. She requested that staff reconsider and eliminate recommendation #1 because Allstate is the Lessee of the property and does not own it. The attorney also stated some confusion on the applicants part regarding which driveway the City Engineer is referring to and why a culvert is needed. City Planner stated that although he has not had a chance to discuss the culvert with the City Engineer, he must have felt it necessary in his review of the property. He went on to add that the request is a matter between the lessee and lessor as to who is responsible for the installation. There were no more comments from the audience. Schmitt/Allen moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Comm. Schmitt stated the assumption that the culverts were constructed in accordance with building standards at the time and would be so inclined to strike recommendation #1 from his motion. He again questioned whether or not the structure could be placed in front of the principal structure and recommended a 3 year time limit with the structure to be removed at that time by deleting the renewal option. City Planner suggested that if the Planning Commission, in its review of this particular request, is comfortable in agreeing with the location and type of the proposed structure that Comm. Schmitt should include it in his motion and the City Planner will review the code and procedure if a variance is required with the City Attorney. If the City Attorney agrees that the action will stand, it can be left as written. If not, the applicant would have to come back with a separate variance request to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Three Schmitt/Foudray moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution $543 allowing a temporary sales office to be moved onto the property subject to the following conditions: 1. The permit is temporary and shall expire 3 years from the date of approval at which time the structure must be removed from the property. 2. Skirting compatible with the siding must be attached around the entire perimeter of the structure and the structure must be firmly anchored to the ground. 3. The structure must be placed at the rear of the parking lot. 4. The structure must have wood siding. 5. The variance issue regarding an accessory structure permitted ahead of the principal structure be reviewed with the City Attorney to determine whether that can be granted within this permit or whether a separate variance application is required. 6. Subject to a one year review. Motion carried. Chrmn. Rockne informed the applicant and audience of the 7 day appeal period. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - NANCY AND JAMES WRIGHT Czaja/Allen moved to open the public hearing to consider a ! request for a conditional use permit to operate a glass and mirror etching business from a garage located at 1166 Jackson Street. Motion carried. City Planner stated the applicants intend to insulate the garage and install 220 wiring. Business hours would be from 4-8 p.m. weekdays and 9-5 p.m. weekends with business generating only 6-8 customers per month in terms of additonal traffic. He also stated the home occupation requirements in the code are that 1) there be no outside storage 2) there should be no sign of the business from the outside of the building with the exception to allow a 2 ft. sign and, 3) the business would not employ more than one person outside of the household members. Applicant, Nancy Wright stated that the glass etching is not done with chemicals but with a sand blaster self-contained in a large cabinet and that she also uses a high speed dentist's drill. There were no additional comments from the audience. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Four City Planner received a petition prior to the meeting stating: "We the undersigned are opposed to the Planning Commission of Shakopee issuing a conditional use permit to Nancy and James Wright for the following reasons: 1) properties in the surrounding areas are residential 2) traffic and parking on the street will be increased and, 3) the existing condition of the yard is already in a bad state with old vehicles and the like and we're concerned that it will worsen" . City Planner stated the petition included 18 signatures. Czaja/Allen moved to enter the petition into record. Motion carried. City Planner stated that 6-8 customers per month is not a very large increase in traffic and that at present there are no violations in the zoning files regarding the appllicant's yard. Schmitt/Czaja moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Schmitt/Allen moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution $544 allowing for a home occupation to operate a glass and mirror etching business subject to the following conditions: 1. The garage must be insulated. 2. Hours of operation shall be restricted to 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. 3 . The process be limited to the garage structure. 4. The process be limited to sand blasting and drill work. 5. No non-family employees will be permitted. 6. Subject to an annual review. Motion carried. Chrmn. Rockkne informed the applicant and audience of the 7 day appeal period. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ST. FRANCIS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER Schmitt/Czaja moved to open the public hearing to consider a request for a conditional use permit to permit temporary medical office space and hospital storage for approximately 360 days upon the property located at 414 West Fourth Avenue. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Six City Planner stated that at the September 8, 1988 Planning Commission meeting additional information was requested of staff and applicant on the following: 1) treatment effect on odor and fog 2) DNR Storm Water Permit 3) Corp. of Engineering Permits 4) Ramifications of the 50 percent expansion on the community 5) Basis for the last remodeling and why a conditional use permit was not required 6) Additional information on the EPA lawsuit, and 7) Landscaping Plan. City Planner reviewed with the Commission the additional information provided by the MWCC and staff regarding these issues. JoEllen Hurr, MWCC Commissioner representing several counties, stated that hopefully we answered all questions at the last meeting and appreciated the time taken to tour the plant. Carol Mordorski, MWCC, stated that she has talked to the MN DOT and that they will conduct an investigation of the fog problem. The MN DOT said that they could post signs or that a more sophisticated alternative would be a flashing light that detects fog. Applicant stated that MN DOT would also check to see if there had been any fog related accidents. Applicant stated that they will be submitting a landscaping plan and that they have been working with the Fish and Wildlife Service regarding their concerns for landscaping in keeping the "natural" look. Chrmn. Rockne stated that the Commission had received a letter from the Fish and Wildlife Service which states concerns of the chain link fence and screening for the area. The letter also contains a surface drainage consideration involving the construction of a temporary sedimentation pond for the construction site. Applicant stated that they are required by the Watershed District to acquire sedimentation basins for the temporary construction. Site preparation will begin this winter after which the permanent dike will be constructed. At that time they wouldn't need the sedimentation basin. Applicant stated that the Fish and Wildlife Service also has concerns for the permanent drainage located to the north. The DNR and the Watershed District will have to review the storm water drainage situation. The MWCC will be required to conform to whatever their requests are as far as sedimentation control. Schmitt/Czaja moved to enter the letter from the Fish and Wildlife Service dated October 6, 1988 into record. Motion carried. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Five City Planner stated that the applicant has requested the- use of a home currently owned by the hospital for temporary office and storage space. A representative of the hospital stated that the intent is to have a clinic exam room in the home to serve patients by two physicians working part-time approximately 24 hours a week each. The applicant stated that parking would be in the out-patient clinic lot next to the house. The temporary space requested is a result of an internal space study by the hospital to be completed in January or February of 1989 at which time the hospital can better determine what structural changes need to be made to the existing facility. Marilyn Rhine, 412 Scott St. , expressed her concern with parking. She stated that employees of the hospital park on the street rather than in the parking lot. She stated her street does not have a 2 hour parking restriction and has concerns that if they don't use the parking lot now what is it going to be like with the addition of the clinic. There were no other comments from the audience. Foudray/Allen moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Foudray/Czaja moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution #545 allowing temporary medical office space and hospital storage subject to the following condition: The permit shall expire one year from the date of approval . Motion carried. Schmitt/Czaja moved to request that a parking review be conducted on the streets that are immediately adjacent to the medical center complex with the review to lessen the burden on the residents. Motion carried. Chrmn. Rockne informed the applicant and audience of the 7 day ' appeal period. Schmitt/Czaja moved to a 10 minute recess. Motion carried. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION Foudray/Allen moved to continue the public hearing to consider a request for a conditional use permit to expand the Blue Lake Waste Water Treatment Facility at 6957 TH 101. Motion carried. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Seven Beverly Koehnen, 2036 Canterbury Rd. , questioned if the proposed clarifiers are considered as secondary treatment. Representative of the MWCC stated that the plant already has secondary treatment that takes place in the aeration basin. The clarifiers are to settle the solids that come out of the secondary treatment. The new treatment plant will contain advanced secondary treatment which will remove ammonia nitrogen and will provide for dechlorination which is the removal of some of the residual chlorine used to disinfect the waste water. Beverly Koehnen recommended 2 conditions be added to the permit. 1) This permit, if approved, is granted only for secondary sewage treatment additions to the Blue Lake Plant. I 2) Anaerobic digestors or any other tertiary treatment or any treatment of the sewage which makes the sludge more suitable for land application will require a separate conditional use permit application. John Shoemaker, Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, stated their primary concern is with the asthetics on the east side where there is a state trail and the water quality that enters Blue Lake. The refuge will require an easement for the construction if approved that will include landscaping requirements as a part off it. When the land is restored on the east side, the refuge requests concern be given to what kind of grass and tree species be planted there. JoEllen Burr, MWCC, stated her concerns that the proposed conditions would prohibit them from the ability to make a new compost or better ways of disposing of the sludge. Comm. Schmitt stated that he has made a note relative to the motion that the expansion permit is based on the continual removal of solids from the city and that any change in the process, i.e. , on-site disposal via burning or other such means ,. would require a new or revision of the existing conditional use permit. Foudray/Allen moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Foudray/Schmitt, moved to approve Conditional Use Permit Resolution W540 subject to the following conditions: 1. The facility will be required to obtain a grading permit from the City for relocation of the dike. A soil erosion control plan must be submitted with the grading permit application and approved by the City Engineer. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Eight 2. The facility must comply with City landscaping requirements along Hwy. 101. A landscaping plan showing improvements needed to comply with City Code requirements shall be submitted with the building permit application. Landscaping improvements shall be installed prior to issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. 3. The facility must obtain a storm water out fall permit from the DNR and place a copy of the permit on file with the City. 4 . The conditional use permit shall include all the previous improvements to the property. 5. The applicant must obtain the appropriate permits required by other Governmental Agencies, in particular the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Department of Natural Resources, and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District. 6. The permit is contingent upon the continued removal of sludge from the City in it's present form. Any on site change in the processing or disposal of sludge shall require a new conditional use permit. 7. The MWCC shall initiate action with the Minnesota Department of Transportation to make safety improvements along Hwy. 101 in regard to the fog present in the area of the plant. S . The MWCC must obtain an easement agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which stipulates the required restoration and landscaping within the area of the easement and construction of the new dike. Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT OF CITY CODE SECTION 11. 05 SUED 11 I Foudray/Allen moved to open the public hearing to consider amending the Shakopee City Code Section 11. 05, Subd. 11 I. Regulating Occupancy in RV Parks. Motion carried. City Planner stated that concerns have been raised regarding the code for RV parks on the issue of permanent occupancy. He stated that people who work at Canterbury Downs for the 5-6 month period come to the area in RV's and would like to stay in an RV park. However, the code only allows a maximum of a 3 month stay. The proposed amendment would change the definition to 7 months in a 12 month period so that anything beyond 7 months in a 12 month period is considered permanent occupancy. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Nine John DuBois, Riverview Campground, stated his concern regarding people who want to leave their vehicles here during the winter. City Planner explained that the city code allows for a conditional use permit to be issued for outdoor storage. Schmitt/Foudray moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Schmitt/Czaja moved to recommend to the City Council that Section 11. 05 Subd. 11 I be amended to read as follows: I. Permanent Occupancy Prohibited. 1. No recreational vehicle shall be used as a permanent place of abode, dwelling, or business or for indefinite periods of time. Continuous occupancy extending beyond seven-months in any twelve month period shall be presumed to be permanent occupancy. All seasonal RV parks shall be totally cleared of all vehicles for the months between November and March unless a separate Conditional Use Permit has been issued for outside storage. 2 . Any action toward removal of wheels of a recreational vehicle except for temporary purposes of repair or to attach the vehicle to the grounds for stabilizing purposes is hereby prohibited. 3 . All recreational vehicles within the park must have and display a current license. Motion carried. i PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT OF CITY CODE SECTION 11. 24, SUBD 3 AND SECTION 11. 25 SUBD 3 Foudray/Schmitt moved to open the public hearing to amend Shakopee City Code Section 11.24 Subd 3 and Section 11. 25 Subd 3 . ❑. and Section 11. 60, Subd. 3D 3c. Motion carried. City Planner stated that Section 11. 60 Subd 3 D 3 c which relates to screening and the use of planting material for screening would be amended to add the statement "which shall occur no more than 5 years after planting" . City Planner stated that the City received a request from a local realtor that the City consider allowing veterinary clinics and animal hospitals in the R-1 and Ag Zoning districts. He also stated that the current R-1 and Ag zoning districts allow kennels and horse riding academies. In reviewing this, it was felt that there are similarities between animal clinics and Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session Page Ten kennel and riding academies in that both do care for and contain animals in a confined area. Wally Bishop, Edina Realty, requests that the same creedance be given to veterinary clinics and animal hospitals as given to kennels and riding academies in that they are considered a permitted use as outlined in general requirements for Ag districts. Kennels and riding academies are a conditional use in the R-1 district and a permitted use in the Ag district. Wally Bishop questioned whether or not a home could be built along with a clinic on 20 acres. City Planner stated that the home is a permitted use and if the veterinary clinic received a conditional use permit it could be placed on the same parcel. Foudray/Allen moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Allen/Czaja moved to recommend to City Council that Section 11.24 Subd 3, Section 11. 25 Subd 3 and Section 11. 60 Subd 3 d 3 c be amended as follows: 1. That Sections 11.24, Subd. 3 and 11. 25, Subd. 3 be amended to allow animal hospitals and veterinary clinics within the Ag and R-1 Zoning Districts as Conditional Uses. 2 . That Section 11. 60, Subd. 3 D. 3 c. be amended to read as follows: c. Screen fences and walls which are in disrepair shall be repaired. Planting screens shall consist of healthy, fully hearty plant materials at least 6' in height and shall be designed to provide year around opaqueness of at least 80% at the time of maturity which shall occur no more than five years after planting. Motion carried with Chrmn. Rockne opposing. VACATION OF 6TH AVENUE EAST OF MAIN STREET City Planner stated that the City received a petition to vacate the 1/2 block of 6th Avenue located east of Main street between Main and Market. He stated that the Planning Commission is required to review proposed vacations and make a recommendation to the City Council based upon whether its consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. He also added that the area is underdeveloped. There have been no formal plans developed and no formal action taken to initiate any street projects in the immediate area. Staff indicated that the City at this point in time, can't be assured that there will not be a need for that street to be put through until development plans are more concrete. Shakopee Planning Commission October 6, 1988 Regular Session - Page Eleven Comm. Schmitt stated that there is no dedication of street property to the east. He stated that there have been attempts to develop that property in some manner, shape or form for almost 30 years. Unless the City has something concrete he suggested the street be vacated. Foudray/Schmitt moved to recommend to City Council to vacate 6th Avenue, the 1/2 block east of Main street. Motion carried with Comm. Czaja opposing. DISCUSSION - PARK DEDICATION FEES Foudray/Czaja moved to set a public hearing regarding park dedication fees. Motion carried. Foudray/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried. - Meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Andrea DeJoy ` Recording Secretary Douglas Wise City Planner Shakopee Coalition Meeting Minutes - October 4, 1988 The meeting was called to order at 4:40 P.M. by Chairman Brian Norris in the Citizens State Bank meeting room. Members Present: Gary Laurent (Rotary) , Phyllis Hussong (Community Action Agency) , Debra Bates (Community Education) , Steve Humburg (Shakopee Ministerial Association) , Claude Kolb (Knights of Columbus) , Barry Stock (City of Shakopee) , John Anderson (City of Shakopee) , Kathy TenEyck (Shakopee Jaycees) , David Hart (Scott County Extension Office) , Sister Esther Wagner (SACS) , Brian Norris (Citizens State Bank) and Eilleen Moran (Scott County Human Services) . All members intr—euc�- d themselves. Phyllis Hussong reported that she did not have any numbers available from the Food Shelf for this past month. She did note that the numbers were up and that the agency was gearing up for the holidays. She also noted that the Thrift Shop was celebrating their 10th Anniversary today. Phyllis reported that volunteers were needed for the upcoming holiday projects. The Thanksgiving Project was scheduled for November 22nd and the Christmas Project was scheduled for December 14 - 17th at the Shakopee Valley Mall. Phyllis noted that a food package consists of the traditional holiday meal based upon how many persons residing in a household. In 1987 200 households participated in the Thanksgiving Project and 350 households in the Christmas Project. Phyllis then volunteered to appear before any group in Shakopee to give them a better understanding of what the Food Shelf is all about and to eliminate any misconceptions that there may be regarding the Food Shelf's primary responsibilities. Brian Norris questioned the impact of the recently proposed Federal Welfare Reform Program. Eilleen Moran stated that Minnesota was already doing many of the elements of the proposed Federal program. She noted that Minnesota is advanced in the provision of social programs when compared to many other states around the country. She stated that the greatest impact from the program would be felt in the Southern states. Ms. Moran also stated that one of the largest costs that the social programs are incurring when trying to employ the unemployed is for day care. She noted that Scott County was investigating cooperative child care and other child care alternatives. Mr. Stock stated that the City of Shakopee was currently negotiating with an industrial prospect who was considering the construction of a day care facility in the industrial park that would be physically connected to their manufacturing plant. The industrial client was considering constructing the facility and giving it to the City to manage. Another alternative being considered is for the industrial prospect to donate one acre of land to the City. The City would in turn solicit proposals from day care providers to construct and manage the facility. In turn, the industrial prospect would receive first priority and perhaps reduced day care rates for their employees. Mr. Stock also noted that the City of Shakopee is currently investigating the implementation of a curbside recycling program in conjunction with regular refuse collection. He noted that Metropolitan Council has mandated that unprocessed wastes can not be disposed of in landfills after 1990. This has made it necessary for counties in the Metropolitan area to adopt solid waste management plans. Scott County's plan calls for the licensing of all refuse haulers in Scott County and the provision of a $2.00 per cubic yard surcharge imposed at the landfill for refuse disposed of. Refuse haulers can receive a portion of the $2.00 surcharge back in the form of a rebate if they can prove that their customers are recycling. The program currently being considered by the City of Shakopee involves volume based collection. Each customer will be provided with a 60 gallon refuse container. Each household would also be provided with three separate recycling containers. One for glass, one for aluminum and one for newsprint. Mr. Stock noted that garbage rates were likely to increase by 308 between now and January lat. Mr. Hart questioned the impact of the proposed program on the volunteer organizations currently collecting recyclables in Shakopee. Mr. Stock stated that he has met with each of the organizations and informed them of the proposed program. Mr. Stock stated that he felt the City's curbside program run in conjunction with regular refuse collection would have a significant impact on the volunteers organization programs. However, in meeting with the organizations two of the organizations felt they wanted to continue with their program. The Shakopee Cub Scouts have stated that they will no longer be continuing their glass drive on the second Saturday of each month when the new program is implemented. They have expressed interest in receiving a $1,500 payment from the City of Shakopee for their participation in a Spring Clean-up Day activity. Mr. Gary Laurent stated that the rotary was offering a group study exchange program. That the program was open to females between the ages of 25 and 35. Interested applicants should contact him. The program scheduled for May and June of 1989 will include a all expense paid trip to Austria. The successful candidate will be selected on the basis on their career. Application deadline is October 15, 1988. Kathy TenEyck reported that the Shakopee Jaycees were having a debate between Commissioner Dick Mertz and Commissioner Candidate Gary Scott on October 20th at 7:00 P.M. at the Shakopee KC Hall. The public was welcome to attend the debate. �3 Debra Bates reported that the Safety Awareness Seminar last month was very successful and there was great cooperation among the sponsoring organizations. Approximately 85 persons attended the event and a video tape of the seminar will be shown on the public access channel. Ms. Bates also noted that she felt it was important for this type of program to be included in the school curriculum or as a special seminar for interested high school students. Ms. Bates also reported that the college credit information orientation program was successful and that several college courses would be offered in Shakopee next year. She reported that she did not know which courses would be offered at this time. Approximately 50 persons attended the orientation program. Chairman Norris stated that if anyone had a volunteer that they would like to have honored that they should contact him. He noted that the process was simply a letter of recommendation from the nominating person stating the reasons why the person should be considered as volunteer of the month. Chairman Norris noted that the next meeting would be on November 1, 1988 at 4 : 30 P.M. The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 P.M. Respectfully Submitted, Barry Stock, Acting Secretary Name Title Length of Service Base Pay 1988 Louis Van Hout Manager 12 years 55,093.00/Year Raymond Friedges Line Supt. 28 years 45, 777. 00/Year Barbara Menden Comm. Sec. Office Super. 21 years 29, 306 .00/Year Barbara Nevin Billing Clerk/ Typist 15 years 9.81/hour Sharon Moonen Billing Clerk/ Typist 9 years 9. 81/hour Sherri Anderson Billing Clerk/ Typist 8 years 9. 81/hour Nancy Huth Billing Clerk/ Typist 17 years 9.81/hour Terrill Roquette Technical Asst. 9 years 13.76/hour John Dellwo Serviceman 18 years 16.92/hour Marvin Athmann Crew Foreman 13 years 18.33/hour Eugene W. Pass Lineman 1st Class 16 years 16.92/hour Kent Sanders Lineman 1st Class 9 years 16.92/hour Roger Hennen Lineman 2nd Class 2 years 15. 24/hour Arthur Young Senior Water Systems Operator 9 years 15. 93/hour Kenneth Menden Water Systems Operator 1st Class 7 years 12.82/hour James Dunning Part time 7. 51/hour Vincent Marschall Meter Reader 8.03/hour James Cook Commission President 150.00/month Barry Kirchmeier Commissioner 125.00/month Jim Kephart Commissioner 125. 00/month e TO: John Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Lou Van Hout, Utilities Manager RE: Information request on Assets DATE: 10/28/88 As a previous memo stated, we usually use the data from the most recent audit when discussing financial matters, however, the current information is available. With the exception of the Customer Deposits Account which has to be kept separate from our other funds, and the Cash on Hand which is kept at $ 400.00 throughout the year, all the rest of our financial assets are reported on the monthly Cash Flow Statement prepared by the City Treasurer. A copy of that report for 9/30/88 is attached for reference. A listing of all financial assets is as follows: Checking Account Balance: 8 7, 677.19 Investments: 3, 378, 713.30 Subtotal from Cashflow Statement: 3, 386, 390.49 (as on 9/30/88 Cash Flow Statement) Customer Deposits Account: 36, 133.74 Cash on hand 400.00 total: $ 3,422,924.23 More information on investments is detailed on the attached list that has been furnished by the Greg Voxland. I Shakopee Public Utility Commission Cash Flow Statement September 30, 1988 Electric Water Sewer/Garbage Fund Fund fluid Total Receipts $706,301.14 $6,164.32 $87,002.38 $799,467.84 Interest 34.02 22.68 56.70 Disbursements 679,509.78 30,873.76 87,002.38 797,385.92 ------------------------------------------------------ Net Increase (Decrease) 26,825.38 (24,686.76) 0.00 2,138.62 Balance BeginF2,394.824.25 98.87 1,016,253.00E3,378,713.30 0.00 3,384,251.87 Balance End 991,.566.240.00 3,386,390.49 In checking Not Posted Checking ments Balance Begin 90,207.59 (129,669.02) 713.30 $3,384,251.87 Balance End 0.00 7,677.19 $3,386,390.49 Interest Received REPO -..__ $0.00 CHECKING 56.70 Tyese �� Rte Ir Lori 6Qe4. COMM PAPER 0.00 FHL 0.00 4M Fund 0.00 Tye ,P-C S T ,4/L @.. A- ZC`M 17/},Q 2 T Note 0.00 s T Note 0.00 Cart. Deposit 0.00 ------------- Total $56.70 This statement based on data supplied by SPUC staff. I . SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION INVESTMENTS October 1988 Printed 27-Oct-88 1988 INV Broker Purchase Maturity YIELD basis -------------------------- ---------------------------------- TR DB 06-May-88 15-May-92 8.54 555,799.13 TR DB 25-Feb-88 15-Feb-91 7.67 522,193.03 T Note ML 03-Dec-85 15-Feb-91 9.21 380,000.00 FHL DB 25-Nov-87 26-Nov-90 8.40 250,000.00 FHL DB 25-Aug-87 27-Aug-90 8.95 200,000.00 UST DB 29-May-87 15-Aug-89 8.22 152,096.93 TR DB 25-Feb-88 15-Aug-89 7.35 386,638.80 T Note ML 30-Jun-86 15-May-89 7.02 339,799.17 414 592,186.25 ----------------------------------------- Total 3,378,713.30 ----------------------------------------- i MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: SPUC Contributions DATE: October 11 , 1988 Attached is some information on SPUC contributions to the City. The City Attorney should have more information coming also. GV/jms 90 n w n i i > m N o w u ry m i� RESOL9TION z]]$ A RSOl"71Du CIA,F,lSF FA1UFI PEED IS THE DFTERYIRATIO1, OF TUE CO1JTRIS FS` FRO!1 THE SHAXOPFF PC9Llf UTILITIES COM^IISSIOH TO THE CITY OF SHAFouFS IN LI ' — TAXES VHFRF4S, Tli, Sbakooee Public Utilities CoamissiOn and the Shakopee City council did meet to j...I session and did agree on the classification of factors 1n the determination of the annual contribution as described in Shakopee Public Utilities Commission resolution ,193, THER'FORF, 9E IT RESOLVED, that the calculation shall be as follows: GROSS SAILS: F.LECTFIC: WATER: Residential Electric XS Residential Vater Heating XX Rural sales XX Rural Nater Heating XX Camnercial Sales xs Customer Penalties XX Poser Adjustment XX .aira Pumping XX .Ater sales _ XY_ Total Gross Sales XX XX COST OF EFlERGY: Wholesale Electric xx Power for PumpingP.X Total Cost of Ener., XX XX Gross margin xx XX Times 23.97% .2377 .23]] Payment to Cill XX XS Passed in adl furred regular session of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commi=_sf.n this 15th day of Marc., 1994. Al Vresident: Wallace Blshoo A^TFST: 6arbxra Menaeq Cwmnissi.a Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 1144 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PAYMENTS 5( BY THE SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION TO THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE IN LIEU OF TAXES BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission did, by Resolution No. 193 dated 12/12/77, agree to and therefore shall contribute to the general fund of the City of Shakopee an amount annually equal to the greater of the following: a. $240,383.00 or b. 23.77 per cent of its gross margin, gross margin being defined as the total gross sales minus the total cos[ of purchase energy. 2. Said payments shall commence on Jaunary 1, 1978. One- twelfth of the annual amount shall be paid monthly on the first day of each month commencing January 1, 1978. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of SHakopee, Minnesota, held this 13th day of December, 1977. ✓3�o���- Hayor of [he City of Shakopee ATTEST: -i City ClerKr Prepared and approved as to for this 3' day of 1977. _ JORASS, F / AN, MEYER 8 KANNING - Asaietant City Attorneys ORDINANCE NO. 413 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 265 INCREASING PAYMENTS BY SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION j IN LIEU OF TAXES The City Council of the City of Shakopee does ordain as follows : Section 1 : Section 1 of Ordinance 265 is hereby repealed in its entirety, and the following substituted therefore: "Section 1 : Payments to be Established i Fron and after the 1st day of January, 1978, the payment by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission into the general fund of the City of Shakopee shall be established by the City Council of the City of i Shakopee by resolution: Section 2 : Repeal Sections 2 & 3 of Ordinance 265 are hereby repealed in their entirety . i Section 3 : Effective Date _.._s ordinance shall not take effect until January 1 , 1978 . Passed in adjourned regular session of the City Ccuncil this i 27th day of Septenber, 1977 . Mayor of: the City of Shakopee ATTEST: C+ t'' Y dmitCistrator nd�pprpved by: � E/// / Ch. - 1 .6 yJ Published Notice ORDINANCE NO. 265 An Ordinance to Increase Payments by Shakop, Public Utilities Commission In Lieu of Taxes THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP SHAKOPEE DOES ORDAIN: SECTION I: Payments to be Increased From and alter the l5th day of the first month following the approval of Lite increase hereto ordained, the payment by the Shacopce P.Idhc Utilities Cmnm slum into the general fund Of :.he City of 6 c of the gross receipts of said Cotsmdsser. excepting all rentals collected, and as provided by the Amended Cha-tm, shall be increased by GSc to provide that the payments to be made by said Commission to the general fund of the Civ of Shakopee shall be 1127c of the gross receipts of said Uchues Commission from all sources, excepting rentals colleted. SECTION If: Subject to Approval The 67c increase hermobefore provided shall, before it becomes effective, be approved by the majority of the voters of said cur voting on the question at the neat regular ejection held bereztter. SECTION III: Authorissllon The proper =3 o33icials are hereby authorized and directed to place the qupahm of said increase as hereinbefore proposed on a ballot for the next regular city election to be held April 4, 19Gi. Passed in adjourned session of the Common Council held tltis 28 dap of Febmarp, 196,. A. s. BE MNS ATTE—STPresident of the Common Council ffiELVW: P. LEBENS Cityy Ree Recordrd er Approved this 1st day o: ASarc4, RAY RAY $SEBEtiAI-111 AlavpT of the City of Shaxopee Prepared and approved this 10 dap of COLLER 1967. J[JLiL'S A., COLLEP. Ci:c Puo n - Pub.in Sha};onee Palley Nems, March 9, 1967,. (36776) c i_G-G i IDJJ P. PJ?. j L 11TH TENTATIVE AGENDA REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 1 , 1988 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding 1 ] Roll Call at 7 :00 P.M. 2] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting 31 Re-convene 41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 51 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 61 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) 71 Communications: a] League of Minnesota Cities re: Proposed Rule for National Primary Drinking Water Regulation b] Association of Metropolitan Municipalities re: 1989-1990 Legislative Policies - bring item 9b from 10/18/89 agenda *c] Suburban Rate Authority re: Funding of Combined Sewer Separation Programs in St. Paul and Minneapolis 81 Public Hearings : R. 7: 30 p.m. - Vacation of Utility Easement in Meadows 1st Addition .?. 7:40 p.m. - Vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street C 7 :50 p.m. - Improvements to Alley between Lewis and Holmes and between 6th and 7th by bituminous surfacing 8:00 p.m. - Appeal by Clete Link from Planning Commission' s denial of a variance from setback requirements for a car wash at 612 East First Avenue 91 Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission : a] Ord. No. 259, Amending City Code by Permitting Animal Hospitals and Veterinary Clinics in Ag and R-1 Zones as Conditional Uses 101 Reports From Staff: (Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 :00 p.m. ) a] Amending Gambling Regulations b] Developer' s Agreements *c] Fire Protection, Minnesota Correctional Facility *d] Gerald Poole/Completion of Probation TENTATIVE AGENDA PAGE TWO NOVEMBER 1 , 1988 101 Reports from Staff: (continued) *e] City Towing Contract *fl Electrical Contract *g] Grader Bid Award hl Shakopee Water Management Organization i] Adams Street from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue *j] OSM Contract Extension *k] Stop Signs at 5th and Sommerville 11 Minnesota Bridge Replacement Report - Informational Only ml Murphy' s Landing Audit *n] John Nelson' s Structure located on City Park Property *o] Extension of Ambulance Agreement p] Recruitment of New City Administrator *ql Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed Repairs r] Joint Power Agreement with I.S.D. 720 *s] Farm Lease for 1989 tl Computer Communications Equipment u] Approval of the Bills in the Amount of $250 ,565 .13 *v] Delinquent Assessements from Land Acquired from Soo Line wl Upper Valley Drainage Project 117 Resolutions and Ordinances: *a] Res. No. 2967 , Establishing a Future System Charge for Costs Associated with the Improvements of Valley Park Drive - Project No. 1986-11 *bl Res. No. 2977 , Authorizing the Execution of a Zero Percent Loan Agreement with the Metropolitan Council cl Res. No. 2978, Approving the Preliminary Layout for the T. H. 169/101 Bridge and Mini-Bypass Project d] Ord No. 258, Adopting Official Map for T. H. 169/101 Bridge and Mini-Bypass 121 Other Business: a] Worksession on November 22nd at 7:00 p.m. with Gerald Garski and Steve Hurni from the State Dept. of Revenue re: Scott County Assessing Report b1 pev. & P976 Qf�aa¢ce¢7�m� to94v Cdndln. 131 Adjourn to November 8 , 1988 at 8 :00 p.m. OR November 15, 1988 at 7 :00 p.m. John K. Anderson City Administrator 1 TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting November 1, 1988 chairman Steven Clay presiding 1. Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M. 2. Approve the October 18, 1988 Meeting Minutes 3 . Bergguist Proposal 4 . Other Business a. b. 5. Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Special Session Shakopee, MN October 18, 1988 Chrmn. Clay called the meeting to order at 7: 05 P.M. , with Comm. Wampach, Vierling, Scott, and Zak present. Also present: Mayor Lebens, John Anderson, City Admin. ; Dennis Kraft, Exec. Dir. ; Barry Stock, Admn. Ass't. , Julius A. Coller, II, City Atty. and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk. Vierling/Zak moved to approve the minutes of October 4, 1988. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Vierling moved to reconsider the information submitted by Mr. Wallace Bakken for the Shakopee Valley Square TIP Project and grant a four week extension to allow for a decision from the State Bank of Young America relative to the request for the Small Business Administration package loan and at that time further to reassess the value and the financial situation for the Jellystone proposal. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 P.M. Jane VanMaldeghem Recording Secretary Dennis Kraft Executive Director -03 MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Bergquist Proposal DATE: October 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION• On August 16, 1988 the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority directed the appropriate City officials to submit an economic development proposal to the Bergquist Companies. The proposal included a commitment from the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority to provide industrial revenue bond financing and tax increment financing. The amount of tax increment financing was based on the City's Industrial Development Incentive Policy. (Three years of tax increment. ) On October 26, 1988 the City of Shakopee received a correspondence from the law firm representing Bergquist. (See attachment #1) The letter outlines the level of financial inducement being requested by Bergquist for the location of their facilities in our community. BACKGROUND: Since- submitting the economic development proposal to Bergquist, staff has met with officials from Bergquist on several occasions. Bergquist officials contend that other communities in the Metropolitan area are offering free land and free roads as a financial inducement. The City's current Economic Development Incentive Policy provides for the provision of industrial revenue bond financing and three years of tax increment financing providing that the developer is a qualified business. City staff has verified that Bergquist Company is a qualified business pursuant to the guidelines set forth in our incentive policy. City staff recognizes that we only have the authority to offer inducements as setforth in the policy. We have therefore been very hesitant to offer any other type of financial inducements to Bergquist Companies. The development site plan proposed by Bergquist requires the provision of two roads to their facility. (See attachment r2) The North Road (Research Boulevard) is currently dedicated and is owned by the City of Shakopee. The normal right-of-way for a road in the industrial park is 661 . Bergquist has requested that the road right-of-way be expanded to 98' and that the City pay for this road improvement. Additionally, Bergquist has requested Southerly access to their property. They have agreed to locate 50% of the right-of-way along their property. However, the other portion of the roadway is currently not dedicated. Approximately 600' of the roadway proposed on the Northern edge of the South road is owned by Conklin Companies. The Southerly 1400' of the South road is owned by Scottland Company. Bergquist is requesting that the right-of-way owned by Conklin Company and Scottland Companies be acquired by the City of Shakopee. They have also requested that the roadway be constructed and paid for by the City of Shakopee. In regard to sewer and water, Bergquist has requested that sewer and water be provided to their site on the South road at no cost to them. Bergquist officials have agreed to give 1 acre of land on their property to the City of Shakopee providing that a day care center be located at that location. In return, they would like the City to attract a day care developer to the site and provide them with an agreement in which their employees would receive a reduction in the normal day care rates. In terms of the provision of day care, staff has met with several day care providers. The day care providers are interested in locating a day care facility in Shakopee. However, all but one of those day care providers are not interested in the one acre of site on the Bergquist property. According to those with whom we have spoken, the Bergquist site does not provide for the visibility that is necessary to successfully operate a day care center. Additionally, the day care providers that we have spoken with are hesitant to come to the City of Shakopee without any financial inducement or leasing assistance. One day care provider has expressed interest in managing a day care facility as part of the Bergquist facility. Shown in attachment #3 is a summary of Bergquist's requests and approximate cost breakdowns. Shakopee HRA must consider whether or not they want to deviate from our current Industrial Development Incentive Policy and offer a greater financial inducement to the Bergquist Companies or whether we should simply stay with the level of financial assistance as set forth in our Industrial Development Incentive Policy. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Offer the Bergquist Companies the financial inducements as set forth in the City's Industrial Development Incentive Policy. (IDRB financing and 3 years tax increment assistance) 2. Agree to provide Bergquist Companies with financial assistance for all the items that they have requested. 3 . Agree to offer Bergquist Companies the financial inducements as setforth in our Industrial Development Incentive Policy and a combination of several of the other items that they have requested. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends alternative 13 . ACTION REODESTED: Move to direct the appropriate City officials to inform Bergquist Companies that the City of Shakopee would like to offer them industrial revenue bond financing, an amount equal to three years of tax increment captured from the project and the following: 1. 98' of road right-of-way for Research Drive. 2 . Dedication or official mapping of a road on the South side of the property extending from Valley Park Drive 1400' to the East. 3 . Continued staff assistance in working toward the provision of a day care facility. Attachment #1 Lommen,Nelson,Cole & Stageberg, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 11 DO TCI TOMER LYLE R.FREVERT P.OWEN NELSON 1211.LI. EIGXTH S I RE CI - MINNEAPOLIS,M11111D1 A 15J0] TXOM4S1 NIEVIEC' PHILLIP4.COLE Cef PI,— 11,2113961Sl MICHAEL OYER -0.K N.SIAGEBERG ETERS ROGER , SIAGEBERG M ^^nou NITS Lmr 18004 S3�J 39- PAUL A PETERSON CLENI� R.K ESSEL' I...v.P— 161].319.EFKJ RA OL A.45TE00.0, R. THOMAS C PETERSON EHRICH L KOCH IHOti AS NI A COBSON•! SOLTHSIDE OFFICE PLAZA.SUITE 2A 1.R YN T.„0.ENN ER RICXARDA.LIND TOGO I. OF TXOMAS O.IE N SEN IBIO CRESTL'IEW DgIVEXL'OSO N,N'15CO NSILA N016 JUDY L.XA LL ETT TE0 E,SULLIVAN' 11MIP.v'(]151CHK 821] JAMES R.ANDREEN 20 BYN N.MOSCXET 1—Cn, Llne 61^_1J1660B5 SHERRID.ULLAND THOMA 5 i.DOUGHERTY Teleen P.a Ol iI 3668219 MARGIE R,SODAS NORD HUNT. KATHRYN H.DAVIS RICHn RD L.PLAGENS )AMESF RLS DAVID I.DOSE B EL REPLY TO'. N'ENOY A.WEBER Minneapolis JOHN P. LOMMEN (1927-19681 HUOio o/ October 21 , 1988 City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Attention: Mr. Dennis R. Kraft Community Development Director Gentlemen: In regard to our most recent meeting of October 13 , 1988 , The Bergguist Company would like to propose the following : 1 . That the C_.-_- a-oxide tax ineremen-- financing for three ye- c` - - __ - -- sad on S- ..,__ 1on to be used to offset -- _dGd expend-LLres 2 . Thate - _ va_crem. tax or general f undinc __� ____ow- a athe westerly edge of the =__C_ ` 4GC . `eet The width Of the 'ro- = r- crt c` wap of 66 feet c� fe - ana ro_a orcvided by the -r__i ce a __ecard _a�_a- �:.ac a t _,,, wo-Zane City of Shakopee Page 2 October 24 , 1988 b. That a road be dedicated on the south side of the property with the right of way being provided equally by The Bercauist Company and Southland Realty. Approximately 1400 feet of the road would be installed. C . Sewer and water be provided to the cite by the road on the south side of the property . d . , That the City of Shakopee provide guidelines and a suggested acreement for a day care center possibly to be located qn property purchased by The Bergqu-i =_t Company. we request that this proposal be extended to the City Council for further consideration. We await your reply . Very truly yours, LOMMEN, NELSON"/ COLE & STAGEBERG, P.A. V. Ewen Nelson - VON/rfc cc : Thomas Hay zlI' II I , I I tibcl ;wc..,. 'fea u, S 1 I LL I � Attachment #3 Bergquist Inducement Request Estimated Cost Requested Inducement 1. $325, 000 Three years of TIF proceeds based on a project value of $3, 000, 000 2 . No Cost North Road R-O-W (98 ' blvd, 400.21 ft. long. ) $ 48, 025 North Road Construction ($120. 00 /ft. ) 3 . $33,000 South Road R-O-W Acquisition and Dedication (66 'R-O-W, 1400 £t. long) Bergquist will provide 50% of R-O-W along their property. 4 . $70, 000 A South Road Construction. (Bergquist Share and non-assessable portion) 5. $35, 000 B Provision of sewer and water to the site along the south road. (Bergquist Share and non-assessable portion) 6. Staff Time City to provide day care guidelines and an agreement for a daycare center to possibly be located on the Bergquist property. Total Cost of Requested Inducements - $511, 025+ A. Actual Cost to Construct South Road - $140,000. 50% of cost could be assessed to Scottland and deferred until developed. B. Actual Cost for Sewer and Water - $70, 000. 50% of cost could be assessed to Scottland and deferred until developed. - Road Cost Estimate - Standard Street - $100. 00 /In. ft. Boulevard - $120. 00 /In. ft. - Sewer Construction Cost Estimate - $25. 00 /In. ft. - Water Construction Cost Estimate - $25. 00 /In. ft. - Land Acquisition for R-O-W - $.50 sq. ft. Action Alert from the 183 University Ave. E., St. Paul, MN 55101-2526 (612) 227-5600 R�CEtt<r-r) October 17, 1988 CTI MEMORANDUM 81988 To: Mayors, Managers, Clerks CITY OF SHAKOpEE FROM: Ann Higgins, Federal Liaison SUBJECT: Proposed Rule for National Primary Drinking Water Regulation City officials have serious concerns about the workability and steep cost increases that are likely to affect water utility operating costs if new proposed federal drinking water regulations are implemented as now proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) . The regulations call for the elimination of lead contamination of drinking water supplies. EPA published the proposed new regulations on August 18. Some 53, 000 water utilities throughout the nation will be affected. It is expected that nearly all systems in Minnesota will be required to install treatment equipment and/or to take other measures to comply with new standards for maximum contamination levels. The official comment period on the proposed regulations has ended. It is nevertheless, very important for city officials to make your concerns known directly to members of the Minnesota Congressional Delegation. Comments and examples of the impact on local water utility operations and potential impact on utility rates for city residents should also be brought to the attention of Representative Gerry Sikorski (6CD-MN), who serves on the House Environment and Commerce Committee. He authored legislation (H.R. 4939) during the 188 Congress. As originally drafted, the bill would have imposed far-reaching mandates on cities to regulate the level of lead in drinking water. While the bill was amended to remove features in conflict with the current EPA regulatory process, concerns over the threat of lead contamination in the environment may cause the effort to be renewed in 1989. (Addresses for Representative Sikorski 's local and D.C. offices are listed on the next page. ) Since members of Congress are out of session for the November elections, make it a priority to contact them while they are in the state. Senator Durenberger also serves on a committee of jurisdiction on this issue: the Senate Environment Committee. It is important to communicate your concerns to him as well . Pay particular attention to the impact of the proposed increased regulation of lead and pH levels on the local water utility operation and let lawmakers know the potential for cost increases to the city and for residents who must pay increased rates to cover the costs for new treatment and corrosion control measures that may be imposed if regulations are adopted as originally proposed. r For drinking water systems serving less than 500, the new regulations would require water utility operators to take 10 samples for testing and to submit an annual report on maximum lead and copper contaminants and PH levels in the first year; in the following years, water utilities serving populations of less than 500 would submit additional reports every 5 years in order to comply with the new regulations. Cities serving 500-3, 300 would be required to obtain 10 samples for testing c.. r.r�: i0_�am _ *^..`_-R and submit an annual report the first year and then repeat the sampling every 2 years. Cities serving 3, 300- 10, 000 would be required to sample 20 units each quarter. Cities serving 10,000 - 100,000 would have to have 30 samples tested each quarter. Systems serving over 100,000 would require 50 samples per quarter. Testing parameters would also be expanded, significantly increasing the cost of testing. The proposed federal drinking water regulations are designed to to prevent corrosion of lead and copper plumbing material by water and to remove lead from distributed water. The federal Safe Drinking Water Act requires that final regulations be promulgated no later than June 19, 1989. The proposed NPDWRs require water utility operators to meet "no action" levels for lead, copper, and pH. If maximum contamination levels (MCL) are not achieved, cities would be required to install or improve corrosion control treatment (best available technology) , drill new wells or blend water from other sources. Very complex and costly sampling and testing requirements would also add to the cost of local water utility operations. Currently, the maximum contamination level (MCL) for lead in drinking water is 0.050 mg/l ; in the future it would be 0.005 mg/1. Another way of expressing the measure is parts per billion; the current standard is 50 parts per billion (50 ppb) ; the new limit would be set at 10 ppb. Copper is not considered nearly as toxic; the current MCL for copper is 1.0 mg/1 ; the new proposed maximum contamination level is 1. 3 mg/1. The proposed NPDWR rules also require a pH level for drinking water of not less than 8.0. Many water systems and groundwater sources in Minnesota are stable at a pH lower than S. Water utility operators strongly object to the arbitrary assignment of a specific minimum pH level and point out that requiring cities to raise the level to 8. 0 will require purchase of costly equipment and chemical treatment supplies and result in scaling and deposits in the distribution and plumbing system. It is evident that pH should not be included in a criterion since there is no reliable correlation between PH and the leaching of lead from plumbing systems. The proposed regulations would also require city water utility operators to initiate and carry out sample site selection that is complex, unworkable and costly. The rule would require a first-draw sampling in indvidual residences. At each monitoring point, the city would have to meet the maximum contamination level. If not, combined treatment would be required. The sampling procedures would require utility operators to obtain samples at the 1 � tap as a "morning first-draw" or another 8-18 hours standing sample. The sampled units would be required to have either new lead solder (less than 5 years old) or lead service connections or interior plumbing. National figures on the cost of corrosion control, public education and compliance with maximum contaminant levels indicate that for very small (under 500) drinking water systems, meeting the new MCL requirements would increase rates by $340 per year for single- family residence service lines. The cost of installing corrosion control treatment measures would increase individual water utility rates by $27 per year. Costs for larger systems are somewhat less per ratepayer but are cause for serious concern for city officials who must implement standards mandated by regulations. In many instances, the costs may far outdistance the degree of public benefit derived since lead levels in drinking water had not previously been viewed as a state or local public heath issue requiring costly treatment and corrosion control. Address: Representative Gerry Sikorski 414 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D. C. 20515 or 8060 University Avenue N.E. Fridley, MN 55432 Recommended Action Direct the City Administrator to contact Representative Sikorski and our legislators asking that they carefully weight benefit against cost when considering National Primary Drinking Water Regulations and that legislation provide funds for implementa- tion of any new regulations. SUBURBAN IC'j ® NSEN T /C RATE AUTHORITY Cr-T _ MEMBERS MOOKVN PARK BURNSVILLE MEMORANDUM CXAMPLIN CIRCLE PINES COLUMBIA XEIGXTS MFPMAVEN TO: SRA Member Cit Managers and Clerks EDEN PRAIRIE Y 9 ENNA PENNEY FROM: William D. Schoell GREENWOOD MABTING: Chairman MOPKIN$ LAIICERDALE MULE PLAIN DATE: October 27, 1988 MAPLEWOOD MINNETONKA WERIETRISTA RE: Funding of Combined Sewer Separation Programs N`RTHSTBT.MiON P pTMPAUL NI in St . Paul and Minneapolis MONO OSSEO P"MOUIM RICHFIELD At its quarterly meeting on October 19 the Suburban Rate ROBIRELLE ROBEIULE Authority Board of Directors unanimously passed a reso- SAVAGE lution urging member cities to contact their State ST.LOUIS PARK elected representatives regarding the funding of the sNAKOPEE P 9 9 9 sMOREVIEW Combined Sewer Separation Program in the Cities of St. SPRING PARK Paul and Minneapolis. The Board recommends that cities VADNAIS HEIGHTS P WArzATA adopt a resolution along the lines of the enclosed model . WEST ST.PAUL WOODunD In 1983 and after the Suburban Rate Authority was very active in working with the MPCA and others to develop a method of funding Combined Sewer Separation projects in the two core cities. The purpose of SRA participation was, of course, to safeguard insofar as possible the resources of its members, who had installed their own separated sewers . At that time EPA was threatening to shut off all hookups in the Metropolitan area until the problem was resolved. Such action would have landed particularly hard upon SRA members who are experiencing growth. After many meetings over a period of approxi- mately two years, and appearances in the legislature, it passed a bill providing for a loan and grant program which would enable St. Paul and Minneapolis to complete their sewer separations by 1996 . The scheme settled upon by all of the parties included a combination of federal grants, no interest state loans to be repaid beginning in 1996, state grants and self-help. In the waning hours of the last legislature, two provisions were inserted in the appropriations bill which repealed the provisions re- quiring repayment of the loans . These repealers were not heard by any committee of the legislature, except a conference committee on the appropriations bill . In 2000 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST A MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 A (612)333-0543 SRA Member Cities October 27 , 1988 Page 2 effect, the repealer forgives approximately $32 million in loans to the two cities . Another more important matter, at least in terms of dollars, is the abolition of the federal grant program. It now appears that the federal share will be reduced by approximately $49 million from that expected when the funding plan was developed. The legislature will have to face the problem this session. The Board anticipates that the two cities will ask the legislature to make up the $49 million in federal money which will not be forthcoming. The Board feels it is patently unfair for the residents of the state to pay for the replacement and separation of sewers in St . Paul and Minneapolis. The SRA Board feels that it is imperative that we speak up. In addition to passing the resolution or something similar, elected officials should make sure that their state legislative delegation under- stands the problem. I would appreciate it if you will provide a copy of the resolution, should your council decide to adopt it, to me or to SRA counsel . A brief report on what other steps have been taken would assist the SRA Board at its January meeting in determining what more to do on this subject . Enclosure 00601t0l.b18 cc: Directors ACTION RECOMMENDED: Offer Resolution No. 2981, A REsolution Opposing The Spreading upon the State Treasury of Any Replacement Funding for Minneapolis and St. Paul Combined Sewer Separation Projects, and move its adoption. G RESOLUTION NO. 2981 A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE SPREADING UPON THE STATE TREASURY OF ANY REPLACEMENT FUNDING FOR MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL COMBINED SEWER SEPARATION PROJECTS WHEREAS, such sewer separation is required by law and by contract, and is otherwise desirable; and WHEREAS, expected federal funding for the program has been cancelled and replacement funding must be identified; and WHEREAS, most cities in the seven county metropolitan area have built separate sanitary and storm sewer systems, principally through local funding; and WHEREAS, the cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis have obtained legislation forgiving approximately $32 million in separation loans from the state. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Shakopee, does by this resolution state that it is opposed to the spreading of the replacement funding upon the State Treasury, and that it believes the most equitable resolution is for the affected cities to themselves provide that funding. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota held this day of 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1988. City Attorney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City A istrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk . L- RE: Vacation of Utility Easement Within Meadows 1st Addition DATE: October 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION: A public hearing has been scheduled for November 1, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. or thereafter to consider the vacation of a utility easement within the plat of Meadows 1st Addition. BACKGROUND: The City has received a petition from the abutting property owner requesting the vacation of a utility easement within outlot A and B of Meadows 1st Addition. When the surveyor prepared the final hardshells for the plat, he erroneously drew in a seventy six foot ( 76 ' ) utility easement which should have been described as a Minnegasco easement. Minnegasco has a high pressure transmission line within this easement. Minnegasco asked the Developer to ask the City to vacate this utility easement. Minnegasco has a signed easement agreement with the Developer for their needed easement. The easement bisects the southerly one- third of outlet B. The City' s vacation of a utility easement would not negate the easement between Minnegasco and the Developer. The City has no need for a utility easement in this area. This is simply a housekeeping matter. council should hold the required public hearing and receive any comments from the audience. If after the public hearing is held and Council concurs that retaining the utility easement serves no public purpose the attached resolution should be approved by Council. ALTERNATIVES: 1 ) Retain utility easement. 2) Vacate utility easement. RECOMM1ENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 2, vacate utility easement. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Resolution No. 2980, A Resolution Vacating A Utility Easement Within Meadows 1st Addition, and move its adoption. JSC/tiv RESOLUTION NO. 2980 A RESOLUTION VACATING A UTILITY EASEMENT WITHIN MEADOWS 1ST ADDITION WHEREAS, There presently exists a utility easement within the plat of Meadows 1st Addition lying within Outlot A and Outlot B, which was platted and dedicated to the public use; and WHEREAS, It has been made to appear to the Council that it would be to the best interest of the . general public to vacate said easement; and WHEREAS, The Council has set a date for a public hearing at which time to consider said vacation and due notice of the hearing has been given as prescribed by law; and WHEREAS, All persons desiring to be heard on the matter were heard at the public hearing in the Council Chambers in the City of Shakopee; and WHEREAS, The Council has been fully advised in all things. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1) That it finds and determines that the vacation of the utility easement described in exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof is in the public interest and serves no further public need. 2) That the property described in exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof is hereby vacated. 3) That the easement between the property owner and Minnegasco is not affected by this vacation and that said easement is still in effect. 9 ) After the adoption of the resolution the City Clerk shall file certified copies hereof with the County Auditor and the County Recorder of Scott County. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this 1st day of November, 1988. ATTEST: Mayorof the City of Shakopee City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1988 City Attorney EXHIBIT "A" , P I O (VEER Civil Engineers • Land Planners • Land Surveyors • Landscape Architects engineering UTILITY EASEMENT A 76 foot wide utility easement to be vacated over that part of Outlot A and Outlot R, The Meadows lst Addition as platted and of record in the County Recorders Office, Scott County, Minnesota, the centerline of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at the most southwesterly corner of said Wtlot B; thence on an assom_d bearing of N 0 degrees 07 minutes 51 seconds E along the west line of said Outlot B, 587.51 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence H 79 degrees 13 minutes 59 seconds F., a distance of 1895.95 feet to the northeast corner of said Outlot A and there terminating. Dated this nd day of A.D. 1988. Robert B. Sikich, L.S. Minnesota Reg. No. i I I No. 79 Ranee 23 1 Range 22 - — jai / �Z1 ; T y / y � _ I ELO z' i 2I aD I c 0 1 ,. y gb MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator _ FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street DATE: October 28 , 1988 INTRODUCTION• The Council has set a public hearing for November 1, 1988 at 7: 40 p.m. to consider the vacation of 6th Avenue from Main Street to the East. BACKGROUND: The City has received a petition from John and Ione Theis requesting the City to consider the vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street. Mr. and Mrs. Theis own the three lots abutting 6th Avenue in this area. If the street is vacated, the property abutting 6th Avenue as well as 6th Avenue will be sold and developed into three lots. Jane Dubois, the interested buyer, is planning on developing the three lots each accommodating a twin home facing Main Street. When the City determines that a street or alley serves no public purpose and adopts a resolution vacating it, it is standard procedure to retain a utility easement under the public right of way being vacated. In this case construction is planned on the vacated street. Staff, therefore, recommends that no utility easement be retained, should the Council determine that this street serves no public purpose and decides to vacate it. There are no City utilities in this street, therefore there is no need to retain a utility easement. It is the consensus of the City Planner, City Engineer, and City Administrator that 6th Avenue not be vacated at this time. Development has not occurred in this area and there may be a desire in the future to extend 6th Avenue through to Market Street. I£ 6th Avenue were extended to Market Street, Homes along 6th Avenue could have access off of 6th Avenue rather than along Market Street which is a collector street. Council needs to determine how important this is and whether or not it is worth waiting for this kind of development to take place. (See attached memo from City Planner, dated September 30, 1988) . At their meeting on October 4, 1988 the Planning Commission reviewed the request for the vacation and passed a motion recommending that the Council vacate 6th Avenue East of Main Street. Their discussion included the fact that the construction of 6th Avenue would require the acquisition of additional right of way, and that there is still the option of putting 5th Avenue through to Market Street. They also noted that the development of this area has been discussed for many years and approval of the vacation may prompt some development to occur. (See attached memo from City Planner, dated October 25, 1988. ) E There is a small amount of curb, gutter and bituminous surfacing which does extend into that part of 6th Avenue being considered for vacation. There is also an existing catch basin located within the street. The City Engineer recommends that if the street is vacated, the catch basin should be removed as well as the curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing. Also a curb should be constructed from north to south along the east side of Main Street adjacent to the street being vacated. He has prepared an estimated cost for completion of this work in the amount of $2,410.00. Staff recommends that the cost be borne by the abutting property owners requesting that the street be vacated. The restoration work could be preformed by the new property owner or by the City in conjunction with another City improvement project next summer. In either case, it is recommended that the cost of the improvements times 110% be placed on deposit with the City until the work is completed. ALTERNATIVES: After conducting the public hearing: 1) Deny the request for the vacation of 6th Avenue East of Main Street. 2) Determine that the street serves no public purpose and direct staff to prepare the appropriate resolution for Council consideration. If Council determines that the street serves no public purpose and desires to vacate it: 1) Require the property owner to complete the restoration work at their expense and deposit the estimated cost times 110% with the City prior to adoption of the vacating resolution. 2) Determine that the City will complete the restoration work at the City's expense. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Determine whether or not 6th Avenue east of Main STreet serves a public purpose, and if not, direct staff to prepare the appropriate vacation resolution; and direct staff to notify the abutting property owners that they are responsible for completing restoration work and should deposit with the City the estimated costs of the restoration work prior to Council's adoption of the vacating resolution. JSC/tiv WE WIN . 0 9�1® v�aln= _ © ..M � ►� Oen � �0'_ �� � ,,� ►1, MM ani►® ' �" i MEMO TO: Judy Cox, City Clerk FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Vacation of Sixth Avenue East of Main Street DATE: October 25, 1988 INTRODUCTION• At their meeting on October 4, 1988 the Planning Commission reviewed the request for vacation of the half block of Sixth Avenue immediately to the East of Main Street and passed a motion recommending approval of the vacation. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission is required by State Statutes to review proposed vacations for compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed vacation of Sixth Avenue East of Main Street at their meeting on October 4, 1988. The staff had recommended to the Planning Commission that they pass a motion recommending that Sixth Avenue not be vacated (staff recommendation attached) . After discussion at the Planning Commission meeting, the Commission recommended the vacation of Sixth Avenue because improvement of the street would require the acquisition of additional right-of-way, and there is still the option for putting Fifth Street through to Market. The Commission also noted that development of this area has been discussed for many years and approval of the vacation may prompt some development to occur. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission at their meeting on October 4, 1988 passed a motion recommending to the City Council that the vacation of Sixth Avenue East of Main Street be approved. MEMO TO: Shakopee Planning Commission FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Vacation of Sixth Avenue East of Main Street DATE: September 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION: The City has received a petition to vacate the half block of Sixth Avenue immediately to the East of Main Street. The City Council will be setting a public hearing on this request for their October 4 , 1988 meeting. BACKGROUND' John and Ione Thies owners of the two lots abutting this half block street stub have petitioned for it's vacation. The street is only a half block long between Main and Market Streets and has never been improved. Discussion has occurred over the f last several years regarding improvement and development of this area. A couple of different proposals have been made in the past to improve streets in the area, some of the proposals have called for improvement of Sixth Avenue through the block between Main and Market and others have recommended vacation of the street through this block. The Thies' have been leading the attempt to improve streets in this area over the last couple of years because they would like to market their lots. Unfortunately, property owners in the area have not been able to come to an agreement on how the area should be developed. Therefore, development of the area has been stymied. The responsibility of the Planning Commission is to review the proposed vacation for conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Although the Comprehensive Plan does not specifically address this area, other than showing it's continued development for urban residential use, the plan does indicate that roadways which are not needed should be vacated. The Commission needs to determine whether the roadway will be needed in the future. To approve vacation at this time and find that the roadway is needed later would entail the expense of having to purchase the land back. ALTERNATIVES• 1 . The Planning Commission could make the determination that the roadway can be vacated and pass a motion recommending to the City council that the roadway be vacated. In order to make this motion the Commission needs to determine that the vacation of the roadway will not inhibit the future development of this area. 2 . The Commission can pass a motion recommending that the roadway not be vacated and determine that the construction of Sixth Avenue between Main and Market maybe necessary in the future for the further development of this area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative n2 . Although the staff favors the proposed development plans which do not include constructing Sixth Avenue through between Main and Market, at this point no action has been taken towards the development of this area which would insure that Sixth Avenue is not needed in the future. The staff feels that we should not vacate a street until we are sure that there will be no need for it in the future. The Theis' could undertake a simple lot split and reverse the direction of the two lots so that they front on Main Street instead of Sixth Avenue. This would allow them to market the two lots without the vacation of Sixth Avenue. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer and pass a motion recommending to the City Council that Sixth Avenue East of Main Street not be vacated at this time because the Planning Commission can not insure that the street will not be needed for the future development of the immediate area. g � MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Enginee . SUBJECT: Alley in Block 81 DATE: October 25 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 2979, Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Alley in Block 81 . BACKGROUND: On September 20 , 1987 City Council accepted a petition and ordered a feasibility report for improvements to the alley in Block 81 , which is bounded by Lewis Street, Holmes Street, 6th Avenue and 7th Avenue. The feasibility report was distributed to Council on October 18, 1988 and subsequently a public hearing was scheduled for November 1 , 1988 . The proposed improvements consist of paving the alley with 2 inches of bituminous concrete placed on a 6 inch gravel base . Staff will briefly go over the feasibility report at the public hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, if Council wishes to proceed with the project, Resolution No. 2979 is attached for Council consideration. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Determine that the project should proceed and order staff to prepare the plans and specifications by adopting Resolution No. 2979 • 2 . Determine that the project is not in the best interest of the City and do not proceed any further with the project. RECOMMENDATION: Depending on the public testimony received , staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 2979 , A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Alley in Block 81 , Project No. 1989-1 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM2979 RESOLUTION NO. 2979 A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For The Alley in Block 81 Project No. 1989-1 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2968 , adopted on October 18 , 1988 , fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of the Alley in Elock 81 ; and WHEREAS , ten days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held on the 1st day of November 1988, at which all Persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: - 1 . That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter described: Adding &numinous Pavement to the Alley in Block 81 located between Lewis and Holmes Streets and 6th and 7th Avenues. 2. David Hutton, City Engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City cf Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day cf 19_. Payor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of City Attorney MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. wise, City Planner RE: Appeal by Clete Link of Variance Request for Car Wash DATE: October 26, 1988 INTRODUCTION' Mr. Clete Link has submitted a request for variances for the setback of the building and parking lot in order to construct a four bay car wash at 612 East First Avenue. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals at their meeting on September 22 , 1988 denied the variance request made by Mr. Link. Mr. Link has appealed the denial of the variance to the City Council. BACKGROUND' Mr. Link submitted a variance application in order to construct a four bay car wash at 612 East First Avenue with the following variances: 1) A 5' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the building allowing a 25' setback instead of the required 30' setback. 2) A 1' side yard setback variance from the East property line for the building allowing a 19' setback instead of the required 20' setback. 3) A 7 ' front yard setback variance from the North property line for the parking lot allowing an 8' setback instead of the required 15' !, setback. 4) A 12 ' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the parking lot allowing for a 3 ' setback instead of the required 15' setback. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals opened the public hearing on the request at their meeting on September 8 , 1988 and continued the hearing until their meeting on September 22 , 1988 . At their meeting on September 22, 1988 the Board of Adjustment and Appeals denied the requested variances. Mr. Link has appealed the action of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals to the City Council. Following action by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, Mr. Link added additional property to the project which has enabled him to obtain a building permit. The building permit was issued to Mr. Link on the basis that the building and parking lot will meet all setback requirements in the Code. Mr. Link has indicated that he would still like his appeal to be heard and request variances for the setback of the parking lot. Following this action by Mr. Link, the City Planning staff consulted with the City Attorney to determine whether the adding of the additional lot to the project following action by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals constitutes a new project requiring Mr. Link to begin again with a new application to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. Mr. Coller indicated to staff that since Mr. Link had appealed the decision of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals and paid the required fee he should be entitled to a hearing before the City Council. For further background on this item please refer to the ` following attached information: 1) Letter of Appeal from Mr. Link. - 2) Minutes from the September 8, 1988 and September 22 , 1988 Board of Adjustment and Appeals meetings. 3) Staff memos dated August 30, 1988 and September 16, 1988 . 4) Site plan for the proposed car wash. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council can sustain the action of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals by moving to deny the variance requests made by Mr. Link. 2 . The City Council can override the decision of the- Board of Adjustment and Appeals and offer a motion to approve the variance requests made by Mr. Link. 3 . The City Council can move to send the appeal back to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals for review again since the applicant has changed the project by adding an additional lot. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends alternative `1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer resolution =537 and move for it's aooroval or denial . � 6L BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Reuular Session Shakopee, Minnesota October 6, 19c£ Chrm,r.. Rockne called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p. m. - - - �Ce C .rzn. :oudra Cc,—.r,. ellen, Scnr.,i tt and Czaja present. AlscsC present: Doug Hisc, City Planner and Jc;,n Anderson, Cit, Czaja/Foudray moved to approve the agenda as presented . tion carried. Foudra}'/Czaja moved to approve the June 9 , 1988 meeting minutes r:ith one word change of ^reopen" to "Continue" to read - follows: "Schmitt/Czaja moved to continue the public hearing zc consider a variance request to allow a 10' rear yard setback instead of the required 30' setback for the Property loca-ted on the proposed Lot '- Block - Hentges 1st Addition (North of Hwy 169 and East c` Third Avenue) . Motion carried unanimously. ', Motion carried. Czaja/Allen moved to approve the September 8, 1988 meetinc r:.inutes. Motion carried with Chrmn. Rockne abstaining due to his absence. There was no other business. Foudray/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried. h:=_et^nc adjourned at 7 : 35 p.m. - HOh�D C- '-:.=STMEF.TS —= -ALS ,�.dj . 3eg . Session S al:cnee , N-inneseta . ice C:;;c.. a �--__zc c.._ reel_ -_ Cc-.r. SLaL. c_ , Sc..c._-[ ..�___. . - - ---cser^ __- . cciine a-4 'Sc..c_— 7o% zc cC a�- rcve _-e c-_c., c... .--__ _ _=__ _=..ces _n -c _c::_ ____c a ca_ c ea ces pec c.,_ �z___r--es _____ C=—r—_— - Eon. = n__ var.. � va-_ nee _ _ _ _ _, .._ � c 5__... sLEaa .. ne rec red seLZa - __ - = -__--- . : �_ _a-ce sez ac 'c_ s_=_ac c ` -.a€ recce-ec :5 se�cac : - _ -_3 se�z_ l vzr_-..c_ - c ..+es- ✓-cnz_ __ _cLDac : ,_�SLEcG c'_ L^E aD =Can r s::^_.__ of a - - ___ c , -_ vva -- c_ sr—_-7.a -sc anc s-ac Board o: Adjustments a Appeals September 22 , 14EE Regular Session Fzae -2- Ccmmcssicn members raised concerns whether -here .as anecuate _-a_.._ng space for cars waiting tz use the __alis . :-_ __ Royer stated that another car crash we.ud alleviate same c` _-essures and stacl:ine of `-:e only ether car :cash that cc= _.:=jest car wash in the twin cities is on Lake Street on a _-a'_-er lot than what has been proposed for Mr. Link's ca_ asn an-. that there have been no problems there. _fere were no additional comments from the audience . /Cz-;a coved to close _ne _ ___c .,ear-ng. C�a-a/Schm,itt moved to deny .ariance Hesclnticn the following reason: The applicant can inceroera-e ac=acent cropert_ into the project to eliminate the need -- -.-noes. - adjacent 60' lot were not incorporated _..t., the elect its future use is extremely limited and would most^likely nece=s=sitate additional variances for a future project. motion carried. C-rr.,n. £oudrzv advised the audience and - =icznt of the { cavGanneal period. Czaja/Schmitt moved to adjourn. Motion. carried. Meeting adjourned at 7 : 55 P.N. September 28 , 1938 To Shakopee City Council: I would like to appeal the decision of the Shakopee Planning Commission denying my variance requests in order to construct a car wash at 612 East First Ave. Clete Link P 15� it I I �.3 d- MEMO TO: Shakopee Board of Adjustment and Appeals FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Clete Link Variance Request for Car Wash DATE: September 16, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Mr. Link has submitted a variance application in order to construct a four bay car wash at 612 East First Ave. , with the following variances: 1. A 5' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the building allowing a 25' setback instead of the required 30' setback. 2 . A 1' side yard setback variance from the East property line for thebuilding allowing a 19' setback instead of the required 20' setback. 3 . A 7 ' front yard setback variance from the North property line for the parking lot allowing an 8 ' setback instead of the required 15' setback. 4 . A 12 ' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the parking lot allowing a 3 ' setback instead of the required 15' setback. At the last Planning Commission meeting the public hearing on this item was opened and continued until September 22nd. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing and requested the applicant and staff to provide additional information regarding the parking area and drive-way requirements, and a plan showing circulation on the site. CONSIDERATIONS: 1 . The abutting Lot 8 could be incorporated into the project and thus meet all setback requirements. Alone this Lot 8 is only 60' wide and has very limited development potential for the uses permitted in the B-1. Mr. Link is the sole owner of the adjoining lot (Lot 8) , the two lots in which the project is to be located is owned by a partnership. Mr. Link has indicated that it is not economically feasible to include the additional lot. 2. City Code Section 11. 05, Subd. 3 .E. does not contain a specific parking requirement for car washes, the most closely related is for service stations which states: "Gas service station, auto repair. Four off-street parking spaces for each service stall" . This provision may or nay not be appropriate for this use. The site plan submitted by Mr. Link shows two cars stacked for each bay, staff in reviewing the site plan feels that it would be possible for three cars to be stacked behind each bay and an additional four cars could be stacked along the West side of the building if necessary. It is staff's conclusion that the four car per bay requirement can be met in this manner. 3 . The enclosed site plan shows cars entering the site off of First Avenue and stacking behind the bays. The site plan also shows one-way traffic movement on each side of the building. One-way access drives should be a minimum of 12 ' in width and ideally 16' in width. Two-way access drives should be a minimum of 22 ' in width and ideally 24-26' in width. The City staff feels that the one-way traffic circulation on each side of the building is preferable to sliding the building further to the East and having two-way traffic on one side of the building. FINDINGS: The staff included findings in it's previous memo dated August 30, 1988 and at this time wishes not to change the findings. ALTERNATIVES' 1 . Deny variance '537 for the reasons recommended by staff. 2 . Grant variance '537 as requested by the applicant. 3 . Grant variance -537 as outlined in paragraph 2 of staff recommendation. 4 . Grant variance =537 allowing different setbacks than identified in alternatives 112 & 113 . STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff in the previous memo recommended denial of Variance Resolution 11537 . The staff at this time is not changing it's recommendation, it is staff's conclusion that the best solution would be to add additional property to this site to eliminate the need for variances. (Alternative fl) However, if the Board of Adjustment and Appeals determines that a hardship exists and that a variance should be granted, allowing the building to be constructed on the two lots as proposed, staff recommends that a 6' variance be granted on the West side of the building allowing for a 24' setback and that no variance be granted for the setback on the East side of the building. The staff would also recommend that a 7 ' front yard setback variance be granted on both the North and West property lines, requiring a 8 ' parking lot setback adjoining the two s�reets. (Alternative =3) Requesting the following variances: 1. A 5' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the building allowing a 25' setback instead of the required 30' setback. 2 . A 1' side yard setback variance from the East property line for the building allowing a 19' setback instead of the required 20' setback. 3 . A 7 ' front yard setback variance from the North property line for the parking lot allowing a a' setback instead of the required 15' setback. 5 . A 12 ' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the parking lot allowing a 3 ' setback instead of the required 15' setback. MEMO TO: Shakopee Board of Adjustments and Appeals FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Clete Link Variance Request For Car Wash DATE: August 30, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Mr. Link has submitted a variance application in order to construct a four bay car wash at 612 East 1st Avenue, with the following variances: 1 . A 5' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the building allowing a 25' setback instead of the required 30' setback.. 2. A 1' side yard setback variance from the East property line for the building allowing a 19 ' setback instead of the required 20' setback. 3 . A 7 ' front yard setback variance from the North property line for the parking lot allowing a 8' setback instead of the required 15' setback. S . A 12 ' front yard setback variance from the West property line for the parking lot allowing a 3 ' setback instead of the required 15' setback. The subject property is approximately 18 , 000 sq. ft. in area and zoned B-1 Highway Business. CONSIDERATIONS: 1. The acplicart's original plan for the car wash as submitted to the City met all building setback requirements. The second plan submitted enlarges the width of the building by 6 ' and creates the need for the variance requests. The applicant has indicated the additional 6' is necessary to provide a bay for RV's and adequate space in the mechanical room for equipment and a handicap restroom. 2 . The abutting Lot 8 could be incorporated into the project and thus meet all setback requirements. Alone this Lot 8 is only 60' wide and has very limited development potential for the uses permitted in the B-1 . Mr. Link is the sole owner of the adjoining lot (Lot 8) , the two lots on which the project is to be located is owned by a partnership. Mr. Link has indicated that it is not economically feasible to include the additional lot. 3 . City Code Section 11. 05, Subd. 3 .E. Does not contain a specific parking requirement for car washes, the most closely related is for service stations which states; "Gasoline Service Station, Auto Repair. Four off-street parking spaces for each service stall . " This provision may or may not be appropriate for this type of use. FINDINGS• Criteria =1 Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result form lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of property since enactment of this Chapter have had no control. Finding -1 Most if not all lots in this area are 60' x 142 ' or 8520 sq. ft. This size coupled with setback requirements severely limits buildable area. Criteria r2 The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of right commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Chapter. Finding v2 The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter will allow the applicant to construct a four bay car wash only if the adjoining lot is included in the project. Criteria r3 That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Finding =3 The lots were created prior to the applicant taking over ownership. The applicant controls the ownership of 3 lots together which when combined would be large enough to construct the proposed building without variances. Criteria 1'.4 That granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any sspecial privilege that is denied by this Chapter to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Finding 1"4 Granting the variances will allow the applicant to utilize a parcel of property in a manner which other applicants are not allowed (i. e. larger structure than permissable, less setback area. ) . Criteria ;:5 The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hard=_^:;p. Finding 4'5 To construct the building on the two lots as proposed a variance of six feet for the building is necessary on one side or the other (or some from each) . The parking lot variance from First Avenue is not needed and a lessor parking lot variance from Main St. could be granted. If additional property is added to the project no variances would be necessary. Criteria =6 The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Chapter, or to the property in the same zone. Finding t6 The variances would be materially detrimental to the purposes and provisions of this Chapter by reducing the current required standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of Variance Resolution '1537 for the following reason: 1 . The applicant can incorporate adjacent property - into the project to eliminate the need for variances. If the adjacent 60' lot were not incorporated into the project its future use is extremely limited and would most likely necessitate additional variances for a future project. Ya, NEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: Amendments to City Zoning Code Re: Permanent Occupancy in RV Parks & Animal Hospitals as Conditional Uses in the Ag. & R-1 Zoning Districts DATE: October 28, 1988 INTRODUCTION• At the October 18, 1988 meeting the City Council received recommendations from the Planning Commission for amendment of City Code Section 11.05, Subd. 11. I, Section 11.24, Subd. 3 . , Section 11. 25, Subd. 3, and Section 11. 60, Subd. 3D, 3C. The City Council at the October 18th meeting approved the recommendations of the Planning Commission and directed the City Attorney to draft the appropriate ordinance. The ordinance drafted by the City Attorney is attached. BACKGROUND: At the October 18, 1988 meeting the City Council received a recommendation from the Planning Commission to change the code requirement for permanent occupancy within RV Parks. The amendment extends the time limit for defining permanent occupancy from 3 months to 7 months in order to allow people connected with Canterbury Downs Racetrack the opportunity to stay in RV parks for the entire racing season. The Commission also forwarded a recommendation that animal hospitals and veterinary clinics be allowed as conditional uses in the Ag and R-1 Zoning Districts. An additional amendment was also attached to this recommendation suggesting that the outdoor screening requirements utilizing vegetation have the following phrase added: "Which shall occur no more than five years after planting" . The purpose of this change is to require a definite time period for the maturity of the plantings. For additional background on these items please refer to the memos contained in the packet for the October 18, 1988 meeting (Agenda items #11 C. and 11 D. ) . At the October 18, 1988 meeting the City Council approved the recommendations of the Planning Commission and directed the City Attorney to draft the appropriate ordinance. Attached is the ordinance drafted by the City Attorney. ALTERNATIVES: I 1. The City Council can offer and approve Ordinance #259 as drafted. 2. The City Council can offer and approve Ordinance #259 making changes to the wording of the proposed amendments. 3 . The City Council can offer and pass a motion to not approve Ordinance #259 thereby not changing the City Code. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Ordinance #259 An ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 11, entitled "Land Use Regulation ( Zoning) " by Repealing Subd. 11 I of Section 11.05 and by enacting a New Subd. 11 I of Section 11. 05; and by Amending Subd. 3 of Section 11.24 and Subd. 3 Section 11.25 by permitting Animal Hospitals and Veterinary Clinics in Ag and R-1 Zoning District as Conditional Uses; by Repealing Subd. D 3 c of Section 11.60 and by enacting a new Subd. D 3 c of Section 11. 60 and by adopting by reference Chapter 1 and Section 11.99, which among other things contain penalty provisions, and move its adoption. S ORDINANCE NO. 259 FOURTH SERIES An Ordinance of the Citv of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code, Chapter 11, entitled "Land Use Regulation(Zoning)" by Repealing Subd 11 I of Section 11.05 and by enacting a New Subd 11 I of Section 11.05; and by Amending Subd 3 of Section 11.24 and Subd 3 Section 11.25 by permitting Animal Hospitals and Veterinary Clinics in Ag and R-1 Zoning District as Conditional Uses; by Repealing Subd D 3 c of Section 11.60 and by enacting a new Subd D 3 c of Section 11.60 and by adopting by reference Chapter 1 and Section 11.99, which among other things contain penalty provisions. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAAiCOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: j SECTION I: Repeal The following are hereby repealed: Subd 11 I of Section 11.05 and Subd D 3 c of Section 11.60 SECTION II: A new Subd 11 I of Section 11.05 is hereby enacted as follows I-Permanent occupancy prohibited 1. No recreational vehicles shall be used as a permanent place of abode, dwelling or business or for indefinite period of time. Continuous occupancy extending beyond seven months in any 12 month period shall be presumed to be a permanent occupancy. All seasonal RV parks shall be totally cleared of all vehicles for the period from November 1 through March 31, unless separate conditional Use Permit has been issued for outside storage. 2. Any action toward removal of wheels of a recreational vehicle except t for temporary purpose or repair or to attach the vehicle to the grounds for stabilizing purposes is hereby prohibited. 3. All recreational vehicles within the park must display a current license. SECTION III: S bd 3 of See 11.2 's a ended by adding a further conditional use L. Animal Hospitals and Veterinary Clinics SECTION IV: 5 bd 3 of See 11.25 is hereby amended as follows: Adding the following conditional use classification: L. Animal Hospitals and Veterinary Clinics SECTION V: A new Subd D 3 c Section 11.60 is enacted as follows: C. Screen fences and walls which are in disrepair shall be repaired. Plainting screens shall consist of healthy, fully hearty plant materials at least 6 feet in height and shall be designed to provide year around opaqueness of at least 807 at the time of maturity which shall occur not more than five years after planting. SECTION VI: Adopted by reference The general provisions and definitions applicable to the entire City Code including the penalty provisions of Chapter 1 and Sec 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION VII: When in force and effect After the adoption and attestation of this Ordinance it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the data following such publication. Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1988. ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakopee City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 27th day of October 988. i t �oTa2� �l0 0., MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner RE: The Parking of Trucks on the Property Located at 1831 West 6th Avenue DATE: October 31, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Donald and Soloma McElderry received a warning citation from Howard Jones, City Code Officer for the parking of a semi truck on their property at 1831 West 6th Avenue. According to City Code Section 9.30 the parking of trucks on property in residential districts is prohibited. Subd. 5 of Section 9. 30 allows the City Council to issue a modification or exemption to this requirement in cases of undue hardship. Attached is a request from the MCElderry's for an exemption from City Code Section 9.30. BACKGROUND: On September 16, 1988 Mr. Howard Jones issued a warning citation to Donald and Soloma McElderry for the parking of a semi truck on their property located at 1831 West 6th Avenue in Shakopee. The property is located within a R-4 Zoning District. Section 9 . 30 of the City Code regulates truck parking and indicates that "it is unlawful to park a semi trailer whether or not attached to a truck tractor, within an area zoned as a _ residential district, except for the purpose of loading and unloading the same. " Subdivision 5 of Section 9 . 30 states: "Upon showing of undue hardship in individual cases the Council may grant modification or exemption from the above provisions and shall forthwith notify the City Engineer, the City Streets Department and the Police Department". There is no criteria for determining an undue hardship contained in Section 9 of the City Code. Attached is a letter from the MCElderry's requesting an exemption from this Section. The MCElderry's indicate in their letter that they would be willing to construct an accessory building to house the transportation equipment. Mr. Jones in his warning citation also mentioned City Code Section 11. 05, Subd. 3 C 6. This Section of the Zoning Code allows for the parking of one truck in a residential zone that is not in excess of 9,000 lbs. rated capacity. The provision goes on to say that under no circumstances shall parking facilities accessory to residential structures be used for open storage of commercial vehicles (copy of code provision attached) . In discussing this with the City Attorney it is his opinion that since both provisions deal with the same subject matter, the last provision adopted would take precedence. Since Section 9. 30 was amended in 1983 it would take precedence over Section 11.05 Subd. 3C6. The City's Zoning code regulating accessory structures also contains provisions regarding the maximum size of accessory structures. The Zoning Code does not allow accessory structures in the R-4 Zone to exceed the height of the house or to exceed the square footage of the foot print of the house. If the accessory structure proposed by the MCElderry's to house the truck is larger than allowed by the City Code, they would have the right to request a variance for the size of the structure from the Board of Adjustment and Appeals. ALTERNATIVES: 1. The City Council could decide that an undue hardship does exist in the case of the MCElderry's and pass a motion granting an exemption or modification from the provisions of Section 9. 30 of the City Code. In granting such a modification or exemption the Council may stipulate the terms under which a truck maybe parked on the property, such as it must be housed within a closed building. 2 . The City Council could determine that no undue hardship exists in the case of the MCElderry's and move to not grant a modification or exemption from the provisions contained in Section 9.30 of City Code. 3 . Although it is not required by the City Code, the City Council could set a public hearing on the request for the December 6 meeting and direct the staff to notify surrounding property owners. This would allow the City Council the opportunity to receive input from the neighborhood before making a final decision. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends alternative #3 . ACTION REOUESTED: Offer and pass a motion as outlined in either alternative #1, alternative #2 or alternative #3 listed above. 1 October 8, 1988 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue City Hall Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Re: City Ordinance Violation TRUCK PARKING IN RESIDENTIAL ZONE Property at 1831 West 6th Avenue/Shakopee Residence of Donald R. and Soloma McElderry Dear Mr . Anderson, On September 1 , 1987 , my husband and I purchased the above listed property on Sixth Avenue in Shakopee. At the time of the purchase of said property, it was discussed with both Real Estate agents as well as the seller Matheal Schneider, the fact that husband made his living by owning and operating a tractor/trailer rig, driving over the road . We were told at that time, that this property would be acceptable and that we would not encounter any problems parking his vehicle here and with our almost three acres of land, would not be a bother to any of our neighbors . It was been over a year now, and not only have we grown to love our home, but enjoy and love living in this community. Our daughter has established herself in the Jr . High School and has made many friends . It was our belief that not only had we found the perfect home, but the perfect community to raise our family and make our lives. On September 16 , 1988, we were notified by mail in the form of a warning citation issued by Mr. Howard Jones, that we were in violation of a city code which states that a tractor and/or trailer may not be parked for more than a few hours within the city limits of Shakopee. As our property does in fact, reside within the city limits, we were unable to park our equipment at home. I have discussed our situation with both Howard Jones and with Rick Paulseth and they seem willing to help resolve this problem so that we would not be forced into selling our home and moving out of this community that we have made our home. According to the Subdivision 5 of the code, if we can prove a hardship in our particular case, that it is possible for the Council may grant some modification or exemption from the provision. There is not a doubt in our minds that enforcement of the code will , indeed, cause a grave and undue hardship on our family. As I previously stated , my husband earns our living from driving truck. Because we are independent, driving in business for ourselves, the only way that we can make a living in trucking today is for him to be able to work and maintain his equipment at home. And, due to the fact , if he is unable to park said equipment on our property, we could suffer loss and/or damage if he had to leave them over at the truck stop. It is unfortunate, but vandalism is very much a part of todays trucking industry. We are willing to do anything within our means to do what is necessary to stay in our home. We are making two suggestions that could helf solve the problem. In exhibit one, we show that by adding onto one of the existing structures, we could build a buildinglargeenough to put the equipment in and out of sight. In exhibit 2, we show the possibility of building a new building on the South side of our property which is bordered by the County line. In either event, we would not have the truck/trailer rigs parked in view of anyone. In that way, we would have them pro- tected and available for my husband to work on them. If the Council has any other suggestions , we would be open to thought when proposed to us . I have attached a copy of our prop- erty showing its boundaries as well as the two suggestions in placement of a containment building. We thank you for your consideration in this matter, and hope that some reconcilation and solution can be reached without us being forced to sell and move away from Shakopee. We will be awaiting an answer from you and the Counsil . Sincerely, Donald R. McElderry Soloma B.McElderry cc: Rick Paulseth/City Hall Howard Jones/Shakopee Police Dept . Richard Perkins/Attorney at Law City of Shakopee (o ai KO,,� POLICE DEPARTMENT 476 South Gorman Street ` SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 ®L I JP Tel. 612/445-6666 NESO�P DATE: TO: b.>ronL,L Rss /leo LDCen rj FROM: Howard C. Jones ^ j Code Enforcement Officer / ,�/ L✓ / T,1 Shakopee Police Department RE: Citv Ordinance Violation (s) - Dear Sir or Madame: Violation (s) of the City of Shakopee ordinance (s) have been observed on your property as indicated below. Please find enclosed a warning ticket with the specific violation (s) marked, as well as a copy of the city ordinance (s) for the violations noted. Please note the compliance date requested on the warning ticket, at which time we will again be checking the area (s) of concern while patrolling your area. If you have any questions please contact me at the Shakopee Police Department on any Monday, Wednesday or Firday (445-6666) . The area (s) of concern are: 1 . � y � 2. 6 . 3 . 7 . 4 . B. '�n e$ewe � 1n-ioEeeE III x i3. WARNING .j CITY OF SHAKOPEE VV! 1 I Mc / Mxs. �•✓n Cil ji':,cs rilr jl)ep✓-you have been issued a warning ticket for violation of City Code Section: , t section 11.60 subtllvblen t /r j/ Ex allot storage of materiel,and epulptment, /` Located on promisee commonly known n V ,u ;i sntmn tt.6o Subdivision 2.A / " vb r�`Tt• f, ' E.brlor storage of rel we,conte m...Hall.eebrl,end pulp.... Located an pr.mlw mmmonl9 known..: -seal"11.00 Subdivision 2.13 eII Store"of mopenme v.nlclehl.red/.r venla.41 wltnout current license plan In residential district on prattle" vA commonly known ee: ~ ❑ s.nlon n60 suWlNabn 10Aac / Melmelmng a public nuisance due to noise,odors,vibration, a.w> +' �- •' v? make..11 polmtlo ,111.1d.sold wen..tor.M.he.,glare. y ! tlun,pollution ei privet*Or public went,wall,chulm.stream 1 Y or lake. Locend on pnmbn commonly known se <M Y 1^5 t section 11.80to c z a pith"don endd control control of unused dingrefrigerator or container be he relic. Lo Incises or Provipremises locks to prevent s: 1 E� by[M public. Lound on pnmisv commonly known n. �• Section 10 mx"S Occup'� ❑ Ca uleae at Occupancr for Buowl constructed ilding buildingPermit ithout rvp.assuring e I Ie 5ectlon 11 26& 11.27 subdivision 4-A 1 t C Maximum of three uncovered off street perking placid permhndIF {{{] pa dwelling unit. Vi obtlon located on premises commonly j. • ;:,± known as u i Section 10.74 S, 1 sroflng junk nn,furniture,household appliances and twit shin"on public or private pmpaty on pnmbn commonly known as: Seclkn 10.05 now tled.10111Iln I[of e .d r rteuon pnmbn k commonly jknown"M : i y mss{ k ,j Failure to abate/the indicated violation(s) withn ten (10) days will result in formal charges being brought against you. COMMENTS: �l 5✓ _14,17 J 3 s � a �i Issued by: ;v-aa...r=fi CL 'PA Date: Required Date of Compliance: aG '4^•"" i t r � 1 i d x i SEC. 9.30. TRUCK PARKING. o Subd. 1. It is unlawful to park a detached semi-trailer upon any street, municipally-owned parking lot, or other public property. Subd. 2. It is unlawful to park a semi-trailer, whether or not attached to a truck-tractor, within an area zoned as a residential district, except for the purpose of loading or unloading the same. Subd. 3. It is unlawful to park a commercial vehicle of more than 3/4ths ton capacity within any metered parking space, but parking of such vehicle for a period of not more than twenty (20) minutes shall be permitted in such space for the purpose of necessary access to abutting property for loading or unloading when such access cannot reasonably be secured from an alley or from an adjacent street where truck parking is not so restricted . Subd. 4. Parking of commercial vehicles is permitted in duly designated and sign-posted loading zones, and in alleys, for a period of up to twenty (20) minutes, provided that such alley parking does not prevent the flowoftraffic therein, all of which -- -- _ sbal"tzer-'-tir�IsprPase-o P-acne ss to•abutting or adjacent property for loading or unloading. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-78 Subd. 5. Upon showing of undue hardship in individual cases the Council may grant modification or exemption from the above provisions and shall forthwith notify the City Engineer, the City Street Department and the Police Department. Source: Ordinance No. 140 , 4th Series Effective Date: 12-29-83 SEC. 9.31. LOADING ZONES. The Council may, by resolution, establish loading zones to be used for the specific purpose of loading or unloading merchandise from a commercial vehicle or vehicle temporarily being utilized in the transport of merchandise. Such loading zones shall be installed by order of the City Administrator where in the judgment of the Council a commercial loading zone is justified and duly sign-posted. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-78 (Sections 9.32 through 9.39, inclusive, reserved for future expansion. ) -212- (1-1-84) i Nl,Cer x� LP �29y\q ♦9W ♦ roti' ♦ yJ�. XPi o M N _ ro w 4 1 � / zi . /19ZE a y9.a a 3DD BPsegveloN, - All that part of the West } of the Northeast }, Sleben 11, Ton hip 115, of the 23, Scott Cthe No thea dewribed as fo7lovn - Begi g at the interaectlon of the Weet line od said W} of Ngk: / ° th the centerline of T.N. No, 3001 thence N 59 -321 § along said centerline a distance of 451,19 f$etp thence N 31 -0V W - a dietenoe of 241.20 feet; theme 5 63 -19' W a distance of I/ 296.19 fest to the West line of said W} of NE41 thence Scath sloop said Weat line to the point of beginning. Subject to an d^perbeae ent fur toaover the 311,,33.-f." v theof for T.H. No. 300. Containing 2.06 acre. i �L Ke, 1Npt. SareyM this3_° day of 196 Me. J. 5ehmbkel, Surrey r No. 730 Valley Engineering Co. Inc. . Prior Sake, HSM. 55372 - a7� ' a1a�1 IW7 pO �� toe (NIBNAOr-- of �sr _ A9D nl �o �xrs TIN o > Sr�uerv�r c fl d0 _ T '� /oTN Ewe (N/BNW,0300l �sr 60A) RverNNry 7- e® TY Rr O I property within the B-3 District shall be exempt as it relates to off-street parking requirements. Source : Ordinance No. 96 , 4th Series Effective Date: 11-11-82 C. General Provisions. 1. Reduction of Existing Off-Street Space. Off-street parking spaces and loading spaces existing upon the effective date of this Chapter shall not be reduced in number unless said number exceeds the requirements set forth herein for a similar new use. 2. Expansion of Existing Uses. Expansion of existing uses and/or structures will require the application of the provisions of this Section to both the existing and new uses and/or structures. 3. Floor Space. The term "floor area" for the purpose of calculating the number of off-street parking spaces required shall be the net usable floor area of the various floors, exclusive of hallways, utility space, storage areas other than warehousing . 4. Benches in Places of Public Assembly. In stadiums, churches and other places of public assembly in which patrons or spectators occupy benches, pews or other similar seating facilities, each 22 inches of such seating facility shall be counted as one seat for the purpose of determining required parking. 5. Minimum Size of Parking Spaces. Each park- ing space shall be not less than 9 feet wide and 20 feet in length exclusive of access drives, and each space shall be served adequately by access drives. 6. Use of Parking Facilities. Off-street parking facilities accessory to residential use shall be utilized solely for the parking of passenger automobiles, except that for each dwelling unit one truck not in excess of 9,000 pounds rated capacity may be parked by the occupant within a structure. Under no circumstances shall parking facilities accessory to residential structures be used for open storage of commercial vehicles nor open air parking of automobiles belonging to the employees, owner, ten- ant or customers of business or manufacturing establishments. V� 7. Location of Parking Facilities. Required off-street parking in "R" Districts shall be on the same lot as the principal building. 8. Joint Parking Facilities. Off-street park- ` ing facilities for a combination of one or more uses may be pro- vided collectively in any district except the "R-1" and "R-2" Districts, provided the total number of spaces provided shall equal the sum of the separate requirements for each use. 9. Control of Off-Street Parking Facilities. When required accessory off-street parking facilities are provided elsewhere than on the lot on which the principal use served is located, written authority for using such property for off-street parking shall be filed with the City so as to maintain the required number of off-street narking spaces during the exist nce of said principal use. No such parking facilities at its closest point shall be located more than 300 feet from the premises. 10. Use of Parking Area. Required off-street (11-1-82) -289- i n a. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City clerk �. RE: Amending Gambling Regulation DATE: October 28, 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo offers some alternatives for Council to consider if it desires to expand the gambling regulations. BACKGROUND: As a result of the selling of pull-tabs without a gambling license by an on-sale licensee, Council has discussed on a number of occasions, instituting additional regulations on gambling to prohibit this from happening again. After the Pullman Club was cited for selling pull-tabs without a license, at the direction of Council, staff looked into imposing restrictions on gambling licensees. During the process, it was discovered that the City did already have an ordinance which prohibited gambling violations by a liquor licensee. Such a violation of the liquor laws does provide Council with the authority to hold a public hearing to consider revocation or suspension of a liquor license. Staff feels that this law, which puts a liquor license in jeopardy, is the best handle the City has to insure compliance with the gambling laws. In July of 1988, Council discussed a draft ordinance which would require a pull-tab licensee to employ its own personnel to sell pull-tabs rather than employ personnel of the liquor establishment where the license is located. Representatives of the Lions Club, Rotary Club and Jaycees were present and explained why they were not in favor of this kind of regulation and offered other suggestions. [See attached excerpt from July 19, 1988 minutes] After this discussion, Council directed staff to meet with Mr. Furrie and Mr. Streefland to discuss fiscal controls to better insure compliance with state gambling laws as opposed to putting more regulations on gambling licensees. Staff met with Mr. Furrie and Mr. Streefland to discuss possible changes to the City's gambling ordinance. Our current ordinance does not expand on the State Gambling Law, except it limits gambling to organizations which carry on their activities in the City, and they must be located and based in the City. This better insures that the proceeds will be used within the community. There was consensus that any additional language to the City code would not insure that violations would never occur. The concerns expressed by Mr. Furrie and Mr. Streefland included the fact that the sale of pull-tabs is a big business and should be run as such. New licensees need to learn what the gambling law requires of them regarding financial reporting. They should be required to attend a seminar before obtaining a license and attend an annual seminar to keep up to date with changes. [There are monthly seminars. conducted in the Twin Cities. ] They need to account for daily receipts and should have their own cash register separate from the one used by the business upon whose premises they are renting. This will identify any problem immediately rather than letting it go on for a number of days. They should also be required to submit a business plan. In summary, Mr. Furrie and Mr. Streefland believe that it is important that the sales of pull-tabs is treated as a big business. If the gambling manager attends a seminar, receipts are pick-up daily and a separate cash register is used, problems will be minimized. Beginning in 1989, the State Gambling Board is requiring a gambling licensee to attend at least one seminar on gambling regulations. I understand that they are looking into making that an annual requirement. In the past, the City has taken the approach of not getting into regulating gambling. That is the job of the State Gambling Board. Shakopee limits gambling to local organizations -- they historically are not the ones causing problems. Currently gambling licenses are issued to the following: 1) Lion's at the Backstretch - They have a separate cash register for pull-tabs 2) Hockey Association at Canterbury Inn - They sell pull- tabs from their own booth 3) Baseball/Softball Shakopee Youth at Richard' s - They sell pull-tabs from their own booth 4) Shakopee Rotary at the Pullman - they have a separate cash register for pull-tabs 5) Shakopee Jaycees at the Inside Track - They have a separate cash drawer for pull-tabs 6) American Legion - Liquor license and Gambling license are one and the same. They also have a separate cash drawer for pull-tabs 7) VFW - Liquor license and Gambling license are one and the same. They also have a separate cash drawer for pull-tabs 8) Knights of Columbus - The Council holds the Liquor license and the Home Association holds the Gambling license. Pull-tabs are not handles by the bartender and receipts are kept separate. �b O� If the City desires to monitor licensees, examine their business plan, receive and examine monthly reports, and simply spend time investigating and monitoring licensees, more staff time will be required. State law does allow for a tax on licensees up to 3% to pay for these costs. The more the City becomes involved, the more responsibility the City takes on to insure that the business is run according to law. This would all be a duplication of the State Gambling Boards current responsibilities. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Make no changes to the City Code. 2) Amend the City Code to require: a) Attendance at a seminar on gambling prior to obtaining a license. b) Attendance at an annual seminar on gambling. c) Use separate cash register for gambling receipts. d) Receipts are picked up and accounted for daily. 3) Require copy of business plan with initial application. 4) Receive monthly reports. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative No. 2, Attendance at an initial seminar, annual attendance at a seminar, separate cash register or cash drawer, pick up receipts daily. I£ Council desires to adopt an ordinance addressing these items, a draft is attached for your consideration. JSC/tiv _ficial Proceecinas of the City Council �a.v 9 . 98E Pace --- Discession ensues on the _ -_ted crd_carc -. wcu- d require _icensee_ tc t_cv tne.- r sane_ s s=___ the thee_ e- persona= _ - e a. - J..' we ,c menz where - _ _--- -- ^-_ -ssuec. __.. .._, Cn _ - tae ..ions _ _ _. __e , cn __ Ro- a'_ -a .Mever , on beha-_f Of L.� 3aycees ^sr.c., a nc- `tnc t-c? __- crcirance. crdcn ce will c= _nscre t,.- nu_s--=``s a_ e sold according the `maw. an c_- anizaticn -.eecs accounting and interna'_ control. Hav--z a-. employee available at times would be too costly as there are sales only at peek times. There may net be space available to accommodate ac:ittonal personnel . ?ennincton, javicees, explained that the State only allows 45% for expenses. Zak/Clay moved to table the oropcsec craft ordinance regulating the sale of pule-tab=_ and asked Mr. Streefland and Mr . _ rrie to meet with the City .'rinistratien regarcinc fiscal controls and standards and that sta=ff come pack with a revised ordinance and alternatives not ra recuiate at all. Mot'-c-: carried unanimously. City stated that sta-= Oee_n looking into t trocecures receired by state _aw fc7 a__nc of`_icial maps as a result Mr. Jack -ram_-- _ -'t__ -cr a bulking permit . application _sr.._ an - --_- -o an existing buz-_cing which lies within the ccr_-ccr of rne _-dosed __ __ _ City Rttcrnev t .-_a _n crL- ante c .ape anc tne:r _❑ -ng --- -- -n_ct_ t_. rew_th as .. - _,e.. - _ample ober , - 977 . _c ..at__n z - the Leese ctn -_ -_t___ '-ng . -c_r -Ca� Ca , nc, Scct- , and =zp er.s_ec r_ --.e - - ar —t-`n __ r— - --- re zcza- and re "-- _-ave to;:.-. . zak/Sc_— n_. - - roceed w_ __: a s* at _ _ to exce__ _ __ �____ C. _ _ Iota cess-:-t° j_ __ ss`1-_ - _-c_. , a.=aa , 7a - , Scott , .._a_ , trans .. _ _ . .. _ mOt_on ..a .. (0� ORDINANCE NO. 260, FOURTH SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 10 ENTITLED "PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES AND OFFENSES" BY ENACTING A NEW SECTION 10. 61 "GAMBLING", SUBDIVISION 3 "CONDITIONS" AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE SHAKOPEE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 10.99 WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Shakopee City Code Sec. 10. 61, Subdivision 3 is hereby added, to read: Subd. 3. Conditions. The conduct of lawful gambling under license issued by the Minnesota Charitable Gambling Control Board shall be subject to the following conditions in the City of Shakopee: A. Initial Instruction. Before any person may serve as gambling manager for any organization licensed to conduct gambling in the City of Shakopee that person must have satisfactorily completed a course of instruction conducted by the Minnesota Gambling Control Board on the duties and responsibilities of the gambling manager. B. Annual Instruction. Any person serving as a gambling manager for any organization licensed to conduct gambling in the City of Shakopee must satisfactorily complete a course of instruction conducted by the Minnesota Gambling Control Board on the duties and responsibilities of the gambling manager at least once a year. C. Maintain Cash Register. Any organization licensed to conduct gambling in the City of Shakopee must maintain their own cash register or cash drawer for gambling receipts. D. Daily Receipts. Any organization licensed to conduct gambling in the City of Shakopee must pick up receipts on a daily basis. Section 2 . Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 10.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3 . After the adoption, signing and attestation of this ordinance, it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of November, 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of November, 1988 . City Attorney �Ob MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Developer's Agreements DATE: October 26, 1988 INTRODUCTION• When a subdivision is approved by the City, the developer is required to execute a Developer's Agreement with the City insuring construction of required public improvements. The Developer's Agreement contains three financing options which the Developer may select to insure construction of the public improvements. A fourth option an Escrow and Payment Agreement is being presented for Councils consideration. BACKGROUND• If there are any public improvements which need to be constructed in a new subdivision, the City requires the Developer to sign a Developer's Agreement with the City setting fourth these improvements and how they will be constructed. The Developer may choose to construct the improvements himself or he may request the City to construct the improvements and then assess the costs back against the property. When the Developer chooses to construct the improvements himself, the City requires a guarantee that those improvements will be completed. The three guarantees the Developers has to choose from are: 1) a letter of credit in the amount of 125$ of the estimated costs, 2) cash deposited with the City in the amount of 125°% of the estimated costs, and 3) a performance bond. (1) LETTER OF CREDIT: The letter of credit is not reduced or released until completion of the work and until the City is provided with a one year maintenance bond. The disadvantage of providing a letter of credit is that in addition to depositing the full amount of the letter of credit with the bank the Developer must make payments to the contractor as work on the public improvements is completed. (2) CASH DEPOSITED WITH THE CITY: In this case the Developer deposits in cash the full 125% of the estimated cost of improvements with the City. The disadvantage of this alternative is that in addition to the deposit with the City, the Developer must make payments to the contractor as work on the public improvements is competed- similar to the above letter of credit. (3) PERFORMANCE BOND: The Developer provides the City with a performance bond which guarantees completion of the work. If for some reason the y Developer is unable to complete the work the City may then compete the work and obtain funding for the work by drawing on the performance bond. The difficulty with utilizing this alternative is the fact that a Developer is not able to obtain a performance bond. Instead, the contractor obtains a performance bond as a condition of the agreement between the Developer and the contractor. The City has been accepting the contractors performance bond if he obtains a dual obligee rider naming the City of Shakopee in addition to naming the Developer. This alternative does not provide the City with an optimum guarantee of the completion of the work. This is because the performance bond does not bind the contractor if for some reason the Developer withholds payment of the bills. In addition, if the agreement between the Developer and the contractor does not contain the City of Shakopee, it is questionable as to whether or not the City would have any ability to draw on the performance bond. However, the City does not wish to be named within the contract between the Developer and the contractor, because we in no way wish to be held responsible for payments of the Developer to the contractor. As an alternative to accepting a performance bond, it may be desireable for the City to accept instead a contract bond. A contract bond maybe obtained by a Developer because he has in fact entered into a contract with the City by way of a Developer's Agreement. Within a contract bond the Developer is agreeing to fulfill the conditions of the contract. The disadvantage of a contract bond is the difficulty of a Developer to obtain such a bond as well as cost. (4) ESCROW AND PAYMENT AGREEMENT: An Escrow and Payment Agreement between the Developer, the City, and the Lending Institution is a new alternative successfully used by the City of Chaska to insuring that the public improvements are constructed by the Developer. Staff is asking that Council consider at this time permitting the use of an Escrow and Payment Agreement as an alternative measure to insuring completion of the public improvements. When an Escrow and Payment Agreement is used, the Lending Institution (Escrow Agent) receives the 125% of the estimated cost of the improvements. As the work is completed, inspected and OK'd by the City, the Escrow Agent will be authorized to make payment to the appropriate contractor. After the contractor has been paid for all his work, there should be approximately 25% of the original estimate still on deposit. That 25% will not be returned to the Developer until he has provided the City with a one year maintenance bond. The agreement provides that the City may complete the work, if the Developer defaults, and may utilize the money on deposit with the Escrow Agent. The agreement also provides that if for some reason the City is not provided a one year maintenance bond and if repair work should exceed the 25% still on deposit with the Lending Institution, the City may make i 16 necessary repairs and assess the cost against the property. As long as the City has the ability to complete the work, or repair the work if necessary and assess the cost against the property owners, staff feels that the City is assured that the work will be complete at no cost to the City. Of the four options cited above, this appears to be the least costly to the Developer and still a guarantee to the City that the work will be completed. ALTERNATIVES• Within the Developer's Agreement for new subdivisions, the alternatives for assuring completion of the public improvements maybe as follows: 1) Status quo - letter of credit, cash, performance bond 2) Cash, letter of credit, contract bond 3) Cash, letter of credit, contract bond, and escrow and payment agreement RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends utilizing alternative no. 3, accepting either cash, letter of credit, contract bond, or an escrow and payment agreement to insure completion of public improvements within a new subdivision. Attached is a draft of an Escrow and Payment Agreement which has been reviewed by the City Engineer, City Administrator, City Attorney and City Clerk. It is modeled after an Escrow and Payment Agreement utilized by the City of Chaska. Minor changes have been made to it by staff to insure that if the work is not completed or if repairs are necessary that the City may complete the work and assess it against abutting property owners if in fact there are insufficient funds within the balance on hand with the Escrow Agent. Whatever changes Council makes, staff will insert them into the City's standard Developer's Agreement. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Approve the use of an "Escrow and Payment Agreement" by Developer's to guarantee completion of public improvements within a new subdivision; this being in addition to the cash, letter of credit, and bond now accepted by the City. 2) Approve the use of a contract bond (not a performance Bond) by the Developer to guarantee completion of public improvements within a new subdivision. JSC/tlV DEVMEMO ESCROW AND PAYMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 1988, by and between the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" ; party (whether one or more or whether same be an individual, corporation, partnership or any combination thereof) , of the second part, hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER" ; and a financial institution organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, United States of America, party of the third part, hereinafter referred to as "ESCROW AGENT" WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, CITY has, by Resolution No. , dated , 1988, given final approval to the Subdivision referred to as , situated in the City of Shakopee, Minnesota; and WHEREAS. CITY and DEVELOPER have entered into a Developer's Agreement, dated , 1988, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to said Developer's Agreement, Developer agrees to construct and install the improvements designated thereon as "Plan A Improvements" ; and WHEREAS, Developer has made arrangements with ESCROW AGENT to finance the construction and installation of said "Plan A Improvements" to assure sufficient funds to complete same; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual promises and covenants hereinafter contained it is hereby agreed as follows: 1. ESCROW AGENT hereby represents and warrants that it has on deposit, in a separate account; or, has committed itself to lend to DEVELOPER upon such terms as ESCROW AGENT and DEVELOPER agree, the sum of which amounts represents 125% of the cost of said "Plan A Improvements" , to be used for, and only for, the payment for the cost of construction, installation, and Engineering inspection fees for "Plan A Improvements" pursuant to the above referred to Developer's Agreement between CITY and DEVELOPER. 2. Upon receipt of invoices for labor or material or other work performed or contemplated in said Developer's Agreement for "Plan A Improvements" , which invoices are approved for payment by the CITY, ESCROW AGENT Shall pay said invoices, retaining five percent (5%) thereof until completion of the project as set forth in Paragraph 3 hereof; it being fully understood and acknowledged by and between CITY, DEVELOPER and ESCROW AGENT that approval for payment of invoices by the CITY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE APPROVAL OR ACCEPTANCE of work, labor or materials supplied or performed represented by said invoices. g Pr 3 . Upon completion of the "Plan A Improvement" as provided in said Developer's Agreement the CITY shall inspect said improvements and , upon the CITY, by resolution, accepting said improvements, ESCROW AGENT shall pay to the appropriate contractor or vendors, all retainages as above provided, together with such other final payments as per contract between DEVELOPER and its contractors and vendors. Upon acceptance of said improvements by the CITY, DEVELOPER shall provide the CITY with a one year maintenance bond guaranteeing workmanship and materials used in said improvements for one (1) year. Upon receipt of a maintenance bond by the CITY from the DEVELOPER, the ESCROW AGENT shall be so notified. After said notification, the ESCROW AGENT shall release any funds remaining to the DEVELOPER. If the DEVELOPER fails to provide the CITY with a one (1) year maintenance bond, the ESCROW AGENT shall retain in an escrow account or on deposit, the remaining funds. Said funds shall be retained for one (1) year as security for the guarantee of the workmanship and materials used in said improvements. After said warranty period, ESCROW AGENT shall , upon written notice thereof signed by CITY, release any such funds remaining to DEVELOPER. 4. It is further agreed and understood, by and between CITY, ESCROW AGENT and DEVELOPER that the "Plan A Improvements'- contemplated mprovements"contemplated by this Agreement and the Developer's Agreement, upon completion and acceptance by the CITY, will become municipal improvements to be held, managed and maintained by the CITY; and, therefore, it is essential that the materials used and the construction thereof be completed in accordance with the Developer's Agreement and the approved Plans and Specifications thereof on a timely basis. That upon failure of DEVELOPER to faithfully comply with the terms of said Developer's Agreement, or in the CITY's .opinion that DEVELOPER is not making a good faith effort to timely complete said improvements, the CITY may, in addition to any other remedy it may have, enter upon the project and perform, or cause to have performed, any obligation on behalf of the DEVELOPER to be performed pursuant to said Developer's Agreement, and to draw upon the funds above provided and held by ESCROW AGENT to make payment therefore; and, that in the event said funds are insufficient to complete said "Plan A Improvements" as contemplated by said Developer's Agreement, and/or in the event when the maintenance bond does not provide for said maintenance the City may complete said improvements in accordance with said Developer's Agreement and assess the additional cost thereof to the property benefitted, the Developer hereby waives provisions of Chapter 429 and agrees with the City proceeding as above. 5. DEVELOPER and ESCROW AGENT, represent and agree, that whether said amount of money referred to in paragraph one hereof is represented by funds on deposit with ESCROW AGENT or a loan from ESCROW AGENT to DEVELOPER, said amount of money is unconditionally pledged to payment pursuant to the terms of this AGreement; and, any bankruptcy, insolvency or other financial difficulty of DEVELOPER, or default by the DEVELOPER under any agreements entered into by and between ESCROW AGENT and DEVELOPER shall not affect ESCROW AGENT'S obligation to disburse said funds pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 6. DEVELOPER hereby warrants and states that DEVELOPER is the fee title owner of the real property upon which said "Plan A Improvements" are to be installed and constructed; and , if DEVELOPER is not such fee title owner that the fee title owner has consented to this agreement as evidence by the Consent attached to this Agreement. 7. Developer may, upon providing other security pursuant to the Developer's Agreement with the CITY, terminate this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF SHAKOPEE By Mayor BY City Administrator By City Clerk DEVELOPER ESCROW AGENT The undersigned fee owner(s) hereby certify that fee owners(s) have read, understand, and hereby consent(s) and agree(s) to all the provisions of the foregoing agreement. Dated this day of 1988. STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by and the Mayor, City Administrator and City Clerk respectively of the City of Shakopee, a municipal corporation, on behalf of the City of Shakopee. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by _ , and the and the of Developer, on behalf of said Developer. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me by and the and of a lending institution, on behalf of the lending institution. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss COUNTY OF SCOTT ) The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of 1988 by and Notary Public CONSENT / Oc_ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Joseph P. Ries, Fire Chief RE: Fire Protection, Minnesota Correctional Facility DATE: October 26, 1988 Introduction The Minnesota Correctional Facility-Shakopee requested the City of Shakopee to enter into an agreement or contract to provide fire protection at their facility at 1010 West 6th Avenue. Background The Shakopee Correctional Facility has no on-site fire brigade and must rely on the City of Shakopee Fire Department to provide ' fire protection on the site. The facility needs to have on file either a letter of agreement or a contract. Having checked with other cities with correctional facilities, most of them charge for their services. Some charge a one time yearly fee of $1,200. 00 while some also add a $200. 00 per hour charge per fire call. The rationale for charging a fee for providing fire protection to a State facility is because they are exempt from paying taxes and therefore do not pay towards this service as do other property owners. Since the new facility was constructed the Fire Department has responded to a waste basket fire caused by a visitor. If a contract is decided upon a provision should be made for a $200. 00 charge, above the yearly fee, for false alarms due to system malfunctions. This would start after the second call on alarm malfunctions. This has not been a problem at this facility as of yet. Alternatives 1. Enter into a written agreement with no charge. 2 . Enter into a contract for fire protection for a yearly fee of $1,200.00. 3 . Enter into a contract for fire protection for a yearly fee of $1, 200. 00 plus $200. 00 per call for fire alarm malfunctions after two alarm calls. 4 . Enter into a contract for fire protection for a yearly fee of $1,200.00 plus $200.00 per hour for any calls. Recommendation I recommend alternative No. 3. Enter into a contract for fire protection for a yearly fee of $1,200. 00 plus $200. 00 per call for fire alarm malfunctions after two alarm calls. Requested Action Authorize proper City officials to enter into a contract with the State of Minnesota to provide fire protection at the Minnesota Correction Facility at 1010 West 6th Avenue at an annual fee of $1,200. 00 plus $200.00 per call for fire alarm malfunctions after two alarm calls. JPR/jms CONTRACTUALA(n.natale employe ) SERVICES 1� ap nwJ�.e.w -«.,...v..m. -r;•7•. �_82 -_d.:__._ cot -Zi-cf ..rw.r cea.a y51,800.00a Ul�l05051 cr�1111 `~„`�1so � SEND TYPE OF TRANSACTION: ® A. p ..1 nf•2RnR mate Entered pY 5 "HA r Aa. C] A.5 ❑ A46 w•• v.men Enteed by --- NOTICE _NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR: you are mpuired by Minnesota Statutes. 1981 Supplement,S.I..on 270 66 to payvle v u mt,ol.em,dY mer or Minnesota lay archlioban number If You do Ws each so. Son. or Mmnrxu. This inlmmann ow, E-uaM-IN, enforcement of ledeal and "ale tae laws. Supplying these number could result in Oinn In mpuire Vol'In Ply stale tax return,and pay debnuent state of Ilabdlliea. This c will not be appnwd unless tbe.ro m ers are pmv_dM.TMse numb..”You"M avanaMe • to federal and state tax autlmnties and state nnRonnd Inmloed in the MYmrm of slue nblyAinm. THIS CONTRACT, which shall be Integvrd purswnt to the laws of the State al Mmnerma,Mtwv!n In, State of form—la.acting fluma,h ifs S ftMe6BEa�arr86tfglTdl a6l a-Ytj'-1:M0 Lakes hereinafter STATEI and LentPlln]dLfYP_Q]SirJCL- - - - ' evens—nil—BOX-129 Circle ------ So, Sec.of it Tax Il.Nn. Federal Employer 1.0.No.(d apnl cablel_ _ - --. bee rafter CONTRACTOR),witnesseth that. WHEREAS,the STATE,purulent to assarbruessinStatutes 10M SPrtich (Q IS CAI mp.wered m e # tgf th Minnesota c a Cone J'11's F '1' y I ' _.and WHEREAS, the STATE neelP, fire pretprotion and iope� fire de pA t " "iixl WHEREAS,CONTRACTOR--asents that it is duly qualified and willing to perform be,services set forth Mrtin. NOW.THEREFORE,h is asphalt 1. CONTRACTORS DUTIES (As,.&additional page it neeesphyl.CONTRACTOR.Mm is not a state employee,sell: DISTRICT shall furnish, upon call, necessary firement and fire equipment to fight any fires at any of the 24 buildings at the Correctional Facility and to do everything possible to get said fire under control and put out, provided however, that in the sole discretion of the officer in charge of the DISTRICT fire department, the safety of life and property in the DISTRICT proper shall not be imperiled thereby; the STATE agrees that no claim of any type, kind, nature or description shall be made against the DISTRICT, officer or officers in charge of the fire equipment, or in charge of the fire department, or any fireman or Firemen in the event that said officer in Charge Shall at any time determine that the safety of life and property within the DISTRICT shall prevent the sending of firemen or equipment to any buildings used or occupied by the Correctional Facility. It is however, the intent and purpose of this agreement to furnish to the Correctional FAcility and its buildings, such fire fighting equipment and manpower as may be necessary from time to time, to control and put out in, to or about said buildings occupied or used by the Correctional Facility, without detriment to the people and property of the DISTRICT, it being acknowledged by both parties, that the residents and property located within the Confines of the DISTRICT shall have first and superior call upon the use of said equipment I land01V6fUMATION AND TERMS OF PAYMENT. A. Consideration for all accepts, perfumed and goods or maxrnh supplied by CONTRACTOR pursuant to Ibis cxmurtl shall be mid by the STATE as follows' 1. Compensa <t,jy " nn al nx_�a'yl-ay0ypt,�_jq.yeid=Lil.'ir42QO-fIEF-6"&1-1--„ P�-a— maximum f hhere on Cal 1 c •,gpirA ge .hour'-wiN-be-reimAfmsed-at 3100itttopr— (see OLheeirptmxitiodB,fwrladdri Slibnad,gpapenSeDdbnl)v and neerolao., muum by CONTRACTOR re,lono ce al oris conte. In an ammim not 1.extern-R�a -- -- —ttollarf IS el. I,prooded. trial CONTRACTOR ehals 1w rr'mborsM lei v.l and aubanrnce eal&nset n the ” am i o Proper a than mudm in the current - m Cnm -m umm ison Pho - pulo.eed by tM r Commis nermof Employee Rulatlum. CONTRACTOR shall em lx mimburwd lo, havand anhvce surnsulinos funned outside theStateof Mmmmon unless if tin recnwd poor wrinen armorer for such us al bare invel time In-STATE. The total.Million of the STATE to, all compensation and remlwrxmenn to CONTRACTOR sfull ,or exceed ____fee Thn..rand Fig♦ u ndrod y nn nen _dollars IS-SLDRIft CO 1. e. Terms of Payment 1. Payments as be made by the STATE promptly after CONTRACTOR'S peen...ion of -Prices for —'s Mdpmmalsostatements,aaancstatements, u of such es by the STATE'S aulhoneed asset pursuant to Clause VI. ozone,shall he submTed m a form pexvbed by the STATE and acwrding to.he following sCedulrsua Annual on-call amount becomes due and payable on June 30th, 1986. Per call amounts will be paid upon receipt of invoice. 2. IWlaen appliohlel Payments are m Ire made from federal footle obunwd by the STATE Mrrvmtr Tnlr _. be _Ann ry cool ll. .n nm ancn funds hem ailablr. rho: ,ball In e" el mmial..ly r. r, .. a,a ..,,lLv r STATF o CONTRACTOR In the nnf swb mm�nn'CONI"ACTOR ,hall br rnrnwfn. L.v..mnl, .. .... Pe' a ern ,ase bat...lm a..v.c.a aaub urod y nermnredm iffoolux 1.11an n1A'1•on o11M.STATf v..T ono rmrl in Io..rut. .f..r4nn nl n.aer... .n.n...•'o i. .r.....1 n. ..r..., Ir.. SrL..e. and ..' Tawe, today.-'. ,taro aril ,Corm.. CON I HACICIR aL.n. nm .. ..•... I .y.....,. fu. r,..p : ...r p Lr Il.r 11 ql. satielMlWY.nr Awf.y Ierl in int at nl "To"p. rr lm '.Tun ...ur µ u.nn. IV. TERM OF CONTRACT This roloaCt shall tv eflatwe un7Ljy It, - - -- --- . 19 , upon ouch date as i1 is led as u eaumbrance by the C m nl f.na tt,wlr.Jrevw urs Talar aIM shall .e elbn rmul items 36tls —, 19..(-,or unel all ,Iebos..,.ns sal loan.n mnr•'nnbas nave loco sauarar'mrip hrHa1M, wtrml e s if first V. CANCELLATION. Thi, rz may le cancellcl be Te STATE m CONTRACTOR n any I. with a werbum cause. upon drip, (30) days wnllen n the ulnar I.ITT, In Thr I of much a no-R.Io , CONTRACTOR shall W rTOed to W ybi Attention.on a Ma rata Wsia.for work. r . ,m lmbr 1,cFoil VI. STATE'S AUTHORIZED AGENT. lit.. STATE'S ..,hot..rVI agr.o Inr rhe p.HpRt of admimara....1 of Th!, mmrxt is itckadeet r ,vftr flc.L.operaLleof_Oirectill Such anm shall have final aulmmov for n r Rs.-ce of C0N1RAC71R S vrv.rr, VVI .I ,ucn irrr.,I.an.arrenrnl a, .ah,larror Y. nall so ceody on each nVoice vmmiRerl Illosulnif to CNrne II n amano It VII, ASSIGNMENT. CONTRACTOR shall neither .....A no, u.nnu. .n v lebo,- nbbbn •n, uneher rhrt—T,ol wnhnul the mine riUwT of be frIATE. VIII. AMENDMENTS. Anv amendment io the en an shall L ,e in w o. and a6 ,con :.IT b.: ned by The samr isoly,who eA., I Use original co r their successors office, IX. LIABILITY. CONTRACTOR agree m indendy and o ve and hol.l ane STATE s, . :,g.no,and emarm pinvv,harmless I...or any and .11 tla. ., from the w _rlm rr.. of du, —ball nv fON1RACTOR rr CIINTRAr.TOR'S +Mm m mpinvee VTht Claus, ana11 nor'be C nxuud W ha. .n.y Inm1 --,s— CONTRACms .is, Ew. bo the SIATf'S la,b- ro lullill.11 nUio 1pNna pt a., Iu dors sI.e.. X. STATE AUDITS. The Iwnis, .ecoydis. • dor and er. r m9 1 rr.1,n.-. nil p.. .. of mm e CONTRACTOR rmle- ro ,no—11-1 door E, i , sl.nna by r he.-b,cb,.!epn.r...uo nnrl !Lox ,,..m IDWnnr. XI. 'OWNERSDIP OF OOCIIMENTS•Any reryn .dies, p'.... ion, .. u. mfi... rlrn ..r, o.,of br rONTRACTOR n The beiw o of . cf,al this n n sfinll Ix:The uC1u-, nn r rhe ST ATL a,ul all-,1r • ,h .a1, all be re .coed to TheSTATE to,CONTRACTOR talon c nAeUnr..nmune con n. ...r.b.on 01 this r....li I.CONTRACTOR,ball willinofy allow u. n n base mCh cowNh owl Inr a ...., A,,,,., tem. IIT.....an—.,I CUN T R Al T DR'S obi. nations susler This ro without the Pio, Cor of the STATE. )III. AFFIRMATIVE_AQ10N. ( Neine, Nei CONTRACTOR ce,W- tbal n has . rvw1 a n al c,r,. from the Lam of Risen- R.Ni punwnl lu Min.wenla Statutes, 1901 Sonplrmn., SClgu,36341)31 awe XIII. WORKESRS_COMPENSATION, In accordance with the Toovisinm or bailey-I.. Aawu's 1981 $uPplelnrnT,S'mmr, 116181.the STATE afbrms thaT CONTRACTOR s PoviJed a .,Ugly e.d.•. . of u .niia. will, The w...k- ro .b.m .nsunn e, mry•n ns, requ Sta vTIT UST. of Minnesota ex, a.es, 1981 Sopthe Slmem,Senors 17611f,R. TuV,and .,I.. n Z. XIV. ANTITRUSTdCONTRACTOR Mrebv signs e the Swe of Mimm,ma a. and all clyth a for I lonforf a, n Pals 0 In, s Provided!d i netyit l with This Stale of resulting Lom Tptusl wulal.ons wlticll suu mvlry Ibu anldm9 lava of the United States and thea antitrust laws of the Stale of Minnesota. XV. OTHER PROVISIONS. (Atvch additional page it necel l: 1141itiJeaj FPQS for ell fir!-Ye 10 attfndi:{e St the UR^ot 1109rI) NAae rXtf, for td SiP,ICr /rFP^PT. At jet tlTee firer. -:1St he 1, at tRPMara the ell"trdtt At h -t 19 inter? t} Ill •Yp'd]R UMPIPenCe$ of fire. IMNevera bers,.se of The •rv.reair.A111 it a at!.:PI +fres, A c, lydrt 5 .1,11.1.1. vl It b11 Prdtesfed to MV,-r act-al port of ,pr it env:rt. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have caused this Contract to be duly executed inlendirg to be bound thereby. APPROVED: NOTE: Remuye carbon,befr.bin.od" trT.hrom. As to form and execution by the Qi CONTRACTOR: Q ATTORNEY GENERAL: 11f a corporation,Two cnrlgnte officers mast feature, tdl t/ Cow d. 3_ 6, Q COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION: r bm.wrn.a nrvrvnl Try nc/r w yl1' I..uw-C'Glp ® STATE AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT: _ Q COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE: Tow - s bvnn r Pur - Po••.r P o .r yr..:ar-A. pit pnve..1nn f.. . Pion.. .viii..r Gw.r P. .f Knit Gx•v ► ° GENT ' ✓ TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: TOM Brownell, Chief of Police RE: Gerald Poole/Completion of Probation DATE: October 27 , 1988 INTRODUCTION On April 6, 1988, Gerald Poole was appointed to the position of police sergeant which requires a six month probationary period. BACKGROUND On October 26, 1988, the Shakopee Police Civil Service Commission approved the appointment of Gerald Poole to the position of permanent police sergeant upon evaluating his performance as a probationary sergeant as required by MN statute 919. Sergeant Poole has performed the duties of sergeant in an excellent manner and I highly recommend the permanent appointment. The permanent appointment does not require a salary increase at this time. RECOMMENDATION Approve the appointment of Gerald Poole to the position of �I permanent police sergeant. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED Appoint Gerald Poole to the position of permanent police sergeant. TO: Mayor, Councilmembers FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police RE: City Towing Contract DATE: October 27, 1988 INTRODUCTION The police department requires the services of a vehicle towing company. BACKGROUND In past years the city has entered into an agreement with private towing vendors. The current agreement with Shakopee Towing Company expires December 31, 1988. We propose to use the same specifications as contained in the current contract (attached) . RECOMMENDATION Authorize staff to advertise for bids to obtain a vendor to tow and store vehicles for a two year period commencing January 1 , 1989. COUNCIL ACTION REODESTED Authorize staff to advertise for bids to obtain a vendor to tow and store vehicles for a two year period commencing January 1, 1989. i TOEING , IMPOUNDING , AND STORAGE OF MOTORIZED VEHICLES BID OPENING : 7 City Hall , 129 East 1st Shakopee , Minnesota 1 . Towing Charges : Type I Type II Type III 2 . Towing of Large Vehicles : 3 . Storage Charges : a. First 24 hours or fraction thereof 1 Inside storage 2 Outside storage b. Each additional 24 hours or fraction thereof 1 Inside storage 2 Outside storage 4 . Unlocking Vehicles : Signature Company Address AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT , made and entered into thisday of 19 1 by and between the City of Shakopee , hereinafter referred to as the "City , " and hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor . " WITNESSETH : WHEREAS , the City of Shakopee desires to enter into a contract for the towing , impounding , and storage of motor vehicles . WHEREAS , the Contractor is the operator of a towing and storing facility located in the City of Shakopee and is desirous and willing to enter into such a contract with the City; NOW , THEREFORE , the parties hereto , for and in consideration of the covenants hereinafter set forth , agree as follows : 1 . The Contractor hereby agrees to tow , impound , and store all motor vehicles which are ordered removed under the direction of the Police Chief of the City of Shakopee or persons so authorized by them. A. The Contractor agrees to unlock vehicles upon the request of motor vehicle operators . 2 . The Contractor shall have satisfactory equipment and personnel to provide immediate service on all vehicles ordered impounded by authorized City Officials at all times , twenty-four ( 24) hours a day , seven ( 7 ) days a week , holidays included . 3. The Contractor shall own or have available to the City of Shakopee , Minnesota , the following equipment : A. A minimum of two (2) tow trucks having a gross vehicle weight of eight thousand (8,000) pounds or more, equipped with a crane and winch, and further equipped to control the movement of the towed vehicle; and B. Equipment sufficient to move a completely demolished vehicle on dollies or low-bed trailer. The Contractor agrees to maintain said equipment in good condition and repair . The City reserves the right to inspect the Contractor ' s equipment from time to time for the purpose of determining whether the equipment is in good condition and repair and in conformance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement . 4 . All storage and parking lot facilities and equipment of the Contractor must be located within the City limits of Shakopee , Minnesota . The storage and parking lot facilities of the Contractor shall meet all applicable state building code standards and municipal license and zoning requirements , including those relating to screening and landscaping . 5 . The Contractor shall control and operate facilities capable of storing a minimum of two ( 2) vehicles inside and facilities capable of storing a minimum of ten ( 10) vehicles outside . It is further agreed that vehicles will be stored inside only when so directed by an authorized City Official . 6. The Contractor assumes full responsibility for the conduct of its employees and guarantees that its employees will respond promptly to calls , use safe and adequate equipment , be clean in appearance , use decent language , and treat the public courteously at all times . 7 . The Contractor shall be solely responsible for the loss or damage to any motor vehicle , including its equipment and contents , from the time the vehicle is turned over to the Contractor or his agent by an authorized City Official until such time as the vehicle is released to the registered or actual owner or agent thereof . 8 . The Contractor agrees to maintain proper records of all vehicles received . These records shall be approved by the Police -2- ra 9' Chief of the City and are to be available at all times for inspection by authorized City Officials . The records shall include a copy of the police impounding report . The Contractor must submit to the Police Chief of the City monthly reports to vehicles stored and released . The contents of these reports shall be determined by the Police Chief of the City . 9 . All vehicles towed or impounded for the Police Department of the City are to be released by the Contractor only upon the showing of a release form issued by the Police Department of the City . Either the Contractor or his employee( s ) must be present at the Contractor ' s parking facility or on call at least between the hours of 7 : 00 a .m. and 6 : 00 p.m . , Monday through Friday , and on Saturday from 8 : 00 a .m. to 12 : 00 p .m. , and Sunday from 12 : 00 p.m. to 5 : 00 p .m. , for the purpose of releasing vehicles to authorized claimants . 10 . It is agreed that motor vehicles will not be driven during the towing procedure . Where a motor vehicle is without tires or has flat tires , the Contractor agrees to tow the vehicle without damaging the wheels and further agrees not to tow a vehicle on its rims , on wheels without tires , or on flat tires . 11 . When the Contractor arrives at the scene of a tow where a motor vehicle accident has occurred , the Contractor assumes respons- ibility for removing , without charge , any vehicular parts or other debris resulting from the accident . 12 . The Contractor shall be entitled to a charge for its towing and storage services pursuant to those fees specified in the following schedule . These fees shall apply only when the car is towed to the Contractor ' s storage area at the direction of the City of Shakopee . Towing recuested by vehicle owners shall be subject to fees agreed on -3- between the Contractor and the owner including charges for towing vehicles outside the City of Shakopee . A. Towing Charges Type I , all tows which involve a vehicle which is on or immediately adjacent to a public street or alley and which can be secured for towing with the usual type of winching . S Type II , all tows which involve a vehicle which is not on or immediately adjacent to a public street or alley and which requires an unusual amount of winching to secure it for towing by one tow truck or the use of a dolly to tow the vehicle . S Type III , all tows which involve a vehicle that requires , and for which a specific request has been made , two or more tow trucks . $ NOTE: The designation as to the type of tow performed will be by the duly authorized agent of the City . Any disagreement with this designation shall be made in writing to the City Administrator within 24 hours . B . Towing of Large Vehicles Towing of vehicles of more than five ( 5) ton factory rated capacity. $ C . Reclaimed Vehicles at Scene if an operator of the Contractor is called to tow a vehicle and after arriving at the scene of the tow, the owner appears to claim said vehicle , the vehicle may be turned over to the owner provided the police authorize the release of the vehicle and the towing operator is paid a service fee in the amount of one-half ( 1 ) of the Type I towing charge . D . Storage Charges 1 . First 24 hours or fraction thereof A. Inside storage $ B. Outside storage $ 2 . Each additional 24 hours or fraction thereof A. Inside storage $ B. Outside storage $ E. Unlocking Vehicles : $ The City shall not be responsible to the Contractor for the payment of any charge for towing and/or storage , and/or unlocking vehicles . -4- l° .a'�' 13 . Should the Contractor fail to appear at the designated point of tow within twenty ( 20) minutes after a call , the City reserves the right to call another tow service to perform the work . if the Contractor is called for a tow and is unable to respond , it must immediately so inform the City Official or department requesting the tow , and the City nereby reserves the right to call another tow service to perform the work . _ 14 . This Agreement will not be executed nor shall the Contractor commence work under this Agreement until the Contractor has established that it has obtained the insurance coverage set forth below and that I said insurance is in full force and effect with respect to all oper- ations of the Contractor . The Contractor agrees to furnish to the City a copy of the policy or policies issuedthereto which shall be in force on the date of the execution of the Agreement and shall continue for a period equal to the duration of the Agreement . The following coverage is required : A. Public Liability insurance including general liability automobile liability as follows : 1 . Bodily Injury Liability in the amount of at least $250 ,000 for injury or death of any one person in one occurrence. 2 . Bodily Injury Liability in the amount of at least .500 ,000 for injuries or deaths arising out of any one occurrence . 3. Property Damage Liability in the amount of at least $50 ,000 without aggregate limit for any one occurrence . Such property damage insurance shall include coverage for property in the care , custody , and control of the Insured . 4 . Garage Keepers ' Legal Liability policy in the amount of at least $30 ,000 . Each of these policies shall carry an endorsement which reads : It is understood and agreed that the insurance provided under the undermentioned policy and endorsements attached thereto, is hereby extended to apply to the liability imposed by law on the City of Shakopee for bodily injury and for damage to property, which liability is assumed by the insured under the towing Agreement between the City of Shakopee and the Insured. B . Workmen ' s Compensation Insurance covering all employees of the Contractor working in the job in accordance with the Minnesota Workmen' s compensation Law . C . Cancellation Notice The policy shall provide for 10 days ' notice to the City before any changes or cancellation of each policv becomes effective . 15 . The Contractor shall defend , indemnify , and hold harmless the City , its employees and agents , from any ana all claims , causes of action , lawsuits , damages , losses , expenses on account of bodily injury , sickness , disease , death , and property damage as a result , directly or indirectly , of the operations of the Contractor in connection with the work performed under the Agreement . In the event any such action is brought therefor against any said indemnities , the Contractor shall assume full responsibility for the defense thereof ; and upon its failure to do so on proper notice , the City shall have the right to defend such action and to charge all costs thereof to the Contractor . 16 . The Contractor shall operate its parking facility in compliance with the terms of this Agreement and all applicable laws , ordinances , rules , and regulations which are now in effect or which may hereafter be adopted . 17 . It is mutually understood and agreed that no altercation or violation of the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto . 18 . In the event of a breach by Contractor of any term or condition of this Agreement , the City shall have , in addition to any other legal recourse , the right to terminate this Agreement forthwith. 19 . This Agreement shall be for a period from to provided that either party may terminate the same by ninety ( 90) days ' written notice to the other . -6- i r6 �- 20 . A copy of this Agreement and a schedule of the fees authorized shall be posted in a conspicuous place in the Contractor ' s garage . IN WITNESS WHEREOF , the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their appropriate officers and their seals affixed as of the day and year first above written . CITY OF SHAKOPEE : By Its Mayor Its Clerk Its Administrator CONTRACTOR: By Its MEMO TO: City Council FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building official RE: Electrical Contract DATE: October 19, 1988 INTRODUCTION• Attached, please find written notice of termination from John Wagner as the City's electrical inspector. BACKGROUND• As you are aware, Mr. Wagner underwent hip replacement surgery in January. In his absence we temporarily contracted for electrical inspection services with Terry Krominga who is a state inspector. During Terry's temporary contract we have had no complaints. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize a permanent contract with Terry Krominga. 2 . Do not renew the contract and seek another source for electrical inspections. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend we renew our electrical contract with Mr. Krominga. ACTION REOUESTED: Authorize the appropriate city officials to execute the attached electrical contract with Terry Krominga for the remainder of the 1988 operating year. LH:cah Attachments i Jclul Wagner 278 West Lake Street Excelsior, Minn. 55331 i i To City of Sha'_kocee: As of October 18, 1988 I am banding in MY resignation as Electrical Inspector for Shakopee. M. Sincerely, W XX YU _ U n�, 10 (b CONTRACT FOR ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS CITY OF SHAKOPEE Terry Krominga, Box 91, LeSueur, MN 56058, is hereby appointed electrical inspector for the City of Shakopee to serve at the pleasure of the City Council. The City of Shakopee acknowledges receipt of his electrical inspector's bond in the amount of $1,000 payable to the City of Shakopee in case of default. As such inspector, he hereby agrees to enforce the Minnesota Electrical Act, the Rules and Regulations of the State Board of Electricity thereunder and the appropriate Ordinances of the City of Shakopee, as pertaining to the licensing of electricians and inspection of electrical installations. The rate of compensation for his services shall be 80% of the electrical inspection fees collected by the City of Shakopee. In addition to any other rules, regulations or directives promulgated or issued under authority of the City of Shakopee, he hereby agrees to comply with the following rules: 1. Report to this office when called upon. 2. Supply the City of Shakopee with a verification of automobile liability insurance on Form 1927 of the amounts of not less than $50, 000 for any one per- son, $100, 000 for any one accident for personal injury and $10,000 for property damage. 3 . Supply a monthly report of inspection completed. (Payment shall not exceed percentage or work completed) . 4 . Deposit with the City of Shakopee any inspection fees received in the field. 5. Delegate authority and responsibilities to no one except duly authorized representatives of this office upon request. 6. Keep a Journeyman or Master electrician's license in force at all times. By this appointment, the City of Shakopee places trust and authority upon Terry Krominga as an independent contractor qualified and certified as such to make electrical inspections in behalf of the City of Shakopee in the geographical area defined by the City's corporate limits. This appointment shall be dated concurrent with said bond, which shall terminate on December 31, 1988, unless amended or withdrawn previous to that date by the City of Shakopee or its duly authorized agents, or which shall terminate upon 30 days written notice by Terry Krominga requesting same. Approved by the Shakopee City Council this day of 198_. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Terry Krominga Mayor of the City of Shakopee Present Address City Adm. , John K. Anderson City, State, Zip City Clerk, Judith S. Cox c CONSENT /('9 AIL'il SI5I!..AIt h „ ] � . MIQ1, 1 : GRADF71 D I II : 1),'I . 21,1111. 196l, 1 N I'Ri,OI( I 0\ : The 1988 caoi t,l fa_u_umeut budget oroyided S150. 000 for. the rr,oJ acv-roent of our 1969 eradrr for the Street division of the Nuhn, Uuiks depa r t.meni . Bid specifications were sent_ to four vendors rho were capable of sul,nlying us with a machine that could meet our specifications . The bids were oriented far the grader on October 19th , 19x8 . and the apparent low/best. bidder is ieglers ,- Tnc. , of Bloomington, Minn . BACGGROI'ND: The apparent best bidder completely comnlied with our request. for a Total Cost Bid which renuires that t:he vendor will buy back the arader within 5 years if required b, the City . The vendor trust furnish a performance bond for this 5 year period until the time limit expires, or the repurchase option is imnlemented. The runner-up bioder for the grader did not comply with the repurchase requirement , therefore . not offering its an option to return the grader if it did riot perform satisfactorily before the 5 year time limit expired. Unlike most Derformance bonds for repurchase , we asked for only 25% of the total cost of the machine which is considerably less than the total. renurchase figure . The typical repurchase performance bond is usually for Che f'ull. amount of repurchase stated by the vendor, however, ::e did not, want. to place a vendor into a large financial commitment for 5 years . we asked only for a per-formance bond which would be only '25% of the list price. We felt. that this option would pct after an advantage to a vendor who is in a better financial position, but would, at least, offer some sort of a guarantee to the City that their investment would be protected as well . 11' a vendor does not offer to repurchase the machine within a 5 year tame frame. we felt that we could be 'stuck" with a bad machine far un to 20 tears, or that the vendor does riothave faith in his machine : On Thursday, Oct. 20th , the two H.E.O. ' s, Mechanic, and Street Foreman and myself, visited the Ziegler Inc . . (Cateinillarl facilities to experience a 'hands on" demonstration of the 2 machines which were bid. The following day, we visited Carlson Lake State Equipment Co . ( John Deere ) facilities fn Burnsville to obtain a direct, comparison of the two machines . These demonstrations were video taped, and the operators were asked to evaluate the machines irregardless of price difference . We explained to the operators that the machine that we purchase, would probably be in our fleet for 20 years , and that. their r um:menl ami ,•ra i u a t icv,r. ,:uu1 be heayiJc runsidr,i ed ip out r eocmm, uda t ioi: lTu a mnu , all of the crew members foun,; tIn, t lhr laterpilJar grader was a much superior machine 1 ,. tin .lohu D. et-- era it er. Titis , I ieei . war, all absolute "apples Icr a pl.le•n" roma..lvts,",u by 1Ge neople who have to cpe rate and woI with the mal-h inr . 1i.•cause th. i:i e�J el ICa el FA J ail bid comq.l te,' ruwpl rt e1 , w 1h our Spec i li r ati op= , we will recnmatend ih- pur ohane of th { s n:arhill, to Cuuuci 1 . The , ileo tape i.,r th, d emonst raI i ,mand the piomol oral tapes sa! p1ied 1, Zieelers, are available for your regi ewa t . Pleri.e checl, t+it.h Mr. Zak , Mrs . \"ierJiug , or Barbara Pot,t.bier ( our secrrtary lot, the lr avai labi J i tv . 1-hese tapes of"1'er some comparison of the two machines in question, and also heip explain the Total ,_ost Bid concept The snecifications that we used were slmiJ ar to those used . most recently , by the Scott Count, llighwa: Dent . ( 2 machines ) , Maple Groye , and Eagan and Lakeville . This specified grader will have a snow wing . t:-plow and one-wap plow attached to it and these options will change our plowing operation somewhat because of the equipment versatility and capability . Our wader will. be lit: ilized more in our rural areas somewhat like the plowing method employed by Scott County= . Because there is a delivery date problem. there is the possibility that this machine won' t be available untilthe latter stages of winter this year . The specifications were written so that four different machines could meet our specifications , but two of these vendors have notbeen bidding consistently with the other' communities Jat.ely. and we feel that. this was partly due to the fact that the more recentspecifications from the other communities have been more restrictive to obtain a better quality machine to protect. their lone range investment , however , we knew that two of these bidders would be very comnetitive in their bidding if they both offered a renurchase option . We used this Total Cost Bid concept in 1984 , when w purchased a frontend loader for the Street department . This Total Bid also had a repurchase option which we will probably implement before the expiration date of the agreement . This repurchase clause states that. they ( the vendor ) will buy back the front end loader f'or $48 , 000 when requested before the expiration date of the buy back clause expires . We have checked for the wholesale value of this 1984 Case loader . and found that it is only worth 522 , 000 on the wholesale market , butthat the tender is obligated to pay us 548 , 000 for the repurchase of this loader. This loader is not performing up to our standards . and we have already pro.iec'ted the replacementof this loader in our Capital Equipment, budget for 1990. This would not have been possible if we had not insisted on a repurchase price f'or this loader when we let rr,-civ,-,i bid' . A fronL end loader is aenePeil > expected to last i (1-12 }cars in ser, ioo pears . but a Grader is eenerally expected to L+st lh-20 veare, wi ih a municipal work load . If we were to exper ienoc -pr ob] ems with this grader rithout a repurchase option, Lhcn ,re ,:oold haN-e to res.ian ourselves to ifving with Lhe probl Cnl eradcr until the 20 near cvcle had expired . i"you reviewing tlu. 2 bids received for the- ^-rader, we checked to comnare other bias in the metro area , that virtually used the same s_necif jr:ations . Because the Soott Co. zIighw. y Dept . had ,just bid fairly identical machines last yea: , we used their rationale to .justifv the award for the Caterpillar grader. Fr alio reviewed the bids from 5 governmental agencies for comparison to make sure that our bid ,:as not out of Line. A,; noticed that our bid specifications contained more accessory enuipment , and this was because of the equipmentapplication toward our Cite needs . The higher cost of the complete grader was reflected by the eauipment add-on' s. 2/87 Scott County 5 133 , 379 V-plow. wing. one-way plow scarifier 2/88 Dakota Count?' 133 , 187 V-plow, wing 12/86 Citv of Eagan 132 , 353 wing, scarifier 9/87 City of Maple Grove 126 , 932 V-plow, wing 12/85 City of Lakeville 135 . 546 wing , V-plow 10/88 City of Shakopee 139 , 546 V-plow, wing( 16 , 000 ) one wav plow ( 4 , 000 ) scarifier ( 11 , 000 ) blade float 12 , 0001 installed radio ( 1 , 400 ) + The Citv of Maple Grove tried to readvertise and see if the bids would change , they did not . All vendors supplied the same bids the second time. They then awarded the bid to Zieglers . ** After trade-in, the City of Shakopee will pay $127 , 546 for this purchase Ziegler, Inc. had reported two 3% price increases since 10/87 , which would represent an approximate additional 58 , 300 costincrease for our machine. We Lhink thatthe cost of our machine was comparable with the other communities who specified the same type of machine. lie Can aliticipalr all argumentfrom th.r John Deere dealer whey wi 11 claim that they have been excluded from the Lidding process by our requiring a ben bade option . This repurchase Claus, is c,-r to iuly fair to t.he- lily- to protect their investment . and is enmmonlc used b) many governmental agencies. . The John Derry dealer wi l : also claim that we could say" $30 . 000 by purchasing their machine , but we ha\ e already asked them to offer a repurchase option so the bids can be determined equal . In cheeki.n" with Scott. County officials . they feel that the Total Cost Rid concept protects their equipment investment, and that they are comnletely satisfied with the graders that were supplied in this bid process. We feel that our recommendation is ,justified to recommend purchasing the Caterpillar 1=.OG grader because : 1 . The vendor offered its a repurchase option as requested. 2 . precious experience with this dealer. 3 . Equipment selection by the .Cities of Eagan , Naple Grove, Lakeville, Dakota County, and Scott County, in a similar bidding process . 4 . Comparing the equipment prices paid by the other agencies for similar graders . 5 . Our Equipment operators and City- Mechanic comparing the two graders with a "hands on" demonstration . They reported that they would prefer the Caterpillar, especially if they will have to "lice" with this grader for the nest 20 .rears . The durability of the "Cat" grader is not in question. 6 . The City of Chaska has a John Deere grader , and they are not happy with it' s reliability. ALTERNATIVES : 1 . Award the grader bid to Zi.eglers . Inc . , for furnishing the bestbid as requested. 2 . Do not award the grader bid. 3 . Readvertise again like Maple Grove . 4 . Do not purchase a grader. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative =1 . A,;ard the grader bid to Zieglers, Inc specified. ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the proper City officials to purchase a Caterpillar 140G motor grader from Zieglers , Inc . , for the net amount of 8127 . 546 .00 which includes the trade-in of City unit. *105 , as proposed . MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer 1 Aw SUBJECT: Shakopee Water Management Organization DATE: October 24, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a letter from Darrell Jahn, Chairman of the Shakopee Water Management Organization (WMO) , requesting that the City of Shakopee review the Watershed Management Plan and submit all comments to the WMO by December 1 , 1988 . BACKGROUND: The Shakopee WMO consists of representatives from the cities of Shakopee and Prior Lake , Louisville Township and Jackson Township . In 1982 , the state legislature mandated that all watersheds form organizations to manage storm water and _ground water concerns. In 1985 , the Shakopee WHO was formed by a joint powers agreement between the four entities. The WMO' s were further mandated to formulate management plans (509 plans) to accomplish these goals. Once the 509 plans were completed, the local units of government would then adopt these plans to aide them in managing storm water and groundwater. The Shakopee WMO 509 plans is now completed and begins the lengthy review process prior to adoption. The first step in the review process is the 60 day review period by the local units of government. Subsequent, review steps are as follows: • 60 day review by Scott County • 120 day review by Met. Council • 60 days each by DNR , MPCA and the Health Department The entire review process may take 1 - 1 1/2 years. Once all comments have been received , the WMO will make all pertinent changes and submit the plan to the Scott County Soil and Water Conservation District for a final review prior to adoption. Once the 509 plan is finally adopted by the WMO, all local units of government must revise their comprehensive plan to include the water management plan or some other water mmanagement plan. The Shakopee WMO must approve all comprehensive plan revisions. The Shakopee WHO 509 plan is now ready for review by Shakopee. Attached is an executive summary of the plan. In addition, the Engineering Department has two copies of the complete plan for Council members to borrow for an - in-depth review . Staff encourages Council to take an active part in this process. All comments must be submitted to the WMO by December 1 , 1988 . One last item is that several Council members questioned the expenditures required to support the WMO. To date, the four governmental units have donated $15 , 500 to the organization; $13 ,500 of which was for developing the 509 Water Management Plan and $2 , 000 for general operating expenses. Attachment C summarizes the expenditures for the $13 ,500. Steve McComas was the consultant from the Soil and Water District assigned to assist the Shakopee WMO in completing their 509 plans, hence the majority of expenditures were to him. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Submit all comments to the Shakopee WMO by December 1 , 1988. 2 . Do Nothing. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . In addition, Council may want to involve the Planning Commission or other Boards or staff in the review process. If so, all comments should be submitted to the City Engineer by November 15 , 1988 for submittal to the WMO. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct the City Engineer to submit a formal response to the Shakopee WMO by December 1 , 1988 regarding the review and comment of the Water Management Plan ( 509 plan ) and solicit comments from various staff or Boards as directed by Council. DH/pmp PLAN ATTACHMENT A /6 September 29, 1988 Mr. John Anderson, Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Ave. Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear John, The Shakopee Basin Watershed Management Organization is hereby sub- mitting their Watershed Management Plan for review as prescribed in Minnesota Statutes Chapter 473 . 878, Subdivision 5 - Review, which reads as follows : "Upon completion of the plan, but before final adoption by the organi- zation, the organization shall submit the plan for review and comment to all counties , soil and water conservation districts , towns , and statutory and home rule charter cities having territory within the watershed. Any local government unit which expects that substantial amendment of this local comprehensive plan will be necessary in order to bring local water management into conformance with the watershed plan shall describe as specifically as possible within its comments, the amendments to the local plan which it expects will be necessary. " The statue provides 60 days for this review period. The Shakopee Basin WMC has est_allished DeLpmher 7 . 1988 as the off iciaT Deadline for local review. Please forward your comments by December 1, T488 t —" Darrell Jahn, Chairman Shakopee Basin Watershed Management Organization 14830 Townline Ave. Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 The Shakopee Basin WMO will not be holding a public meeting, so you are asked to solicit comments from interested individuals or groups having lands within the Shakopee Basin Watershed. Should you have questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me at 445-6140. S`iincerely, Darrell n�h Chairman Shakopee Basin Watershed Management Organization P . S . According to our records , you should already have a copy of the draft plan for review. ATTACHMENT B 1 SHAKOPEE BASIN WMO WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Metropolitan Water Management Act is a law requiring metropolitan watersheds to develop a plan that addresses two broad areas: stormwater runoff (water quantity) and factors that affect lake, stream, and wetland resources (water quality). An important consideration is the use of natural surface and ground water storage to meet these needs. The Shakopee Basin Water Management Plan consists of two reports, the first report is the Surface Water Management Plan and includes policies, management programs, and implementation programs that the Shakopee Basin WMO Board will oversee. The second report is the Ground Water Management Plan and includes sections on ground water resources, policy areas, and management programs. The Ground Water Policies and Management Programs are only recommendations and are not enforceable at the WMO level; ground water programs should be implemented at the County level. This first report, Surface Water Planning, has several sections: inventory of resources, identifying areas of concern, policy statements, a management program, a mechanism to implement policies, and a capital improvements program. Executive Summary, page 1 ATTACHMENT B 2. Soil loss limits. For the control of excessive soil loss in a non— construction situation where soil has sedimented onto an adjacent property. In agricultural settings, excessive soil loss is greater than three times the tolerable soil loss values for soil series (3T). For non—agricultural areas, excessive soil loss is 100 cubic feet of soil. 3. Stormwater runoff and drainage. Measures will be taken to maintain runoff rates to predevelopment levels. Land—locked depressions may be allowed a positive outlet. Drainage plans are encouraged for work that diverts water either into a natural watercourse or from a natural watercourse. 4. Stormwater detention. Natural systems are preferred over constructed basins for stormwater detention. Either on—site ponding or regional ponding can be used. The Local Unit of Government will decide the methods for procuring ponding sites. 5. Role of wetlands. Natural systems are recommended. The WMO should develop a Iist of potential sites that could be used for stormwater detention areas. J 6. Water qualit . A reasonable effort should be made to maintain phosphorus and nitrogen loadings to predevelopment levels. In agricultural areas, farm conservation plans will be used to address nonpoint source reduction. Stormwater detention areas should be designed to promote water quality improvement as well as detention. 7. Addressing past problems. The WMO will concentrate on managing existing and future water resource issues and problems. Past problems brought to the attention of the WMO Board will try to be solved using technical input, with the use of financial resources being decided on a case by case basis. The WMO adopts by reference, existing rules and regulations pertaining to filling in wetlands, dredging, shoreland setbacks, and agricultural rules and regulations such as Ditch Laws (Chapter 106), feedlot criteria, etc. Executive Summary, page 3 ATTACHMENT B �6 _ l RESOURCES The Shakopee Basin WMO has approximately 13,000 acres within its legal watershed boundaries. There are two major lakes, O'Dowd and Thole, and 16 state protected wetlands within the legal watershed boundaries. There are no perennial water courses, but several intermttent streams. Land use is a mix of agricultural and urban with urban development rapidly increasing in areas around the City of Shakopee. CONCERNS, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES The Shakopee Basin WMO developed policies and management programs based on concerns that were generated by the WMO Board of Commissioners and from the public by way of a public meeting held in the course of preparing this —� Plan. Main concerns involved the following topics: runoff from development, flood prone areas, dry planning (for drought), lake and wetland storage capacities, nutrients in runoff, controlling erosion, and maintaining or enhancing lake and stream water quality. POLICY STATEMENTS The Shakopee Basin WMO developed seven policies concerning soil erosion, stormwater runoff, and water quality. It is intended that the Local Units of Government will incorporate these policies into their Local Plan. The seven policies for this WMO are summarized in the next seven paragraphs: - 1. Soil erosion and sediment control. For many types es of new construction, soil erosion and sediment control plans will be required. Executive Summary, page 2 fDFv ATTACHMENT B MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS Several watershed management projects are being considered, but with an open— ,. d—d completion date, and include the following: 1. Evaluate land use and runoff rates at the subwatershed level. Z. Estimate ponding requirements for subwatersheds 3. Conduct a wetland inventory 4. Locate and rank wetlands for future stormwater management needs. 5. Model nutrient runoff from subwatersheds, locate problem watersheds, and implement best management practices on them 6. Gather physical, chemical, and biological information on lakes in the WMO that currently have little background data. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS No major capital improvement projects are scheduled at the present time. Funding for watershed management projects (small—scale projects) should be pursued through grants or tax levies. Funding for large—scale projects (over $50,000) would be obtained on a case—by—case basis. MANAGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT OF POLICIES The Policies for the Shakopee Basin WMO are designed so that the Local Unit of Government has the option of conducting the management or enforcement themselves, or deferring to the County (primarily through the Office of Planning, Inspections, and Environmental Health) or to the Scott Soil and Water Conservation District. If a Local Unit of Government deferred, it I would be arranged for the County to handle routine cases and the SWCD to handle the more complex cases. Executive Summary, page 4 ATTACHMENT C ` SHAKOPEE BASIN WMO PHASE I. Total Allocation $ 9,000. 00 Steve McComas Allocation $ 8,289. 00 Labor $6,680. 00 Mileage 454. 25 Expenses 1, 062. 40 Total 1$8,196. 65 - 8 , 196 . 65 BALANCE $ 92. 35 i District Allocation $ 711 .00 Clerical Labor $529. 74 Administrative Exp . 181. 26 Total 711. 00 - 711. 00 BALANCE -0- BALANCE PHASE I AS OF 8 /31 / 88 $ 92 . 35 — - - - - - - - - - — - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a e PHASE II Total Allocation $ 4500.00 Steve McComas Allocation $ 4,375.09; Labor $3 ,380.00 Mileage 275.00 Expenses 538. 00 Total $4, 193. 00 4, 193. 00 BALANCE $ 182. 00 District Allocation $ 125. 00 Clerical, Admn 6 Supplies $125. 00 125 . 00 125.00 BALANCE - - -0- BALANCE PHASE II AS OF 8 /31/ 88 $ 182.00 p SHAKOPEE BASIN WMO August 1 , 1986 thru July 17 , 1987 : Receipts - $9 ,000. 00 Disbursements - Steve McComas , 186k hrs @ $20 . $3 , 730. 00 Scott SWCD clerical - 48 hrs . @ $12 . 50 498. 49 Scott SWCD Administrative Ex_D . 99 . 12 Mileage - 1189 miles @ 251, 297 . 25 Expenses 295.40 Total Expenses $4, 920. 26 BALANCE $4, 079. 74 July 20, 1987 - November 7 , 1987 Disbursements - Steve McComas - 73 hrs @ $20. $1 ,460. 00 Mileage - 360 miles @ 25C 90. 00 Scott SWCD Clerical - 2§ hrs @ 12. 50 31 . 25 Scott SWCD Administrative Exp . 82 14 Expenses 71. 00 Total Expenses $1, 734. 39 BALANCE - PHASE I 11/7/87 $2, 345. 35 I April 25, 1988 - August 31 , 1988 Disbursements - Steve McComas - 74. 5 hrs @ $20. $1,490. 00 Mileage - 268 miles @ 25C 67 . 00 Expenses 696. 00 Total Expenses $2 ,253 . 00 BALANCE - PHASE I 8/31/88 $ 92 . 35 SHAKOPEE BASIN NMO ALLOCATION PHASE II $4, 500. 00 Disbursements - Steve McComas - 16' bra @ $20. $430.00 Mileage - 192 miles @ 25C 48. 00 Exnenses - 5 . 00 Total Expenses $ 483 . 00 BALANCE 1/2/38 PHASE II $4, 017 . 00 1/3/88 - Anril 21 , 1983 Disbursements - Steve McComas - 106 hrs @ $20 . .$2120. 00 Mileage - 520 miles @ 25C 130. 00 Expenses 458.00 Scott SWCD Clerical , Administrative and supply Expenses 125 . 00 Total Expenses X2 , 833 . 00 BALANCE 4/21/88 PHASE II $1, 184. 00 Anril 25 , 1988 - 8/31/83 Disbursements - Steve McComas - 41 . 5 bra @ $20. $ 830.00 Mileage - 338 miles @ 25C 97 . 00 Expenses 75. 00 Total Expenses $1,002 . 00 BALANCE 8/31/38 PHASE II $ 132 . 00 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer \\ SUBJECT: Adams Street from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue DATE: October 25 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo addresses that portion of Adams Street that is currently a gravel road (from 6th Avenue to 3rd Avenue) . BACKGROUND: In June, 1988 a request was brought before City Council by Joe - Noterman regarding dust control on Adams Street , between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue, which is currently a gravel road. At that time, there were two issues being discussed : 1 ) the City' s overall dust control policy and 2) the specific section of Adams Street per Mr. Noterman' s request. On July 5 , 1988 City Council voted unanimously to bring the issue of dust control on Adams Street (requested by Mr. Noterman) back in 60 days, which was the estimated time for completion of the sanitary sewer project in this street. The sewer project has now been completed. Therefore, staff is bringing this item back to Council, as directed. Regarding the City' s overall policy on applying calcium chloride to gravel roads, adopted in 1980, calcium chloride is only being applied on rural roads at the owner' s request. The reason being that it is cost prohibitive to improve rural roads and extremely difficult to encourage those residents to petition for street improvements. Whereas, in urban areas the costs are much more reasonable per lot and residents are encouraged to petition for street improvements. As indicated in Jim Karkanen ' s June 30 , 1988 memo to City Council, this current policy results in an expenditure of $2 ,640 per year to apply calcium chloride to 7 requested locations on rural roads ( applied twice per year ) . The memo further calculates that to dust coat all rural roads would cost about $32 ,600 per year and to dust coat all urban streets and alleys would cost an additional $46 ,000 per year for a total of $78,600 per year to dust coat all gravel surfaces within the City of Shakopee. Due to the large rural lots , it is generally not feasible to assess those residents for improving a rural road. Whereas an urban lot is much smaller, the assessments are spread around to more properties and the valuation of a property usually reflects the fact that it is on a paved road or gravel road (Properties on gravel roads are valued less) . Those are the major differences between the urban and rural streets and the reason that the City Council adopted the rural dust control policy in 1980 . If calcium chloride were applied to urban streets, there would be little incentive for residents to request street improvements. The second issue specifically dealt with Mr. Noterman' s request regarding dust control on Adams Street. One of the issues last summer was the possibility that the Scott County HRA would acquire the prison property on the east side of Adams. If they acquired that property, they could share in the cost of calcium chloride application on Adams Street. The Scott County HRA has now decided against purchasing that property. The options for dust control on Adams are 1 ) calcium chloride 2) oil and 3) paving the road. Staff is recommending against the calcium chloride based on the existing City dust control policy. Oil is no longer allowed, due to environmental reasons. That leaves upgrading the road to add pavement as the most viable option to controlling dust on Adams Street. Scott County has programmed the upgrading of Adams Street from the new bypass to 6th Avenue for the 1990 construction season . The plans call for this section of road to be upgraded to a 4-lane urban cross-section with curb and gutter. Staff feels that the City should upgrade Adams from 6th to 3rd at the same time. There has even been some discussion about curving Adams Street through the prison property to tie into 4th Avenue. This alternative would need to be addressed in the feasibility report. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Reaffirm the City ' s overall dust control policy and specifically as it applies to Mr. Noterman' s request. 2 . Revise the dust control policy as Council desires. 3 . Direct the City Engineer to prepare a resolution ordering a feasibility report for upgrading Adams Street between 6th and 3rd Avenue during 1989. 4. Do Nothing. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to reaffirm the City ' s overall dust control policy and to direct staff to notify Mr . Noterman of that decision. A " Staff also recommends Alternative No. 3 , to study the feasibility of upgrading Adams Street between 6th and 3rd. The study would be done in 1989 for possible construction in 1990 in conjunction with the County project. Staff also feels strongly that the existing gravel roadways in urban Shakopee have created a negative image for those neighborhoods and that the Council should take a strong stand in either upgrading those roads or vacating them to create additional residential lots. Staff feels that an in-depth study of all gravel roads should be prepared with recommendations on the action to take within a reasonable time frame (say 5 years) to upgrade or vacate all remaining gravel roads. This study should address various assessments, alternatives, including an area wide assessment as one alternative, to reduce the impact on corner lots. In addition, the City Council will need to take the initiative for upgrading these streets by ordering the projects, because they will probably not be petitioned for. ACTION REQUESTED: 1 . Direct staff to notify Mr. Noterman of the current City dust control policy and the future of Adams Street. 2, Direct staff to prepare a resolution ordering a feasibility report on Adams Street, between 6th Avenue and 3rd Avenue. 3 . Direct staff to develop a long range plan for eliminating or upgrading all remaining gravel roads in urban Shakopee and submit this plan to the Planning Commission for a recommendation to City Council. DH/pmp DUST Administrative Policy No. ;p - Subject : Dust Coating Date Adopted : June 4 , 1982 l Source of Authority: City Council Motion The Citv ' s policy on dust control has evolved over a number of years and is based upon the action taken by Council on the two attached memos . In brief the Citv does not permit oil treatment of any kind for dust control , only calcium., chloride . The only roads eligible for dust control treatment paid for by the City are rural roads , urban roads can receive dust treatment if they Day for it . The City contracts annually with the low bidder for Scott County dust control program and the Public Works Superintendent coordinates all City applications . 5/18/82 - "Colligan/Fierling moved to reject the request of dust treatment for 11th Avenue , but if the residents in the area would like to do something themselves for dust control , they should work that out with the City . Mction caried unanimously. " ' { �V / e Y rroceadings of the City Council �. -5�-3-- ,Iu'_y s. 1968 page -2- Z' y ,Q.,ywsYl.r inq vowed to submit an amendment request to the rt+ nt of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) extending the nu�h prized -ner y a ournocil Grant agreement one additional year and tofficial, o an agreement with the Sc tt/Carver Community Action Agency for home energy check-up auditor assistance. (Approved under Consent Business) Wampach/Vierling moved to approve Dial-A-Ride contract amendment ";7 extending the Saturday Dial-A-Ride Service hours through the remainder of the contract period and eliminating the provision of I service. (Approved under Consent Business) I e City Engineer reported the estimated cost to provide calcium chloride to unimproved rural roads, urban roads and alleys as ll as the estimated cost to improve rural roads with bituminous rfacing and urban roads with curb, gutter and bituminous rfacing and urban alleys with bituminous surfacing. He also plained the city's policy on applying calcium chloride to improved roads and alleys. Discussion followed. e City Administrator reminded Council that the reascn for considering the City's policy was because of M.r. Notermann's quest for treatment to Adams Street South of 6th Avenue. Ate previous meeting Mr. Notermann suggested waiting until after e sewer project going in on Adams Street is completed. If the ott County HRA acquires the state property to the East of Adams reet maybe they would be willing to share in the cost of some cium chloride treatment. rling/Clay moved to bring the dust control request of Joe ermann back to Council in 60 days. (This would be after pletion of the 6th and Adams Street sanitary seweronstruction project. ) Motion carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on how Council wished to proceed following the recent defeat of a referendum for a community center to be located in the Minnesota valley Mall. Wampach/Scott moved that the City Council take no action and thus interpreting the results of the June 28th referendum to mean that the voters are no longer interested in a co=unity center proposal. (Existing organizations who want to repackage the proposal and bring it back to Council are encouraged to do so. ) Roll Call : Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried. Wampach/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on the vacation %of Angor Street from 1st Avenue to 2nd Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. CONSENT /!J MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer ¢ SUBJECT: OSM Contract Extension DATE: October 26 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a Contract Extension Agreement from our consultant, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. , for preliminary surveys for several proposed 1989 projects. BACKGROUND: On October 18 , 1988 City Council ordered feasibility reports for several 1989 projects. These projects included 3rd Avenue Reconstruction, Bluff Street, and Marschall Road Sidewalk. At the time the feasibility reports were ordered, staff indicated that preliminary surveys needed to be done on these projects to prepare accurate cost estimates and determine their feasibility. Due to existing staff workloads , it is requested that our consultant, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron, be utilized to gather all of the field surveys now, before winter arrives. Once the feasibility reports are completed, public hearings held and the projects are ordered, staff may request that OSM assist in the design of some of these projects, although staff is hoping to complete the design of several of the projects in-house. Attached is an extension agreement for OSM to complete the field surveys for these projects. The agreement also includes doing the surveying for two alleys (Blocks 55 & 81 ) which Council has already ordered plans and specifications for. The cost for these services would be at their 1988 fee schedule with a not-to-exceed amount of $12 ,500 .00 . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Authorize staff to execute the extension agreement. 2 . Deny the request. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize the appropriate City officials to execute the Contract Extension Agreement with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates , Inc . in the amount of $12,500.00 to complete the field surveys for 3rd Avenue Reconstruction, Bluff Street, Marschall Road , Block 55 Alley, and Block 81 Alley Projects. i Schon en +• r� C j Mayeron& l -AW=. ..'I::.. Associales,lnc. ^ 2021 East Hennepin avenue Minneap,llc.MN 55413 612-331-8eo0 - FAX 113SW, En�mecrs Suneeurc Planners October 24, 1988 City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Attn: Mr. David Hutton, P.E. City Engineer Re: Contract Extension Agreement Preliminary Survey for 1989 Projects Dear Nr. Hutton: As per our Agreement for Professional Services with the City of Shakopee, Section 1-A - 3-b (Major Projects) , this extension agreement is for the referenced projects. Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc, agrees to accomplish the attached Scope of Services for a fee not-to-exceed $12,500. The City of Shakopee agrees to reimburse OSM for these services in accordance with Section IV of the Agreement for Professional Services. If this proposal meets with your approval , please sign below and return one copy to our office. We look foward to working with you on this project. Yours very truly, ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERO'N CITY OF SHAKOPEE & ASSOCIATES, INC. D. Edward Ames, L.S. Dave Hutton, P.E. Associate City Engineer IC/ cl s tt�t B.A. Mittelsteadt, P.E. President DEA/BAM:IIr Attachment lD � ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR PRELIMINARY SURVEY FOR 1989 PROJECTS FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SCOPE OF SERVICES PROJECT 1 A. 3rd Avenue from Shumway to Spencer. B. Nine side streets between 3rd and 4th Avenue. C. Eight alleys between Shumway and Spencer. Survey to include full topography and cross-section for new street construction. 1. Use right-of-way centerline for alignment. 2. Set centerline may need profile first thing. 3. Locate City utilities. a. Check manhole top of casting and invert elevations. b. Check catch basin top of casting and invert elevations. 4. Locate all small utilities and tie into survey. 5. Minimum 100 foot profile on centerline and curb and gutter at all intersecting streets except new downtown project and 4th Avenue project. F. Cross-sections at 100 intervals plus driveways and perpendicular sidewalks. 7. Obtain location and elevation of top and bottom of retaining walls. 8. Profile alleys between side streets. Estimate eight (8) days of 3-man survey crew plus note reduction, research and administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $8,000 PROJECT 2 - ALLEYS A. Between 6th and 7th Avenue from back of sidewalk on Holmes to centerline Lewis. B. Between 4th and 5th Avenue from Lewis to Summerville. Survey to include full topography and cross-section for new alley. 1. Set right-cf-way centerline. 2. Locate all utilities. 3. Obtain elevation and location of garage floors and hard surface driveways. 4. Profile intersecting streets. Estimate one (1) day of 3-man survey crew plus note reduction, research and administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,000 PROJECT 3 - BLUFF STREET FROM DAKOTA TO MARSHALL A. Survey to include same information as 3rd Avenue, however, no existing curb and gutter or surface. Estimate two (2) days of 3-man survey crew plus note reduction, research and administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,000 PROJECT 4 - MARSHALL ROAD SIDNALK EAST SIDE ONLY FROM 4TH AVENUE TO LOTH AVENUE A. Obtain alignment from County. Survey to include cross-sections and topography generally from back of curb to right-of-way plus 10 feet. If low, use 25 feet from right-of-way. B. Locate trees, visible utilities, existing sidewalks. Estimate one and one-half (1-1/2) days of 3-man survey crew plus note reduction, research and administration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,500 Off / i� Schelen MaVeron& ASSOCidfCS,InG 2021 East Hennepin Avenue Minnea�li,.MN 55413 612-331-8660 FAX 3313806 EnEinrers Surveeors Plannea 1988 FEE SCHEDULE Schedule of direct personnel costs to be multiplied by 2.25 to determine hourly fee. Senior Project Manager 32.00 Project Manager 27.50 Senior Project Engineer, Surveyor, Planner 27.50 Project Engineer, Surveyor, Planner 21.50 Engineer, Surveyor, Planner 17.75 Senior Designer 25.25 Designer 20.00 Senior Technician 17.50 Technician (2) 14.50 Technician (1) 11.00 Schedule of direct personnel cost to be multiplied by 2.15 to determine hourly fee. Construction Observer $22.00 3-Man Survey Crew 42.75 2-Man Survey Crew 34.00 Schedule of computer cost per hour: Intergraph CADD Workstation $35.00 Prime 2655 Mainframe Terminal 15.00 Microcomputer 5.00 Microcomputer CAD Workstation 15.00 "Direct personnel cost" is defined as salaries plus payroll burden and fringe benefits. All personnel assigned to the project will be billed at the rates shown above based on their respective classification multiplied by the appropriate multiplier. All other costs, such as vehicle mileage, survey equipment and vehicles, word processing, clerical , printing and reproduction costs are included in the hourly fee. CONO" EN i /0k. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer W*1e SUBJECT: Stop Signs at 5th & Sommerville DATE: October 24, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Staff has received a request by Mr . Schmidt of 437 Sommerville to install 4-way stop signs at 5th and Sommerville due to a recent accident and the large number of children in this area. The accident involved a child being struck by a moving vehicle on October 5 , 1988. BACKGROUND: There are several warrants for stop signs. In urban areas, the two most frequent tests for a stop sign are accident history and traffic volumes. The Chief of Police has researched the accident history for this intersection over the last 12 months. The accident on October 5 , 1988 is the only accident within this time period. The accident on October 5th involved a child darting out between two parked cars and being struck by the moving vehicles in mid-block. Based on the accident history, a stop sign or 4-way stop signs are not warranted. Staff has also taken traffic counts at this intersection. The 24-hour total traffic volume on Sommerville was 681 vehicles , with the peak rate during any one hour being 68 vehicles (5-6 P. M. ) . On 5th Avenue, the 24-hour total was 57 vehicles, with a peak of 9 vehicles. Based on the traffic counts, there is no warrant for a 4-way stop sign. If anything, stop signs should be installed on 5th Avenue, giving the traffic on Sommerville the right-of-way , but these signs are not even warranted by the traffic counts. Based on the above analysis , staff feels that Mrs. Schmidt' s request for stop signs at this intersection should be denied . One last note , going north-south on Sommerville there are existing stop signs at 4th Avenue and 6th Avenue. Therefore , traffic has little distance to gather speed . Staff has indicated that "School Zone" signs with flashing yellow beacons may help in this area, but the Police Chief has indicated that those signs are non-enforceable and discourages their use. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Concur with staff ' s analysis that stop signs are not warranted at the intersection of 5th and Sommerville. 2. Request additional studies. 3 . Approve of Mrs. Schmidt' s request for stop signs. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Move to concur with staff ' s analysis that stop signs are not warranted at the intersection of 5th and Sommerville and direct staff to notify Mrs. Schmidt of the action. DH/pmp SIGNS MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer I�X1'v SUBJECT: Minnesota Bridge Replacement Report DATE: October 26 , 1988 INFORMATIONAL ITEM: I have received a copy of a report prepared by the Minnesota Department of Transportation Task Force appointed to evaluate all bridges in Minnesota. Attached is the Table of Contents and the Executive Summary of this report. I have also attached two pages that may be of interest to the City of shakopee: 1 . Page C-10 , which is the first page of a list of the 100 most deficient bridges in the state, listed in order of highest priority. It should be noted that the C. R. 18 Bloomington Ferry Bridge is number 8 on the list with a scheduled bid opening of Fall, 1990 . 2 . Page E-2 , which is a listing of bridges that have already been programmed into Mn/DOT' s construction schedule. This listing shows the 169 bridge scheduled for 1990 construction at an estimated cost of $8 .0 million. I thought this information may be of importance to the City Council or Planning Commission members. The complete report is on file in the City Engineer' s office, if anyone would like to review the entire report. DH/pmp TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 MINNESOTA BRIDGE EVALUATION SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Bridge Inventory System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Bridge Appraisal/Rating System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Deficient Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 MINNESOTA BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Bridge Replacement Efforts Since 1976 8 Trunk Highway Bridge Replacement Program 9 Local Road Bridge Replacement Program 11 Current Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS AND RATIONALE 15 Appraisal/Rating System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Replacement Cost Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Appropriate Bridge Replacement Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Funding - Trunk Hichway System 19 Funding - Local Road System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 EMERGING ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 APPENDIXES A: Bridge Inspection Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Al B: Bridge Deficiency Category Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 61 Sufficiency Rating Factors (diagram) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B2 C: Responses for Non-Replacement of High Priority Deficient Bridges in the Trunk Highway and Local Road Systems . . C1 D: Deck Areas of All Bridges by Age of Structure (graph) . . . . . . . . . . D1 Average Age of All Bridqes by Road System (graph) . . . . . . . . . . . . . E: Trunk Highway Bridge Replacement Program 1989 - 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . El EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Minnesota's Bridge Replacement Program has reached a critical juncture. Until now it has been successful in removing critical bridge deficiencies. However, without a significant influx of bridge funding, the task of preserving Minnesota's bridge system will be increasingly difficult. - This is due to a set of evolving issues, among which are included: By current Federal criteria, 5,281 (27 per cent) of Minnesota's 19,492 bridges are deficient. To reduce that backlog, as well as satisfy anticipated annual replacement needs would require an accelerated bridge replacement program over the next twenty years. . Many of the bridges becoming and expected to become deficient within the next twenty years are older, larger, and more complicated than deficient bridges dealt with in the past. . In twenty years, 61 per cent of Minnesota's bridges . .most built immediately following World War II . .will be reaching the end of their useful life. In light of these, as well as other emerging issues, the Task Force concludes that substantially increased bridge funding is necessary for system preservation. A two-fold program to accomodate projected and current needs is recommended: . A 20-year program to reduce the current backlog of bridges in need of replacement as well as anticipated replacement needs for the next twenty years. . A 60-year bridge life cycle replacement rate. i To accomplish both of these, the Task Force recommends: . Initial annual replacement of 289 bridges (all systems) with an estimated cost of $70 mill-ion. By comparison, in 1987, 179 bridges were replaced at a cost of 533.8 million. An accelerated bridge replacement level (all systems) spread out over i twenty years. In the year 2009, this would require replacement of 388 bridges estimated to cost 5156 million. . Beginning in 2010, maintain a 60-year bridge life cycle replacement 1 annual rate of 325 bridges. A 60-year life cycle annual replacement rate would cost (in todays dollars) $146 million. j Without additional funding, a minimum of a third of the aforementioned bridge a replacement needs (all systems) will not be met. - I - 1 BRIDGE REPLACEMENT NEEDS CURRENT PROGRAM VS 20 YEAR PROPOSED PROGRAM ALL ROAD SYSTEMS 400� 2B9-386 BRIDGES NEED TO BE 388 REPLACED ANNUALLY IN THE j D, NEXT 20 YEARS TO $156 M t 1+ ELIMINATE THE BACKLOG _ _ - - _ _ _ _ w 289 325 BRIDGES AT AN ESTIMATED I 0 300 f70 R COST OF $-i46.i MILLION NEED TO BE REPLACED ANNUALLY m IN A 50 YEAR LIFE CYCLE o 250 z 200 I 1111111 LAST YEAR 179 BRIDGES <---- WERE REPLACED AT A COST OF $33.6 MILLION 150 f 1989 1994 1999 2004 2009 mLL1 ! A breakdown of the dollars needed to meet Minnesota's immediate bridge 1 replacement needs shows requirements of 1 5147 million over the next five years, in addition to estimated federal funding, for major trunk highway (state owned) bridge projects through f fiscal year 1993. . An increase of $27 million annually for local road bridge replacement ) needs. t EMERGING NEEDS There are several emerging issues that will significantly impact and most likely add to the cost of Minnesota's bridge needs (all systems) in the next twenty years. These issues include truck growth, revised bridge inspection and rating standards, bridoe posting and enforcement, ability of local units of Government to meet growing bridge replacement needs, bridge management programs, decreasing availability of Federal Discretionary Bridge replacement dollars, and a growing list of bridges that not only require replacement, but also special historic and/or architectural treatments, which greatly add to their cost. Each of these emerging issues is touched on in the body of this report, however, the Task Force recommends further detailed study on each of them so that their true impacts can be more adequately defined. i 2 �a x _ ^_ -� ^ P D v N � F. o C w V U V �_n. �p� v _� v v v' J v N O c 3 3 3 3 n. _ 3 3 3 _ r _ r � _' _ o � ,. :_� z - o = rn � n n > _ n 3 n n 9 n � � ' � � � = p o o � : "' N � N N N N v � C� N Z .O N CP• � O N P N � o U N =r. y u Pe r a c c p' _� P �O r n �, � d a �.. P m: � n .na N 3 3 � �.O� �{"T 3 N 3 N N N a j > •a. ��.[[ > D D D N I K S N N Dp' Z y S to S O " O r N CD. r. C_ 0 O a o N r �, w 3a yn =� r O U N r wp: r w N CP ON S O- Ow Om ^N Oy pm. Dn? ^� aT �D ,.3n r T_ GA SZ r VS tpi1�. TOO _ �.� y0 N y ..K Z r2 2 Z '-' rm NC. w0 3^ Cy ^D OT �D 3ra 3'y 3 TK ry OT. K9A-1 V' yO G _C _S '" �\ ZS C Ow � � NC _- _ T T T nT £m OOTr yA � D TA C ya n p T C n ON C\ p0 T\ TZ T\ rD T\ OP TT r � FOPO K Tw TO Nn O^1T _ mT oo is c\ nz `m yr ca Tn � � �r .: � _S ~_ T <P �w � nP N x= Z 3 D •.. CZ "� ZP' cnn� pa'_ T Z ar 3n nw NN rP Df) Sm.32 C =n D On Z Tn No- a_£ Si+ Zr rn= yyp - r P Ow T Nn 9 T^ A � � +P u. £ 6 C P S Dn Z rP 'Zp A S^ a GP V pA y r.A TZ P P p',) £ oD rP C w n IIY{{- P n ,^. � c� 3 P n � n � C D �_ y N' a D C y C � K K y� - K K A ti D' .._ C - O K p. :: K F j K K C Z Z p Pc !! {{[[ I v .S. n P Pa p � � D' F a_ �, o a D a a � � r `m. T Z " y r � A y K A P: C p y A p p D < y C: Z K p K D a n p - > � � p O O _ p r � � r _� � � . O n � � D _ � _ c _ � � w L C ._ _ _ T_ ~ r > I �] _ _ _ _ _ x' 4 � _ � n � �G .'. N YIM > ly 1a IH - 1n K ly 'JYWNJY Y!+ JPITNYYJYNY bWN'Hb �I VIH bNNY UIYI NO YH�p tna ONPPP Ob0 JU PtT OWY N b P YOb pd u I=H IHA IOC I �Z Ex 1 > IK Z-3. A• . . . . YYAW5YO1'^ASLAaWONOWHa.taSHOOP WOO D'^ zy mtn• • • m�I?• <Smmnmm• f nmYNTYbNN�lWr3-i30 y"T^HA[xaTTy^'OY1p 0Ul>dY TT mm otll mm 1 n ysS;3333333>roaA3M Ih HHnYr-iHHHHmmtnmHNNnm=nn. .... . H. nrozz. my 1 H Nn m• y5• yma mm• • r--., ozE• • yc 1 0 00 NU]ZZp:S Om• Z• . Z• fnZ Ox T zm I z 0000=>OOOOOmAHVN.Z<a ,-^.a Z. ohm V:a mmp 1 rxmmHZ ry-mTmmnxZP A• HHZH O m Om �=a b Ay i^O-f ppO O> O• nON �-,O OOm 00 z H00HC1 =M=0 M=X-3 om 1 TzZowontn -Z" W 0l Nr'0'9GA I T M-OOmN". >=3ma0 znbM-1 Om MPOzz mOIA <N Ozzr Omn<-•HI bY3LynaLy m<H000AmIp ammrtnwEyOZNm =mkiZnxEHyO.- On=a>C=uNm• >OO. aa3HW z=rcN H• a ..3u Zs TM-34 >mc O 5 000 ZO 1 4 Im OZo3yamH 1 Z nest!OP -'Mr- NC:_: .INE m• x7',0 in dzcmc.000 O Haa>HHPOa mm-awwyo---S• mZ ZT0=mn> CMZT mb3 K= yo< - ym ZOOOrA 1 n>yOHm mm> ..l r>Oy HG OOZmO =OOm« < m .. <ZE 1nOATmaynaT• Hr<o.<z 5<P mTmm3m HTZAEOAa O< rt O mO Nyr• .Mm<Hm 0 m Zr r,z.m t•. naz• a -Mu Amoao<fna3m>n• • - 0 �0 Hmxmr C== 1O a <m> HExA 5A Zmmor aV-O'9A>mw zm^m ;m(n Ommazm• now-.ZA m(nA<_ 3JrZ<O N O ¢+- my H• _nGrS OH m 3500• m Cm oOC^ n m30N mm=MOHO<I mm50r H=nx N nZSAE• mm T .,..yalJm a'F PGmTm=xw MCZCZ az= O Hm _0,0 A I 0=1 a>n mOtAmnJ.• 5H>HmStn<rtnaA�r HOZ - O '00051r xmrn0• O 3Hnxy0ydmrNHH yrx _^GHz u15rm >TOPDXNznmEH<mmra=oa• o«<m -_-£Z O"= 3m HT. c O>mHmm x o omm-a an= - a -r yazmmo==.5Sm0. Z. OtnSA A..•A• rmH Nr mmO=CHyT O• Z. H5T rm 0 30 n0 N m r =Ca am <M SaHN Km= Vn 1' 0<m M1HaammSm<>J�• mm,ZN mZ< >na �'nm Z <H• TxmA.-.O• >� TTua yyy ONH NVZt+i[5+,•Zyyypmirat< • ar N»nm >0 a K H G < yxTn.^ yO Am". 5 3 a mC bT 3d Y5m zzn m Y <5 TAT ^m M. 5A� o0 04-.5 5znm> I YaOO[-". . . .•• P oT ymanao• mavmm `a.�a za .. :^P -• r> mm bP s ___�� AT nJoar Stn» a0��om0 O HO Ht.I';mmmmP m N U --_ _'- tnm o• m eaaH HuimH z• obm --» 05 Oli r>•5 Eames. JAC a y n+n� ; -moi, n •'� r' tnc>mm�-3tn = o o _ 'D0 b 0-3MVN N »u W' c=•J u -'m rYAV>TP>YH N TTo N M N 85 G to T T:nO O TTU1 Nr 5AP c 'VYS > ma 70>a o e` HPn 0> 5 e M>TO a H >Oy <j v J' b m Zm > 05> P Z 00 T m >V T> -an y u TT mO= > mm 0 MT m>M tnm Z N >0 nb > r N N NN Y J' u P Oua u(Il, r.u...00�NN 000 Ob�a.LN n 1(n.�i u 0000000000mo00VItnNOOPd000ud�10lntnOlnOOYUWONOU100PONb00UJ0IH 1y0 N 00O>tnOOdOOVI000O00000000000O 0 00000000000000000000000000000000000000ooi>a _ o c000000000000000000000000000000000ro0o0olHy MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Murphy's Landing Audit DATE: October 24, 1988 INTRODUCTION• The City Council directed that information be obtained for the conduct of an audit for Murphy's Landing. The attached letter addresses this issue. BACKGROUND: The City Council is presently grappling with the question of who is going to be operating Murphy's Landing in the future. The City Council has been involved in a series of discussions and litigation with the Minnesota Valley Restoration Project (MVRP) and the Scott County Historical Society (SCHS) on the operations of Murphy's Landing. One of the requests City Council made was to have an audit of the Murphy's Landing financial records to determine the financial status of the facility. The accounting firm of Coopers & Lybrand was contacted for the purpose of reviewing the Murphy's Landing records and to determine what it would cost to provide an audit of the Statement of Cash Receipts and Disbursements for Murphy's Landing for the year ending February 28, 1988 and the seven month period ending September 30, 1988. A representative of Coopers & Lybrand visited the site and reviewed the financial records. The attached letter indicates that Coopers & Lybrand would be willing to conduct an audit for an amount of $7,500 Plus out-of-pocket expenses. The cost of the audit is higher because this one time audit will require a certain amount of start-up time, and the lack of current periodic audits for the facility. The letter also indicates that this fee if 50% of the normal rate for this type of audit. ALTERNATIVES• 1 . Direct the City Administrator to enter into a contract with Coopers & Lybrand for an amount of $7,500 to conduct an audit of Murphy's Landing. 2 . Instruct the City Administrator to contact a minimum of two other outside accounting firms who can perform an objective audit of the facility. 3. Decide against the conduct of an audit for Murphy's Landing at this time. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the City Council pursue alternative #2 above. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct the City Administrator to take certain specific actions on the provision of an audit for Murphy's Landing. Attachment Coo ens .1 ied pab¢a mpn an s ,ow TU rp..e, WI.. pf 0a wotltl Minneap hs.Minnesda 55002 6 &Ly rand tekphone 612)370.MW / October 21, 1988 Mr. Dennis R. Kraft Community Development Director City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Kraft: To confirm our conversation yesterday regarding our understanding of the terms and objectives of our potential engagement, the nature and scope of the services we propose to provide, and the related proposed fee arrangements. We propose to audit the Statement of Cash Receipts and Disbursements of Murphy's Landing for the year ended February 28, 1988 and seven-month period ended September 30, 1988, in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. The objective of an audit is the expression of our opinion concerning whether the Statement of Cash Receipts and Disbursements present fairly, in all material respects, the cash receipts and disbursements of Murphy's Landing in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles Our proposed fees for this audit are $7,500,plus out-of-pocket expenses, principally for report reproduction. The one-time audit of Murphy's Landing requires certain start-up time, recognizing the lack of current periodic audits; however, we determined our fees at 50%of our normal rates recognizing that we would expect our work to be performed in the next six weeks. Please call Mark Chronister at 370-9334 if you have any questions. We look forward to the opportunity of serving you and the City of Shakopee. Very truly yours, MC:az-S44 CONSENT /G '' MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: John Nelson's Structure Located on City Park Property DATE: October 25, 1988 INTRODUCTION: Mr. John Nelson requested that he be allowed to maintain a small building on City park property adjacent to his house in East Shakopee. After due consideration by the City Council the decision was made to have Mr. Nelson move his structure based upon a legal opinion rendered by the City Attorney. BACKGROUND: — Mr. Nelson was told that he needed to move the structure and a letter was sent to Mr. Nelson telling him that he had 30 days in which to move the structure. Simultaneous with the City Administrator sending him the letter he discussed the subject with the Community Development Director and asked if it would be ok if he did not move it until the ground froze because he was going to be using a large "Bobcat" to pull the structure off of City property and he did not want to dig up the ground around it. The Community Development Director indicated that that sounded reasonable and that it was not the intent of the City Council to have the planted area around the shed dug up, particularly in as much as the ground will be freezing in the next two to three weeks.__ -_ Mr. Nelson also questioned whether he needed to remove the landscaping and the grass that was planted on the area which is occupied by the City park and adjacent to his yard. The Community Development Director told Mr. Nelson that it was not the City Council's intent to have the vegetation removed from the property but they definitely did want the structure moved. It is desireable that all members of the City Council be informed of what is going on and that there should be Council consensus on this so that all concerned are aware of what is expected. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Allow Mr. Nelson to remove the shed from City park property at such time as the ground freezes up but no later than Nov. 15, 1988. 2. Inform Mr. Nelson that he does not have to remove the grass or shrubs that were planted on the City property but that these will become the property of the City, that he will not be compensated for the planting of these materials and that, if for construction or service purposes the grass or shrubs are removed, the City will not be obligated to replace materials which are removed or destroyed. 3 . Require Mr. Nelson to move the structure within the original 30 day time frame regardless of the condition of the turf around the shed. 4 . Require Mr. Nelson to remove all vegetative materials he planted on the City park property. RECOMMENDATION: Alternatives $1 and $2 above are recommended. ACTION REQUESTED: ---- -- Move to direct the City Administrator to send a letter to Mr. John Nelson informing him that the shed he owns which is located on City park property must be moved by November 15, 1988 and that he will not be required to remove the vegetation that he planted on City property but that this will become the property of the City of Shakopee and that the City will not compensate him in any way for this material. CONSENT MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Extension of Ambulance Agreement DATE: October 24, 1988 INTRODUCTION: The attached letterfromSt. Francis Regional Medical Center addresses extending the current ambulance agreement an additional year. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Council authorization, the City Administrator has been involved in discussions regarding the extension of the ambulance agreement with the City. Council authorized up to a 10% increase over the current agreement. The attached letter is an extension agreement to the existing agreement. It extends the existing agreement another year at $1.54 per capita to June 30, 1989 at an increased cost of 10% or $1. 69 per capita. To figure the popuLtion —to complete the capita we will use the 1988 Metropolitan Councir estimated population. ALTERNATIVES' 1) Extend agreement for one year. 2) Discontinue being part of the agreement. 3) Continue to negotiate for a different figure. RECOMMENDATION• Alternative No. 1, extend agreement for another year. ACTION RECOMMENDED: Authorize proper City officials to sign a one year extension to the ambulance agreement with St. Francis Regional Medical Center increasing the City's subsidy to $1.69 per capita. JSC/tlV oP H E wy 0 z � c ST. FRANCIS (612) 445-2322 REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER 325 West Fifth Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 October 14. 1988 Mr. John Anderson - 129 First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Anderson : In our meeting yesterday, we proposed that we continue the terms of the Scott/Francis Ambulance Service Agreement dated August 8, 1985 for one additional year , extending its term throv-ghwae 3fr, -119-89. Your acceptance of this arrangement will be documented by returning one signed original of this letter to my attention , and retaining one for your files . Further, we recognize that both parties could enter into negotia- tions of a new arrangement prior to the revised expiration date, if such action was acceptable to the Medical Center , the townships of Sand Creek , Louisville , and Jackson , and the cities of Savage and Shakopee. Sincerely, � Brian Weinreis Vice President of Finance APPROVED BY: DATE: Shakopee by & Mayor Administrator AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER K12/1D-88 - oP�Hewti ��Q ST. FRANCIS (612) 445-2322 REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER 325 West Fifth Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 TO: John Anderson, City of Shakopee Mark McNeil , City of Savage William Dellwo, Louisville Township Norbert Theis, Jackson Township Cycil Wolf, Sand Creek Township FROM: Brian Weinreis, VP of Finance 44 SUBJ: 1989 AMBULANCE SUBSIDY DATE: October 14, 1988 Thank you for taking the time to meet with Rick Wagner and myself. We look for- ward to meeting with you on a quarterly basis or whenever to meet the goal of _ providing quality service to your areas. Attached please find an individual agreement extension letter for each city or township that will extend the agreement for one extra year. My secretary called and obtained the population data for 1988 from the Metro- politan Council . Below is a calculation of the subsidy calculation for fiscal 1989, as we discussed at the meetings: 1988 1989 Population Per Capita Total Subsidy Qtr Billing SHAKOPEE 11,733 $ 1.69 $ 19,829 $ 4,957.25 SAVAGE 85351 $ 1.69 $ 14,113 $ 3,528.25 SAND CREEK 1,585 $ 1.69 S 2,679 $ 669.75 LOUISVILLE 890 $ 1.69 $ 1,504 $ 376.00 JACKSON 1,490 $ 1.69 $ 2,518 $ 629.50 I understand that our Accounting Department sent out first quarter billings by mistake, not knowing that the Agreement may change. Some of you have paid the bills. The bills for the second quarter will reflect the above charges and provide a retro calculation for, the first quarter. I apologize for this. Again, thank you for working with us and providing a much needed support, both financially and customer service input from your communities. If you have any questions, please contact me: cc: Jerry Hart Ed Tusa Rick Wagner AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER SOP MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Recruitment of New City Administrator (Supplemental Memo) DATE: October 26 , 1988 Introduction The Shakopee City Council, at its October 25, 1988 worksession reviewed my memo of October 21st regarding the cost of employing an interim Administrator and/or using an executive recruitment firm. Council made some preliminary suggestions that are outlined in this memo. Executive Recruitment Services City Council has arrived at the consensus that it would not be using an executive recruitment firm. Without the assistance of a firm Marilyn Remer, Personnel Coordinator, and I believe Council as a whole must agree upon the recruitment screening process to be used prior to any screening . The following format is suggested. FORMAL SCREENING PROCESS Introduction - All data privacy requirements must be adhered to and complied with by all Councilmembers and staff members involved in the selection process. See Exhibit A, Subd. 3 and Exhibit B, paragraph two. Initial Screening Process Using Criteria As Listed In Advertisements ( Exhibit C ) . Steps one through three to be performed by the Personnel Coordinator: Minimum Requirements 1 . Degree in business/public administration or equivalent degree. 2. Government experience - minimum of five to ten years. a. Five to ten years City Administrator/Manager experience. b. Five to ten years in city larger than 12 ,000 as Administrative Assistant or Assistant Manager. C. A combination of a. and b. above. 3 . Desired characteristics of applicants: a. Strong financial management (yellow tab) . b. Strong Economic Development and planning skills (blue tab) . C. Strong community skills (pink tab) . 4 . Screening by Council of all candidates meeting minimum and desired qualifications. Council should reduce this list to a short list of 10-12 candidates with written documentation of the specific criteria to make that determination. ? 5• Employment verification check on finalists by Personnel Coordinator. ? 6 . Reference checks by City Council using standardized questions which are the same for all applicants. 7. Selection of finalists ( 4-6 ) for interviews by Council. Note all other applications are private data and must not be released by Council or staff involved in the screening process. 8 . Finalists screening alternatives: a. The traditional full Council interview will take roughly two hours for each candidate (five candidates x 2 hours = 10 hours) with Councilmembers asking a set of agreed upon printed questions. Time should be left for the candidate to ask questions as well . Final ouestions for interviews by Council must be reviewed and approved by the Personnel Coordinator and City Attorney , and Councilmembers must receive a briefing by both regarding interview procedures to avoid any inadvertent violation of the data Privacy act or affirmative action reauirements. b. The individual one-on-one Council interviews with candidates will take approximately 30 minutes each or about three hours total . Final ouestions for interviews by Council must be rev sewed and aper oved by the Personnel Coordinator and Cit Attorney and Councilmembers must receive a briefing by both regarding interview Procedures to avoid any inadvertent violation of the data privacy act or affirmative action requirements. C. Council can combine a. and b. thus taking roughly 13 hours . d. The Council could use assessment center exercises two of which I just experienced and felt were quite valuable. The first was a leadership group exercise with all five candidates sitting down together around a table for 40 minutes hammering out consenses on a draft report on a key issue to City Council. This took approximately one hour and required four observers rating the candidates as they participated in the group exercise. The second assessment center exercise built upon the first and had each candidate making a report on the results of the leaderless group exercise to one l of or more individuals. This took 30 minutes with a 15 minute presentation and 15 minutes of questions and answers . This approximately 30 minutes would take about three hours total. e. The Council can include one or more informal "get togethers" with candidates either at meals or by giving a tour of the community. These informal contact points allow Councilmembers and/or staff members to meet and observe the candidates in a less formal more social atmosphere. Final Questions for interviews by Council must_ be reviewed and approved by the Personnel Coordinator and City Attorney, and Councilmembers must receive a briefing by both regarding interview procedures to avoid any inadvertent violation of the data privacy act or affirmative action reau ' rements. f. The Council can choose three to run some personality and management style profiling exercises on the final candidate. The City has used this process on finalists for department head positions, but I would recommend that it only be used on the finalist after that individual is selected . The Personnel Coordinator recommends that the top three finalists be directed to complete the predetermined tests by a firm such as PDI, Inc. as another impartial means of screening. The firm provides a written report on the results of various exercises, and psychological and cognitive testing, listing areas of strengths and weaknesses. g. The Council, after making a final section based upon a. through f. above, can consider sending two individuals (or the consultant) to the finalist' s home community to interview people on a first hand basis. I believe Councilmembers were impressed with this process when it was used by Polk County officials. In completing this outline Marilyn and I felt that the portion that fit least well at this point was step 5 and 6 . It is difficult to see how six Councilmembers will handle reference check telephone calls and, therefore, this needs to be discussed Tuesday night. A Burnsville firm, Verified Credentials Inc. , provides background checking services including verifying academics, former/current employment data including performance, reason for leaving - re-hire, etc. , financial report as means of a character check, driving records and convictions. Their fee is $12 .00 per item checked (Exhibit D) . This is usually done on final candidates as an aid to help make further cuts and give you some assurance that the applicants have all the credentials needed for the job . This firm provides this service for Canterbury Downs and the City of Savage has also utilized their services. i Interim Administrator Attached is Exhibit E from the Council worksession which outlines estimated costs for an interim Administrator. As I stated at the worksession on 25th , I had received a telephone call from Cam Andre who stated he would be available for steps in the screening process at the fee of $200 .00 per day . Council must establish a position profile and I have obtained one additional profile from the City of Brooklyn Park (Exhibit F) . Please note the section on Management Style and Personal Traits. This example along with the City of Ann Arbor, Michigan sample should be customized to fit the Shakopee City Council. This task should be completed by November 18th which means City Council should schedule a worksession on November 8th with Marilyn to develop a draft for approval at the November 15th Council meeting. Just as Marilyn used the brief advertisement in the newspaper for the three screening steps she will be performing for City Council, Council must use the recruitment profile for establishing the questions it will have when doing reference checks and asking questions at the interview. Summary City Council needs to make firm time commitments to complete these tasks before the November 18th deadline for applications. JKA/jms �d 1 EXHIBIT A Subd. 2. Except for employees described in subdivision 5, the following personnel data on current and former employees, volunteers, and independent contractors of a state agenn, statewide system, or political subdivision and members of advisory boards or commissions as public: name; actual gross salary; salary range; contract fees; actual gross pension: the value and nature of employer paid fringe benefits; the basis for and the amount of any added remunera- tion, including expense reimbursement, in addition to salary;job title; job description; education and training backeround; previous work experience; date of first and last employment; the sta- tus of any complaints or charges against the employee, whether or not the complaint or charge resulted in a disciplinary action; and the final disposition of any disciplinan action and sup- porting documentation; and the final disposition of any disciplinary action and supporting do- cumentation; work location; a work telephone number; badge number; honors and zwards received; payroll time sheets or other comparable data that are only used to account for em- ployee's work time for payroll purposes, except to the extent that release of time sheet data would reveal the employee's reason's for use of sick or other medical leave or other not public data; and cit} and county of residence. - Subd. 2a. Data disclosure by statewide pension plans. Notwithstanding any lacy to the eontran, wwah respect to data collected and maintained on members, survivors apo beneficianes by siatc%y2e rrJuctinenisyseems that is classlned as public data in accordance with subdivision 2, those retirement systems may be only reouired to disclose name, grossenp sion, and t_De o benawarded, lsceDt as reouired by sections 113_U3, subd�yisions 4 znd 6; and 13_05. subdivisions 4 and 9. Subd. 3 Public employment. Except for applicants described in subdivision 5, the follow- ing personnel data on current and former applicants for employment by a state agency, state- wide system or political subdivision is public: veteran status; relevant test scores: rank on eligible list; job history: education and training; and work availability. Names of applicants shall be private data except when certified as eligible for appointment to a yacami or schen _applicants are considered by the appointing authority to be finalists for a position in public employment. For purposes or this subdivision, "finalist means _an individual who is selected to be interviewed by the appointing authority prior[o elecuon. Subd. 4. All other personnel data is private data on individuals, but may be released pur- suant to a court order. j Subd. 5. All personnel data maintained by a state agency, statewide system or political subdivision relating to an individual employed as or an applicant for employment as an under- cover law enforcement officer is private data on individuals. Subd. 6. Access by labor organizations. Personnel data may be disseminated to labor or- ganizations to the extent that the responsible authority deterrincs that the dissemination is necessary to conduct elections, notify employees of fair share fee assessments, and implement the provisions of Y chapters 179 and 179A." Personnel data shall be disseminated to labor organizations and to the bureau of mcciauon services to the extent the dissemination is ord-red or authorized by the director of the bureau of mediation services. Subd. 7. Employee assistance data. All data created, collected or maintained by any state .. agency or political subdivision to administer employee assistance programs similar to the one authorized by section 16B.39, subdivision 2," are classified as private, pursuant to section 13.02, .24- EXHIBIT B II. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY POLICY STATEMENT This is to affirm the City of Shakopee 's policy of providing Equal Opportunity to all employees and applicants for employment in accordance with all applicable Equal Employment Opportu^ity/Affirmative Action laws, directives and regulations of Federal. State and Local governing bodies or agencies thereof, specifically Minnesota Statutes 363. /The City of Shakopee will not discriminate against or harass any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, or status with regard to public assistance. The City of Shakopee will take Affirmative Action to ensure that all employment practices are free of such discrimination. Such employment practices include, but are not limited to, the following: hiring, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, selection, layoff, disciplinary action, termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The City of Shakopee will use its best efforts to afford minority and female business enterprises with the maximum practicable opportunity to participate in the performance of subcontracts for construction projects that the City engages in. " The City of Shakopee will commit the necessary time and resources, both financial and human, to achieve the goals of Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action. The City of Shakopee fully supports incorporation of non-discrimination and Affirmative Action rules and regulations into contracts. The City of Shakopee will evaluate the perfcrmance of its management and supervisory personnel on the basis of their involvement in achiev--- Mese Affirmative Action objectives as well as other established criteria. .- employee of the City, or subcontractor to the City, who does not corn_z c:the Eeual Employment Opportunity Policies and Procedures as set this Statement and Plan Pili subject to disciplinary act., . - subcontractor not complying with all - '_icable Eons' Opportunity/Affirmative Action laws, direc =_s and reguiatio-:- Federal, State and Local governing bodies or asenc_es hereof, spec i`_:ca=-_:- Minnesota Statues 363 will be subject to appropr-:ate a,_'_ sanctions. The City of Shakopee has appointed Persenne_ to manage the Equal Employment Cu-c' -_- responsibilities will include monitoring `-- Cppc activities and reporting the effectivene= ._ ts - -_=.,atiye Program. as reo_uired by Federal, State a-- --=_ _ Administrator of the City of Shakepee w;1- _ e.- _= c - _ progress of the program. If any emplo-za= c_ =---_ca-- _ - believes he/she has been discriminates r.__ ease ce Reiner, 129 East First Ave. , Shakopee, ^_:. , or call 612---�-3— .ic:^. �. .---,censor., C = -_-._sa tc'acor .,ate EXHIBIT C CITY ADMINISTRATOR Pursuant to the Personnel Policy of the City of Shakopee this notice of vacancy is posted in all City work places for five (5) days prior to advertising. Please submit applications to Personnel by October 14, 1988. A job description can also be obtained from Personnel. CITY ADMINISTRATOR: Shakopee, MN (Pop. 12,000) . Range $40,233- $53,644/yr. Start $40,233 - $48,280, commensurate with background and experience. Requires degree in business/public administration or equivalent; minimum of 5 - 10 years City Administrator or Assistant experience in larger city; Strong finance management, economic development and planning and community skills desired; 62 employees; $3.9 million General Fund Budget; growing Minneapolis suburb with strong industrial base (5,000 jobs) and regional recreation attractions (3.2 million visitors per year). Send resume to Personnel Coordinator, 129 E. 1st Ave. , Shakopee, Mn 55379 by November 18, 1988. (612-445- 3650) . EOE EXHIBIT D /O VERIFIED CREDENTIALS INCORPORATED VERIFIED CREDENTIALS, INC., a national professional verification serv- ice, is dedicated to helping employers install the most qualified person for the right position. We do not require an annual contract - so you may use our service when- ever the need arises. VCI is a full service company providing complete verbal response within 24 hours, followed by documented hard copy. VERIFIED CREDENTIALS services include the following: - Criminal Conviction Search - Credit Profile - Employment Verifications - Education Verifications - Driving History . - Professional License • Personal References FEE SCHEDULE: $12.00 each check - Plus state fees if applicable. Your business will be provided with complete anonymity throughout all in- vestigations. If you are implementing a screening program or up-dating your present one, Verified Credentials can help you make the best selection. Our office number is (612) 431-1811 , Fax (612) 431-1842. VERIFIED CREDENTIALS INCORPORATED INFORMATION NEEDED TO PROCESS VERIFICATIONS GENERAL (Regarding ALL applicants) Name:First: Middle: Last: Maiden: Date of Birth and Social Security Number ACADEMIC University/College/School Attended: and LOCATION Date of Graduation: Degree/Certificate: Major/Minor EMPLOYMENT Employers Name/Location: Dates of Employment: Position Held: Reasons for Leaving: Salary: PROFESSIONAL LICENSE Type of License: License #: City/State Granted: PUBLIC SAFETY (Driving Records) State: License #: CRIMINAL CONVICTION HISTORY Address: Current: Previous: CREDIT/FINANCIAL HISTORY Address: Current: Previous: The information requested for the above verifications is ideal and will give you the best results possible. Provide as much information as you have available for each verification requested. A verification specialist will provide additional assistance, if necessary, at the time of your call. e1yy7 CREATIVE '° � Management Screen applicants carefully before you hire "COMPANIES have to be extremely diligent in their and give themselves false credentials toward getting it," hires.The cost of hiring and training are too great to take says Burmeister. the chance of going through the whole process again in a few months should a new employee not work out.One of An increasing number of companies are contracting out the simplest steps a firm can take to minimize risk is to job applicant background checks,points out Burmeister. screen a potential employee's credentials," declares Foronething,they don't have the staff to keep up with the Duane Burmeister, president of Verified Credentials flow of applicants. For another, most checks require Inc.,Minneapolis. knowledge of out-of-state agencies since many employ- ees today have worked in two or three different states and "No particular profession or company can say they don't probably have a degree from a college in yet another have a problem in that area.We have even seen instances location. of corporate mcmiters-themselves responsible forbring- Ignorance can be expensive ing talent into the organization-claiming Ph.D.'s or master's degrees which they didn't have,"says Burmeis- "If your hire an employee and you don't check back- ter. ground, and he commits a crime that could have been predicted with a check, you're completely liable. That The type of data to be checked includes details of current check helps you hedge your bem. There is also the risk and past employment,such as job titles,dates of employ- that the employee with a criminal background will con- ment,salary,reason for,performance,and how the appli- taminate other employees, for example, by forming a cart got along with fellow employees. Professional li- theft ring. A company that says it can't afford to do pre- censing,driving records,debt history,academic records, employment checks, especially a small company,takes and criminal records will also be verified. the chance of employing the one bad apple who could "Mostofthis informationis public.I don'traed arelease bring the company down;"he warns. to obtain it. When a company does insist on a written "Most of the falsification that we see in application release, we send them the standard release that has been information,of course,is not criminal in nature.What we signed by the applicant on the employment application;' find generally are dates of previous employments and Burmeister explains, previousjob titles changed,and reasons for leaving a job misstated.In terms of academic background,we often see `Embellishments' expected applicants changing their majors or minors. A history "Employers want to know if they are being lied to.With major will say that he was a business major,and so forth. all the problems in today's world,companies are looking These we consider in the category of gross embellish- for the truth. We find something wrong with 30 percent ments. of the job applications we are asked to verify. For 15 percent,we find out-and-out lies.Minor embellishments "Today, everyone is under peer pressure to achieve- are expected,but employers can't tolerate total lies.They everyone wants to get ahead and do well.They see others find it more acceptable if an applicant states that he was succeeding with a college degree, and if they have ordy fired from a previous job, instead of finding out he has attended college for two years, they will put on their lied about it,"Burmeister continues. resume or application that they graduated. The easiest thing in the world to check are college credentials, be- "The tighter the job market,the morejob applicants will cause schools are willing to give you an individual's do to get a position.They tbink,'I know l can do thaijob,' record," says Duane Burmeister. Reprinted from Creative Management, December 1987. EXHIBIT E 16f MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Recruitment of New City Administrator (Supplemental Memo) DATE: October 21, 1988 Introduction The Shakopee City Council, at its October 18 , 1988 meeting, requested that I obtain more information about the cost of an interim Administrator and the cost of selected services from a professional executive search firm. Estimates Obtained Interim Administrator: 1. I spoke with Bill Radio and he provided the estimate of $5, 000 per month based upon working eight days a month (two day a week) and attending all Council meetings. 2 . I spoke with Orville Johnson and he recommended $200-225 per day based upon the current Administrator's hourly rate x 8 hours. For Shakopee that would be $206 . 32 so the $200 rate would be realistic. At two days per week including Council meetings (eight days) his fee would be $1600. 00 per month. If Orville worked three days per week this would equal $2400. 00 per month for an estimated two to three months. Executive Recruitment Services: 1. I spoke with Jim Brimeyer from Sathe & Associates, Inc. and he stated that he could provide services outlined in his proposal under Step No. 1 drafting the profiles and Sten No. 2 initial screening with one initial confidential phone contact with the 10-15 candidates for $3 , 000. 00. He estimated that this would take 80-90 hours of his time with the bulk of the time focusing on Step No. 1. The total fee for Steps No. 1-8 would be about $9, 500. 00 (20% of the advertised top salary) . Summary I believe the City Council had a good, but limited, discussion about using an interim Administrator and/or an executive search at its October 18th meeting. I believe that those preliminary discussions began to ilPs trate that there may be some merit to obtaining assistance in one or both areas. I have also placed a call to Orville Johnson to discuss the possibility of his assisting our Personnel Coordinator with candidate screening should the City Council choose not to use an executive search consultant at all. /j as MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator R£: Recruitment of New City Administrator DATE: October 14 , 1988 Introduction City Council will have two decisions to make in filling the City Administrator's position. The first deals with filling the position on an interim basis and the second deals with the process used in finding a permanent replacement. The first decision should be made no later than the November 1st Council meeting. The second decision should be made no later than November 18th, the cut off date for applicants for the position. Interim Administrator The City Council has two alternatives in deciding how to provide an interim Administrator. (1) The first alternative is to select an individual currently on staff to act as "Acting Administrator'$ until the permanent replacement is selected and arrives. This alternative will provide Council with someone they are familiar with, however, it will mean that the individual's normal responsibilities will be set aside for two to three months. I have discussed the position of Acting Administrator with several department heads and I would recommend that Council consider Dennis Kraft, our Community Development Director, as Acting Administrator if an existing staff person is chosen. (2) The second alternative is to employ a retired City Administrator on a part-tine basis to fill the position of Acting Administrator. Orville Johnson, the retired Administrator of Mendota Heights, has served in several Minnesota communities in this capacity. Orville would be an excellent choice. Bill Radio, the former City Administrator of Chaska, and a partner in the firm of Practical Management Concepts, 7710 Computer Avenue, Edina 55435, might be available to serve as part-time Acting Administrator. Finally, Charles Brandmire, former City Administrator of Janesville, Minnesota for 14 years and currently employed by Gedney's in Chaska may also be available to serve as Acting Administrator on a part-time basis. Should Council choose to explore this alternative and obtain cost estimates, the person selected to fill in as Acting Administrator nus not be a candidate for the permanent position. Y EXHIBIT F D onff RECRUITMENT PROFILE CITY MANAGER CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK , MINNESOTA This Recruitment Profile reflects the experience, qualifications/skills and expectations considered to be important for the City of Brooklyn Park's position of City Manager. The Profile has been prepared on the basis of interviews with the Mayor, Members of the City Council, City Attorney and key City Staff. The Profile will be used as a key guide in the City Manager recruitment process, providing specific criteria by which applicants will be screened and selected for interview and final appointment consideration by the Mayor and City Council. i, All inquiries relative to the recruitment and selection process for the City Manager position are to be directed to: Paul A. Reaume Vice President/Partner Korn/Ferry International 120 South Riverside Plaza -- Suite 916 Chicago, Illinois 60606 COMMUNITY BACKGROUND First incorporated in 1954, Brooklyn Park became a city in 1969. The City contains approximately 27 square miles of land and is one of the fastest growing communities in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area of Minneapolis - St. Paul located contiguous to the Mississippi River, approximately 15 minutes from downtown Minneapolis. The community has more than doubled in population since 1970 having a current estimated population of 52,000 with projections to reach over 100,000 upon full development. Approximately 40 percent of the City area currently remains undeveloped although residential, commercial and industrial growth proceeds at a rapid pace. A long adopted "planned growth management" program has insured orderly growth throughout the years and has prevented "leap frog" development and urban sprawl. The community is currently undergoing a transition from entry-level cost, multi-family and single family dwellings to more costly upscale development. Consistent with the City's interest in enhancing the community's image a major 160 acre, 18 hole Robert Trent Jones II designed golf course, "Edinburgh USA," was recently opened. The multimillion dollar club house features both public and private dining facilities and is a major area attraction. The area surrounding the golf .course is being subdivided into approximately 1 ,500 single family homes priced at $125,000 and up. The community also enjoys substantial commercial development including Northland Park, a privately-owned 400 acre office and industrial park. In addition to its many neighborhood parks and new Community Center, a heavily booked multi-use facility, Brooklyn Park is served by excellent educational facilities and other amenities of a growing, high-service suburban community. CITY GOVERNMENT The City of Brooklyn Park is governed by the Council - Manager form of government. The City Council consists of a Mayor and six Council Members with the Mayor elected at-large and Council Members elected by districts, on a non-partisan basis for four-year overlapping terms. The City Council appoints the City Manager and the City Attorney as well as members of a variety of Boards and Commissions, including, Airport Joint Zoning Board, Charter Commission, Economic Development Commission, Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council, Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission, Police Civil Service Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, and Planning Commission. The City Manager is fully responsible for the day-to-day operations of the City, including direction of departments and functions including, Assessor, City Clerk Finance, Fire, Community Development, Police, Engineer/Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Intergovernmental Relations, and Health and Welfare activities. Appointment and removal tmewt-__heads of the City are the responsibi i e ity Manaoe sable t r aoorova CoIIrrcii. s currently annual budget is $28,993 ,500 inc uding capi�� improvement projects, with an authorized work force of approximately 250 (FTE) employees. RECRUITMENT PROFILE The following criteria are considered to be important qualifications, background, management style and performance expectations relating to the Brooklyn Park City Manager position. Education and Experience Possession of a baccalaureate degree is considered important with attainment of a Master's degree in public administration or related field highly desirable. Be a strong "generalist" Manager who can quickly relate to and successfully direct a wide variety of municipal services and operations in a positive, public relations-oriented manner. Have a proven record of successful interaction and leadership involvement in a high growth community and be familiar with modern land use concepts, urban design and construction standards, and financial implications of urban growth-expansion. Be particularly capable in financial management and budgeting procedures with the ability to deal with complex financial issues, long-range fiscal forecasting, economic and community development strategies, and be oriented toward providing government services in a cost-effective manner. Have skills in working with elected officials in developing and maintaining a positive public relations program that strengthens the image of the City and creates a climate whereby individuals and groups can join together in achieving goals and projects that are in the best interest of the overall community and its citizenry. Have excellent written and oral communication skills, a strong "professional presence," and willingness to be highly visible, officially representing City Programs and activities, as well as being personally active and involved iii community affairs. Be capable of taking a leadership position in a program establishing formalized organizational and community goals and objectives toward identifying and prioritizing Council-Staff attention to both short-term and longer range needs, responsibilities and opportunities facing the City. Have experience in intergovernmental relations working with other jurisdictions and agencies in a constructive, cooperative, and mutually supportive manner, while representing the City's interests tactfully and firmly. Have demonstrated success in economic development activities and a record of business-like and positive interaction with corporate, business and development interests. Have sensitivity to and a reputation for fair, even-handed labor/employee relations practices; familiarity with "comparable worth" and merit pay plans highly desirable. Be familiar with and committed to the principles of Council-Manager government and work closely with elected officials, staff and community leaders to ensure the continued success of that form of government in service to all interests and citizens of the community. Management Style Be a strong, aggressive, but diplomatic leader who can quickly earn respect and credibility inside and outside the City organization. Have strong organizational and interpersonal skills with the ability and courage to make changes, tough choices and difficult decisions when required to maintain a responsible/responsive and highly competent management team and productive work force capable of meeting the needs of a high growth municipality and the community it serves. Possess the maturity, self confidence, and temperament to provide professional leadership and to function effectively in an environment that includes considerable interaction and involvement by the Mayor and Council Members involving inquiry and suggestions concerning municipal programs, activities, and operations. Be comfortable in working_ closely and openly with the Mayor and City Council Members, both individually and collectively, being careful to keep all elected officials equally informed in an open, straightforward manner, avoiding "surprises" insofar as possible. Be an administrator who anticipates issues, needs, and opportunities, a conceptualist with vision and sensitivity, and one who broadly delegates while retaining both accountability and knowledge of general municipal activities and projects. Have interpersonal and facilitative skills, capable of providing principal assistance in development of a "team" approach toward policy development and problem solving among staff and elected officials, facilitating constructive and appropriate exchange of information and interaction among all. Provide prompt, thorough and fully responsive implementation and follow-through on Council policy decisions, actions and directions. Be able to relate positively, personally, and comfortably with all persons from all segments and stations of life in the community. Be comfortable in interacting with the public with the ability and sensitivity to the views and needs of all peoples, toward assisting elected officials in keeping the community "together," avoiding serious divisions over varying issues and interests. Have the ability to anticipate, recognize and work with others to cope with and facilitate community change in an orderly and effective manner. As appropriate, be both a "hands-on" as well as a "delegator-type" Manager with the ability to keep personally informed and aware of the status of all major programs and activities of the City. Make an effort to interact with all levels of the municipal work force, understanding the views and concerns of employees, while providing exemplary leadership and supportive counsel toward maintaining high morale, job satisfaction and top performance throughout the organization. Personal Traits Have a good sense of humor. Possess complete integrity, professional ethics and behavior, projecting a positive professional image to the community and municipal organization. Be an energetic leader, willing to personally take on "touch issues" and be committed to achieving organizational and community progress and improvement. Set high personal -standards that will be exemplary for staff and employees. Be willing to devote substantial time to meetings and activities occurring beyond normal office hours. Be willing to be an active "citizen" of Brooklyn Park in addition to "official" City Manager responsibilities, participating in civic and community activities and maintaining a relatively high community profile. i Be a "people person," one who feels comfortable relating to people and problems involving a wide variety of human and community needs and concerns. Have a personality and professional style that is flexible and adaptive, while dealing with all in a positive business-like manner, PROFESSIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT j The following or similar text will be placed in the International City Manager Association Newsletter and other publications, as publication deadlines permit: BROOKLYN PARK , MN (52,232) (Minneapolis) - City Manager. Salary $68,000+/-; negotiable, dependent upon qualifications and experience. Three Managers since ICMA recognition in 1966. Appointed by seven member City Council: Mayor elected at-large, others by District, all on non-partisan basis for overlapping four-year terms. $29 million total budget, 10 departments with 250 FTE workforce. City Manager/Assistant City Manager experience in full-service, high growth, suburban/metro area desired. Strong leadership, financial management, interpersonal, public relations and urban/economic development skills required. Long range planning and community/intergovernmental relation abilities important. Apply at once: Paul A. Reaume, Korn-Ferry International, 120 South Riverside Plaza, Suite 918, Chicago, IL 60606. Kf1R\"[CD Pt' rV"�CD\'s'rV,vnt ccs MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed Repairs DATE: October 26, 1988 Introduction The attached letter to Rod Krass dated October 18, 1988 from the attorneys for the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District (PLSLWD) clearly indicates that the Watershed District will not complete the repairs on the District's Prior Lake outlet mandated by the arbitrator's November deadline. I Background The City has been struggling with the PLSLWD for years to make needed repairs to the Prior Lake outlet. We felt we had a solution when the arbitrator ruled early this spring that plans were to be approved in May and construction completed by June. The District, as stated in their letter, will fail to meet the deadline. In addition, the City Engineer was to review plans before bids were taken. The City Engineer participated in one review session, did not accept the plans, and never heard a response to his concerns. We received plans for a new section last week which we are now reviewing. Even so, it appears that the PLSLWD went ahead and bid the plans anyway. The response of the PLSLWD to the arbitrator's ruling is symptomatic of the District's dealings with the City of Shakopee. Nothing has changed. I spoke with Mr. Krass and he said that the next step is for the Court to enforce the arbitrator's ruling. Alternatives 1. Direct the appropriate city staff to file the arbitrator's report and move the Court to enforce the abritrator's report. 2. Accept the PLSLWD's explanation for their failure to meet the November deadline, and grant them the requested extension to complete the project this winter and next spring. Recommendation I recommend alternative No. 1 based upon the PLSLWD's prior performance. The City simply needs to bring all the legal mechanisms it has to bear on the PLSLWD to get them to perform. Action Requested Direct the Assistant city Attorney to file the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed District/City of Shakopee arbitration report with the Court and move the Court to enforce the arbitrator's findings. HUEMOELLER & BATES _ ATTORNEYS AT LAW - - POST OFFICE BOK 67 I"M FRANKLIN TRAIL PRIOR LAKE,MINNESOTA 55171 TMlBlque 161$180.1131 l eleroper (6121 1,A5628 TAMES D.BATES BRYCE D.HUEMOELLER October 18 , 1988 Phillip R. Krass, Esq. 327 South Marschall Road Shakopee, MN 55337 RE: Prior Lake-Spring Lake f Watershed District - City of Shakopee Dear Mr. Kress : This letter is intended as an update on the status of work ordered by the arbitrators. As you probably know, plans for the work have been sent by Al Kremer to Shakopee' s new engineer for review and comment, and also to SCS regarding possible financial assistance. The development of cost effective plans that meet the arbitration requirements has taken longer than anticipated, in part because of certain SCS requirements for financial assistance. Additionally the District' s board of managers concluded that since outside funding for the repairs is unlikely, a special assessment would have to be made in order to provide money for the outlet maintenance fund out of which repair expenses will be paid . A special assessment of $157 ,059 was adopted at a public hearing on September 29 . Based on past experience, 25-30% should be received this year, with another 30-40% by July of next year. The assessment itself is spread out over four years, but the District should be in position to fund the repairs during next year' s construction season. The District in fact has advertised for bids on the work to be done north of Deans Lake, and bids were opened October 11 . Although none of the bids was accepted (because the lowest was 40% more than the engineer' s estimate) , we still anticipate that work will get done in the fall or even perhaps in the winter. As to the remaining work, rather than rush the planning and repairs at the end of this season the District plans to get them done as early as possible next year after spring runoff. This will provide enough time for the engineers to resolve any differences about the plans and should allow for work to be done at a time when the channel banks have the best chance to stabilize. Xours t���!y,, James D. Bates JDB:dc cc: Donald 0. Benson Al Kremer 10r LAW OffiCES KIRASS & MONROE CHARTURED Phillip R. K. v Manwhall Road Busl�Center Dennis L.Mon. 327 Marschall Road Barry K.Meyer P.O.Box 216 Jay D.Goldberg NOVO 11988 " I Treyo,R.WW�n akopee,Mioneeota 55379 Mark J Moxnm Telephone(612)"5 5080 Diane M.Curlson VAX(612)"5-7640 Robert,J.XWlter L.chlan B Muir Jarnes B.Croft Colleen M.Trende Odin D Te Slaa Patrida A.Waller Kent A.Carlson,CPA October 31, 1988 Mr. Gregg Voxland City Treasurer City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Proposed Contract with Independent School District 720 Our File No. 1-1373-1 Dear Gregg: Pursuant to your request I have reviewed the proposed Joint Powers Agreement between the City And the School District relative to the tax increment financing districts presently in place in Shakopee. As I indicated to you in our phone conversation, I have not been involved in the negotiation of the contract and assume that the concepts contained in the contract accurately reflect the negotiations of the parties. It is obviously a very significant contract involving City and School District rights now and in the future. The form of the contract is fine and it appears to me to be very well drafted. If you are satisfied that it accurately represents the negotiating posture of the City, I would recommend its approval and execution with respect to its form. Very truly yours, SS NO CHARTERED ll-P7Kr-s s PRK:mlw ) Cr Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Joint Powers Agreement with I .S.D. 720 Date: October 28, 1988 Introduction The School Superintendent has approached the City Administrator with a new proposal for tax increment distribution to I.S.D. 720. It has been discussed informally by Council Members and is presented here in formal agreement form. It will be reviewed by an attorney before the Tuesday Council meeting. Background Basically, the agreement provides that: A. Year 1988/89 payable - School gets full value of tax increment due to 19.79 referendum. B. Year 1989/90 School gets value of TIF due to 14.29 mills of the 19.79 referendum. C. Year 1990/91 Same as "B" D. Year 1991/92 School gets all TIF referendum increment except City may keep up to 5.5 mills from District =4 if needed. E. Year 1992/93 Same as "D" F. Year 1993/94 Same as "D" G. Year 1994/95 School gets all TIF referendum increment. The School will use its best efforts to provide $100,000 of tax relief in levy 1989/90 and 1990/91. Action Reauested Council should discuss and reach a decision to deny or modify the agreement or authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement. GV:mmr KNUTSON, FLYNN, HETLAND & DEANS PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION SUITE OSd, MINNESOTA WORLD TRADE CENTS•;: 30 EAST SEVENTH STREET ST.PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 012222.281t FAX NUMBER (612) 222-2819 FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION COVER LETTER Date : 9-26-88 Time : 3 : 25 p.m. To: Superintendent of Schools Independent School District No. 720 Shakopee FAX # 445-3938 From: Thomas s . Deans ?ages ( including this page ) 15 Message ( if arty) : Contact Super n-ender ' = office to have douument picked up. They will provide a copy to the City. NOTE TO FACSIMILE OPERATOR : ?lease deliver thie Facsimile Transmission to the above addressee(s ) . If you did not receive all of the pages in good condition or if any other problems arise , please contact Desiree at (612) 222-2811 . Thank you. LIMES E. KNR:TSON JJSE?H E.FLYNN PA :W. H TLAND THOMAS 5. DANS PATRICK J. FLYNN GLCeRIA B.OLSEN POEM A. HL:Gi{6S JOHN M. MAAS Ph A STEPHEN M.KI UTSON MICHA6:.J. FLYNN MARIE C. SKINNER CONSULTANT JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT /V • This Joint Powers Agreement is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 by and between the School Board of Independent School District No, 720 (Shakopee) , Minnesota and the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. In consideration of the mutual covenants and provisions con- tained in this Agreement, the parties acree as follows: I. BACKGROUND A. Prior to January 1, 1988, the City of Shakopee (the 'City") established the following tax increment financing districts withir. Minnesota Valley Redevelopment District No. 1: Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 (K-Mart); Tex Increment Financing District No. 2 (Elderly High-Rise)) Tax Increment Financing District No. 3 (Downtown); Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 (Racetraok) ) and Tax Increment Financing District No. 6 (Shakopee Valley Motel) . B. Prior to January 1, 1988, the City issued various issues of general obligation tax increment bonds and pledged the incre- ment from the tax increment districts to the payment of the prin- cipal and interest thereon, C. In May, 1982, the voters of Independent School District No. 720 tthe "School District") approved a referendum levy in the amour.: of 11.5 mills times the most recent taxable valuation of the School District for a three-year period, i.e. , the 1982/payable 1983 levy for the 1983/84 school year, the 1983/payable 1384 levy for the 1984/85 school year, end the 1984/payable 1985 levy for the 1985/86 school year. This levy authority expired by its terms after the 1984/payable 1985 levy. In October, 1985, the voters of the School District approved a referendum levy in the amount of 5.5 mills times the most recent taxable valuation of the School District for a three year period, i.e. , the 1985/payable 1985 le';y for the 1986/87 school year, the 198E/payable 1987 levy for the 1997/88 school year, and the 1987/payable 1988 levy for the 1988/69 school year. This levy authority expired by its terms after the 1987/payable 1989 levy. On March 8, 1966, the voters cf the School District approved a referendum levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 124A.02, Subdivision 2 in the amount of 19.79 mills times the moat recent taxable valuation c° the School District. Cf this authorization, 9.0 sills was a continuing levy authority, with authorization granted until revoked or reduced as provided by law) and, 10.79 mills was authorized for a 3 year period, i.e. , the 1988/payable 1969 levy for the 1989/90 school year, the 1985/payable 19°C levy for the 1990/91 school year, and the 1990/payable 1991 levy for the 1941/92 school year. The 13.79 min ie•:'; authority will expire by its terms after the 1990/payable .991 levy. E. As a part of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill :Lave 1956, Chapter 719, article 12, Section 2k) , the 1988 Legislature amended the tax increment law to provide under certain cir- cumstances for distributions by cities and other tax increment authorities to school districts of tax increment generated as a result of school district referendul levies. ander the provi- sions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 13, as -2- amended, if a City has requested certification of tax increment 1 6 I`� financing districts and projects before May 1, 1988, and if those tax increment districts or projects are located within a eohoo: district in which the voters have approved new millage or an increase in millage after the tax increment financing districts were certified, and if the referendum increasing the mill rate was approved after the most recent issue for bonds to which increment fr0m the districts is pledged, then, upon approval by a majority vote of the governing body of the city and the school district, the city must pay to the school district an amount of increment equal to the increment that is attributable to the increase in the mill rate as a result of the referendum. The amounts cf these increments paid by a city to a school district may be expended and must be treated by the school district in the same manner as provided for the revenues derived from the referendum levy approved by the voters. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Joint Powers kgreement is tc authorize the City of Shakopee tc make distributions to Independent School District No. 720 of amounts of increment attributable to the increase in the mill rate as a result of the School District's March E, 1988 referendum and as a result of any subsequent referendum levies which may be amended by voters of the School District. In arriving at this Agreement for a TIP Capture Phase-Out, it is the intention of the parties to address three mutual goals t -3- 1. Tc reduce ultimately School Dietriot and City tex bur- dena and to provide the potential for property tax relief for the residents and taxpayers of the City and the School District, 2. To protect the City's debt service obligations in regard to existing tax incrementbondissues; and 3. To protect the School District's programs and to reduce School District operating debt as much as possible in the 1988/89 school year and thereafter. III. DISTRIBUTION OF INCREMENT A. The parties have been fully advised and understand that the distribution of tax increments relating to Minnesota Valley Redevelopment District No. 1 by the City to the School District is governed by the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 10. In consideration of the covenants herein contained, the parties hereby agree to waive any rights they may have relating to distribution er receipt cf distribu- tions under that Statute or any future statutory provisions relating thereto and agree that, to the extent inconsistent with any subsequent statutory provisions, distributions of increment shall instead be governed by the provisions cf this Agreement. To the extent that the Modified Development Agreement or Minnesota Valley Redevelopment District No. 1 or the Tax Inurement Financing Plan for any Tax Increment financing District may be inconsistent herewith, the City agrees to amend said Development Agreement or Plan to make it consistent with this Agreement. -4- 11 B. The parties agree to distribution of increment as �v follows: 1. Por the 1988/payable 1989 levy for the 1989/90 school year and for the levy for each year thereafter, the City agrees to raw to the School District all amounts of increment from Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6, or from any tax increment financing districts created or modified after May 1, 1988, that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate as a result of the 9.0 mill continuing levy authority approved by the voters of the School District on march 6, 1988. 2. For the 1988/payable 1989 levy for the 1989/90 school year, the City agrees to pay to the School District all amounts of increment from Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6, or from any tax increment financing districts created or modified after May 1, 1988, that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate for that year as a reeult of the 10.79 mill levy authority approved by the voters of the School District on March 8, 1988. 3. For the 1989/payable 1990 levy for the 1990/91 school year and for the 1990/payable 1991 levy for the 1991/92 school year, the City shall each year retain an amount of incre- ment from Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 that is attributable to the increase in the mill rate for that year as a result of a levy of up to 5.5 mills (but not to exceed the actual millage levied) of the 10.79 mill levy authority approved by the voters of the School District on March 8, 1988. -3- For the 1989/payable 1990 levy for the 1990/91 school year and for the 1990/payable 1991 levy for the 1991/92 school year, the City shall each year pay to the School District all amounts of increment from Tax Increment ?inancing District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate for that year as a result of a levy by the school District greater than 5,5 mills cf the 10,79 mill levy authority approved by the voters of the School District on March 8, 1988. The City shall also pay all amounts of increment from any tax increment financing districts created or modified after May 1, 1988 that aro attributable to any increase in the mill rate for that year as a result of the 10.79 mill levy authority approved by the voters of the School District on March 8, 1988. ks specified above, for the 1989/payable 1990 levy and for the 1990/payable 1991 levies, the School District will receive a por- tion of the increment attributable to the increase in the min rate ae a result of the 10.79 mill levy authority. The School District is urged and the School Board agrees to use its best efforts to provide $100,000 of property tax relief in each of those years, Prior to its certification of School District levies in 1989 and 1990, the School Board shall report in writing to the City Council on its efforts to provide property tax relief in conformance with this provision of this Agreement. 4. The City understands that the 10.79 mill levy authority cf the School District expires after the 1990/payable 1991 levy. It further understands that, in order to meet its continuing operating requirements, the School Districtbe may -6- 1 required to submit a request for an additional referendum levy authorization to the voters in 1991 or thereafter. The City is urged to reassess its need for increment that is attributable to the increase in the mill rate as a result of the School District's referendum levy. In that the City will be able to make a judgment as to the need for these increments after the receipt of its second half property tax payments in 1990, the City Council shall report in writing to the School Board prior to December 31 of 1990 as to whether it will need that portion of the increment from the property located within Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 that is attributable to School District referendum levies in order to pay principal and interest on its tax increment bonds issued prior to May 1, 1988. The parties understand that the School District will utilize this information in part to determine the approximate sire of any levy authoriza- tion request which may to be submitted to the voters in 1991, The City Council shall make a similar report to the School Board prior to December 31 of 1991 and 1992 as to its need for tax increments attributable to the referendum levy and as to whether any portion of such increments generated from the property located within Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 will be ..ta+bla to the School District in 1992 and 1993 which then could by utilized by the School District for tax relief or other appropriate purposes. S. If the School District submits a recuest for addi- tional levy authorization to the voters in 1991, 1992 or 1993 and if such authority is granted by the voters at an election held -7- for the purpose, the parties further agree to the distribution of increment as provided hereafter. Por the 1991/payable 1992 levy fcr the 1992/93 school year, for the 1992/payable 1993 levy for the 1993/94 school year and for the 1993/payable 1994 levy for the 1994/95 actool year, the City is authorized each year to retain an amount o° increment generated from the property located within Tax Increment Financing D'_atrict No. 4 that is attributable to the ir.c=eaee in the mill rate for that year as a result of the levy of 5.5 rails upon that property (but not to exceed the actual millage levied) of the referendum mill levy authority approved by the voters of the School District and applicable to its 1991/payable 1992, 1992/payable 1993, or 1993/payable 1994 levies. For the 1991/payable 1992 levy for the 1992/93 school year, for the 1992/payable 1993 levy for the 1993/94 school yea: and for the 1993/payable 1994 levy for the 1994/95 school year, the City shall each year pay to the School District any amount generated by the levy cf up to 5.5 trills upon the property located within Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 that it determines it does not need, any remaining amount from Tax Increment Firancins District No. 4 that is the result of a levy in excess of 5.5 mills, and all amounts of increment from incre- ment Financing District Noe. 1, 2, 3 and 6, or from any tax increment financing districts created or modified after May I, 1988, that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate for that year as a result of referendum levy authority approved by the voter; of the School District. -8- 6. For the 1995/payable 1996 levy and for the levy for / °' /1 each year thereafter, the city agrees to pay to the School District all amounts of increment from any existing or thereafter created tax increment financing districts that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate as a result of any referendum levy authority approved by the voters of the School District. C. Nothing within the provisions of this Agreement shall be construed tc prevent the City from terminating any existing tax increment financing district according to its terms or otherwise in the manner provided by law. D. It is the understanding of the parties that, pursuant to the provisions of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill, mill retell may be converted to tax capacity rates, As such conversion takes place, this Agreement shall be deemed to be amended to carry out the same intent and to reach the same results as specified by the parties herein. E. It is the further understanding of the parties that the laws relating to distribution of tax increments generated as a result of school district referenda may be amended in future Legislative sessions; however, the parties agree that the distri- bution of increment attributable to such referenda shall be governed by the provisions of this Agreement to the extent incon- sistent with any subsequent statutory provisions, and that this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect notwithstanding any such changes in legislation. _9- F. The City agrees that it shall pay to the School District on an ongoing basis the agreed upon increment as soon as poaaibls, but not more than 15 days after its receipt by the City. Whenever a distribution, of increment is rade, it shall be made directly by the City to the School District and snail no: be returnee to the County Auditor for further transmission. The City shall maintain its book8, accounts, and records in such a manner that the correctness of all payments of increment made to the School District pursuant to this Agreement may be verified. Prior to January 30, 1990, and January 30 of each year thereafter, the certified public accountants engaged by the City to audit its books and records shall verify the payments made by the City to the School District in the preceding calendar year pursuant to this Agreement and shall provide a written opinion to the City and School District as to their correctness. IV. DEFACLT A. Any disputes relating to this Agreement or items in this Agreement requiring clarification will be jointly investigated by the Superintendent of Schools of the School District and the City Administrator of the City, or their designees, and they will pre- sent their findings and recommendations to their respective governing bodies. E. It shall be a default under this Agreement if either party shall fail to make a payment required on or before th• date that the payment is due, or if either party should fail to observe or perform any other obligation, agreement, er covenant on its part for a period of thirty (30) days after receipt o: -10- written notice from the other partyspecifying /v ,.he default and requesting that it be remedied. AU notices required to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and be addressed to the Chair of the school Board or the Mayor of the City at the appropriate administrative office. If an event of default has happened or is existing, the other party may take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear necessary or appropriate to collect the amounts then due and thereafter to become due, or to enforce performance and observation of any obligation, agreement or covenant of the other party under this Agreement. No remedy conferred upon or reserved to the nor.-defaulting party is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or reme- dies, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be an addition to every other remedy giver. under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing in law or in equity. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing under any default shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exer- cised from time to tine and es often as may be deemed expedient, In the event any agreement contained in this Agreement shall be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other breach hereunder. Zr. the event either party should default under any cf the provisions of this Agreement, and the other party should employ attorneys or incur other expenses for the collection of payments required hereunder, or the enforcement of performance or -11- observance of any obligation, agreement or covenant on the part of the other party, each party agrees that it wi:: on demand therefore pay to the other party the reasonable fees of such attorneys and such other expanses so incurred by the other party, V. DURATION, AMENDMENT; SAVINGS CLS This Agreement shall be perpetual in duration, It may only be amended or terminated by,a written agreement signed by the apprcpriate officers of the City and the School District after approval by resolution of the City Council and the School Board. Should any provisions cf this Agreement be found unlawful, the other provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect if by doing so the purposes of this Agreement, taken as a whole, can be accomplished. Should any provision of this Agreement be found unlawful, the parties shall attempt to agree upon an amendment to replace the unlawful part. V:. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; CHOICE OF LAW It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement of the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement super- cedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern as to the interpretation, validity and effect of this Agreement.. -12- O 11V IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties by their respective o••ic re have executed this Agreement on the dates indicated. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT CITY OF SHATC??E, MINNESOTA NC. 720 (SHAKOPEE), MINNEsoTA By By yMayor By By Clerk City Adnir.Iatrator Date: Dater Approved at the meeting of the Approved at the meeting of the School Board thereof, held on City Council thereof, held on the day of November, 1988. the day of November, 1988. -13- =•�EtiDsF� Member introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: Resolution No. RESOLUTION APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WHEREAS, a proposed Joint Powers Agreement has been nego- tiated and drafted regarding the distribution of certain incre- ment revenues attributable to increacee in the mill rate as a result of school district referendum levies ; and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed draft is attached and incor- porated by reference; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, as follows : 1. The attached joint Powers Agreement is hereby approved; and 2. The Mayor and City Administrator are hereby authorized to execute the attached Joint Powers Agreement. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same; Whereupon said Resclut'_on was duly passed and adopted, c i2 /6 Il member introduced tho following Restlutioi; 411%2 moved its adoption ; RESOLUTION APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WHEREAS, a proposed Joint Powers Agreement hat been nego- tiated and drafted regarding the distr buLion of certain incre4 menf-• rmvp.nn .s nttributabie to inereaceo in the mill raLc ad a rasnit of school distrivt referendum levies; aria WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed draft is attached and incor- porated by reference; NOW THEREFORE, t3L" IT RESOLVED try the School Boa rid of Independent School District No. 720, as follows ! 1 . The attached Joint Powers Agreement lb approved; and 2 , The Chair, err•& clerk and Superintendent. are hereby authorized to exi.cuLe the attached Joint Powers Agreement. Tne m(nlof :or the adoption of t.ha fnrAvii nq Resolution waL duly secnncirte by Member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in savor thereof : and the tollowing voted against the same! Whereupon said xesoluticn 0,7 duly gassed and adoptr1 . Mmmher introduced the f011oWing Resolution and moved its ae1nption • Resolution No. RESOLUTION APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WHRRFA;;, n rrnno5Fr; Joint Dowers Agreement hsas been nego- tiated and drafted regarding the z2LsLiilJuLivu uL certain incre- mmnt. r-venue6 eLLLibuL6v1e to increases in the mill rate as a result of zchool district referendum levies , and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed draft is attached and incor- porated by reference; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVC;> ly the City Council of the City of Shakopcc, as follows, 1. Thr. nt tnohed JOi,;L PuwwL x Ay i Bement is hereby approved; and 2. The Mays>r, Clerk and City Administrator are hereby auLhuilced Lu execute the attacked Joint Powers Agreement. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly u ti d by M=mbw1_ and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the sante: Whereupon said Resolution wag duly passed and adopted. • i() /1 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT 'nag Joint rrwnr.s AgreeLU IL is made pursuant to Minnesota Ztmf ur?a•, tiection 471 , 59 + 9 by and bettyn the 9i_liuvl Board of Independent 4r:hor.rl District No. 720 (Ehakopee) , Minnesota and the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. In consideration of the miii-»rl rc,veinanta and provisions con - tained on - t3incd in this ArI1emcuL, the parties agree as follows ; 1. BACKGROUND A. Pr lur to January 1, sytjb , the City of Shakopee (the ,.rit5'" ) eo=sb:.(-prhr.r3 npnrnvthe ei•tsadliashmerrit by the housina ano Redevelopment Authority In ani; for L1'r,✓ City of Shakoneo , Minneer,Le ( Lhe "NRA" ) of the >:011OWlrig tax increment- fi nAncin0 tai ntri rrt•s wi i-h i n Minns sc La Rivwr Valley Houoing and tiedeveloement Prn j&r.i- Nn. 11 Tac Increment Finnne:( ng Di•.triaL I (K-Mat t.) ; Tnr..Ler, -rpt Pii�aii�i�j L�iLit tQv. 2 (Elderly high-teise) ; Tax Increment Financing Di.otrict No. 3 (Downtown) ; Tax Ir.orortont :Financing T)i nf.ri r.t No. 4 (RaceLrac•k) j Qua Tax In,rem:r;l Fii]n,�uir,y District No. $ (Shakopee Valley Motel ) . A; uaod in this Ac.Bement:, t hn term "City" shall man the City anti/or HRA at, the context may require. C. Prior to January 1, 1988, the city iccucd various isauea of general obligation ;.ax inr.re'rr.ent bonds and two issues of non- r7en.sral ob'1iqntic,,i t<_,u& irc,_ament revenue bond and p1 ndgt:1 t.hr increment from the tax ircremeut dibtricts to the payment of the pr. inripr, , enn interest tt;ereon. D. In M_y, 19A2, t.hs? vnt'r-t-s nr Toth-L, .,,cunt S{•t7riol District No. 720 ( t:lw "SQhho(.>1 Dietrict" ) approved a referendum 0 !1/ levy in the amount of 11. 5 mills times the most recent taxable valuation of the school District for a Ghree-year period, i,e . , the 1982/payable 1983 levy for the 1983/84 school year, the 1983/payable 1984 levy for the 1984/85 school year, and the 1984/payable 1985 levy for the 1985/86 school year . This levy authority expired by its terms after the 1984/payable 1985 levy. In October, 1985 , the voters of the School District approved a referendum levy in the amount of 5. 5 mills times the most recent taxahla velnarinn of the Snhonl nistrint. for R t.hrAR year period, i .e . , the 1985/payable 1986 levy for the 1986/87 school year, the 1986/i:ayaLle 1987 levy rut Llie 1987/88 school year , and tha 1987/payable 1988 levy for the 1988/89 school year. This levy authority axpirad by its terms after the 1987/payable 1988 levy. D. On March 8, 1988, the voters of the School ni .atrict approved a referendum levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes , 6cv1.ivL, 124A. 03 , eul:.livision 2 in t'ne amount of 10 . 70 Brills times the mmmt rPrant taxahle valuation of the School District. Oi' this authorization, 9.0 mills was a continuing levy authority, with authorization granted until revoked or reduced as provided oy law; one, lu . tv mills wag authorized for a 3 year period, i.e. , the 1988/payable 1989 levy for the 1989/90 school year, the 1969/payable 1990 levy for the 1990/91 school year, and the 1990/payable 1991 levy for the 1991/92 school year. The 10 .79 mill levy authority will expire by its terms after the 1990/payable 1991 levy. -2- .. v .. - .. . e /a r" E. As a part of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill ( Lawts 1988, Chapter 719, Article 12, Section 24 ) , the 1988 Legislature amended the tax increment law to provide under certain cir- cumstances for distributions by cities and other tax increment authorities to school districts of tav incrpmant gen?rAt•Pr. Aa A resnl t of srhnnl district rpferendnnm 1 ev i PS . finder the provi - sions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 459 .177, Subdivision 14, to tmenlitiT if a city has recuested certification of tax inc:einnt financing districts and projects before May 1, 1988 , and if those tax increment districts or projects are located within a school district in which the voters have approved new millage or an increase in m .Llage arter tne tax increment rinancing districts were certirica, ane it tne referendum increasing the mill rate wag appruvCd c1LLCt L11C 111VtlL rV . Lvi'i.le Lv whi.:h iris ement. Cram the dietricte is pledged, than, uperl approval by a mej.ritly vote of the governing body of the city and the aohool district, the city must pay to the oehool dintriot an amount of increment equal to the increment that is attributable to the increase in the mill rht•P na rh rP4111 t n4 th* rrfprrndium. Th* mmn„ntA of the** innr*mrnt-g priirl by A r.if-.y t.n A school district may he etxpr.nc3ed nnd must be treated by the school district in the same manner as provided for the revenues derived from the referendum levy approved by the voters . II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Joint Powers Agreement is to nutherizc provide the terms upon which the City -t __ shall make distributions- to Ir.dcperdent the School District tio. 720 or -3- ***END*** 44;4a40 ..7 L )11 amounts of increment attributable to the increase in Lhe mill ial.v mo a LooulL ur Lti Schvv1 District' s March 8 , 1568 referen- dum and as a result of any subsequent referendum levies which may be marIrrre, approved by voters of the School District. In arriving at this Agreement for a TIF Capture Phase-Out, It is the intention of r.he prsrtir?S to address three mutual goals : 1 , To reduce ultimately School District and City tax bur- dens and to provide the potential for property tax relief for the residents and taxpayers of the City and the Schonl District; 2 . To prnre.cr rhe r1 ty' .s t it Aprvi rp oh1 i gat inns in regard to existing tax increment bond issues; and 3 . To protect the School District ' s programs and to reduce Ochooi District operating debt as much as poss i Lle in Lhe 1988/89 school year and thereafter. III . DISTRIBUTION OF INCREMENT A. The parties have been fully advised and understand ti- -t ttl laws :el4tiny to the distribution of tax increments g _l- '-c�tTr: Dietri.;t No. 1, generated as a ,v -Sre•ult ef Oeheol District ref=_rer„lu-, levies , by Lhe Ci Ly Lo Lhe VIt' ; School DisLricL_ io governed by the provioicr• f-M4ftnesot,a 6tat.utec, Eeetion rrlft-t ► t-o ikr ihut ion or receipt ef distr bu tions under that statute or any future staff -4- 44;4000 •///4 al.�zl _li.teQd be governed by the prov-i�ioms of this irrg:cemcnt. - - L ♦ • 1 •1 ll 1 . 4 .. - • �'i a l -r.ar.cing D-istrict may tc ineennistent herewith/ the-• -_ ,, . - . . _M Asreemelttl- B . The partioc agree to distribution of increment a6 follows: 1 . For the 1988/payable 1989 levy for the 19R9/90 school year and for the levy for each year thereafter, the City agrees to pay to the School District all amounts cf increment from Tax Increme::t Financing District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 , or from any tax inrrempnt- financing districts which aro craatcd or i-4b i:,creaecd in ciao after May 1, 1988 , that are attribu table to nny increase in the mill rats AS a rtsulL vi' Llm 9 . 0 mill continuing levy authority approved by the voters or the School District on March 8, 1988 . 2 . For the 1988/payable 1989 levy for the 1989/90 sr.hnnl yp;,r, the City agrees to pad/ to the School District all amount, of increment from Tax Increment Financing District Nos. 1 , 2, 0 , 4 and G, n f:.vm airy Lax inuLCmut. £inanciny districts which are created or = r increased in size after May 1, 19885 , that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate for that year ea a rezu1L of the 10.79 mill levy auli/vt1Ly appluvud by the voters of the school. District on March 8 , 1988 . 3 . For the 19R9/payahle 1990 levy for the 1990/91 -5- ***END *:. school year and for the 1990/payahle 1991 levy for the 1991/92 school year, the City shall each year retain an amount of incro- ment from Tax IncremNnt Pinancing District No; . 1, 2, 3 , 4 ail() 6 that. 15 attLlbuLdb1e to the increase in the mill rate for that year a raetilt oc 1ovy of up to 5 . 5 mills (but not to exceed the actual millago levied ) of the 10 . 70 mill levy authority approved by the voters or Lbe School Dibt.Livt cu March 8, 1988 . For thA lth4V payahle 1990 levy for the 1990/91 school year and for the 1990/payable 1991 levy for the 1901/92 echool year, the City shall seek year pay to the Q.heel DieLricL all amc. La c.f increment from Tax T.ncrement. Financing fli at.ri nt NOR . 1 , 2, 1, 4 and 6 that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate for that year as a result of a levy by the School District greater than 5 . 5 mi11a of the 10 *79 mill levy ate;hcri;y approved y the voters of the school District on March 8 , 1989 . The City shall also pay all amounts of increment from any tax increment financing districts which are created or meth-ri-cd inuread in ai nt After May 1 , 1968 that are attributable to any increase in the mill rate for that year as a result of the 10 .79 mill levy authority approved by the voters of the School District on Marc: 8 , 1988. P.6 specified above, for the 1989/payable 1990 levy and for the 1990/payable 1991 levies, the School District will receive a por- tion of the increment attributable to the inoreaRe in the mill rate as a result of the 10 .79 mill levy authority. The School District is urged and the School Board agrees to use its best efforts to provide $100,000 of property tax relief in each of -6- l6 hi those years . Prior to its ceLLitioaLion of DChool Dietrict levies in 1989 and 1990, the School Board shall report in writing to the City Council on its efforts to provide property tax relief in conformance with this provision 0`_ this Agreement . 4 . Tne city underststctils Lli L the 10 . 79 mill levy authority of the School District expires afLct Uhe 1990/payable 1991 levy. It further underst_anc?s that, in Order to meet its continuitiy operating raquiromente, the School District may be required to submit a ruuaL for an additional rofercndum levy authorization to the voters in 1991 or thereafter . The City is urc:ed to reassess ito need for increment that is attributable to the increuac In the mill rate an a result of the School District' s referCtnduut 1C�y. In .11aie the City will he Ahle to make n judgment as to the need :ort-ese intrLCuccttL3 after the receipt of ite second half property tax payments in 1990, the city council shall Let.dort in writing to the School 'Board Drior to December 31 of 1990 as to whether it will need that portion of the increment from the property located within Tax Increment Financing Distric:L No. 4 that is attributable to School. District referendum levies in order to Pay principal and interest on its tax increment bonds issued prior to May 1, 1988. The parties understand that the School District will utilize this information in part to determine the approximate 3iae of any lovy rt�.itl�nri tion request whi ^h may to submitted to the voterb i„ 1991 or thereafter . The City Council shall mnkn a similar report to the School board 1JL loL Lv December 31 of 1991 and 199, ma t-n its need for tax increments attributable to the referendum levy and as to -7- * *END*** whether any pok LiU„ or such increments generated from the property located within Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 will be payable to thQ School District ill 1992 and 19y.1 Which th+n could be utilized Ly tlse School District for tax relief or other appropriate purposes . 5. If the Cchccl DiL., iut. submits a request for addi- tional levy authorization to the voters in 1991 , 1992 or 1993 and if such authority is granted by the voters at an election held for the purpose, the parties further agree Lo the distribution of increment as provided hereafter. For the 1991/paycble 1992 levy for the 1992/93 school year , for the 1992/payable 1993 levy for the 1993/94 school year and for the 1993/payable 1994 levy for the 1994/05 oche .1 ybai Llic City i.A authorized each year to retain an amount of increment generated from the piuperty located within Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 that is attributable to thc increase in the mill rate for that year as a racult of the levy or 5. 5 mills upon that property (but not to exceed the actual millage levied) of Lhe referendum mill levy authority approved by the voters of the School District Ana applicable to its 1991/paya:dlc 1992, 1992/payable 1993 , or 1993/payable 1994 levies . For the 1991/payable 1992 levy for the 1992/93 school year, tut the 1992/payapie 1993 levy for the 1991/94 school year and for the 1993/payahlo 1994 levy for thc 1994/9: auiiuvl year, the ( ity shall each year pay tie the s..1,vyl tiztrict any amount generated by the levy of up to 5 . 5 mills upon the property located within Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 that it -e- * E ND* A. .•A G c � �; ,vtv . , v-J :-00 J Vv'h LLvJJv 1.6 determines it does not need, any remaining amount from Tax Increment Finnnrino District No. 4 that is tlx:. result of a levy in Qyrass of 5. 5 mills And all anli,ut,LS of increment rrcm incre- rne tt Fir;ancing District Nos . 1, 2, 3 and 6 , or from any tax increment financing districts which are created or m dificc; increafipt3 in size after May 1, 1998 , that and aLLLibutable to any increase in the mill rate tot that year as a result of referendum levy authority approved by the vnt.prc of thA School District. 6 . For the 1995/payable 1996 lovy and for the levy for each year thereafter, the City agrees to pay Lo the School Dictriot all amounts or from any eXiSting or thnrPnftrr created tax increment financing districts that are attributable to Any increase in the mill rate as a result of any refercnaum levy authority approved by the voters of the School District. rvotning witn_n the provisions of t:hia Agreement shall be construed i.o prevent the City from terminating any existing tax incrorr,cnt finanoing district according to ite term= or otherwise in Lh lttdt,ttttL pLvvlded by law. It Le the unaaretanain.3 of tltc r+a:. Lice that , pursuant to the piovieions of the )9$e Omnibus 'lax gill , mill rates may be converted to tax capacity rates . As such conversion takes place, this Agreement shall be deemed to be amended to carry out the came intenL and Lu Leah the same results as specirlea by the parties herein , .. �. _ _ - - ; -9- begisla sessions, ht7revcr, t:ie pa-tics agree that the distri . _ . - . -- - - ,t— provisi�rs- , ane that tl:_e e-ry such changes in legislati.,:;. g- E. The City agrees that it shall pay to the School District on an ongoing hA'Ris the agreed upon increment an soon as possible, but not more than 15 days after it receipt by the City. Whenever a distribution of i«viement is made, it shall be made directly by the city to the School District and shall not be returned to tho County Auditor for furthor tranomiaaion. Tho City shall maintain its books, accounts, and records in such a manndz 1;110,* the correctness of all payments of increment made to the School District pursuant to this Agreement may be verified . frier to January 30, -3:g9.O,• and aanuary•-3O-of -.. -1 + r t-hereafte,. , The certified public accvuntarits engaged by the City to audit ite borkn r.nr3 records shall verify the payments made by the City to the School District in the preceding calendar year pursuant to this Agreement_ and shall piuviae a written opinion to the City and 5chool District as to their correctness . IV. DEFAULT A. Any disputes relating Lo Lhis Agreement; Or items in this Agreement requiring clarific:arirn will he jointly investigated by the Superintendent of Schoolc of the School District and the City Ad:tinisLraLor of City, or their designees, and they will -10- *:.,.END..** /Is / present their finding* and recommendations to their respective governing bodies . D. It sha11 be a default under this Agreement if either party shall fail to make a payment required on or before the date thnt tn, pAyrnent is due, or if either party should Lail to observe or perform any other obligation, agreement, or covenant on its part for a period of thirty ( 30 ) days after receipt cf written notice from the other party specifying the default and rsquosting that it be remedied. All noLioet, LcciulicQ to be given under this A Leeillent shall be in writing and be addressed to the Chair of the School Board or the Mayor of the City at the Appropriate administrative office. If an event of default ilea happened or is existing, the other pdrty may take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear necessary or appropriate to collect the amounts then due and thereafter to become due, or to enforce performance an 111JbCi VdL1V11 of any obligation, agreement or covenant of the other party under. this Agreement. No remedy conferred upon or reserved to the non-defaulting party is in.tsnded to bo o clucivc of any other available reuieUy uL 1. 11tc- dies, LuL cdc.l, and eveLy such remedy shall be cumulative and shall he an a1ditinn to av?ry other remedy given under thic Agreement or now or hereafter existing in law or in equity. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing under any aetauit shall impair any such right or power or be construed to he a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exer- cised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expeaient. In the event any agreement contained in this Agreement shall be -11- ***END*** rtyv •Aerox e ecop:er 7020 ; 10-31-88 ; 3:10PM ; -' 4455958410 /6 II/ breaches by either party aria thereafter waived by the Other party, such waiver shall be limited tc the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other breach hereunder , In the event either party should default under Any of the provisions of this Agreement, and the other party should employ attorneyG or incur other expenses for the collection of payments required hereunder, or the ethfcLe;em lit of performance or ohsarvance of any obligation , agreement or revenant nn the part of the other party, each party agrccc, that it will on demand therefore pay to the other party the reasonable fees of such attorneys and such other Rxpenses so incurred by the other parry. V. DURATION; AMFND14F,NT; SAVINGS CLAUSE This- Agreement shall be perpetual in duration. It may only be amended or terminated by a written agreement signed by the appropriate officers of the City and the school i)ist_ricr a¢r.Fr approval by resolution of the City Council and the School Board. It is net the intention of. this Agreement to provide terms that may at the time of their application be unlawful. Should any provisions of this Agreement be found unlawful , the other provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect it by dulny cv L114.1 putput yr t1ala 15,414,31)t, tukv:1 as a whole, can be accomplished. Should any provision of this Agreement be found unlawful, the parties shall attempt to agree upon an amend- ment to replace the unlawful part or jointly to seek such action from the Legislature, including special legislation, as may he necessary to make the terms of this Agreement fully enforceable. VI . ENTIRE AGREEMENT; CHOICE OF LAW It is understood and agreed that the entire agreement -12- . . c c , .c; ,vcv • „,-3 ,-OG o• iirM ., ;�: �.J,35411 /d 1 of the parties is contained herein and that this Agreement suporcedes all oral agreements and negotiatinna hPt-ween the par- ties relating to the subject- matter hereof. The lnua of the State of Mi nnAsota shell govern as to Lh i,aLwrvretatior., vali- dity And effect of this AgJ:eem nt. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties by their respective officers have executed this Agreement on the dates indicated. INDEPENDENT SC F{r)C)r, DISTRICT NO. 720 (SHAKOPEE) , MINNESOTACITY Or GIIAHOP$E, v=NIiL3vTA By By C^Air Mayor By Clerk By Clerk By By Suparintendont City Administrator DAt4! Date! Approved at the meeting of the Approved at Lhe meeting of the Sohool Beard thereof, held on City Council thereof, held on the day of November, 1989 . the day of November, 1988. -13- /e RESOLUTION NO. 2982 RESOLUTION APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WHEREAS, a proposed Joint Powers Agreement has been negotiated and drafted regarding the distribution of certain increment revenues attributable to increases in the mill rate as a result of school district referendum levies ; and WHEREAS, a copy of the proposed draft is attached and incorporated by reference; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, as follows: 1. The attached Joint Powers Agreement is hereby approved; and 2 . The Mayor, Clerk, and City Administrator are hereby authorized to execute the attached Joint Powers Agreement. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee this day of 1988 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1988 . City Attorney 1J 5 CONSENT CONSENT Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Farm Lease for 1989 Date: October 26, 1988 Introduction Gene Hauer has inquired about renewal of his farm lease for 1989. Background The Hauer family has farmed the land in the north part of Memorial Park for may years. Since the City acquired the land for a park, it has leased the north part to the Hauer family for continued farming. A few years ago, the City checked around for other interested farmers and found none. There are no current City plans to use the area being farmed. A lease form has been sent to Gene Hauer for his signature and it is to be returned for City official's signatures. Mr. Hauer pays the taxes on the land and $250-$500 in rent depending upon flooding conditions. Action Requested Move to authorize proper City officials to execute a farm lease with Gene Hauer for 1989 under the same terms as 1988. Gv:mmr Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Computer Communications Equipment Date: October 7, 1988 Introduction The Finance Department has been experiencing problems with data communications with LOGIS. Background The Finance Department has had trouble with data communications to LOGIS such as false signals, garbage characters and the terminal locking up. We are using an ordinary telephone line modems for communications. The modems were replaced in June and the nature of the problems changed somewhat but the end result is that we are not better off than we were before. LOGIS indicates that the problems may be with the telephone lines. There are only a couple of LOGIS cities still on "voice" lines. A dedicated data line is the alternative. Over the past year about 7 cities have changed to data lines. Approximate cost to install a data line is $755 and the monthly cost would be about $72 compared to $51.48/mo. for our present voice line. Additionally we would need a multiplexer at each end of the data line. A multiplexer can last 10+ years. LOGIS is using some that are over 10 years old. I have no plans to quit using LOGIS for the core programs of payroll and financial. How long we use the multiplexers depends on technology and Council direction. There are currently four options available for obtaining multiplexers. Alternatives 1. Buy new ones ($4,000 +) 2. The City of Mound has left LOGIS and has 4 channels, 2400 Baud (Micom) multiplexers as surplus. We could offer Mound $1,000-1,500 for the pair and see if they would sell them. 3. Roseville is leaving LOGIS and will have surplus multiplexers in 2-6 months. They have 8 channels, 9600 Baud Micoms. We could negotiate with Roseville and perhaps buy them for $2 ,000-3,000. LOGIS has equipment we could lease in the meantime for about $110 per month. 4. LOGIS has an Infotron 4 channel, 9600 Baud multiplexer available for $3,616.50 for the pair. These units are expandable to 16 channels so they are a bigger unit than we need but are relatively cheap. LOGIS picked then up from a vendor repossession for about half price. Recommendation Alternative No. 4. We currently use only one channel and don' t foresee adding a second channel in the near future. We currently communicate at 1200 Baud which is fine for "character" activities but is slow for "screen format" activities because the operator has to wait for each screen to fill up before proceeding. As time goes on, there are more screen format uses on LOGIS and when we convert to the new payroll system (next year) there will probably be a lot more screen formats. Therefore, while Mound' s multiplexers are twice as fast as our current modems, they may still be relatively slow for screen formats. It would cost about $1,000 each to upgrade Mound's units to 9600 Baud. Also there would be some cost for cable, phones and installation but LOGIS may take our '88 modems in trade for those costs . Recap: 1. Mound is cheaper but slower 2. Roseville is 9600 Baud but if we lease equipment until theirs is available, the cost could equal LOGIS. 3. LOGIS is 9600 Baud and available now. Funding: There is $5,200 left in the Finance computer system capital equipment budget for 1988. The Equipment Committee concurs with alternative No.4. Action Reauested Move to authorize the purchase of a pair of Infotron multiplexors from LOGIS for $3,616.50 and the acquisition of a data line for communication for approximately $755.00. GV:mmr /O * W * W * W * 1.1 * 19 * 1.41.41.41.41.4141 * 14 W W W * W * W* o * o * O * o * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 * C. * : :I* o * o * o * o * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 0 0 0 * oo * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * 0 *Ln * kn kn Cn 111 kn In VI * N * -CD * kn kn kn in VI In VI * * Vt * W CO CO CO CO Cp CO CO Co Co Co Co Co CO Co 03 Co CO CO Co 0 rA Co a Co Co Co Co co CLCD co co CO Co Co Co m M > 1 0 - - VI In La -. C . . z a s 111 1)1 - - A .I CO - as 0 0 - VI - A A A -I rur ro ro - rVN - N .IIII - .IAao OO Aa - LJ Os 0, Coco NN 14 W COCA NN o0 W CVOOUi VI COo 0o ANA •J -4 -4 o0 CO CO 00 00 IJI VI 00 44 a NON Co . a 00 OUl0 VI 0, 0, 00 A A Co CO VI VI Co Co 0 0 CII .0 a Co 0s W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co Co 0 0 * * * * * * * * * * 0 0 Co Co CO CoCDC Co CO COCA > mmm > > > > 0 M > 33333333333333 CO Co 2 v m v C C Cl) 71 v 11 -4 m Co G) 0 m 0000000 Z r v •-< s 0000 000 >> > m < r 2 :) L^ ^ ', CO ,I., CO 1 ZZZ TI 0 m >i r) m 000 0 > z -I --1 C a a a a a a a -I m m m 33 -•1 0 C 0) I 3) v v 33 v > 0 23 > r 2333131 O NiACI) 70 CO r Z -I 0000000 000 (r) 0 0 -1 0 33731)3333MM 1 ZZZ Z - 2 M 0 0 C)G) 0 0 G) C -I CO m CO v v » » » > Z D. O. D. m f) -< s. z z z z z z z v < > > > Z Z a0) 0) 0 z 2 c) 000 m C) C) A C) G) CO -i RI 33 m to m v m vvvv -CI vv v 000CO m m - o C 0 3/ 0 333331X1233323 XI -ICC 0 0 -i C z C 0 C 0000000 0 2 -0 13 C C m Tt Tt v m TI 11 T v Tt 11 m •9 •V >-, .. 3 -o > o -o 33 r r -o v c) co co CO CO CO (1)CO CO Cl) v 2 m 3 m 3 m m m m m m m m ..m m 1 3 m > > 33 > 33X1333/ .33.37.3) XI 1CO0) > > Cl) 2 < « « « < < 33 C) z > z z 33 Z Z 33 -4 -C -4 -I 0 -I -i < v -I M 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0. CT CT o.0+ 0. - o f)00 0 0 > • - - - - Ifl in In I$IUI VIJ7 0 - - - - t) 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I I I C) A A A A A A AAA AAA A A A A A A 0 N N rV W N LJ W W W W Li W W in N N N N C 1.4 - U - IA - - -. W W Z N in N o N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 N N 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I A A A A VIN UIUI UI UI - - VI O+ 3/ A 1.4 2 re 14 r0 -4 N 0'T o.0+0i o•a - VI Ili W A - 0 as W 0• .I Co Co -4 o.A W O - - .ONo - • 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I A A A A A .A . 31 .0. - - ACnA A l.! N N ro -4 r0 0 - -N ft) A - Z N co A CA a VI a rV A 0 A iF - - A -4 - c N A .I v I LO O 0 Co Or Co 3 m v Cl) > * * * * * * t * * (r) C) * * * * * * * * * > m * * * * * * * * * C) 1 I I I I I I I I m C) C) C) A C) C) C) C) C) X x x x x x X X x *) 01 0) Cl) (I) 13) 011 (.n (J) — N co Ui Ui U) (f) U) N U) U) U) Y Y Y Y x Y Y Y Y Y U V V U U U U U U U W I I I I I I I I I 1 (C * 4 * * * it 4 r t * W < * 4 * * 4 4 * r r 4 U• 0) * it 4 * 4 * * * * r < CO a. W L O ir co 1 O o 0 1 a . - N P .0 - * CO N .0 0 0+ tf1 Cu 1. C •> Zn - - - - - ,- N .- - - - n N Q - in in Q ? )t Q Q P P 7 in 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 • _ _ - - - - - co - o .0 N - 0 O in .0 .- - .- Cu ► - CU 0 W .0 U) n - Z N in in In III ? 7 7 U) U) U) U) - n I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I- o O O Cu O o o O o 0 0 0 0 o O Z 00 - in in P - In W Cu D In in n cu in in in n n n n n n n n o < Q ? •P ? V Q sr 7 7 Q P 7 Q Q U I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I U n - - - - U) - - - - .o N - - - < N CU o 0 o Cu o 0 0 N N .0 N 0 0 Z I_ I- O U) CO CO I- U) J CO CO 0 CD - O I- 0 U > CO ... 0 > CO > > > > > > CO K .0 < CO K .0 CC K K CC CC 0.' 0 W z W W W W W W W LU 0 CO J .0 U) J CO U) U) CO CO CO (D CO W a. w U) < E t- U_ > tl W > W U. 4. It IL U- I- I- W Z 0 < O Z 0 < 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 01) i- W OC CC 0 O re a CC K rell CCC W 0 .... CC a I- w U d I- n. O. O. d 4. OL Cr CL ort W I- (0 _ U U Z ... W Cr > U 000000 0 CO CZ Z ZZZZZZ U) Y U Z LU «. 3- C.) o W CO 0) W a CO CO CC 000000 I 0) Z W (C C9 Z ZZZZZZ 09 U) U < J Z 0 Z W CC < CC W _ I- r r !- I- I- I- •-. 1 0 W 1- E Z Z 0 i- CO U) co co co co J 0 0 I- O I- D W W W W U: W •-• ', Z U_ co 2 < U 2 HI- I- 1- I- I < W 3 0 W a. IY Z 1 0 > I CC < I- •-• 0 CC L 0 I— CO I— I— F I— 1— f- J < *0 L J U > > co co co U) co co r 3 0 W F 0 0 < ZZZZZZ Z 0 0 U 0 0 (C I 0 - 2 * * r * r * * * 4 * 00 U) Ut 00 00 0o UI U) 74 00 o () 00 ( LI) Ifl 00 0 0 N N O O 0 0 0 0 N N o• 0^ ► b .- rl 01 V P- N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) U) 0 0 U) to 0 0 .O .0 V' P 0• N 0• U) C n n .C+ .O .0 so U) 0 In n CO 0) 7 P N CU CO - P 0 N 0) ► 0 0 I- n n V P CU N CU N n N co — Q n 7 Z D In In CU 0 r < W W CO 0 0) co co co co () 0)) 0) 0) 0) 0.) C. CO C CO 0) CO 0 0) 0 CI) a) 0) 0) Cr CO CO 0 0) 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N. \ N. N Y .0 0. b 0, co 0 .0 0 U) 0 0 .0 .0 .01 0 < Cu N N CU CU CU CU til CU CU CU (U N 0.4 CU 2 W N N N N N N N N \ \ �. N N N N. U) I- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 < - - - - - - - - LL 0 0 Y. 0 .- Z 0 Y P o) CU 4 .n 4 CU CO CO 0) 0) 0) CO CO * 0 4 U. 4 U 0• 0' * N * CU * 0, t + n n n n n n * P * U) * 0) W 0 * 0 * CU CU CU CU N CU N CU * N CU * 0) I O * 0 O * O * O * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * O r 0 * P U O * 0 0 * 0 * 0 4 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 * o - in * in + in * in * in * in * in * n n n n n n * in * n : I...1 * w * W * W W * W * W * W * W * W * W * W W - p * o * o * O o * 0 * 0 * O Y+ o * o * O * O O A . p * 0 * 0 * 0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 4 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 0 2 CO A * A * * W W W . W * W 4 W * N * N * N N m Co qp * fJ * - * .O ,n * CO * p * W Y. * 0 . 0 � J J A 01 * A * N * C• In * - * J' * N * -4 * .l 4 o W W x A i O -< O O m o _ 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 -4 co N - 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N m I 10 ro N N R) N R. N N 10 N rU N a C P v` 5' 03 co O+ co O+ 0 m O+ O+ x N N ' N N N N N N N N N 0 CO CO CO Co Co CO O Co CO Co CO W m CO COO COCO CO CO OD COqp Co Co m a 2 0 - 0 A C - - - _ . Z L1 -4 -.I W W - - .0 .O 0' T -I w M. 0, CON LA 1.1 JJ .0O jO NN a0 v9 A N - AA - UI U1 AA NN 00 -J .7 a. co a. a. JsJ p. W W CO N 0 0 O. on 1n U1 CO N U1 U1 IA in 0 0 0 ..0 - U1 Ad W W 1.4 IA - - 00 .P A UI to ...0 ..o 00 00 tri o U1 * * * * * * * * * * * W q O Z Z Z = 2 3' r 3. r I- 0 0 .[ 0 CO a 0 .J. A Z a Z Z r0nCO CO MI A [3 9 'D -� m 0 x A Z Z X1 va z 0 C C < m m -1 m CO CO to to m v) -1 0. to m r -t m3 "1 Z 'I 33 73 O o x x o m C .Z) a m A m a s> 4 O O -o r 0 0 N 3 '1 ') A z) 0 Y) 73 r C C Z -1 -I I 3 z o .. 77 a A 0J W N -o A C) Z 0 m -i r N 0 A m -< - o z m m33 " 'i z m m m o 0 33 A Z -. < 0 -I m 77 C 0 MI C C z '0 m m O 0 77 23 -1 0C-i C z c 0 C m a 3. m r -o O •I 4 2 O ,-, .ti N N < < 3 r r " r r. -I �' -o v r mm -I .r. • .. 0. r r 0 -1 COrn -a -1 Cl) 2 2 m m m Cm3 z — m a) a .a. C 0) Co 0 U) CO < CO y C < Z Z W co co 70 co -1 -1 q) C C .. A O W '0 xi Cn co -4 .r N CO CO 0 -1 J -I Z 0 O o 0 0 O0 O- O- 33A O N o O - -.- w - I I I I 1 A II I I I I I I A d a a s 0 A a a ro L4 L a .0 A W W c w CO w w w �) w CO w .0 w w z J J In 0 - 0 0 -I -4 o c o p o o N N 1 I 11 II I I I N - Z d I in 10 ? w co w N N N -I 0 10-4 N N - — N .a o J J "' O. I 1. 1 I 1 I I I I I N - 1 I0 I ro A w w Co 3. N - N J z .L A - N N N N N < -J LI N w 0 a - y p J - rA .0 C N I A 0 W 0 - CO a CO 2 m -o U) a co c) * * * * * * * * * 4. a m * * * * * * . * * * O * * * I 1 i I I I CI'f m I I I A A A A A A A A A x x x x x w x x x Yc CO Cl) 'n rn fp Cr CO CO co A P CO 0) N CO CO N U) c) CD Cl) Y Y Y Y ]C Y Y X X Y V V 0 0 0 V U U U V W I I I I I 1 I I I 1 V * 4 * * * * * * 4 * W < * * * * 4 * * 4 4 4 o 0) * it4 * * * * 4 * 4 < U) n_ w E c, Al U) 1 - 0 co of I 0. 0) c rl - 01 o c N - aF P N Cl 0 0 0, o • - f'1 > Z - P f') P - N P U1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I N N In - - .- o - P P'1 P - N P U) Z f')P f') Cl 1'1 P P N) M P P M I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I- O N N N o 0 0 0 0 o N o 0 Z - Cl M Cl m N M M N M n N N N N CU CU In M N N N Cl N o P P P P P P P P P P P P ? V I I I I I I I I • I I I 1 I U < O O O O O O O O O O O O O z I- o co co I- J U) 0__ o m F- I- F- O C Z Z Z I F- I- J CO ✓ 0 Z Z w CO CO< < < Ui CO CO '. .. D .0 U) W W E E E W W W << W W 0 .0 c0 I E .J J O_ 0. 0. .J J < C W J I 0_ .. 0. a IL I- 0 0 0 > 0. w CL n D 0_ 0_ Z CO 0 0 I- < 0. I- D O 0 C9 n n O O J J O C D ... CO W W W CO Cl) U 0_ 0) CO E I- co C W F- U) ol U. W 0. > > W C Z C C C Z < O Z W W < O E U E C CO 0) 0. E V (A W O E W CO IL I- J J C 0 < 2 < J W J O CO < Q 0_ Z U U J O < I- I- < CO C CO 01 O I O r E Z Z 0 .J J O 0 C C LI F- I- I- W W X 0 W W W W CO CO C C .••. 0 z r I I WI U) O > I W V U < 0_ Z 0 C 0_ (0 0 >- > -• •-• C O O I W O O W o Y W W W X I- 0_ > I- F- J 0 U C C 0_ < J < 0) J W < I- I- D 2 D Z Z Z Z < C J CO 0) CA CO U. CO n D D D > (9 0) * * * * * 4 4 * * * * UI O Ill cl CT.C O O IO IA 01 CU O O O O o O O O O CO Cc) O '0 Ili OD f') N Cu O O 0) a• N N 0 0 O 0 .0 0 P N N N N Ll Cr.P P P P N N N N CO 0) 0 0 0 o NOD - .0 'J U) Ll I"1 0)P I'i - - - - Fin P P c c o O CU C' Ul CO CO F''. f^ .0 I- M - - - - - - - - - CU D - PI M O - E W W 0)0) 0) co 0) co 0:• 0.. 0) 0) c) 0) 0) 0) 0) C( 0 CO 0) 0) OD o N. N. .. Y .00 .0 .0 .0 .0 0 U' 0 .0 0 '0 .O < N 0.1 OJ 01 N 01 N N N CU CU CU CU I W N N \ N. N N N N N N N (I) 4- O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O L_ 0 - - - - - - - - ..- - ,_ .- - O r 0 F- z U Y P ? * ti * 4 CU 4 la * O N o 0 * 0 4, o U * 01 OJ 4 l�J * Cl * 7 * P * N /- * Q) co IT 0 * O * O CO W * La Ll . Ll is U• * L'! 4 Ui Ll 4 Ll Ll 4 Ll 4 ..0 0) 0) 2 * O O 4 0 * O * 0 * 0 4 0 0 O 0 0 * 0 O CT U * 0 0 O * O * O * O O O 0 0 4 0 4 O * O - * C`) M n * f a * C') * Cl 4 Ii Cl .. Cl ?') 4 Cl * Cl * M * W W W W 1 14 14 W (4 W W W 1.4 41 1.4 1.4 1.4 - * O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O 0 O C) .0 * O O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O = 0 * CO Co (o CO CO co Co Co co co (o CD CO OD Co or CO CO CO * -. - -. - - - - O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl * 14 14 N - 0 0 0 d Co -I -1 CO In A W N - T. C) Z 1 0 -< O 0 TI O O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 1 N N. N N N N. N N N N N N N. N. N _ N. N. CO I N N to ro IV N ro ro N rV rV CO N N N n. CV > P C C C P O• C C O+ b. O. C• C P 0 O+ C T. \ \ N. \ N N N N. N N N N \ \ 0 CO Co co co or CO Co Co Co Co Co CO CO (D CO Co CO N CO 0 or CO (0 CO (b CO co CO CD CO CD OD Co Co co m m 3 - 1,) O N - A - - - - N 0) CO C A .00N -J - O•AC - - 41 - - NN - - 00 N 1 .oAN.000 - J) -JCN 00 - - N Aa A A A - Vi -I -J AA - ln1rl b .O NN W W O. NNb O - .00CP. d N - A c> c> A A 41 - - - OO AA CCD CD IA 1.4 -J -J 00 CO CO -4 -4 o 0 - .000DNNCOU1o0 co Jf OD 00 00 0000 00 W 4J 000 AA -IN o0 NN in in 00 In Ch N co 1n W In 0 co .o .O 10 A O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o Co OD o 0 0 14 W VI Vt 0 0 IA VI m O. 0 0 0 1 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. C. N or co 01 0 (P D3 r r A C. 0) T Cy C) O O A > A > C > TI n-n 71 n rn 'l 71 T I I O z E C C 0 < 1 1 A r co 0 3 -11 C C C C C C C C C Z Z 1 -< 1 m O •- m zzzz zzZZz -4 > > > -4 z 71 71 r al IA r 71 CO < 1700 CD00000 CCI m c c c c •- o m > > C) 0 0 0 C) < Cn co rCO -1 DC .- z On ro -ICONro- - o G7 G7 > Co -4 > CO m -• -C 0 -ln CI.VI W - IAA - z Z DD C) 0 0 0 -C r < r z 0 m m < o r CO r m v s 1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -4 1 1 73 70 m 1 < < < 2 CO 73 m 01 XI 0 000000000 z 11.41 -CN .'O V1 0 I 11111 -111 -I 01 CO CO C o 3 0 m » » » » > > C C C > co Z > •-• CO A r r r r r r r r r ~ D > > 1 -0 z z z .T1 r r r 1 C) C) 0 (n o A to m N 0) 1 0) 1 to D3 O) -0001 ()2 -4 G) ZZ 0 -4 (000 -0 co CO CO 3 1 m co co C) - m*430,302427D)m z z C z C C C z C C C 0 z O C CO > 1 CCDC> Crn » Z 00 m > z 'O O O -I > c rn C "O m m0Z .. 1.. Z 'n Tt uJ < 0 0 m Z 0 'D o < -+ rn m •• 3 M -I 1 1 1 (o 7) rn r r r 1 r r- r z m 11 r z 1 .-.0> m > .-. > (D CO a r .4 •- r .. > 0 -03Co-) r 1r mm m fn m a m rn m 'n 2 m (A r m c "o z m r Z z 01 O. N (0 CO CO CA V1 C a > co CO co Z 7 -< ... 71 < < C -0 CO -+ z m 0 0 0 xi C) 2 C CD CO C r m z < 0 z <m> to 'O Z (0 c CD C 1 C •-• CO C 10 1 z 0 C) co CD 0 `" N 3 R1•-• 1 0 z M CD 1 2 1) m<-4 0< n "" Z m>> m 1) (I) v) 0 1rr Co3 1 1 -I 1 CD 0m 4 10 0 Z 2 z -4 0 rn 0 -Dzo.. -n - rn 0 0 -4 O 0 0 0 -. _0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O -J 0 > A - - - - - - A - 0 I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I n A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A tJ A 0 1.1 1.1 W W N N N W N N N N W N to 0. V1 C - - J) L4 In - - R) 1+J 41 - 111 - Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o N 0 N 0 - - -I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 41 41 W - - - 1.1 19 - A A o 14 Z 131 W N - A -I - N -) V) A -J N - O - 0 14 W - - N - -- - CO - - 131 - .. - O - I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I I W 14 (4 - - - - 14 W - A A 0 1.1 .. .31 W N - A -I - N - d VI A d N - 0 - Z CO to al - (J - 'D 1 0 O I CO * CO 3 m v C) > * C)) 0) * > CO * C) ( m o z In w w < co co Q a w L o a m 0 0 • • Z 0 Z r Z 0 V V )- /-- -J rJ H Z 0 W H O a_ < Z v < co cc w 0 0 L L re w 0 r I— ., co cc w r co C W Y J V Q W r S 0 ✓ r CC O r 0 C.- LW W O J > Z < I- li 0 r 0 0 0 CO o m o ri r o Z � P O tJY L W W a 0 • w N !- !i 0 T 0 H I 0 1' V 0 W 0 I P U O 0OD OBD CO O OND CoNCoNco OND co CO OD OFD 1 W O O CON0 Co CO Wp HO vRD 0 '�I'O HO OH H 1,7 3 LA) LA) LA) 4" 4" 4 4- 4- 4- 4- LA) W W 4• . 4- 4- 4- 4- 4- I"'. 0 • W H H I-' LA) \0 '0 \O 'D \D '.0 '0'.0'.0 W LA)LA) \0 V'1 H H vt \J1 R) \n V1 W LA)LA) 1-•• (' . N LA) LA) W H N N N N N W NNN Coco co N H W W H h-' � H H 1-"--"-j c H H H H 0 ON w ] l H H OD N 0 O O 0 CJ\ -P. H H \0 'O N) W w O O O • O O N O O O O O O O O O -3 H H O O O O \J1 vi .•' n -IulH H I n O N0 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O w v1 v1 0 0 0 0 ON vi N NON N O\O\ In 0 H O O O H O O O O O O O O O 1-,w N O O O O w CO H O\ I-' I-' w r c+ LA) 0 0 0 N 0 O O O O 0 O O O -1 H H O __O 0 O •. • . . 4" -P"1-' H N O O O N O O O O O O 0 0 0 C)V1 V1 O O O O H H N H H H O\O\ (D 0 CO CO OD 0 OD CO OD OD OD Co Co- Co Co I O O Co 0 Co OD ON LA) 0 N ON N O O CD H 4-' - H H H H H H H H H H w H H F-' H - -A" vt O H vt V1 v1 H H -1 H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O a H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H HH 1-"-. 1-' C) -0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 (D . co LA) OJ H ON I-, H H H I W W -1 H H O\ H H H H W 0 W W W -4 Nil H V1 N H -P-N-11 1: Cb N H W W H LA) vt N -4 C o O CO 1]'D 0 Vt Co ON \O 0 0 4 0 0 •F'H ID Ni 4- -3 \0 \D 4' 4' Co ' O v1 v1 7\O N ' NON N O 1 O O O O O O H vl N 1 cr > (1~-1 0 Co H H O) \0 O O ON O O-3\A O O H O O O O\ O O O O O ON O JC) O O Nil w ON CO 0 0 CD 0 COCO Co N H WN 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O "'1 O I t I� ^0 H 0 C) C) t'' 7:1n:1 OD Z =170 W7:10:1 r• _ w IV C) 0 0 0 Cl) _ W _ _ 'is I a CD 0 CD CD (D (D (D CD (D CD CD CD CD H • • c+ c+ (D 0 '1 I 0 I j -1 • i 1 U 77..1 > a"{ I CO r i NONNONLIN C— C i Lf\O O\O O O ON CM i :)i H� 0�0-gip LNf\ Li II Nr H MN75 O\ 0 LI L i ) = V a. o f~ I I .+1 OA CO •-i +) N +) •°; c +, EGO) •-I N E tip+) G [d O > C O U S-, 0 •-i S. f-, I:i $-1 td H E R+ S-, r-1 4D 1-1 E A r-1 1 iIi .-3 S-1 C Q ~ E O O .1 <* •H l—00 S. Sti S-1 Jp H C cdCOCO O >, O Q S-1 a\O\ c3 W v1 Hc.7Ar-Ir-IUJP. W ¢f I I 1 1 1 1 1 r-1 L\O Lr MH UI G-'1 p i O 0 v vl v1 -•i =1 `Trims A. COLLER. II 0012 1988 JU L1Us A CO LLER ATTORNEY AT LAW 6,2 442 2 ` 1859 1940 211 WEST c1R5T AVENUE SHAKOPEE. MINNESOTA 553779 To: Shakopee City Council From: Julius A. Coller, II, Shakopee City Attorney Date: October 24, 1988 Re: Delinquent assessments from land acquired from Soo Line. When the City acquired part of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 21 of the City of Shakopee from the Soo line this property, being railroad property, was not taxable and hence apparently during negotiations this part was not considered and there still are no taxes against the property as such, but there are unpaid special assessments for local improvements by the City and until these are paid we cannot get our deed on record. It is important to get it on record as soon as possible. According to the information from the assessor' s office the above described property, Taxation Reference No. 27-001-134-0, indicates delinquency of $267.07. There will also be sheriff's fees in addition to this, but the auditor does not have that amount. RECOMMENDATIONS: � ( A. Immediate action - authorization by the Council to pay the assessment '. `1 which eventually will come back to the City in the amount of $267.07 and > direct issuance of a check therefor to Scott County and to deliver it to the City Attorney for processing. B. For future action ascertain the amount of any further assessment, if any. C. As far as Sheriff' s fees, to expedite process I will advance and bill the City. Respectfully submitted, A , J "'us A. Coller, II Shakopee City Attorney C NOTE: Remaining assessment balance: $43 . 1: / ; MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer 9;,�'`' SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Project DATE: October 28 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a confidential memo from the Assistant City Attorney , Rod Krass , regarding the Upper Valley Drainage Project. BACKGROUND: As Council is aware, various agencies such as the DNR and MPCA , are requiring the City of Shakopee to obtain several permits to discharge the Upper Valley Drainage Project into the Millpond due to its "trout stream" designation . Staff has been meeting with these agencies several times over the last several months to try and resolve their concerns. Staff has also kept Council informed of these proceedings periodically by memorandums . The last staff memo to Council indicated that staff had some concerns over these permit requirements and indicated that the Assistant City Attorney would be reviewing the situation . Attached you will find a Confidential Memorandum from Rod Krass summarizing the situation and making recommendations . Due to its confidentiality , the following alternatives are available: 1 . Approve of the action requested with no discussion. 2 . Move to set a date for a closed session to discuss the issues and answer all questions that Council may have. If Council chooses to set a date for a closed session to discuss the situation, some action is still required regarding the bids that were received for this project and a decision on awarding the contract should be made tonite . On September 30 , 1988 bids were received and publicly opened for Phase I of this project ( from 4th Avenue South) . A total of 18 bids were received . The three low bids are summarized below: Bidder City Amount Minnkota Excavating Mpls. $1 ,368 , 319 . 50 J . P. Norex Chanhassen $1 ,400 ,008 .80 Lametti & sons Hugo $1 ,434 , 122 . 50 The engineer' s estimate for this project was $1 .6 million . Per state statute , a bid must be awarded within 30 days of the bidding. We have not reached that deadline and a decision should be made on it. The low bidder Minnkota , has sent a letter to staff (attached) indicating that the City could hold their bid for an additional 60 days if desired . Rod ' s memo also discusses his recommendation on awarding the project based on the difficulties in obtaining various permits . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Award the contract to the low bidder , Minnkota Excavating. 2 . Reject all bids. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff concurs with the Assistant City Attorney that there are too many variables and unknowns associated with this project and that we should not construct any portion of this project until we have all concerns resolved . Staff recommends Alternative No . 2 , to reject all bids . Staff also feels that there are several important issues associated with this project that should not be taken lightly . Staff is recommending that Council hold a closed session to discuss Rod ' s memo prior to making a decision on the issues. ACTION REQUESTED: 1 . Move to reject all bids that were received on September 30 , 1988 for Phase I of the Upper Valley Drainage Project No . 1987-5 . 2 . Set a date to hold a closed session to discuss the Assistant City Attorney' s memo. This could be done at the regular meeting on November 15th or a separate meeting could be held for this one item. DH/pmp T _TT , ,...,.ii Li‘ L....1 a_. "HIGHWAY AND HEAVY CONSTRUCTION" 76 ()) :*iu4 ' .1 1+ Y +f i 3401 85th AVENUE NORTH ' :`�,-.. 'LL W. i ..;'�J. ./i7 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55443 City of Shakopee 10/25/88 129 East 1st Ave Shakopee, MN 55379 Attn: Dave Hutton City Engineer Dear Mr . Hutton : This concerns our recent conversations regarding the award of this pro- ject and the problems surrounding the permit application process for the outlet end of this system. As we discussed, considering the delays associated with the permit pro- cess , we would agree to allow the city of Shakopee an additional 60 days or until December 30, 1988 to award us the contract with the under- standing that the project completion date will be extended also. This should allow the city some additional time to iron out the permit problems. Please call if you have any questions . Sincerely 9 L...„ Jim Doescher JD/hs CONSENT I / a.. MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer W SUBJECT: Valley Park Drive North DATE: October 2'4 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: This memo is a follow up to the Valley Park Drive "systems charge" discussion . BACKGROUND: On October 18 , 1988 Council discussed this item quite extensively and at the conclusion of the discussion , directed staff to develop a "systems charge" for the intersection improvements should a frontage road ever be constructed east of Valley Park Drive . Council indicated that no systems charge would be charged to Valleyfair should a frontage road be constructed west of Valley Park Drive. Please refer to my October 6 , 1988 memo for a complete review of the background information. The whole concept of a systems charge was to spread the costs of the Valley Park Drive improvements over the area that would benefit should a frontage road ever be constructed . Since the Valleyfair property had an existing drive and access to Highway 101 and since they could have constructed a frontage road off that drive ( Valley Park Drive ) going westerly , without any improvements Council determined that there was no benefit to Valleyfair for the intersection improvements and instructed staff to develop a systems charge for a future frontage road in the easterly direction only. It should be noted that a frontage road has already been constructed east of Valley Park Drive along the Prairie House Addition ending in a cul-de-sac at their west property line . ALTERNATIVES: Staff has developed several systems charge alternatives , as follows : ALTERNATIVE 1 Prorate the cost of the intersection improvements based on front footage from Valley Park Drive to the entrance to the Blue Lake Treatment Plant (approximately 5560 feet total ) . ALTERNATIVE 2 Prorate the cost of the intersection improvements based on front footage from Valley Park Drive easterly to the first "cross over" on Trunk Highway 101 (approximately 2930 feet) . ALTERNATIVE 3 Do nothing thereby assessing all costs for the intersection improvement to Bradberg, Inc . DISCUSSION The two properties located immediately east of Prairie House Addition are owned by the U . S . Fish & Wildlife and the Metropolitan Sewer Board . Hennepin County Parks also owns a small piece of land between the two (Refer to attached map) . All of these properties have existing access drives directly onto Highway 101 . Therefore , they would not need a frontage road extended to their property from Prairie House Addition. So as these properties currently exist, there is no benefit to them for improving Valley Park Drive . But if they should ever change ownership or if there was a need to eliminate any accesses to Hwy . 101 , the frontage road would need to be extended to serve these properties . If that were the case , the frontage road could possibly go all the way to the Blue Lake Plant entrance or as a minimum , the first logical spot for the frontage road to access onto 101 is at the cross over east of Valley Park Drive . Staff feels that extending the frontage road all the way to the Blue Lake Plant is highly improbable . Therefore , a systems charge was developed , spreading out the costs of the intersection improvements from Valley Park Drive , easterly to the first cross-over in the median of Highway 101 (Alternative No. 2) . This cost is $81 .140 per front foot (See Attachment for calculations) . Attached is Resolution No . 2967 , A Resolution Establishing a Future Systems Charge for those Costs Associated with the Improvements made to Valley Park Drive from Trunk Highway 101 Northerly for Approximately 350 Feet ( Project No . 1986- 11 ) for Council consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Since these costs will take affect only if a frontage road were constructed easterly to eliminate several existing accesses to Highway 101 , staff recommends adopting this resolution . If no frontage road is ever constructed , the systems charge would never be assessed . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No . 2967 , A Resolution Establishing a Future System Charge for Those Costs Associated with the Improvements of Valley Park Drive from Trunk Highway No . 101 Northerly for Approximately 350 Feet , Project No . 1986- 11 and move its adoption . DH/pmp MEM2967 RESOLUTION NO. 2967 A Resolution Establishing a Future System Charge for Those Costs Associated with the Improvements of Valley Park Drive from Trunk Highway No. 101 Northerly for Approximately 350 Feet Project No. 1986-11 WHEREAS, The City Council of Shakopee received a petition , ordered a feasibility report, held a public hearing and ordered the project for the Valley Park Drive improvements, and WHEREAS , those improvements were constructed in 1987 at a construction cost of $49 , 394 . 63 plus administration costs of $12 , 348 . 66 plus condemnation costs of $176 ,773 .26 for .a total cost of $238 , 516 .55 , and . WHEREAS , the total cost of this improvement was assessed completely to the Prairie House Addition (Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 and Outlot A) by Resolution No. 2794 adopted by City Council on September 8 , 1987 , and WHEREAS, the feasibility report as prepared by Ken Ashfeld dated August 29 , 1986 indicated that the improvements to this intersection and street would benefit not only the Prairie House Addition east of Valley Park Drive but also those properties adjacent to Valley Park Drive whenever a frontage road was constructed along Trunk Highway 101 , and WHEREAS, the City Council on September 8 , 1987 at the time the assessment resolution was adopted directed the City Engineer to develop future system charges to properties adjacent to Valley Park Drive North that would allow the abatement of some of the assessments to the owner of Prairie House Addition (Bradberg, Inc . ) , and WHEREAS , the City Council on October 18 , 198'8 determined that since Valleyfair had an existing driveway access to Highway 101 prior to Valley Park Drive being improved , there was no benefit to Valleyfair for the intersection improvements and that the benefit has solely to those properties lying east of Valley Park Drive . NOW, THEREFORE IT BE RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA; that: 1 . At such time as the frontage road along Trunk Highway 101 is extended east of Valley Park Drive , the abutting properties shall receive a systems charge of $81 .40 per front foot for every foot of frontage road constructed along this property , up to a maximum length of 2930 feet east of the centerline of Valley Park Drive. 1l671"' 2 . This systems charge represents the benefit to the properties for the improvements to the Valley Park Drive intersection , Project Nc . 1986 - 11 as described in this Resolution . 3 . The dollars collected by the City of Shakopee for the system charge shall be used as an abatement to those assessments levied against the owners of the Prairie House Addition as listed in Resolution No. 2794 or if those assessments have been paid up, the City shall reimburse the owners of the Prairie House Addition those moneys collected from the systems charge . 4 . A copy of this resolution shall be filed with the Scott County Recorder. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota , held this day of , 1988 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1988. City Attorney Calculations for Future Systems Charge Total Project Costs = $238 , 516 .55 Total Footage from Valleyfair to 1st Crossover = 2930 Ft. Consists of: Prairie House Addition 1850 Ft. U. S. Fish & Wildlife 390 Ft. Metor Waste Commission 690 Ft . 2930 Ft. Cost Per Foot = $238 ,516 .55/2930 = $81 . 404966 Per Foot Call it $81 .40 Per Foot . ------------------------------" # a_ ' -. . _ . - ---- )--- • . : , • • . ..--' 7 . ,•----- '.:- _ _ . — — -- — --- • .- •__ , - - - = •. ....--' .,. .., ' . . _ _ - i. / '----.., -- .7 .._.- . ... ,,..----,..•'......- -- \. --, ; • I, \ i/ . . • CI :in . .I ._ \ Li • 0 0,-. \\s\! in •-- 75- 1 l'i Z Z 0 N • :._.• .:r. ..11.1 = ''"' i-•, , ,.. _ A .. _ /bancar '...; r------------ ---) ! ,., ; • . . . . — - . 2 11: iii ...._ , ! t:....,\ L / - -7, ----- .-1 z i.1,.: i--- .., ,... ,. — /: / 0 \•I\ . ., , . : ... , pi ,I.I... •1 - f, / i i 1: 4 , II :i i i 1 ..: 0 //i 1 ) ,,,, • I •c .-----------"-----___,/li li ------------- . 1 0 ,// ; . i . .....1 ,1' .:" I I:,1; I I 1. .. 1 .i . ..1---.--------....1 : / , •• •://' it--------1/, _ i ii ,//,/ ,- 1'•f ' ,7-,' / /•: ,----------„,.././i-----_, . ...• , /! ---____ .• . . 2•s . ... 2 . ' / . . / .:....- f. r -:-.----------1:.• \ 1 • - r r • rr . : T.: / /-.I --------f/ \ \ \ . • . . t , , , ! 1; -- .. . . • ./ I. .. os \ t \ • . 1 ,: il I..:.,•...s,,a.- ••-, . • Y ___ ! : : . . ,-- ----- . -.----- _ llama Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street. St. Paul. Minnesota 55101 612 222-8423 October 31 , 1988 Mr . David Hutton City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Proposed System Charge for Highway 101 Frontage Road Dear Mr. Hutton: The Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant, owned and operated by the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, is located at 6957 T.H. 101 in Shakopee and has access to the highway from our private driveway south of the plant. we understand that a development, Prairie House Addition, is under construction west of our property and the developer, Bradberg, Inc. , has been assessed for intersection improvements and a frontage drive east of Valley Park Drive to provide access to the new facilities . At that time, MWCC was not assessed for these intersection improvements and frontage road as the city engineer determined MWCC would not bene- fit from them. Pursuant to a phone call between Jeanne Matross , our legal counsel, and John K . Anderson, City Administrator, and a memo from Dave Hutton, City Engineer, to John K. Anderson, dated 10/24/88 , we understand the following with respect to a "systems charge" : 1 . The "system charge" is not an assessment but is a bookkeeping device by which the city keeps track of costs of improvements that may benefit a property in the future. 2 . That if an assessment is levied in the future, the city will levy the assessment in accordance with the proce- dures , M.S . 429 . 061 , including required notice to property owners . 3 . That the city has no plans to extend Valley Park Drive to the east and if such extension took place, it would most likely be at MWCC' s request or at the request of the DNR, the only other property owner to the east. 4 . That the state highway department has no plans , at this time or in the foreseeable future, to require closing of MWCC' s driveway to its Blue Lake plant. Mr. Hutton 10/31/88 Page 2 we are opposed to the "system charge" and any assessment for the following reasons : 1 . We have received no prior notice of this "systems charge" , nor have we received any notice with respect to any public hearings , meetings , etc . on the assessment with respect to the intersection improvements or service road . The city has not complied with M. S. Chapter 429 . 2 . We currently have our own drive to Highway 101 ; no addi- tional accesses are needed or beneficial . 3 . We have no plans for selling our vacant property to the east and west of our existing plant; therefore, addi- tional access , which may or may not increase resale value, is not of interest . 4 . If the frontage road is needed to alleviate future traf- fic problems , costs should be assigned then, using stan- dard procedures for assessments . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. We appreciate your consideration of these items . Sincerely, `James J. Hiniker Acting Chief Administrator JJH:CJM:pap L-110 cc: Robert Isakson, MWCC Bryce Pickart, MWCC Mark Thompson, MWCC COi SE\i ,71) MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Community Development Director RE: Authorization of Loan Execution for the Comprehensive Plan Update DATE: October 24 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Earlier this summer the City Council authorized the submission of an application for a zero interest loan from the Metropolitan Council. This loan has been approved and action needs to be taken at this time. BACKGROUND: Earlier this year the City Council decided to prepare a comprehensive amendment of the Shakopee Land Use Plan. As a part of the process four consulting firms were interviewed and a decision was made to hire BRW to update the plan. It was decided by the City Council to use a zero interest loan program to fund this planning process. The City will pay back the loan over a period of three years. The loan has been approved and the finalization of the planning assistance loan contract will require the City Council to pass a resolution. Once this resolution and the signed contracts are submitted to the Metropolitan Council a check will be sent to the City. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Approve the attached resolution. 2 . Do not approve the resolution. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council pass Resolution X2977 authorizing the execution of a loan agreement with the Metropolitan Council . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution #2977 authorizing the execution of a zero percent loan agreement with the Metropolitan Council. RESOLUTION NO. 2977 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A LOAN AGREEMENT WITH THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL WHEREAS , The City of Shakopee has determined the need for a complete update of it's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, The City has applied for an received a Local Planning Assistance Loan from the Metropolitan Council for 75% of the total of the cost of the Comprehensive Plan update. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, That the proper City officials are hereby authorized to execute a loan agreement between the Metropolitan Council and the City of Shakopee and to do all things necessary and proper to carry out the intentions of the application for a Local Planning Assistance Loan from the Metropolitan Council. Adopted in regular session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1988 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk approved as to form this day of , 1988 . City Attorney L-7 MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer., SUBJECT: T. H. 169/ 101 Bridge and Min ' ypass DATE: October 25 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No . 2978 , Approving of Mn/DOT ' s Preliminary Layout for the T. H. 169/ 101 Bridge and Minibypass Project . BACKGROUND: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is requesting that the City Council of Shakopee approve of the preliminary layout for the T. H. 169/ 101 Bridge and Minibypass Project ( No. S. P . 7009-52) by resolution. This is required for all projects involving joint Federal , State and Local funding. Attached is Resolution No. 2978 , approving the preliminary layout for this project. The layout will be available at the Council meeting for review and discussion. One last item of interest is that just recently Mn/DOT has expressed to staff that they prefer that the City expend the $1 .9 million dollars committed to this project for construction and/or design rather than for right-of-way acquisition . They have indicated that the right-of-way acquisition will probably exceed $1 .9 million total and therefore would prefer to complete this phase of the project internally. There are specific procedures that Mn/DOT must follow in acquiring land , whereas the City may not be required to follow all of the same procedures. If Council prefers that the money committed to this project be expended for any specific phases, they should direct staff to respond to Mn/DOT in an appropriate fashion . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 2978 . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 2978 . RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to adopt Resolution No. 2978 , Approving the Preliminary Layout for the T. H. 169/101 Bridge and - Minibypass Project . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 2978 , Approving the Preliminary Layout for the T. H. 169/101 Bridge and Minibypass Project ( No. S. P. 7009-52) and move its adoption. RESOLUTION 2978 A Resolution Approving the Preliminary Layout (Layout No. 2A) for the Trunk Highway 169/101 Bridge and Minibypass Project State Project No. 7009-52 WHEREAS , the Commissioner of the Department of Transportation has prepared a preliminary layout for the improvement of a part of Trunk Highway Number 2 renumbered as Trunk Highway No. 169 within the corporate limits of the City of Shakopee , from the Atwood Street to Main Street; and seeks the approval thereof, and WHEREAS, said preliminary layouts are on file iIe in the. OlF fice of the Department Transportation, Saint Paul , Minnesota ,' being marked , labeled and identified as Layout No. 2A S. P. 7009-52 ( 169-2 ) CED Mini bypass and replace bridge No . 4175 over Minnesota River . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA: That said preliminary layouts for the improvement of said Trunk Highway with the corporate limits be and hereby are approved . Adopted in session of the City council of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota , held this day of 1988 . Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of , 1988 . City Attorney 1 PC/ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer� 1 " L SUBJECT: Official Map for Minibypass DATE: October 26 , 1988 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Ordinance No. 258 , Adopting an Official Map for the Trunk Highway 169 Bridge and Minibypass Project. BACKGROUND: On September 13 , 1988 City Council held a public hearing on the adoption of an official map for the T . H . 169 Bridge and Minibypass Project . At the conclusion of the public hearing Council directed staff to draft an ordinance "specifically for the purpose of adopting an official map for the Hwy . 169 Bridge and Minibypass . " The map that was presented to the City Council and the public at the hearing has been modified to add all property owners names and P . I.D . numbers to those parcels affected by the project. In addition, the map has now been certified by a registered land surveyor . Otherwise , the map is identical to the one presented earlier . The official map will be available at the Council meeting and is also available in the City Engineer' s office if anybody wishes to review the map prior to the meeting . Attached is Ordinance No . 258 , establishing the official map . Once the map and ordinance have been adopted , it will be filed with the County recorder and one copy kept in the City Clerk ' s office . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Ordinance No. 258 . 2 . Reject Ordinance No. 258. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Ordinance No. 258 , An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee , Minnesota , Adopting an Official Map for the Right-of-Way and Temporary Easement for the Highway 169/ 101 Bridge and Mini Bypass in the City of Shakopee and Minibypass Project and move its adoption . DH/pmp ORDINANCE NO. 258 Fourth Series An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, adopting an Official Map for the Right-of-way and Temporary Easement for the Highway 169-101 Bridge and Mini By-Pass in the City of Shakopee. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I: Jurisdiction The Council hereby finds that all steps provided for by the terms of Ordinance No. 251 of the Fourth Series, and Minnesota Municipal Planning Act as provided in MSA 462.351 to 462.36 have been done and performed and that pursuant thereto a map, a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof,has been prepared. SECTION II: Official Man adopted That the map described in Section I hereof is hereby adopted and designated as the official map for the acquisition of Right-of-way and temporary easement for Highway 169-101 Bridge and Mini By-Pass in the City of Shakopee. SECTION III: Filing Ordered That after the adoption of said official map, a copy thereof and of this Ordinance shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk and that a copy of said official map and this Ordinance shall be filed for record in the Office of the Recorder of Scott County, Minnesota. SECTION IV: Penalty Any person violating any provision of this Ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be subject to a fine of not more than $700.00 or imprisonment for a term of not to exceed 90 days or both plus in either case the cost of prosecution. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist constitutes a separate offense. SECTION V: When in force and effect This Ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after the date that it is published in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee. Adopted by Shakopee City Council in session assembled this day of , 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form this 27th day of October, 1988. City Attorney Prepared by Mr. Coller at °I\ V my request - for Council consideration. Judy RESOLUTION NO. .°-r A RESOL. T I O.1 APPR C;.AT]ON TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR .illi'.\ K. ANDERSON FOR OUTSTAND1_NC• SERVICE TO AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE Duril,° ':he month of December, 1980, John K. Anderson was named City Administ- rator of the City of Shakopee and he has served with distinction in that position and will continue to serve until November 4 , 1988, when his resignation becomes effective and thereafter he is leaving the state to take up a similar position in the State of Oregon; and WHEREAS, during the time he was a resident of the City of Shakopee and Shakopee City Administrator he identified himself actively with the Shakopee civic and social life and became a valued member of the Rotary and also the Chamber of Commerce; and WHEREAS, in addition to his duties as Administrator he attended the Planning Commission sessions and Community Development sessions and was an active member of the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee and was there during the formation and the completion of Downtown project as well as being active to promote the development of the racetrack and other civic movements; and vithin the specific spear of his duties ha has created an administrative policy and worked to develop a pay plan which implements _:c t>arable worth and has initiated training sessions for new board and cc"T" 5_Cf members and was always very pleasant and helpful to people calling on him while he was at the City ::all and he represented the City on the League of Minnesota Cities Co--ittee and a: the State Legislature and his ;uidance and leadership will certain:.: be missed by his associates as well as by the City of Shakopee as a whole. THEREFORE, EE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY CO;:NCIL in meeting assembled that in its behalf behalf of the citizens and residents of the City of Shakopee _ and in he Council hereby publicly expresses the 2rctitude and appreciation of -- to John K. Anderson for his yea=s of meritorious and dedicated service, and ...... _T \.RTER K.ESCIVID, that t..-_ Kesc_ zIOn be spread ..p C' and eoo e a ram .. of the minutes of the Shakopee City Council and that a signed copy hereof be presented to John K. Anderson as a tangible expression of the City' s gratitude. Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held this day of , 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Prepared and approved as to form 14th day of October, 1988. n 4r 'r--r'24.3 (?Ij.Jtri3usA* . Colley, II City Attorney Memo To: John K. Anderson, City Administrator From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director Re: Update on 1989 Local Government Aid Resolution No. 2958 Date: November 1, 1988 Introduction The City Council received notice yesterday that it's Local Government Aid (LGA) has been increased by $111, 168. Background Tax Levy Due to inquiries and examinations of data at the County Auditor's office by staff and ISD 720, the LGA for Shakopee has been recalculated for 1989. See the attached notice. Some of the effects of this revision are: Original Revised Change Levy Limit $1,841,366 $1,730, 198 $111,168- LGA 527,472 638,640 111,168+ Actual Levy 1,738,729 1,730,198 8,531- Council adopted a levy of $1,841,366 on 10/4/88. Council reconsidered the levy on 10/18 and set it at $1,738,729 which was a reduction of $102,637 and matched the 1987/88 tax levy. This change in LGA means Council again needs to reconsider Resolution No. 2958 and set the levy at $1,730,198 for another reduction of $8,531 to counter balance the increase in LGA. Budget The increase in LGA, in a sense, puts the Council back in the budget position it was in on 10/4 except the tax levy is decreased by $111,168 and LGA increased by $111,168. A review of the budget changes from the document presented to Council is: Expenditures LOGIS Fees - Finance Division $ 5,000 + Wages - Clerk Division 4,000 - Wages - Administration Division 4,000 - Painting - Park/Pool Division 2,700 - Cleanup - Police Division 14,000 + Police Officer Start May - Police Division 8,000 - Engineer Technician Start May - Engineer Division 2,400 - MIS Coordinator 1/2 time - Finance Division 5 , 300 - Pavement Management Study - Engineer Division 50.000 - 57,400 - • Revenue LGA $111,168 + Taxes 105 ,428 - Rent 4,500 - 1,240 + Fund Balance was a draw down of $109,500 and would now show a draw down of $50,860. Totals Draft Revised Total Revenue & Other Sources $4,116,124 $4,117,364 Total Expenditures & Other Uses 4,225,624 4,168,224 Excess Revenue over Expenditures $ (109.500) $ (50,860) Alternatives 1. ) Change Resolution 2958 as per above. 2. ) Change Resolution 2958 as per above but add $5 ,000 in pension special levy to end up with a levy closer to the 1987/88 levy. 3. ) Use the increase in LGA to reduce tax levy by another $111,168. Reommendation Alternative 1 or 2. Action. Requested 1. ) Move to reconsider Resolution 2958, A Resolution Approving 1988 Tax Levy, Collectible in 1989. 2. ) Move to amend Resolution 2958 by replacing the 1988/89 levy amount of $1,738,729 with a new levy amount of $1,730,198. 3. ) Move to approve Resolution 2958 as amended. 4. ) Move to direct staff to prepare the 1989 Budget reflecting the changes to the draft budget contained in the Finance Director memo dated 11/1/88. (Or provide other directions for budget changes. ) RESOLUTION NO. 2958 A RESOLUTION APPROVING 1988 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 1989 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, COUNTY OF SCOTT, MINNESOTA, that the following sums of money be levied for the current year, collectible in 1989, upon the taxable property in the City of Shakopee, for the following purposes: GENERAL FUND LEVY $1,730,198 SPECIAL LEVIES: Public Pension Funds -0- TOTAL GENERAL FUND 1,730,198 DEBT SERVICE SPECIAL LEVY -0- TOTAL LEVY $1, 730. 198 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy to this resolution to the County Auditor of Scott County, Minnesota. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1988. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 1988 City Attorney • .4 SHF Sy4�f • Q STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Mail Station 2240 St. Paul, Minnesota 55146-2240 • (612) 296-2286 • 1�:;tS October 28, 1988 ()t, • Mr. Gregg Voxland Finance Director City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Voxland: This is to inform you of a change in your city's 1989 local government aid and in your city's payable 1989 levy limitation. In recent meetings that the Department of Revenue had with Thomas L. Hennen, Scott County Auditor, it was learned that some of the property valuation data used to determine the city of Shakopee's 1987 net tax capacity was incorrect. When the correct valuation data is used, the city's 1987 net tax capacity drops from $9,982,926 to $9,148,720. A revised 1989 local government aid notice showing the revised 1989 local government aid amount of S638,640 is enclosed. A revised payable 1989 levy limitation calculation notice showing the revised payable 1989 levy limitation of$1,730,198 is also enclosed. A payable 1989 Form 280 is enclosed which has your city's revised payable 1989 levy limita- tion entered on line 4 of page 1. Because of the changes to your city's payable 1989 levy limitation, the city of Shakopee has been granted an extension to November 9, 1988 for certifying a revised payable 1989 property tax levy to the county auditor if it chooses to do so. Sincerely, /4/A144-e/L RICHARD B. GARDNER Local Government Services Division RBG:jdw cc: Thomas L. Hennen Scott County Auditor To: Mayor , Councilmembers From: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police Ref : Liquor License/Information Only Date : October 31, 1988 INTRODU CT1QN Council has granted a liquor license to J & D of Shakopee, Inc. to operate at 911 East First Avenue, formerly the Pullman. Council requested staff to meet with the applicants to discuss problems the city experienced in the past. BACKGROUND On October 31, 1988, the writer met with the applicants Gerald and Durene Morehouse and fulfilled councils request. RECOMMENDATION None. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED None - information only