HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/18/1989 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: April 13, 1989
1. Attached is a memorandum from Dave Hutton regarding commonly
asked questions regarding the Mini Bypass and staff's
responses.
2. Attached is a memorandum from Gregg Voxland regarding
mileage reimbursement.
3. Attached is a thank you letter to Officer Tucci.
4. Attached is the building activity report for the month of
March.
5. Attached is the Revenue and Expenditure Report as of March
31, 1989.
6. Attached is the Program Costs by Department dated April 10,
1989.
7. Attached is a memorandum from Barry Stock regarding the
refuse collection senior citizen discount policy.
8. Attached are the minutes of the March 15, 1989 meeting of
the Community Development Commission.
9. Attached are the minutes of the February 15, 1989 meeting of
the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee.
10. Attached are the minutes of the February 2, and February 23,
1989 meetings of the SPUC.
11. Attached are the minutes of the March 6, and March 13, 1989
meetings of the SPUC.
12. The Church of St. Mark has applied for a gambling license
for their annual festival on July 29 & 30, 1989. They meet
the requirement of the City Code.
13. Attached is the billing summary from Krass and Monroe for
January, February and March, 1989.
14. Attached is the Ehlers and Associates, Inc. newsletter.
15. Finally, after three years of trying, the City Clerk has
recruited an intern with a background in records management
to work for us this summer. Theresa Wastvedt will work on
purging and organizing the records in the basement, prepare
a records management program, and perform related tasks
under Judy's supervision. This position is budgeted.
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: T.H. 101 Bridge and Minibypass
DATE: April 13 , 1989
INFORMATIONAL ITEM FOR COUNCIL
Attached you will find a list of commonly asked questions
regarding the minibypass and staff ' s responses to these
questions.
Please contact me if you would like to discuss any of these
further.
DH/pmp
T.H. 169 BRIDGE AND MINIBYPASS PROJECT
April 12 , 1989
Common Questions and Answers
1 . Won't the Southerly Bypass eliminate traffic congestion in
Downtown Shakopee?
Traffic studies by two separate Engineering firms concluded
that there would be a significant amount of traffic on the
T.H. 169 Bridge, even after the Southerly Bypass is built.
Further both reports indicate that the intersection of T.H.
169 and First Avenue needs major re-engineering to handle
the traffic flow expected - even after the Southerly Bypass
is constructed .
The Southerly Bypass will eliminate much of the east-west
movement of traffic and trucks, but would do little for the
north-south movement of Shakopee commuters that would
continue to cross the river on the T.H. 169 Bridge twice a
day to go to work.
Even after the Shakopee Bypass and C . R. 18 Bridge are
constructed , current traffic projections indicate that
approximately 14,000 vehicles per day would still be using
the T.H. 169 Bridge by the year 2000. The existing two lane
bridge cannot handle that volume of traffic. Clearly, a new
T.H. 169 Bridge is needed, in addition to the other proposed
transportation projects.
2. Wouldn't it be better to •wait and see" what the impacts of
the construction of the Southerly Bypass and C.R. 18 Bridge
have on traffic congestion before building the T.H. 169
Bridge and Hinibypass?
Currently, the T. H. 169/First Avenue intersection operates
at a level of service F during A.M./P.M. peak hours. Levels
of services range from A, being the best (unrestricted flow)
to F, being the worst (unstable flow with significant
delays) . With the completion of the minibypass, the level
of service for this intersection is projected to be
increased to a B.
Traffic projection for the year 2000 indicate that even with
the completion of the Southerly Bypass and the C. R . 18
Bridge , over 14 ,000 vehicles per day will be entering
downtown Shakopee by the T. H. 169 Bridge. The intersection
of the T.H. 169 and First Avenue would still be operating at
a level of service D under this volume of traffic . In
addition this amount of traffic is still undesirable in
terms of creating a conducive shopping atmosphere in _
downtown Shakopee.
Projects of this magnitude involving both the Federal
Highway Administration and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation take years to develop and construct. Many
communities lobby for these type of projects and the funding
is only available for a few projects each year. To postpone
the project at this point, with construction less than two
years away, would result in this project being placed at the
end of the list and it may take many years for it to get
back to the beginning of the list for Federal funding.
As indicated by the traffic projections, the project is
needed today . Delaying the project would only result in
additional construction costs in the future. In addition,
the City of Shakopee has committed 1 .9 million dollars to
this project. If it were delayed, the City of Shakopee may
be required to contribute a higher amount to the project at
that time to attract Federal funding.
This project is further along in terms of the design and
construction schedule than both the Southerly Bypass and the
C.R. 18 Bridge. As a matter of fact, the Counties of Scott
and Hennepin still need to raise approximately 40 million
dollars for the C.R. 18 Bridge and nobody knows where that
money will come from or when it will be available. The
exact construction schedule for the C. R. 18 bridge would
depend on receiving the appropriate funding.
3. Why construct a 4—lane bridge when T.H. 169 going north
would still be a 2—lane highway. Wouldn't a bottleneck
still occur on T.H. 169 in Eden Prairie?
The T. H . 169/First Avenue intersection has long been
identified as the "bottleneck" in the traffic movement on
T.H. 169. Eliminating the bottleneck can only improve the
congestion on T.H. 169 in Eden Prairie.
The bridge and minibypass improve traffic congestion two
ways.
First a three leg intersection operates much more
efficiently than a four leg intersection. It is estimated
that by constructing the bridge and minibypass the traffic
flow through this intersection would improve by 20% over the
existing intersection. More "green time" could be devoted
to each of the three legs of the intersection by eliminating
the fourth leg. Currently, vehicles coming off the bridge
desiring to turn left onto First Avenue must wait until all
vehicles going north on Holmes Street clear the
intersection, severely reducing the volume of traffic that
move off the bridge . The traffic backs up so far that
vehicles desiring to make a free right turn on First Avenue
are also held up. .
In addition to more green time, the new intersection will
consist of improved channelization, free right turns, and an
overall improvement to the intersection configuration.
Secondly, a four lane bridge will improve the stacking
capacity of the bridge. The bridge will be approximately
600 feet long and an additional lane will permit about 20-25
extra vehicles to stack on the bridge. In addition, the
extra lane will permit vehicles desiring to turn right to
have uninterrupted flow through the intersection.
It is quite common for bridges to be replaced and widened
prior to the roads leading up to them being improved. The
C.R. 18 Bridge is being built in the same fashion, with no
immediate plans to widen C.R. 18 north of the river. Long
range plans call for widening C.R. 18 as well as T.H. 169 in
Eden Prairie, but without an improved river crossing at each
location, there is little incentive for the local government
and State Department of Transportation to widen the roads.
Due to the fierce competition for Federal dollars on bridge
replacement projects, the local governments do not program
highway improvement projects ahead of bridge replacement
projects.
4. Will the new bridge shut off any future expansion of Levee
Drive to the east?
Levee Drive currently ends at Lewis Street, the location of
the new bridge. Elevations of thenewbridge and Levee
Drive according to the current project plans are as follows:
Elevation of the top of the new bridge at Levee
Drive 737 .58.
Elevation of the bottom of the bridge (structure
depth is 3 feet) 734 .58.
Existing elevation of Levee Drive at the new
bridge is 724 .50 .
Therefore, clearance on Levee Drive by constructing the new
bridge and doing nothing else would be 10 feet. A portion
of Levee Drive directly under the new bridge will need to be
reconstructed due to the construction of the bridge
abutments. It may be possible to reconstruct Levee Drive
lower yet as part of this project and that is currently
being explored through Mn/DOT and our design consultants.
10 feet of clearance is adequate for current users that
would be crossing under the new bridge, namely vehicles
attempting to get to the public boat ramp.
Levee Drive cannot be lowered substantially by this project _
because of the need for providing driveway accesses to the
Community Recreation Building and the need for a retaining
wall along the parking lot for Community Recreation. When
Levee Drive eventually gets extended east the Community
Recreation Department may be relocated.
As part of the bridge construction, the abutments will be
constructed extremely deep to allow for a future lowering of
Levee Drive in order for it to be extended to the east.
As a matter of fact, the abutments would be constructed deep
enough to provide a full 16' of clearance at Levee Drive, if
desired.
The 100 year flood elevation of the river is at 721 . Levee
Drive could be lowered an additional 3 .5 feet in the future
and still be above the 721 elevation. 3 .5 additional feet
of clearance would give an ultimate clearance of 13 .5 feet,
which is more than adequate for emergency fire vehicles of
which the largest truck is 11 ' gn high.
The state has a required minimum clearance of 14.5 feet for
state highways. The City does not need to follow that
criteria for local streets. The City could restrict Levee
Drive from trucks using it and establish a lower clearance
such as 14 feet.
If the City decides to maintain the 14 .5 foot minimum
clearance, it could be achieved but Levee Drive would be
approximately 1 foot below the 100 year flood elevation.
The Army Corps of Engineers has issued past permits for
local streets to be constructed below a 100 year flood
elevation if the City can tolerate an occasional flooding of
the street. The Minnesota River has rarely reached the 100
year flood elevation of 721 .
Levee Drive is a local street and would be extended east by
the City of Shakopee, not Mn/DOT. At this time, the need
for extending Levee Drive east has not been determined. To
construct Levee Drive east would require a tremendous amount
of fill between Sommerville and Fillmore Streets; or the
road would need to be constructed substantially lower than
the 100 year flood elevation. Neither case is desirable.
The schedule for extending Levee Drive to the east would be
dictated by development in the area and the need for it.
The extension of Levee Drive is not even included in the
City of Shakopee Five Year Capital Improvement Plan. Staff
is not implying that Levee Drive shouldn' t be extended east,
but only that the schedule to do so is uncertain.
5. Can ' t the Bridge be raised to provide adequate under
clearance for Levee Drive instead of having to lower Levee
Drive in the future?
This is not desirable for several reasons.
1 . The elevation of First Avenue dictates the elevation of
the bridge. Raising the bridge would make it more
difficult for the minibypass to tie into First Avenue
at a smooth transition ( i.e. sharper vertical curves
would be needed ) .
2. Retaining walls are needed for the minibypass at three
locations : between the alley behind City Hall and the
minibypass and on both sides of Levee Drive. Retaining
walls are fairly expensive. Whatever height the bridge
is raised would cause the retaining walls to be raised
by the exact same height. The current elevation of the
bridge minimizes the retaining walls height while still
being at the maximum height to adequately merge with
First Avenue.
3. Keeping the bridge low provides a more aesthetically
pleasing look for the downtown area . Raising the
bridge would create the appearance of the bridge
towering over downtown. One of the goals of the City
Council was to. improve the overall aesthetics of
downtown.
4. Raising the bridge is obviously expensive to construct
due to more fill , higher abutments, etc. Without
adding any substantial benefit to the project, raising
the bridge would only increase the cost.
6. What about the parking lot behind City Hall?
Both the parking lot behind City Hall and Brambilla' s are
currently not being utilized by downtown shoppers because of
the difficulty in crossing First Avenue. Recognizing that
excess parking exists in these lots, the City Council is
currently leasing many stalls to Brambilla ' s for parking
recreational vehicles.
Parking stall counts in the downtown area reveal that even
with the loss of the City Hall parking lot, there will be
approximately the same amount of parking downtown as there
is today, due to the downtown redevelopment. After the
minibypass is built , First Avenue will be reduced to two
lanes and diagonal parking will be installed on both sides
of the street between Sommerville and Holmes Street.
Most important is that the new parking on First Avenue will _
be more desirable since it will be located directly in front
of the stores, rather than the current situation of parking
spaces being located in remote parking lots . With the
traffic being diverted off First Avenue onto the minibypass,
this street will function more efficiently as a parking lot
with slow moving traffic, rather than as a through street,
with faster moving traffic and a high volume of trucks.
Additional parking lots can also be installed as part of the
minibypass on the northeast or northwest corners of Fuller
Street and First Avenue. These lots are being considered
during the design process and will depend on the right-of-
way acquisition negotiations for these properties .
The Environmental Assessment Report determined that this
project would not adversely affect parking downtown.
7. Where will the City Hall employees and other business
employees that currently use the City Hall lot park after
the minibypass is constructed?
This would be up to the individual businesses to establish
the policies, but the City should encourage all businesses
in the downtown area to make all their employees park in the
Brambilla parking lot. One of the major problems in parking
downtown today is that the employees are utilizing much of
the parking near the stores and therefore shoppers have to
park farther away. If the downtown businesses would
encourage their employees park farther away, there would be
additional parking directly in front of the stores for the
shoppers. Downtown employees could walk from the Brambilla
lot by utilizing the pedestrian underpass through the
Minibypass.
8. Can the City legally remove this parking lot?
The City has obtained several legal opinions on this matter
that state that this parking lot can be replaced by another
public facility. It is not legal to replace it with a
private facility.
Regarding any property owners who were assessed for this
parking lot, the state is required to follow the Eminent
Domain and Relocation Laws for property acquisitions and any
property owner rights will be resolved during that process.
9. What impact will the construction of the minibypass have on
property taxes?
The City is contributing 1 .9 million dollars towards this
project. The remainder of the money will come from state
and Federal governments. (approximately 6 million dollars)
The City's 1 .9 million dollars will come from Tax Increment
Financing bonds generated by existing TIF districts. No new
TIF districts need to be created to issue these bonds. The
TIF funds can only be used for public improvement projects
and cannot be used for property tax relief.
Therefore, this project would not increase property taxes
if it were built utilizing TIF bonds. If the project were
not built, the City could use the 1 .9 million in TIF bonds
for other public improvements, which would indirectly reduce
the impact on the taxpayers. A review of the transportation
needs in Shakopee indicate that the bridge and minibypass is
a high priority project and the use of TIF funds for it is
well justified.
10. Was this project selected by the Ad-Hoc Downtown Committee?
This project has been planned for by the City of Shakopee
since 1973 • In 1981 , the Downtown Committee was formed as a
sub-committee of the Community Development Commission to
develop strategies for revitalizing downtown. In 1984, the
Downtown Revitalization Plan was completed and states that
the removal of traffic congestion from First Avenue is vital
to the development of the downtown corridor.
In 1985 , the City Council desired to study ways to eliminate
traffic congestion downtown and an Alternative Selection
Committee was formed to develop alternatives for a proposed
bridge and bypass in downtown Shakopee. This committee
consisted of one representative from the following entities:
Scott County, Downtown Committee, Community Development
Commission , Mn/DOT, City of Shakopee Public Works, City
Council, and the Metropolitan Council. The City Engineer
chaired the committee and the City' s consultant, Barton-
Aschman, provided technical support for the committee as did
the FHWA, the Army Corp of Engineer, the DNR and the U.S.
Fish & Wildlife. The City Council was involved in various
decisions during the selection process.
It should be noted that this Alternative Selection Committee
contained only one voting member from the Downtown
Committee.
A total of fifteen alternatives were considered including
the "do nothing" alternative . The purpose of the
Alternative Selection Committee was to reduce these
alternatives to a reasonable number for inclusion in the
Environmental Assessment Report. Two of the main criteria
in the initial evaluation of the alternatives was the
removal of truck traffic from downtown Shakopee and
eliminating traffic congestion, and restricting the project
costs to 2 .0 million for Shakopee and 8 .0 million for the
Federal government and Mn/DOT.
The Alternative Selection Committee narrowed the number of
alternatives down to six in the first trial period. These
six were studied extensively for environmental concerns as
well as the main objectives and rated by the committee
members. The Alternative Selection Committee then narrowed
the list down to three alternatives for inclusion in the
Environmental Assessment Report (Alternatives 7A, 13 , and
the "do nothing" Alternative) . The Alternative Selection
Committee and the City Council recommended that a
Environmental Assessment be prepared on these three
alternatives.
The Environmental Assessment was completed on these three
alternatives. Consequently, a public hearing was held and
Alternative 7A was selected ( the current alignment) and
endorsed by the City Council, Mn/DOT and FHWA.
11 . What about the properties displaced by the project?
Both active alternatives (7A and 13) that were studied in
the Environmental Assessment Report indicate that 11
residences and 5 businesses would be removed due to the
project. These property owners will be compensated as well
as relocated at the expense of Mn/DOT per existing Federal
Relocation Laws. Because all of the commercial locations
are local , rather than national chain stores , the
Environmental Assessment concluded that relocating them
elsewhere in Shakopee would not cause them to go out of
business . All residential properties will also be
relocated.
Therefore, the Environmental Assessment concluded that this
project would not create a hardship for those properties
being displaced.
12. What is the proposed construction schedule?
Mn/DOT will commence the right-of-way acquisition process in
April , 1989 . This process will take approximately 18
months. The embankment for the new bridge on the north side
of the river will be bid in November, 1989 • The bridge and
minibypass will be bid in November , 1990 and take
approximately two years to complete.
Memo To: Mayor 6 City Council Members
Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
Department Heads
All Employees
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Mileage Reimbursement
Date: April 12, 1989
In order to prevent mileage reimbursement from being included in
employees taxable compensation and to follow recent IRS regulation
changes (as further pointed out by our auditor) , the following will
apply.
All requests for mileage reimbursement will have the following detail
on the voucher for each trip.
Date
Starting mileage reading
Ending mileage reading
Miles driven
Destination
Business Purpose
Note: A separate voucher is not needed nor encouraged for each trip.
3
9tc
y
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
PERMITS ISSUED
March, 1989
Yr. to Date Previous Year
Number Number Valuation Number Valuation
No. Ytd.
Single Fam-Sewered 7 12 868,950 6 9 628,400
Single Fam-Septic 1 1 151,000 1 2 174,800
Multiple Dwellings - - - - - -
(# Units) (YTD Units) (-) (-) - (-) (-) -
Dwelling Additions 4 9 84, 600 5 5 30,600
Other - 1 98, 000 1 1 2,500
Comm New Bldgs - - - - - -
Bldg. Addns - - - 2 3 383,000
Industrial-Sewered - - - - - -
Ind-Sewered Addns - - - - - -
Industrial-Septic - - - - - -
Ind-Septic Addns - - - - - -
Accessory/Garages - 2 8,000 1 1 12,000
Signs & Fences 6 11 16,040 1 6 5,560
Fireplaces/Wood Stove - 1 700 4 5 17,500
Grading/Foundation 1 2 1,349, 195 - - -
Remodeling (Res) 1 6 51,790 2 6 20,650
Remodeling (Inst) - - - - - -
Remodeling (Comm/Ind) 1 7 1,052,800 5 7 91,000
TOTAL TAXABLE 21 52 3,681, 075 28 45 1,366,010
TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - - - -
GRAND TOTAL 21 52 3,681,075 28 45 1,366, 010
No. Ytd. No. Ytd.
Variances - 2 3 4
Conditional Use 2 5 2 5
Rezoning - - - 1
Moving - 1 1 1
Electric 18 53 25 62
Plbg & Htg 26 51 23 51
Razing Permits
Residential - - 1 2
Commercial - - - -
Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction
permitted to date. . . . . . .4,298
Cora Hullander
Bldg. Dept. Sec.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN MARCH, 1989
8105 Drentlaw Bros. 5015 Fox un T�. 1 House $ 151, 000
�L
8106 LeRoy Menke 2�4eri age Dr1 House $ 66, 300
8107 Monnens Bros. Const. 1039 Monroe Addn. $ 6, 000
8108 Peter Sames 605 W. 7th Ave. Alt. $ 11, 000
8109 Gardner Brothers 2021 Heritage Dr. House $ 69,900
Ba �l 1 / �
8110 Busse Const. �L 1 B 5 Ti r Tr. Grade $ 500
8111 Laurent Builders 1289 Limestone Dr. House $ 75,000
8112 Novak-Fleck 112 Minnes to House $ 65, 000
�3 emss rJ
8113 Larry Link 1400W. 34d Ave _
. Alt. $ 20, 000
8114 Suburban Lighting 1251 E. lst Ave. Sign $ 500
8115 Attracta Sign 8050 E. Hwy 101 Sign $ 1, 500
8116 Gardner Brothers 190 Heritage Drive House $ 65,900
8117 Gardner Brothers 1926 rp y Avdg� House $ 53,900
elle void
8119 Signs of Quality 502 E. 1st Ave. Sign $ 500
8120 Theis Const. 1077 Minnesota St. Addn. $ 17,500
8121 MN Valley Wildlife 5981 E. Hwy 101 Fence $ 10, 000
8122 Valley Rec. Products 240 Shumway Sign $ 500
8123 Mike Giles Temp 100
Sign
8124 Gilbert Delbow 962 S. Atwood Addn. $ 1, 300
8125 Ponderosa Bldrs. 2716 Hauer Trail Addn. $ 14 ,500
8126 Baumann Const. 2540 Onyx Drive House $ 104, 000
wuwYYyy wUUU uY YLy YLI M u_ _ Yu l -
NNNYI NO N NON U 41yYYYY4Y • p - ry e nC m
ryNN- -- N!l pNNp F POo04PNlUNNIYNuob ! NN- Sp
U-oJaUN-obOJP o-oJNIYN!'o -O p o
_ ZmZ�D< "' DOOOY l9SFW „ 0^WPmCm ArOIOOpp OA -1 rp p
Ar,Y mGrOi�O!r OCODrrSOD WOA9ACrOC�0021A1109D m 2WZ yu y
rC=JmA i- r ISI ZAysJng,rm q_ 4mr mE.A ro"
nA21TbnONlAi1r< O WAJmAmoyr pAp ZAZ prpppyHA92��J1�1 f9 F 0 nfr OR.
J
�C301�1 MIIIDDAm> < I4AS�JWD09 0 ODIC ObwA_OOOOYwOp T O< n2 T
FA<9004 FIfACD9 Z iADOJDD042 w p2A ' r9lRAOZuZ2 J�J n =
bFDA20 Ay 3 40% y 111 Z r3W 101100 %91 9 D
<i
W!'AICryWADq %21Ji1 DO 9 CW9-9M09A9r�+Wm22Z DA yf
WAy9TN<OT f yFy 4�0 tl J r y9ya SJp2UfIW Glp 1p mm ZO 1m11
10Alf 2 W Iln b' O '., O„W? WW pAYr Wy
i c
� � a
I
mao�e P' :eL9:o <
OIIINJO000000 y y ~ '
ONeoee000N000 N oNeeeeoaee N Dose OaUNNa IA NOO D A
r3 z
o c I
z m
III 1 J
J
_ ny
N aero PNO NO P, -MAP1+0 � -mX YNO lUoo UNP! i
oAOOe a Volo a'P O nVNeNN000
eo m
eoeeoeee00000 o eee see e o e000000 oo o e o e e o e e O eoo m
V s
., W . r
rvw Yorvaua oga '> � � nso deo '� N m, m DJ S
- sou ro eNtleuwro- u
Pw000eoo..Sueo m eorvm eo.eooee Doo e00 Seoeo'o u eo eooveo roe n nee eo �W '
u
Ppe 1
-nn uuno-in'u_o rv�-Jrv:-o I. eW uu- aua eo
jleYeq--+IuuJe ua_N.Y n e ei + -OneMlelu. l� Noae a ~, N a
IOOOXaotlJONe O b OOIaeYIJ- W OJe ry poo
JPPeWJPYeNePo �OeepOe y
�Nooe000aoo.l0 9 OOceoaeeaa UooNao OMoeooa0o 0 00 (SI p
I l l 1 1
tlWPeV m J 0-NPaw oa J ro
- VUOtlNW Y o 0 P .....
`n < -eenemmm mm men Pn r 'r S me li
.. P�mn-�meomomre m e m
c `omawnnememu%ptl r a .a nn n ul I
'j nOmOnN� � N
i w eu wmnfw = n Y IY �m i •� In �
J IONe eo oOt Ptl q •Y� to
Eli O
N r< nyli N~O N h
m m tl Ir -
¢ I Y M • 1'l � ^ tl P I i I
'n I
f '
1 � eeo eeme e e ♦ Iv ; � I 1 �.
a eaN en ew w m a e nem r len 'n a it I I I I
n •i• % n m m � -r e_ it a la I I
I •
LL I !
n I
Y I I
Y I i
1 < tla emm Nn f O '.
I r r -m'nmee x ala dme w y y � I
> 26 eooPOn ^ a P m m Or � mO O i i
i Y -n m n n � • � I. � I
N C I ' • • M N Y N e I i �I
I
Y'wi i
I
o%LL
nbon�4Ww �' ffi • i
JF �W Wdd YLn�.O'V
m Kn y22ISI JJ¢ny> O 212 m S m¢ w LL
ZU 6¢mOW JJ Jm FO nZtl
O VN mLLLVytly -SL JJ y eL i`LL mL Jy LLO LL
O W„N 'OWWb�LUJYC < JJ fJZ 40 ZV Z
`rc I I I
N/�� • p f I I � I I '
m 6• ^NNnnn^n'•n�nn ll � n 3^^O • Mn i L
C mo N va 4
4aa a a• • •a a '+ a as a�� v -
I y •• a C
m i wNN' Yauu uyw�N wwuaa a -e >2 m
- i ro o m-d' • w . ownO rYN N- uro S
AM IM O
a ' ` 003 3n3Op
ymi9WLVqCa
1111 gwOY ^DZ<
F r rA1yrATS0YO9nASHfNDf9TAOrgWqy, AwO9WC-0€SO4A�pC9DdCr9i,.,. OPWfI L23rM1L0FSnfPgZpP9AWwpa AO`pl9Aj. dADY0<q>D CWyee2
0_
y
bAM A� b
A 9 A Z wCtZf gAO ryP 2N Sr_Oyn NZW 3
< b W Y m QCT P �AIII
ZW O SW. . !pWWN wC p D�4>yYY y^ Zpro�A� iIfC
Nw . 1
b L Wy= W p og SY <' ff 0 �WNA O
9n
a H Brei su�i•+!i w
i e uPu's,r'w e-'i�� Y� -s Y:iw u W-moo ai=Wn� >nz z
W e e e e + e+e 3 %otl9`J.BR ie"o;'oL� a eo:�ooMu.B 2J
W y
i L
J 9
i2 w
I
Ai
I O I
I � 9
I y _
u qY Y• 3 I�,NU N p h e N p aN 1
O Y Y w P a d OM yM YUNJ JJ +NUb w �IU reaN
J J Y .. . .. ... . ... .. aoaWo wYOOOMOOO
e e e e e e eee a ee eI`w-wwwwwewwewewww a eeeeeeeeee gy
N m Y1nYe -0.. y1UN p U _YaMU HINS
y s
N N o uOwpwOaNyNJ OI OroroawJ
dUNyry Yyaaw U wwONdN �W 1
N e o e e N ONo w WoeNUmioWNIOONWO YY- eoOUeaNro-ro Dd
o u ro a-ouiep Yawuw �mwww a� + a_wuwPnn neu
0 4 j J OMaPa-PYOya-aewro--O' u ryeya-e A
uwaJawaunwpoeaw u a w oyJJu�'
w - - - ee uPd-wwrwya-+o-JJ� nmYe Ywure
P:�rvoJo-uo:�owuuine -a i
- e e Y `e me i reW We aynwo-uPOOdJeaeyJr eee Ww eu ee aom+m
A m
..Aemurc-a�; w n Pm0 �rour��=
o w J ai�'. a -
w u n
� —
;� a,< 9
� � ,
• W N m � '� � �' �� Iii I � � I' �,
W m I I '�
6 N N
I
N n i i � �
� � I � � � '
�' i � I
N I � i,
" �a � �
� � � � � Ili � i
g `� �� � I I � � � � II
I
>o j � � ! i
i � � � � '
'a � i
I' I �
I; i I � � I� I
W — i
I
W => j �
� = i � I �
� o i i
0o I I I i � �
I
< �� i � i I I
'6 � li i �� � ISI
� � i � i �
Y JF
O W W
yJdO
V � �Z '
a
P I-Y '
P �1�_ �4 .T.o _ l_. . f. . > $ - 0 '.,�.i2-lL� .. 9 .91:-! RFlI�.�: iiY�"_' e 3�S
-
� I pp
S
D
j y Y 1
uo
a O P
< I zr r F r 2 f O
I m
m i
'���]� -- "wuauwww 11 uu eJummm
OJPNDro. - i OYN.uOaNlYN- MYUA- Uro�ON-
-rann aP , oasmzasn moon o; ona eD sirOoi oa� l I iAnoNJoml mi.'.12f o�� n
cimn
ra n..ia "i- 'Ozwi ria
as zn� r�rl mrRr i Y as
nz moo's .Y.n I Jrz ' oi Baa ees �� y '. u
imi
aMA mr P izsm i _ x
iz+m naive r
zNny
aO�roe !t e01e4 SM u +J O �� n IW- _ N 2 �O
N U
ON-NJN� I mPOONOO4Nn YN J UU�Y OWe oY 7P
e J I JeeJ Sw nR
___an`� --♦ +� uu
4
Ju n Iw-lauwtl TA
=M+uJ ro n
PUJp ♦Nr= a ws been .I a-yy�1 s
NYJPJNa 4 LIP O�Y-MPJ aY VO YVJPPI.e -NV uw 2
+YIY-IYJMJPM1J +JJYOJ
INVyl1I �..N WOY
uun'aua oo urouePUNpoun-P unN-eP I
OI i I
p0
aNI UJP ♦ ♦ - ♦ ♦ • P
You N aUl Y P V.NII p 99 i � N NA
Y_o N JO_ V •{y�L J •1 111 OIL Y I N N N.l
JNOooOP a0�0 MO ♦� g P40 jO000Nl JOJ
' We-ooeA Yeo O
P�u Y>Il JNn JMIO♦M44440NlnYayNJPYOYjqq 81
YOJfn Y+ NroN Nr
y
Yyo-ON o 4
D
N�YaJJJNSDwM NiJUOO JWwelu eo
NY a40 VeY NYomUoeJYYP VM1n+Oa +J o
N el +N O♦e � wlPa mmyP rO _roU1M1 J _ SIN N 1V a
O Ii4 YIy ao p
*..m.49 M JOJe O o a m
o O ooe NO � oYoe bbbb eo O ooee000 eoo O 1
�iooTee} ±boo +A+u wa J�In weoeJN lue y -
� J
--VJ'
- _
_ z—c iti c�,37_x �s 'v ioz �_ i•z^ ss 3s q z;s � � _
u z �- : y�N� u m knm n�T[ �- m • NP
d W P n'aPi Itle tl P� Wn aNO .
$ 088E 'e`8°o 8808888
u eme .oP NoP w8�ee u
�veF
Nal oon PmneePNe P0r0 - em worms
� -- non_Nn ' _eeuwuewuPmrnenN '� na-PPPam '
poori � 'wn_nm rmo8n mN Nrvmn
Fw mem'-" _ Nr ro.Ym88u v
n a g ��n m uv�< r-�m ♦n
1, n B�Zm m� � � u
� I
WMT ead8e mPn a edory
a m rnu oem u �� m o
=r r o mine �i a iN em a ew eP OP N
o$ u gip
Z e_ a m eI ni nR ae_ _ o
n
m eo ao i'8 auooB un 8enieod Weworne�Win � en on unsguln
w me minr rm 'win .- �e 'ex irdirv ' ua Pan000
LW o< °ry 8n8 P P$ _�y no= i O� g � n$'{rnm.8nr rr ai��a_�r8nm
j Im mW
�" nv
m0 oor00 Oeen cc Oo OOYOe n_ m0 leoa000mon
O OJ Ofa-P♦-a On ntl ! mn y^ .' .IS O.Y ye f �Na �0N
V O e } ' � N i _ ial tl• _ ♦tl Y fl YP-NlNN i N
J m
F OqYZ '
i u I i �Y L ry LI � Ou .
Z F� W ZLIpy a � �Y~i
6 WE L �IYJYJZO QL^ ! _h I
l
FOVO
UjY� WFW>7I0> W ZJOaYyI W Z<�LpJ^2
� U<�nygVV(O w (Wf U60¢SV
HIMOOU___OP �pnPNmPNmOPPcan n NnPRpOPmN
Pn Afl AMgnPPPPPm Y�1'1 MnlpnnPPPP
i
I
2
II a mr z �
SII f eQ I W i
I �
m
Z I
II •I N
I ! i
L-_ az ° kzczxa - - 1-. L— al• ¢: I,
"
xl e
z 1
T K ' Iz
a a a ae
r Jm
m A
L �
u l l � urtlmwww NuuNu •o,00 o
'°'°a➢u uuuu'ro n$➢ry tl'° J a
WNtlO-1UPo-omJPN- pW11-0➢NacUeury-ep- uOJNIYN o- m
omomww Amwmpw u-«zo-co�nnNx�Jonm
3mzz 6'o="ncmm isJenAa°c'tl zv zPn�iw>aa�r
Aozmczy=m..mm
..o`z mm -KiP w> '<>ei=rioi"ai3m�n�i
Azinm mz m r 's mw A>zR o>i�`s� ' rasa+Dani A
KAwY< .wiW>K3D JAyrW Oy Oar Sfi3YOAA .O. {Oi
ND 00 IO) � I< D z2cmM1 ^'"` z
MI.
M . P D �P J K Z O
I ' ' r mO
a1 �Lj y �y
�`0® JQaY PO �p �I AIS A .. .J1 . .a..... . O Yb
eNONef mMOPoN111N ONS J No Oe O Qo0 NO.N
� m
mw .s�pm yi�PeP � em nab a��aK a n-11w�i �•a!I� � m'
rood wM1 w� - ie �u�u�U'n�eguwoS umiw >H 3
VOPY1-JPq � w YN00•YJ ba
• JmtlaOJ O - JD➢AOJPOYY• •' . . . w y
jIW NJP-KJ-OU-IJYY '. tlw0•nN-tlM1J4NJ1�1YP3oI........• O !u
I j
eA mNeeLom
000eUNNoetlPepV Opo I�eO eee000 o -o
y i O j 'y 00 00 nI
Im
mM1 Y m-.1 powMMN ® I � M1YOJ�M1PJ �O J �nT~ � .. m0
eY - -oKOJ�4 �P YUOO4NJpryP NV OryUlw as NaOO Ow Yr
J6.6mU bN YUamY •X X J P m Y U a O O O U-m a. J Y p ala
!➢YNP-onPOYP4JN ' MUe➢XN-JpJppaNYOUeo-UeJOXJ o N
I M >K
NQM,P•m O M Y N W JO
I I 9�eueetl �g tl�e m • tlu � .I ' m
Yj. NUPpOjMb' �
e0o 000 0o O oo
PNo � -lmmtl ., • e+ W o ro a
OO X Nm MY KY p OX� eP S Y
e . eee: eeeeeee
1 Ie
";:::;..:8......,83.... 8.. tt,tGtt
77
➢: - .9C7�sa sp— yaxiaaa - x ,s:- }III - -
f u In O •- m♦ f• O IA O mn I tl
7 i ' I I 1FI
QL pe a pe qpo pe op ep pee
w e 000a�e� S ene �wmavonnmeJ nlno
ee
e n F n^_u ua Nn yawa r^ N
i 6 ^ N_Yam_O =� fn YnRpaY n Nf O
o<
Jm oe �Gmmo_eaab• eon ' ' w _ oarrv•a
f - PNOPPaf n+ r�us^nw.p-nionrnmF nn
6F - tae-aPnaNFN fIM1 q m
N -f ^n W00--aW+^ hYP qqq aY_•nMPwpl�bp'IuG GOp P N
°� na � n_m innpu S � ?u-n�� =Fx•.. as. � P m
Ne OOp aM �ee rn Sea
GP
: e ww
3 v � pjle GG a
tlrvY00_OpY�• ppp eNa OP
I- P -p-pyP YO rywPpw 0a� mYa Yp�-1[fI mn rller nYi e
L �P FaOepwllYg�G n�A hG •�yt!
Gm-n�PhP1NN
f FOT
G i Nn y^atm nRpe_ u Z- pF'�iwF w
tlm � de - I
p m O NpnptlYlll O e en 00 Op eN NY i♦ mea e o i
V^ 7 e-♦ G M-+YY � am Af nP •'e{ nNf
of a� • e a♦ TT i i
p ^WYr=
F\ isle 6 , SW
L i 1 Z Gl6<W it NFMOV06
VO««< V �` ppVO Vm W
I 6 IZWWYWW LY 6mOM[L�O¢f_6 Z7 Z O
p LZ LI U-UY-OY V
>yyiyy 6 V03066Lf V
6W J6�+ JUJWCpI J<6 li
: KM _r�_ F yCLGmeW00y '. ¢ OJ I
' V6W L VL ptQF¢L<L(�O VJ � V -
♦NmYYpe -h ItlO<•Po_anm-NUU ^n _
I :<f':PtPPw - aN Y4nnnnewPPw Na
'I vinwP aywwiww i I r ,
LL O
P ,
Q
` o Y 5
MEMO TO: Shakopee City Council
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Refuse Collection Senior Citizen Discount Policy (Non
Agenda Informational)
DATE: April 13, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
Since the implementation of our new volume based refuse
collection program, we have increased the awareness of the
Shakopee Public Utility Commission discount that is available to
senior citizens. With the increased awareness of the discount, I
have received several calls from Shakopee residents who are over
65 and working and not eligible for the SPUC discount.
Additionally, I have received several calls from persons who are
62 years of age who feel they should be eligible for the discount
since they are retired.
It appears that the SPUC policy is in need of amendment. I will
be taking this issue before the Energy and Transportation
Committee for a formal review and recommendation. This issue
will then be forwarded to City Council for further consideration
at their May 2, 1989 meeting.
NONAGEN
Minutes of the Community Development Commission
City Council Chambers
Shakopee, MN
March 15, 1989
Chairman Joos called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. with the
following members present; Jane DuBois, Mark Miller, Terry Joos,
Jon Albinson, and Al Furrie. Comm. Koopman was absent. Also
present was Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant and Council
member Zak.
Chairman Joos noted that on page 1 of the minutes 3rd paragraph
that Comm. Miller's name was not listed as being selected as
Vice-Chairperson for the Community Development Commission.
DuBois/Miller moved to approve the minutes as amended. Motion
carried unanimously.
Comm. Miller noted that he was interested in serving on the Comp
Plan Task Force. Comm. DuBois noted that several of the original
members that were appointed to the Committee have dropped off and
that she felt there was room for additional interested parties.
Comm. Miller requested staff to determine if he could be
appointed to the Commission and requested that if it were
possible that he could sit down with someone to be brought up to
speed on the subject matter.
Mr. Stock reported that the Downtown Committee was scheduled to
meet on the morning of March 15, 1989 to discuss the alternatives
pertaining to the planters in the Downtown area. However, due to
adverse weather conditions the Downtown Committee meeting was
cancelled. Therefore, it becomes necessary for the CDC to review
this issue without having received a recommendation from the
Downtown Committee.
Mr. Stock noted that the plantings in Phase 1 Part 1 of the
downtown redevelopment project were included in the original
contract and planted last year. This year, Phase 1 Part 1 is not
under contract. Plantings for Phase 1 Part 2 of the downtown
redevelopment project will be provided by the contractor this
year.
Mr. Stock noted that plantings for Phase 1 Part 1 of the downtown
redevelopment project were not budgeted for -in 1989. Mr. Stock
noted that one of the options to make sure that plantings are
planted in Phase 1 Part 1 would be to enter into a agreement with
a individual, florist and/or greenhouse to provide the plantings
and plant the flowers. Cost quotations received for this type of
service range between $2500 and $4000 depending on the number of
plants per planter. This cost quotation was for the entire Phase -
1 area. If we simply pursue the Phase 1 Part 1 area costs would
be significantly lower.
Another option to consider would be to solicit assistance from
-1-
volunteer organizations in the community. Mr. Stock noted that
he was opposed to this alternative due to the staff time that may
be necessary to coordinate the volunteer organizations as well as
the time spent to insure that the plantings were planted
appropriately. Mr. Stock noted that volunteers may not have the
expertise needed to plant the plantings in such a manner that
they would survive. Mr. Stock noted that he was recommending
that we receive cost quotations for plantings in the Phase 1 Part
1 at a cost not to exceed $2000.
Comm. Miller questioned who planted the plants in the Phase 1
Part 1 area and the cost of the plantings. Mr. Stock noted that
the plantings for Phase 1 Part 1 of the downtown redevelopment
area were included in the original contract. The downtown
contractor who won the award for the project subcontracted out
the planting of the annuals to a landscaping firm. Cost for the
plantings in the Phase 1 Part 1 area was $1600. Mr. Stock noted
that the contractor was not paid the entire amount due to the
fact that he neglected to water the plantings. Mr. Stock stated
that he thought the contractor was only paid approximately $500
for the plantings in the Phase 1 Part 1 area.
Comm. DuBois questioned if she was correct in stating that next
year the cost for the plantings would have to be budgeted for
solely by the City of Shakopee. Mr. Stock responded in the
affirmative. Comm. DuBois questioned what other cities do who
have plantings. Mr. Stock stated that several cities contract
for the planting services and maintenance on an annual basis.
Mr. Stock noted that several other communities have an adopt a
planter program in which the business owners take care of the
plantings in their downtown area. Mr. Stock also noted that in
several communities there are flower clubs which take care of the
plantings and maintenance. It is common place for the City to
purchase the flowers and provide them to the business owners
and/or flower clubs for the planters. Mr. Stock went on to state
that he did not believe that Shakopee had a flower club. He also
noted that since many of the property owners downtown were
opposed to the downtown project, he doubted whether or not there
would be acceptance to the adopt a planter program. Mr. Stock
stated that it would take quite a bit of staff time to attempt to
coordinate volunteer organizations or businesses to adopt a
planter.
Mr. Stock stated that he hoped that next year he would be able to
coordinate volunteer organizations or senior citizens to plant
the annuals. But given the time limitations this year, he
requested the CDC to consider simply contracting with an
individual, florist, and/or greenhouse at a cost not to exceed
$2000. Chrmn. Joos summarized by stating that staff was simply
looking for a stop gap measure to resolve the problem of getting
plantings planted this year.
-2-
Mr. Stock noted that the funding for the plantings this year
could be allocated out of the professional services budget of the
street department. Mr. Stock noted that due to the light snow
fall this winter there may be surplus funds in that category.
Comm. DuBois stated that she felt that this was somewhat costly
for us to consider but did not have any other alternative to
present. Comm. Miller questioned whether or not the proposal
included maintenance during the summer months. Mr. Stock
responded in the negative. The proposal only includes the cost
of the initial plantings, the plants themselves and an initial
watering. Mr. Stock stated that maintenance during the summer
months would be provided by the street department. Comm. Miller
questioned whether the cost estimate received was for 51 planters
or 25 planters. Mr. Stock stated that in the entire Phase 1 area
there were 51 planters which called for annual plantings.
Approximately 25 of these plantings were not under contract for
this year. Therefore, assuming the cost of $2000, the cost per
planter (for 25 planters) would be approximately $80 per planter.
Comm. Miller suggested that some perennials be planted in the
planters to reduce the cost in subsequent years.
It was the consensus of the Committee that this is a very costly
for the City to pursue this issue but they could not think of an
alternative at this time which would be more cost effective.
Miller/DuBois moved to recommend to the City Council that the
status quo be maintained for Phase 1 Part 2 of the downtown
redevelopment area planters (plantings to be provided by the
contractor this year) and request that the appropriate City
officials be directed to receive cost quotations from
individuals, florists and/or greenhouses to provide plantings for
Phase 1 Part 1 of the downtown redevelopment area and authorize
staff to enter into an agreement with the individual, florist
and/or greenhouse at a cost not to exceed $2000. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mr. Stock then gave a brief update on the Mebco Company
development status. Mr. Stock stated that things are moving
ahead as planned for the financing package for Mebco. He
expected that they would be breaking ground this May with project
completion this fall. Mr. Stock also noted that he has spoken
with Bergquist Company officials to determine if and when they
would consider constructing their plant in Shakopee. Mr. Stock
noted that Bergquist officials have informed him that in light of
their new product development they were hesitant to begin
construction until they could be assured that the new product
would take off as planned. Bergquist officials are still
interested in building in Shakopee but may have to hold off their
-
plans until 1990.
-3-
Comm. Miller then gave a brief report on the status of the park
development subcommittee. Comm. Miller stated that in his
conversations with Park Board members, they were hesitant to
begin any planning on park development until such time that the
Comprehensive Plan could be completed. He noted that this was in
direct contrast to what he had heard the previous month. Comm.
Miller noted that in the future he would like to recommend a
motion on cooperation between the CDC and the Park Board on
future park planning issues. Comm. Miller also noted that he was
considering attending the future meetings of the Park Board to
determine where they are going in terms of park development.
Mr. Stock then informed the Committee that on April 17, 1989 the
Shakopee Showcase would be held at Canterbury Downs. The
Showcase provided all the various community boards, commissions,
and organizations with the opportunity to inform Shakopee
residents of their activities. This year the Shakopee Showcase
will be coordinated in conjunction with the City of Shakopee's
annual open house. Mr. Stock stated that the CDC would have a
booth at the Showcase and he would like several commission
members to volunteer to be in attendance to staff the booth.
Comm. Joos, Miller, DuBois and Albinson stated that they could
attend the Showcase.
Mr. Stock then went through an analysis of the current property
tax situation in Shakopee. He noted that the major increase in
the property taxes in Shakopee was attributed to the School
District. Mr. Stock addressed the summary of the school tax
situation as provided by the Shakopee School District. Comm.
DuBois questioned why the school district used a market value of
$61,700. She stated that every time they do an analysis of this
type they use a market value that is not realistic. Comm. DuBois
stated that a more realistic figure for a market value would be
in the mid 701s. Discussion ensued on the public's perception of
this year's tax increase. Mr. Stock stated that he would like to
propose that the City of Shakopee offer assistance to Shakopee
residents in qualifying for the special property tax refund. Mr.
Stock noted that he felt the majority of Shakopee homestead
properties would be eligible for the refund up to a maximum
refund of $250. Mr. Stock stated that he felt the City should
provide technical assistance to Shakopee residents in preparing
the appropriate documentation to receive the refund. He
questioned whether or not Shakopee residents were aware of the
refund.
Comm. Miller stated that he felt the City of Shakopee should join
forces with the School District and Scott County to participate
in an external independent audit of the expenditures of each of
the bodies and the revenue sources as well as state
-
appropriations to the various bodies. Comm. Miller stated that
he hoped Shakopee residents would pursue this type of activity
before pursuing a recall on excess mill levy referendum.
-4-
S
Comm. Albinson suggested that the City do some marketing on the
qualifying tax refund for the general public. He questioned
whether or not the average Shakopee homeowner actually needed
assistance in preparing the appropriate documentation. He did
suggest however that City staff (intern) be available to assist
senior citizens in preparing the appropriate documentation.
Comm. Miller suggested that this would be an appropriate article
for the Community Newsletter which we have been trying to get off
the ground. Comm. Albinson suggested that one or two small
display ads be placed in the Shakopee newspaper. After much
discussion, it was the consensus of the Committee to recommend
that the City pursue the following marketing plan to inform
Shakopee residents of the qualifying tax refund and City
technical assistance program: 1. Newspaper article; 2 . To
display ads in the newspaper; 3. Open letter to the editor from
the CDC; 4. Cable television commercial and/or show.
Albinson/DuBois moved to recommend to City Council that the
appropriate City officials begin a program to assist Shakopee
residents in preparing the appropriate documentation for the
qualifying refund. Motion carried unanimously.
It was the consensus of the Committee to carry over the
discussion on community marketing/image to the next meeting.
Comm. Albinson stated that he would like to volunteer to serve as
the CDC liaison to the Transportation Coalition. DuBois/Miller
moved to appoint Jon Albinson as the CDC's representative to the
Shakopee Transportation Coalition. Motion carried unanimously.
Albinson/DuBois moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
-5-
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
DOWNTOWN AD HOC COMMITTEE
Regular Session City Council Chambers February 15, 1989
Chairman Laurent called the meeting to order at 7:45 A.M. with
the following persons present: Gary Laurent, Melanie Kahleck,
Ruben Ruehle, Terry Forbord, and Mary Keen. Also present were
Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant and Councilmembers Joe Zak
and Jerry Wampach. Absent were Commissioners Bill
Wermerskirchen, Jim Stillman and Harry Koehler.
Chairman Laurent asked if there were any additions to the agenda.
Commissioner Forbord requested that the following items be added
under other business:
1. Resolution of appreciation to Jerry Wampach.
2 . Resolution of appreciation to John Schmitt
3 . Meeting date/times.
4 . Vacation of City property in the downtown area.
Kahleck/Forbord moved to approve the agenda of the February 15 ,
1989 meeting as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairman Laurent then read a resignation letter from Shiela
Carlson.
Prior to the election of officers for the Downtown Committee,
Chairman Laurent stated that he felt it would be in the best
interest of the Commission if he were not appointed to serve as
Chairperson in 1989. Commissioner Forbord stated that contrary
to the belief of many Shakopee residents, Mr. Laurent has
attempted to resign from the Chairmanship position for the past
four years. Commissioner Forbord felt that this year the
Committee should attempt to honor Mr. Laurent's wishes.
Commissioner Forbord then nominated Mary Keen for the Chairperson
position. Chairman Laurent asked if there were any other
nominations. There being no other nominations, Forbord/Kahleck
moved to appoint Mary Keen as Chairperson for the Downtown
Committee. Motion carried unanimously.
Chairperson Keen then asked if there were any nominations for the
Vice Chair position. Commissioner Forbord nominated Ruben Ruehle
for the Vice Chair position. Chairperson Keen then asked if
there were any other nominations. There being no other
nominations, Forbord/Laurent moved to nominate Ruben Ruehle as
Vice Chairperson for the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. Motion
carried unanimously.
1
Chairperson Keen then asked if there were any nominations for the
second vice Chair position. Commissioner Kahleck moved to
nominate Bill Wermerskirchen for the second Vice Chair position.
Chairperson Keen then asked if there were any other nominations.
There being no other nominations, Kahleck/Laurent moved to
nominate Bill Wermerskirchen as second Vice Chair for the
Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. Motion carried unanimously.
Kahleck/Laurent moved to approve the minutes of the January 11,
1989 Downtown Ad Hoc Committee meeting. Motion carried with
Commission Forbord abstaining.
Mr. Stock then gave a status report on the Downtown Committee.
He noted that on January 31, 1989 the Shakopee City Council
approved the Downtown Committee's One Year Work Plan. At that
time, the Council also discussed the status of the Downtown
Committee as an advisory body. He noted that it was the
consensus of the Council that the Downtown Committee should
continue to meet on a monthly basis. It was also the consensus
of the City council that the Downtown Committee should attempt to
operate as it was originally established. That is, a
subcommittee of the Community Development Commission. Mr. Stock
noted that the only change in the process was that now the
Downtown Committee would be making it's recommendation to the
Community Development Commission rather then the City Council.
In closing, Mr. Stock stated that he doubted whether or not the
Downtown Committee would be removed as a subcommittee of the
Community Development Commission until such time that Phase II of
the Downtown Redevelopment Project is complete.
Mr. Stock then gave a status report on the Downtown Property
Inventory. He noted that the foundation of the Downtown
Committee's One Year Work Plan the rest was the establishment of
the Downtown Property Inventory. He reviewed an example of the
property inventory check list as it pertained to a particular
parcel in the downtown area. He requested that the Committee
review the property inventory check list and make changes as
necessary.
Commissioner Laurent questioned what staff meant by exterior
overall building condition as compared to the facade condition.
Mr. Stock noted that the facade ranking simply relates to the
front portion of the business which faces the street. The
exterior overall building condition ranking related to the
physical and structural condition of the buildings exterior. Mr.
Stock noted that this type of ranking system is fairly subjective
and maybe subject to dispute. He noted that he was attempting to
identify target buildings that scored a 10 in each of the
specific evaluation categories. These parcels would then be used
as the basis for the ranking system.
2
Commissioner Forbord suggested that the property owners name be
placed on the inventory check list and that the scale be
identified on the check list. For example 10 being the best
score and 1 being the lowest. Commissioner Forbord also
suggested that the building condition/code compliance category
should also look at the structural condition of the building and
also attempt to tie it to the design criteria that was adopted by
the City Council for rehabilitation projects downtown.
Commissioner Kahleck questioned how the location score was
determined. Mr. Stock stated that he felt that the Lewis Street,
Holmes Street and First Avenue between Lewis and Holmes Streets
would be the key development areas in the downtown area following
the completion of the mini by-pass. Mr. Laurent stated that
different business uses may have a different ranking depending on
their location. Commissioner Forbord suggested that the building
land use and access to parking should also be listed on the
inventory check list for ranking purposes.
Commissioner Forbord questioned how detail oriented the Downtown
Committee wanted to be in preparing the inventory check list.
Mr. Stock stated that he felt the inventory check list should
remain relatively simple in the initial go round. He stated that
he would contact several planning consultant firms to determine
what type of criteria they use and the scoring method utilized
when implementing this type of check list.
Councilmember Zak suggested that the inventory check list be kept
fairly simple in this first go round. He stated that it could
always be refined and made more detailed in the future.
It was the consensus of the Committee to allow staff to use their
own discretion in completing the property inventory check list.
Mr. Stock stated that in the last month the City has received
several inquiries regarding the potential development of the
railroad depot. Mr. Stock also noted that the City of Shakopee
is currently in the process of completing a feasibility study on
the extension of Second Avenue to the East between Atwood and
Scott Streets. He noted that the railroad depot currently stands
in the way of a straight Westerly extension of Second Avenue.
On February 6, 1989 Mr. Stock stated that he met with officials
from the Chicago\Northwest Railroad to determine if they were
interested in selling the depot and subsequent property. At that
time, they informed him that they own 50$ of the depot and 100%
of the land. The railroad's asking price for their property
interest in the depot was $22,000 and an additional $28, 000 for
the land.
Mr. Stock stated that he has contacted the presumed owner of the
remaining 50% interest in the building. Upon discussing the
3
presumed ownership with the individual, it became apparent that
the individual in question did not own a share of the depot.
Mr. Stock stated that he will now have to get back in touch with
the railroad in an attempt to determine the exact ownership of
the property in question.
Mr. Stock stated that he felt the asking price for the land and
building was unreasonable. He suggested that perhaps the City
could pursue an appraisal of the property in question.
Additionally, Mr. Stock noted that it would cost approximately
$60,000 to move the structure (depending on final site location)
and in excess of $10, 000 to demolish the structure.
Commissioner Laurent stated that he felt the City of Shakopee
should be very careful in offering a developer a site within the
downtown area for the relocation of the depot. He stated that he
believed many developers would be interested in the depot and
it's rehabilitation if the City of Shakopee were to offer free
land for the final building site. Commissioner Forbord
questioned whether or not the persons interested in the building
would pursue acquisition without the City's assistance. Mr.
Stock responded in the negative. Mr. Stock also stated that
since the City of Shakopee is currently completing a feasibility
study of the property in this area in terms of extending Second
Avenue, it may be appropriate for the Downtown Committee to wait
until a recommendation has been made from the City Engineer
regarding the proposed extension of Second Avenue.
Forbord/Kahleck moved that pending the feasibility study
recommendation on the extension of Second Avenue to the West by
the City Engineer and upon analysis of the Downtown Committee
that the Downtown Committee recommend to the Community
Development Commission an appropriate course of action regarding
the acquisition of the railroad depot and property. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock them reviewed the 1988 Downtown Committee Annual
Report. Commissioner Forbord questioned how this report relates
to previous years reports of the Downtown Committee. Mr. Stock
stated that in 1988 the Downtown Committee was fairly successful
in having their recommendations approved by the City Council.
Mr. Stock also noted that the activities of the Downtown
Committee decreased in 1988 as a result of the completion of
Phase I Part II of the Downtown Project. He stated that in 1989
the Committee's activities will also be diminished somewhat.
Actual recommendations to the Community Development Commission
and City Council will likely increase as we get closer to the
construction of Phase II.
4
Kahleck/Laurent moved to approve the Downtown's Committee 1988
Annual Report as drafted and requested that it be submitted to
the Community Development Commission for their approval. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock then handed out a copy of the issues identified by the
City Council at their 1989 strategic Planning Session.
Commissioner Forbord suggested that the Committee should attempt
to broaden it's membership as a result of Shiela Carlson's recent
resignation. The Committee then discussed potential candidates
for the Downtown Committee. Mr. Stock stated that if the
Downtown Committee has someone who is interested in serving on
the Committee they should direct the individual to City Hall for
a Commission application. Mr. Laurent stated that the actual
size of the Downtown Committee could be increased to over 14
members if there were candidates available.
Forbord/Laurent moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution of
appreciation and thanks to Councilmember Wampach for his time
that has been dedicated to the Downtown Committee and his ongoing
Council support for the Committee's action plan. Motion carried
unanimously.
Forbord/Laurent moved to recommend that staff prepare a
resolution of appreciation to Mr. John Schmitt commending him for
his many years of service on the Planning Commission and his
ongoing support for the Downtown Committee during his term of
office. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Forbord questioned whether or not the Downtown
Committee could change their meeting times to earlier then 7:45.
Laurent/Ruehle moved to maintain the current meeting time of 7:45
a.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Forbord questioned whether or not the staff could
prepare a annual calendar listing the dates for the Downtown
committee meetings. Mr. Stock stated that the established
meeting date for the Downtown Committee is the third Wednesday of
each month and that Committee members should schedule their work
activities accordingly.
Councilmember Zak stated that he was hopeful that the Carlson
Companies would pursue some type of public/private proposal for
the location of a hockey arena in the Shakopee Valley Mall. He
did not think it would be appropriate for the City to request the
Carlson Companies to pursue this type of activity but that he was
hopeful and supportive of the concept should they propose it to
the City.
5
Mr. Zak also stated that he is serving as Council liaison to the
community Development commission and also to the Downtown
Committee since it is a subcommittee of the Community Development
Commission. He noted that in 1989 he would like to see the City
of Shakopee pursue an aggressive advertising campaign to improve
the image of the community. He hoped that the Downtown Committee
and Community Development Commission would both be supportive of
implementing a positive marketing campaign.
Commissioner Forbord suggested that the vacation of City property
in the downtown area be placed on the March 15, 1989 Downtown
Committee Agenda for further discussion.
Ruehle/Laurent moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:05 a.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
_ 6
16
MINUTES
OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in regular
session on February 2, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities meeting
room.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Cook, Kephart and
Kirchmeier . Also Liaison Wampach, Manager Van Hout and Secretary
Menden.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the minutes
of the January 9, 1989 regular meeting be approved as kept.
Motion carried.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook that the minutes of
the January 10, 1989 joint meeting with the City Council be
approved as kept. Motion carried.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the minutes
of the October 5, 1988 special session be approved as kept.
Motion carried.
BILLS READ:
City of Shakopee 20,032.00
Auto Central Supply 26.65
ABM Equipment and Supply, Inc. 218.40
Business Outfitters, Inc. 1,031 .40
Border States Electric Supply 65.96
Burmeister Electric Co. / 2,457.36
Battery and Tire Warehouse, Inc. 46.42
Chanhassen Lawn and Sports 146.35
City of Shakopee 700.47
City of Shakopee 58.34
City of Shakopee 215.34
City of Shakopee 242.78
Clay's Printing 169.85
Champion Auto 3.98
Cy's Amoco and Tire Center 86.95
Dem-Con Landfill, Inc. 10.00
Feed-Rite Controls, Inc. 806.36
Gopher State One-Call, Inc. 72.61
Graybar Electric Supply Inc. 4,424.04
HDR Engineering, Inc. 946.24
Hennen's ICO 15.00
H 6 C Electric Supply 338.10
KAR Products 126.59
Kress and Monroe Chartered 188.93
Leef Bros. , Inc. 43.00 -.
Treasurer State of Minnesota 299.27
Minnesota Municipal Utilities Assocfatin 295.00
Minp@arta Valley Testing Laboratories, Inc.
06Pthern States Power Co. 16.00
NECO 1,030.31
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 75.00
Scott County Sheriff Communication. 270.67
Schoell and Madson, Inc. 450.40
Starks Cleaning Services, Inc. 401.15
Southwest Suburban Publishing 68.00
Simon-Midwest, Inc. 12 .80
Ralph Thomas Construction Co. 131 .40
Truck Utilities Mfg. Co. 150. 00
United Compucred Collections, Inc. 21 .89
Louis Van Hout 225.00
Voss Electric Supply Co. 241.09
Viking Industrial Center 433.92
Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. 159.92
Water Products Co. 1,838.45
Yarusso's Hardware Co. 5,126.20
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 88. 95
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 450.00
Chapin Publishing Company 75.00
U.S. West Communications 104.40
Northern States Power Co. 300.55
Minnesota Department of Health 302,780.26
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the bills be0
250.
allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried.
A communication from Cecil Clay regarding obtaining a 5/8•
water meter for the Community Youth Building without charge
was acknowledged.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook to donate the
Proper size water meters for the project known as the Community
Youth Building. Motion carried.
Ken Adolf, Schoell and Madson was present to update the
Commission on the progress of bid, for Well i8. Bids will
be opened on February 10, 1989.
Indications have been given of an award date of February
13, 1989 provided some locations problem. are worked out
in the interim.
Mr. Adolf also informed the Commission of the need for
to advertise for bide for the mechanical and electrical
additions and modifications to Well •8.
Notion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to authorize
Schoell and Madson to advertise for bids for the electical and
mechanical modifications to the Pumphouse and inside the
pumphouse for Well t8. Motion carried.
I�
Schoell and Madson are also looking into, at the present
time, updating the control systems in some of the wells for the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission, and putting them under a
central control system. A coat proposal for a feasibility study
for this project was authorised by the Commission
Dave Hutton, City Engineer was present to inform the
Commission of the results of the feasibility study for putting
in sewer and watermain for the project on Fifth Avenue from
Filmore to Market Streets . Cost projections were given the
Commission.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the Shakopee
Public Utilities Commission in conjunction with the City of
Shakopee installation of sewer on Fifth Avenue from Filmore to
Market Streets that we would participate in paying the costs
for the watermain construction that crosses the properties which
presently have water service. The project is very consistent with
the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission desire to upgrade our
system.
Mr. Hutton also presented a feasibility study being done
on 3rd Ave. from Spencer at to Shumway St. The project has not
been ordered at the present time. It will be the intent of the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission to replace watermain on
3rd Avenue if the project is ordered.
Manager Van Hout advised the Commission of certain looping
conditions in the Heritage Plat 2nd Addition which will have to
be ■et before final plat approval.
Mr. Andy Shea from O'Connor and Hannan attended the meeting
to discuss with the Commission the acquisition of service
territory from Minnesota Valley Electric Cooperative.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to direct and
authorize staff council and consultants to proceed with
initiating contact with the cooperative to request negotiations
on acquisitions. Motion carried.
The Commission also directed staff to proceed with gathering
data to be used for the service territory acquisition.
Liaison Nampach gave his report.
Mr. Van Hout advised the Commission that the Minnesota
Municipal Utilities Association legislative roundup is scheduled
for March 16, 1989.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to offer
Resolution #345 A Resolution Designating Official Depositories
of The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Funds. Ayes;
Commissioners Cook, Ki es
and Kephart. Nayes: none.
Motion carried. Resolution passed.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Cook to offer Resolution
#346 A Resolution Designating An Official Meana of Publications.
Ayes: Commissioners Kirchmeier, Kephart and Cook. Nayea : none.
Motion carried. Resolution passed.
There was 1 fire call for a total of 20 minutes man hours for the
month of January, 1989.
There were no lost time accidents for the month of January, 1989.
The 1989 wage requests were discussed by the Shakopee Public
Utilities Commission.
The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission will be held on March 6, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. in the
Utilities meeting room.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried.
1 �
\I
Barbara Menden, Commission Secretary
� o
MINUTES OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission Convened in special
session on February 23, 1989 at 5:00 P.M. in the Utilities
meeting room.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Cook, Kirchmeier, and Kephart.
Also present were Manager Van Hout, and Ken Adolf, Engineer with
Schnell and Madson.
Commissioner Cook opened the meeting at 5:01 P.M. The special
meeting had been called to consider bids and award the contract
for the new well.
Manager Van Hout reported that the proper notice for the special
meeting had been posted as needed.
Liaison Wampach had previously indicated he did not see the need
to attend the special meeting which had been anticipated for the
bid award.
Manager Van Hout reviewed the present well site on the School
property, as well as other sites that had been considered and
found not workable. The School Board has approved of the
locating of a well on their property, provided their staff is in
agreement with the site selected, and with the formal easements
to be drawn up in the near future. A letter of understanding has
been sent to the Superintendent, and a response has been received
back that the terms are agreeable.
Ken Adolf reviewed the bids. The low bidder is E.H. Renner
company, which is a qualified well drilling firm. He recommended
award of the contract to the low bidder, E. H. Renner.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart, to award the contract
to the E.H. Renner Company as the low bidder. Motion Carried.
Ken Adolf will assemble the contract documents as soon as
possible.
Motion to adjourn by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier. Motion
Carried. Meeting adjourned.
Minutes Approved:
Jiook, Commission President
n
Attest: t f jp' �,--�_
Barbara Menden, ommiasion Secretary
MINUTES
OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Special Meeting
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in
special session on March 13, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. in the
Utilities meeting room.
Mr. Ken Adolf,of Schoell and Madson was present to present
the bids received for the electrical and mechanical construction
of project 89-2 Pumphouse t2.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to award the
bid for project 89-2 the electrical and mechanical construction
for pumphouse •2 in the amount of 889,792.40 to A 6 K
Construction, Inc. Motion carried.
The progress of Welli8 was reported by Mr. Adolf.
The 1989 wage discussion continued.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to amend our
personnell policies in the area of mileage reimbursement to
replace the ■onitary figure with the current I .R.S. rate.
Motion carried.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to allow the
request of Terry Roquette, Technical Assistant to go to a
salaried position provided the Manager does not find any
complications in that regard. Motion carried.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission establish a section 11
in its personnell policies titled •Employee Recognition• and
develop the language to go with it that basically says that the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission at its expense will provide
to the employees and the Council Liaison an annual picnic for
the purpose of recognition. Motion carried.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried.
Barbara Menden, Commission Secretary
MINUTES
OF THE
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission convened in
regular session on March 6, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. in the Utilities
meeting room.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Cook, Kephart and
Kirchmeier. Also Manager Van Hout and Secretary Menden.
Liaison Wampach was absent.
President Cook conveyed the Commission's deepest sympathy
to Liaison Wampach on the recent death of his wife Juane.
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission employees were present
to further discuss 1989 wages.
BILLS READ•
City of Shakopee 20,032.00
Larae Anderson 300.00
William Anderson 100.00
Auto Central Supply 73.60
Bills Toggery, Inc. 59.94
Burmeister Electric Co. 995.00
C .H. Carpenter Lumber 18. 00
Champion Auto Stores 17,27
Chanhassen Lawn and Sports 52.75
Chapin Publishing Company 108 .00
Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Co. 2, 050.00
City of Shakopee 641 . 08
City of Shakopee 15,551 . 16
City of Shakopee 724 .14
Davies Water Equipment Co. 39,82
Deputy Registrar t89 88.25
Don's Body Shop 469.08
Dressen 011 Company 50.00
Feed-Rite Controls, Inc. 2,299,54
General Office Products Co. 45 .62
Glenwood Inglewood 9.00
Gopher State One-Call, Inc. 65.00
Graybar Electric Supply Co. , Inc. 303.20
HDR Engineering, Inc. 2,359. 33
Howard Industries, Inc. 27,165.00
International Business Machines Corp. 263.00
Johnson Block and Ready Mix, Inc.
Kress and Monroe Chartered Law Office 25.00
Leef Bros. , Inc. 117.40
Minnesota Department of Health 10.75
Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association 300.00
Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories, Inc. 7.000.00
Northern States Power Co. 48.00
Northern States Power Co. 308,384.44
Barb Nevin 804.83
Northern States Power Co. 79.00
North Star Water Works Products 332.32
Otter Tail Power Company 241.61
Pitney Bowes 283 . 14
Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 94.50
S 6 T Office Products Co. , Inc. 6.82
Schoell and Madson, Inc. 306.00
Shakopee Postmaster 291 .00
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 2.500.00
Shakopee Services, Inc. 108.10
Southwest Suburban Publishing, Inc. 26. 00
Starke Cleaning Service 377.07
Total Tool, Inc. 68.00
Truck Utilities and Manufacturing Co. 129.79
Unisys, Inc. 19.04
Valley Industrial Propane, Inc. 88.00
Viking Industrial Center 11.03
Water Products Company 88.89
Yaruaso•e Hardware Company 148.43
Westinghouse Electric Supply Co. 57.13
Lou Van Hout 162.50
ABM Equipment 61 .08
Sherri Anderson 47.77
79. 00
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the bills be
allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried.
A letter received regarding impending legislation on
testing of water was read by Manager Van Hout.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart to acknowledge
receipt of the letter and place it on file.
Bids for a new truck to replace 0615 (water service truck)
were presented.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook to award the bid to
Shakopee Ford in the amount of $11,427.59 with trade.
A letter regarding the watermain ovwrsicing for the Meadows
Additon and the coats involved were perused by the Commission.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to accept the
figures received from Pioneer Engineering on the Coate of the
overaizing for the Shakopee Public UtilitiesCommission for the
Meadows Addition in the amount of 824,031.00.
Information on the Prairie Estates watermain overaizing
was given to the Commission for their information.
Costs involving the Vierling Drive within Hauers Fourth
Addition overaizing of the watermain dated February 13, 1989
were discussed by the Commission.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook that the Shakopee
Public Utilities regarding the moving of the watermain on the
west and of Vierling Drive reject item it and item ♦4. t
i4 is felt to be a project cost and the Shakopee Public UtIilemities
Commission should pay their fair share as part of the overaizing
costs . Items 15 and t6 are okayed as Shakopee Public Utilities
Commiscarried. costa. Commissioner Kephart abstained. Motion
carried.
An amendment offered by Commissioner Kephart, seconded by
Cook to the above motion that the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission will not authorize any payments for any project
costs until sufficient backup information has been submitted
to us for pervious approval . Motion carried.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Cook to again offer the
amended motion that the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
regarding the overaizing costs for the Vierling Drive within
Hauers Fourth Addition reject items i1 and 44. Item •4 is felt
to be a project cost and the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
should pay their fair share as part of the oversizing costs.
However, that no payments will be approved for any projects costs
unless sufficient backup information has been submitted for
previous approval. Motion carried.
A memo from Dave Hutton, City Engineer, dated February 13,
1989 regarding the Fifth Avenue water project was acknowledged
and discussed by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kirchmeier that the Shakopee
Public Utilities Commission on the Fifth Avenue water project
between Filmore St. and Market St. will pick up the costa for
those properties currently nerved by a copper service and the
properties that are already under service on the extremities
currently with water service an indicated on the map are ■
j
project cost and should be allocated against the assessment
and the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission will not
Participate. Motion carried.
Motion by Kirchmeier, seconded by Kephart that the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission concur with the City
Engineer to use the City Staff and OSM to complete the design
for the Fifth Avenue water, Market Street project. Motion
carried.
The Third Avenue water project from Spencer to Shumway was
presented by Manager Van Hout. A discussion followed as to
what information would be needed in the future for this project.
The Vierling Drive along Heritage Second Addition water
project was discussed. The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
was in concurrence with Manager Van Hout as to the requirements
needed for that plat.
Well i8 project has begun. The progress of the well
completion will be reported as it progresses .
The bid opening for the mechanical work for Well t8 is
scheduled to be held on March 8, 1989.
A bid was received in the amount of 84, 572.00 for the
additional work of changing out the motor in pumphouse 42 to
the additional voltage required by the new Well i8.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to award E.H.
Renner the mechanical contract for the additional work to
be done on Pumphouse 42. Motion carried.
A letter from H Needles Engineering regarding the
abandonment of Well 41 was acknowledged.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to acknowledge
the letter from H. Needles Engineering and relay to them that
the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission feels that the project
should encur the costs involved. Motion carried.
The Shakopee Public Utilities Commission set up tentative
special meeting dates for March 13, 1989 for the awarding of
the bids for the mechanical work for Well 48 and also
March 27, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. at the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission meeting room for a report of the progress of the
service territory acquisitions.
i
There were no new plata for the month of February, 1989.
There were no fire calla for the month of February, 1989.
1989.There were no lost time accidents for the month of February,
The next regular meeting of the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission will be held on April 3, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. in the
Utilities meeting room.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier that the meeting
be adjourned. Motion carried.
�Sarbara Menden, Commission Secretary
KRASS & MUNROE CHARTERED 13
327 South Marschall Road .,
Shakopee, MN 55379 -
z -
City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 01-31-89
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE ( ino(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
18-11373002-1 General $95.44
$154.00 $10.44 $69.00
18-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist
$209.00 $0.00 $209.00 $0.00
18-11373158-1 c/o James Lockart at Popham Haik
Law firm
Racetrack bond issue
(Bill applicant ) James Lochart
$85.00 CR $85.00 $0.00 $0.00
18-11373200-1 Eminent Domain
(Perry - BILL PROJECT)
$0.00 $13.00 $0.00 $13.00
18-11373210-1 Storm Drainage Easements.
Bill Project.
$65.00 $768.00 $65.00 $768.00
18-11373220-1 By Pass Ordinan( P ( 445- 3650) g7g0.00
$596.00 $740.00 $596.00
PLEASE INCLUDE ACCOUNT NUMBER FOR PROPER CREDIT
PAYMENIS RECEIVED AFTER JANUARY 31ST CREDITED THE FOLLOWING MONTH
IF YOU HAVE A BILLING QUESTION CONTACT VINO( (I' DUHN Al !.I / 441' !,OIM.
PAGE 2
Cil.y of Shakopee BILLING DATE 01-31-B9
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
-------- -------- --------
_-
19-13137311-1 Prosecutions
$3,400.00 $4,500.00 43,400.00 44 ,500.00
I8-137321OC-1 Outlet Permit Problem
$90.44 $51 .00 $90.44 $51 .00
----------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL $4,429.44 $6, 167.44 $4,429.44 $6, 167.44
KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED
327 South Marschall Road
Shakopee, MN 55379
City of Shakopee BILLING DATP 02- 2H-09
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
18-11373002-1 Geneer al
$95.44 $273.00 $0.00 $368.44
18-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist
$0.00 $17 .00 $O.00 $17 .00
18-11373200-1 Eminent Domain -
(Perry - BILL PROdECTy _
$13.00 $0.00 $0.00 $13.00
18-11373210-1 Storm Drainage Easements.
Bill Project.
$760.00 $159.00 $0.00 $927.00
18-11373220-1 By Pass Ordinance (445-3650)
$740.00 $34.00 $0.00 $774.00
19-13137311-1 Prosecutions
$4,500.00 $2,956.00 $0.00 $7,456.00
18-1373210C-1 Outlet Permit Problem
$51 .00 $104.00 $0.00 $155.00
PLEASE INCLUDE ACE:(iUNI NUMBER FOR PROPER CREDIT
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER FEBRUARY 28TH CREDITED THE FOLLOWING MONTH
IF YOU HAVE A BILLING QUESTION CONTACT VINCE O' BRIEN AT 612-445-5080.
PAGE 2
City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 02-28-89
129 E. lst Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
-------- -------- -------- -------
18-51373213-1 General Matters
$0.00 426.00 $0.00 $26.00
-------- --------- ------
TOTAL $6, 167.44 $3,569.00 80.00 $9,736.44
KRASS & MONROE CHARTERED '
327 South Marschall Road /1
Shakopee, MN 55379
City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 03-31-89
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
-------- -------- -------- -------
18-11373002-1 General
$368.44 $636.44 $368.44 $636.44
18-11373117-1 Prior Lake Spring Lk Watershed Dist
$17.00 $34.00 $17.00 $34.00
18-11373200-1 Eminent Domain
(Perry - BILL PROJECT)
$13.00 $0.00 $13.00 $0.00
18-11373210-1 Storm Drainage Easements.
Bill Project.
$927.00 $246.00 $927 .00 $246.00
18-11373220-1 By Pass Ordinance (445-3650)
$774.00 $170.00 $774.00 $170.00
19-13137311-1 Prosecutions
$7,456.00 $2,924 .00 $7,456.00 $2 ,924 .00
16-137321OC-1 Outlet Permit Problem
$155.00 $357.00 $155.00 $357.00
PLEASE INCLUDE ACCOUNT NUMBER FOR PROPER CREDIT
PAYMENTS RECEIVED AFTER MARCH 31ST CREDITED THE FOLLOWING MONTH
IF YOU HAVE A BILLING QUESTION CONTACT VINCE O' BRIEN AT 612-445-5080.
PAGE 2
City of Shakopee BILLING DATE 03-31-89
129 East First Averlye
Shakopee, MN 55379 C L I E N T S U M M A R Y
Account Number RE Line(s)
Previous New Payment Current
Balance Billings Received Balance
-------- -------- -------- -------
18-51373213-1 General Matters
$26.00 $557.00 $26.00 $557.00
----------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL $9,736.44 $4,924.44 $9,736.44 $4,924.44
Ehlers and at
LEABEfl6 IN PUBLICFINANCE NEWSLETTER
1 1
OFFICES IN MINNEAPOLIS AND WAUKESHA
VOLUME 34 NUMBER 2
FILE Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates,Inc.
please distribute to governing body members
MARCH. 1989
NORWBST CENTER NEW HOME TO EM ERS&ASSOCIATES
After 25 years in the Soo Line Building, we have now transferred operations to the new Norwest Center in
downtown Minneapolis.
Ehlers and Associates,Inc.
2950 Norwest Center
90 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis,Minnesota 55402-4100
Same phone number (612) 339-8291, same super staff rendering super service in financing community
mnprovements. Come see nor new,home.
LOSS OF TAX EIiFMUMON W0IJLD COST M P
Look for future attempts to further diminish tax exemption of state and local borrowings following North
Carolina vs. Baker. Loss of tax exemption will raise borrowing costs by at least 35%, and local L
governments should hold Congress accountable for those higher costs if it taxes your borrowings. At the
same time, state and local governments must guard against re-inflation of the tax-exempt bond supply lest
the interest rate advantage be frittered away on non-governmental public financings.
The law is chaotic and causes higher borrowing costs to you and your taxpayers. Some bonds Be subject
to an alternative minimum tax (AMT), some aren't. Some qualify for deductibility from corporate
income, some don't. Investors are confused, and you suffer higher interest rates. It is important to contact
your congressmen and senators to make sure they understand the importance.
While you are at it, call attention to the outlandish practice of the Treasury Department and legislators of
putting retroactive dates in tax bills which have the effect of law even if never head by committee. A
congressman can rule the country by puning an effective date in a bill! And it costs borrowers a bundle.
LEASE E IRCHA AGREEbEUM CAN RESOLVE PULHICAL FROB FMC
Leasing can convert potential political issues into sound,non-controversial business decisions. If a county
needs a new jail/law enforcement center, without which it cannot hold prisoners, it can lease just as it
leases other equipment and end up owning it. Those who have used leases experience little, if any,public
comment. Moreover, lease transactions are straightforward, and the financing can be offered
competitively. Lessees are not limited to private, non-competitive transactions. They can even create
their own non-profit authorities to build, finance and lease back the facilities, thereby saving leasing
company charges. Generally leases, especially those subject to annual appropriation, are not considered
debt. However, the New Mexico Supreme Court recently decided otherwise. Some states, Minnesota and
North Dakota,have expressly blessed leasing.
2950 Norwest Center•90 South Seventh Street•Minneapolis, MN 55402-4100•612-339-8291•FAX 612-339-0654
DISCLOSURE GUIDELINES MAY RESULT IN INCREASED COSTS
Some movement is afoot to force state and local borrowers into an SEC-type disclosure even absent any
pattern of fraud or abuse (by local governments), even though disclosure has been the primary function of
bond underwriters. If it cams,expect higher issuance costs and delays.
COMP71717IVE BORROWING ENSURES LOWEST BORROWING COSTS
Should a community negotiate its borrowings privately? Only as a last resort. In private deals an
underwriter's margins are nearly double, and the coupon interest rates are about 1% higher than public,
competitive sales. On a million dollar, twenty-year issue that's about $180,000. Regular clients of bond
dealers are investors whose appetite for high yields exactly conflicts with borrowers' desire for low
interest rates.
EWERS SUPPORT SCAFF AT YOUR FINGERTIPS
In our last letter I mentioned that our success was tied to our super account executives, people who you
we at meetings. But behind them, and without whom none of us could be nearly as effective, are a
knowledgeable support staff which makes things happen. Jana Ristamaki heads our operations with the
assistance of Nancy DeMarais, Debra Knieste (investment of funds), Nancy Liss, Diana Lockard, Sandra
Ludford, Katherine Nesgoda, Sue Peterson, and Christine Smith in Minneapolis, plus Darlene Bahr in
Waukesha. Phil Chenoweth and Dan Boyce keep the new computer system functioning at top efficiency.
We should tell you how to use us. If your account executive is not in, ask for her or his assistant. If the
assistant knows the answer, you'll have it. If not, someone will return your call. Our aim is to satisfy
your requests as soon as possible by whoever is available and knows the answers. In some cases we'll
know outside people, such as attorneys, who we can access on a conference call. Of course the message -1
will be given to the account executive for review. If you need a computer ran, say the annual debt service
on a bond issue, ask for Phil or Dan if your account people aren't available. We'll quickly get back to
you. We will W leave you dangling.
Often those with financing problems think of us when they are ready to vote on or to sell bonds which is
fare; we'll start anytime. But some of our best work is in early fiscal planning, to guard against serious
problems such as failure to size the bond issue adequately. It is embarrassing to the governing body to not
be able to finish a building properly or to experience an extra levy in the fust year because someone forgot
to include capitalised interest during construction,or issuance costs,or a bond discount.
We are anxious to serve you.
Very t��idyy yours,
e&�-
Robert L. Ehlers
We look forward to seeing you at:
MIjA RLm AI WATER ASSOCIATION--March 7-9
IQWA ASSOCIATION M 1N1C P 1 ITfLIT1ES--March 12-14
MUNICIPAL CLERKS& FINANCE OFFICERS ANNUAL..CONFERENCE—March 14-17
MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL MOUSTR ATO R --March 29-30
WISCONSIN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATORS --May 1-3
SUMMARY Of AREA BONG SALES
Bond
Net Buyer
Municipality pate Type of Bonds 9BRYBt Haturity NAU Index Ratio,
Igma
Iowa Board of Regents 12/12/88 Utility System Revenue Bonds 120,700M 199(f-2013 7.08% 7.68% Al
Des Mines Area 12/13/88 New Jobs Training Certificates 2,450M 1990-1998 7.28% 7.68% An
Community College
Cedar Falls 12/14/88 G.O. leprovenewt Bonds 3,175M 1990-2002 6.98% 7.68% At
Farley 12/19/88 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds I8011 1909-1998 6.86% 7.66% NO
Newton 12/19/88 G.O. Taxable Bonds 2,0009 1994-2004 9.62% 7.66% Al
Revlon 12/19/88 G.O. Bonds 1,175M 1990.2004 7.05% 7.66% At
enchant cavi l le 01/09/89 G.O. Sewer Inprovement Bonds 13511 1990-1999 7.06% 7.44% NR
was 01/10/89 G.O. Sever Improv..t Bonds 3,900M 1990-2004 6.99% 7.44% Ant
Nest Des Mines Comm. 5/0 01/11/89 G.O. School Bonds 4,700M 1991-2000 6.72% 7.44% M
Algona 01/30/89 G.O. Bands, Series A 120M 1991-1994 6.53% 7.2n A
Algona 01/30/89 G.O. Bonds, Series 8 81 ON 1990-2000 6.67% 7_27% A
Minnesot3
Blowing Prairie 12/01/88 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bonds 2,020M 1991 6.70% 7.58% NR
Blaine 12/01/89 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 1,755M 1990-2005 6.92% 7.58% A
Blaine 12/01/BB G.O. Imgroveeent Bonds 2,400M 1991-2000 6.60% 7.58% A
Shoreview 12/05/98 G.O. Iyrorement Bonds 320M 1990-1999 6.85% 7.66% A)
Shoreview 12/05/911 G.O. Equi want Bonds 565M 1990-1993 6.53% 7.66% Al
Shoreview 12/05/M G.O. Park Bonds 605M 1990-1993 6.53% 7.66% Al
I.S.D. #15 (St. Francia) 12/05/99 G.O. School Building Bands 13,75011 1991-2010 7.65% 7.66% Aaa/AM
Albertville 12/05/118 G.O. Advanced Ref. Imp. Bonds 50% 1989-2000 7.23% 7.66% WR
Stevens County 12/06/88 G.O. Solid Waste Facilities 25011 1990-1996 6.88% 7.66% Baal
V Revenue Bands
I.S.O. Vol (Hibbing) 12/07/88 G.O. School Building Bands 4,49011 1990-2001 7.46% 7.66% Baa
I.S.D. #701 (Ribbing) 12/07/118 G.O. School Building Bands 1,020M 1990-2001 7.4811 7.66% Baa -
Benson 12/08/88 G.O. Nater 6 Sewer Revenue Bonds 560R 1M-2004 7.34% 7.66% Baa
Benson 12/00/88 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 345M 1990-2009 7.52% 7.66% Baa
Benson 72/00/88 G.O. Water If Sewer Revenue Bonds I50M 1994-2004 7.37% 7.66% Baa
I.S.D. 459 (Northfield) 12/12/88 G.O. School Building Bonds 2,035M 1992-2004 7.00% 7.68% A
Warroad 12/12/88 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bonds 1,520M 1990 6.80% 7.60% RR
Warroad 12/12/88 G.O. Loan Antici potion Bonds 24511 1909 6.79% 7.68% NR
Bloomington 12/12/88 Penetrant Ip. Revolving Bands 2,69011 1990-2008 6.77% 7.681t M
Blpowirgton 12/12/88 G.O. Ston Water Bonds 2.5901 1990-2006 7.04% 7.68% M
New Nope 12/12/88 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1,60011 1991-2005 7.07% 7.68% AT
I.S.D. #504 12/12/88 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 620M 1990 6.80% 7.68% N1
of Indebtedness
Faribault 12/131% G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds 595M 1990-2004 7.08% 7.68% Al
Faribaolt 12/13/80 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 460M 1910-2004 7.07% 7.69% Al
Chisago County 12/13/88 Lease Revenue Bonds 3,390M 1991-2005 7.19% 7.Gilt Asa/AM
Champlin 12/13/80 G.O. Refunding Bonds 1,66011 1990-1999 7.02% 7.69% Baal
I.S.D. #423 (MmMnson) 12/13/88 G.O. School Building Bonds 2,750M 1991-2005 7.18% 7.68% A
Eden Prairie 12/13/88 G.O. Improvawnt Bonds 9,800R 1990-2004 7.00% 7.68% Aaa/AM
I.S.O. #742 12/14/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 25,30011 1993-2010 7.39% 7.68% A
(St. Clow)
Broken 12/14/89 Water 6 Sewer Revenue Bonds law 1991-2005 7.46% 7.GB% NR
South St. Paul 12/19/88 G.D. Capital Notes 280M 1990 6.82% 7.66% M
Proctor 12/19/118 G.O. Tax Antic. Certs. of Indebt. 29011 1990 6.75% 7.66% NR
Crookston 1287/88 G.O. Grant Anticipation Notes BOOM 1990 6.83% 7.57% W
Shoreview 01/03/89 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds 6.250M 1992-2011 7.28% 7.50% Al
Shoreview 01/03/89 G.O. Nater Revenue Bonds 1,150M 1990-1999 6.91% 7.50% At
I.S.O. 0200 Hastings 01/04/89 G.O. Tax Antic. Certs. of Indent, 2,97011 1990 6.58% 7.50% NR
Amboy 01/09/69 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bonds BOOM 1991 7.03% 7.441t NR
I.S.O. #196 01/09/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 16,37011 192-2002 7.24% 7.44% A
Rosemount/Apple Valley
Bend
Het Buyer
Municipality Date Type of MWIS dBRWBt Maturi Lv gate IRdaa Bating
I.S.D. 0624 01/09/89 G.O. Tax Antic. Certs. of IMebt. 5,00011 1990 6.85% 7.44% MR
White Bear Lake
Normand 01/09/89 G.D. Mater Bonds 320H 1990-1999 7.12% 1.44% MR
S, School District #1 01/10/89 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 30,00011 1990 6.47% 7.44% MIG 2
Minneapolis
I.S.D. #194 Lakeville 01/10/89 G.O. School Building Bands 1,670H 1993-2002 7.03% 7.44% A
Dodge Center 01/10/09 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bonds 39011 1991 6.68% 7.44% BR
Dodge Center 01/10/89 G.O. Sewer Revenue Bonds 1,03% 1992-2009 7.31% 7.44% Baa
I.S.D. #549 Perham/Oent 01/11/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 1,99514 1991-2005 7.16% 7.44% Baa
I.S.V. #1929 Waseca 01/12/89 G.O. Scheel Building Bonds 1,730M 1994-2005 7.05% 7.44% A
I.S.O. #829 Waseca 01/12/89 G.O. Tax Antic. Certs. I,470M 1990 6.73% 7.44% A
Cannon Falls 01/17/89 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds. A 37 SIM 1989-2001 6.98% 7.40% Deal
Cannon falls 01/17/89 G.O. Tax Increrent Bonds. 6 MGM 1989-2001 6.98% 7.40% Baal
I.S.O. #12 Centennial 01/17/89 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 2,225M 1990 6.75% 7.40% NR
I.S.D. #119 01/17/89 G.O. Tax Antic. Certs. of Indebt. 1,790M 1990 6.66% 7.4% NR
I.S.D. 032 Mahtomedi 01/17/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 7,075M 1990-2008 1.081c 7.40% Awa/AAP
I.S.D. #446 Warren 01/18/89 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 60011 1990 6.74% 7.40% NR
Gaylord 01/18/09 G.O. tax Increment Bonds NOR 1991-2009 7.06% 7.40% Baa
Gaylord 01/18/89 G.O. Water % Sewer Revenue Bonds 825M 1991-2010 7.09% 7.40% Baa
I.S.D. R84 Wayzata 01/23/89 G.O. Schaal Building Bonds 12,970H 1995-2009 7.07% 7.29% AT
Buffalo Lake 01/23/89 G.O. Refunding Inprovement Bonds 505M 1990-2006 7.1A 7.29% MR
I.S.D. #508 St. Peter 01/23/89 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 1,250" 1990 6.55% 1.29% MR
LS.O. #720 Shakopee 01/23/09 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 1.93514 1990 6.68% 7.291c NR
Cottonwood 01/24/89 G.O. Refunding Bonds 150M 1990-2006 7.21% 7.29% NR
Eden Valley 01/26/89 G.O. Refunding Bonds 200M 1990-2006 7.21% 7.Z9% MR
I.S.D. #141 01/26/89 G.O. Tax Anticipation Certificates 970M 1990 6.6% 7.291 NR
Chisago Lakes
Wheaton 01/26/89 G.O. Sewer Revenue Bands MOM 1990-2009 7.15% 7.29% Baal
Wheaton 01/26/89 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bonds 215M 1991 6.62% 7.29% NR
Dent 01/27/89 G.O. Refunding Bends 85H 19902001 7.38% 1.27% WR ^
I.S.D. #564 01/30/89 G.O. Tax Antic. Certs. of Indebt 1,275M 1990 6.BOX 7.27% MR
Thief River Falls
I.S.D. #364 01/30/09 G.O. Schaal Building Bonds 300H 1991-2005 7.05% 7.2n Baa
Thief River Falls
Wisconsin
Green Bay PM 12/05/88 G.O. Promissory Nates 4,800M 1990-1998 6.85% LBB% As
Marshfield 12/13/88 G.O. Promissory Nates 1,77511 1990-1998 6.68% 7.68% Aa
Sussex 12/20/88 Water System Mortgage Revenue Bonds 1,065M 1990-2DO4 7.61% 7.66% Baa
Green Bay 12/20/88 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds 3,650M 1990-2008 7.27% 7.66% As
Green Bay 12/20/88 Taxable G.O. Bonds 685M 2002-2003 9.33% 7.66% As
Rice lake Area S/D 01/09/89 G.O. Improvement Bonds 1,28011 1990-2OD3 7.11% 7.44% A
Del avan 01/17/89 G.0 Promissory Notes 1,52" 1991-1999 7.02% 7.40% Baal
TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 18, 1989
Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding
1] Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M.
2) Reading by Mayor Lebens of City's Non-Discrimination Policy
3] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
41 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
5] 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 Approval of Minutes of March 21, and April 4, 1989
8] Communications:
a] Becky Kelso re: Spilling of sand and gravel on City
Streets - tabled April 4th
*b] Donald Koopman re: resignation from Community
Development Commission
c] Randy Laurent re: Request to fast track the issuance
of a building permit
d] Federal Highway Administration re: Finding of no
significant impact for the Mini-Bypass and Bridge
Project in downtown Shakopee
e] Rep. Becky Kelso re: Homeowners' tax increases in
Shakopee
f]) Zachary Zoul re: Siting. of a new Veterans Home 9] PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
101 Boards and Commissions:
Downtown Committee and Community Development Commission:
a) Pedestrian Underpass for the Downtown Mini Bypass
11] Reports from Staff:
a] Spring Clean-Up Day
b] Taco John's Restaurant - tabled March 21, 1989
C) Location for Second Fire Station
TENTATIVE AGENDA
April 18, 1989
Page -2-
11] Reports from Staff continued:
d] Sidewalk Replacement/Repair Policy
e] 5th Avenue, Spencer Street to Market Street
f] Marschall Road (CR-17) Sidewalk - Res. No. 3020
g] OSM Contract Extension - Deans Lake Drainage Basin
h] Health & Life Reimbursement in Lieu of Health
Maintenance Accounts - tabled March 21, 1989
i] Fire Service Agreements
j ] Property Liability Insurance
k] Sewer Bill Adjustments
*1] Recording Secretary Employment Agreement
m] Approve Bills in Amount of $454, 681. 31
n] Agreement with Mn/DOT for Bridge Design for Proposed
T.H. 101 Bypass Project - Res. No. 3042
12] Resolutions and Ordinances:
a] Res. No. 3035, Ordering the Preparation of A Report on
Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane
b] Delete
c] Res. No. 3041, Revising the City of Shakopee's Standard
Specifications
*d] Res. No. 3040, Amending Res. No. 2983, A Resolution of
Affirmative Action in Employment
e] Ord. No. 263, Amending the Policy on Snow Removal from
Sidewalks
*f] Res. No. 3038, Release of Easement to Jim Hauer
*g] Res. No. 3039, Release of Easement to Chad Fauks
13] Other Business:
a] Council correspondence and dissemination of information
between various members of the Council and with other
groups
b]
C]
14] Adjourn
Dennis R. Kraft
Acting City Administrator
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 21, 1989
Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Clay, Vierling, Zak, Wampach and Scott present. Also present
were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; Barry Stock,
Administrative Assistant; Douglas Wise, City Planner; David
Hutton, City Engineer; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A.
Collar II, City Attorney.
Liaison reports were given by the councilmembers.
Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished
to address anything not on the agenda.
Gale Fink, 2330 Berg Drive, stated he had a concern on the rate
of his taxes and why they are so high this year. He said he
feels that the proposed mini bypass bridge and the CR-18 bridge
are wasteful spending.
Dennis Kraft reviewed where some of the funds for the bridge will
be coming from. He said for the downtown bridge and mini bypass,
the City has pledged money from tax increment proceeds, as its
share, to the project. The State and Federal government will
pick up the remainder. In terms of the Highway 18 bridge the
City is contributing no funds toward the project.
Cncl. Vierling expressed a concern that the 101/169 bridge is not
structurally safe. The City Engineer replied that the bridge is
not structurally deficient at this time, it is deficient in
capacity.
Jim MCCure, 4th Street, asked if there was anything that could be
done to prevent any of this wasted spending to save on taxes.
Floyd Corns, 1034 So. Main, said he fully supports Mayor Lebens
and wanted to know if K-mart was going to be off the tax rolls
for the next 20 years. Cncl. Clay answered that they are paying
taxes like others and sending it to the County and the County
distributes it.
Mike Mobley, 4th Avenue, said he feels that if the City has the
money then use it, if not then don't spend it.
A question was asked by a member of the audience as to how tax
increment financing benefits more than regular taxes. Dennis
Kraft replied that it is the distribution of the monies that is
different and it may or may not be beneficial to certain parties.
Linda Duede, 8th and Apgar, had a concern on the K-mart increment
money not going into the school district.
Proceedings of the City Council
March 21, 1989 Page 2
Barry Stock spoke on tax increment financing and the City's
policy on the use of TIF. He said Shakopee's policy is based on
what the surrounding communities are doing.
Dennis Kraft said a meeting will be held between the Shakopee
City Council, the Board of Independent School District #720 and
the Scott County Commissioners on Monday April 3 at 7: 00 p.m. in
the Central Elementary Gymnasium and the purpose of this meeting
will be to develop a plan to respond to tax payer issues. It
will be a public meeting.
Sohn Albinson, Scott Realty, said he does not feel Shakopee will
attract new businesses without tax increment financing.
Ruth Bayless, Certainteed Corp. asked why the existing industry
cannot encourage hiring individuals from Shakopee.
Dennis Norland expressed his opinion that he is not happy with
the spending that the City seems to be doing.
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the consent business.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of March 7, 1989.
(Approved under consent business) .
Wampach/Zak moved to remove the public hearing issue from the
table. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on proposed
public improvements to 3rd Avenue between Spencer and Shumway and
all North-South streets between 3rd and 4th Avenues within these
project limits - Project 1989-5. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer gave a brief presentation to the audience. He
said this project is a reconstruction of 3rd Avenue. It will
include replacing the sanitary sewer and water main, replace any
curb and gutter and defective sidewalks, and adding storm sewers
where needed. The estimated construction cost is 1. 1 million.
Water mains and storm sewers will not be assessed. 25% of the
street and sidewalk will be assessable. The assessment will be
$22.00 per foot for properties that have frontage on 3rd Avenue.
The assessments can be spread out over a period of 10 years. The
project will be done this year and will not be put on the tax
rolls until 1991.
The Mayor asked if there were any questions from the audience.
-
One person expressed concern about construction during St. Marks
festival. The City Engineer explained that construction can be
controlled so as not to not take place there during the festival.
Proceedings of the City Council
March 21, 1989 Page 3
Wampach/Vierling moved to close the public hearing. Motion
carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved to remove Resolution No. 3021 from the table.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3021, A Resolution Ordering
an Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications
for 3rd Avenue Between Spencer Street and Shumway Street, Scott
Street Between 2nd Avenue and 4th Avenue, and Atwood, Fuller,
Lewis, Sommerville, and Spencer Streets all Between 3rd Avenue
and 4th Avenue, Project No. 1989-5 and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous with Cncl. Wampach abstaining.
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Wampach moved for a 15 minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Wampach moved to reconvene to City Council at 9: 10 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the preliminary plat of Heritage Place
2nd Addition located south of Heritage Place 1st Addition and
north of Vierling Drive. He said it Consists of 102 lots and the
Planning Commission recommended its approval.
Vierling/Wampach moved to approve the preliminary plat for
Heritage Place 2nd Addition subject to the conditions recommended
by the Planning Commission as contained in their minutes of March
9, 1989. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner reviewed the Final Plat of Kubes 2nd Addition
located in the NE corner of the intersection of CR 79 and CR 72.
He said it is a subdivision containing seven lots ranging in size
from 3 .8 acres to 10 acres in an R1 zone. Cncl. Vierling had a
concern on the lots being subdivided when water and sewer is
available. The City Planner replied that it would be at least 10
years or more before sewer and water would come out that way.
Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 3027 A Resolution Approving
the Final Plat of Kubes 2nd Addition, and moved it's adoption.
Motion carried with Cncl. Clay abstaining.
Vierling/Clay moved to recess for a Housing and Redevelopment
Authority meeting at 9: 17 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to reconvene to City Council and 9:40 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Barry Stock addressed the issue of how the City is going to
handle yard wastes this spring. He reviewed the alternatives
Proceedings of the City Council
March 21, 1989 Page 4
available to the City: contracting to have collection of yard
waste on a weekly basis, solicit bids from other providers for
the collection of yard waste, or utilize city street department
staff to collect yard waste.
Vierling/Scott moved to authorize appropriate City official to
execute refuse/recycling contract amendment #2 with Waste
Management, Inc. providing for the collection of yard waste on a
weekly basis between the months of May through October. Motion
carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to direct the appropriate City officials to
begin a program to assist Shakopee residents in preparing the
appropriate documentation for the qualifying tax increase refund.
Motion carried unanimously.
Barry Stock reviewed the alternatives regarding the downtown
plantings that need to be replanted this year in the downtown
area. He said he talked to the Cub Scouts and they will
participate in the plantings.
Vierling/Scott moved that the appropriate City officials be
directed to order plantings for the Phase I Part I area at a cost
not to exceed $250 and request the Shakopee Cub Scouts to plant
the plantings and to clean up Murphy's Landing.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes; None Motion carried.
The City Planner gave an update on the House parked near the
intersection of County Road 16 and 83 . He said several weeks ago
Mr. William Otting parked a house on his property. He has had
some complaints filed on him in the past. The County has
determined that the house in not on the right-of-way and is not
creating a safety hazard. The City ATtorney explained that a
formal complaint has been filed with the court. He explained
that that is a long process and that an alternative would be to
start civil action against him.
Scott/Vierling moved to have the City Attorney handle this matter
in the most effective way he deems necessary. (House parked near
the intersection of CR-16 and CR-83) Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to waive the procedural policy and appoint
Ruth Bayless, Gwen Solseth and LaVern Johnson to the Shakopee
Youth Building Committee for a two year term ending January 31,
1991; and appoint Ed Giesen and Dick Marks to the Shakopee Youth
Building Committee for a one year term ending January 31, 1990.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
The Acting City Administrator reviewed the draft agreement
between Minnesota Valley Restoration Project and the City for
Proceedings of the City Council
March 21, 1989 Page 5
operation of Murphy's Landing. The drafted Resolution commits
$50,000 to MVRP for 1989. Cncl. Vierling said she feels the
Resolution should read up to $50,000. Dr. Pistulka, said that
the $50,000 was for the hiring of a Program Director and payments
for electrical and sewer problems and that there is a need for
the full amount. He said that the discussion was on providing
MVRP $50,000 per year for three years.
Zak/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3031, A Resolution
Authorizing the Payment to Minnesota Valley Restoration Project,
Inc. as Hereinafter Provided, and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Wampach/Vierling moved to authorize the proper City officials to
execute the agreement before the Council with Minnesota Valley
Restoration Project for the operation of Murphy's Landing.
Motion carried unanimously. _
Vierling/Wampach moved that services be continued with Mr.
Streefland as desired by Minnesota Valley Restoration Project.
Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved that the appropriate City staff reimburse
Gold Nugget Development Inc. associated with the street and
watermain oversizing those costs in the total amount of
$31,974.43 to come out of the contingency fund and direct staff
to submit an invoice to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
in the amount of $24,031.00 for the watermain oversizing costs.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved to terminate the LEO hiring process that was
started in 1988. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to start a new LEO hiring process. Roll Call:
Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Zak, Scott, Wampach, Vierling
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Scott/Vierling moved to authorize Police Department to advertise
for and hire an additional patrol officer effective May 1, 1989.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize the appropriate City staff to
advertise and hire an Engineering Technician II and make the
present MIS Coordinator/Engineering Technician a full-time MIS
Coordinator.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Proceedings of the City Council
March 21, 1989 Page 6
Clay/Vierling moved to purchase a 42" lateral file through the
Hennepin County Purchasing Cooperative in the amount of $564 .50.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
Vierling/Wampach moved to approve purchase of two AT PC's and one
386 PC plus ArcNet cards as described from PC-Express for a total
cost of $8,474. Funds to come from HRA and City Capital
Equipment budgets.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Zak, Wampach
Noes: Mayor Lebens, Cool. Scott abstaining
Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the purchase of 15 fire fighter
helmets at $110.00 each from Smeal Fire Equipment Company, and
use the remaining $550. 00 to modify storage equipment. (Motion
approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the purchase of four automatic
nozzles from Minnesota Conway Fire and Safety for $1, 696.00.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the purchase of Heavy Duty Vetter
Salvage Vacuum from Smeal Fire Equipment Company for $1,751.00.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the purchase of portable pump from
Smeal Fire Equipment Company for $2,559.80. (Motion approved
under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the purchase from Smeal Fire
Equipment Company 15 50-foot lengths 2-1/2" hose at $2,550. 00 and
10 50-foot lengths 1-3/4" hose at $1,470. 00. For a total cost of
$4, 020. 00 (Motion approved under consent business) .
Vierling/Zak moved to authorize the Public Works Department to
purchase a SUN Model VAT-60 electronic tester from Sun Electric
Corp. of Eden Prairie, MN. , for $1, 036. 00.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Zak, Scott, Vierling, Wampach
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved to accept the submitted specifications for a
utility tractor to be used by the Public Works department as
presented, and set the bid opening date for April 25, 1989 at
2 :00 p.m.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Zak, Scott, Vierling, Wampach
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Vierling/Clay moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$234,516.90.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Proceedings of the City Council
March 21, 1989 Page 7
Clay/Vierling moved to approve payment to Stephen Hurley in the
amount of $435.00 for travel/subsistence reimbursement. (Motion
approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to table the Health and Life Reimbursement in
Lieu of Health Maintenance Accounts to April 18, 1989. (Motion
approved under consent business) .
Wampach/Vierling moved to table the issue of the retaining wall
at Taco John's due to the fact that both Mr. Plaisted and Mr.
Houser are out of town. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3030, Relating to Minnesota
River Valley Redevelopment Project No. 1; Calling for a Public
Hearing on the Adoption of a Modification to the Redevelopment
Plan for the Project, the Establishment of Tax Increment
Financing District No. 7 in the Project Area, and the Adoption of
a Tax Increment Financing Plan Therefore, and moved it's adoption
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Zak, Vierling, Clay i
Noes: Cncl. Scott, Wampach and Mayor Lebens
Motion fails.
Clay/Vierling Offered Resolution No. 3024, A Resolution Amending
Resolution 2989 Adopting the 1989 Budget and moved for its
adoption. (Motion approved under consent business) .
Scott/Vierling moved to transfer the replaced Shakopee Police
squad car to the Shakopee Fire Department for the Fire Chief's
use. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to concur with the Claims Committee and
pay 508 of the sewer hook-up claim of Jim Mork.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Zak moved to approve the agenda for the Public Working
Session of the City, School District and Scott County Policy
Bodies on 1989 tax issues to be held Monday, April 3, 1989.
Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to recess for Executive Session at 11:00 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Zak moved to reconvene to City Council at 11:30 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to approve the Police Officer Labor Contract
proposal as presented. The agreement provides for 3 1/28 salary"
increase for 1988 and an additional 3 1/28 increase for 1989.
The agreement provides for our additional $10 per month increase
in insurance benefits in 1988 and an additional $10 per month for
Proceedings of the City Council
March 21, 1989 Page 8
1989. There will be no increase in either longevity benefits or
uniform allowances for 1988 or 1989.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved that when additional labor data is
available along with any changes in comp worth law that this be
made available to Cy Smythe and the City Administrator for
consideration and future study. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Scott moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adpj'njlour ed at 11: 32 p.m.
it"fi S 'Cox
C¢.ty Clerk
Carol Schultz
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 4, 1989
Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Vierling, Zak, Scott and Clay present. Cncl. Wampach was absent.
Also present were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; David
Hutton, City Engineer; Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant;
Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Collar II, City
Attorney.
Clay/Vierling moved to recess to HILA meeting. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved to reconvene to City Council at 7:03 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers.
Cncl. Zak read a letter from the Community Development Commission
requesting the City's reconsideration of the MEBCO project
wishing to locate in Shakopee.
Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was no
response.
Vierling/Clay moved to approve the consent business.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved to acknowledge receipt of the bulletin from
Vern Peterson, Association of Metropolitan Municipalities dated
March 21, 1989, regarding the Annual Meeting May 31, 1989. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mel Bolster, owner of MEBCO Industries, was present and reviewed
the MEBCO Company. He said they have been in business 11 years
and are now the 2nd largest manufacturer of hair combs in the
United States. Today they employ 65 people and by next fall will
be up to 100.
Clay/Vierling moved to table the letter from Becky Kelso
regarding the spilling of sand and gravel on city streets, until
Cncl. Wampach returns. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to receive and file the letter from John
Bisek, regarding erosion and sediment control in urbanizing
areas. Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to receive and file the letter from the
-
Shakopee School Board regarding erroneous statements made by
Cncl. Scott.
Proceedings of the Shakopee April 4, 1989
City Council Page 2
Cncl. Scott Stated that he believes that erroneous statements
have been made by the School Board. He does not believe that his
statements are in error.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to open the public hearing on MEBCO Industrial
Development Revenue Bonds. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to receive and place on file the affidavits of
publication of the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Dennis Kraft reviewed the MEBCO proposal saying they wish to
construct a building of 60,000 square feet. Bonds to be issued
for this purpose will be industrial development revenue bonds
with a maximum face value of $2,300,000. The City will have no
responsibility to service this debt. Mayor Lebens asked if there
was anyone from the audience who wished to address this issue.
There was no response.
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3036, A Resolution Giving
Preliminary Approval to a Project on Behalf of MEBCO Industries,
and its Financing under the Municipal Industrial Development Act;
Referring the Proposal to the Minnesota Department of Trade and
Economic Development for Approval; and Authorizing Preparation of
Necessary Documents, and moved it's adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Zak and Clay
Noes: Cncl. Scott and Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Vierling/Clay moved to direct the appropriate City officials to
negotiate an agreement with New Frontier Productions Inc. , for
the provision of public access studio management and operation
and recommend that the Shakopee Access Corporation enter into an
agreement with New Frontier Productions, Inc. (Approved under
consent business) .
Barry Stock reviewed the 2nd Annual Derby Days coming up on
August 5-6, 1989. They have changed the celebration to Lions
Park. There were concerns regarding police officers on duty and
parking availability. Mayor Lebens asked if there was to be beer
sold on premises. Barry Stock answered there will be a beer
garden.
Scott/Vierling moved to approve the Chamber of Commerce request
for inkind assistance for the proposed Derby Days Celebration and
granted permission for the following:
1. Provision of city park or maintenance crews to assist in
set-up and clean-up of the area before and after the event.
Proceedings of the Shakopee April 4, 1989
City Council Page 3
2. Provision of a police officer on the evening of August 6th
for the Bob and Beachcombers concert.
3. Permission for the sale of goods on public property.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Zak and Scott
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Barry Stock reviewed the Minnesota River Valley Trail License
Agreement. Steve Rose from the DNR was present and reviewed
their request to extend the trail through Murphy's Landing. Cncl.
Scott asked if the trail through Murphy's would be fenced off so
as not to allow access into the park itself. Steve Rose, DNR,
was present and said they would be working with Murphyis Landing
on it.
Vierling/Zak moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
execute the trail license agreement providing for the extension
of the Minnesota River Valley Trail through Murphy's Landing and
subsequent City properties lying within the proposed trail
alignment. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved to authorize the proper city officials to
execute the proposed labor contract for 1988-89 for the Police
Union. (Approved under consent business) .
Vierling/Clay moved to accept the low quotation from Pump and
Meter Service Co. , for $7,528.00 to replace a hoist in the Public
Works garage. This hoist replacement is not to exceed $9,500.
Rall Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Clay moved to approve the updated deferred compensation
plan with the U.S. Conference of Mayors and authorize the
appropriate city officials to execute the necessary documents.
(Approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$413,015. 10.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
David Hutton reviewed the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed
District and Lower Minnesota Watershed District - Joint Powers
agreement. The agreement does not hold the City responsible in
any way. The City will assume the responsibility for the
maintenance of that portion of the outlet channel through
Shakopee assuming that the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed
District complies with all other requirements. He also stated
that the Assistant City Attorney has received the agreement.
Proceedings of the Shakopee April 4, 1989
City Council Page 4
Clay/Vierling moved to direct the appropriate City staff to
respond to Mr. Sorenson that the City has no objections to the
proposed joint powers agreement between the Lower Minnesota
Watershed District and the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Watershed
District. Motion carried unanimously.
Scott/Clay moved to take a 10 minute break. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Scott moved to reconvene to City Council at 8:10 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Scott/Zak moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
execute a contract extension agreement with Orr-Schelen-Mayeron
and Associates, Inc. of Minneapolis, MN to perform design
services associated with the 5th Avenue Extension Project (1989-
4) per the proposed Scope of Services for a fee not to exceed
$16,800. 00.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
The City Engineer reviewed the sidewalk replacement policy. He
said there currently is no formal repair policy. The current
policy requires that the property owner pay 100% of it. The
proposed policy would require an inspection of sidewalks on an
annual basis. The City would be divided into zones and one zone
would be inspected each year. All defective sidewalks within the
zone would be repaired. If the sidewalk is less than 5 years old
the City should pay 1003 of the cost, if it is older than 5 years
then the cost would be shared 50-50. Consensus was to review the
recommendations presented by staff and bring back comments in two
weeks.
Vierling/Scott moved to direct staff to cease working on the
feasibility report for street improvements to Market Street
between 1st Avenue and 7th Avenue until such time as the Council
determines the improvement to be necessary. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Engineer said the City maps are outdated and should be
redone.
Vierling/Clay moved to print all maps and composites splitting
the cost among Building, Engineering, Planning, and Public Works
for a total cost of $1,711.00.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
George Muenchow, Director, Shakopee Community Recreation,
requested permission to purchase and erect a swimming pool sun
Proceedings of the Shakopee April 4, 1989
City Council Page 5
shelter at a cost of $7,054.52. Cncl. Scott said he did not feel
it a necessary expense. Cncl. Zak had a concern as to whether it
was needed at this time. Cncl. Vierling had a concern on wind
damage and fading. Mr. Muenchow responded to councilmembers
concerns.
Clay/Vierling moved to authorize the purchase and erection of a
40ft by 24ft sun shelter from Minnesota Playground, Inc. at the
cost of $7, 054 .52 to be erected in the concession area of the
Shakopee Municipal Swimming Pool.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Clay and Mayor Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Scott and Zak Motion carried.
Vierling/Clay moved to table ordering the preparation of a report
on drainage improvements to Boiling Springs Lane for two weeks.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3033 , A Resolution
Initiating the Vacation of Utility and Drainage Easements in Lot
1, Block 2 , Valley Rich 1st Addition, Scott County, Minnesota,
and moved for its adoption. (Approved under consent business) .
Vierling/Clay offered Resolution No. 3034, A Resolution
Initiating the Vacation of a 160 foot Drainage Easement Lying
within Lot 1, Block 1, Clay's lst Addition, and moved for its
adoption. (Approved under consent business) .
Dennis Kraft said the City has been receiving requests for
adjustments to sewer bills as a result of the fall lawn watering.
Mayor Lebens said the billing was based on water use from
December to March. She asked Dennis to check into this matter
further.
Cool. Scott had a concern on whether or not there is any form of
insurance available to the councilmembers. Mayor Lebens said
that this was looked into before and that the insurance company
will not go along with it because Councilmembers can not document
the minimum number of hours which must be worked per week to be
eligible for coverage. He feels there should be some compensating
device made available to the councilmembers. He requested staff
to look into other programs and also to check what benefits other
Councils may have.
Vierling/Scott moved to adjourn to April 18, 1989 at 7: 00 p.m.
tion ar ie unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
J d th S. Cox
t Clerk
Carol L. Schultz
Recording Secretary
Minnesota
'\ Becky Kelso House of 5L
District 36AdC Representatives
Scott and Carver Counties iR.
Committees:
Education
Health and Human Services,Vice Chair
Economic Development and Housing
Business Finance Subcommittee,
Vice Chair March 21 , 1989
Future and Technology
Long Term Health Care Commission
Dennis R. Kraft
Acting City Administrator
city of Shakopee
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379-1376
Dear Dennis:
Thank you for your letter regarding the spilling of sand and
gravel on city streets.
After discussing this issue with our research people, I would
like to relay some of their advice for your discussion. I'm
told that, if trucks are not overloaded, sand or gravel should
not spill from them even in the most extreme weather con-
ditions. You may want to check to see if weight limits can
be enforced more effectively.
It may also be worthwhile to talk with your local businesses
which are most likely to be involved in this type of hauling
and request that they make a greater effort to cover their trucks
and maintain weight limits.
I am certainly willing to introduce legislaiton mandating covers,
but I'm told trucking companies are bitterly opposed to the
idea and that it would be very difficult to obtain passage of
such legislation. In most situations, I try to consider legis-
lation as a last resort to problem solving.
I will await your reply.
S' c rely,
Becky Keao
State Representative
BKdp
3107
Reilly to ❑ 329 State office euiNing,St.Paul,Minnesota 55155 Office:(612)296"1072
0 151 S.Shannon D.,ShaWWe.Minnesota 55379 Home:(612)665.6658
`CONSENT
CiTTY
April 6, 1989
City of Shakopee
129 E. lst.
Shakopee , MN 55379
Dear Barry
Please allow me to offer my resignation from the CDC.
Recently, my work load has not allowed me the time I need to devote
to my position on the commission.
I have found the time spent to be most enjoyable and a great
learning experience .
I am sorry that I have not the time to continue my term.
Sincerely,�y
Donald Koopmann
Action Requested
Accept resignation from Donald Koopmann from the Community
Development Commission with regrets.
GTheSic-
The
Laurent Building 128 South Fuller Street Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
f0AUREN phone:8121445-6745
BUILDERS,INC.
April 13, 1989
Shakopee City Council
ATTN: Building Department
City of Shakopee
129 First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Soon, Stonebrooke Golf Club will be open for play. In order to best
serve the golfing public it is our desire to have the first phase of the
club house facility cogripleted as soon as possible. As such, we are
requesting approval of a fast track permit so that, pior to complete plan
review by the city and the Department of Health, we can complete the
following items;
Excavation and backfill
Foundation and floor slab
Underslab rough-ins
Wast management system (sewer disposal). -,
This approval would also allow more time for turf mending in the
club house complex prior to opening.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely, L
�� /i 6dunkil
Randy R. Laurent
RRL;at
Jug
A. Gpr
"Our Reputation is Building"
ea-
MEMO TO: City Council
FROM: Fulton Schleisman, Building Inspector
RE: Stonebrooke Golf Club/Fast Tracking Building Permit
DATE: April 14, 1989
INTRODUCTION
The Stonebrooke Golf Club developers have requested approval to
fast track the building permit process, as allowed by City Code
(Resolution No. 2605, attached) .
BACKGROUND
Stonebrooke Golf Club for reasons stated in their letter dated
April 13, 1989, (attached) , is requesting Council approval to
fast track the construction of the club house facility.
The resolution which sets forth the fast tracking process is also
attached.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the fast tracking process for this project, charging
a fee to cover additional City expenses.
2. Deny the request for fast tracking.
RECOMMENDATION
We recommend alternative number 1.
ACTION REQUESTED
Move to approve the fast tracking process for the Stonebrooke
Golf Club clubhouse facility, charging a fee to cover additional
City staff expenses.
FS:cah
Attachments
� x}
I / RESOLUTION NO. 2605 Ci
A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH A FAST TRACKING
PROCESS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS
WHEREAS, the procedure followed by the City of Shakopee for
the issuance of building permits includes the submission of a
building permit application as well as building plans by the
pplicant for review by staff, and
WHEREAS, the procedure also allows staff three to five days
to process the application, and
WHEREAS, upon occasion an applicant wishes to fast track the
procedure for issuance of building permits.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
I . The building permit process may be fast tracked at the staff
level for projects, when in conformance with zoning and
subdivision requirements, as follows:
a. issuance of a grading permit
f b. prior to issuance of a building permit, issuance of a
`- footing permit only may be granted for an R-1 or an R-2
zoning district
C. a footing permit only may be issued prior to the
Planning Commission public hearing on a conditional use
Permit (CUP) request for an addition to a building
which was Originally constructed with a CUP, provided
the applicant signs a hold harmless statement with the
City.
2. The building permit process may be fast tracked, when
authorized by Council, for multi-family, commercial and
industrial projects in conformance with zoning and
Subdivision requirements, as follows:
a. When desirable to get footings in before the winter
freeze-up
b. To facilitate compliance with the requirements of other
governmental ,agencies
C. To commence projects dependent upon public financing
requirements
d. To commence projects requiring clean up from major
l accidents or disasters.
Resolution No. 2605
Page Two
3 . There shall be a fee for fast tracking the building permit
process to cover additional city expenses which shall be set
forth in the city' s fee resolution.
Adopted in
C' t1,g session of the City Council of the
y of Shakopee, ,JMinne�ota, held this /yam
1986 . day of
Mayor of the City Or Shakopee
ATTEST:
city Clerk
Approved as to form this LI
day of - 1986.
City A� rney
Resolution No. 2605
g �
?age Two
3. There shall be a fee for fast tracking the building permit
process to cover additional city expenses which shall be set
forth in the city' s fee resolution.
.
Adopted in session of the City C2uncil of the
City o` Shakopee, ,JMinnegota, held this /9 g day of
1986.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
,
City ,Clerk
Approved as to form this Z
day of ,: 1986.
l
City A` rney
2J
MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the
TH 169 "Mini-Bypass" and and Bridge Project in
Downtown Shakopee
DATE: April 12, 1989
Introduction
Attached please find correspondence from the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) which indicates a finding of no significant
impact for the Mini-Bypass and Bridge Project in downtown
Shakopee.
Background
The City of Shakopee and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation have been working for the past several years on
the design and construction of the so-called Mini-Bypass Project
in downtown Shakopee. This project also includes a new bridge
crossing over the Minnesota River.
The issuance of this FONSI will result in the Minnesota
Department of Transportation (MnDOT) proceeding with the design
and construction of the bridge and mini-bypass. I would like to
point out to the City Council that there are four conditions
attached to the FONSI which must be complied with.
Alternatives
1. Receive and file the FONSI.
2. Do not receive and file the FONSI and direct the City
Administrator or City Engineer to take other action on this
document.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the
FONSI from the Federal Highway Administration.
Action Requested
Move to receive and file the Finding of No Significant Impact for
Minnesota Project BRF005-2 S.P. 7009-52 (TH 169) over the
Minnesota River and approaches and CBD Mini-Bypass for the City
of Shakopee.
DRK/jms
a gJ---
U$DepOf}n1 t Reg 5 Suite 0.90.Moro Spuare 9uJClllg
OfTfOfiSIJOfIOfiOn MlnresoN o'vivon nh Roperls Sheets
Federal Highway :m PaM.M..
Administration April 11, 1989
Mayor Dolores M. Lebens
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379-1376 - -- -
Re: BRF 005-2 ( )
TH 169 over Minnesota River
and approaches and the TH
101 Mini-Bypass, Shakopee
Dear Mayor Lebens:
Your letter dated March 3, 1989 to Division Administrator Charles
E. Foslien was carefully reviewed and considered before the
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was issued for the
referenced project. We also reviewed and considered letters from
other members of the Shakopee City Council along with the
remaining project related documentation before making the FONSI.
A copy of the FONSI is enclosed for your information. Subject to
the conditions noted in the document, the FONSI allows Mn/DOT to
proceed with Right-of-Way acquisition and final design.
Sincerely yours,
Charles E. Foslien
Division Administrator
�: �A/ �
ByAen
District Engineer
DepWmen
0t Re s SWe 490.M&ro Sgwre BUJevq
IOnspOanon Mmesau Division 7108 Aa sSeem
FodNd HWwmy St Paul,Mwuyye 55101
Admiristroum ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
For
Minnesota Project BRF 005-2 ( )
S.P. 7009-52 (TH 169)
TH 169 over Minnesota River
and Approaches
and CBD Mini-Bypass
City of Shakopee
Scott County
The FHWA has determined, subject to the conditions attached, that
the proposed replacement of the TH 169 crossing of the Minnesota
River with a 4-lane bridge on new location and the proposed
construction of the TH 101 CBD Mini-Bypass (Alternative 7A) in
the City of Shakopee as described in the Environmental Assessment
(EA) and other supporting documentation (copies attached to the
FHWA copy of this finding) will have no significant impact on the
human environment. The environmental assessment, the public
hearing transcript, the December 28, 1988 letter from the
Minnesota Historical Society, The Mn/DOT June 25, 1987 letter of
request with attachments, the Mn/DOT February 3 , 1989 letter of
request with attachments and the Mn/DOT February 1, 1989 letter
to Shakopee Mayor Dolores M. Lebens have been independently
evaluated by' the FHWA and determined to adequately and accurately
discuss the need, environmental issues, and impacts of the
proposed project and appropriate mitigation measures. The
documents provide sufficient evidence and analysis for
determining that an EIS is not required. The FHWA takes full
responsiblity for the accuracy, scope, and content of the
attached documents.
Attached are conditions upon this finding. Failure to
satisfactorily comply with these conditions could result in
withdrawl of this finding and a determination that an EIS is
required.
^ /J �7 Cj
0 V C3-� �-� LSV z
Charles E. Foslien Date
Division Administrator
Attachments
Attachment to FONSI
Conditions for Finding of No significant Impact for
SRF 005-2 ( ) , S.P. 7009-52
1. Construction of the mini-bypass must include provision of a
safe and efficient pedestrian crossing between the Shakopee CBD
and the senior citizens' center.
2. Vertical clearance over Levee Drive must be consistent with
the city's official plans for Levee Drive.
3 . Construction of the mini-bypass must not cause a net loss to
parking facilities in the vacinity of the Shakopee CBD.
4. Mn/DOT must provide a study indicating what improvements are
needed to keep the existing bridge open to pedestrians and
bicyclists, how and when these improvements will be funded, and
what public agency will be responsible for operations,
maintenance and enforcement activities on the old bridge.
Minnesota X'
Becky Kelso House of
District 36A
Scott and Carver Counties - - _ Representatives
committees: -
Education
Health and Human Services,Vice Chair
Economic Development and Housing
Business Finance Subcommittee,
Vice Chair
Future and Technology
Long Term Health Care Commission
April 71 1989
Dennis Kraft, Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 First Avenue E.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Dennis:
Enclosed is a copy of a memorandum from one of our House researchers.
I had requested an explanation of our Shakopee situation regarding
home owners' tax increases just for my own understanding. I
thought the last portion of this memo regarding the homestead
credit might be of interest to you.
I believe the basis of the suburban property tax crisis is that
increases in values and demand for local services have exceeded
our ability to "blunt" those increases with the homestead credit.
In other words, I'm afraid that, to a certain extent, the problem
is here to stay.
Sincerely,
Becky Kel
State Ee esentative
BKdp
Enclosure
Reply to: ❑ 329 State o Bulking,St.Paul,Mianesom 56155 of ice:(612)29&1on
❑ 151 S.Shannon Drive,Shakopee,Minnesota 55379 Home:(612)645-6656
Research Department
Director Kerry Korey Fine
Cemle Pagones Minnesota House of Representatives John Hellard
Stephen D. Hr.
Assuiarc Durenor 600 Stam Office Building, St. Paul, MN SS155 Lisa P. I..
Thonus M. Tadd (612) 296-6/53 Mary lane Uhnem
Stwso B- Dass
Legal Scrums Coordinator Deborah K McKnight
Joel T. Michael Jayne Sprenthall Rankin
Samuel W. Rankin
Public finance Coordinator Bonnie G. Resnick
Alan R Boatman '4�5' 1989 Emily Shapim
Mark Shepard
Karen M. Baker Timothy 2 Stmm
Maureen Belli, Linda S. Taylor
Randall Chan Susan undin
James D. Cl., John Williams
Gary K Curti. Douglas S. Wilran
P.m.. G. Dalton Lung-Fm Wong
TO: Representative Becky Kelso
FROM: Pat Dalton, Legislative Analyst
RE: Shakopee Home Owners' Tax Increases
There are three major factors that contributed to the 60-100 percent property tax increase experienced by
Shakopee homeowners. One factor is the 25 percent increase in local tax rates, another is the 8.9 percent
increase in value for the average home in the city, and the third is the classification and homestead credit
that currently are part of the Minnesota property tax system.
It is difficult to directly compare factors influencing final taxes between 1988 and 1989 because of the new
property tax system that went into effect in 1989. Tax capacity rates have replaced mill rates and tax
capacities have replaced assessed values. To make an explanation of the causes of the tax increase easier to
understand, the 1988 mill rates and assessed values have been converted to tax capacity rates and tax
capacities in the example given in this memo. Although the conversions are not totally accurate, they are
close enough to illustrate what occurred in Shakopee in 1989.
Lew Increase
The fust factor that influenced the tax increase was a 25 percent increase in tax capacity rate (mill rate under
the old system). The tax capacity rate went from about 94 percent in 1988 to 118 percent in 1989. This
increase was mainly due to:
• a county levy increase of 13 percent
• a school levy increase of 50 percent of which
i) 1/2 was from a referendum levy
u) 1/4 was due to changes in state aid
w) 1/5 was due to a wanly auditor error
iv) the rest was due to miscellaneous causes.
Properly Value Inulase
The second factor that influenced the tax increase was the increase in the average home value of 8.9 percent.
This was larger than the sec percent increase in value for all property in Shakopee. Because of tiers in the
classification system (217 percent of fust $68,000 of home,25 percent on part of home between$68,000 -
$100,000,33 percent on the remainder) and because the average home in Shakopee is worth$70,000, the
increase in gross tax capacity of a home (assessed value in old system) is larger than 8.9 percent The gross
tax capacity of a 570,000 home in Shakopee increased 10 percent between 1988 and 1989. The gross tax
capacity of a$150,000 house increased by 12 percent.
Research Department April 5, 1989
Minnesota House of Representatives Page 2
The table below illustrates the effect of the tax rate increase and home value increase on the property taxes
on a typical house in Shakopee. The average home in Shakopee was assessed at about $70,000 in 1988. The
wmbined effect of the value increase and tax rate increase is a 38 percent increase in gross tax on this home
(line 4).
Examples of Property Tax Changes for a$70,000 House in Shakopee
Percent
1988 1989 Change
(1) Homestead Market Value $70,010 $76,230 8.9%
(2) Gross Tax Capacity 51,525 $1,681 10%
(3) Tax Capacity Rate 94% 118% 25%
(4) Gross Tax (3 x 2) $1,432 $1,984 38%
(5) Homestead Credit $700 $725 3.6%
(6) Net Tax(4- 5) $732 $1,259 72%
Homestead Credit
The third factor that influenced the final tax bill that a home owner received is the homestead credit.
Homestead credit pays 54 percent of the homeowner's tax bill on the fust $68,000 of value on the home up
to a certain maximum. In 1989 the maximum was increased from $700 to$725. The average Shakopee
homeowner already received 57110 in homestead credit, therefore only$25 of the $550 increase in gross tax is
paid by homestead credit. The remaining$525 becomes an increase in the net tax the homeowner pays. The
result was a 72% increase in net taxes for the house in the example. The fact that homestead credit pays
only a minimal portion of the gross tax increase is why a homeowner could receive a 60 percent or more
increase in net taxes even though gross taxes for homes in Shakopee went up only 35-40 percent.
PD/re
Saint Peter
Southern Minnesota Veterans Home Coalition
March 22, 1989
PEMPI V uQ
The Honorable Dolores Lebens
City of Shakopee MAR2 31989
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 CITY O'z
SHAKCFEE
Dear Mayor Lebens:
We would like your assistance in providing the Shakopee
City Council with the following information and include a
resolution of support as an item on your next meeting
agenda.
The Southern Minnesota Veterans Home Coalition would like
to call your attention to a proposal currently before the
Legislature regarding the siting of a new Veterans Home
in Health Service Area 6, a 27 county region in the
southwest quadrant of the State. Saint Peter is one of
four sites being considered by the Legislature for this
new State veterans home. The other sites under
consideration are Luverne, Worthington, and Willmar. The
Senate site selection process will be limited to these
four recommended sites. Final selection is expected to
be made during the current Legislative session.
This is a historic opportunity for our region, and the
communities and veterans within it. It is not often that
the State locates new facilities of this nature. The
proposed facility would consist of approximately 60 beds.
The important issue is service to southern Minnesota
veterans. Of the four recommended sites, Saint Peter is
best able to do this. Of the 50,000 veterans in our 27
county area, fifty percent (508) live within a fifty (50)
mile radius of Saint Peter. The facility will be highly
accessible to veterans and their families.
Veterans will have access to the most advanced,
specialized care available. The Saint Peter site lies 65
miles from the Minneapolis Veterans Administration
Medical Center, a state-of-the-art facility. Veterans
will be able to utilize a transportation system which
makes daily trips to this facility.
The Saint Peter site offers a shared services approach
which will expand availability of services to veterans,
as well as reducing construction and operational costs.
The Saint Peter Regional Treatment Center, adjacent to
the site, offers pyschiatric, general medical, laboratory
227 South Front Street Saint Peter, Minnesota 56082-0270 (507)931-4840
The Honorable Dolores Lebens Page 2
March 22, 1989 XXaa
v
and x-ray, and hearing impaired services which may be
utilized by the Veterans Home. In addition to
professional services, the Regional Treatment Center is
able to provide services including food, laundry, and
steam heating by utilizing existing excess capacity. The
Regional Treatment Center currently serves 575 patients
on a campus designed for 3,000. The Saint Peter site
enables both facilities to operate more efficiently at a
reduced cost to the State.
At its March 1 , 1989, meeting at the State Capitol, the
Region Nine Development Commission unanimously adopted a
resolution to support efforts to establish a Veterans
Home in Saint Peter. Their endorsement of the Saint
Peter site confirms the significance of this region-wide
issue.
We believe that a cooperative effort among cities in our
area is an effective demonstration of widespread support
for a new Veterans Home. The Southern Minnesota Veterans
Home Coalition requests your support by way of a
resolution endorsing the Coalition' s efforts to establish
a new Veterans Home in Saint Peter.
Working together, we can guarantee that the Saint Peter
Veterans Home site proposal receives serious
consideration before the Legislature. In this way,
veterans in our communities will benefit from quality
care close to home.
Sincerely,
(—SSOOUUTHHERRN MINNESOTA VETERANS HOME COALITION
Zachary Zt Zoul
Chairman
Enclosures
Qp THEC�T �]Si
i'�v of Saint Peter
yts'`'a—moi:, � `J,
Sallllt Minnesota Veterans Home
>ErEaM< Peter Site Proposal
SAINT PETER OFFERS VETS CO FM13NSM CART IN MUMMA
CE1?M OF DEM(ZEUww7CS Saint Peter is the demographic center of the
southwestern Minnesota veteran population. Fifty percent (50%) of the veteran
population lives within 50 miles of Saint Peter.' A majority of the veterans'
families could be with4, a one hour's dr-4--c of the facility. Most major
highways in southwestern Minnesota offer a direct route to Saint Peter.z
Cll14R TO VAMC The Saint Peter Veterans Home site lies 65 miles from the
Minneapolis Veterans Administration Medical Center,s a state-of-the-art medical
facility. Veterans would receive comprehensive medical care in their home state
of Minnesota. The route from Saint Peter to the VAMC is via four-lane Highway
169,4 maintained in excellent travel condition throughout the year.
SHARED SERVICES APPFDKZ The presence of the Saint Peter Regional Treatment
Center adjacent to the Veterans Home site offers a unique opportunity to utilize
the RTC's excess capacity in laundry, food service, steam heating and
recreation.5 Both state-owned facilities would benefit from improved cost-
effective operations.$
RIa1M= CDNSMKnaON CD= An estimated $500,000 savings on construction costs
could be realized due to the shared services approach, use of existing state-
owned lend, and City of Saint Peter financial contributions.v
^w,±v_ka:, !g'no1^'I^ ^igf4 Lag-term operatic.., n^eta _ "d be ;ig ifirmtl;.
reduced as a result of the shared services approach. Potential savings exist in
several areas including administrative and indirect care staff levels,
contracted professional services, utilities, food and drugs.$
POSITIVE SITE AMEN= The Saint Peter Veterans Home site is a 14 acre parcel
most suited for a nursing care facility because of notable physical attributes
and a supportive community environment. Veterans would enjoy a spectacular view
overlooking the Minnesota River Valley,$ and a convenient location in which they
have access to a great variety of educational, recreational and cultural
opportunities.10
ASSORED STAFFING Saint Peter anticipates no difficulty attracting qualified
personnel to staff the veterans home. Statistics indicate that 9.5,% of the
labor force have health care training. Area residents have access to
specialized health care training programs at Gustavus Adolphus College in Saint
Peter, and Mankato State University and Mankato Technical Institute in
Mankato."
1 Minnesota Department of Administration, Management Analysis
Division, Potential Siten for - Minnesota Yaterans Home, February 1989,
Appendix 7.21.
2 Saint Peter, Minnesota v t - Home Site PrQPQ , November 1986,
page 36.
3 Klein McCarthy & Co. , Ltd. and Gair & Associates, Veterans Home
S' .n Study, February 1989, Appendix II-2.
a Saint Peter Site Proposal, page 35.
s Saint Peter Site Proposal, pages 3-5.
e Department of Administration, page 45.
* Department of Administration, pages 45 and 95.
e Department of Administration, page 45.
s Klein McCarthy, Appendix IV-27 and 28.
io Saint Peter Site Proposal, pages 14-15 and 18-31.
li Saint Peter Site Proposal, pages 16-17.
F Aditional info,mation. contact:
Zachary Z. Zoul
City Administrator
227 South Front Street
Saint Peter, Minnesota 56082
(507) 931-4840
RESOLUTION NO. 3037 h
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING EFFORTS OF THE SOUTHERN MINNESOTA
VETERANS HOME COALITION TO ESTABLISH A MINNESOTA
VETERANS HOME IN SAINT PETER
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council recognizes that elderly
veterans comprise an increasing share of the total veterans
population; and
WHEREAS, many of these veterans will require nursing home
care; and
WHEREAS, the Saint Peter Veterans Home site lies in close
proximity to the Minneapolis Veterans Administration Medical
Center, a state-of-the-art facility providing highly specialized
care; and
WHEREAS, fifty percent (50%) of the Veteran population in
Health Service Area 6 lives within fifty (50) miles of Saint
Peter; and
WHEREAS, the shared services concept with the Saint Peter
Regional Treatment Center facility offers an excellent
opportunity to reduce construction and operation costs and
improve efficiency of both the regional treatment center and
veterans home; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Administration
Management Analysis Division recommended the Saint Peter site as
one of four sites which best meet the veterans home siting study
criteria.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, wholeheartedly endorses and supports
the efforts of the Southern Minnesota Veterans Home Coalition to
locate a Minnesota Veterans Home in Saint Peter and urges the
State Legislature to act favorably on behalf of this proposal.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST: Approved as to form this day
of 1989.
City Clerk City Attorney
G8habP ee CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU
April 14 , 1989
Dear Mayor Lebens and Council:
The Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce represents over 235
business interests in the Shakopee area. our Board of Directors
collectively represents retail , industry, civic, trades and
professional interests.
The Board of Directors would like to voice their concerns about
the Mebco Industries proposal to relocate in Shakopee. The Mebco
project would increase the annual property tax base thus
relieving the burden from current property tax payers. In
addition, the Mebco project would also increase the job force in
Shakopee creating 50 jobs initially and in excess of 400 new jobs
over the next five years. The Chamber believes economic
development projects of this nature are vital in preserving a
healthy business climate in Shakopee. In the most recent
Minnesota Labor Review, published by the Minnesota Department of
Jobs and Training, Scott County is listed with the highest
unemployment rate in the seven county metro area including
Minneapolis, St. Paul and Bloomington.
Because Mebco does meet the previously established criteria set
forth in the industrial development incentive policy, the
Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors at their
April 12 , 1989 meeting unanimously supported a public hearing for
the Mebco Project.
Thank you for your time and concern for the future of Shakopee
and its business interests.
Sincerely,
Georcfe Muenchow
President, Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce
1801 Trunk Hwy. 101 P.O. Box 203 Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 612-445-1660
Shakopee Area Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors:
Lee Markgraf, Kawasaki
Don Mertz, Bill's Toggery
Stan Nymeyer, Toro Co. 'Uy
Bud Berens, Berens Supermarket
Karen Martin, Treat Factory
George Muenchow, Community Services
Brad Flaagan, Casualty Assurance
Marilyn Hagerman, Transportation Coalition
Brian Norris, Citizens State Bank
Linea Stromberg Wise, ValleyFair
Gayden Carruth, Shakopee Public School
Marge Henderson, Murphy's Landing
Jim Streefland, Jasper Streefland
Randy Laurent, Laurent Builders
Tom Edman, Edman Builders
Greg Smith, Fremont Industries
Terry O'Toole, First National Bank of Shakopee
Robert Walter, Kress and Monroe
CC: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
Mel Balster, Mebco Industries
Delores Lebens, Mayor
Joe Zak, Councilman
Jerry Wampach, Councilman
Steve Clay, Councilman
Gary Scott, Councilman
Gloria Veirling, Councilwoman
to a
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Pedestrian Underpass for the Downtown Mini By-Pass
DATE: April 13, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
The design engineers who are preparing the final plans and
specifications for the Downtown Mini By-Pass have requested a
decision from the City on the mini by-pass BEBO design. Staff
has therefore reviewed the mini by-pass SEED design alternatives
with both the Downtown Committee and Community Development
Commission for their comments and recommendation. Based on their
review and comments staff is prepared to make a recommendation to
City Council on this issue.
BACKGROUND:
Since the conception of the Downtown bridge and mini by-pass
project, the plans have included a proposed pedestrian underpass
called a BEBO. The SEED has been included in all of the
environmental reviews and project planning reports.
At the request of the project design engineer, staff has reviewed
several specific design alternatives of the proposed BEBO with
both the Downtown Committee and Community Development Commission
(CDC) . The proposed BEBO resembles a large culvert. The BEBO is
approximately 30' wide, 12, high and 120' long. The BEBO will be
lighted on the interior.
In addition to discussing the SEGO with the Downtown Committee
and CDC, staff presented two concepts for a small park that would
be located just South of the mini by-pass at the entrance of the
BEBO. Because of the elevation of the pedestrian underpass vs.
the elevation of the street (First Avenue) , handicap
accessibility is dictating what kind of design can be utilized
for this pedestrian walkway. Attached are two alternatives which
would provide pedestrians with access from First Avenue to the
BEBO. The elevation of the BEBO is approximately 18' lower than
the elevation of First Avenue, hence the difficulty in designing
the handicap walkway. On April 12, 1989 both the Community
Development Commission and Downtown Committee reviewed the two
pedestrian walkway concepts. The Committees split on which
concept they favored. However, staff believes that both
Committees would favor concept 42 if slight modifications were
made.
The Committees and staff generally prefer concept #2 for the
following reasons:
1. Concept #2 does not necessitate a large retaining wall
near the BEBO entrance.
2. Concept #2 is less costly.
3. Concept #2 would be less difficult for a person in a
wheelchair to traverse.
4. The embankment near the alley would not be as steep as
the embankment proposed in concept #1.
5. Visually, a jogged staircase is aesthically more
pleasing than a straight staircase.
The CDC and Downtown Committee have suggested that a few small
curves be added to the larger portions of the handicapped ramp to
make it more attractive.
Shown in attachment #3 is a correspondence from Mr. Jeff Stewart,
Project Engineer which outlines the cost differences between the
two options. Note that Mn DOT will provide funding for concrete
and timber retaining walls, stairways and railings, concrete
sidewalks, bituminous trail and turf establishment. Additional
streetscape elements such as trees, park benches, ornamental
lighting and concrete pavers would have to be 100% funded by the
City. At this time, it is not necessary for the Council to
decide which if any streetscape elements should be included in
the project. The Project Design Engineer has simolv requested
that we select which design we favor. Both the Downtown
Committee and Community Development Commission concur that when
the actual mini by-pass and pedestrian walkway is complete, the
placement of streetscape materials can be reevaluated to
determine if- they should be installed. It is also likely that
the streetscape elements in this area, if any could be completed
in conjunction with Phase II of the Downtown Redevelopment
Project.
Based on the consensus reached by the Downtown Committee and
Community Development Commission, staff would like to recommend
to City Council that the appropriate City officials be directed
to inform the Downtown Mini By-Pass Project Design Engineer of
the City's preference for Concept #2 of the Downtown Mini By-
Pass BEBO and pedestrian ramp with the addition of a few curves.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Select Concept 2 with the addition of a few curves as the
preferred design for the BEBO and pedestrian ramp.
2. Select Concept 1 as the preferred alternative for the BEBO
and pedestrian ramp.
3. Select Concept 2 as the preferred alternative for the BEBO
and pedestrian ramp. -
4. Table this issue pending further information from staff.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REODESTED:
Move to select Concept 2 with the addition of a few curves in
pedestrian ramp as the favored design for the Shakopee BEBO and
pedestrian ramp and direct the appropriate City officials to
inform the design engineers accordingly.
BEBO
rRi117'
glee•:!.! v
Rl
NO�tl
!�I_. X"1'11.7 •:l rr.� �e-
��� \\\\\�\gip �.:�,-�, ;�\� _���Gj•��
� I
�1
■
1111", Mill;
ifflffi
•
® NOWARO NEEOLESTANNEN�I ERGENOOFF 6'0,/innn•
ARCNITEOTS ENGINEERS Pi r NERS {e.aer Luun
$nit,•�/1
April 5 , 1989 yl;,,m•.y.,rc
55+35
Mr. Dave Hutton ��ra-lerr
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Re: Shakopee Downtown Bypass
Dear Mr. Hutton:
We have completed estimates for both options of the park area at the
southern terminus of the pedestrian underpass. In a conversation with Ken
Anderson, Mn/DOT District 5, we discussed which items may be eligible for
Mn/DOT funding and those that would probably use City Funds only.
The potential MN/DOT funded items included concrete and timber retaining
walls, stairways and railings, concrete sidewalks, bituminous trail and
turf establishment. Plant material, park bench, ornamental lighting and
precast concrete pavers were included as items funded 100 percent by the
City. Those costs are summarized by option as follows:
Option #1 Option #2
Mn/DOT Funding $ 100,500 $ 80,600
City Funding 36,300 41 ,600
Totals $ 136,800 $ 122,200
The Mn/DOT funded amount of option #2 was less than option #1 primarily due
to the decreased length of concrete and timber retaining walls. The
increase in cost between option #1 and #2 for City funded items was the
result of an increase in the amount of area using precast concrete pavers.
The cost of constructing option #2 could be reduced by substituting
bituminous for the precast concrete pavers at the entrance to the
pedestrian underpass. This would reduce the City amount for option #2 to
$36,800.
If you have any questions on the estimate please give us a call.
Sincerely,
HOWARD NEEDLES T`AM�MEN &�BERGENDOFF
J��W. Stewart, P.E.
JWS/irk
Enclosures
//LZ
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant
RE: Spring Clean-Up Day
DATE: April 12, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
For the past two years the Shakopee City Council has sponsored a
Spring Clean-Up Project. The project consisted of placing large
roll-off containers at a designated site for Shakopee residents
to dispose of refuse. In 1988 the City Council budgeted $14,000
to hold this activity once again in 1989. With the recent
increase in landfill costs, staff has discovered that assuming
the same level of participation as last year, the budgeted amount
will not be enough to cover estimated expenses unless stricter
control is placed on the activity.
BACKGROUND:
In 1988 the Spring Clean-Up activity was held over a three day
period. (Friday, Saturday and Sunday) Sixty-eight 30 yard roll-
off containers were used to dispose of refuse collected in last
year's program. The cost for each 30 yard roll-off was $191.00.
The total disposal costs in 1988 were $12,988.00. I would like
to point out that last year Public Works Department employees
were utilized to load the dumpsters. It took over two days to
load up all the waste that was disposed of at the site. Staff
estimates that staff time involved in disposing of the waste
collected in 1988 exceeded $2,000.00.
This program was originally conceived in 1985 to clean-up
exterior storage in Shakopee. It was thought at that time that
with the opening of Canterbury Downs, extra effort should be
placed to insure that our community looked attractive to not only
our residents but also the many tourists that come through our
community annually. With the current tax whoopala, staff felt
that prior to preceding with the program this year we may want to
consider reevaluating our costs. The average cost per dwelling
unit for last year's program was approximately $4. 00.
This year we are expecting that the disposal cost for a 30 yard
roll-off container will be approximately $235. 00 each. Assuming
the same level of participation as 1988 (68 dumpsters) we are
estimating that this year's disposal costs alone will exceed
$16,000.00.
Following are several alternatives which I feel are more
manageable and cost effective than our current program:
1. Single Day Dump - Under this alternative, the City of
Shakopee would provide a site for Shakopee residents to
dispose of their waste on a single specified Saturday in
May. Staff would propose that the compound area or rear
parking lot at the Public Works site be utilized as the drop
off site. Both areas can be totally fenced in. Staff would
also propose that a person be on site at the gate to check
the I.D. 's of those persons requesting to dispose of waste.
Staff is also proposing that we charge $1.00 per load. This
will help off-set staff time used to staff the site and load
the waste. Once inside the compound area, residents would
simply dump their trash on a pile or deposit it in compactor
trucks. Trash that can not be disposed of in the compactor
trucks would be loaded by City Public works Department into
roll-off containers provided by our waste hauler. The
compactor trucks will help us reduce our disposal costs.
This alterative allows us to maintain our costs while still
providing a service to Shakopee residents. Strict policing
of the area on Friday and Saturday night will be necessary
to deter persons from illegally dumping. It may also be
appropriate to have a person on duty on Sunday to deter
people from dumping.
2. Extra Service Coupon Distribution - Under this alternative,
I would propose that we simply mail three extra service
coupons to all Shakopee residents. The method of
disbursement would be the Shakopee Utility Bill. At this
time, there are approximately 4700 utility bill accounts.
By sending the extra service coupons to the accounts, we
guarantee that the coupons are utilized by our customers and
avoid excess staff time in preparing for a dump day. The
cost to distribute three extra service coupons to all the
Shakopee Utility bill accounts is $14,100.
3. Limited Disposal Dump Day - Under this alternative, the City
would simply provide for the disposal of specified wastes
such as appliances, tires and furniture. The contractor has
been found who will dispose of appliances for $6.00 per
appliance. Amex tire in Savage can provide for the disposal
of between 900 - 1100 tires for a cost of $650.00.
Furniture would be disposed of utilizing the roll-off
container method. Once again, if this alternative is
pursued, staff would recommend that it be confined to a
fenced area on a single day in May and that an individual be
available at the gate to make sure that no undesignated
waste is disposed of. Staff estimates that this alternative
could be pursued at an approximate cost of $5,000. 00.
Staff is recommending that we pursue alternative #3 because it is
the most cost effective.
If Council wishes to pursue one of the other alternatives, staff
would recommend that the date for the dump day be set for May 20,
1989. I would request that City Council select one of the
proposed alternative and direct staff accordingly.
110-
ALTERNATIVES:
10-
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Do not proceed with the dump day program.
2. Single Day Dump Unlimited Drop-Off
3. Extra Service Coupon Distribution
4. Single Day Limited Collection Program
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative q4.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to direct the appropriate City officials to proceed with the
single day limited collection program.
DUMP
?1 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM. LeRoy Houser, Building Official
RE: Taco John's Restaurant
DATE: March 12, 1989
INTRODUCTION
It appears Council has some concerns regarding the retaining wall
at the rear of the Taco John property. The following account
provides historical background on the problem and recommendations
from staff regarding the solution to this matter.
BACKGROUND
As our inspection service is "on call" we are called to the
projects when one phase of the project is ready to be inspected
(footing, foundation, rough-in plumbing, framing, etc. ) . We were
not called to look at the retaining wall until it was near
completion. At that time, the contractor was informed that the
wall encroached on the alley by 6 to 18 inches and he would have
two options to rectify the problem: 1) move the wall or 2) to
have the alley vacated. We also informed him that we needed
engineering design criteria for the %all to assure us of its
structural integrity, which we have not received.
A meeting with Shakopee Utilities, the City Engineer and myself
resulted in concurrence that if the alley was vacated and a
utility easement/ingress/egress was filed, we would have no
problem with the vacation as utilities are the only people using
this area, alleys are costly to maintain and the City does not
and has not required alleys in any plats in the last five years,
the development possibility to the north and west in this area is
negligible, as the buildable area out of the flood plain is
small, and utility extension (sewer and water) would be extremely
costly. Consequently, we recommended he petition the Council and
Planning Commission for alley vacation, which the Planning
Commission approved.
I think it would behoove the Council to require Mr. Plaisted, the
property owner, to obtain a certified as-built survey before
Council issues any orders. We may find that the utility poles
are not within the easement and are in fact encroaching on Mr.
Plaisteds property, or that Mr. Plaisted has in fact encroached
on the alley. However, if the City Council decides to vacate the
alley, then the property survey would represent a needless
expense to Mr. Plaisted.
At that point, Council must decide if a reasonable solution to
the problem is to vacate the alley. Council should remind
themselves that in the past not only have they vacated alleys,
they have in fact vacated streets for the purpose of private gain
(Clete Link) .
Staff has attempted to set up a meeting with Mr. Plaisted, but he
is currently out of town and at the time this memo was written a
meeting still has not been held with him.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Order the wall removed.
2. Vacate the alley.
3. Order an as-built survey and delay any decision until staff
can meet with the property owner.
RECOMMENDATION
The Acting City Administrator and City Engineer continue to
recommend vacating the alley. Staff clearly does not feel that
the alley is needed, now or in the future, and does not serve a
public purpose.
Staff also feels that if the Council desires that the wall be
removed, then the owner should be ordered to do an as-built
survey to determine exactly where the wall is before a final
decision is made.
The City Engineer has reviewed the structural integrity of the
wall and has indicated that it appears adequate, but has
recommended that the owner have a structural engineer certify the
wall for structural stability and compliance with retaining wall
codes.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Vacate the alley by adopting Resolution No. 3032.
or
2. If Council desires the wall moved, order Mr. Plaisted to
provide an as-built survey showing the exact location of the
wall in relation to the property line.
LH:cah
l�la" /
RESOLUTION NO.
//P27 30 3 a..
A RESOLUTION VACATING THE PUBLIC ALLEY IN BLOCK 12, ACCORDING TO
THE PLAT OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY, SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, it has been made to appear to the Shakooee City
Council that the alley in Block 12, Shakopee City no longer
serves any public interest or use save and except for the
installation and maintenance of public utilities; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing to consider said vacation was held
in the Council Chambers of the City Hall in the City of Shakopee
at 7:30 p.m. on March 7, 1959 ; and
WHEREAS, two weeks published notice has been given in theShakopee Valley News and posted notice has been given by posting
such notice on the bulletin board on the main floor of the Scott
County Courthouse, and on the bulletin board in the Shakopee City
Hall; and
WHEREAS, all persons desiring to he heard on the matter were
heard at the public hearing in the Council Chambers in the City
of Shakopee.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVEC BY THE CI^_Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. That it finds and dete=rmines that the vacation
hzreinafter described is in the public interest and
serves no further public need as an alley.
2 . That all that part of the alley in Block 12, Shakopee
City, Scott County, Minnesota, be the same hereby is
vacated.
3 . That the City reserves, however, to the City of
Shakopee its licensees and franchise holders a 16 foot
wide perpetual easement on, under and over the said
vacated alley for utilities with the right to install,
maintain, repair, lay and relay the utilities by the
City, its licensees and franchise holders.
4. After the adoption of the Resolution, the City Clerk
shall file certified copies hereof with the County,
Auditor and County Recorder of Scott County.
-r
Adopted in Regular Session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of March, 1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this 7
day of 2�412a1 , 1989.
City At ney
Shakopee Fire Department \ ��
SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379 .
To: Shakopee City Administrator
From: Shakopee Fire Department
Re: Location for Second fire station
Copy: Shakopee City Councilmembers
Date: 3/31/69
Introduction:
This letter outlines the need to acquire a site for a second
fire station and presents alternatives to provide this second
location.
Background:
The Shakopee Fire Department has been responding from the
existing Fire Station at 334 22nd Ave. W. for 33 years. This station
was expanded in 1977 to accommodate additional equipment and increase
space for training and activities.
Since this time the Shakopee Fire Department has acquired four
additional fire apparatus and replaced one piece with a larger one.
This department is also at 35 members compared with 30 in 1977 .
Both equipment and manpower requirements are continuing to grow as
the fire department capabilities must keep up with this cities
expansion and new government requirements.
The Insurance Services Office (ISO) ratings as applied to fire
department coverage requires a fire responding location within 1 . 5
miles of any possible incident. This requirement combined with the
City of Shakopee's primary expansion to the East makes a second fire
station a necessity.
The present fire station location is next to heavily traveled
trade routes both highway and rail which carry hazardous materials.
If an accident and/or spill were to happen close to the current
station, response to the station may become impossible due to
impassable hazardous conditions or traffic.
Proposal :
The Shakopee Fire Department proposes acquiring land for the
construction of a second station within 3 miles to the east of the
existing station. This location for a second fire station does
provide a logical progression of coverage which puts us in an
excellent position to meet these ISO requirements in the near future.
The exact property to be acquired for the second station as
recommended by the Shakopee Fire Department is the North East Corner
Lot at the intersection of County road 17 and Vierling Drive.
This location provides many advantages regarding fire department
operations and responses.
-- This location would greatly reduce response time to the
Eastern portion of The Shakopee Fire District.
--This location is on the North side of Veirling Dr. Thin is
the same side from which most firefighters will be responding. This
makes response to the station easier and safer for us, as we do not
have to cross Veirling Dr.
--This location is near a number of residential areas allowing
quick response by firefighters from their homes near the station and
from industrial park locations. Placing the station in a commercial
area would possibly provide reasonable daytime response however
morning, evening and night response .would suffer severely.
--This location is on Veirling Drive and County Road 17 thus
providing easy future access to the Highway 169 bypass for crosstown
responses.
--Access to this site will not be blocked by Racetrack, Valley
Fair, Renaissance Festival or other traffic at any time of the day.
--Future growth of this city appears to be in this direction
thus this location covers our most immediate needs.
--This proposed location would accommodate the ISO standard
interstation distances of 1 . 5 mile interconnected radius of coverage.
--This site provides ample space for station, training, and off
street parking facilities.
--This would be a corner lot allowing access from two sides.
This makes drive through truck bays in the station a possiblity.
This provides additional safety and convenience in handling fire
apparatus. -
--If used as a voting location, this site would be easier to
access because this location facilitates minimal crossing of Veirling
Drive and it is located on County Road 17.
Alternatives:
1 . Not to acquire property for a second fire station.
2. To acquire property for a second fire station at another
location which meets similar criteria to the proposed location.
3. To acquire property for a second fire station at the North East
Corner Lot at the intersection of County Road 17 and Vierling Drive.
Recommendations:
The Shakopee Fire Department recommends acquiring the properties
at the North East Corner Lot at the intersection of County Road 17
and Vierling Drive. This property would allow us to construct a
second fire station for eastern fire district coverage in the most
appropriate location possible considering road access, ISO
requirements, peak traffic flows, firefighter availability and a
minimal neighborhood impact.
The Shakopee Fire Department prides itself with the quality of
fire protection it provides to this community. A location for a
second fire station must be considered in order to continue this
quality of coverage to the City of Shakopee as this community expands
to the east farther from the current fire station. Land which meets
fire station usability criteria must be acquired in the appropriate
area before it becomes unavailable.
Respectfully Submitted,
Charles Ries,
Shakopee Fire Department
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
e' CY
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engine
SUBJECT: Sidewalk Replacement/Repair Policy
DATE: April 11 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
This memo follows up on the proposed sidewalk replacement policy,
which was tabled at the April 4, 1989 Council meeting.
BACKGROUND:
Staff submitted a proposed sidewalk replacement/repair policy to
Council for consideration on April 4 , 1989. No action was taken
to allow Council adequate time to review the policy and staff was
directed to bring this item back to Council on April 18 , 1989 .
Attached is a copy of staff' s original memo dated March 24, 1989
which discusses the proposed policy.
The main portion of the proposed sidewalk replacement policy that
generated Council discussion was the cost sharing proposal .
Staff had proposed a 50/50 split between the City and the
property owner for funding of sidewalk replacement. Council had
indicated that the 50% property owner share may be to high. To
assist Council in discussing this issue further, the following
information is provided by staff:
• The cost for removing and replacing concrete sidewalks
is around $2 .50 - $3 .00 per sq. ft. depending on the
volume of sidewalk in the contract and locations.
• A standard sidewalk "square" is 5 ft. wide and 5 ft.
long or 25 sq. ft. in area.
• Using $3.00 per sq. ft. , the cost to remove and replace
1 sidewalk square would be approximately $75 . 00
(total) .
• A standard City lot is 60 ft. wide, which would contain
about 12 squares of sidewalk . Typically , most
properties do not need the entire length of sidewalk
replaced, but rather only several squares.
• The sidewalk would be replaced under a City contract
and any cost to the property owners could be assessed
back. The property owner could choose to go on the
City' s payment plan for the assessment.
The following table summarizes the cost per sidewalk square to
the property owner for various cost sharing splits.
Cost Sharing Property
Alternative Owner Citv
100% Property Owner/0% City $75.00 -0-
75% Property Owner/25% City $56 .25 $18.75
50% Property Owner/50% City $37 .50 $37 .50
25% Property Owner/75% City $18.75 $56 .25
0% Property Owner/100% City -0- $75.00
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Adopt the proposed sidewalk policy as recommended with the
50/50 split for cost sharing.
2 . Discuss the cost sharing alternatives and revise the
proposed policy accordingly prior to adopting it.
3 . Do not adopt the proposed sidewalk policy, thereby leaving
the situation as is . ( Property owners pay 100% of the
sidewalk replacement costs. )
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends a 50/50 cost sharing split for funding sidewalk
replacement. While it is true that the sidewalk is on City
property ( i.e. street right-of-way) and that the general public
has a right to use that sidewalk and therefore benefits from it,
the adjacent property owner undoubtedly uses that sidewalk more
than people who live farther away. Therefore, the benefit to the
adjacent property owner is greater than the general public and
the benefit decreases the farther away someone lives.
Staff feels that the 50/50 split adequately reflects that
benefit. The adjacent property owner benefits 50% and the
general public benefits 50% .
Another viable cost sharing option is 25% property owner/75%
City. This would be consistent with the current street
reconstruction policy.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to direct the City Attorney to draft the appropriate
ordinance establishing a sidewalk replacement/repair program
(Based on the preferred cost sharing alternative) .
DH/pmp
SPLIT
II �
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Sidewalk Replacement/Repair Policy
DATE: March 24, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Staff has been directed by Council to formulate a sidewalk
replacement/repair policy and to draft an ordinance establishing
this policy.
BACKGROUND:
Currently , the City does not have a formal sidewalk repair
program. Basically City staff keep an inventory of requested
sidewalk repair locations and bids out a contract to complete the
repairs City-wide. As the current "policy" requires that the
property owner pay for all sidewalk repairs or replacement 100% ,
there is very little incentive for an owner to notify the City of
any defective sidewalk. Consequently, the City has not bid a
sidewalk repair contract for several years.
Our insurance company, through North Star Risk Services, Inc. ,
has recommended that the City implement a sidewalk inspection and
maintenance program. Attorneys for the League of Minnesota
Cities have also indicted to staff that the most difficult
sidewalk injury cases to defend are those where Cities do not
have an inspection program and repair policy.
Additional background information on this issue is contained in
the attached memo from the previous City Engineer, Ken Ashfeld,
dated December 10, 1987 •
Another inconsistency that should be mentioned is that if an
entire street is reconstructed only 25% of the sidewalk is
assessed , but if a single property owner requested that the
sidewalk be replaced on its own, they would pay for it 100% .
PROPOSED POLICY
Staff is proposing the following sidewalk repair/replacement
policy.
1 . The Engineering Department would develop an annual
inspection program to inventory defective sidewalks. The
ideal would be to inspect all sidewalks annually, but staff
limitations prevent that. Rather, the City would be divided
into zones and each year a different zone would be
inspected.
IIS
2 . All defective sidewalks within each zone would be repaired
or replaced during that year.
3. In addition to zonal repairs, a list of sidewalk complaints
will be maintained and those deficiencies would be repaired
first.
4. Funding for sidewalk repairs shall be as follows:
a. Less than 5 years old.
Sidewalks installed under a City Contract shall be
replaced at no expense to the property owner .
( 100% City funded) .
Sidewalks installed by the property owner shall be
replaced at the property owners expense ( 100%
property owner funded) .
b. Older than 5 years
Sidewalks older than 5 years shall be jointly
funded 50% City and 50% property owner. The 50/50
split was arbitrarily selected. To be consistent
with the reconstruction policy, Council may want
to use a 25% property owner and 75% City split on
sidewalk.
C. If the sidewalk is damaged by the property owner
or occupant of the property, the property owner
shall pay 100% of the sidewalk replacement cost,
irregardless of the age of the sidewalk or who
installed it.
5 . The City Engineer shall determine which sidewalks are
defective and in need of repairs or replacement . In
general , any defect in the sidewalk will justify repairs but
the following criteria will be used as guidelines
determining defective sidewalk:
a. Sidewalks that pond water or ice
b. Sidewalks that are cracked and heaved greater than
1/2" .
C. Spalled sidewalk. (sidewalk that has developed
numerous holes and pockets due to the aggregate
chipping off)
d . Cracked sidewalk.
e. Sidewalk that has developed other hazards such as
tree roots, water valves, etc.
6 . The brick pavers downtown will be in included in the
sidewalk inspection and repair program.
11d
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff is proposing that the City adopt the aforementioned policy
by resolution or ordinance. Items that Council may wish to
discuss is the funding proposal , which includes a 50/50 cost
split and establishing 5 years as the cut off between the funding
alternatives. Council may also want to add curb and gutter to
this policy.
Staff also feels that the City of Shakopee needs a Comprehensive
Sidewalk Plan for the installation of new sidewalk. The current
guidelines are inconsistent and subject determination by the
Planning Commission or Council. Staff will be working with the
consultant preparing the Comprehensive Plan Revisions to
establish an overall sidewalk plan.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to direct the appropriate City staff to draft a resolution
or ordinance establishing a sidewalk repair/replacement program.
Note: The City Attorney may want to advise Council on whether
this policy should be adopted by Resolution or Ordinance.
DH/pmp
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City EngineEr 1 lslN"
SUBJECT: 5th Avenue, Spencer Street to Market Street
DATE: April 11 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Staff is requesting Council concurrence on several design
decisions regarding the 5th Avenue extension project, Spencer
Street to Market Street.
BACKGROUND:
City Council ordered plans and specifications prepared for the
extension of 5th Avenue, from Spencer Street to Market Street .
In researching the property lines and existing street right-of-
way, two main questions are raised:
1 . What should the width of the right-of-way be for 5th Avenue?
2. What should the pavement width be?
Both of these questions are inter-related and should be addressed
together.
The existing right-of-way on 5th Avenue just east of Spencer is
80 ft. wide because it was part of the original Shakopee plat.
This portion of 5th Avenue is not paved, but the gravel base was
constructed for a future 44 foot wide street to conform with all
other streets in this area.
During the field surveying and deed research, it was discovered
that a 14 foot jog exists between the north line of block 77
(south line of existing right-of-way) and the north line of block
300. This jog occurs at the quarter section line (please refer
to the attached drawings) . -,
The City of Shakopee currently has 55.5 ft. of street right-of-
way on 5th Avenue from Main Street to Market Street. The City' s
standard right-of-ways are either 60 ft. or 80 ft. wide.
The existing situation produces a variety of alternatives.
Pavement Width Alternatives
Staff feels that a 44 foot wide street in this area is excessive,
even though the surrounding area has all 44 foot wide streets.
For local streets, the current City specifications require a 36
foot wide pavement. Staff feels this is adequate for the entire
length of 5th Avenue from Spencer to Market. This would reduce
the overall construction costs slightly and reduce the amount of
right-of-way needed, but would not conform to the surrounding
streets . The feasibility report recommended a 36 foot wide
street, also.
The existing houses on 5th Avenue east of Spencer Street are
built fairly close to the right-of-way line and by reducing the
pavement width a larger boulevard could be obtained. It may even
be possible to reduce the existing right-of-way from 80 ft. to 60
ft. by vacating 10 feet on each side.
An alternative to the 36 foot wide street would be to construct a
40 ft. wide street. This would not be as drastic of a deviation
from the surrounding streets and may provide a more aesthetic
transition from the adjacent 44' wide streets.
Night-of-Nay Alternatives
If a 44 foot wide street is constructed, an 80 foot wide right-
of-way would be required all the way to Market Street
(Alternative 1 attached ) . This right-of-way would be off-set
slightly (14 feet) at the quarter section line.
By reducing the pavement to 36 feet (or 40 feet) the amount of
right-of-way can be reduced to 60 feet. Unfortunately, due to the
14 foot jog at the quarter section line, an 80 ft. wide right-of-
way is needed at that point even to construct a 36 foot wide
street. Therefore, a transition in the right-of-way is needed to
reduce it to 60 feet. From Main Street east, a 60 foot right-of-
way can be achieved by acquiring 4.5 additional feet.
Attached are two alternatives for transitioning this right-of-
way. Alternative No. 2 provides a straighter taper from 80 feet
at the section line to 60 feet at Main Street. Alternative No. 3
maintains a 60 ft. right-of-way further east to the point where
the street is an adequate distance from the right-of-way, then
tapers to 80 ft.
Although both alternatives are "non-standard" staff recommends
Alternative No. 3 . This would take less right-of-way than
Alternative No. 2 .
A fourth alternative would be to purchase 94 feet of right-of-way
so that the north line of the right-of-way lines up with the
existing right-of-way. Staff does not recommend this option.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends constructing a 36 foot wide street on a 60 foot
right-of-way with a taper from 80 feet as shown on Alternative
No. 3 •
Reducing the right-of-way width will reduce the acquisition costs
while increasing the amount of land that could be developed.
Reducing the pavement width will also reduce project costs
(although slight) but more important, it will conform to current
design requirements and enable this street to function as a
narrower, local street rather than as a wider collector street.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to concur with staff' s recommendation and construct 5th
Avenue as a 36 foot wide street on a 60 foot wide right-of-way
from Main Street to Market Street and a transition right-of-way
going from 80 feet wide at Fillmore Street to 60 feet wide as
shown on Alternative No. 3 •
DH/pmp
ROW
ALTERNATIVE 1 = 1
o
tT y
o
�t 3
a
oUfcer
A 3 s
o `
PROPOSED
e SO'. R.O.W.. - 8
it �° 9
.. o
` G PROPOS •D
�- 4t � EXISTING 5.5' R.O.W..
s 1 , 4' STR ET
1
13011
W
1 6hh.o ,e E k
oc
- z
HIAWATHA L
PARK r
s 7 AV
3 3 1 r
s J _[
o L
N r r 35
8 1"] dVA-
1
11 1
ALTERNATIVE 2
0
Y
� 1 -
J 8 Z
4
�. PROPOSED 0' R. 1or 3 5
° U, c
PROPOS
� 80' R.O.W. 8
TAPER TO
60' R.O.W. 9
�-
oe o
i;: ;: ;: :%�:
PROPOSED
j G 36' STREE EXISTING 55. R O.W.
e —1
N 6f,a VE y�
-, HIAWATHA -
1 PARK
s 7ffi AV
1313
01iI
3 3
11 1 -
1
ALTERNATIVE 3
J �
Y
O "
J 1
- " 5
8 z
� 5
i \7-
4
m PROPOSED O' R. • ter 3 5
e Ur PROPOSED TA
TO 80' R.O.W. 8
�-
c a
.F . - PROPOSED
36'. STREE EXISTING 55. R 0.W.
s 1
. "' 3 it
sMI,e VF
-� Z HIAWATHA -
PARK
I s 7 AV i
1:113
I I ~
� to
FTC,
I lilt
d�Jf 5
£may
/ if
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Marschall Road (C.R. 17) Sidewalk
DATE: April 11, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
This memo is a follow-up to the discussion by City Council on
February 21, 1989 regarding the installation of sidewalks along the
east side of Marschall Road, from 4th Avenue to 10th Avenue, which
was tabled until staff could provide additional information for
Council.
BACKGROUND:
On February 21, 1989 a public hearing was held to consider a
proposed project to install sidewalks along the east side of
Marschall Road (C.R. 17) , from 4th Avenue to 10th Avenue. Staff
gave a presentation on the feasibility of this project and public
comments were received.
The public hearing was closed, but Council tabled any action on the
proposed improvements until staff could provide additional
information to Council. The information requested consisted of the
following items:
1 Research the letter of credit which expires on July 1
1989 to see if it can be renewed.
2 . Contact Scott County or Mn/DOT to find out if there are
any plans to widen this portion of C.R. 17 .
3 . Contact Scott County to find out if they will pay for the
sidewalk or participate in the cost. A motion was made
for Councilman Scott to accompany staff to the County
Board meeting to discuss this item.
4. Research the safety issue.
Staff would like to discuss each item separately.
Letter of Credit
The original letter of credit was submitted to the City on July 12 ,
1985 and was for a total amount of $19,129.57. Attachment 1 is a
copy of that original letter of credit.
This letter of credit has been renewed annually every year since,
at the request of the city. The current letter of credit is for
$9, 375. 00 and expires on July 1, 1989 (See Attachment 2) . The
amount contained in the letter of credit was reduced from the
original amount several years ago because some of the construction
that the developer agreed to do was completed.
The City Clerk has indicated that if the sidewalk is not
constructed in 1989, the City would again ask for an extension of
the letter of credit. Theoretically, this letter of credit could
be extended annually for an indefinite time period. Staff does not
recommend this course of action because the dollar value of the
letter of credit is reduced every year due to the inflation of
construction costs. In fact, based on the estimated cost of this
project, the assessments for these properties is estimated at
$9,900.00, which already exceeds the current letter of credit of
$9,375.00.
The original developer who submitted the letter of credit is
essentially not a fee owner of these 3 parcels anymore, although
this developer is still committed to completing the sidewalks as
required by the agreement. The developer realizes that they are
not actively involved in these properties anymore and have
officially requested that the City of Shakopee construct the
sidewalk using the letter of credit, so they can finally complete
all the terms of the developer's agreement. (Attachment 3 is a
copy of this request from the developer) .
Future Improvements to C.R. 17
Staff has contacted both the County Highway Engineer and Mn/DOT
staff regarding any future construction or widening of this road.
There are no plans, either immediate or long range to widen this
portion of County Road 17. The existing road is adequate to handle
the traffic projections for the next 20 years and beyond. Since the
expected life of a sidewalk is only 20 years, any sidewalk
installed today would not need to be relocated prior to the life
expectation of the sidewalk expiring.
Scott County, in conjunction with Mn/DoT, will be upgrading C.R.
17 to a 4 lane highway from approximately the Junior High School
south to the bypass, but that is beyond the project limits of this
sidewalk project.
County Participation
The Scott County Engineer was contacted to find out if they would
participate in the cost of the project. The County Engineer denied
our request, since their existing cost participation policy states
that new sidewalk along County roads will be 100$ municipal funded.
This policy was developed jointly between Scott County and the
Municipalities/Townships. Attachment 4 is a copy of Page 4 of the
County policy which discusses new sidewalk participation.
Staff also contacted the County Engineer to request that Scott
County participate in the cost of the retaining walls. on past
projects (4th Avenue Reconstruction for example) Scott County paid
for 100% of the retaining walls as part of the street
reconstruction. 4th Avenue is a designated County Aid Highway. The
County Engineer denied our request for cost participation on the
retaining walls, because unlike 4th Avenue these retaining walls
are needed solely for the construction of the sidewalk, not the
street construction. Their existing cost participation policy does
not cover retaining walls. Retaining walls are usually included
thru special negotiations.
Staff, along with Councilmen Scott and Zak, attended the March 21,
1989 County Board meeting to request that the County participate
in all or part of this project. The County Board tabled any action
on the City's request until the full County Board was present.
On April 4, 1989 staff again appeared before the County Board.
Staff requested that the County consider a) paying for the entire
project, estimated at $72, 000 or b) as a minimum paying for the
retaining walls, estimated at approximately $20,000.
The full County Board rejected both requests on a unanimous vote.
safety considerations
There were several comments made at the public hearing implying
that installing sidewalks along this street would create a greater
safety hazard than already exists. Staff would like to comment on
those claims.
The existing right-of-way for Marschall Road is 80 feet wide. The
roadway is 52 feet wide, curb to curb. This leaves approximately
14 feet behind the curb on each side of the street for sidewalk.
The existing sidewalk on the west side of the street is 6 feet
wide, located on the property line, which means that there is an
8 foot grass median between the sidewalk and curb for snow storage.
The proposed sidewalk for this project is recommended to be only
5 feet wide. If it is also located on the property line, a 9 foot
green area would exist between the curb and sidewalk. For snow
storage, planting of boulevard trees and safety reasons, a sidewalk
should be located at least 10 feet away from the curb according to
current engineering standards.
This project has a 9 foot median, which does not quite meet that
accepted minimum standard but it is fairly close and would be
considered adequate for this project. The only way to lengthen the
distance between the sidewalk and curb and gutter is to purchase
additional right-of-way or easements. At certain locations, to
avoid buildings or power poles, the sidewalk may need to curve
closer to the curb, but this is not recommended unless absolutely
necessary.
It was implied that installing sidewalks along a busy collector
street is unsafe. On the contrary, collector streets contain more
pedestrian traffic than local streets. By definition collector
streets are used to collect traffic (both vehicular and pedestrian)
and channel that traffic to main routes and business districts.
Since pedestrians are using Marschall Road anyway, it would be much
safer to control where they walk and provide a good surface for
them to walk on. In discussions with the Chief of Police and by
visual observance, the current practice is for pedestrians coming
from the east part of Shakopee to cross Marschall Road to the
sidewalk on the west side, travel north on the sidewalk until they
get to their destination and then cross Marschall Road again if
they desire to visit those services on the east side of the road.
In effect, some pedestrians are crossing this busy street twice,
without the aid of a traffic signal. The police have received
numerous reports of "near misses" involving pedestrians crossing
this street.
The alternatives for pedestrians coming from this part of the City
is to walk on an undesignated path along the east side of Marschall
Road, often consisting of snow or mud, and probably walking on
private property rather than within public right-of-way or to walk
along the curb and gutter adjacent to the traffic lane.
Another factor that needs to be considered is the new traffic
signal and crosswalk at C.R. 16. This will enable pedestrians who
currently live on the west side of Marschall Road an opportunity
to cross this highway safely. With a convenience store, a motel,
a liquor store, video store, restaurant, pool hall and soon to be
a bank all located along the east side of Marschall Road, residents
have ample reason to cross the street at this signal. The
crosswalk will provide a safe means to cross the street, but there
are no sidewalks to control pedestrian movements along the street.
It was stated that very few pedestrians actually use the east side
of the street. City staff has personally observed many pedestrians
using this side of the street. On a daily basis, pedestrians are
observed walking on the "path" along this side of the street, quite
often school children using it in the morning or evening going to
the Junior High school. Discussions with the Police Department,
other City departments and commercial establishments along this
route confirm the fact that there are pedestrians walking on this
side of the street.
Actual pedestrian counts were not obtained, because it would
consume countless staff hours. The results would also be deceiving
because since there are no sidewalks on this side, many pedestrians
concentrate on the sidewalks along the west side, even to the point
of crossing the street twice as was previously discussed.
It was stated that sidewalks are not needed at this time and should
be postponed until additional development occurs. Staff disagrees
and contends that there are already enough commercial
establishments on this side of Marschall Road to attract
pedestrians and justify sidewalks. Residential development is
already occurring in the southeast quadrants of urban Shakopee,
increasing the amount of residents who may want to use Marschall
Road for a pedestrian route. With the construction of the new
bridge and bypasses, additional development will occur in Shakopee
1 � �
creating additional demands for good pedestrian networks. Since
there are no plans to widen Marschall Road, postponing the
construction of this sidewalk will only increase the costs of the
project needlessly.
It was also indicated that sidewalks should be located elsewhere,
rather than along the highway. Since there are no other easements,
the City would need to acquire additional easements for sidewalk,
possibly along the rear lot lines. Staff does not believe this is
an appropriate place for sidewalks and would be an extremely unsafe
route for pedestrians (unlit and obstructed by buildings) .
Relocating the sidewalk would not substantially reduce the project
costs and possibly increase the costs due to the need to purchase
easements rather than using existing street right-of-way.
Other Concerns
Shakopee's insurance company has also recently indicated that the
City of Shakopee has the obligation to construct sidewalks along
an entire block or pedestrian route if part of the sidewalk is
already in. In a December 5, 1988 letter to Dennis Kraft, they
state:
"The general rule is that the duty of keeping a sidewalk in
a reasonably safe condition for travel or for providing a safe
travelway is upon a municipality. A sidewalk is part of a
street and a municipality, which is given exclusive control
of the streets, is required to exercise reasonable care for
providing sidewalks and in keeping them in a safe condition.
The municipality is liable to any person who is injured as a
result of want of such care" (from the League of Minnesota
Cities Legal Department) .
In this situation, with sidewalks north of 4th Avenue, sidewalks
south of 10th Avenue and sidewalks along the Century Plaza
Building, staff contends that the City is obligated to complete
the sidewalks along this street, from a potential liability
standpoint. Attachment 5 is a map of all existing sidewalks along
this street.
Several properties along Marschall Road are currently undeveloped.
It was mentioned that if sidewalks are constructed prior to
development, the sidewalk will get damaged during development and
need replacing. At this point it may be several years before all
of those properties develop. Once a developer starts the
construction of a building, the sidewalk can be protected by the
use of dirt or plank ramps over the sidewalk. In addition, the
amount of sidewalk subject to heavy truck traffic can be kept to
a minimum by using a single driveway entrance for all vehicles.
By taking these precautions, the owner can minimize the amount of
sidewalk that may get damaged as a result of development. The
sidewalk located in the driveways would normally need to be
replaced with 8" thickness anyway. Because development is
speculative, staff does not recommend delaying the sidewalk until
those vacant lots are developed.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Construct only that portion of the sidewalk covered by the
existing letter of credit (from C.R. 16 north to existing
sidewalk fronting Century Plaza) .
2 . In addition to Alternative 1, construct those portions of the
sidewalk covered under existing developers agreements with the
City.
3. In addition to Alternative No. 1, construct that portion of
the sidewalk from Century Plaza north to 4th Avenue to
complete the sidewalk between 4th Avenue and C.R. 16.
4 . Construct all of the sidewalk from 4th Avenue to 10th Avenue.
5. Postpone the entire project until a later date.
RECOMMENDATION:
Currently, the City has the right and permission of the developer
to construct that portion of the sidewalk covered by the letter of
credit, from C.R. 16 to Century Plaza. This sidewalk construction
would terminate at a street intersection (C.R. 16) and also at the
existing sidewalk along Century Plaza. Therefore, this construction
would fill an existing "gap" in the sidewalk system, instead of
creating a new gap. Rather than renewing the letter of credit,
staff recommends constructing this sidewalk.
The other two developer's agreements also give the City every right
to construct the sidewalk at our discretion and waives all rights
to a public hearing prior to ordering a project and waives all
rights to appeal any assessments. By completing the sidewalks at
these two locations, though, other gaps in the sidewalk system
would still exist. Staff does not recommend Alternative No. 2 on
its own.
If the City constructs the sidewalk covered by the letter of
credit, then the sidewalk system on the east side of the road from
lst Avenue to C.R. 16 will be complete except for a portion along
the apartment building complex at 4th Avenue. Staff recommends
that this portion of the sidewalk also be constructed as part of
this project (Alternative No. 3) .
Staff also feels that the sidewalks along the entire length is
justified and should be constructed, as recommended in the
feasibility report. The Chief of Police supports the construction
of the sidewalk also, for public safety reasons.
Due to the current property tax situation though, Council may want
to discuss whether or not this project will cause an additional
hardship to those properties that would be assessed for it and
possibly postpone the project until a later date.
1( t
If the project proceeds, staff further recommends that the City
pick up the costs of any retaining wall construction based on past
practice on other projects involving retaining walls (i.e. Downtown
Project) . Staff is also recommending that the City pay for the
pedestrian ramps in the intersections.
Several property owners have requested that they be allowed to
construct the sidewalk themselves. Staff recommends against
allowing property owners to construct their own sidewalk for the
following reasons:
1. Several properties have agreed to construct the sidewalk
for a number of years and still haven't done it. What
assurance does the City have in getting the sidewalk
installed by the property owner now when it has not been
done for several years?
2. The quality and appearance of sidewalk may vary from
property to property.
3 . It would create problems in bidding the City project and
estimating quantities.
4 . It would result in the City contractor jumping from
property to property to install sidewalk, thereby raising
the City contract price.
5. It would generally consume more of staff time than
necessary.
6. A County permit would also be required to work in the
right-of-way, which requires bonding and insurance. A
typical property owner would not be able to obtain the
appropriate bonding and insurance.
If Council concurs with ordering the plans and specifications for
this project, attached is Resolution No. 3020 for Council
consideration, which orders the entire project. - If a portion of
the project is ordered the Resolution should be amended
accordingly.
ACTION REQUESTED:
1. Offer Resolution No. 3020, A Resolution Ordering an
Improvement and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications
for Marschall Road (C.R. 17) Sidewalk Between 4th Avenue and
10th Avenue, Project No. 1989-6 and move its adoption.
2. Move to go on record to have the City pay for all retaining
wall costs associated with the sidewalk and all sidewalks with
intersections including the pedestrian ramps.
DA/pmp
SIDEWALK
ATTACHMENT I
July 12, 1985
IRREVOCABLE IEITTB OF CREDTT NO. 109
City of Shakopee
129 Fast First Avenue
Shakopee, [Minnesota 55379
Gentlemen:
In conformance with the provisions of the development agreement between the
City of Shakopee and J.O.N. Investment Company, a partnership comprising of
Dennis 0. Olson and Leland Jonson, we hereby issue this Irrevocable Letter
of Credit in the amount of $19,129.57.
This commitment will expire six (6) months from the date hereof, (January 8,
1986), unless extended in writing.
Si_rawly,
Daniel
G.G. SG� -
Vice President
DGS/mL
t� FIRST NATIONAL. B.A� OF Slj,-kKOPEE
SXAKOKE, MINNESOTA 55379 MEMSER r��C
ATTACHMENT 2
RFIRST :d.`:T:`
R
S.AKC?EE.
�r'9b _
IRREVOCABLE LETTER OF CREDIT NO. 182
June 27, 1988
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Gentlemen:
In conformance with the provisions of the development agreement
between the City of Shakopee and J.O.N. Investment Company, a
partnership comprising of Dennis O. Olson and Leland Johnson and
Carl Nelson, we hereby extend the Letter of Credit originally
dated July 12, 1985 and renewed January 8, 1986, July 6, 1986,
January 5, 1987, July 1 , 1987 and January 1 , 1988, in the amount
of 59,375.00.
This extension will expire twelve ( 12) months from the date
hereof an July 1 , 1989 unless extended in writing .
To the extent applicable hereto this Letter of Credit is subject
to the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary drafts/ICC
Publication No. 400. Except as otherwise expressly stated
herein, this Letter of Credit shall be subject to and governed by
the laws of the State of Minnesota, including the Uniform
Commercial Code as applied to letters of credit .
Sincerely,
-�'Z'q'
Robert J. Blenkush
Assistant Vice President
RJB/sr
ATTACHMENT 3
DEAN➢PI' ER REYNOLDS Gr G.
Normandalc Lak;:bpum Park. Salle 1;50
8500 Norman Gemer llrirc.Bloomington. MN 55457
CARL C NLLSIM ,SCP 1
senior Vice President.Irmiments _!a
0a
"il yw1.• . .
r•��
September. 13, 1988
Judith S. Cot, City CteJch
City o6 Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, NN 55379
Dean Judy,
Thank you So)t youA eoxtupondence dated 8-30-88 regarding
CentuV Ptaza SquaAe AddU an - Sidewalks.
Pu my diACa46ion today with NA. Dennis Mon, we aAe in
ag,teement that the City os Shakopee should proceed, when appticabte,
to constAuat the sideoa.lk puAauant to the developers agreement.
The tetter o6 credit held by the First NatEonal Bank o6 Shakopee
i5 valid anti! Juty 1989.
IS you shoutd have any questions ncgauUng this matter, please
beet Sree to give me a cat!.
S&Lceaely,
Cant F. Nelson
Senior Vice President
DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS, INC.
CFN/ftb
CC: M. Dennis Otson
126 South 4th StAeet
Le SeueA, MN 56058
ATTACHMENT 4
Policies for Cost Participation
Page 4
County
Participation
E. Concrete Sidewalk
New sidewalk - concurrent with or subsequent to county
construction project.
Townships & Municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 08
2. Replacement sidewalk - concurrent with or subsequent to
construction except where County Engineer determines existing to
be worn out (Worn out - treat as new sidewalk)
Townships & Municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008
3. New sidewalk prior to construction of County Construction project.
Townships & Municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . by negotiation
F. Concrete Curb and Gutter
1. New Construction
Townships & Municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508
2. Replacement (except where County Engineer determines existing to
be worn out - worn out, treat as new)
Townships & Municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008
G. Concrete Driveway Entrances
1. New Construction
I'. Townships & Municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 508
2. Replacement (except where county Engineer determines existing to
I
be worn out-worn out, treat as new)
Townships & Municipalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1008
1 is st AV TVAC N-- -
{ 1
o
u 0.T
` ' I
9Y��
1 ar, fHORTH
C {
I 1W
IJIM, A.
__
���
Existing Sidewalks
S P _.
Y,0
s �t
2
YUNg1eHL
SERVICES
BYILOIHO
2
609Y Y
1144. 9
R V
f
B 9.
•f
eo
L ' 1
hako ee ve.
FIM RRE48.
CNYRCN I11
IT
Z_ B.F. 7ARSd I 1 I
SV
_OL 14XY IL p _
I Of •'uU 1 N I N
CM'JYCN
4
T= 70th Ave._
- I 14
J
Y 1 F 4
,3 zJUNIOR HIGH •�
PRAT / ' P PARK
P
WTLOT P P
RESOLUTION NO. 3020
A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And
The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For
Marschall Road (C.R. 17) Sidewalk
Between 4th Avenue and 10th Avenue
Project No. 1989-6
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3014, adopted on February 7 , 1989 ,
fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of
Marschall Road (C. R. 17) between 4th Avenue and 10th Avenue by
Sidewalk; 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 21st day of February 1989 , 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 :
Marschall Road (C. R. 17) between 4th Avenue and 10th
Avenue by Sidewalk installation along the east side of
street.
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 of Shakopee, Minnesota , held this day of
19_-
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day of
19--
City
9_-City Attorney
/119
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineerlel/
SUBJECT: T.H. 101 Bypass (Southerly)
Deans Lake Drainage Basin
DATE: April 12, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is contract extension agreement with our consultant,
Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Assoc . , to perform preliminary drainage
analysis of the Deans Lake Drainage Basin in association with the
Shakopee Bypass Project.
BACKGROUND:
Currently, there is severe drainage problem near the intersection
of C.R. 16 and C.R. 83• Water is ponding in several areas near
this intersection and there is no outlet for this water.
Mn/DOT is currently working on the design of the Shakopee Bypass
from C.R. 83 east to existing Highway 101 . The Mn/DOT engineers
have informed staff that their design cannot correct the drainage
problem that exists in this area . The highway will provide
sufficient drainage facilities for the runoff generated by the
bypass , but the remainder of the ponding problem is caused by
water draining from the entire Deans Lake Outlet Basin . In
short , Mn/DOT has indicated that they will maintain status quo
with the situation. They will take care of their own drainage
but cannot resolve the existing drainage problems.
Mn/DOT engineers have also informed staff that the K-Mart ditch
will need to be relocated and provide another outlet either to
Deans Lake or to the Prior Lake-Spring Lake Outlet Channel. Any
expenditures associated with relocating the K-Mart ditch would be
the City of Shakopee' s responsibility. The Mn/DOT engineers have
requested that we provide them with a proposal for relocating
this ditch.
There have been several studies done on the Deans Lake Outlet
Basin Drainage. One was done in conjunction with the Prior Lake-
Spring Lake Outlet Channel. Another one was done in conjunction
with the construction of the K-Hart ditch. At this point it
looks like the City of Shakopee may need to plan for implementing
an overall stormwater management plan for this entire basin to
ensure that adequate ponding is provided as development occurs
and also to provide a comprehensive plan for stormwater discharge
from Deans Lake to the river. '
Staff is requesting that the City' s consultant, Orr-Schelen-
Mayeron & Assoc. be retained to complete a comprehensive drainage
study for this basin. This study will provide Mn/DOT with the
appropriate assurances that the City of Shakopee will address the
water problem in this basin while also providing the City of
Shakopee an implementation tool for ensuring that stormwater
management is addressed as this basin develops.
Attached is a contract extension agreement from OSM to perform
this study. As indicated in the agreement, they will complete
the study for the Deans Lake Drainage Basin for a "not to exceed"
amount of $23 ,600 .00.
Staff is proposing to request of Mn/DOT that the funding for this
plan be included in the $1 .0 million already allocated for the
Bypass project.
If Mn/DOT does not allow the entire amount to be included in the
Bypass project, the remainder would come out of the Storm
Drainage facility.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Approve of the contract extension agreement.
2 . Deny the contract extension agreement.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Direct the appropriate City officials to execute the attached
contract extension agreement to Orr-Schelen-Mayeron 6 Assoc. ,
Inc. for the purpose of providing a comprehensive drainage study
for the Deans Lake Drainage Basin at a "not to exceed" figure of
$23 ,600 .00 .
DH/pmp
CONTRACT
Off
Schelen /
Mayemn&
A55oOates,lllG � V
2021 East Hennepin Avenue
Minneapolis.MN 55413
612-331-8660
FAX 331-3806
Enipneers
Surveyorseyom
Planners
April 11, 1989
Mr. David Hutton
City Engineer
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379-1376
Re: Stormwater Management Plan for the Dean's Lake Outlet Basin
OSM Comm. No. 3845.30
Dear Dave:
Outlined below please find a work plan which describes the tasks associated with
the above referenced project.
TASK 1: INVENTORY BACKGROUND INFORMATION
As part of this task, background information on topography, soils, land use, and
existing stormwater conveyance systems will be inventoried to assist in the
completion of a hydrologic analysis for this drainage basin. Background
information previously developed as part of the Prior Lake/Spring Lake outlet
channel design will also be inventoried.
It is estimated this task can be completed in 1 week at an estimated cost of $900.
TASK 2: ESTABLISH BASIN SPECIFIC STORMWATER MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
As part of this task, the stormwater management objectives of the City of Shakopee
will be established. Objectives in regard to stormwater rate control and
treatment, ground water infiltration, and channel maintenance consideration will be
addressed as well as others that are brought to the attention of our firm, and/or
the City. It is anticipated that one to two meetings will be held with appropriate
agencies to assure that the proper stormwater management objectives will be
addressed through the development of this plan. At a minimum, one meeting will be
held with City of Prior Lake and the Prior Lake/Spring Lake Watershed District to
establish anticipated management strategies for areas outside the limits of the
City of Shakopee.
It is estimated this task can be completed in 3 weeks at an estimated cost of
$3,000.
Equal Opponvnuy Ernplo er
Page 2
Mr. David Hutton
April 11, 1989
TASK 3: DEVELOP BACKGROUND HYDROLOGIC INFORMATION ON WATERSHED
As part of this task, subwatersheds will be delineated within the drainage basin
and appropriate hydrologic information will be developed for each subwatershed.
Stage-storage-discharge relationships will be established for existing basins as
well as future basins, and in general, stormwater runoff characteristics of the
basin will be analyzed.
It is estimated this task can be completed in 8 weeks at an estimated cost of
$11,200.
TASK 4: SET-UP, CALIBRATE, AND RUN COMPUTER-ASSISTED HYDROLOGIC MODEL
As part of this task, the hydrologic information developed as part of Task 3 will
be incorporated into a TR20 hydrologic computer model which will allow the
stormwater runoff characteristics of the drainage basin to be determined for a wide
variety of rainfall events of varying durations and return frequencies.
Specifically, the model will be run to establish 100 year peak discharge rates for
a critical duration event from each of the watersheds modeled. Format of this
information is anticipated to be similar to that provided in the report for the
comprehensive stormwater management plan for the Millpond watershed.
It is estimated this task can be completed in 2 weeks at an estimated cost of
$1,500.
TASK 5: REPORT
This task will involve compiling the background data, analysis results,
descriptions of improvements, and other findings, conclusions, and recommendations
into a final report. This report will provide the City with the following:
1. A map showing the subwatersheds broken out within the Dean's Lake outlet
basin.
2. Schematic drawings showing pertinent hydrologic information for each of the
drainage areas studied. This schematic utilizes a standard TR20 format
developed by the SCS.
3. Appropriate figures and tables to provide pertinent hydrologic information for
areas within the Dean's Lake Outlet Watershed Study Area.
4. The report will contain specific sections addressing the level and extent of
rate control and treatment to be provided, measures to be provided to
encourage infiltration, and discussion on the implementation of the
comprehensive stormwater management plan.
It is estimated this task can be completed in 5 weeks at an estimated cost of
$4,000.
Page 3
Mr. David Hutton
April 11, 1989
TASK 6: PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AS NECESSARY
As part of this task, technical assistance will be provided in the review of the
drainage system to be provided for the State Trunk Highway 101 Bypass, the
relocation of the K-Mart ditch, and the impacts of these improvements on Dean's
Lake and the Prior Lake/Spring Lake outlet ditch.
It is estimated this effort can be completed for an estimated cost of $3,000.
SUMMARY OF TIME TABLE AND COSTS
We estimate we can complete this project for a total cost $23,600 within 19 weeks
from the date we receive notice to proceed.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with this work plan for this project.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 378-6399.
Very truly yours,
ORR-SCHELEN-MAYERON
& ASSOCIATES
Peter R. Willenbring, P.E.
Manager, Water Resources Department
PRW:tja
Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Marilyn Remer, Personnel Coordinator
Re: Health & Life Reimbursement in Lieu of Health Maintenance Accounts
Date: March 17, 1989
Introduction
At the February 9, 1989 meeting, Council discussed the City's policy of
the health 6 life reimbursement in lieu of a health maintenance account
for employees receiving single coverage and tabled it until everyone on
the Council had a chance to better understand the current policy before
making a final determination on making any changes.
Background
Staff has researched the concept of the health reimbursement program.
Following is a chronological summary of background information:
Attachment A
October 26, 1983 memo to Council from John K. Anderson, City Adm.
regarding 1984 Labor Negotiations. The last paragraph on page three
reads, ^I would also like Council to consider the creation of a
innovative benefit program that some larger private sector employers are
currently using. It calls for the payment of health insurance benefits
into an individualized account for each employee rather than simply
making continued increasing payments to the health provider. The
approach is married with an increase in the deductible which holds down
the premium of the health provider and in turn allows the employee to
draw from this individualized account to make payments on medical bills
that would not be covered because of the increased deductible.-
Attachment B - 26 Reduction in Salary
December 15, 1983 memo from John K. Anderson summarizing the 1984 wage
and benefit packages. Note Comments: paragraph stating that the 48 and
$45.00 is comparable to the 58 and $20.00 settlements in the Metro area
to date. Also the 1985 Clerical Pay Plan footnotes (3) states the
comparison is based on 988 of the Stanton mean because in 1983 and 1984
Shakopee employees put 1% of salary (total of 28) into benefits.
Attachment C
December 30, 1983 memo from John K. Anderson regarding the establishment
of individual employee health/maintenance accounts.
Attachment D
Minutes of 1-3-84 Council meeting authorizing the establishment of
individual health maintenance program.
Attachment E
March 2, 1984 memo from Gregg Voxland regarding unfavorable ruling from
I.R.S. on the proposed program and request to pay the $45/mo. to
employees.
Attachment F
Minutes of 3-6-84 authorizing payment of $45.00 per month to employees
with single insurance coverage and the payment of the difference of the
$195 per month benefit level and the average insurance premium when the
premium is less that $195 per month to the employees with family
coverage; such payment to be part of a payroll check.
Attachment G
June 13, 1985 from Marilyn Ramer requesting clarification as to whether
all employees were to receive the $10/mo. increase for health & life for
1985.
Attachment H
Minutes from June 18, 1985 stating that the 1985 compensation plan for
non-union employees be clarified that all employees are to receive the
additional $10/mo. health & life increase by the City.
Attachment I
Memo dated February 2, 1989 from Gregg Voxland & Dennis Kraft providing
current data and statistics.
Attachment J
Effective January 1, 1989 Blue Cross/Blue Shield is the provider for
health insurance. At the time of application, all employees who were not
applying for family coverage were asked to fill out the attached Group
Waiver of Coverage Form.
Budget worksheets for 1990 are scheduled to go to department heads May 12,
1989. Council should resolve the issue before that date so that staff can
prepare 1990 budget requests accordingly. The issue also needs to be
resolved before entering into any 1990 union negotiations.
1984 Labor i aL ions ^
Page '1•111-0c
' October 26 , 19::3 '*-v ATTACHENT A
disability benefits . The City has included in the '64 Budget
$108 ,458 in contingencies and we normally use less than $60,000
of this amount-, The cost to the City to bring the budgeted 3%
increase and $10.00 health benefit into line with the police
settlements listed above would be an additional $24,000 in salaries
(2 x $12 ,000) , and an additional $1 ,920 for health, life and long
term disability benefits . The metro police labor settlements have
been adding an additional $20.00 to the health packages which means
that Shakopee would have to budget a second $10.00 increment at a
cost of $1 ,920 to match this package. Thus , the total additional
cost for a settlement matching those discussed above would be an
additional $25,920 which can be covered by the amount provided in
contingencies .
Alternatives
1. Wait until there are further labor settlements in the metro-
politan area which might alter the trend in settlements
established by the six cities discussed above , and which
might bring us closer to the end of the �year so we would
not have to deal with 9 month projections for inflation or
the consumer price index.
2 . Begin negotiations in earnest with an intent to settle with
all union and non-union employees with a total package
equalling that of the six settlements discussed above.
3. Negotiate to bring the final package in an 3% plus an addi-
tional $10.00 for health, life and long term disability
which are the figyres incorporated in the division budgets
for 1984.
Recommendation
I recommend alternative No. 2. Things have been quiet on the labor
front in Shakopee for the last several years and I believe that
can be attributed to our efforts to peg our salaries at the metro
average . Because two of the police settlements include arbitration
awards , I feel confident that there is no reason for us to settle
for a package costing any more than that established by the six
cities listed above. The only question for Council is whether or
not they want to maintain past philosophy or whether they feel
its necessary for Shakopee to come in with a package that costs
slightly less . In making this decision Council must realize that
while we can count on arbitration to bring a police wage package
down to the metro average, the policemen can likewise count on
arbitration to bring any proposal we put on the table up to the
metro average .
I would also like Council to consider the creation of an innovative.
benefit program that some larger private sector employers are
currently using. It calls for the payment of health insurance
benefits into an individualized account for each employee rather
than simply making continued increasing payments to the health
provider. This approach is married with an increase in Lite deductible
which holds down the premium of the health provider and in turn
1954 Labor Negotij+Aons -�
Page Four
October 26 , 1983
allows the employee to d. .iw from this individualized account to
make payments on medical bills that world not be covered because
of the increased deductible . 'Phis approach means more work for
the Finance Department but in the long run might become a significant
benefit to employees while holding premiums down on health, life
and long term disability rates . It would be my intent to discuss
with the unions putting the additional $20.00 for health, life and
Lung term disability payments in such individualized accounts
rather than just increasing the City's $150.00 contribution to
the health provider by $20.00.
Action Requested
Council consensus to allow the City Administrator to negotiate 1984
wage packages not to exceed the 5% salary increase and $20.00 bene-
fit increase established by early police settlements in the metro-
polican area. Furthermore, that the City Administrator be permitted
to discuss an optional individualized health account should the
labor unions be willing to participate by increasing the deductibles
on the current health plan.
JKA/jms
1
ATTACFRENT B
MEMO TO: Mayor and Council SII
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: 1984 Wage and Benefit Packages
DATE: December 15, 1983
Introduction
I have been negotiating with Teamsters Local 320 for the
Police and Public Works Departments within the peramiters set
by Council. Negotiations are drawing to a close and the
packages described below could well be confirmed before Tuesday
evening' s meeting. In addition, this memo includes a benefit
package request from non-union employees and the two pay plans
that have not yet been adopted by Council .
1984 Wage and Benefit Packages
Proposed Local 320 Police Package:
1. A 4% salary and longevity increase.
2. A $45.00 increase in the health, life, and
long term disability benefits .
3 . A modification in the sick leave cashin of
one-third of 120 days after five years
which would include 160 days after 10
years .
4. Increase in the Detectives' pay differen-
tial from $85 .00 to $100.00 ( for 1983 the
average differential in the Metro area is
$96 .00) .
;,20.00
ents : The 4% and $45.00 is comparable to the 5% and
settlements in the Metro area to date. The sick leave
stment is still well within the norm in the Metro
area where a number of cities provide a 50% cashin with no
total limit on the number of accumulated sick leave days .
Finally, a review of the earlier memo you received with
police union' s demands will indicate that a large number
of them have been dropped through the negotiating process .
Local 320 Public Works Negotiations :
1. A 400 per hour salary increase for all
employees except light equipment operators,
who would receive a 45¢ per hour increase.
There are five light equipment operators
and this total package equals 4%.
ATTACHMENT B
JOL
F F F F F F W W L y
m v P U W N P U O n
v v y y y C y y y 9 Z
on m w H .�. o r 8 ✓ YO• O o O n E' o O n o 0
m^ B T r. n r' m n r• r' o p
R n m o n v n m o w o n o o e
m o Y• b m T «'• T m R n m T R n n � �
m E o n v 8 O m
m m O w B 0
9 M T 9 d •> •p w O n w Y, m w n y Y•�<
9 O m m u Y m m m n ry p R R O w
m w Y• S E O w p. O K O 9 p R' w
ae r. w Y.y S Y R Y.Oc
IT U n m
0 E m m n [> r
o se o m •e s n m Y' Y. ,..
R 0 .n Tw T .e yw o w m
r' O m m w p ry n
N n Y w d b n C p e
O b ^ M
w o w m E b y m m
S S •" p T. n m T w p T ^
Y'
• S m m � w w w 6 p
m O m x w p < m n V T
9
m
O
V. 19'• T ry 6 R V O � w b
O
c m K A m ^ E m
rR• o V' S r' Op OO 0).4r
Yn 4. y m ^ w r• n
'A 0
n p m_ O w ry y u
u g p p ry O m b
•" p w w G m p V U V N P m V W O n M 9 w A
n a mlaw
N O n
m m S 9r„
d ry F O O
B S w w m 9 w V _O u r u r• u u u � n U b
w Y' m Y. IT r• R U m
c B W o m n n # v
m n m R S n
mS p m r. w y O r•
w n p n o O
m a Y m m w w
C;
w "" u
'p O Y r r u
N < r m w p ru
N F ry m O F B m U N N r O r W N O O m
O U O U O N w
9 O m O
O m
9 .
N
w H O
S'O
R II
w w y
K p w
F
m m_
o\ �
C
ATTACHMENT C
MEMD TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Individual Employee Health/Maintenance Accounts
DATE: December 30, 1983
Introduction
In my memorandum discussing 1984 labor negotiations dated October 26, 1983
and presented to City Council at its November lst council meeting, I included
in the recommendation the option to consider an innovative benefit program
based on individualized accounts for employees. Cancil authorized me to
pursue this alternative if employees were willing to-participate by increasing
the deductibles on the current health plan.
Employee Response
All City employees have seen the attached fact sheet outlining the
current health coverage options and using as an example a family of four and
a single employee. After having an opportunity to discuss the option in the
fact sheet with me, the employees have voted as follows:
Employee In No
Group Favor Against Opinimn
1. Department Heads 7 *1 -0-
2. City Hall Employees
(Non dept. head) 8 -0- -0-
3. Public Works 7 1 2
4. Police (includes
secretarial) 1 15 **1
Total: 23 17 3
Footnotes: *This employee might change his vote depending upon the
implementation methods selected by Council.
**This employee has not yet voted for or against the plan.
State law requires that a public employer must obtain the approval of
all employees before it can reduce the level of benefits provided in a health
benefit program. Because the City's proposal for individual employee health/
maintenance accounts was tied to an increase in the deductible from $100 to
$200, the above employee poll was required. I have checked with the league
of Cities and with Labor Relations Associates, and both indicated that their
interpretation of the law was that a simple majority would prevail if a City
Ehployee Health/Maintenance Accounts
Page 2
A:cember 30, 1983
was proposing, a change in the benefit level. Given this information, it is
clear that the City has sufficient support from employees to make the change
to individual employee health/maintenance accounts and to simultaneously
increase the deductible in the health plan from $100 to $200. This change
in the deductible will reduce the current monthly family premium from $208
to approximately $175.
Steps Required for Implementation
To set up a program of individual employee health/maintenance accounts
the City must comply with IRS code provisionvs. To do this, the City should
employ the services of a firm that can assist us in establishing the proper
documents to implement such a plan. We have contacted Deferred Compensation
Administrators, 13100 Wayzata Boulevard, Minnetonka, MN 55343 in our efforts
to map out how such a program might be put together. Deferred Compensation
Administrators (DCA) are currently employed by Hennepin County and a number
of other metropolitan cities looking into the individual employee health/
maintenance accounts most frequently referred to as cafeteria style benefit
plans. For a flat fee of $1500 DCA will help the City establish such
accosts if the City's legal staff will prepare the legal documents using
DCA's samples and guidelines. The implementation period usually runs about
three months, and the City would carry its current program into 1984 until
such time that we were prepared to actually implement the program.
Logis has been planning to have its Payroll Systems modified to handle
individual accosts as of the first payroll in 1984, therefore, we are certain
that they will be able to handle this program should Council choose to proceed
with it.
DCA provides a second level of service in which they screen the health
claims coming in from individual employees to preserve the confidentiality
of employees' use of the health maintenance account. DCA charges approxi-
mately $600for this service.
DCA provides a third tier of service under which they actually process
all the claims that pass through the individual health/maintenance accounts.
DCA has explained to the City that the normal recomrended break-even point
is 50 employees or more for this type of service. Because Shakopee will
have one standardized program and falls slightly below the 50 employee
figure, Gregg Voxland and I recommend that we not consider this third tier
of service at this time. The cost for this will be approximately $1200.
The City of Shakopee's approach will be somewhat unique in that most
employers provide this individualized health/maintenance account on a
voluntary basis along with a large number of other choices in health benefits.
The City of Shakopee is proposing that all employees participate in this
Program and that the increase in the City's contribution to health benefits
for 1984 be deposited in the individualized accounts. Moreover, the program
Employee Health/Maintenance Accosts
Page 3
December 30, 1983
would provide the flexibility for employees to include more of their salary
in the account on an individual basis by properly notifying the Finance
Department.
Alternatives
L. Direct the appropriate City staff to contact DCA and draft the appropriate
documents to hire then to assist the City in implementing the individual
employee health/maintenance accents at a total cost of $1,500.
2. Direct the appropriate City staff to contact DCA and draft the appropriate
documents to hire them to implement the program at $1,500 and to process
individual employee claims at an additional $1,200 per year.
3. Do not implement the program and maintain the status quo.
4. Develop the program in a modified form.
Recommendation
I recommend Alternative No. 1. I believe that the individual employee
health/maintenance accent will prove to be a real boon to City employees and
the City as employer. Individual health/maintenance accounts in the context
of cafeteria style benefit plans are clearly the wave of the future because
of the flexibility they provide both the employer and the employees. If
Council accepts this recommendation, the $1500 fee to set up the accents
would be paid from contingencies budgeted for 1984. In accepting Alternative
No. 1 this world be then a one-time expense to set up the accents and the
City Finance Department would administer the accounts thereafter. The adop-
tion of the individual employee health/maintenance account also establishes
a new precedent, in that the employer would be making equal contributions
to family and single employees wig never it makes contributions to a benefit
plan. Under our present program, when the City puts money into the health
benefit plan those dollars only benefit family employees. This process will
be more equitable and also more expensive. The wage package we are nego-
tiating right now with the two 320 Locals takes this into consideration.
I would also recommend that if Council accepts Alternative No. 1, it
seriously consider making the $45.00 monthly payment to the individual
health/maintenance accosts on a quarterly basis at the beginning of the
quarter. This would provide individual employees with a modest amount of
money to pay medical bills under the higher deductible proposed under this
plan. The $45.00 per month employer contribution of course, can always be
supplemented by employees who choose to funnel more of their salary into
these individualized accosts. IRS requires that the individual accounts
accumulate no more than is paid in in any given year, therefore, at the
end of the second year accosts with more than one year of accumulation
will have to be drawn down on before the end of the year and taxes paid
on that anoint.
Employee Health/Maintenance Accounts
Page 4
December 30, 1983
Action Requested
Direct the appropriate City Staff to contact Deferred Carpensation
Administrators and draft a contract to employ said firm at the cost of
$1,500 to establish an individual employee health/maintenance account
program for the City of Shakopee to be implemented at the beginning of
the second quarter of 1984, and that employer contributions to the accounts
be paid quarterly of the first day of each quarter.
JKA/ldd
Shakopee City Council ATTACHMENT D
January 3, 1954 _
page 5
The City Admr. explained the proposed benefit program Lased on 'individualized
accounts for employees. Some discussion followed.
Lebens/Vierling moved to direct the appropriate City staff to contact Deferred
Compensation Administrators and draft a contract to employ said firm at the cost
of $1,500 to establish an individual employee health maintenance account program
for the City of Shakopee to be implemented at the beginning of the second quarter
of 1984, and that employee contributions to the accounts be paid quarterly on the
first day of each quarter. The City Admr. said he talked to the Ass't. City
Attorney about this action who had little background in this area so he was relying
on league of City's Counsel.
}toll Call: Ates; t'nanimous Noes; None Motion Carried
1 .
ATTACHENT E
Memo To: John K. Anderson , City Administrator
From: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Health Care Accounts
Date: March 2, 1984
Introduction & Backgound
The City was preparing to implement individualized health
care accounts as part of the 1984 benefit package. However,
the I.R.S. issued a ruling in February which made most plans of
the type we were implementing unacceptable. There will
undoubtedly be lobbying and congressional hearings on this
issue throughout the year. Our consultant firm has been to
Washington-to clarify the situation and will advise us of any
changes.
Alternatives
1 . Proceed as planned even though I .R.S. has ruled against
such plans and hope for a change before year end .
2 . Pay in cash as part of payroll the amount that would have
gone into the accounts from the employer ($45/mo. for
singleand $195 less premium for family) . These payments
are taxableincome.
3 . Put the , $45/mo . into the accounts for all employees .
They can draw on the account for premiums and costs , but
Forfeit -any unused balance of the account. There is no
employee contribution to the account, but the account is
tax free.
Recommendation
The employees are being polled , but as of the time when this is
written , it appears that the employees prefer number 2 because
of the forfeiture provision of number 3 . They have shown the
desire to return to the original concept .should the I .R.S.
change-it 's position on the issue.
Action Regye
Move to authorize the payment of $45 per month to employees
with single insurance coverage and the payment of the
difference of the $195/month benefit level and the average
insurance premium when the premium is less than $195/mo. to
the employees with family coverage. Such payment to be part
of a payroll check. -
GV:mmr - .. ..-.
an TpR ruling. Diseuasl on ensuofl ragarung m. .icor.,.ei.::: �—�� � ��—
Minutes ofLeroux/'dampach mov to authorize the payment of $4' per month to employees with
3-6-84 sin a insurance c*oerage and the payment of the d$,..arence of the $195 per
Meeting month it level and the average insurance premium when the premium is less
than $195 per month to the employees with family coverage: such payment to �I n
ATTACHMENT F part of a payroll check. Motion carried unanimously. " /
Vierling/Wampach moved to declare three 1980 Malibu's, two 1979 Malibu's and one
Granada surplus property. Noes; None Motion carried.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous
Leroux/Colligan moved that bills in the amount of $55.961.09 be allowed and
ordered Paid- Motion carried.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous
The City Admr. explained the INC position on comparable worth policy. He said
it is a political issue that will be coning up and the League just wants local
units of government to be able to address it, instead of having something man-
dated by the State. Discussion followed.
Colligan/Vierling moved to authorize the proper City officials to vote in favor
of the proposed 1984 League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Policies and Priori-
ties. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wempach offered Resolution No. 2232, A Resolution Approving the Plans
and Specifications for the 1984 Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk and Driveway Approach
Replacement Program, Improvement No. 1984-2, and moved its adoptioon. carried.
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None
Vierling/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2231, A Resolution Amending Resolution
No. 220I Desigaating Official Depositories of City Ends, and moved its
acarriedon,
1 Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None
MotionThe City Admr. gave some background on the Local Government Aid formula.
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2230, A Resolution Recommending That
the State nner aLown.Go M�ontcAid Forned unaaibe Frozen for Fiscal Year
1985, and moved its
Vierling/Leroux moved to direct the appropriate City officials to forward a copy
Of Resolution No. 2230 to the City's State Representatives and the Municipal
Caucus. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2233. A Resolution Promoting Downtown
the
eNewoSSttate Jaycees Offient by Jointly
Building,ding, and movedicipating i the S itso adoption.
pee in Securing
The City Admr. pointed out a typographical error in the resolution' He Bell,also
explained that a portion of Lots 4 and 5 are awned by
and
language should be added to the resolution to exclude that portion. He said
he would insert "excluding the 3825 square feet not now owned by the City" . He
said he has been in touch with Northwestern Bell, and he thinks the City will
be able to purchase that property to add to the parcel to be offered to the
Jaycees. He said the Jaycees will be able to utilize those lots even if the
Northwestern Bell portion is not included.
s
Ray Hussong, of the Jaycees, said the Jaycees are a public charity, and as such
do not pay real estate taxes.
the location--' The City Admr. added that Burnsville is competing for
o oral on Marchf8,S 1984•
Jaycees building, and both cities will be making a Pr P
He suggested several alternatives for making S oDtanin location more ao£dive.
He explained further the alternative involving B _
debtedness for the Tahpah Park sewer construction, which would
Dingfree tth sapooert
ATTACHMENT G
Memo To: John R. Anderson, City Administrator
From: Marilyn H. Remer, Sr. Acct'g. Clerk/Personnel
Re: Clarification of 1985 Health S Life Compensation
Date: June 13, 1985
Introduction S Background
The 1984 Employee Compensation package included an additional $45.00/mo. for
Health 6 Life in lieu of an average 2: wage increase. The $45/mo. was to
be an equal benefit for all employees by establishing individual employee
health maintenance accounts into which this $45/mo, was to be credited and
drawn from by the employees for specified expenses. This new concept is similar
to many "cafeteria" health plans. Due to unfavorable Federal government regu-
lations this was not feasible. Therefore, employees with family coverage
applied the $45/mo. towards the cost of their health 6 life coverage and were
reimbursed the balance on a quarterly basis thru payroll. Employees with
single coverage receive their $45/mo. also on a quarterly basis through the
payroll system. -
The 1985 compensation package included an additional $10/mo. towards Health
5 Life at such time the cost would increase by like amount. The rates did
increase over $10 effective March 15th raising. the City's contribution to
$205/mo. The average cost of family coverage is currently $216.93/mo. with
employees paying the difference through a payroll deduction.
.There are currently 16 employees with single caaerage at an average monthly
cost to the City of $67.50. At the time the yearly compensation package was .
discussed, .many employees assumed the policy established the previous year
would continue with all employees receiving the $10/mo. The cost to the City
for the single coverages would be $160/mo. ($30 x 16 employees) for the remaining -
9 months for a total 1985 cost of $1440.
The average monthly cost of $67.50 plus the $55 for a total single coverage
cost to the City of approx. $122.50 is still substantially less than the $205
cost for family coverage. Besides being more equitable for all employees,
this policy has served to encourage some employees to drop family coverage
due to their spouses also carrying insurance, which ultimately helps to reduce
-
the high cost of insurance for everyone.
The last payroll in June (6/28) is the date for the 2nd quarterly adjustment
in lieu of health maintenance, therefore. I am asking for clarification at
this time whether all employees are to receive the $10 benefit.
Alternatives
1. Give additional $10/mo. to single coverage employees.
2. Do not give additional $10/mo. to single coverage employees.
Recommendation
{ Staff recommends alternative no. 1 . Staff cannot recall this being discussed
previously, therefore Council' s clarification and approval is being requested.
Action Recuested
Move that the 1985 Compensation Plan for Non-Union Employees be clarified
that all employees are to receive the additional $10/mo. Health 6 Life increase
by City.
ATTACHMENT H
George Muenchow, Community Services Director, gave a presentation regard-
ing his department's desire to "go on computer". He is requesting 50/50
contribution from the City and the School Board. At this point he is just
looking for direction as far as if this is a viable alternative for them
to look at.
Cncl. Lebens asked how this program would be affected if the City leaves
LOGIS. The City Admr. responded there would be an additional annual cost
of $2,500 for them.
Mayor Reinke asked about the possibility of more than 50% funding from
the school with the Community Services fund that is in place.
Cncl. Leroux discussed with Mr. Muenchow more detailed questions about
the computer. He would like to see more detailed supportive data regard-
ing pricing and components before actually supporting the purchase.
Vierling/Wampach moved to indicate City Council is interested in Community
Services' exploration of the adoption of a computer system, but will not
be able to provide any funds to assist with this project at this time.
Cncl. Leroux suggested Community Services making its request to the City
through the computer selection committee
Motion carried unanimously. -
Leroux/Wampach moved to refund $345.66 to Del oris Schmitt, 120 East First
Avenue, for garbage service. .
Roll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
ERroux/Wamapch moved that the 1985 Compensation Plan for Non-IIaion Employees
clarified that all employees are to receive the additional $10/month
alth S Life increase by City.
ll Call: Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None - Motion carried.
Lebens/Vierling moved to remove from the table On Sale, Sunday, Off Sale
and Club liquor license applications. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to approve the applications and grant a 1985-86
On Sale and Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor license to Pullman Club, Inc., '
124 West 1st Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux moved to approve. the applications and grant a 1985-86
On Sale, Sunday and Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor license to XX Corp. 6
Wittles, Inc., 1561 Zest 1st Avenue. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to approve the applications and grant a 1985-86
On Sale and Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor license to Clair's Bar, Inc.,
124 South Holmes. Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Wampach moved to approve the application and grant a 1985-86
Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor license to Valley Liquor Inc. , 1104 Minnesota
Valley Mall. Motion carried unanimously.
ATTACHMENT I
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Administrator
Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Employers Contribution To Group Insurance
DATE: February 2, 1989
Introduction
A memo has been requested reviewing the City's contribution to group
insurance costs, specifically the situation of single coverage versus family
coverage.
Back rg ound
There are several points to be made regarding the suggestion made at the
1/31/89 Council meeting of using the amounts paid directly to employees with
single coverage to finance increased life insurance and the related comments of
"kickbacks" to single coverage employees.
1. The attached memos dated 3/2/84 and 6/13/85 explains the start and the
rational of the payments to single coverage employees. The 1984 employee
benefit package provided $45 per month to all employees in lieu of 28 of wages
to be committed to an individualized health care account for tax free
reimbursement of medical expenses. The IRS disallowed the City's initial
intended plan, therefore in March 1984 Council action provided the additional
cash benefit as part of payroll pending clarification or modification of the
IRS position.
Employees with single coverage received the $45/mo. on a quarterly basis
as a payroll reimbursement in lieu of a health maintenance account. Employees
with family coverage applied the $45/mo to the cost of their benefit package
and also for a short time received a payroll reimbursement when the cost of the
insurance was less than the benefit provided.
In each subsequent year the City contribution has increased $10 per month
for all employees and has been distributed in the same manner. There are now
several health maintenance accounts which meet IRS regulations, although none
will allow the employee to receive in cash any unused balances in the health
maintenance account at year end.
All employees are covered or eligible, this arrangement is not limited to
just union or nonunion employees. The payment is a partial attempt to equalize
the benefit provided by the City to employees with single coverage as compared
to the benefit provided to those employees who select family coverage. The 2%
wage reduction from Stanton averages is still in the calculations for the
current comparable worth schedule and the pay plan. See attachment for the
footnotes (H) to the calculations supporting the 1989 Pay Plan.
The payments are part of the compensation package that has been provided
for several years and is an established labor practice. Finally, the
comparable worth act mandates compensation equity therefore contributing a
lessor amount to those employees with single coverage is inconsistent with
achieving comparable compensation to all employees. l
2. We are part way through 1989 with the compensation packages set for the
nonunion, public works and the police sergeants. Even if this issue is not
specifically addressed in the labor contracts for the latter two groups, it is
an established practice and could probably be challenged by the union if it is
changed unilaterally in the middle of a contract.
The City just bid the insurance contracts for group insurance. Changing
the single arrangement could result in a significant number of employees
changing from single to family coverage and raising the possibility that Blue
Cross would not accept the conversions because it is different from the bid
specifications and the reason for the change is not a valid reason from their
perspective and it is not an open enrollment period. Therefore, if this issue
is pursued, it should be a 1990 issue and not a 1989 issue.
3. Currently there are 24/26 (24 with single insurance, 26 get the single
reimbursement - 2 have opted for no coverage for health insurance) employees
with single coverage, 6 with two party coverage and 24 with family coverage.
The City is providing the singles with $107 of benefit for insurance and $95
cash payment (taxable income) for a monthly total of $202. The two party
employees get $216 for insurance and the family employees get $245 for
insurance per month. For every employee that elects to get off of family
coverage (i.e. get family coverage or spouse coverage from spouses employer)
there is a savings of $43 per month to the City.
The following chart showing information for he.,.lth insurance only may help
Council visualize the cost difference.
Monthly
emivm City cost Employee cost
Family Avg 247 220 26
2 Party Avg 191 191 0
Single Avg 82 82 0
Single vs Family diff. 165 138 26
Single reimbursement 95
Net City diff. single vs fam. 43
Note: the cost of the other insurance coverage of life, ADSD and long
term disability is about $25 per month per employee.
If the single reimbursement is taken away, there are employees who will go
back on family coverage at an increased premium of $1,656 per year per
employee, a net increased cost to the City of $516 per year per employee. The
scenario of all singles switching to family is unlikely but to put things in a
perspective, if all 26 switched to family it would cost the City $13,416 more
per year. I can not say how many employees will switch, but there are
definitely some that will. Also, having dependents on some other policy helps
our loss history which helps keep the rates down.
To take the reimbursement payment away from just the singles when it was a
trade for wages would be entirely unfair. It should be taken from all
employees or adjustments made to pay rates to compensate for the loss.
4. The City currently provides all eligible employees with $25,000 of life
insurance. It appears from the Stanton survey that the average for other group
five cities is about $14,000 of coverage, ranging from $5,000 to $50,000. I
don't believe that it ever was the intention of the City to meet all life
insurance needs of its employees, just to provide some basic level of coverage.
Depending on the circumstances, other sources of benefits in the event of death
could include the Accidental Death and Dismemberment policy, workers
compensation insurance, PER&, social security and other parties if at fault.
There are a number of employees that have purchased additional insurance
through the deferred compensation plan of the city. If the level of insurance
is changed, I would recommend it be changed for all employees at the same time
at the start of a policy period.
5. One of the goals/objectives of the Finance/Personnel department is to
review the status of the 28 trade-off, the level of the City contribution to
the insurance cost for the employees and possibly establishing an employee
health maintenance account for the 1990 benefits package. Also, depending on
what changes actually might take place, there is a possibility of complications
for compliance with IRC Section 89.
Blue Cross ATTACHMENT J jjS
a� 40
:.: Blue Shield •.• Blue Plus HMO
hill
, nwrporaled
Employer Provider Network, Incorporated Minnesota Health Plans, Inc.
An affiliate of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota A Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minna Company
GROUP WAIVER OF COVERAGE FORM
PLEASE PRINT WITH 13ALL POINT PEN — PRESS FIRMLY
READ INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE SIDE
Name of Employee (Last - First - Middle) isocial Sicurity Number
Name of Employer Employer Group Date of Employment
Number(s)
I have been informed that I am eligible to apply for coverage under my employer's group contract(s) issued by Blue
Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota or one of its affiliate corporations(Blue Plus, HMO Midwast, Minnesota Health
Plans, Inc., Employer Provider Network, Inc. and/or Mil Life, Incorporated).
I hereby forfeit my night to make application for the coverage. I fully understand that if I desire to be covered under the
contract(s) in the future, I will be required to submit, at my own expense, evidence of good health satisfactory to Blue
Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota, or its affiliates, which could result in denial of coverage..
Coverage being waived: Reason coverage being waived:
Blue Cross and Blue Shield Health ❑ I have other Blue Crow and Blue Shield coverage
❑ Employee coverage Group or Contract number
❑ Employee and Dependent coverage ❑ I have other Blue Plus coverage
❑ Dependent coverage only
Group or Contract number
Blue Shield AWARE Dental
❑ Employee coverage ❑ I have other Blua Shield AWARE or Mill Dental
❑ Employee and Dependent coverage coverage
❑ Dependent coverage only Group or Contract number
Blue Plus ❑
❑ Employee coverage I have coverage with another carrier
F] Employee and Dependent coverage Name of carrier
❑ Dependent coverage only ❑ I have other HMO coverage
Mil Life, Disability and AD&D Name of HMO
❑ Employee coverage ❑ I have other Group Dental coverage
❑ Employee and Dependent coverage
❑ Dependent coverage only Name of carrier
Mil Dental ❑ I have no health coverage
❑ Employee coverage ❑ I have no dental coverage
❑ Employee and Dependent coverage
❑ Dependent coverage only ❑ 1 have no Life, Disability or AD & D coverage
Signature of Employee Date
Authorized Signature
of Employer Date
Yellow Copy-Employees Copy
White- Employer's Copy
J104-Rl(loss)
Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Re: Fire Service Agreements
Date: April 7, 1989
Introduction
Jackson and Louisville Townships have requested a meeting with a Council
committee to review the fire service contracts.
Background
The townships have concerns about the cost benefit ratio of some aspects
of the current fire service agreement. In particular, they are concerned
about a second fire station and the two large trucks currently showing in
the five year equipment list.
They have requested a meeting with a Council committee to review the
issues. Suggested Council committee composition was the City Attorney,
Fire Department Liaison and the Equipment Committee members. The date
and time was set for 7:00 P.M. April 26, 1989 at City Hall.
Alternatives
1.) Meet as per above
2.) Select different Committee members
3. ) Select different time/date
Recommendation
Council should discuss and set committee members and meeting date/time.
April 26 at 7:00 P.M. was agreeable with both townships so that time and
date is the most convenient if Council can make it.
Action Requested
Set meeting date/time and select committee members.
GV:mmr
TO: Dennis R. Kraft , Acting Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director U
RE : Property/Liability Insurance
DATE: April 4, 1989
Introduction
The insurance policies of the City (excluding workers
compensation) are up for renewal June 30 , 1989 .
Background
In accordance with past practice , staff is preparing renewal
applications for the various insurance policies with the League .
The bonds for public officials have been with Transamerica, and
we will get a quote from both the League and Transamerica for
comparison. The boiler insurance will be renewed (applied for)
with Hartford since virtually no other company offers that
insurance and the League also uses Hartford.
The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) is a
joint powers self-insurance pool . LMCIT offers joint self-
insurance programs for cities including property and liability,
workers compensation, employee health and dental coverage . LMCIT
is governed by a Board of Directors made up of five city
officials . The property liability program is administered by
North Star Risk Services , Inc . and the workers compensation
program is administered by Employee Benefit Administration
Company. The City recently received a dividend of $20 , 000 on the
property liability program.
LMCIT covers over 808 of the cities in the state and has
virtually all of the larger cities . There is probably only two
other companies writing insurance for the smaller cities in this
state . Changing insurance companies would involve purchasing a
"tail" ($50 , 000 - $60, 000) to cover the transition for claims
that happen during one policy period but not filed or reported
until a later policy. During the last four years , the amount
paid or reserved for claims from Shakopee is approximately
$1 , 008 , 000, while the premiums paid have been about $642 , 900.
The Council has previously decided not to continue with an
umbrella policy and therefore a quotation is not being sought for
an umbrella policy.
If Council desires staff to proceed in a different manner
with the insurance policies for 1989-90 , Council should give
appropriate direction to staff.
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Sewer Bill Adjustments
DATE: April 4, 1989
Introduction
Staff is receiving requests for adjustments to sewer bills due to fall
lawn watering.
Background
The new sewer billing amount appeared on residential sewer bills (SFUC)
sent out last Friday. Many sewer bills are increased due to fall- lawn
sprinkling after the drought and subsequent reseeding in late summer/fall.
Sewer bills are based on water usage from about September 15 to March 15.
The policy for adjusting sewer bills does not provide authority for staff
to adjust bills due to lawn watering between September 15 and March 15. Staff
has received several requests for adjustment due to lawn watering last fall.
The attached letter is one such request. The author of the letter had the
sewer bill go from $8.49 to $19.88 due to lawn watering in the fall. Of
course, water that goes on the lwan does not go down the sewer.
Alternatives
1. Status Quo - no adjustment in bills or any adjustment has to have separate
Council action.
2. Authorize staff to make adjustments to sewer bills due to fall 1988 lawn
watering and treat this authority as a temporary exception to the policy.
Recommendation
Alternative number 2.
Action Reauested
Move to authorize staff to make adjustments to residential sewer bills due
to fall 1988 lawn watering.
-` Cts
IVIK 7,
!77
� QF?
!�.Z . -
G1 ,
.1. NALPN C.LENZMEIEN
113 W- STN AVE
SHAKOPEE, AN SS379
CONSENT - JI �P
Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Marilyn M. Remer, Personnel Coordinator
Re: Recording Secretary Employment Agreement
Date: April 10, 1989
Information
Attached is an employment agreement between the City of Shakopee and Sharon
Swenson, who is being hired as Recording Secretary for the Planning
Commission meetings, replacing Andrea DeJoy who has resigned. She may also
serve occasionally as back-up Recording Secretary for City Council meetings.
Back rf ound
The employment status of Recording Secretary is that of a Contracted
Employee as defined within the Personnel Policy. A Federal law requiring a
mandatory medicare deduction (1.458) for new hires who do not qualify for
PERA membership was passed in 1986, therefore in order to comply, this
individual/position must be processed through the employee payroll system.
Ms. Swenson has previous recording secretary experience with the City of
Eden Prairie and has submitted samples of minutes she has transcribed.
Based on this previous experience, the City Clerk is recommending a starting
salary of $7.50/hr. to be increased to $8.00/hr. after six-months of
satisfactory job performance.
Action Requested
Authorize staff to enter into an employment agreement with Sharon Swenson to
provide Recording Secretary services at the hourly pay rate of $7.50
effective May 4, 1989, with the hourly pay rate increasing to $8.00/hr.
November 4, 1989 contingent on a satisfactory six-month job performance
review.
EMPIOYMENT AGREEMENT
Under the terms of this agreement, Sharon Swenson, 8740 Emerson Ave.
So. , Bloomington, MN. 55420, is hereby contracted to serve as parttime
Recording Secretary for the City of Shakopee effective May 4, 1989.
Employee shall be compensated at the hourly pay rate of $7.50/hr. for
the attendance and subsequent transcribing of the minutes of the planning
Commission meetings. Employee may also serve as back-up Recording Secretary
for City Council meetings. Job performance will be reviewed in six months
by the City Clerk. Contingent upon a satisfactory job evaluation the hourly
pay rate will increase to $8.00/hr. effective November 4, 1989. Applicable
taxes shall be withheld in compliance with State and Federal Statutes.
No benefits shall accrue.
This agreement may be terminated by either party upon a two-week written
notice.
In witness, where of, the parties have executed this Agreement at
Shakopee, Minnesota on the day of , 1989.
EMPIOYEE EMPLOYER
Mayor
City Clerk
City Administrator
I it : YtlCC 6 CCC II�
oe qn Pn Pwn Pn u Pn Rn%Pn R�ro • ylro +�.�. . . ..ro fi P
u VVU U U U U N N hN N • I !F
tlm O
m ro nniu�na-m n- n� -mm w ro - s
mauoo�m � a� a<mmma m m! I
m
I
0
y �re mm i+
yyl pp PIOYMP Oe o M111 Pry roPJL ♦• !NN
q I
mP� tlNN PMoy N J �'O Np aUOA 00 ANN 1
m €Ebg ro
gaaaa W o oeo,o m w
a $agwyiy vn io^ �w CCg Nr,q qy I, _ ^m
® Aw UnmmU 10 a frrrIll rr F n IyV 1
ql wgg0 Wgq z KK< KIK
I P I a
@
'w w w w ml� m -
E, g gel.
�z z; rmmmmmm m 9z�zzn;m z m m
$ a,, n mwwwwmm z� saJaaa,q is R <
u u SAR'ro'n_ S am ON
N o f Pee 'P nnlnn Pio ro re
jn U J
O ro I
n �
SII F F lC � F F
. :,pr .. .a t?. t ',•'_,..Sy - LJ..
I I
i
Y: Y tl y Y
U <
Dou_
=1 TT I11 1111
-- - WWI- -
FOOD
y < ( o
O 6 6 JJJ
LG w 'L}L�i o 000
n � a' Y Y OJ J �S'Jtl V Om
I
p n LNN
W m n V
V i O C cUU JJJJ
Q II. u F Si LL Z
O ..z Y �WjWj
LL i6Q�
g T J C 90e
nLL0bm
€ I I
I
® ¢mom
I f00 _
II U O O e eo e0 e
. O aii ". a . FiSRFLRR9 :
, . : . • .
_%[i..T-% S %Ct EC ' S_000YY `-� CgE Y_C_ [ E =E_J - : _:�:T-= .T• - r
rvnl �• m rv�mP nm id m [Z rrry �iY m i`s �,i
b N N W WWW^ J W A Po W W Po Po
I N
« Y
1- Nu N yU! U V VV UU JVpV
AAo _PV oe
01 row pe
1::10. :gaoe' nm o A pm e
dllll .
m Q¢ v
3 A Z
19 C Og 1 m Zz H
pm •• s z i m Pmp w
FF � 2 p J4 ___
A9 P ^ w I
'6 37 :
a P! A p 9
� 1 I
I I
A 9 AA A A a AAN ^ A
go
g EF g o g°
AO 111,1 A
rs ! iii! P 111 3� o A
ro
I
r
SA R W AN
r y robil�
% I ♦ I I
I i
am �
P I I
mq-
dl� r N � tl1FY♦ r r � rd^
nn frm ♦ N m
_ M o M M � i i.
'i i i r i R ri r � r
o I,
a m
m
6� > F 6 •\ .Z. J JJJ
mm s € `9 s'd 'oq :C CCC
iiK
w
Y -- Q
6g w
6 q J tr rj JJ ¢¢f
qO q Y
> OIC J xZ O pF
1 J J JJ O J J JJ t Z
�.. mllm ®• mM o0 R OYt t R
00 q Pr- r ♦ MM Rf -
g, '
I
I m �
OZ
I R
u Y� N mb d M e ee f O
t ali N NN W N o oe o My N
^. . i : ] EERi9R : a
p � Y � Y e Y4'41 yNyNVY IIA b
ro ® 0 0 ro 000 ro 0nmm o
ro RM
HH ren -- roc 1. -uu4 0o NmNmm
w a eie n'm00
m E A > A ♦4 4
n foo $ "mmm i<
$ o ski i 0000 'o
m as ro � � wam i
00 00
�
i z A
o
n x c nna 9 cccy .. A
I ~
oo i
�aNm o
-
�
va
ro
� I s .•
i F F
i F
• - /\.����\���«��\/y«yz\«� \
.
� \ f \s\! • � -
2 TF77T �)
�§
\22 � .
. | | / _
\§|
« R ® ,
m e
-
;
Kf
�
Y �ETY CTY C E .T'. Y S Y Y Y Y C Y i Y S
N i NN a ry p N � Np+nN � n NNNNKMnPRNNNIN o
N f MIN f V 4 � N i NtlUNN � N_ UNNNN NNtUNNNNNN T m
ylY o
i � w
N NN M1 N N NNmNN �.N rt�NrvrvNNNNNNNNN F
liu li � � 0 inuYa m ammuomaommmm � m
I I
I
mI uw, - i
noon u -rv- N�+e y
0 oio nri mo iii wi om eNom ism`m�mo'mao+.o v"'iu re
� lia uuuwNe wOea �' ' .o die
uIo -u-mjl.lu`"
y ®qq Yry
n DD S = � ylyyy Y ICC^, nr,33 A(Ci(�i�n
.. w nmmg
V
o I m
ya
S I2A m 3 m OO.... 9 ~4yy4i
c g r' a Imm m,mm IT ''.m rr r F�P�rrr
rr131Ixn-.-..-.-.-.-.-...-.-.- -
-
m mm �33ww.a33a Ilm m m
� i m � '< zzz¢z < 'y z as mwwmwaanu<
PomI
y m U
IZ
O 00 e o02 yym_O_O eOee00000 A
1 ju 1 1 1y1 1 II it 1
Yo x Y Y xC YN -
. ...�.I�.. ....-
p 0 � -OO OOIOO.00000
� 11 1 y 1y111 � V II � I'� :N.I 11
Im _mll W 1 1 y $f.# 11 N NNNNPIS N�N.ON
U tl <
Iy N I n Ilei a A
m m
3
I — I
m m n N
i . I
....i
w I I 1 I 1
gymT
w o
m F n YI I
mNa-aLP W_ F iv - � � an r-m annPommnn=
nvei�S itl I (��i' � i 1 1 11 IIS 11
mv:;l�; N: fI n p iFN'I ai 1Na LP•MM YaiaWNlN le-F YIe INi
V till 1II`'N nIW I 1111111 11 Ifl „
C e, ee
al i , I I
m SS .z. „_ zi.MI Tww ww__wl .
_ 6 S Z'Z
O. { ' SII 0____0_0_0_0000
FFf FFF IY L J J 666..4 6666
may.^^j^j I 0. a.66
...............
F F F I as �O � m � FwFFWWFFWWJWWW WIJW
7JIJ J0J-J III tl FFTFF
I IY w p M1 �
Q ILII LL 4_ F Y[ I F
y W WW WWW W I I iV � � I
YYYYOOO 4 '
y WI J J J L 00 i S HEEEEI
O NMM MN0 m^ � IIF Z � W FVFFUVU
Y
LLLLLL LLOO FF OC NN ~b
J O ......w.3
V Vi4 �O � F � »»»Jw077JDOJ
I
I 0�e i f f �• SII I
e • oP� o 0o Wn oo P.nep m e-_a
aen.:e�'n ea - ee mm __ w wmnr eelm Wvr•P
. . . . va
eiue e�,W ea �uan laNoo as �a-<vpm me m
e-_ane n� a aeu i �=neaev_�en Nhi_�e 2
II I I
I
W e PPs P
PPPPPP ; u mmNem.mm�mmm S
m a�.ry uuNN u mmw iPiw
eev - I-r e v vvv.vae ve e
m u oOe pe o 000 Deese
> (
�______..-_ _
i oa, n.n nu
nn
�' rJ—vim^_ ! _ : 0.9 iia : A R : .9 R 9 a R 9 c.�_:� a e•_: i F
_TYL 'TCLY ' YTYYYYLCC Y •_ Y T: CGCG •- YT:
m � m00 P mmwa P it _
w Puuu� of y
iz
ml � m o ama m �mmlmm w m m m
i
D
3
2
P MN V WX Y i VJ -I� r YYJywI PM ee uJ
o �� >ji O10 no J ~1+110• J� oo
I s
fD f fm i • ZwwZ N i D1DD i1 � I fm it •
r TI iiA gCCC A, r_ y
p Fl i7 A PPoO D
C y
q V OE D TOii,,l9 9 CC c..9 P w_
d a m w nm p'r �aZZ
O
I i I I I 1 I I I11�•r 1 ;
u' Y 11PY I all of � 1 1 1 I
r
�.. .L..
I I
77
o
n
L M I Iy- X
e i I1'�11 II,,11W}}�
_ • W
II I 1 1 11 � 1 I 1
O N
tl
• = V
_ • I'1
ONI nil NN YI I I F X 1X'1
1 'p1• 1 1 I 11
< oI
eIN
.Isi
ffi . h . a� q . q
JI WIG z O W if W FS Wtl 60cON.J.
OI C z U F -vi6J
I F
W I
Ire Fa
' hl yl � J JJ�IJJ
_
_
W JI 61 O'' 22 ih
V W M F 0 0 OOO F
yW V ggln m O u o �gbFl00
WI 6
4' WO
L T Z F = (
Ni yj Uu p1r> X F 2 F q Q {O� � lLL 6LLLLLL F
1• e t a bo al
1 p 1 e hh Y 00 ee
9a aW01 o�p1'm Noo
FM1 �� o- eO 11��N NN � P e DNX FI- Nye lnhP.,.,.1'Iq
_ IN FF �M •OP FN irN WWW
p' i Y On •WN 'I N q
�i WW
ml m m mb � a m o
of ei I'
u e e o e o 0
C I
.. - . . . • . . 'p '_l• v 'IS ^ •-SSaal. Rh : R R : Sa3SSR-AA c�ai 3-Rb_RiO:'
m OY0 m Io N N N N w N C N 0 � _ = a _ _ = O
m
F F F F W F F F F F W W FFF F G y
4 —t w r w r
0 0 0 0- t P O w 0 0 i- F'w W n
0 0 O r o Y Y W o Y 0 0 WY Y N Y Y
0 0 O Y O r Y r N O Y
0 0 0 M' O w 0 0 YFw W H
0 0 O Y O r Y W O Y O O W N Y Y N
m m m o o o m o Oro = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 n
Y Y r Y r r r r w r H
Y Y r Y r r Y r Y r Y r Y Y Y r a
0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O O
Y Y r Y r r r Y r Y Y r Y Y Y r O
0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 O �
HI
a
n
N m a r
W 0 W Y N r Y 3
Vi OBD m 0 w N W O -yl N O WH- 0 a
O O O F���Dpp �n O O O O
0 0 m 0 vii vNi 0" 0 0 -
rt
O
a n
n
a
m a o ac o om a o v a
a 3 a n4 a m a �o 0 oOM
a
r x
ldD b R W caf h f�D C Y W W (A °� m K
C n m n n
O a r O M
O N n 0 H b Y
o a• r ao m
roa 3 w m m �
. n
a+ }I
N N N N
MM N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n
m mO\ O� O\ O\ O� O\ N vii vii Vii V1 �
O H O C W M W y O MO O m
0 0
n o a o a �+ �+ a m � o r m a. a r r o
O b Y H ro a 'G A a ro M P• z Y ro P• P• M
' Y £ m O .* M N b Y •< o tY+ z 0 r o n
n 3 H W Mm G a C W m S Ox �r ^ai M m
H o n N m t o A r x m
•C a O m a m m < n M n H a m x
O
N
a0 O a m m ct Y H a a
°H
v •e
0
H
" n
x
-
o 0 0 x .wig 0 0 0 0 —oi m $ 00 8 $ 0 0 �o g o 0 0 0
0 r 0 0 c 0 o m o .fin. �+. 0 0 0 g g 0 0 g o 0 $ 0
NO N H 0 0 �O D\ H In M O N 0 0 -7
O O N 1 0 o T 0 -y M O N 0 0 1
N Ih O C\ O M N 0� .S O -Y •
N X NH
Q H
Y
U
v v
v v W
0 a m
vv' X v N e z
Y -v+ o m v
[O U] C O v y O H F b W O
v Y H O w c rn P W �p O F
H H P'. •2 m Y ? m O N V �'
Y y WW G .7C C m Wv O m ; F dJ
O Z Z O O L 40 T IA C > m
G +' +' E Q d L F S N d P. W •+ b
m m O
>
Z NUN O� O� Oi mmm m m m m
H
U N N N N N N N N N N N N NNW N N N N N N N N
fG
W
W y m H m 0008MH\0O�0
N O O In N
W mrHi L P U O +di P O H O M O�ONOt-
.] U O b 7 z O
w F NN HNa0 NCO
Q F U b >a E W ((y5 U F ++ W ++ S v >b W W F W (9 P. y l] Gl H U v dJ fU F CO m H H
Y m H v W +i U H di lA H
C F
O
O _ -
O
U ik
U
Q L b
U Y
y 4
W v
R
InN OO N H 0 0 � O� H �n D WN O N O 10 C O
.Y N.S O N 1 0 0 T .S O 1 NN N O N O S .Y O0 O 948 � Ri
N O� .Y O NO yF
yp
O\
O N D N NNNO
Q C
N� H m a0 HN
b v d h b b
N H CCy 15 W I CGy
G N W F
[0 O H Y 3
d F C F H O
y H C E
QUO 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
00 O O O O 0000 HO Ov U0 G TH Uv
HHHH H H HH " H HH
000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0000 3l L7m4a�+` Wvm
O I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
M H H H
U
www
NH HH OH OH OH 000 0H 0H 0 0H 0 O W N WJ O HH NN w\NH NMDMY
H
t~i aQU
000
SS0SS SS00M
H .O�HO Ny
S00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ti 4 1i 1 In N
Ci
000000 0000 N HH
900 0 0 0 o O o
99 dTH M e .7 e HHIn Ire
y ONMH H T 0 O H H 0 0 HHN O In O O 0000
.,�
NNW T N N M T In In In In H H M H H T m H H H H
N M T TTTT
M 69 69 1 8 N g o 8 800 0 0 0 0 8oNR�i
///I,,
MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Interagency Technical Services Agreement between
the City of Shakopee and the Minnesota Department
of Transportation for Preliminary and Final
Bridge Design for the Proposed TH 101 Bypass Project
DATE: April 12, 1989
Introduction
The attached agreement allows the Minnesota Department of
Transportation to contract for certain design services in
conjunction with the eight crossroad bridges which are to be
constructed as a part of the southerly bypass project.
Background
The City of Shakopee has been working with Mn/DOT over the past
one to two decades on the design and ultimate construction of a
bypass around the southerly part of the urbanized area of the
City of Shakopee. The attached agreement provides for design
services for this project. The City Council has previously
committed $1 million toward the cost of the bypass project. This
agreement states that the City will pay for the bridge design
consultants, by submitting a lump sum payment to Mn/DoT for these
services.
This agreement is for a total sum of $361,487.00. Previously the
City Council authorized the execution of an agreement with Orr-
Schelen-Mayeron & Associates for the drainage design associated
with the bypass in the amount of $115,000.00 and an agreement
with Barton-Aschman for the crossroads design in the amount of
$280,769.89. The total amount of these three agreements is
$757,256.89. The remainder of the City's $1.0 million
contribution for this project would probably be used for
construction but staff will need to confirm that through Mn/DoT.
Alternatives
1. Authorize the appropriate City officials to enter into
Mn/DOT agreement No. 65657 for the southerly bypass project.
2. Do not authorize the execution of these agreements at this
time.
Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of this agreement.
Action Requested
Offer Resolution No. 3042, A Resolution Authorizing Execution of
an Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for
Design Services Associated with the Eight Crossroad Bridges for
State Trunk Highway 101 Shakopee Bypass, and move its adoption.
DRK/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 3042
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT
WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FOR DESIGN SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE EIGHT
CROSSROAD BRIDGES FOR STATE TRUNK HIGHWAY 101
SHAKOPEE BYPASS
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has agreed to contribute $1.0
million to the State of Minnesota towards the State Trunk Highway
101 Shakopee Bypass, and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has entered into an agreement
with Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc. for roadway design for six
of the crossroads associated with the Bypass in the amount of
$380,769.89, and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee has entered into an agreement
with Orr Schelen Mayeron & Associates, Inc. for storm drainage
improvements associated with the Bypass in the amount of
$115,000.00, and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation is
requesting that the City of Shakopee spend a portion of this
commitment towards bridge design consultants.
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 Agreement No. 65657 with the
Minnesota Department of Transportation for the cost of consultant
services for the design of Bridge Numbers 70011, 70012, 70039,
40040, 70013, 70014, 40037 and 70038 on the State Trunk Highway
101 Shakopee Bypass in the amount of $361,487.00.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,
1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1989.
City Attorney
AGREEMENT SERVICES SECTION AGREEMENT NO. 65657
M I N N E S O T A D E P A R T M E N T O F T R A N S P O R T A T I O N
INTERAGENCY TECHNICAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH
CITY OF SHAEOPEE
FOR
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL BRIDGE DESIGN
� , 41/
65657
INDEX PAGE
Parties to the Agreement 1
Justification and Explanation 1
I. Purpose 2
II. Project Organization 3
III. Financial Participation 3
IV. Term of this Agreement 3
V. General Provisions 3
1.0 Invoice Requirements 4
2 . 0 Quarterly Progress Reports 4
3 . 0 Access to Records 5
4 .0 Ownership of Documents 5
5. 0 Nondiscrimination 6
5.05 Interest of Public Officials 6
5.06 Disadvantaged Business Enterprises 6
5.07 Employees 6
5.08 Covenant Against Gratuities 7
5. 09 Changes in the Scope of Work 7
5. 100 Amendments 7
5. 110 Termination 8
5. 120 Hold Harmless 8
5. 130 Claims 9
5. 140 Severability 9
5. 150 Non-Waiver 10 -
5. 160 Rights and Obligations 10
VI. Approvals 11
65657
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the State of
Minnesota acting through its Commissioner of Transportation,
hereinafter referred to as "Mn/DOT" and the City of Shakopee,
hereinafter referred to as the "City" .
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS Mn/DOT does not have sufficient funds or available qualified
personnel to design Bridge Numbers 70011, 70012, 70039, 70040, 70013 ,
70014, 70037, and 70038 on the proposed new T.H. 101 Bypass around
Shakopee, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS the City desires to expedite construction of the Bypass to
relieve traffic congestion in its central business district; and
WHEREAS the City has committed one million dollars ($1 Million)
toward the cost of the Bypass project; and
WHEREAS Mn/DOT and the City are authorized to enter into an agreement
providing for the exercise of powers shared in common pursuant to
M.S. Section 471.59 (1988) ; and
V
IIW
65657
WHEREAS Mn/DOT and the City desire to enter into an agreement to
reimburse Mn/DOT for the cost of consultant services for design of
the above mentioned bridges; and
WHEREAS Mn/DOT has executed agreements with consultants to design the
above mentioned bridges on the Bypass; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein
contained the City and Mn/DOT mutually covenant and agree as
follows:
I. PURPOSE
The purpose of this agreement is to provide a method for the
City's participation in funding the design of Bridge Numbers
70011, 70012, 70039, 70040, 70013, 70014 , 70037 and 70038 on
the proposed T.H. 101 Bypass around Shakopee, Minnesota. The
Minnesota Agreement Numbers 65655 and 65656 incorporate the
scope of services and costs to be performed by two consultant
firms for which the City has agreed to pay in full. Copies of
Minnesota Agreement Numbers 65655 and 65656 have been
transmitted to the City.
_ p _ I , �l
U
65657
II. PROJECT ORGANIZATION
Mn/DOT will have overall responsibility for managing the design
and plan preparation of the bridges. Mn/DOT shall serve as
project manager for the project and shall have primary
responsibility for the administration and coordination of the
contract and the construction.
III. FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION
The City agrees to provide a lump sum of $361,487 . 00 to Mn/DOT.
Mn/DOT will bill the City immediately after execution of this
agreement for the entire lump sum of $361,487. 00.
IV. TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT
This agreement shall remain in effect for a period of 24 months
from the time of final execution of this agreement.
V. GENERAL PROVISIONS
In carrying out its responsibilities as set forth herein, the
City and Mn/DOT shall comply with all of the contractual
conditions set forth as follows:
- 3 - 1 ,
) I I/
65657
1.0 INVOICE REQUIREMENTS
Payment for services rendered under this agreement shall
be subject to the following conditions:
A. The invoice shall be for the amount stated in Section
III and shall be submitted immediately after execution
of this agreement.
B. The invoice shall include the Mn/DOT Agreement Number
(65657) .
C. The invoice shall be sent to:
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
D. The City will process the invoice for payment within
thirty (30) days of receipt providing said invoice has
been prepared in accordance with the invoice
requirements.
2 . 0 QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORTS
Mn/DOT will provide the City with quarterly progress
reports which shall include 1) a narrative `of
accomplishments, 2) meetings attended, and 3) other
pertinent information.
4 - 4
65657
3 .0 ACCESS TO RECORDS
Mn/DOT shall permit the City's duly authorized
representatives and the City shall permit Mn/DOT or its
duly authorized representatives, access to any books,
documents, papers and records of Mn/DOT and the City which
are directly pertinent to the agreement for purposes of
making audit, examination and excerpts and transcriptions.
4 .0 OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
All working papers, reports, graphics, recordings,
materials, computer programming materials, plans and
specifications prepared by or for Mn/DOT specifically in
the performance of this agreement shall be organized and
annotated in a logical manner for future reference and
shall remain the property of Mn/DOT. This also includes
any material or service purchased under this agreement.
Reports, recordings, information, data, etc. , prepared or
developed specifically under this agreement shall not be
made available to any individual or organization unless
permitted by the Data Practices Act of the State of
Minnesota.
V
) 1
65657
5.0 NONDISCRIMINATION
The provisions of Minnesota Statute 181. 59 and of any
applicable ordinance relating to civil rights and
discrimination shall be considered part of this
agreement as if fully set forth herein.
5.05 INTEREST OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
No member, officer, employee or agent of the parties
hereto during their tenure or for two (2) years
thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or
indirect, in this agreement or the proceeds thereof.
5. 06 DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISES
The parties to this agreement shall provide
disadvantaged businesses with the opportunity to
participate in the provision of services and goods under
this agreement.
5. 07 EMPLOYEES
The City shall not engage, on a full or part-time or
other basis during the period of the agreement, any
professional or technical personnel who are or have
been at any time during the period of the agreement in
the employ of the State of Minnesota, except regularly
retired employees, without written consent from Mn/DOT.
6 vt
65657
5. 08 COVENANT AGAINST GRATUITIES
The officials, employees or agents of the parties to
this agreement shall not accept gifts , favors,
entertainment, offer of employment nor any other
gratuities of monetary value from any individual or
organization performing services under this agreement
during the period of this agreement nor for a period of
one year thereafter.
5.09 CHANGES IN THE SCOPE OF WORK
Changes in the scope of work to be performed as part of
this agreement shall receive prior Mn/DOT and City
approval and shall be incorporated into this agreement
as part of a duly executed agreement amendment.
5. 100 AMENDMENTS
This agreement may be amended when mutually agreed by
the parties hereto. Any change in responsibilities,
monetary obligations or term of agreement shall be
amended in writing and duly executed by the parties
hereto prior to the performance of any services agreed
to by said amendment.
V
II llt�
65656
5. 110 TERMINATION
This agreement may be terminated in whole or in part
pursuant to Section 5.100 above when mutually agreed to
by the parties hereto or when required by circumstances
beyond the control of either party.
5.120 HOLD HARMLESS
Mn/DOT indemnifies, save and holds harmless the City and
all of its agents and employees from all and any claims,
demands, actions or causes of action of whatsoever
nature or character arising out or by reason of the
conduct of this project. Mn/DOT further agrees to
defend at its own sole cost and expense any action or
proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any
claim of whatsoever character arising as a result of the
conduct of the project.
The City indemnifies, save and holds harmless Mn/DOT and
all of its agents and employees from all and any claims,
demands, actions or causes of action of whatsoever
nature or character arising out or by reason of the
conduct of this project. The City further agrees to
defend at its own sole cost and expense any action or
proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any
claim of whatsoever character arising as a result of the
conduct of the project.
_ 8 _
65657
5. 130 CLAIMS
Any and all employees of the City or other persons while
engaged in the performance of any work or services
required by the City under the agreement shall not be
considered employees of Mn/DOT, and any and all claims
that may or might arise under the Worker's Compensation
Act of Minnesota on behalf of said employees or other
persons while so engaged, and any and all claims made by
a third party as a consequence of any act or omission on
the part of the City's employees or other persons while
so engaged on any of the work or services to be rendered
shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of
Mn/DOT.
5. 140 SEVERABILITY
It is further agreed and understood by the parties
hereto that if any part, term or provision of this
agreement should be unenforceable in the jurisdiction in
which either party seeks the enforcement of the
agreement, it shall be construed as if not containing
the invalid provisions, and the remaining portions or
provisions shall govern the rights an obligations of the
parties.
9
65657
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have caused this contract to be duly
executed intending to be bound thereby.
APPROVED:
CITY OF SHAKOPEE As to form and execution by
ATTORNEY GENERAL:
By By
Title Date
Date
COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION:
By
Title By
(Authorized Signature)
Date
Date
By
City Clerk
STATE AGENCY OR DEPARTMENT: COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE:
By By
(Authorized Signature) (Authorized Signature)
Title Date
Date
V�"y '
65657
5. 150 NON-WAIVER
The failure of Mn/DOT or the City at any time to insist
upon a strict performance of any of the terms,
conditions and covenants herein shall not be deemed a
waiver of any subsequent breach or default in the terms,
conditions and covenants herein contained.
5. 160 RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
It is agreed that except as specifically provided
herein, by the execution of this agreement, neither
party relinquishes or waives any rights or powers
possessed by it under any law or regulation, neither
party is relieved of any responsibility, duty or
obligation imposed upon it by law or regulation.
VI. APPROVALS
Before this agreement shall become binding and effective, it
shall receive the approval of such State officers as the law
may provide in addition to the Commissioner of Transportation.
- 10 -
"TABLED FROM APRIL 4TH"
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer (
4V
SUBJECT: Boiling Springs Lane
DATE: March 29 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Staff has received a citizen request to solve a drainage problem
in the Boiling Springs area.
BACKGROUND:
Mr . Reed Otterblad of 9186 Boiling Springs Lane has contacted
staff about a drainage problem near his residence. Basically ,
his house is situated at the lowest point in the surrounding area
and during rainfalls or snowmelt the water ponds around his house
substantially. Mr . Otterblad has requested that the City correct
this situation. For your information, Mr. Otterblad is a mute-
deaf and is sometimes difficult to communicate with.
This area has developed into 2 .5 acre lots over the years. Some
of the homes were built when this area was part of Eagle Creek
Township and some were built after the City of Shakopee annexed
the township. Apparently, each lot developed on its own rather
than as a subdivision, hence there was little thought given to
drainage. Please refer to the attached map showing the area and
specifically Mr. Otterblad' s lot.
Boiling Springs Lane (originally 16th Avenue and 90th Street) was
constructed as a gravel road prior to the City assuming
jurisdiction. The road was constructed several feet higher than
the surrounding areas.
The general drainage in this area is west to east, although there
is a substantial area at the same elevation that does not drain.
The construction of the gravel road essentially created a dam
ponding all of the water west of Boiling Springs Lane, centered
on Mr. Otterblad ' s lot.
Shortly after the area was annexed , Mr. Otterblad applied for a
building permit to construct a house. At that time, the Building
Inspector informed Mr. Otterblad that this area was unusually low
with inadequate drainage and that the soils were also bad .
City staff apparently recommended against constructing a home in
this area. Mr. Otterblad chose to build anyway, and raised the
elevation of his first floor several feet above the surrounding
land .
In 1982 , several property owners in this area petitioned the City
to pave the road and in 1983 the road was paved. As part of that
project, an "equalizing culvert" was installed at elevation 735
to allow the ponding water to equalize on both sides of the road,
rather than pond all on one side of the road. The feasibility
report for this project discussed constructing a drainage ditch
easterly to Eagle Creek as one alternative, but the Council did
not order this as part of the project at that time.
Staff has done a preliminary investigation of the drainage
problem in an attempt to respond to Mr. Otterblad. It is quite
apparent that the only outlet for this standing water is to
construct a ditch east to Eagle Creek. The easterly 500 feet of
this ditch would be in the City of Savage. Permanent drainage
easements would need to be acquired from several properties ,
including one property in the City of Savage. The construction
of the ditch would not eliminate all of the standing water but it
would reduce the depth of the water to approximately 1 foot
during major storm events.
The ditch would be approximately 3 feet deep and 1100 feet long.
The cost to construct the ditch has been roughly estimated at
$9,000 .00 . A 30 foot permanent drainage easement would need to
be acquired for the ditch. The easement acquisition costs are
estimated at $6 ,000 .00. The total project costs would be in the
$15 ,000 - $20 ,000 range. To adequately study this situation, a
Feasiblity Report should be prepared.
Per the current Storm Sewer Utility Policy, 25% of the costs
would be assessed to the area directly benefiting from the
improvement as a Special Benefit Cost. The remaining costs would
be funded from the Storm Sewer Utility Fund.
Mr. Otterblad has requested that the City Council review this
situation and take action on it. Mr. Otterblad was notified of
the Council meeting and was informed that he might want to send a
representative to the meeting.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Direct staff to prepare a feasibility report on the project.
2. Determine that this is a private drainage problem and take
no action.
RECOMMENDATION:
While it may be true that this situation could be considered a
private drainage problem which existed prior to the development
of the area and was not corrected during development, the fact
remains that there is a severe ponding situation in this area and
the Council must decide if the City has any obligation to correct
it.
Staff believes that if the City doesn ' t construct the
improvements, they probably won' t get done and the problem will
continue to exist. Staff also feels that the Storm Sewer Utility
Fund was created to handle situations such as these. The City
Council cannot expect property owners to pay an annual Storm
Sewer Utility fee while periodically being subject to flooding.
Staff recommends ordering a feasibility report on this project.
The feasibility report would address the proposed improvements ,
project cost estimates, area that would directly benefit by such
improvements, funding and any assessments. As part of the
report, the City of Savage would be contacted regarding a joint
powers agreement to complete the project.
Attached is Resolution No. 3035, ordering the preparation of a
feasibility report.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3035, A Resolution Ordering the Preparation
of a Report on Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane and
move its adoption.
DH/pmp
OTTERBLAD
RESOLUTION NO. 3035
A Resolution Ordering The Preparation Of A
Report On Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane
WHEREAS, it is proposed to improve Boiling Springs Lane by
drainage facilities and to assess the benefitted property for all
or a portion of the cost of the improvement, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the proposed improvement be
referred to David Hutton, City Engineer for study and that he is
instructed to report to the Council with all convenient speed
advising the Council in a preliminary way as to whether the
proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it should best
be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement,
and the estimated cost ofthe improvement as recommended
Adopted in - session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this - day of
19 '
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _
day of 19_
City Attorney
J
16th AVE.
�- MAXIMUM WATER DEPTH 2.3 FT.
1
'REED� _ w
r
t
_• i I
r
i
3 •
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: David Hutton, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Standard Specification Revisions
DATE: April 11 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3041 , Revising the City of Shakopee' s
Standard Specifications for Public Works Projects.
BACKGROUND:
In 1979 , the City of Shakopee adopted the Standard Specifications
by Resolution No . 1514 . A minor amendment to these
specifications was made in 1986 by Resolution No. 2521 .
Staff is now proposing to revise the Standard Specifications
again. Basically, specifications need revising periodically to
keep up with new technologies or industry trends.
The City of Shakopee' s Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction generally refers to the Mn/DOT specifications for
street construction and the C.E.A.M. specifications for sewer and
water construction. Exceptions to those standards make up the
bulk of Shakopee' s specifications.
The following summarizes the major changes proposed in the
standard specification revisions:
1 . Revised the bituminous paving specifications (2341 modified)
to conform to recent Mn/DOT revisions.
2 . Revised the specification for maintenance of sod/seed to
conform to current Mn/DOT standards.
3 . Revised the change order procedure whereby if a written
request for a change order is not received within 7 days of
the work being done, no additional compensation will be
allowed.
4 . Placed the responsibility of televising sanitary sewers on
the contractor, if the City Engineer suspects a problem and
orders the sewer televised.
5 . Updated the insurance limits to bring the required coverage
more in line with the industry.
6 . Revised the Affirmative Action section to conform to the
City' s new Affirmative Action Plan.
7 . Revised the prevailing wage rate section to conform to
recent legislation.
8 . Revised all standard drawings and eliminate those drawings
that are no longer allowed .
The City Attorney and Personnel Coordinator assisted staff in
researching and revising the sections dealing with insurance,
affirmative action and wage rates.
A complete Standard Specification book is available in the
Engineering Department for Council review and staff will also
have one available at the Council meeting.
Staff is now requesting that these revisions be adopted by
Resolution No. 3041 .
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3041 .
2 . Deny Resolution No. 3041 .
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3041 , A Resolution Revising the City of
Shakopee' s Standard Specifications and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
RESOLUTION NO. 3041 �-G
A Resolution Revising the City of Shakopee's
Standard Specifications
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council adopted design criteria
and standard specifications for construction of roadways on
November 19 , 1979 by Resolution No. 1514 , and
WHEREAS, the standard specifications are amended on February
25 , 1986 by Resolution No. 2521 , and
WHEREAS, it is proposed to revise the City of Shakopee' s
Standard Specifications to reflect current construction practices
and new technologies, and
WHEREAS , the City Council has reviewed the proposed
specifications and being fully advised,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: that it hereby approves and adopts
by reference the Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction in Shakopee dated 1979 and amended 1986 and 1988 .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that copies of the Standard
Specifications Manual shall be kept in the office of the City
Engineer and open for reference at all times.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota , held this day of
1989 •
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this day of
, 1989 •
City Attorney
CONSENT
Memo To: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Marilyn M. Remer, Personnel Coordinator
Re: Affirmative Action Plan
Date: April 11, 1989
Introduction
A 1988 Legislative Amendment to the Minnesota Human Rights Act required
businesses or firms which (a) have more than 20 full-time employees
working in Minnesota at any time during the previous 12 months; (b) bid
on a state contract for goods or services in excess of $50,000 must have
a certificate of compliance issued by the Commissioner of the Department
of Human Rights. Certificates are issued upon approval of an Affirmative
Action Plan complying with M.S. 363.073 setting forth guidelines for the
employment of minorities, women and disabled persons.
Background
The City of Shakopee's Affirmative Action Plan, adopted by Resolution No.
2983, November 15, 1988, was submitted to the Minnesota Department of
Human Rights for certification.
Their review determined some technical deficiencies that needed
correcting in order to meet the requirements.
The Weed/Tree Inspector job was deleted from page 15 of the Workforce
Analysis of the Public Works Dept. with the total changed to 13.
Temporary/seasonal positions do not need to be part of the analysis.
Pages 24 and 25, Problem Identification and Corrective Action were
revised to reflect a more indepth summary analysis of problem/deficiency
areas as determined through the workforce analysis and specific actions
proposed to correct the deficiencies.
These corrections/revisions were submitted to the Human Rights Dept.
February 8, 1989. The plan was reviewed and approved by the Commissioner
and a Certificate of Compliance, dated March 14, 1989 was issued.
Whereas, the Affirmative Action Plan was adopted by Resolution No. 2983,
a resolution amending that resolution is required.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council adopt Resolution No. 3040, A Resolution
Amending Resolution No. 2983, A Resolution of Affirmative Action in
Employment.
Action Reauested.
Move Resolution No. 3040, Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2983, A
Resolution of affirmative Action in Employment.
Nov. 15, 1988 Version
a
M
N
2 Y
q _ < > L
Z ` X r U
L 7
t W TF
A A V
C A
1 A 6
C A
I = = A A
U 1
O L M
1 6 �
m OI< <
W
< J
O
W O J
6 p. ..1
O < J
W f 6
¢ m O f-
Y _ _
2I ¢
U
v ¢ W
O Z
W c
F ¢ L
6
¢ N L
< < an
b
W
L
d`
L NO c
Y
u n c
VI J ti Y C
Y F •^ L E L C ~ L
L U
3• F d O N V li V ~
V O F !J J C Y C G
4 1 3 C W d yV Y C
£ N N C
F_
Q -C
y' J
F H O
Q' U
N C
15
Nov. 15, 1988 Version \
VIII. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTIVE ACTION
A summary analysis �F problem/deficiency areas at the City of Shakopee
indicates the following:
- The workforce composition is underutilized in several areas. Please
refer to City Plan of Action below.
- The total selection process dictates a need to expand our recruiting
efforts to attract qualified women and minorities.
- No other problem areas were identified, i.e. , applicant flow
composition, transfer and promotion practices, company facilities
and company-sponsored activities, seniority practices and contract
provisions for same, apprenticeship programs, company training
programs, workforce attitude, posters, application retention and
subcontractor notification.
City Plan of Action
A. Job Group: Managers
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for women in this job group.
Corrective Action
There is currently a vacant management position projected to be filled
in 1989. The City shall make every effort to recruit qualified women
and will select at least by availability rate. Recruitment for women
will be expanded to colleges and areas outside of Minnesota.
B. Professional/Technicians
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for women and minorities in this job group.
Corrective Action
The has budgeted an additional technician to be hired in May 1989.
Recruitment for women and minorities will be expanded to college and
technical trade institutes and area ethnic councils and organizations.
C. Skilled Craft
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for women in this job group.
There is currently an additional Light Equipment Operator budgeted to be
filled. Recruitment for women will be expanded to include various trade
institutes, area women organizations and other external sources. Women
will be urged to apply.
24
Nov. 15, 1988 Version
D. Protective service Workers
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for minorities and women in this job group.
Corrective Action
The Police Department has budget approval to hire an additional Patrol
Officer in May 1989. The city will recruit for qualified minorities and
women and will select at least by availability rate.
The department will continue to coordinate educational programs with the
local school district such as Officer Friendly and other
Vocational/Career Day programs to encourage females and minorities in
ongoing recruitment efforts.
25
O � IIIINInlllllll'
�- � � 4i lllnllll�Illllr.
( IIIIP�'IIIIIIIIN
�1� � ^- II;:�C Illlllltllllll�
I
e O �'lomol lV
M VIII II.
^V4 y yIAllI!I,." hil;
3 � � H 11f�inlllplllltlln�^"
RF:1%1
._;.
-` T Mihhesotg Deplvfmht of Hamm Rights
March 14 , 1989
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear State Contractor:
We thank you for submitting your Affirmative Action Plan and
appreciate the effort that was put into developing it.
Your actions as an Affirmative Action Employer will be an
important part of opening up opportunities in Minnesota to
female, disabled and minority workers so they can participate and
contribute at all levels of government service.
Your step will also assure that your community will be served by
a work force as richly diverse and creative as the community is
itself.
Once again, thank you for your good work.
Sincerely
E; C�.
Stephe W. Cooper V
Commissioner
Department of Human Rights
AN EOUA-, OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
500 Bremer Tower, ] PW aM Minnesota Street, St. Pa" MinnasaM M101 (612)2WS663 or (mm2-9747
Mihhesotg Depgrof tiamgh fights
� >
qtr,�i55ti*`�'
March 14, 1989
Marilyn Ramer
Personnel Coordinator
City of Shakopee
129 Fast First Ave.
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Ms. Remer:
Your Affirmative Action Plan submitted to this Department hes been reviewed
and approved by the Commissioner. The review of your organization's equal
employment opportunity policies and practices indicates compliance with M.S.
363.073. This determination does not preclude a subsequent finding of
noncompliance should your organization deviate substantially from the
commitments set forth in your plan.
The enclosed. Certificate of Compliance is valid for a period of two years.
The Department of Human Rights assumes no responsibilities when the
certificate expires. Also enclosed are the required semiannual reports to be
completed and submitted six months from this date and every six months during
this certification period. It is your obligation to submit the appropriate
reports and to notify us of any address or status changes of your
organization.
If you have any questions contact Dennis E. Maki at 297-1693.
Sincerely,
!� Qom-
Wendy Adler Robinson
Contract Compliance Supervisor
WAR/cs
Fnclosures: Certificate of Compliance
Semiannual Report Forms
DHRCC-3
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
500 Bremer Tower, 71h Place ano Minnesom Strew. SL Peal, Minnesota 55101 (612)296-ssm or (800)652-9747
RESOLUTION NO. 3040
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2983, A RESOLUTION OF AFFIRMATIVE
ACTION IN EMPLOYMENT
WHEREAS, the Shakopee City Council did reaffirm and declare the
Affirmative Action of Shakopee dated November 15, 1988, to the extent that
such declaration was reasonable and realistic and was not in conflict with
applicable laws of State or Federal authorities; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Human Rights has requested certain
changes be made to bring the plan into compliance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA, that pages #15 and 24-25 have been amended as outlined in Exhibit
A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this of , 1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this _ day
of 1989.
City Attorney
rn
Exhibit A
M
N
U7
Y 6 6
Z
L 4L < > L
Y OI N N 4• .•O. R hVi
N L O C Y
O m G R
-1c m
U 6
V V 1
L ti
1 b `
0 Q" GI
f
1 f ] f7 N
O �
U >�
6
m F O M M N M
O x
O C
p 3 ¢
W �
H
W ¢ w
� O V
Y. s
O ma
V F ¢
41 G b
4 G N O1 4• .r M N N 1�
Z y N M O O N O ,D
b
Y N
.n
T c
O C ry y L C O
3 f O d q V LL Y f O
O q
� O
U
N C
L f m C
15
Exhibit A
VIII. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND CORRECTIVE ACTION
A summary analysis of problem/deficiency areas at the City of Shakopee
indicates the following:
The work force composition is underutilized in several areas:
A. Job Group: Managers
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for women in this job group.
Corrective Action
There is currently a vacant management position projected to be filled
in 1989. The City shall make every effort to recruit qualified women
and will select at least by availability rate. Recruitment for women
will be expanded to colleges and areas outside of Minnesota.
B. Professional/Technicians
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for women and minorities in this job group.
Corrective Action
The City has budgeted an additional technician to be hired in May 1989.
Recruitment for women and minorities will be expanded to college and
technical trade institutes and area ethnic councils and organizations.
C. Skilled Craft
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for women in this job group.
Corrective Action
There is currently an additional Light Equipment Operator budgeted to be
filled. Recruitment for women will be expanded to include various trade
institutes, area women organizations and other external sources. Women
will be urged to apply.
D. Protective Service Workers
Problem Identification
There is a profile imbalance for minorities and women in this job group.
Corrective Action
The Police Department has budget approval to hire an additional Patrol
Officer in May 1989. The city will recruit for qualified minorities and
women and will select at least by availability rate.
The department will continue to coordinate educational programs with the
local school district such as Officer Friendly and other
Vocational/Career Day programs to encourage females and minorities in
ongoing recruitment efforts.
24
Exhibit A J'�_�
A review of applicant flow indicates that female and minorities applicants
are not applying proportionately for all positions. Local availability of
minorities is a factor, therefore added emphasis will be given in the
recruitment of minorities and women from outside the Shakopee area including
contacting organizations that specifically represent women and minorities
and aggressive advertising in publications catering to women and minority
groups.
Public transportation accessibility to the City of Shakopee may also be a
factor in the small number of minorities and women applying from outside the
Shakopee area. In 1984 the MTC provided the City of Shakopee with peak A.M.
and P.M. service. MTC service at that time simply provided Shakopee
residents with transit service to Downtown Minneapolis in the morning and a
return trip to Shakopee from downtown Minneapolis in the evening. In 1984
the City of Shakopee selected to opt-out of the MTC. This action allowed
the City of Shakopee to create their own transit program.
Today, van pools are utilized to transport Shakopee residents to and from
downtown Minneapolis as well as other areas in the Metropolitan area.
Minneapolis residents may also utilize the City's van pool program to
commute from the Minneapolis area to Shakopee. This type of service is
known as the reverse van pool program. The City of Shakopee will provide
reverse van pooling capability to any one wishing to commute to Shakopee,
that a minimum ridership of six persons in a twelve passenger van can be
maintained. Additionally, the City has and will continue to work with
Minnesota Ride Share to provide car pooling matching capabilities to persons
wishing to commute to the Shakopee area.
The EEO clause is not on the current stock of purchase orders, but will be
included when the current supply is exhausted and a new order is processed.
All vendors and subcontractors of the City of Shakopee shall be notified of
the City of Shakopee's Affirmative Action Policy within 30 days.
No other problem areas were identified, i.e. , the selection and screening
process is based on specific predetermined job qualifications and open to
all applicants; transfers and promotions are posted internally and are open
to all employees; company facilities and company sponsored activities are
open to everybody; seniority practices and union contract provisions are the
same for all employee groups; internship/apprenticeship programs recruit
from various technical schools, institutes and colleges plus metro
advertisements; and all employees are encouraged to participate in various
training programs both internally and externally funded by a tuition
reimbursement policy applicable to employees.
It appears the work force attitude would be accepting of females or
minorities within the organization. Future employment of women and/or
minorities in currently all-male departments (i.e. , Police Officers and
Public Works Operators) will be monitored closely. Supervisors and
Department Heads will receive training and be advised of Affirmative Action
Policy guidelines. Utilization of an Employee Assistance Program is
provided by the City in an effort to provide on-going seminars and
assistance in maintaining a work place free of discrimination and job
related stress.
Display of posters, job application forms, and application retention
schedules comply with applicable laws.
The City of Shakopee has adopted a Comparable Worth Pay Equity Plan for all
employees. 25
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: -Judith S. COX, City Clerk,/
RE: Ordinance No. 263, Snow Removal from Sidewalks
DATE: April 10, 1989
Introduction
The attached ordinance amends the existing City Code to require
snow removal from sidewalks within 24 hours from property zoned
commercial and within 36 hours for property other than
commercial.
Background
On March 7, 1989, the City Council directed staff to draft the
appropriate ordinance to have a 24 hour snow removal period in
the commercial areas and a 36 hour removal period in all other
areas. The City Attorney has prepared the attached ordinance in
follow-up to that request.
Recommended Action
Offer Ordinance No. 263, Fourth Series, An Ordinance of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending the Shakopee City Code Chapter 7
entitled "Streets and Sidewalks Generally" by Repealing Subd. 1
of Sec. 7.04 entitled "Ice and Snow on Public Sidewalks" and
Replacing it with a New Subd. 1 Sec. 7 .04 and by Adopting by
Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 7 . 99 , which
among other things, contain penalty provisions, and move its
adoption.
SSC/jms
ORDINANCE NO. 263
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending the Shakopee City Code
Chapter 7 entitled "Streets and Sidewalks generally" by Repealing Subd:1 of
Sec 7.04 entitled "Ice and Snow on.Public Sidewalk" and Replacing it with a
New Subd 1 Sec 7.04 and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1
and Section 7.99, which among other things,contain penalty provisions.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
SECTION I: Repeal
Subd 1 of Section 7.04 entitled "Ice and Snow a Nuisance" is
hereby repealed.
SECTION II: Adopt
Subd 1 Ice and Snow a Nuisance
All snow and ice .remaining on public sidewalks is hereby declared
to constitute a public nuisance and shall be abated by the owner or tenant of
the abutting private property within 24 hours after such snow or ice has ceased
to be deposited on property zoned commercial and within 36 hours after such snow
oricehas ceased to be deposited upon property zoned other than commercial.
SECTION III: Penalty
The provisions of Section 7.99 entitled "Penalties' shall apply
hereto in addition to any other penalties where appropriate.
SECTION IV: When in force and effect
This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect after its adoption
and publication.
Passed in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, -
Minnesota, held this. day of 1989.
ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakopee
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this 6th day of April, 1989.
City Attorney
CONSENT � f
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Release of Easement to Jim Hauer
DATE: April 10, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The attached Resolution No. 3038 authorizes city officials
to sign a quit claim deed releaseing an alternative easement
which is no longer needed by the City of Shakopee.
BACKGROUND:
When the cable company located the Head End out on CR-16,
the City wanted to insure that they had necessary easements to
run their underground wires from the Head End to public right-of-
way on CR-16. Two easements were obtained from Mr. Jim Hauer.
Only one easement was necessary, provided additional easements
were obtained from other property owners. The second
(alternative) easement was obtained in case the easements from
other property owners were not obtained. Mr. Stock,
Administrative Assistant, has advised me that the original
easements were obtained from all property owners. Mr. Hauer is
now requesting that the alternative easement be released.
Shakopee Public Utilities has advised that this easement is not
needed by them.
The original easements were granted to both the City of
Shakopee and Zylstra-United Cable Television Company. The City
of Shakopee was named on these easements because it was the City
who granted the franchise agreement to ZU. Zylstra-United Cable
Television Company has already released their interest in this
alternative easement.
The attached drawing shows the easement being retained and
the easement being released.
ALTERNATIVES:
1] Release easement
2] Retain easement
3] Table request in order to obtain additional information
RECOMMENDATION:
Unless Council needs additional information, staff
recommends that the alternative easement be released-
alternative #1.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 3038, A Resolution Vacating Part of an
Easement, and move its adoption.
� 'a- I 1
RESOLUTION NO. 9038
A RESOLUTION VACATING PART OF AN EASEMENT
WHEREAS, on or about December 14, 1982, James J. Hauer and Mary Ann Hau
husband and wife, Zylstra-United Cable Television Co. , a Minnesota Partnersh
and the City of Shakopee entered into a certain easement agreement which was
filed in the Office of the Scott County Recorder as Document No. 195755 and
196668 , and
WHEREAS, the grant of the easement has served its purpose and is no Ion,
desired and all of the parties thereto desire to cancel that part of the sea,
hereinafter described.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL, That said easer.
containing the aforesaid agreement be and hereby is released only as to the
Westerly 15 feet of the east 250 feet of the West 969 feet of the north 350
of the South 573.4 feet of Section 5, Township 115, Range 22, Scott County,
Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the proper city officials be and hereby are
authorized and directed to execute a deed of release in accordance herewith.
Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council held thi
day of , 1989.
ATTEST: Mayor of the City of Shakope
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
12th day of April, 1989.
Jul" s A. Collar, II
Shakopee City q�to_
`(10
DEED
a DEED
QUIT CLAIH D
QUITNm ul VVV
No delinquent taxes and transfer
enured; Certificate of Real Estate
value ( ) filed ( ) not required
Certificate of Real Estate value
No.
County Auditor
Deputy
STATE DEED TAX DUE REASON: $1.65
Kneen.(asonso no Wi
Date: March 1989
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the CITY OF $HMOPEE, a municipal corporation under
the laws of the State of Minnesota, Grantor, hereby conveys and quit claims to
JAMES J. HAUER and MARY MN HAUER, husband and rife, Grantees, real property in
Scott County, Minnesota. described as follovs:
The westerly 15 feet of the following described property) The East
250.0 feet of the Vest 969.0 feet of the North 350.0 feet of the
South 575.4 feet of Section 5, Township 115. Range 22, Scott County,
Minnea oce.
This deed is given for the purpose of releasing the alternative easement over
the above-described property which was granted in those certain easements dated
December 14, 1982, and filed in the office of the Scott County Recorder an
Document Noe. 195755 and 196668.
Together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto, subject to
the following exceptiwsm NONE
CITY OF SHMOPEE
By
Its
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)SS.
COUNTY OF SCOTT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before we this 4a— day of
March, 1989, by and the
and respectively, of the City of Shakopee, a municipal
corporation under the lave of the State of Minnesota on behalf of the
corporation. Grantors.
gl1RILL 9TUV M aVl
Signature of Person Taking Acknowledgment
Tax Statements for the real property
tlesezibed in Chia instrument should be
sent to (include name and address of
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Grantee)1
ARABS 6 MONROE CHARTERED (RJV/M)
Southpoint Office Center As tax rolls presently indicate
1650 West 82nd Street, Suite 1100
9loamington. MN 55431
(612) 685-5999
RELEASE OF ALTERNATIVE EASEMENT TO JIM HAUER (�
Q n Easement from Jim Hauer being retained
Easement from Jim Hauer being released to Jim Hauer
Existing easements from ZU Head End to SPUC lines
7;4A___ . ._
i t
) 2 RDS '
i
':2C5 v C,
„� Q Q ,:1NE5 d1UER 'n .1[1NE <Cw-AUSCM
\ J Q J 158a10 "^ !9C'S5
'90166 Eno
W 1
`i
r• - _ S
THE'�{y/�{+ECOINC STR�U Wr WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE NE THIS DAY- OF DECEMBER,
1982 nV - lL� ,_..' . 1. .I _ , !ZN /,? /_/ -
CONSENT
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Release of Easement - Chad Fauks
DATE: April 10, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The attached Resolution No. 3039 authorizes the release of
an electric easement across certain property.
BACKGROUND:
In 1933 a blanket easement for electricity was granted
across a large tract of land. The land has since been platted
and the electric lines have since been installed. Mr. and Mrs.
Fauks currently own a parcel of land which has the blanket
easement across it. At the time they were purchasing the parcel,
an examination of the title showed that this blanket easement
included the parcel they were purchasing. The City has been
requested to either confine the easement to the actual area
needed or, if not needed at all, release the easement against
this parcel. Shakopee Public Utilities has authorized the
release of the blanket easement against the Fauks' parcel.
ALTERNATIVES:
1] Release the easement
2] Do not releae the easement
3] Table the request for additional information
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative No. 1, release the easement,
unless Council desires additional information.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Offer Resolution No. 3039, A Resolution Extinguishing an
Easement and Authorizing Delivery of a Deed, and move its
adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 3039
A RESOLUTION EXTINGUISHING AN EASEMENT AND AUTHORIZING DELIVERY. OF,A
WHERAS, under date of October 11, 1933 an easement was executed by
Doyle and wife Anne Doyle running in favor of the City of Shakopee for
purpose of constructing and maintaining electric transmission lines over
across Lot A, except the east one foot thereof and Lots 4 and 5, Block 89
Marymark Addition, Shakopee, Scott County, Minnesota, according to the p
thereof on file and of record in the office of the Scott County Recorder,
WHEREAS, the City no longer requires the above described easement an.
same served no useful purpose and should be released and discharged of re
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL, That the e.
above described be and the same hereby is released and discharged.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a Quit Claim Deed to discharge the same
record be made and signed by the proper City officials and delivered to C'.
Fauks and Tani A. Wolter.
Passed in session of the Shakopee City Council hel<
-- day of 1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakope,
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
12th day of April, 1989.
City Att me
reese
OW5 InUnture, Made
Rlsk cipa ,caxpovativa——------
camrstion vvaw a.la.of Isis '.rf'.f Me find part,and
............
............. ...........................
.f 0'. Csu'", Siale pa�a of tho
sensed part'
Mitutozetb, Thot fls ana party of Me fist part'in mwideratlon of the MM of_—__.._.._._.
-..0¢e.dollar...aM.nthen..flood_.and_.xalua6le...covsidexatinn..{il_00J....-__.-.--.-.--..... DOLIdBg'
f ----------
DOZIdBg'
W tt in haM paid by the mid pareira o/the semM part, the reulpt mAermlu hereby apxmmtatped, doe,
Ae-by G,.M,Bargain,anit-Injo,nM Co.,ants eb, x,,, aba /she axse,, art as joint saaa,,
and—6-sxxan In eass—I t --ifes,the survivor of said parties,and she heir sad asaiina of the
Amway, au As dapl.aAr parmI S—Of Land Lying sea wer in the County
Siabs of Minnows, doe,riw as fslls., t umtl:
Lot A, except the east one foot thereof and Lots 4 and 5, Block 89,
ftryaaxk Addition, Shakopee, Scott County, Mi.mast., according to the
plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Scott County
Recorder.
j:o]babe anb to ftlb the *aRx. Togibr mesh oil the hmedifame,n4 sed x,,% nanw A,,sxn
Ivionjinjorzaanywise appertainini, "raudim,thovury
.ioor of.&pa,11ra and the h4ra and azdfas of M. sarviom, Y.r, the said part w of the esmxf
pare taking.ioist Inane,and nat as isson1v is e.n.
N
.,suMetootiemnMbcirnc.iThe mid)fret party
1,Ao .—a these
orb ..W iU corporate.b,�MpYU....
.....
?%Awm anE4..accDRA4MdAf5XXAtMXdavrvwxatnaa*
Aa
DxA 'Neoax
0 and its clerk, and its corporate seal to be hereunto
affixed the day and year first above arict..
7rR, CTTY OF—SH-KOPEP
1.P.of 1 By
11 Ita_acsloa_adminlatsatat
--Ft. City—Clark
/3L?l
MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Council Correspondence and Dissemination of
Information Between Various Members of the
Council and with Other Groups
DATE: April 14, 1989
Introduction
Recently various members of the City Council have indicated
concern over how other members of the City Council have
corresponded with one another, and with governmental agencies on
various projects. The issue of Boards and Commissions utilizing
letterhead for external communication should also be discussed.
I would like to suggest that it may be of benefit to the entire
City Council if these types of issues could be discussed and
courses of action identified which would be compatible with the
expectations of all members of the Council.
Background
Earlier this year Councilmembers expressed concern over other
Councilmembers sending correspondence to other governmental
agencies on City letterhead. Past pieces of correspondence have
reflected the point of view of the individual sending the
information not consistent with the City Council as a group.
There was some level of disenchantment expressed as a result of
this communication.
More recently another Councilmember personally prepared and
submitted two memos for dissemination to fellow Councilmembers,
CDC, and Downtown Committee members. At my direction this was
photo copied and mailed to other Councilmembers at City expense
and placed on the table for the CDC and Downtown Committee.
The above mentioned activities have apparently created concern
among Councilmembers. While I think it is important that
Councilmembers communicate with one another I also believe it is
in the best interest of the City Council that this be done in a
manner which does not needlessly aggravate other Councilmembers.
Therefore, I am recommending that the City Council discuss
procedures and attempt to arrive at a method of communication
which is consistent with the standards and expectations of the
Council.
Alternatives
1. Determine how City Councilmembers will communicate with
Federal and State agencies on City Council item where either
majority or minority opinions are expressed.
0 �/
2. Determine whether any photo copying, intended for City
Council distribution, can be done of Councilmembers's
individual correspondence at City expense or if all photo
copying should be at the expense of individual
Councilmembers.
3. Determine if the City Council wants to allow a photo copy
limit per Councilmember for correspondence purposes with the
Council.
4. Determine what positions or opinions Councilmembers mention
when communicating with other governmental agencies,
corporations, or individuals.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council discuss the above and
arrive at some sort of consensus and perhaps policy direction
that is mutually agreeable to all members of the City Council.
It is suggested that the City Council determine what types of
subjects should be communicated by members of the Council or the
Mayor and when it is appropriate to use letterhead. For example,
it would be entirely appropriate if a new industry where to
locate in the City of Shakopee that the Mayor would send a letter
to this particular business welcoming them into the community.
whatever policy is created, it should be extended to other City
Boards and Commissions.
DRK/jms
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting C' y A ministrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk ,
RE: Fixing A Place For The 1989 �oard of Review
DATE: April 18, 1989
INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND:
Board of Review for 1989 has been set for Tuesday, May 9,
1989 at 7:00 P.M. Because the COuncil Chambers are not
handicapped accessible and because of the limited space, two
rooms at the Courthouse have been reserved for the Board of
Review.
State law does set the City Clerk's office as the location
for Board of Review. In order to move it, the City Attorney has
advised that a Resolution changing the location should be
adopted.
The County Assessor has been advised of the location and is
printing it on the notices he is sending out to property owners
whose valuations are increasing.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3043, A Resolution Fixing A Meeting
Place For The 1989 Board of Review, and move it's adoption.
JSC/tiv
RESOLUTION NO. 3043
A RESOLUTION FIXING A MEETING PLACE FOR THE
1989 BOARD OF REVIEW
WHEREAS, the County Assessor has fixed May 9, 1989 at 7:00
p.m. for the meeting of the Board of Review for the City of
Shakopee, pursuant to State law; and
WHEREAS, this meeting should be held in the office of the
City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the City Council Chambers are not handicapped
accessible; and
WHEREAS, there is reason to believe that the City Council
Chambers may not be large enough to accommodate the expected
property owners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the Board of Review set for May
9, 1989 for the City of Shakopee shall be held in rooms 319 and
320 at the Scott County Courthouse, 428 South Holmes, Shakopee,
Minnesota.
Adopted in Adj . Reg. Session of the City Council, City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this _ day of 1989.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1989.
City Attorney