HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/20/1989 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: June 15, 1989
1. The Shakopee Rotary Club has applied for renewal of their
gambling license at the Pullman Club. They meet the
requirements of the City Code.
py 2 . Attached is a memorandum from Dave Hutton regarding stop
4 signs at 4th and Holmes.
3 . Attached is the Building Activity Report for May, 1989.
4. Attached is the Revenue and Expenditure Report as of May 31,
1989.
5. Attached is the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 1988
Audit.
6. Attached is the agenda for the June 21, 1989 meeting of the
Energy and Transportation Committe.
7. Attached is the agenda for the June 21, 1989 meeting of the
Downtown Committee.
8. Attached are the minutes of the May 17, 1989 meeting of the
Energy and Transportation Committee.
9. Attached are the minutes of the May 10, 1989 meeting of the
Downtown Committee.
10. Attached are the minutes of the May 1, 1989 meeting of the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
DRK/jms
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administration
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engine e DPS
SUBJECT: Stop Signs at 4th Avenue and Holmes Street
DATE: June 14, 1989
INFORMATIONAL ITEM:
The County Highway Engineer has informed staff that since Holmes
Street intersects with the County State Aid Highway (namely 4th
Avenue) the higher governing body has jurisdiction over the
traffic control throughout the entire intersection. Based on
this, the County Highway Engineer indicated that the City cannot
install any stop signs on Holmes Street because it is the
County' s jurisdiction. Staff disagrees with the County and has
requested documentation verfying this. The County Highway
Engineer has indicated that they will study the situation to
determine if 4-way stop signs are indeed warranted at this
intersection. Staff has provided the County Highway Engineer
with all available information including traffic counts and
accident history for this intersection in order to determine the
feasibility of installing the stop signs.
DH/pmp
3
CITY OF SHAEOPEE
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT
PERMITS ISSUED
May, 1989
Yr. to Date Previous Year
Number Number Valuation Number Valuation
No. Ytd.
Single Fam-Sewered 9 33 2,367,850 7 24 1,758,250
Single Pam-Septic - 3 332,000 2 6 634,800
Multiple Dwellings 2 2 222,000 - - 216,800
(# Units) (YTD Units) (6) (6) - (-) (4) -
Dwelling Additions 8 29 163, 130 12 28 150, 553
Other 4 5 156,790 - 1 2, 500
Comm New Bldgs 2 2 487,700 - - -
Bldg. Addns - - - 2 7 563, 000
Industrial-Sewered - - - 1 1 915, 000
Ind-Sewered Addns - - - - - -
Industrial-Septic - - - - - -
Ind-Septic Addns - - - - - -
Accessory/Garages 6 13 75,925 4 7 78, 500
Signs & Fences 13 29 35,734 6 21 32,974
Fireplaces/Wood Stove - 2 4,400 - 5 17,500
Grading/Foundation 4 7 1,405,720 1 1 500
Remodeling (Res) 2 10 63,990 4 10 39, 150
Remodeling (Inst) - - - - -
Remodeling (Comm/Ind) 7 22 1,523,325 2 10 132, 000
TOTAL TAXABLE 57 157 6,838, 564 41 125 4,541,527
TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - - - -
GRAND TOTAL 57 157 6,838,564 41 125 4,541,527
No. Ytd. No. Ytd.
Variances - 2 5
Conditional Use 2 9 1 9
Rezoning - - I
Moving -
1 - 1
Electric 49 119 17 102
Plbg & Htg 48 139 28 112
Razing Permits -
Residential - - _ 2_
Commercial - -
Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction
permitted to date. . . . . . .4, 321
Cora Hullander
Bldg. Dept. Sec.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN MAY, 1989
8176 G.F. Juergens 2168 Hillside Dr. Garage $ 7,500
8177 Erhardt Dallmann 1187 Jackson St. Fence $ 580
8178 Ricky Warner 437 E. 3rd Ave. Alt. $ 4,000
8179 Met Con Metro 7700 Hwy 101 Car $ 264, 000
Wash
8180 Kenneth Lenzen 2535 OnyDr. )141 House $ 79,800
8181 Universal Lumberline 1570 E. Hwy 101 Alt. $ 5, 000
8182 Mike Menke 2187 E. Hwy 101 Addn. $ 19,925
8183 E.L. Prahm 741 Canterbury Rd. Alt. $ 3, 500
8184 H & M Builders, Inc. 1952 E. 11th Ave. Addn. $ 10, 000
8185 Novak-Fleck 1177 Minnesota St. House $ 60, 000
8186 Jack Brambilla 201 E. let Ave. Alt. $ 1,500
8187 Novak-Fleck 1146 Minnesota St. House $ 53, 000
8188 Tony Christensen 321 E. 4th Av . Alt. $ 2,000
8189 Larry Link 1400 W. 3rd Ave. sign $ 600
8190 Fremont Ind. 4400 Valley Ind. Blvd. Fill $ 1,300
8191 MN Valley Fence 741 Scott St. Fence $ 390
8192 B & D Development 2547 Onyx Drive House $ 71, 000
8193 B & D Development 2770 Jade Circle House $ 94,000
8194 C.H. Carlson 1070 Market St. Stg Bld $ 1,200
8195 Martin Schmitt 1146 Van Buren St. Addn. $ 7, 500
8196 Mark German 1928 Heritage Dr. Addn. $ 900
8197 Logeais Homes 1103 Min sot Court House $ 62, 000
8198 Wallace Bakken 1251 E. First Yve. Addn. $ 137,000
8199 S.V.K. Quality Homes 1940 Heritage Dr. House $ 70, 000
29 Bf
Al
8200 Signs of Quality Tahpah Park Signs $ 250
8201 Dennis Duff 1042 Ramsey St. Stg. $ 1, 000
8202 Olympic Pools 1250 E. Bluff Pool $ 24,000
8203 Mike Boeckman 1869 Norton Dr. Grade $ 25
8204 James Koehnen 1076 Ramsey St. Fence $ 500
8205 Gerald Popp 5055 Eagle Creek Blvd. Addn. $ 840
8206 J. Brad Komarek 1199 Limestone Dr. Fence $ 500
8207 Olympic Pools 959 Apgar St. Pool $ 15,840
8208 Mahowald Bldrs. 1393 Co. Rd. 18 18 Comm. $ 223,700
C!
a"/ B/ f/' /,.t
8209 Stonebrooke 2693 Co. Rd. 79 Fndtn $ 10,000
8210 G.F. Juergens 1166 & 1168 Limestone Duplex $ 102, 000
8211 E2 Const. MN Valley MalV Alt. $ 50,000
8212 Kevin Kleman 1053 Dakota Fence $ 1, 500
8213 G.F. Juergens 1166 & 1168 Limestone Garage $ 4 ,600
8214 Siekmann Const. 1061 E. Shakopee Ave. House $ 58, 500
8215 Scandi Co. 1221 E. 4th Ave. Sign $ 3, 000
8216 Signs of Quality 1221 E. 4th Ave. Sign $ 850
8217 Mike Phillips 129 S. Holmes St. Temp Sign 1, 000
8218 Clifford White 1140 Pierce St. Addn. $ 4,500
8219 Sign Service 129 S. Holmes Sign $ 7, 000
8220 Dennis Welter 966 Holmes St. Addn. $ 5, 000
8221 MN Valley Fence 1040 Jefferson Fence $ 1,000
8222 Void
8223 Timothy Geis 731 W. 7th Garage $ 10,900
8224 James Stocker 831 Bluff Ave. Addn $ 1,000
8225 Void
8226 Olympic Pools 982 Market St. Pool $ 13 ,950
8227 Richard Majerus 1219 Sunff,JowerCircle House $ 128, 000
8228 Wallace Bakken 1250 E. Bluff Bleachers 5,000
8229 Sun West 1210 Polk 4-Plex $ 120,000
8230 S & S Services 1076 Merritt St C1 Fence $ 200
8231 Bruce Prescher 118 Holmes Alt. $ 8,000
8232 Gordon Peters 128 W. 6th Ave. Garage $ 8,500
8233 Anchor Glass 4108 Valley Ind. Blvd. Alt. $ 6,000
8234 Jack VanRemortel 1451 Co. Rd. 18 Grading $ 45,000
+ r X
O e y N QyWMtiQO x'10 O N mw
LL n N y W N -nN mMWny yn m O y m .y NMWMNn
NMN m
n U nOn d 000-�OOODOOm000000000 OOOOOOOmWD OnOyOmWy00
Z nOd N OrvOMOm000y0Myyy00000 Q OOOOOOOWnO OmONONM000
N NOO M OtiOWOtl Q^'�y M-1-ly OOm O OOOOOOdNO n OMOmOmmm00
MOw N OtiOQOm ti OMyMn�ndOy 000000.~. m OMOtiWOnmyO
6 OOy m OMOyON m OMWMnmmNm mOONWNNOM ONWONmymMM
> mmm O NNOmmQ tin n titlNnti�N n O�NM.•tl�.�1
W Oym O y y M mN y m ti
F
y OJ m
6 MOM OOOWOOOOOOQOOOOODO00 M 00000000.0 OMOyOytiy00
7 NON ONOmOQO00ymnyyW00000 W OOOOOOOmNO O OMOhOnmW00
U O m O^" O m mmdmWWmOON O dn0 n mOtiOM-1M0
y H6 O � Oti y M OmemNmNeOQ m d NWM .yWmMN..m
¢ Q oM d N ymo-.n dmry-.-. w o Wim
rc m -tli N donor v m -� � nrvmnn ..e
W .q m yM
¢ .1
a
0.00 0 o00.0090oa o0oo000000 o 000.000000 D 0.000000000
z 0.00 0 00000000000000000000 0 0000000000 0 0000000000
w . . . . .
> 000 0 00000 0000000 00 o 000000 o o 00 o00oo00
w
goo W 0000 0 0000000 00. m Q00000 0. e 0.0 0000000
C 00 W OOOy DOOyyOW wN 000NwN O w 00 OOOy 00M
Qmy y OOyQ Omy Ny '1 n m.ymNN 'n m � Oy �Nm.Om
f mNn O ONW N M MMtl y
y y N~ Q mN w
W
F
U
6
f
W
O U
2
w c
a i
c x>
W z
� o
2 FJ
W>W �z6 OOOOQymNm OoO-+Dn00m 0DN OnN,Nrmdya�0lyn0o0 00 0
0000000000 O yW Nm0Onym.m+Otl-N.mynrv0mno
0
9NOmOQ9ODN"9co00000 n 0000000O 9o.9n0000
o
O- NOW. n Wry
mOM
UW
7_
>
H
y
W
O y y
r~i J
N a Z
y F
Y r• y ~ F r• ? ww. y
Zy JWw y FyK y « N 6 D w SyU
p_ WW'W Fy y H KFW F F " Iwi
NW OW2yWH w..a LLQ. J N 1' > O> UY
6 Z 1'r WWy �ZWFHF >F £ 6 y Oh tl O ¢ 2C 6'Z¢
LL� J�"� aLLyNyyJUNF£W 6'W 2UW y N aNN N%O 2 „mNWWWF>W
yF U6 Fy222WmNJ 6'1'6yW6MW6y7 d y¢ WZa 6C W LLLLyO
a KN � X 6yUUWy£J WW FF 2^/ Wm F fF1F W01-W F Y O (cJ�2W
x y¢ N 2ZU2¢ W66JN6JWm 'y Y 2H 6¢ ¢ S 2 �QOZWYrOOw
y ¢ Yh1f 0U661+W0wJ ¢F3660y22 a>pf'd'a OWf W 02.pUZpN
WU >p OUwOJ„ -mOMUc UO 0w0 W O¢Mr3xcr0 >
LLy¢�-w>WC¢awwS£LL w0
y W O W6LLIi NWa22NWW�"� Om�Z DOW S ¢ O
O6'W
O OW JJ2 KJ HNA-126 6r W FWW WYOy D YNWWpUN2
p 4i"� y WWYWO OC 00a 6HWJJ 2 yUUW JrWF W 2m� y WM
JJUJ7K06JJ£xJWUW6U U W f6goo F HOU JN ' '2WWF6
N Zyp Wm¢WUWZDO�OUJ3WK>ypy N 6((JJ££JJ6m70a J£OOO¢yJaF
OZ W1'nO Q Mv. JWWWJFZNO
goo HOU N ¢GZZSJN¢JW
U O OLLJ 1- UUI"U JIpmU6m6£3yWyNFOF J yJS66y£U¢O >¢�'1WW6¢y66
W DU N99000 .... dymI�mW00�1 NNrvMQrvnOtiO n 00�NMOn
ZU ~NN O •y.y.y.y..r.•.y N.Mi.y�1.M-�Ma.M.yi.yr NNMMQOy DOOO.y.y..r.y.yr
O¢ mm0 �� �� MMMMMMMMMM • MMMyWyyymm
.� y M • MI~OMM MI7MMMMMMMMMMMMMM • MMMMMMM MMMmMMM
ry
o w0 m o
a
om N-. o o n fc a
¢ v owwmoom0000a oo oin mor 000m ry o0 0 0
n z oNNWoo-.oy000000Wmm 000m m o0 0
¢
o o....o o0-�e oaorvowrcw w o 00 ov e
OmmmOONrN000eNOrNm O Oe ON N
Q OmW NmNmHOmNO NOWti O Nry ON N r
>
Nm bN mOOdm O-vmN O W .yw Wd O
Q
pJ
¢ ow-.a oom0000000ymoN w w 000m 00 0
LL � aryr000-.o N00000mmmm 000m m o0 0
o O�
0 omm omin o�em o o o 0 0
Q b0 -1 NMm m m ®OWti N N O
C mti ry d e N m O O
¢ ry
>> 000000000000000000 0 0 0 00000 00 0 0
z 000000000000000000 0 0 0 0009 0 00 0 0
0 0
w . 0 00 v 00 0. 0. .
W o 0000 00000000 0 e
0 0000 000000y9
ry o 0 0 No 0 0m
K O ONNm OOON N `1 O O O O N Om
N N m .1N O�y0
W MN m
O
U
F n
C
W
O U
z
6 Q
W
_Q
w z
� O
2 fJ
� oen000n0000000��vnm m umi 000w d 00 o m
w YY
> za oe y m a e m row m m y y ry
m N m m r
o 0
w
m ~ N r N ry O q
N
K .y
7
ow
J_
>
W
y
W
W
N
NN W Y 6 OZ T
O FN NNp O N1> U W J
w 2 W> mz¢ o yZ OOm i O O f
w LLZ s OwHY 20J2U i
d N 6W OynN NQOU6W p f �
WOyZN>WZ y N N J
Y J�- yNMW6WWW 6Wr�OW U�+
Q ¢� QYNQONU Y dn'NJ p' y N „ Q W N 2
2 >1'Y n22NyypUyJJN >U LL
U _
N W6' ppO3WQOJWJNM2 pp 06T N pF N LL
WU £3 'a m�-rO wJJr000��wU
LL y W 0 N6nQN 26 NW N LL WLL J j LLQ W
O OW n'�nl-pN U ZNti WJ L' LL J
p 'WZW 'p 60NZ 'N UQ 1- H Wp W yU N
j UWMUU2WWNH£UJYi'> C m w�-U U 2U Z
0Y OMN 6'K ZNJ6fQ£NNLLUf1- ¢ O O F YN N ¢7 Q
2 Y�M�-r�O�O�+awp 3 +wwxr� 2 O O
U O0 NnfNWU26LL3NQN£m n'WU U U U ym£ Z 1-N f
W 0Otimdm r.vryMWOtiNMONme O 00 '10 00
J6 NNNNNNNNNNNNNN��INpm
^'� LL MmmmMMmmMMmmmMmmMM . m i MMmm a MM x
n OWWO-1 OOy meNea mONyOmONrN m m O O O
mamvM Mmm m in M.-1-.m eevm-.ry Mrvrom m ry m b o o Po b
Q U mnMtiWOWrON O NaWOameOmbeOnNOPo00n ONO O O O O
6 Z -�OMnON-10-1 mayWOOmmnnmmMOe0em00m d ONO O O y
Q
b0�1N n 0 +-�Nn ON-1d mON-+nPoNWMN�1yOW0 Oa d '
6' yyN-1m OMmPon O mmOOrddO,-: rn WNym ONMnOcO N O OW W m M
Q MOnWPoOWdWr MmrmmyWNO Oe a M M O
>
q nyyOMyNnd O nOOMyy NOWOWmOm .-1
W Nmny WM m mNMnyWW MMNONmMM W N M
F
y
pJ
Q dmnWMOMmON O NNWmfIO mNdONamOMWONOOm Om0 O O O o
J NOrmOti N mye-1WOMmnmbMmOymmti00m Oro O O
O Or
U mdb mym mNOMNPoWay m y y
y F6 mN0 m y mMgmmWOWamNN O O m m N
¢ amrMM rnory o-.mdyMaMmym-. v a
m mmr a omyHr eev nm a w a m
NtiNeN eb N q N N a a y
W
>Z
O
� 0OOO000000 0 000000000000000000000 O 000 0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000000 0 000000000000000000000 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0
z000raooMo a 000000000ymom0oyyyo o p o0 0 -. 0 0 0
rvggmrororm moym.�orooro-+WWaomNno 0 00 o r o O
a WyaWWomM-. yanrMormorommmambyao om m o 0 0
O
ydNWmy M-1.-1 .-lmgnyW MnnynWWMymW m mm N m M M
yaWMr dm OmmrnmPo -1 NOMyNM a a y a a W
a
m v
O u
W U_
rc 6
K
w S>
K Y-
J Z
� O
M £¢ OymNNomyory oymMmoyorvommooN0000Om 000 0 0 0 0 0
p moyymomro.+ 0 lmm�omomomNNmmoMNoo00m w o.+0 0 0 0 0
z p m mmo moNMM m moymaoo y 0 0 ry
zQ oomeN NmmaM M Wmagmy o o a
W PomWm '1a n aaWyn y a NMPom '1M 1y O M y
d NdWy W OMMNm m M NNM O M M N
K N y N MM W
X 1 i
K
W =
UZ
O
r
LL
O
m
6
Q
W
F
UU 2
ZZ Q yU O y y
CK N UW
ZJ$rWJWJ6- mzuSZ O$
p ££ yW OO pyW -y p
ZZm JO UJZ=WryzbW OyK-
Q- -0 U 6J >0i0 £ U ££ O> CMZ 2
y6LLyZ�'
Y 1 „MOLL£F C W OJO W6 U 7 y > W
6 ¢6 O0 WI'1O2 W fNQF2QZ 7 yyWWO 00 6 f y >
S 1-1 l£JUW y QJ£Z1-i 21-1y yd O-,z 4I OOm % W U
y Wm LL111 LL £ £W OJ2 0y U7w7$ W6 f_ y U 2
ZU yMy yymb.T m -J0001"1n'1O o z.- gyp ¢ y £ W w 2
y WMW ZZZ $O Q LLZ£OyLL t1W0 ZZn1 2HJ nwi WJF1 J W Q O
O OW M rr OOOFWJ Z NU UW 02Jr1<r zW62J ¢6 ¢ aS LL ti rZn
T J¢jQyyy JY£ y 6LLO pJ MJLLQ 0O 1- >S7JhLLyUmU LL UMW
n~u MM9W W 66'�-M J0000 QMyM$$W
OZ 6JQWWWWWO$ OBJ pOOWmWKOW1'd'ZFWOJW7M O 06T 6 Wn 6 O
U O yOy6CnnS3J d Wy£O]Wy6J61MM6M7WUp£U£ y 6U0 U f Y' d' U
q pU ONOOMNMO-nN ONNONNOmWOM000000MNMW O
ZU OMMaaedyyy Mati�1-�N NMymnWggq-1m OMM
W J6 mVd yyN
-. LL eeeeeaeeee eeaevaaaaeaooaeaoeeaa + dev + a v + e
N V
a
0
m m
Q U O
6 Z N O
Q
N
C
Q O n
1
W W
F W
Q N
N
pJ
Q m
LL l d
O Ol
U W
N H6
6
rc e
Q N
az -.
0
0 0
Q
0
N
O
O
m m
m n
N
6
r
rc �
p c
6
w U_
rc 6
K
C f
� 2
� O
M £J
a ry
p �
Z U N N
26 d
W O
N O
1' d
X N
m
W
U2
O
6
O
6
Q
N
p a
W z r
0 LLo �
Y JH p
2 K• O �
N 2 LL
ZU
LLWN O
O Ow 2
p
02z
oS
0
U 7 U
O
m
ZO
m 2V
7Q
o LL �
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
REPORT ON EXAMINATION
WITH SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1988
i
JEROME JASPERS & CO.
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
POS SCOTT STREET
SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379
L
L
L
L
LSHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
I
` REPORT ON EXAMINATION
LWITH SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
` YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1988
L
r
I`
L
L
L
L
L
h/
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COM14ISSION
- Shakopee, Minnesota
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Organization I
Accountants' Opinion on Financial Statements II
General Purpose Financial Statements
Balance Sheet 1
` Statement of Income and Retained Earnings 2
Statement of Changes in Financial Position 3
` Notes to Financial Statements 4
` Combining, and Individual Fund Statements and Schedules
Combining Balance Sheet (Enterprise Funds) 10
Combining Statement of Income and Retained
Earnings (Enterprise Funds) 11
Combining Statements of Changes in Financial
Position (Enterprise Funds) 12
LElectric Fund
Balance Sheet 13
Statement of Income and Retained Earnings 14
Statement of Changes in Financial Position 15
Schedule of Property, and Equipment and
Accumulated Depreciation 16
L - Schedule of Operating Expenses 17
Water Fund
Balance Sheet 18
` Statement of Income and Retained Earnings 19
Statement of Changes in Financial Position 20
Schedule of Property, and Equipment and
Accumulated Depreciation 21
Schedule of Operating Expenses
22
L Agency Fund
Balance Sheet 23
Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities 24
Statistical Information 25
I
L
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
ORGANIZATION
James Cook President
Jim Kephart Commissioner
Barry Kirchmeier Commissioner
LLouis Van Haut Manager
LBarbara Menden Secretary
I
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
LI
L
i
JASPERS, STREEFLAND & COMPANY
JEROME JASPERS CPA•JAMES STREEFIANO,Jr.CPA
L MEMBERS OF TIRE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
CERTIFIED MDMA OUNTAMS
NI6 SCOTT STREET,SXANOGEE.MN 55119,115121445-2817
L
Members of the Public Utilities Commission
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
` Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
We have audited the accompanying general purpose financial statements of the
Shakopee Utilities Commission, a component unit of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota
L as of and for the year ended December 31, 1988, as listed in the table of contents.
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Utilities Commission
Management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
.. statements based on our audit.
L We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
L supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general purpose financial statements.
An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such general purpose financial statements present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of the Shakopee Utilities Commission,
L a component unit of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota at December 31, 1988 and the
results of its operations and the changes in financial position for the year then
L ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general
purpose financial statement taken as a whole. The combining and individual
fund statements and schedules listed in the foregoing table of contents are
presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of
the general purpose financial statements. Such supplemental information has
been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the general
` purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material
respects when considered in relation to the general purpose financial statements
Ltaken as a whole.
February 28, 1989
LII
L
GENERAL PURPOSE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
L
L
i
i
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Balance Sheet
December 31, 1988 and 1987
I
1988 1987
ASSETS _
I
Current Assets
Cash $ 87,502 $ 107,308
Investments 2,782,125 2,291,205 i
Accrued interest 24,962 48,116
Accounts receivable 602,441 572,587
Due from City of Shakopee 22,293 20,181 i
Inventories of materials and supplies 209,047 234,175
Prepaid expenses 28,395 23,988
Total current assets 3,756,765 3,297,560
Restricted Assets
Construction fund investments 1,059,412 927,343
Customers' deposits 369260 33,105
1,095,672 960,448
I
Property, Plant and Equipment 9,310,336 8,852,968
Accumulated depreciation 3,324,691 3,127,776 _
5,985,645 597259192
$10,838,082 $ 9,9839200
I
The accompanying notes are an integral _
part of these financial statements.
1988 1987
LIABILITIES, RESERVES, CONTRIBUTIONS
AND RETAINED EARNINGS
Current liabilities (payable from current assets)
Current maturities of long-term debt $ 2,988 $ 2,988
.. Accounts payable 405,459 393,521
Due to City of Shakopee 221,067 164,306
Total current liabilities 629,514 560,815
Other liabilities (payable from restricted assets)
Customers' deposits 36,260 33,105
V
Long-term debt 1,776 4,764
Contributions
Contributions from municipalities 3,323,047 3,2289773
Contributions from developers 1,199,091 1,015,356
L 4,522,138 4,244,129
Retained earnings
Reserved for future construction
and emergencies 19059,412 927,343
Unreserved 4,588,982 4,213,044
5,648,394 5,140,387
$10,838,082 $ 9,983,200
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
1
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Statement of Income and Retained Earnings
i Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
Operating revenue $6,043,975 $5,397,044
Operating expenses 5,268,257 4,648,765
Operating income 775,718 748,279
Other income (expense)
Rental and miscellaneous income 24,680 18,561
Trunk charges 23,837 22,179
Interest income 197,921 259,956
Interest expense (6,236) (953)
`. Maintenance of street lighting (16,961) (8,905)
Free service to City of Shakopee (27,388) (24,711)
Payments to City of Shakopee (418,087) (378,198)
Sales tax expense (43,921)
Net income 509,563 636,208
Retained earnings
At beginning of year 5,140,387 4,504,179
Decrease in reserve for future
L construction (1,556)
At end of year $5,648,394 $5,140,387
i
LThe accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
2
L
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
�. Statement of Changes in Financial Position
Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
Working capital provided from
$ 509,563 $ 636,208
Net income
Depreciation 268,434 249,002
Working capital provided from operations 777,997 885,210
... Increase in other liabilities payable
from restricted assets 3,155 4,495
781,152 889,705
Working capital applied to
Increase in restricted assets 135,224 95,753
Reduction of long-term debt 2,988 2.987
Net additions to property, plant and
L equipment, less contributions from
municipalities and developers 250,878 350,256
Decrease in construction reserve 1,556
390,646 448,996
Increase in working capital 390,506 440,709
Working capital
At beginning of year 2,736,745 2,296,03fi
`
At end of year $3,127,251 $2,736,745
Increase (decrease) in elements of working capital
Cash $ (19,806) $ 34,655
Investments and accrued interest 467,766 418,942
Accounts receivable 29,854 (3,230)
Due from City of Shakopee 2.112 85
Inventories of materials and supplies (25,128) (26,010)
Prepaid expenses 4,407 (11,998)
Current maturities of long-term debt 11,463 4,614
Accounts payable (23.401) 58,483
Due to City of Shakopee (56,761) (34,832)
$ 390,506 $ 440,709
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
3
i
1
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Notes to Financial Statements
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
LAccounts receivable includes only those accounts considered collectible.
Inventories consisting of material and supplies at December 31, 1988 and
1987 are valued at average cost.
... Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost for acquisitions subsequent
L to 1951, and at values assigned to contributions from municipalities and developers.
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method based upon the estimate
useful life of the asset.
The Utilities Commission has designated amounts of its net profits for
future improvements and emergencies along with designating its water connection
fees for future construction.
L
Property, Plant and Equipment
LProperty, plant and equipment consisted of the following at December 31, 1988.
Contributions from municipalities
L Upon formation of Commission in 1951 $ 597,113
Upon annexation of Eagle Creek Township in 1972 248,000
Improvements to Water Distribution System 2,477,934
3,323,047
` Contributions from developers and others 1,199,091
Total contributions 4,522,138
Acquisition, at cost 4,788,198
Property, plant and equipment $9,310,336
' Depreciation is computed on the straight-line method as follows:
` 1988 1987 Rates
!
Plant and building $ 231,424 $ 211,390 2 - 20%
Equipment 37,010 37,612 5 - 20%
$ 268,434 $ 249,002
i
I
` 4
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Notes to Financial Statements
Free Service to City of Shakopee
Electrical services to the City were determined at the rates of $.04510 per KWH
which represents the cost of energy plus fixed and variable expenses. Since all
city water usages are not metered, no provision is made for this amount.
Cash and Temporary Investments
Cash balances from the departments are pooled and invested to the extent
` available in short-term securities and other authorized investments. Earnings
from investments are allocated to the respective departments on the basis of
applicable cash balance participation.
Retirement Plans
A. Plan Description
All full-time and certain part-time employees of the Utilities are covered
` by defined benefit pension plans administered by the Public Employees Retirement
Association of Minnesota (PERA). The PERA administers the Public Employees
Retirement Fund which is a cost-sharing multiple-employer public employee retirement
system.
All full-time employees and certain part-time employees are eligible to
` participate in the PENA plans. Public Employees Retirement Fund members belong
to either the Coordinated Fund or the Basic Fund. Coordinated members are covered
by Social Security and Basic members are not. The PERA plans provide pension
benefits, deferred annuity, and death and disability benefits. Benefits are
` established by State statute.
Retirement benefits for members of the Basic and Coordinated Funds are as
follows:
a. When age plus years of service equal 90, the full unreduced normal
annuity is payable.
b. As early as age 55 with at least 5 years of paid service credit;
annuity reduced 1/4 percent for each month under age 65.
` c. Any age with at least 30 years, reduced by 1/4 percent for each month
under age 62.
d. Age 65 or older with at least one but less than 5 years of paid service
credit (proportionate annuity) . Must terminate service at age 65 or
` older.
e. Age 55 with at least 5 years of paid service credit or any age with at
least 30 years representing PERA service combined with other fund coverage.
5
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Notes to Financial Statements
A member who terminates public service with five or more years of credited
allowable service may leave his or her amount in the fund to qualify for an
annuity at retirement age. The annuity as determined under the formula will be
increased from the first of the month following date of termination at prescribed
interest rates. The former member may accept a refund at any time prior to the
date retirement annuity begins.
The funds also provide various death and disability benefits, whereby the
disabled employee or surviving spouse is entitled to receive amounts determined
` as defined by the funds.
B. Contributions Required and Made
Covered employees are required by State statute to contribute fixed percent-
ages of their gross earnings to the pension plans. The Utilities makes annual
contributions to the pension plans equal to the amount required by state statutes.
Current contribution rates for the plans are as follows:
Additional
Employee Employer Employer
Public Employees Retirement Fund:
Basic Fund 8% 8% 2 1/2%
Coordinated Fund 4% 4% 1/4%
Total contributions made during fiscal year 1988 amounted to $48,075, of
which $25,515 was made by the Utilities and $22,560 was made by employees.
C. Funding Status and Progress
The "pension benefit obligation" is a standardized disclosure measure of
the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected
salary increases and step-rate benefits, estimated to be payable in the future
as a result of employee service to date. The measure, which is the actuarial
., present value of credited projected benefits, is intended to help users assess
the PERA's funding status on a going-concern basis, assess progress made in
accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due, and make comparisons
_ among Public Employees Retirement Systems and employers. The PERA does not
make separate measurements of assets and pension benefit obligation for
individual employers.
6
L
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Notes to Financial Statements
I
The pension benefit obligations of the PERA as of June 30, 1988, were as
follows:
Public Employees
Retirement Fund
I
Total pension benefit obligations $3,334,423,000
Net assets available for benefits, at market 2,749,289,000
Unfunded pension benefit obligation $ 585,134,000
The measurement of the pension benefit obligation is based on an actuarial
valuation as of June 30, 1988. Net assets available to pay pension benefits
were valued as of June 30, 1988.
Ten-year historical trend information is presented in PERA's State PERS
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 1988. This
information is useful in assessing the pension plan's accumulation of sufficient
assets to pay pension benefits as they become due.
D. Related Party Investments
During 1988 and as of June 30, 1988, PERA held no securities issued by the
Utilities or other related parties.
i
Vacation Pay Compensatory Time, Severance Pay and Sick Pay
The Utilities compensates employees upon termination for unused vacation
` pay. The accumulated liability for unpaid vacation benefits at December 31, 1988
was $24,365 and is reflected in the financial statements. The Utilities makes
use of compensatory time off in lieu of paying overtime. The accumulated liability
at December 31, 1988 was $1,775 and is reflected in the financial statements.
Utility employees are compensated after ten years of service for one-third of
unused sick leave benefits upon termination. The maximum accumulation is one
hundred and fifty days. In the event of retirement (age 55 and beyond) the Utility
employees are compensated for a minimum thirty working days, if the employee
has less than ninety sick leave days accumulated and provided the employee has
met the ten year's service requirement. The accumulated liability for severance
` at December 31, 1988 was $44,588 and is reflected in the financial statements.
Sick leave is expensed when paid. The accumulated liability for unpaid sick
leave benefits at December 31, 1988 was $165,631 and is not reflected in the
�- financial statements.
7
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Notes to Financial Statements
Retained Earnings
The Utilities designates a portion of its revenue (trunk charges and water
connection fees) each year for future construction. As of December 31, 1988 net
income, retained earnings reserved and unreserved are as follows:
... Electric Water Total
Retained earnings
January 1, 1988
` Reserved $ 100,000 $ 817,343 $ 927,343
Unreserved 3,983,791 229,253 4,213,044
.. Total 4,083,791 1,056,596 5,140,387
Net Income 1988 (loss)
Reserved 133,625 133,625
` Unreserved 404,759 (28,821) 375,938
Total 404,759 104,804 509,563
Decrease in reserve
Over sizing costs (1,556) (1,556)
Retained earnings
December 319 1988
Reserved 100,000 959,412 1,059,412
Unreserved 4,388,550 200,432 4,588,982
Total $4,488,550 $1,159,844 $5,648,394
Reserve designation December 31, 1988
Electric Water Total
Emergencies $ 100,000 $ $ 100,000
Trunk charges 224,180 224,180
Connection charges 735,232 735,232
Total $ 100,000 $ 959,412 $1,059,412
.. 8
L
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Notes to Financial Statements
` Long-Term Debt
Long-term debt consisted of the following at December 31, 1988:
Current Total
�. Special assessments to City of Shakopee,
annual payments of $1,212 plus interest
of 7.75% $ 1,212 $ 1,212
Special assessments to City of Shakopee,
annual payments of $1,776 plus interest
Lof 8.75% 1,776 3,552
$ 2,988 4,764
r, Less current maturities
2,988
i Long-term debt $ 1,776
Contingent Liabilities
i
The City of Shakopee is a defendant in a lawsuit regarding a vechicle accident.
The plaintiff is claiming damages in excess of $50,000. At present, the outcome
cannot be determined and no provision has been made in the financial statements.
Investments
The Shakopee Utilities Commission Investments at December 31, 1988 are shown
below:
Carrying Market
Amount Value
U.S. Government Securities $2,838,524 $2,832,990
Minnesota Municipal Money Market Fund 1,003,013 1,003,013
$3,841,537 $3,836,003
9
L
L
L
L
L COMBINING, AND INDIVIDUAL FUND
STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
i
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Enterprise Funds
Combining Balance Sheet
For The Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
ASSETS
Electric Water Totals
Fund Fund 1988 1987
Current Assets
Cash $ 65,825 $ 688 $ 66,513 $ 101,655
Investments 2,624,449 157,676 2,782,125 2,291,205
Accrued interest 17,723 7,239 24,962 48,116
Accounts receivable 519,598 82,843 602,441 572,587
Due from the City
of Shakopee 16,832 5,461 22,293 20,181
Inventory 190,546 18,501 209,047 234,175
Prepaid expense 21,300 7,095 28,395 23,988
Total Current Assets 3,456,273 279,503 3,735,776 3,291,907
Restricted Assets
Construction fund
investments 100,000 959,412 1,059,412 927,343
Customer deposits 36,260 36,260 33,105
136,260 959,412 1,095,672 960,448
Property, plant and equipment 3,667,916 5,642,420 9,310,336 8,852,968
Accumulated depreciation 1,849,410 1,475,281 3,324,691 3,127,776
1,818,506 4,167,139 5,985,645 5,725,192
Total Assets $ 5,411,039 $ 5,406,054 $10,817,093 $ 9,977,547
i
L LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
L Electric Water Totals
Fund Fund 1988 1987
Current Liabilities
Current maturities of
long-term debt $ $ 2,988 $ 2,988 $ 2,988
L Accounts payable 393,629 11,830 405,459 393,521
Due to the City of
Shakopee 166,601 33,477 200,078 158,653
LTotal Current
Liabilities 560,230 48,295 608,525 555,162
LOther liabilities payable
from restricted assets
Customer deposits 36,260 36,260 33,105
Long-term debt 1,776 1,776 4,764
L Fund Equity
Contributions 325,999 4,196,139 4,522,138 4,244,129
Retained Earnings 4,488,550 1,159,844 5,648,394 5,140,387
Total Equity 4,814,549 5,355,983 10,170,532 9,384,516
Total Liabilities
` and Fund Equity $ 5,411,039 $ 5,406,054 $10,817,093 $ 9,977,547
L
L
L
The accompanying notes are an integral
Lpart of these financial statements.
10
L
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
r, Shakopee, Minnesota
Enterprise Funds
Combining Statement of Income and Retained Earnings
For the Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
Electric Water Totals
Fund Fund 1988 1987
Operating Revenue $5,554,093 $ 489,882 $6,043,975 $5,397,044
Operating Expenses 4,882,145 386,112 5,268,257 4,648,765
Operating Income 671,948 103,770 775,718 748,279
Other Income (expense)
Rentals and Miscellaneous 15,974 89706 24,680 18,561
Interest income 140,524 57,397 197,921 259,956
Trunk charges 23,837 23,837 22,179
Maintenance of street
lights (16,961) (16,961) (8,905)
Free service to the City (27,388) (27,388) (24,711)
Payment to the City (329,678) (88,409) (418,087)- (378,198)
Interest expense (5,739) (497) (6,236) (953)
Sales tax expense (43,921) (43,921)
Net Income 404,759 104,804 509,563 636,208
Retained Earnings
At beginning of year 4,083,791 1,056,596 5,140,387 4,504,179
Decrease in reserve (1,556) (1,556)
At end of year $4,488,550 $1,159,844 $5,648,394 $5,140,387
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
11
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Enterprise Funds
Combining Statement of Changes in Financial Position
For The Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
j Electric Water Totals
Fund Fund 1988 1987
L Working Capital provided from
Net income $ 404,759 $ 104,804 $ 509,563 $ 636,208
131,996 268,434 249,002
Depreciation 136,438
Working capital provided
from operations 541,197 236,800 777,997 885,210
L
Increase in other liabilities I
payable from restricted 3,155 4,495
Lassets 3,155
Total 544,352 236,800 781,152 889,705
Working Capital applied to
Increase in restricted assets 3,155 132,069 135,224 95,753
Net addition to property,
plant and equipment 178,697 72,181 250,878 350,256
Reduction of long-term debt 2,988 2.988 2,987
Decrease in construction
reserve 1,556 1,556
L
Total 181,852 208,794 390,646 448,996
Increase (decrease) in
362,500 28,006 390,506 440,709
working capital
Working Capital
` At beginning of year 2,533,543 203,202 2,736,745 2,296,036
i
At end of year $2,896,043 $ 231,208 $3,127,251 $2,736,745
Changes in elements of
working capital
Cash $ 19,140 $ (54,282) $ (35,142) $ 34,165
Investments and accrued
interest 391,843 75,923 467,766 418,942
Accounts receivable 25,116 4,738 29,854 (3,230)
Due from the City of Shakopee 1,696 416 2,112 85
Inventory (24,696) (432) (25,128) (26,010)
Prepaid expense 3,300 1,107 4,407 (11,998)
Current maturities of
11,463 11,463 4,614
long-term debt
L Accounts payable (23,401) (23,401) 58,483
Due to the City of Shakopee (30,498) (10,927) (41,425) (34,342)
$ 362,500 $ 28,006 $ 3909506 $ 440,709
The accompanying notes are an integral
L part of these financial statements.
12
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Electric Fund
` Balance Sheet
December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
ASSETS
Current Assets
Cash $ 65,825 $ 46,685
Investments 2,624,449 2,217,610
Accrued interest 17,723 32,719
Accounts receivable 519,598 494,482
Due from City of Shakopee 16,832 15,136
Inventory 190,546 215,242
Prepaid expenses 21,300 18,000
Total current assets 3,456,273 3,039,874
L Restricted Assets
Construction fund investments 100,000 100,000
Customer's deposits 36,260 33,105
136,260 133,105
Property, Plant and Equipment 3,667,916 3,536,677
Accumulated depreciation
1,849,410 1,760,430
1,818,506 1,776,247
L
Total Assets $5,411,039 $4,949,226
LLIABILITIES, RESERVES, CONTRIBUTIONS AND RETAINED EARNINGS
Current Liabilities (payable from current assets)
Accounts payable $ 393,629 $ 370,228
Due to City of Shakopee 166,601 136,103
I
560,230 506,331
Other Liabilities (payable from restricted assets)
iL Customer deposits 36,260 33,105
Contributions from Municipalities and developers 325,999 325,999
Retained Earnings
Reserved for emergencies 100,000 100,000
Unreserved 4,388,550 3,983,791
4,488,550 4,083,791
L $5,411,039 $4,949,226
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
L13
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Electric Fund
Statement of Income and Retained Earnings
For The Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
Operating Revenue
Residential sales $1,947,143 $1,798,899
Power adjustment 720,245 380,172
` Commercial sales 2,817,022 2,693,556
Free service to the City of Shakopee 27,388 24,711
Customer penalties 42,295 41,556
Total 5,554,093 4,938,894
Operating Expenses
L Energy purchased 4,139,755 3,649,996
Operations and maintenance 605,952 526,907
Depreciation 136,438 133,438
Total 4,882,145 4,310,341
Operating Income 671,948 628,553
Other Income (expense)
Rentals and miscellaneous 15,974 18,481
Interest income 140,524 176,749
Interest expense (5,739)
Maintenance of street lighting (16,961) (8,905)
` Free service to the City of Shakopee (27,388) (242711)
Payment to the City of Shakopee (329,678) (300,497)
Sales tax expense (43,921)
Net Income 404,759 489,670
Retained Earnings
At beginning of year 4,083,791 3,594,121
At end of year $4,488,550 $4,083,791
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
` 14
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Electric Fund
Statement of Changes in Financial Position
For The Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
Working Capital Provided From
Net income $ 404,759 $ 489,670
Depreciation 136,438 133,438
Working capital provided from operations 541,197 623,108
Increase in other liabilities
payable from restricted assets 3,155 4,495
LTotal 544,352 627,603
Working Capital Applied To
I Increase in restricted assets 3,155 4,495
L Additions to property, plant and equipment 178,697 136,537
Total 181,852 141,032
` Increase In Working Capital 362,500 486,571 '.
L Working Capital
At beginning of year 2,533,543 2,046,972
At end of year $2,896,043 $2,533,543
i
Changes in Elements of Working Capital
Cash $ 19,140 $ 7,838
Investments and accrued interest 391,843 494,924
Accounts receivable 25,116 (17,299)
Due from the City of Shakopee 1,696 439
Inventory (24,696) (28,793)
Prepaid expenses 3,300 (9,245)
Accounts payable (23,401) 56,618
Due to City of Shakopee (30,498) (17,911)
$ 362,500 $ 486,571
L
I
I
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
15
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
` Shakopee, Minnesota
Electric Fund
Schedule of Property, Equipment and Accumulated Depreciation
For The Year Ended December 31, 1988
r
Property and Equipment
r
Balance Balance
1/01/88 Additions Deletions 12/31/88
Land $ 4,500 $ $ $ 4,500
Buildings 555,424
555,424
Equipment 422,587 41,744 6,270 458,061
i
Other Improvements 2,554,166 136,953 41,188 2,649,931
Total $3,536,677 $ 178,697 $ 47,458 $3,6679916
Accumulated Depreciation
Balance Balance
1/01/88 Provision Deletions 12/31/88
Land $ $ $ $
`
Buildings 3499474 20,560 370,034
Equipment 253,281 32,812 6,270 279,823
Other Improvements 1,157,675 83,066 41,188 1,199,553
.. Total $1,760,430 $ 136,438 $ 47,458 $1,849,410
i
16
I
v
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
` Shakopee, Minnesota
Electric Fund
Schedule of Operating Expenses
Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
Other Operating Expenses
Distribution
Salaries, wages, and unallocated benefits $ 75,685 $ 82,961
` Maintenance, supervision and engineering 130,120 96,918
Maintenance of structures and equipment 31,460 22,814
Maintenance of distribution system 128,082 94,352
Fuel, lights, purification and
` maintenance of building 12,129 10,934
377,476 307,979
Selling and Administrative Expenses
Meter reading 12,989 10,954
Customer billings 61,013 53,336
Bad debts 5,605 10,119
Office salaries 7,021 6,916
` Office supplies 14,686 11,640
Insurance 62,938 71,299
1 Payroll taxes 36,228 31,164
Commission expenses 8,271 7,332
Other administrative expenses 19,725 16,168
228,476 218,928
i
$ 605,952 $ 526,907
i
L
I
I
I
I
17
I
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
` Shakopee, Minnesota
Water Fund
Balance Sheet
December 31, 1988 and 1987
d
ASSETS 1988 1987
I
i- Current Assets
Cash $ 688 $ 54,970
Investments 157,676 73,595
Accrued interest 7,239 15,397
Accounts receivable 82,843 78,105
Due from City of Shakopee 5,461 5,045
Inventory 18,501 18,933
Prepaid expenses 7,095 5,988
Total Current Assets 279,503 252,033
V
Restricted Assets
i Construction fund 959,412 827,343
Property, Plant and Equipment 5,642,420 5,316,291
Accumulated depreciation 1,475,281 1,367,346
4,167,139 39948,945
Total Assets $5,406,054 $5,028,321
` LIABILITIES, RESERVES, CONTRIBUTIONS AND RETAINED EARNINGS
' Current Liabilities
Current maturities of long-term debt $ 2,988 $ 2,988
Accounts payable 11,830 23,293
Due to City of Shakopee 33,477 22,550
Total Current Liabilities 48,295 48,831
Long-term debt 1,776 4,764
Contributions from Municipalities and Developers 4,196,139 3,918,130
Retained Earnings
Reserved for future construction 959,412 8279343
Unreserved 200,432 229,253
1,159,844 1,056,596
Total Liabilities, Reserves,
Contributions and Retained Earnings $5,406,054 $5,028,321
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
18
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
w Water Fund
Statement of Income and Retained Earnings
For The Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
Operating Revenue
Water sales $ 419,862 $ 376,923
Installation fees 10,167 6,461
Connection fees 59,853 74,766
w Total 489,882 458,150
Operating Expense
Operations and maintenace 254,116 222,860
Depreciation 131,996 115,564
LTotal 386,112 338,424
Operating Income 103,770 119,726
LOther Income (expense)
Rentals and miscellaneous 8,706 80
Interest income 57,397 83,207
Interest expense (497) (953)
Trunk charges 23,837 22,179
Payment to City of Shakopee (88,409) (77,701)
Net Income 104,804 146,538
Retained Earnings
,a. At beginning of year 1,056,596 910,058
Decrease in reserve for furture
construction (1,556)
M
At end of year $1,159,844 $1,056,596
L
L
6.
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of these financial statements.
` 19
y
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Water Fund
Statement of Changes in Financial Position
For the Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
` 1988 1987
Working Capital Provided From
Net income $ 104,804 $ 146,538
Depreciation 131,996 115,564
Working capital provided from operations 236,800 262,102
` Working Capital Applied To
Increase in restricted assets 132,069 91,258
L Reduction of long-term debt 2,988 2,987
Additions to property, plant and equipment
less contributions of $278,009 - 1988
and $64,978 - 1987 72,181 213,719
Decrease in construction reserve 1,556
Total 208,794 307,964
I Increase (decrease) In Working Capital 28,006 (45,862)
Working Capital
At beginning of year 203,202 249,064
At end of year $ 231,208 $ 203,202
Changes in Elements of Working Capital
Cash $ (54,282) $ 26,327
Investments and accrued interest 75,923 (75,982)
` Accounts receivable 4,738 14,069
Due from City of Shakopee 416 (354)
(432)
y 2,783
Inventor
Prepaid expense 1,107 (2,753)
Current maturities of long-term debt 4,614
Accounts payable 11,463 1,865
Due to City of Shakopee (10,927) (16,431)
$ 28,006 $ (45,862)
I
i
The accompanying notes are an integral
Lpart of these financial statements.
! 20
L
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
` Shakopee, Minnesota
Water Fund
Schedule of Property, Equipment and Accumulated Depreciation
For The Year Ended December 31, 1988
Property Equipment
i
Balance Balance
1/01/88 Additions Deletions 12/31/88
i
Equipment $ 65,650 $ 4,268 $ $ 69,918
` Other Improvements 5,250,641 345,922 24,061 5,572,502
i
Total $5,316,291 $ 350,190 $ 24,061 $5,642,420
Accumulated Depreciation
Balance Balance
1/01/88 Provision Deletions 12/31/88
` Equipment $ 41,677 $ 4,198 $ $ 45,875
Other Improvements 19325,669 127,798 24,061 1,429,406
Total $1,367,346 $ 131,996 $ 24,061 $1,475,281
21
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Water Fund
Schedule of Operating Expenses
Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
Other Operating Expenses
Distribution
Salaries, wages and unallocated benefits $ 22,288 $ 20,498
Maintenance, supervision and engineering 3,240 2,873
Maintenance of structures and equipment 27,625 30,615
Maintenance of distribution system 48,208 35,941
` Fuel, lights, purification and maintenance
of building 13,987 13,912
Power for pumping 61,403 50,035
176,751 153,874
Selling and Administrative Expenses
Meter reading 2,563 3,378
Customer billings 23,429 19,941
Bad debts 246 521
Office supplies 4,051 3,083
Insurance 23,709 21,230
Payroll taxes 22,080 19,244
Other administrative expenses 1,287 19589
77,365 68,986
$ 254,116 $ 222,860
i
L22
I
L
STATISTICAL INFORMATION '
` III
I
L.
I
L
I
L
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Agency Fund (Sewer and Garbage)
Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities
For The Year Ended December 31, 1988
Sewer and Garbage
Balance Balance
1/01/88 Additions Deductions 12/31/88
ASSETS
Cash $ 5,653 $1,453,140 $1,437,804 $ 20,989
Total Assets $ 5,653 $1,453,140 $1,437,804 $ 20,989
LIABILITIES
Due to City $ 5,653 $1,453,140 $1,437,804 $ 20,989
Total Liabilities $ 5,653 $1,453,140 $1,437,804 $ 20,989
The accompanying notes are an integral
` part of these financial statements.
24
SHAKOPEE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Shakopee, Minnesota
Statistical Information
December 31, 1988 and 1987
1988 1987
ELECTRICAL DEPARTMENT
Total KWH Purchased 109,013,600 101,946,400
Total Cost of KWH Purchased $ 4,139,755 $ 3,649,996
Average Cost Per KWH Purchased .0380 .0358
Total KWH Delivered And Accounted
For As Of Last Billing Date 105,057,115 98,147,374
Number of Metered Customers 4,813 4,637
WATER DEPARTMENT
Total Gallons Pumped
Metropolitan metered 796,527,400 705,298,000
City facilities accounted for 21,644,380 4,570,590
Gallons not accounted for 67,845,620 63,598,210
886,017,400 773,466,800
Number of Metered Customers 3,081 3,017
This Information is subject to the
L Accountants' opinion on supplementary information.
25
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Energy and Transportation Committee
Shakopee, Minnesota
June 21, 1989
Chrm. Ziegler Presiding:
1. Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M.
2. Approval of Minutes - May 17, 1989
3 . Refuse Collection/Recycling Ordinance Amendments
4. Informational Items
a. Recycling Program Reports
b. Dial-A-Ride Monthly Report
C. Dial-A-Ride Saturday Service Report
d. Van Pool Monthly Report
e. Business Update from City Hall
£. Highway Project Updates
g. Board & Commissions Picnic
5. Other Business
a. Next Meeting-Wed. , July 19, 1989 - 7:00 PM
b.
6. Adjournment
Barry A. Stock
Administrative Assistant
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Note Meeting Time: 7:45 A.M.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
Downtown Ad Hoc Committee
City Hall Council Chambers
June 21, 1989
Chairperson Keen Presiding
1. Call to Order at 7:45 A.M.
2 . Introduction of New Members
a. Theresa Roehrich
b. Charlie Fonder
3 . Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of the Minutes - May 10, 1989
5. Downtown Property Inventory
6. Property Acquisition/Condemnation Policy
7. Downtown Development Report (Verbal)
a. Arnie's Bar
b. Foster's Upholstery
C.
8. Informational Items:
a. Highway Project Updates
b. 169 Bridge & Mini By-Pass
C. Business Update from City Hall
d. Downtown Assessment Hearing (Verbal)
e. Board & Commissions Picnic
9. Other Business
a. Next Meeting - July 12, 1989
b.
C.
10. Adjourn
Barry A. Stock
Administrative Assistant
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Energy and Transportation Committee
Regular Session Shakopee, MN May 17, 1989
Chrmn. Ziegler called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with
Comm. Otto, Drees, Amundson, Roman, Prudoehl, and Ziegler
present. Comm. Spiotta was absent. Also present was Barry A.
Stock, Administrative Assistant, Jim Kemp, Waste Management Inc.
and Dick Jilek, Shakopee resident.
Roman\Prudoehl moved to approve the minutes of the April 19, 1989
meeting minutes as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock reported that on April 17, 1989 the City of Shakopee
initiated a curbside yard waste collection program. The program
split Shakopee into two service zones. Curbside collection of
yard waste is currently being provided on Tuesdays and Fridays
depending on which zone you live in.
Mr. Stock stated that since the program was implemented he has
received several inquiries and complaints from Shakopee residents
regarding the curbside collection of yard waste. Mr. Stock noted
that several Shakopee residents have informed him that they are
not pleased with the idea of placing their yard waste at the
curbside. Mr. Stock noted that the majority of these complaints
have been received from residents who have their refuse picked up
in the alley.
Mr. Stock stated that the people who have complained have some
valid points. Some to the issues which Shakopee residents have
brought up in opposition to the curbside collection of yard waste
include the following:
1. Yard waste generally sits at the curbside for 2-3 days
depending on when the yard was raked or mowed and this is
ascetically unpleasing.
2 . Since we encourage residents to not tie their leaf bags,
this has resulted in some of the yard waste being blown over
the neighborhoods.
3 . When the hauler picks up the yard waste from the curbside,
if it is a windy day, the yard waste tends to blow all over
the neighborhood at the time when it is being dumped.
Mr. Stock noted that the Committee decided to implement yard
waste collection for the following reasons:
1. our refuse hauler contends that curbside collection is
quicker than alley pick-up.
2. Yard waste collection is being provided for with large
compactor trucks and these trucks tend to rut up the alleys
in the Spring and Fall.
3. Since the City is responsible for maintaining the alleys, it
was more cost effective to keep the trucks on the street if
possible.
4. It was the general consensus of the Committee to investigate
whether or not the City could pursue City wide curbside
collection of refuse. It was felt that the curbside yard
waste collection program would serve as an excellent
demonstration project.
Chairman Ziegler questioned why yard waste is sitting on the
curbs for more then 2-3 days. Mr. Stock stated that when people
rake their yards they tend to rake them towards the point of pick
up and generally bag them at the curb. Mr. Ziegler stated that
he felt Shakopee residents could just as easily bag the leaves
and place them in the alley and move them to the front on the
before their pick up.
Mr. Dick Jilek questioned why Shakopee residents were not
informed that they could use their old garbage cans for yard
waste collection. Mr. Stock stated that in future promotions we
will encourage Shakopee residents to use their old garbage cans.
Mr. Stock stated that this method of pick up would be acceptable
and he has received several calls from residents who are using
their garbage cans.
Mr. Jilek questioned whether or not the City could have a
separate voucher for yard waste. He noted that often times he
does not have three bags of yard waste and at the present time he
must place a extra service coupon on the one bag that is worth
$1.10. He suggested that the City have a separate color coded
coupon for yard waste and that they be sold on a one for one
basis. One coupon for one bag of yard waste.
Mr. Stock stated that he felt this was a good suggestion but to
implement it at this time would only confuse Shakopee residents.
He suggested that this item be brought up for discussion when the
program is reevaluated this Fall.
Commissioner Prudoehl stated that she felt to change the program
from curbside pick up to pick up at the point of refuse
collection at this time would only confuse Shakopee residents.
She supported maintaining the status quo and reevaluating the
program later this Fall.
It was the consensus of the Committee that to make any changes in
the program at this time would only complicate matters. The
Committee was supportive of taking all the issues that were
brought up by the residents and at the meeting under advisement
and incorporate them into the discussion when this item is
reconsidered later this Fall.
Prudoehl/Drees moved to maintain the status quo for the remainder
of this year and reevaluate the yard waste collection program
later this Fall. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock reviewed the March Recycling Report. He noted that the
March Recycling Report was only for a 1/2 a month time period.
The total amount of revenues generated from recycling in March
was $1,075.94. Mr. Stock noted that in addition to the revenues
received from Waste Management for recyclable collected, the City
also will receive a rebate from the County for $8 .00 per ton of
recyclables collected. Based on the amount of materials
collected in March, the City will receive an additional $203 .28
from the County.
Discussion ensued on the recycling program. Mr. Jim Kemp stated
that at the present time he believed that the average
participation rate in Shakopee was 608. In some areas he
estimated that over 80$ of the homes were participating on a
regular basis.
Mr. Stock requested Mr. Kemp to give the Committee an update on
the paper glut. Mr. Kemp stated that several weeks ago Waldorf
Paper Company decided to close their doors and not accept paper
until their supply could be reduced. This effectively put many
recycling programs out of business. Mr. Stock noted that since
the price of paper has dropped to zero, the Shakopee Boy Scouts
will no longer be picking up paper on the second Saturday of each
month. Mr. Stock stated that he doubted whether or not the price
of paper would recover until new markets can be discovered. Mr.
Stock questioned whether Waste Management was receiving the best
prices for the recyclables collected in Shakopee. Mr. Kemp
stated that they have gone with a larger recycling supplier for
several reasons. First, Waste Management felt that the supplier
that they selected could provide a guaranteed price for the
recyclables that would not fluctuate. Second, the recycler that
they have selected will accept the steel and aluminum cans in a
mixed fashion. Additionally, the supplier will also accept tin
cans.
Commissioner Amundson questioned whether or not we could expand
our recycling program to include tin cans. Mr. Kemp stated that
while our supplier will take tin cans, he did not recommend that
we expand our program at this time. There is a market for tin
cans but the price is minimal. To expand at this time would only
confuse Shakopee residents. He felt that when the tin market
develops, we could expand our program to include tin cans. He
felt that perhaps next Spring we could expand to include tin in
our recycling program.
Mr. Dick Jilek questioned whether or not there was a market for
plastic containers. Mr. Kemp stated that at this time there was
no viable market for plastic containers. Additionally, due to
the bulky size of the plastic containers, they were very
difficult to collect in a curbside program.
Mr. Stock shared with the Committee the problem that is being
experienced in the Metropolitan Area with newsprint. Mr. Stock
stated that what looks like a simple problem is really very
complicated. To construct a paper plant which could produce
recycled paper for newsprint would cost over $750 million.
Additionally, there are five new plants being built in the United
States at this time. Therefore, there is not enough market
supply to support the construction of another facility at this
time. Mr. Stock noted that many people blame the Minneapolis
Star and Tribune and the St. Paul Pioneer Dispatch for this
problem. He noted that these two papers have stated that they
can use more recycled paper in their final product. However, the
only place where they can get the recycled paper is from out
East. Transporting paper from out East will not resolve our
paper problem in the Metropolitan Area.
Commissioner Drees questioned Hennepin County's proposed ban on
plastics. Mr. Stock noted that in his opinion this was a rather
ridiculous solution to the problem. Again, it looks like a
fairly simple task to simply ban plastics. However, one must
take into consideration that the manufacturers who are using
plastics for packaging materials would have to totally retool to
develop alternative packaging. This would drive up consumer
costs. Mr. Stock stated that in his opinion education and the
development of reuseable plastic containers maybe a more valuable
alternative than simply banning all plastics.
Discussion ensued on the Dial-A-Ride transition. Mr. Stock
stated that he has received few complaints regarding our new
provider. In general, he felt the transition period has been
very smooth. Chairman Ziegler stated that he has been impressed
by the responsiveness of the new provider to complaints. He
noted that the President of the company actually visited with a
Shakopee resident who experienced a problem. Mr. Stock noted
that for the first two weeks of the program, the President of the
company actually staffed the phones to get a handle on what was
going on with our program.
Commissioner Drees questioned if we were providing service to
Southwest Metro Service Area. Mr. Stock stated that when we
switched providers, we tried to phase out the provision of
service to the Southwest Metro Service area. At the present
time, twelve riders have been grandfathered into the program.
These twelve riders are continuing to receive Dial-A-Ride service
to the Southwest Metro Service Area. The only reason these
riders are being provided with service is because their jobs
depend on the ride.. Mr. Stock noted that our contractor is
looking at alternatives which would provide service to Southwest
Metro Service Area. Commissioner Prudoehl questioned if
Southwest Metro was still providing service to Shakopee. Mr.
Stock responded in the affirmative. He noted that this is
causing confusion for our residents. Residents question why
Southwest Metro will provide service to Shakopee and Shakopee
e
will not provide service to Southwest Metro Service Area. Mr.
Stock again reiterated the City's position on this issue by
stating that it was more cost effective to carry 10 riders in
Shakopee in the time period that it would take to carry 1 person
to Southwest Metro Service Area.
Mr. Stock reviewed the transit monthly reports with the
Committee. He noted that we did not receive an overwhelming
response to the Van Pool Community Awareness Survey. However,
Mr. Stock stated that several persons did request more
information on the Van Pool Program. The survey also did serve
as a marketing tool to inform Shakopee residents that we do have
transit alternatives available in Shakopee. Mr. Stock suggested
that this survey be conducted on an annual basis. He suggested
that perhaps next time it could be included in the Shakopee
Utility Bill and returned with residence payments.
Mr. Stock reminded the Committee that the dump day was set for
this Saturday.
Amundson/Roman moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 P.M. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
Minutes of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee
City Council Chambers
Shakopee, MN
May 10, 1989
Chairman Keen called the meeting to order at 7:50 A.M. with the
following persons present: Gary Laurent, Melanie Kahleck, Ruben
Ruehle, Bill Wermerskirchen, Jim Stillman and Mary Keen. Also
present were Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant and
Councilmember Zak. Absent was Commissioner Forbord. Charlie
Fonder representing Fonders Carpets was also in attendance.
Commissioner Keen questioned if there were any additions to the
agenda. Kahleck/Ruehle moved to approve the agenda as submitted.
Motion carried unanimously.
Kahleck/Ruehle moved to approve the minutes of the April 12, 1989
meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock reported that at our last meeting we discussed parking
in the Second Avenue parking lot. At that time, the Downtown
Committee directed staff to contact business owners in Downtown
Shakopee regarding the unavailability of short term parking
within the Second Avenue lot. Mr. Stock shared with the
Committee a copy of the letter he sent to the businesses in late
April.
Mr. Stock noted that he has received complaints from several
persons who are employed in the downtown area that received a
parking ticket while parking in the Second Avenue lot. He noted
that several persons in the downtown area were also dissatisfied
with the City's sporadic enforcement of the parking restrictions.
Mr. Stock stated that he was bringing this issue to the attention
of the Downtown Committee again because in the letter that he
drafted and mailed on April 27, 1989 he invited persons who feel
that the parking restrictions should be changed to attend today's
meeting. Finally, Mr. Stock reported that he is not proposing
any changes to the parking restrictions as posted at this time.
Charlie Fonder stated that he has attended the meeting today to
speak on the Second Avenue parking lot issue. He questioned what
the plan was for the Second Avenue lot given the fact that it is
currently half empty. He stated that the lot was not being
utilized to it's fullest capacity by patrons. Mr. Fonder was
concerned that there was not much long term parking available in
the downtown area and he questioned where employees should park.
Mr. Fonder questioned whether or not more of the Second Avenue
lot could be posted for 8 hour parking.
Commissioner Wermerskirchen suggested that perhaps it was time
for the Downtown Committee to reevaluate parking restrictions in
1
the downtown area including the lots. He also suggested that
perhaps Second Avenue could be posted for 8 hour parking.
Commissioner Wermerskirchen stated that he also favored
consistent police enforcement of the parking restrictions.
The Committee then discussed alternative parking arrangements
within the Second Avenue lot.
Commissioner Stillman questioned whether there was some parking
space behind the library reserved for employee parking. Mr.
Stock responded in the affirmative. Extensive discussion took
place on who was utilizing the Second Avenue parking lot and what
could be done to resolve the parking problem for employees in the
downtown area.
It was the consensus of the Committee to monitor the parking in
both the downtown area and the Second Avenue lot. Mr. Stock
stated that he would contact the Public Works Director to
determine if the center aisle within the Second Avenue parking
lot could be delineated to offer 8 hour parking.
Mr. Stock then updated the Committee on the status of the
Downtown property inventory. He noted that at the present time
staff has completed an evaluation of the property values as well
as the building condition in terms of it's historical
significance. Mr. Stock noted that he would be simplifying the
historical ranking into a 1-3 ranking as compared to a 1-10
ranking. Mr. Stock also noted the difficulty that he is having
in determining which buildings are in a critical location in
terms of positioning. Commissioner Laurent suggested that
historical significance should not be scored on a half block
basis. He suggested that staff assign individual rankings to
each parcel. Mr. Stock stated that each parcel has been ranked
in terms of historical significance. The portrayal of historical
significance on a half block basis was simply done for
illustration purposes.
Mr. Laurent suggested that once all the data has been gathered,
staff should put together some alternative plans for site
development. He felt that this would stimulate discussion among
the Committee members. Mr. Stock stated that he hoped to have
the property inventory complete by our next meeting with some
preliminary recommendations ready for the Committee's review and
discussion.
Chairman Keen stated that she was concerned that some people in
the downtown area would become excited when they saw a plan that
may target their building for acquisition and/or demolition. Mr.
Stock noted that the plan would only be a concept plan until
Council officially approved it. He also noted that prior to
Council approval we would be wise to hold public hearings on the
plan. Commissioner Laurent stated that he did not feel the City
2
Council would endorse such a plan at this time. Additionally, he
felt that the Downtown Committee had to evaluate many different
aspects of the plan before we would be ready to submit it to City
Council. Mr. Laurent noted that the plan could either be very
passive or very aggressive. Perhaps the City would simply decide
to pursue acquisition and/or demolition as property becomes
available. This type of approach would be less offending to
property owners in the downtown area.
Mr. Stock reported that Arnie's Bar in Downtown Shakopee was for
sale. The asking price for the property was $64,000. Mr. Stock
noted that a prospective buyer is interested in the property and
is considering bringing the building up to code to reopen the
bar. Mr. Stock noted that since there is an interested buyer at
this time he felt it would be premature for the City to consider
acquisition or condemnation at this time. Mr. Stock noted that
had the property inventory been complete and in place this
property may have been suitable for acquisition.
Mr. Stock reported that a new antique shop has opened in Downtown
Shakopee. He encouraged the Downtown Committee to stop by and
welcome the new business owner into our community.
Mr. Stock reported that at the last meeting the Committee
discussed a second BEBO in the downtown area. Mr. Stock noted
that the City Engineer has investigated the issue and is prepared
to comment on the second BEBO. City Engineer, Dave Hutton stated
that in his investigation of the issue he has found no
documentation which addresses a second BEBO. He noted that at
this point in the process it was too late to include a second
BEBO. Additionally, the cost to construct a second BEBO would
have to be totally funded by the City of Shakopee. Mr. Hutton
explained to the Committee that there were at grade pedestrian
crossings at Fuller and Sommerville Streets. He questioned the
need for another BEBO on the East end of the by-pass.
Commissioner Stillman questioned whether or not the State could
provide some type of signage or design which would make the at
grade crossings more visible to the public. Mr. Hutton responded
in the affirmative. He stated that pedestrian walkway signage
could be incorporated into the by-pass which would make the at
grade crossings safer. He also stated that the cross walk
signals would be able to be timed for a longer crossing at the
two at grade signalized crosswalks.
Mr. Stock stated that the Downtown Assessment Hearing for the
Downtown Redevelopment Project would be held some time in June.
Mr. Stock stated that he has been attempting to solicit new
members to the Committee but has not been having much success.
He hoped that Mr. Fonder and Theresa Roehrich would be joining
the Committee in June.
3
Mr. Stock reported that to date he has not had time to
investigate a street vacation policy. He would continue to keep
this on his agenda and attempt to gather information on
establishing a street vacation policy.
Mr. Stock stated that the next meeting would regularly be
scheduled for June 14 , 1989. He stated that he has a conflict on
the 14th and would like to change the meeting to June 21, 1989 .
The Committee did not have a problem with changing the meeting
date to the 21st of June.
Laurent/Wermerskirchen moved to adjourn the meeting at 9: 00 A.M.
Motion carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
4
LO'6SZ -OUT •sao4OW U082e4TeW
OS'TZ -OUT ' -song Joel
1111'4/11 eOt;30 rel paa84aV43 aoauoW pus saeay
WE aaerpaOH suomaeH
ZE'6T8'9 *OUT •6uTzeeuT6u3 8OH
ZE'TET ATddng OZa43aT3 0 9 H
SO'£EI'S •00 6TddnS Ota4oeT3 aegdea0
00'OL • OUI 'TTaO-suo 81039 sagdog
SZ'ST pooraT6uT p00AUSID
119158 -OD s40npoad aOT;;O Teaauao
91'SO11'Z -OUT •sTOi4UOD 04tH-pae3
SL'bZ 6ut4utad s,APTO
ZS'6ZE aadoNegS go PITO
OS'LT aadoAugS go AIT
EZ'EOL'LLT oadoNvgS ;o AIT
00'SE9'TT aado3egg go ALTO
911'6 saao4S o4ny uotdmaq,
00'11E aagmnq aa4uadaeD H 9
£L'ZE 'OUT 'sa944t;4n0 ssaucsna
811'983 Auedmoo OZa4OB13 a34stamana
001ZE911 ATddnS ota4oala sa4045 ;apaos
S6'£61 'OUT 'AJB6601 9TTT9
LZ'STI AlddnS Tea4uso o4ny
00100T uosaapuy •y metTTZN
00'Z£O'OZ aedoNegs go A4TO
S9'3L6'T uot4eTOo8sy aarod OTTgnd ueOTaamy
:0V3H 9'1'II9
•pataaeo
uot40W •4daN 80 panoadde aq asTn6aa 6861 IS IZadV aq4 go
sa4nutm aq4 4eg4 NooO Sq papuooas '4aegdaA Aq uot4oW
•NOOO aaUOTBatmmoD moa;
aatamgo1Tx 4uaptsaad 6UTm07 rau 04 passed ser Tane6 aqy
-Ajnp AinC o4 anp 4uasge ser 4noH ue6 sa6eueW
•goedmeh uostetl pue uapuaW Aae4aa0as osTy •aatamgOaTN
pue 4aegdaA 'aoo0 saauotsstmmo0 :yN3538d SN3aW3W
•moon BUT488m
sat4TIT40 aq4 ut 'W'd OE:11 4e 6861 IT 6eW uo uotssas aeTn68a
ut pauanuOO uot6stmmo0 s9t4TTT4ff oTlgnd aadoNegs aqy
NOISSIWW00 53I1PIISff OIIS(1d 33dOAVHS
3HS 30
s3Sf1NIW
qr
Barbara Menden 23.04 f b
Ken Menden 30.24 /
Midwest Utility Equipment, Inc. 288.20
Minnesota Valley Testing laboratories, inc.32.00
Motor Parts Service of Shakopee 38.12
Northern States Power Co. 290,928.82
Northern States Power Co. 935.43
O'Connor and Hannan 1,253.74
Precision Metal Fabricators 48.22
Schoell and Madson, Inc. 15,289.29 '
Scott County Sheriff Communications 442.20
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission 308.97
Shakopee Services, Inc. 33.00
Skarnes, Incorporated 137.46
Starks Cleaning Services, Inc. 68.00
Stemmer Farm and Garden Supply, Inc. 24.95
Truck Utilities Manufacturing Co. 47.84
Valley Industrial Propane Inc. 11.03
Louis Van Hout 60.30
Water Products Company 41 .00
Reynolds Welding Supply Co. 6.82
Wild Iris, Inc. 35.00
Yarusso's Hardware Company 60.87
Concrete Mudjacking Co. 11195.00
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart that the bills be
allowed and ordered paid. Motion carried.
Liaison Wampach gave his report.
Mr. Jerome Jaspers and Mr. Jim Streefland from Jaspers
Streefland and Company were present to present the audit
for 1988.
Quotes on lawn maintenance for the pumphouse sites were
given to the Commission.
Motion by Cook, seconded by Kephart to accept the bid from
Jerry's Lawn Service for maintaining the trees and shrubs at
the various pumphouse sites . Motion carried.
A bid tabulation sheet from various companies on cable
quotations were presented to the Commission.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Kirchmeier to award the bid
for cable to E.P.L. , Inc. in the amount of 827,640.00 plus
metal escalation. Motion carried.
Mr. Jim Dunning was present to give the Commission the
results of a meeting held on April 27, 1989 with H.D.R.
Engineering and the Shakopee Public Utilities staff regarding
the design of the feeder line from Blue Lake.
Mr. Dunning gave various changes to be made in the design
of the power line. A November 1969 completion date was given.
Mr. Art Young was present to give his recommendations on
the 3rd St.watermain reconstruction between Spencer to Shumway
Streets. A report dated April 26 regarding recommended
watermain work and related problem areas connected with this
project were given.
A recommendation was given to Manager Van Hout to send a
letter to the City Engineer indicating that since the Shakopee
Public Utilities Commission are replacing the watermain on Third
Avenue and the services some problems have arisen which might
indicate the additional watermain on the side streets to provide
service to customers which might involve additional curb and
gutter, blacktop and storm sewer. Those problems should be
worked out before the project begins.
Manager Van Hout will also be looking into historically
what the Utilities Commission recommendations have been on past
watermain projects and with services specifically the Atwood
project from First to Third Avenues and how the City would not
pick up some of the cost to install watermain from second avenue
to third avenue.
Commissioner Cook reported on looking into the idea of self
funding the insurance for the employees of the Shakopee Public
Utilities Commission. Facts and figures are being gathered for
a closer look.
There were no new plats for April, 1989.
There were 4 fire calls for a total man hours of 7 hours and
20 minutes .
There were no lost time accidents for April, 1989.
The next regular meeting will be held on June 5, 1989 at the
Utilities meeting room.
Motion by Kephart, seconded by Cook that the meeting be
adjourned. Motion carried.
?�J " rng-)-Va�
Barbara Menden,Commission Secretary
_
TENTATIVE AGENDA
ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 20, 1989
Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding
1] Roll Call at 7:00 P.M.
2] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
3] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
41 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an
asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council
and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember
so requests, in which event the item will be removed from
the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence
on the agenda. )
*51 Approval of Minutes of May 22nd, June 6, and June 9th, 1989
6] Communications:
a] Herb Dallmann re: high taxes
b] League of Mn. .Cities re: Municipal Amicus Program
7] 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING on public improvement to the alley
in Block 102, lying between Sommerville and
Spencer and between 7th and 8th
8] Boards and Commissions: Planning Commission:
a] Request to Rezone Property - J.L. Shiely Mining Facility
- Ord. No. 267
b] Final Plat of Meadows 2nd Addition - lying So. of 11th
Ave. and East of County Road 79 - Res. 3068
c] Final Plat of .Canterbury Park 3rd Addition - lying in
the Northeast corner of CR-83 and 12 Ave. - Res. 3069
9] Reports from Staff:
a] Applications for Liquor Licenses by Corp-Tool, Inc.
b] Applications for Liquor Licenses by Centennial
Investment Corp.
c] Auditors Report on the 1988 Annual Financial Report
d] Roadway Improvements in Killarney Hills - Res. No. 3059
*e] 1989-1990 Set Up License Renewals
*f] 1989-1990 On Sale Wine License Renewals
*g] 1989-1990 3.2 Beer License Renewals
*h] 1989-1990 Intoxicating Liquor License Renewals
&it, i] Purchase of Fire Department Equipment - memo on table
TENTATIVE AGENDA
June 20, 1989
Page -2-
9] Reports from Staff continued:
*j] Swimming Pool Time Clock Purchase
*k] Surplus Equipment
*1] Authorize Advertising for a Planning Intern
*m] Engineering Tech II Vacancy
*n] Computer Network Upgrade
o] Approve Bills in Amount of $366,405.96
*p] property Liqbility Insurance
*q] Application for Temporary 3 .2 Beer License by Jaycees
101 Resolutions and Ordinances:
a] Ord. No. 266, Adopting Erosion Control Measures
b] Res. No. 3070, Accepting Work on Heritage Place
Improvements, Project 1987-14
11] Other Business:
12] Adjourn
Dennis R. Kraft
Acting City Administrator
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NNE 6, 1989
Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl.
Vierling, Clay, Zak, Scott and Wampach present. Also present
were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; David Hutton, City
Engineer; Julius A. Collar II, City Attorney; and Judith S. Cox,
City Clerk.
Wampach/Clay moved to recess for an HRA meeting. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mayor Lebens/Zak moved to reconvene to City Council at 7: 03 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously.
Liaison reports were given by councilmembers.
Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone from the audience who
wished to address anything not on the agenda. There was no
response.
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the consent business.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None - Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the minutes of May 9 and 16, 1989.
(Motion approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to acknowledge the letter dated May 10, 1989
from Gayden F. Carruth, Superintendent of Schools, regarding
their approval of the circulation of the Request for Proposals
for a joint study of the property tax situation in the taxing
jurisdictions of Scott County, the School District, the City of
Shakopee, Jackson Township and Louisville Township. (Approved
under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to acknowledge the letter dated May 25, 1989
from Marjorie R. Henderson, Murphy's Landing, regarding their
appreciation for the City's participation in "clean-up" day at
Murphy's Landing by Cub Scout Troop 218. (Approved under consent
business) .
wampach/Zak moved to table the letter from Senator Robert Schmitz
regarding property tax refund proposal by virtue of the veto of
the tax bill by the Governor. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Administrator introduced two items relating to
Canterbury Inn. The first item relates to the letter dated June
1st from William Kruger, Centennial Investment Corp. , requesting
waiving the minimum ($5,000) fee for a liquor license through
June 30, 1989. The current City Code requires a minimum of one-
half year fee. The second issue deals with a question about the
Proceedings of the June 6, 1989
Shakopee City Council Page -2-
transfer of the liquor license itself and the existence of a
liquor license. Mike Flanagan, Moss and Barnett of Mpls. ,
representing First Minnesota Savings Bank and Centennial
Investment Corp. , a subsidiary of First Minnesota, said that at
the time they purchased the real estate and assets of Scottland
Hotels, Inc. from the bankruptcy court, they did not purchase
the liquor license. They entered into an agreement to act as the
bankrupt trustee's agent to operate the license until it expires
on the last day of June. He stated that he disagrees with the
City Attorney's interpretation of the law here.
The City Attorney explained that the City is governed by the City
Code which does not allow the transfer of liquor licenses. He
recommended that the Council, for the protection of the City, and
for the protection of individual Councilmembers fulfilling their
oath of office to uphold the law, proceed to serve a written
notice on the operator that they do not have a valid liquor
license and that the sale of liquor without a license is
unlawful. He also recommended that it be done tomorrow.
Discussion followed trying to sort out whether or not a license
had been transferred, who holds the licenses, can the matter be
researched and action delayed until July.
Scott/Clay moved to table action regarding the liquor licenses
currently issued until to Scottland Hotels, Inc. June 20, 1989,
and directed the City Attorney get together with the City's
bankruptcy attorney and come up with a solution.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Scott and Clay
Noes: Cncl. Vierling, Wampach, Zak and Mayor Lebens
Motion fails.
Zak/Scott moved to table for 48 hours and allow the City Attorney
to talk with the bankruptcy attorney and enforce the provision of
Mr. Coller's interpretation that the license cannot be
transferred without legal ramifications and that they are in
violation of the City Code as of Thursday, June 8, 1989, if it
cannot be reconciled. -
Barb Stewart, attorney for Moss and Barnett, said she talked to
Mr. Ianncone, bankruptcy attorney for the City of Shakopee, and
he stated that the automatic stay may be in place but he has not
seen the documentation and cannot say for sure until he has a
chance to review the material.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Zak, Scott and Clay
Noes: Cncl. Vierling, Wampach, Mayor Lebens
Motion Fails.
Consensus was to go on with the agenda and have Dennis Kraft call
the Assistant City Attorney and the bankruptcy attorney for the
Proceedings of the June 6, 1989
Shakopee City Council Page -3-
City and see if all concerned parties could meet and discuss this
matter in order to come up with a viable solution.
Wampach/vierling moved to open the public hearing regarding
Roadway Improvements to Tyrone Drive and Sharon Parkway in
Killarney Hills Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engineer reviewed the street improvements needed in the
subdivision of Killarney Hills. He said the streets have
continued to deteriorate and the City's maintenance costs have
continued to rise. He reviewed the feasibility report and the
background information on the proposed project. Total estimated
cost of the project is $171, 000. Recommended assessments would
be 1008 to the property owners based on 150 foot depth. The
City's assessment would be $56, 000. Assessments could be spread
over a 10 year period. The roads were not built to the City
standards and pavement was put down in 1973 to prevent temporary
erosion. He said there is no sewer and water now and in order to
do the project right they should go in. This area is currently
outside of the municipal urban service area (MUSA) and sewer
cannot be extended until the MUSA line is in place. He said the
options at this time are the sewer and water can be put in but
not connected until a later time, or the sewer and water does not
have to be put in the street it could be put off to the side. A
third option would be to just put in a little section of pavement
and gravel and leave the curb and gutter off.
Wade Kohlrush, 1440 Tyrone Drive, had a question as to who owns
the outlots and if they would be responsible for some of the
assessments and he wondered why the streets were not done
properly from the beginning. The City Engineer replied that the
development came from Eagle Creek Township and they did not have
any requirements at that time.
Roger Sames, 1459 Sharon Parkway, asked what it would take
minimally to maintain this roadway until City sewer and water is
ready to come in, in 5 to 6 years from now. He believes it would
be worthwhile to wait until sewer and water can be extended.
Todd Bladow, 1456 Sharon Parkway, said he feels the owners of the
outlots should also be responsible for the cost of the road
repairs.
The general consensus of the property owners was to temporarily
maintain the roads until 5 to 6 years when sewer and water could j
come in. The City Engineer recommends making the repairs now
because of the high cost of maintenance.
Zak/Scott moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Proceedings of the June 6, 1989
Shakopee City Council Page -4-
Zak/vierling directed the City Engineer to come back to the
Council with alternatives to constructing the streets in
Killarney Hills at this time. Motion carried unanimously.
Dennis Kraft said he has set up a conference phone call with all
interested parties regarding the Canterbury Inn Liquor license.
The conference call will be at 2:00 P.M. on Wednesday June 7,
1989, with the City Attorney, Asst. City Attorney, Dennis Kraft,
and Mr. Iannacone, and Attorney's representing Centennial
Investment Corporation. He recommended that Council delay action
on the liquor license currently held by Scottland Hotels, inc.
until after the conference call. Council agreed to meet on June
9, 1989 at 12:00 P.M.
Scott/Clay moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried
unanimously.
Vierling/Clay moved to reconvene. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting reconvened at 9:20 a.m.
Vierling/Zak moved to reconsider the motion of May 16, 1989,
allowing repairs to the septic system at 519 Gorman Street.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to refer the septic system request of Ronald
Savino for property at 519 Gorman to the Building Code Board of
Appeals. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to not increase our liability exposure
regarding tree house regulations and leave things as they are.
Motion carried with Mayor Lebens opposed.
Scott/Vierling moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare an
ordinance restricting parking on the frontage road north of
Highway 101 in the vicinity of Valleyfair Amusement Park for a
maximum term of two hours. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on the MIS Coordinator Salary. Steven Hurley
reviewed the issue saying that he has been the only computer
coordinator and has been doing that job since 1983. He feels he
should be placed on the 4th step of the MIS position.
Mayor/Vierling moved to reconsider the MIS Coordinator salary.
Motion carried with Cncl. Scott opposed.
Vierling/Wampach moved to classify Stephen Hurley as full-time
MIS Coordinator at the top step (3 years) of the 1989 Pay plan
effective June 5, 1989, and that this is an exempt position as
indicated on the Pay Plan.
Proceedings of the June 6, 1989
Shakopee City Council Page -5-
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Zak, Wampach, Clay and Mayor
Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Scott Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling moved to appoint Judith S. Cox Acting City
Administrator from June 9 through June 14, 1989. (Approved under
consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$151,155.52 .
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Vierling/Wampach moved to direct staff to provide billing
services to Jackson township for fire calls to property owned by
MnDOT, DNR or the railroads. Such service to consist of
preparing and mailing one copy of an invoice, payable to Jackson
Township, and any follow-up to be the responsibility of Jackson.
The payment due the City for the fire call itself remains the
responsibility of the Township in accordance with the current
contract. Motion carried unanimously.
Cncl. Scott said he was not happy with the consulting work done
by Mr. Ronald Nelson on Murphy's Landing.
Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize payment of $681.38 to Mr.
Ronald E. Nelson for consulting services performed in conjunction
with Murphy's Landing.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Zak, Wampach, Clay and
Mayor Lebens
Noes: Cncl. Scott Motion carried.
The City Engineer reviewed the supplemental agreement No. 2 from
Howard Needles Tammen and Bergendoff for the T.H. 169/101 Mini
By-pass project. This agreement totals $37,545.00.
Wampach/Vierling moved to direct the appropriate City officials
to execute Supplemental Agreement No. 2 with Howard Needles
Tammen and Bergendoff, Inc. for the T.H. 169/101 Downtown Mini
By-pass Project in the total amount of $37,545.00.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Zak, Clay, Wampach, Scott
Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
The City Engineer reviewed stop signs at various locations. He
said he took traffic counts on 12th and Tyler and said that this
area does not warrant a four way stop sign. He would recommend
that 12th Avenue have through traffic and Tyler have the stop
sign. He said the police chief is in agreement with this
recommendation.
Proceedings of the June 6, 1989
Shakopee City Council Page -6-
Scott/Clay moved to direct staff to install stop signs at the
following locations:
a. On Tyler Street, at 12th Avenue.
b. On Quincy, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Jackson and
VanBuren Streets all at 12th Avenue.
C. On Holmes Street at 4th Avenue making this a 4-way stop
intersection.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Zak moved to direct the appropriate City staff to
install or relocate the downtown benches as shown in Attachment 2
of the memo dated May 31, 1989, from the City Engineer (CC DOC
#168) . Motion carried unanimously.
Clay/Vierling moved to nominate Charlie Fonder to the Downtown
Committee and dispense with the rules and appoint Charlie Fonder
to the Downtown Committee. (Approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3060, A Resolution Approving
Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for
the Upper Valley Drainage Project from 4th Avenue to 1000 Feet
West of C.R. 17 Project No. 1987-5. (Motion approved under
consent business) .
Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3061, A Resolution Approving
Plans and Specifications and Ordering the Advertisement for Bids
on 3rd Avenue between Spencer Street and Shumway Street, Scott
Street Between 2nd Avenue and 4th Avenue and Atwood, Fuller,
Lewis, Sommerville and Spencer Streets between 3rd Avenue and
Avenues, Project No. 1989-5 and moved for its adoption. (Motion
approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3065, A resolution Amending
Resolution No. 3053 Rescheduling the Date for the Public Hearing
for Downtown Streetscape Improvements Project No. 1987-2, and
moved its adoption. (Motion approved under consent business) .
Scott/Wampach offered Ordinance No. 265, An Ordinance of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending the Shakopee City Code Chapter
10 entitled "Public Protection, Crime and Offenses" by enacting a
new Section 10.37 entitled "Fires or Barbecues on Balconies or
Patios" and by adopting by reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1
and Section 10.99, which among other things contain penalty
provisions, and moved for its adoption.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3058, A Resolution Receiving
a report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to the Alley in
Block 102 of the original Shakopee City Plat Project No. 1989-8
and moved for its adoption. (Approved under consent business) .
Proceedings of the June 6, 1989
Shakopee City Council Page -7-
Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3064, A Resolution Accepting
Work on the V.I.P. Sanitary Sewer Extension Project No. 1987-13
and moved for its adoption. (Approved under consent business) .
Clay/Vierling moved to approve final payment to Austin P. Keller
Co. , Inc. 481 Front Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55117 in the Amount of
$2,000.00 (Approved under consent business) .
Wampach/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3062, A Resolution
Determining the Necessity for and Authorizing the Acquisition of
Certain Property by Proceeding in Eminent Domain for purposes of
Constructing 5th Avenue from Fillmore Street to Market Street,
Project No. 1989-4 and moved for its adoption. Motion carried
unanimously.
Clay/Vierling Offered resolution No. 3063, a Resolution amending
Resolution No. 2805, vacating Drainage and Utility Easements
within Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Valley Park 6th Addition, and moved
for its adoption. (Approved under consent business) .
Dennis Kraft said Mr. Gregg Johnson, President of Hygenics
Service Systems Inc. , is asking some time from the City Council
for possible consideration of locating a laundry and incineration
facility for medical uses in Shakopee. Consensus of the Council
was to hear his proposal on July 18th at the regular City Council
meeting.
Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize the appropriate personnel to
issue $200.00 each to Jim Hill, Jim Miller and Mark Bernhardson
as an honorarium for the services they provided as panel
interview members.
Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous
Noes: None Motion carried.
Discussion ensued on filling the City Administrator position. An
interview panel has interviewed the finalists and the next step
is to test the top three candidates. Cncl. Scott had a concern
on the cost of the testing. Cncl. Vierling thought it would be
money well spent and felt that the testing was important for a
position such as this.
Vierling/Wampach moved that the top three candidates for the City
Administrator position be tested.
Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Clay, Wampach, Zak -
Noes: Cncl. Scott and Mayor Lebens Motion carried.
Discussion followed on whether or not Council should have some
input on who the top three candidates are versus the top three
recommended by the interview panel.
Proceedings of the June 6, 1989
Shakopee City Council Page -8-
Wampach/Scott moved to test the top three candidates selected by
the interview panel. Motion carried unanimously.
Zak/Vierling moved to adjourn to Friday, June 9, at 12 :00 Noon.
Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
Judith S. Cox
tyCle k p n
Orly
ar 1 L. Schultz
ording Secretary
6-6-89
Sirs:
Our high taxes are giving us a bad business climate.
Look at all the businesses that are not more!
We once had a thriving Ben Franklin store, a Gambles store, a
Coast to Coast, another bakery and Dunnings Hardware.
The mall also lost some so us homeowners must pay more!
No new businesses will come to Shakopee with our high tax!
There are over 100 homes for sale and no buyers.
Where are we going? We don't need a bypass now because Shakopee
will be a Ghost Town.
Sincerely,
Herb Dallmann
\^ RECEIVED
JUN - 81989
CITY OFSHAKOPEE . G �
0�- .,�,
t
Air -4e
A
G
i"
db
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk ����
RE: League of Minnesota Cities' Municipal Amicus Program
DATE: June 13, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The City has received a letter from the League of Minnesota
Cities asking that the City consider joining the Municipal Amicus
Program (MAP) .
BACKGROUND:
In 1986 the League created the Municipal Amicus Program.
Funds to support the Program are derived from dues from members.
These funds enable the League to be more involved, than they were
able in the past, in influencing the development of judge made
law in Minnesota. The memo dated May 2, 1989 spells out the
involvement that the MAP has played during the three years since
its establishment in 1986.
When MAP was first established, Council chose not to become
a member. After three years of activity, the League is once
again asking Shakopee to consider joining.
The cost to become a member of the MAP is 10% of the League
dues. Our League dues for Sept. 1, 1988 to August 31, 1989 were
$4,696.00. We do not know what the Lequge dues for 1989-90 will
be. Based on the current dues, the membership fee to join MAP at
this time would be $469.00. If the City Attorney is a member of
CLEAR (City Lawyer Exchange Aid and Repository) , the MAP dues are
5%. The cost to become a member of CLEAR is $170. 00.
10% of League dues . . . . . . . . . $469.00
5% of League dues . . $235.00
CLEAR dues . . . . . 170.00 $405.00
We were unaware of what CLEAR had to offer so obtained
information on it, see attached. Although we may not be
interested in their codification services, since we have already
codified our ordinances, there are other services that may be
beneficial. Of particular benefit may be the research and
drafting assistance, ability to hire the CLEAR attorney if the
city attorney has a conflict of interest in a particular matter,
and the referral system.
ALTERNATIVES:
1] Join the League of Minnesota Cities' Municipal Amicus
Program
Municipal Amicus Program
June 13, 1989
Page -2-
2] Do not joint the Municipal Amicus Program
33 Join the Municipal Amicus Program and authorize the City
Attorney to join CLEAR.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Select one of the alternatives.
AMICUS
SII
�4-
183 University Ave.East
3t.Paul,MN 55101.2526
League of Minnesota Cities (612)227.5600(FAR 221.0981))
May 2, 1989 i1ECEIVE0
MAY - 51989
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Judith Cox
City Clerk
City Hall: 129 E. let Ave.
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Judy:
In 1983 the Minnesota Court of Appeals was created with the goal of
reducing the significant case load facing the Minnesota Supreme
Court. The creation of the Court of Appeals had an immediate and
direct effect on cities by dramatically increasing the number of
reported judicial decisions affecting them. What were previously
unreported decisions of three-judge district court panels became
reported pronouncements from the State Court of Appeals.
In reaction to the increased volume of appellate decisions
affecting cities, the League considered and eventually created the
Municipal Amicus Program (MAP) . MAP's creation enabled the League
to develop a systematic method of influencing the development of
judge made law in Minnesota. Prior to the creation of MAP the
League only had the resources to file amicus curiae briefs in about
two or three cases a year. Since the creation of MAP in March of
1986 the League has filed briefs in 24 appellate court cases. Of
the cases with final dispositions the Courts have decided 16 in
keeping with some or all of the arguments made in the League's
briefs (See enclosed summary of cases. ) . Of particular
significance is the fact that we have been a factor in getting the
Supreme Court to overturn eight unfavorable Court of Appeals
decisions. The Supreme Court has quoted us on several occasions.
We believe MAP is meeting its objective of influencing the
development of judge made law affecting Minnesota cities.
As most of you are aware, MAP is funded by separate dues from
cities voluntarily becoming members. Currently, 155 of the 854
cities in Minnesota pay dues to support the efforts of MAP
Of the state's 75 largest cities, 40 are members.
We encourage your city to seriously consider supporting MAP. Its
achievements attest to its value, and we believe it is worthy of
your city's support. We believe larger cities are particularly
� a,,"
benefitted due to the level of their municipal activity and the
consequent increased potential of litigation.
If you would like to discuss the program or have someone from the
League further describe its benefits to you or the city council,
please contact me, Stan Peskar or Tom Grundhoefer at the League
offices.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Serely,
�IVIIv V�
Donald A. Slater
Executive Director
MUNICIPAL AMICUS PROGRAM
REVIEW
(6/1/86 to 5/1/89)
Since June of 1986 the Municipal Amicus Program (M.A.P. ) has
filed 24 amicus briefs. The program has allowed the League to
have greater impact on the increasing volume of appellate court
cases affecting Minnesota municipalities. On a number of
occasions the Supreme Court specifically cited from the League's
brief as a basis for deciding in the cities' favor.
Of the cases in which the League has filed a brief, we have
received 16 favorable decisions, 3 unfavorable decisions and 2 no
decisions. There are currently 3 cases waiting final
disposition. Of particular significance is the fact that we have
been a factor in getting the Supreme Court to overturn 8
unfavorable Court of Appeals decisions. No favorable decision of
the Court of Appeals has yet been reversed by the Supreme Court.
The program has filed briefs or memoranda in the following cases:
1. Lund v. Hennepin County: a case challenging the
constitutionality of the state's property tax system.
Disposition: Case was decided in the County's favor by the
Minnesota Supreme Court. The United Stated Supreme Court
dismissed an appeal.
2. Anderson v. City of Hopkins: a case challenging the right of
a city and its employees to immediately appeal to the Court of
Appeals, from a trial court's wrongful denial of a summary
judgment motion on the issue of qualified immunity.
Disposition: Case was decided in City's favor establishing an
immediate right to appeal. The case allows cities to potentially
avoid burdensome litigation in otherwise frivolous lawsuits.
3. Wesala v. City of Virginia: a case challenging the Court of
Appeals decision holding that a city waives its various statutory
immunities by belonging to the League of Minnesota Cities
Insurance Trust (LMCIT) .
Disposition: After accepting the case for review, the Minnesota
Supreme Court reversed itself and decided not to hear the appeal.
4. Swanson v. City of Bloomington: a case involving the scope of
judicial review of municipal zoning decisions.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Minnesota
Court of Appeals and held that the scope of judicial review of a
municipal land-use decisions is limited to a review of the record
before the council, if there is a verbatim transcript of that
record and if the public hearing was fair and adequate.
5. City of Eden Prairiey. Leipke: a case involving the extent to
which a city may be estopped from enforcing its zoning ordinance
because of alleged actions of the city's zoning and building
officials.
Disposition: Court of Appeals ruled against the City and
returned the matter to the trial court for further testimony.
6. Chabot v. City f Sauk Rapids: a case reviewing the issue of
the whether a cityocouncil's decision to undertake a storm sewer
improvement after it has knowledge of the storm-sewer's
inadequate capacity, is a discretionary decision immune from
liability.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Minnesota
Court of Appeals and held that such decisions are discretionary,
and there is no duty to correct the inadequacy.
7. Anderson v. City of Willmar et al: a case addressing the
issue of whether a police civil service commission may lawfully
use independent examiners to conduct examinations and make
recommendations concerning prospective job applicants.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Minnesota
Court of Appeals and found that use of independent examiners was
not an unlawful delegation of authority.
8. Shortridge v. City of Maplewood et al: a special assessment
matter raising the issue of whether a property owner may
challenge a special assessment 4 years after it has been imposed,
on the ground that the notice of hearing contained a defect. The
Court of Appeals held that the property owner could bring the
challenge.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the decision
of the Court of Appeals and held that the property owner could
not challenge the assessment 4 years after it had been adopted.
9. independent School District #254 v City of Kenyon: a special
assessment case challenging the City's method of apportioning
assessments for storm trunk sewer projects.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals found against the City.
10. Bahr v. City of Litchfield: a case challenging a civil
service promotion decision. Plaintiffs claimed defects in the
process, but waited approximately 18 months before bringing their
lawsuit.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Court of
Appeals and found that posting of written notice of the promotion
decision was sufficient to commence the running of the 60 day
period in which to challenge the decision. The Court of Appeals
had required personal service of the notice.
� 6- 4_f�
11. City of Minneapolis v. Krawsky, : a case challenging the
constitutionality of the State's Obstructing Legal Process
statute (M.S. 609.50) . The trial court and the Court of Appeals
ruled the statute unconstitutional vague on the basis of City of
Houston v. Hill.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Court of
Appeals and upheld the State's Obstructing Legal Process
statute.
12. Minnesota Teamsters v. Washington County: a case addressing
the issue of whether health insurance for retirees is a mandatory
subject of bargaining under the Minnesota Public Employees Labor
Relations Act (MPELRA) .
Disposition: The Court of Appeals found in favor of the County.
Review was accepted by the Minnesota Supreme Court. The matter
was eventually dismissed when the 1988 Legislature passed a law
on the question.
13. State v. Holmquist: a case involving the doctrine of
discretionary immunity and whether the doctrine applies in
instances of alleged failure to place a no shoulder sign on our
road.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals found against the State. The
Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and held
that the State was not liable. However, it did not decide the
discretionary immunity issue but ruled for the State on the basis
of causation.
14. Crystal Green v. City of Crystal: a case involving a
challenge to a road dedication requirement. The challenge was
brought after the plat had been approved and recorded. In order
to secure plat approval the developer agreed to the dedication
requirement 'under protest.' The City argued that the challenge
was brought too late.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals held that the challenge to the
dedication requirement had to have been made prior to plat
approval and recording. The Minnesota Supreme Court denied
further review. The decision assures the finality of the
platting process.
15. Parranto Brothers, Inc. v. City of New Brighton, et al, : a
case addressing the issue of whether a downzoning of property
results in a taking of property. The city down-zoned an area of
property from B-3 to B-1. The downzoning precluded plaintiff's
desired use of the property but permitted other commercial uses.
Plaintiff alleges that the rezoning does not substantially
advance legitimate state interests or afford the owner
economically viable use of its land.
Disposition: The Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in favor of
the city, finding that the downzoning was supported by sound
planning rationale and that the regulation did not deny the
landowner all economically viable use of its property. The
Minnesota Supreme Court turned down the landowner's petition for
further review. Consequently, the Court of Appeals decision
stands as good law.
P 16. Snyder v. City of Minneapolis: A case raising the issue of
the constitutionality of the Municipal Tort Liability Limits.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals applied the limits but did not
specifically rule on their constitutionality. The Supreme Court
has granted further review. The Ldague filed an amicus brief in
support of the tort liability limits.
17. Annandale Advocate v. City of Annandale, et al, : a case
addressing the applicability of the open meeting law and the data
practices act to proceedings involving the termination of a
police chief. The Court of Appeals generally affirmed its
previous decision in in Itasca County Board of Commissioners v.
Olson, 372 N.W.2d 804 (Minn. App. 1985) , that private data on
high level employees changes when it is reasonably necessary to
discuss it at an open meeting. In effect, declaring that the
Open Meeting Law overrides the Data Practices Act.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the Court of
Appeals and found that a council must close that portion of a
meeting during which it discussed private data under the data
practices act. The Supreme Court adopted reasoning from the
League's brief.
18. Lienhard v. State of Minnesota, : a case involving a challenge
to the State tort liability limits. The Court of Appeals upheld
the limits against a constitutional challenge.
Disposition: The Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the
constitutionality of the state tort liability limits. Thus
implicitly recognizing the validity of the municipal limits.
19. Gorecki v. Ramsey County: a case addressing the issue of
whether a comparable worth job reclassification triggers the need
for a veteran's preference hearing. The employee argued that the
reclassification constituted a demotion.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals held that there was no need
for a veteran's preference hearing. The Supreme Court affirmed
the decisions of the Court of Appeals.
P 20. Countryside village v. City of North Branch: a case raising
the question of whether the special assessment appeal rights
contained in Minn. Stat. chap 429, apply to an ad valorem tax
levied in a storm sewer improvement district. The trial court
held that such rights exist and that failure to notify the
landowner of the rights invalidates the tax.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals made clear that a tax in a
storm sewer district is not a special assessment. Therefore
there is no requirement to show special benefit. The case is
currently before the Minnesota Supreme Court on the issue of the
proper notice procedures that must be used in establishing a
storm sewer improvement district.
21. Frank's Livestock and Poultryy. City of Wells: a case
alleging negligent firefighting.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals held that the City owed no
duty to take extraordinary measures to put out the fire.
P 22. Dahlheimer v. City of Dayton: a case alleging negligent
firefighting.
Disposition: The case is pending before the Court of Appeals.
23. Lovrien v. City of Shorewood: a case alleging that city
shoreland zoning regulation work an unconstitutional taking of
plaintiffs' property.
Disposition: The Court of Appeals held that the shoreland zoning
regulations furthered a legitimate governmental objective and did
not work an unconstitutional taking of property despite the fact
that the plaintiffs' property could only be used for lake access,
boat docking and other recreational purposes.
24. Anders et al. v. Washington County: a case raising the issue
of whether the County could change the amount it contributed as
its portion of employee health insurance premiums. The employees
alleged that changing the employer contribution with regard to
existing employees resulted in breach of an implied employment
contract.
Disposition: The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the trial
court which had ruled that a 1988 legislative amendment barred
plaintiffs' action. The Court said that there was no indication
of legislative intent to apply the statute retroactively. The
Court did not specifically rule on the validity of plaintiffs'
underlying cause of action.
P = Pending matter.
183 University Ave.East
St.Paul,MN 55101.2526
League of Minnesota Cities (612)227.5600(FAX:221-0986)
June 2, 1989
Jeanette Shaner
City of Shakopee
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Ms. Shaner:
Tom Grundhoefer, CLEAR attorney, has asked me to write you about
CLEAR.
I am enclosing CLEAR information, a copy of a recent CLEAR
newsletter and information about CLEAR's codification service.
CLEAR attorney Tom Grundhoefer came to the League three years ago
after spending more than two years as an attorney with the South
St. Paul law firm of Grannis, Grannis, Farrell and Knutson where he
assisted in the representation of the firm's municipal clients.
Clear offers a wide range of benefits to its members. These
benefits are summarized below:
1) Clear members can take advantage of our CODIFICATION service.
If your city's municipal code is like many, ordinances have been
written as needed and have been added chronologically rather than
systematically. You may have difficulty finding a specific law or
you may have discovered your code contains conflicting laws.
CLEAR has an indexed codification program on its computer.
Although the code will be customized to meet the city's needs, we
believe CLEAR's $26 an hour rate is cheaper than most codification
services. The city attorney is the codifier -- that is, we do most
of the work but we work with him or her to make sure the code suits
both the attorney's needs and those of the community. Because the
product, he knows the code and can work with it easily.
The cost of the codification cannot be estimated without talking to
Tom Grundhoefer, but in general the factors are how long ago the
previous codification was, how many pages and ordinances are
involved and the number of substantive changes needed. Most of our
bids are under $5,000.
2) CLEAR members have access to our BRIEF BANK, a repository for
legal briefs and memoranda on cases and issues of concern to
G6 � �
Minnesota cities. They receive an annual index of all briefs and
memoranda currently in the brief bank plus a listing of new
additions in our monthly newsletter. When they find one they want,
they can contact us and we will, for a nominal fee, make a copy for
them. The brief bank allows members to take advantage of another
city attorney's research and experience.
3) CLEAR's most valuable service may be its RESEARCH AND DRAFTING
ASSISTANCE. If members need just a few hours of research or if
they need help in the preparation of an appellate or trial court
brief, they can contract with us to work at a $26 an hour rate. Our
rate is less expensive than other research systems and often our
service is faster because we are specifically geared for municipal
issues.
4) If because of a conflict or other reason members find themselves
unable to represent their city in a particular matter, they may
want to hire CLEAR Attorney Tom Grundhoefer to represent their city.
6) CLEAR also serves as a REFERRAL SYSTEM for city attorneys. If
members need information in a specific field, we can give them the
name of a Clear member city attorney who is an expert in that field.
7) A REDUCED SUBSCRIPTION RATE for the Municipal Amicus Program
(MAP) is available for cities whose city attorneys belong to
CLEAR. Normally cities pay ten percent of their League dues, but
they pay only five Cities pay 5 percent if their city attorney
belongs to CLEAR.
We hope you will agree that the annual $170 CLEAR subscription
fee offers good value for the money. And we currently are offering
a half-price $85 membership which is good through August.
If you or Julius Coller have any questions about the CLEAR program,
please call Tom or me at (612) 227-5600. We look forward to
hearing from you.
Sincerely,
MeriMeri e�rgQ_/
CLEAR Administrator !
cc: Julius Coller
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CITY LAWYER EXCHANGE AID AND REPOSITORY
YES. I wish to subscribe to CLEAR beginning immediately. I
understand that my subscription will entitle me to receive all CLEAR
services through August 31, 1989.
NAME: TELEPHONE: ( )
FIRM: MUNICIPALITIES
REPRESENTED
ADDRESS:
Enclosed with this renewal form is a check for $85 (Please make
the check payable to "The League of Minnesota Cities, CLEAR.-) for my annual
membership. _
Please bill me.
City Lawyer Exchange Aid and Repository
CLEAR (City Lawyer Exchange Aid and Repository) serves Minnesota
city attorneys. The League developed it in 1984 to permit city
attorneys to exchange briefs and attorney opinions -- thus
benefiting from the research and work other member attorneys
have done and eliminating duplication of effort. CLEAR also
serves as a referral service, giving members access to the names
of attorneys with expertise in specific areas of law.
CLEAR's most valuable service may be its research and drafting
assistance. City attorneys who need a few hours of help in
research or drafting can use CLEAR as a temporary-help service.
It is inexpensive and quicker than other research systems
because it's specifically geared for municipal issues. City
attorneys get the extra help they need without paying for a
full-time assistant.
CLEAR offers members a codification service. Municipal codes
with ordinances added chronologically make laws difficult to
find and perhaps conflicting. CLEAR's indexed, on-line
codification system is cheaper than most codifiers, plus it
allows city attorneys to customize the code to suit their
needs as well as the city's needs. In effect, the city
attorney is the codifier, although CLEAR does most of the
detailed work.
If your city attorney belongs to CLEAR, you save on your
Municipal Amicus Program (MAP) dues. Cities pay only half of
their regular MAP dues if their city attorneys are CLEAR
members.
CLEAR's annual membership rate is $170. Its 1988-89 fiscal
year begins September 1, 1988, and continues through August 31,
1989.
For information on having your city's attorney become a CLEAR
member, call the League at (612) 227-5600.
January 1 - August 31, 1988 CLEAR Update
From both a financial and a program perspective, 1988 has been a
good year for the League's CLEAR program. There are 89 CLEAR
members representing approximately 176 municipalities.
Tom Grundhoefer, CLEAR Program attorney, continues to offer city
attorneys assistance in a wide variety of legal matters. The
presence of an experienced attorney continues to enable CLEAR to
offer an effective program.
The activities of CLEAR have been diverse. In addition to
handling many research matters, the CLEAR program has worked on
or is working on the following projects during 1988:
* Preparation of a Court of Appeals brief for the City of
Litchfield.
* Advice to the City of Owatonna regarding open meeting law/
data privacy question.
* Review of City of Stacy Code to verify conformance with
law.
* Quarterly summary of State and Federal court cases of
municipal interest.
* Codification of the City of Woodland ordinances.
* Codification of the City of Long Lake ordinances.
* Codification of the City of Wrenshall ordinances.
* Codification of the City of Wyoming ordinances.
* Codification of the City of Olivia ordinances.
* Codification of the City of Annandale ordinances.
These activities, together with the research and the ever
increasing brief bank, have made CLEAR a valuable asset to the
municipal attorney.
I
4901 Manitou Road.Tonka Bay.Minnesota 55337 Tel <.a-=a^=
September 6, 1985
unm iT MAY CONCERN:
CI.F.A4 City Lawyer Exchange Aid and Repository) assisted our city
atto, ..ev in the codification of Lite ordinances of the Cicy Df
Tuuku gay in 11,84 .
We have been working with the code for several monthsand have
found it highly satisfactory. I am, therefore, happy
to CLEAR' s codification service.
CLEAR' s concept of involving the city attorney in the codificat'.on
process was an advantage because the city attorney' s familiarity
with the oruinances saved codification time. The city attorney
also monitored any necessary revisions to make sure such revisions
reflected the intention of the city council as nearly as possible.
Because CLEAR undertook a substantial portion of the development
of the code and relieved him of some of the routine and mundane
codification tasks, the city attorney was able to limit his
involvement t� outlining areas to be covered , giving general
directions and directing the revision and review of the f:aal
product .
Alsi„ because of the resources at CLEAR' s disposal through the
League of Minnesota Cities , CLEAR could compare and contrast
ordinances from other cities and model ordinance codes and it
could monitor legislation and recent court decis;-n s that midh`.
effect file code .
Finally , beCa!Ase CLEAR is a non-profit organization., they were
able to offer a high-quality finished code at an extremely reason-
able price .
Sincerely ,
Kirk McDonald
Administrator-Clerk-Treasurer
City of Tonka Bay
i
REAR
City Lawyer Exchange Aid and Repository
CLEAR CODIFICATION SERVICES
CLEAR offers substantial assistance to member city attorneys who
wish to codify their city's ordinances.
The city attorney is the codifier , although CLEAR does most of the
detailed work.
Making the city attorney the codifier provides several advantages:
1. City attorneys know the existing ordinances, they know
the problems concerning the language or interpretation of
certain ordinances and they know the needs and desires of
their city government. Familiarity with existing
ordinances substantially decreases the time needed to
complete the codification process.
2. Because the city attorney works with the city council,
the city attorney can monitor any necessary revisions to
insure that revisions reflect the intention of the council.
Using CLEAR services also provides advantages:
1. CLEAR handles the detailed work of the code, allowing
the city attorney time to outline the areas to be covered,
to give general directions and to direct the revision and
review of the final product. CLEAR relieves the city
attorney of routine and mundane codification tasks, yet the
city attorney remains intimately involved in the
development of the code.
2. CLEAR has League of Minnesota Cities resources
available, so it can compare and contrast ordinances from
other cities and model ordinance codes.
3. CLEAR's computer assisted codification process
decreases the number of man-hours needed to complete the
project.
- 1 -
0- 2�
4. Because it is a non-profit organization, CLEAR can
assist the city attorney in offering the city a high
quality finished code in a timely manner and at an
extremely reasonable price.
5. The League constantly monitors legislation and
recent court decisions affecting municipalities, and CLEAR
utilizes these resources to make sure no portion of the
finished code conflicts with state or federal law.
6. CLEAR can assist you in drafting and integrating into
the code future ordinances. j
WHERE DO WE START?
1. CLEAR reviews your city's existing ordinances,
determines any possible new areas of regulation or
ordinances requiring substantial revision, and discusses
with the city attorney and/or the city council or city
manager the code format preferred.
2. CLEAR discusses with the city attorney the amount
of time anticipated to complete the project, the division
of work between the city attorney and CLEAR, and the number
of work hours projected for CLEAR and for the city
attorney.
3. Based on this information, CLEAR submits a bid to the
city council for codification of the city' s ordinances.
The city attorney is responsible for review of the final product,
for supervising CLEAR's work, for suggesting changes,
modifications or necessary revisions, and for setting up
conferences with the city council.
CLEAR is responsible for drafting the code, providing indexes,
tables of contents, and for all other Substantive work necessary
to complete the code.
Because CLEAR's hourly cost is generally less than most attorney's
and professional codifier's and because of the efficiencies
provided by the League of Minnesota Cities computer , research, and
other facilities, the city attorney with the assistance of CLEAR
can provide a high quality finished code in a timely manner and at
a competitive price.
If you have any questions regarding CLEAR's assistance in
undertaking codification of your city's ordinances please call
Merideth Chelberg, CLEAR Administrator , or TOM Grundhoefer , CLEAR
Attorney, at (612) 227-5600.
2 -
G �,-� ,-
nIN ews�eI SI TTeR
Volume 6 Number 5 February 1989
City Lawyer Exchange Aid and Repository (61 2) 227-5600
Contents Note
Briefs PROGRAM REVIEW Legislative Items of Interest
ZONING AND O M ting Lav Bill
SUBDIVISION: Introduced. S.F. 1006 appears
Contractor's to be the first bill introduced
Bond in This month's Notice discusses to deal with the effects of the
Development two legislative bills: 1) decision in Annandale Advocate
Activities . .. . 2 Open Meeting Law bill and 2) cit, of Annandale. The bill
Comprehensive Land Use defines •final disposition•
LIABILITY: Recodif ication bill. for purposes of Minn. stat.
Defamation Lie- 513.43 subd. 2 as follows: •For
bility for state- IF YOU'VE WRITTEN AN ARTICLB purposes of this subdivision,
mems Made as OR GIVEN A SPEECH, please there is final disposition of
Part of an contribute a copy to the Brief disciplinary action if no
Internal AffairsBank. You need not limit your further action is pending
Investigation Z contributions to briefs or before the body taking the
attorney opinions. action and no appeal to that
ANIMALS: body is possible or the time
Regulation of Pit Do you need assistance, for filing an appeal to that
Bulls . .. . .. .. . 2 have a question, or want to body has passed. Final
research a topic through disposition of disciplinary
Attorney Opinions
wESTLAW? Call Tom or me at action includes a settlement
PERSONNEL: (612) 227-5600. We'll be concerning a complaint or
pleased to hear from you. charge that is agreed to by the
Outside BmPlOy- subject of the data.•
ment by Police
Personnel . . .. . 3 The bill also contains an
amendment to Minn. Stat.
LIABILITY: 5471.705 subd. lb which reads,
snow and Ice -Materials that contain not
Conditions onpublic data may be discussed or
Sidewalks . .. . 4 printed copies distributed at a
meeting required by section
::otice . .. . ... . .. 1 13.43 subdivision 2, to be open
to the public if the portions
Contributors this discussed or distributed are
Issue . .. . . . . ... 1 substantially related to an
issue at a meeting required by
Mow to Use the a ♦ * * e * e �, y subdivision 1 to be open to the
Brief'Bank . . .. . 4 public. Section 13.08 and
13.09 do not apply to the
Joke of the month 3 dissemination of not public
data in compliance with this
Program Review . .. I `Thanks subdivision.•
At this point in time it is too
early to tell whether this
bill has any prospect of
Proinram passing. This bill is
Admlstiator: CONTRIBUTORS TRIS ISSUE: different than one currently
Mer Beth Chelberg being negotiated between the
Cliff Greene League and the Newspaper
Clear PrograID Tom Grundhoefer Association.
Laye Roger Knutson
Tom Grundhoefer Norbert Smith continued on page 2
Issue: vhilh certain police officers
�p �� /'► Whether a private vera sued in:
n reaction to
'''LV7_1 W ® development which includes the statements Uey made to an
eonstrum.ion of various public investigator conducting an
impro=ements by the developer internal affairs investigation.
Ie a public work- as that term The District Court has issued
is used in Minn. Stat. 55'14.26 an order dismissing the
February 1989 PAGE y and .28. complaint against the police
officers. The Court found for
Analysis: The city argued that the officers on three separate
the work by the contractor on grounds.
Cozehensive Land Use behalf of the developer did not
Recodion. constitute •Public work.• They 1) The Court found that the
argued that the city did notstatesents made by the officers
A bill that attempts to hire the contractor or agree to could not be considered as
consolidate county, city and pay the contra,rtor envthinq. statements of fact and thus
township zoning and subdivision In fact, no city money was were not actionable. The Court
authority into a single chapter expended on the construction of found the statements primarily
has now been placed into bill the improvements. to be opinion and not specific
form. The bill has not yet or precise enough to support a
been introduced and does not The city cites Minn. Stat. defamation action.
yet have a number. We will keep 4462.358 subd. 2a which states
you advised of any further that a city may require a2) Relying on Supreme Court
action on the bill. bond as a condition of decisions in Erickson V.
subdivision approval. The city MacArthur, 414 N.W.2d 406
The bill in its present form is argues that the specific (Minn. 1987) and Johnson v.
somewhat different than the one provisions of Minn. Stat. Dirkswager, 315 N.W.2d 215
which was introduced last 5462.358 supersede the general (Minn. 1982) the Court reasoned
session. statute on contractor's bonds. that there are overiding policy
considerations that weigh
Disposition: The Court found against subjecting these
for the City stating the officers to defamation
wording of Minn. Stat. ;574.26, liability. The Court affords
makes it inapplicable to the immunity to the officers when
fact situation. The Court it is necessary to further a
B R I E F S A N D states the statute refers to a greater public interest in
contract between a municipal preserving government
corporation and a contractor, accountability and the free
M E M O R A N DA and here the city had no flow of information about
contractual relationship with government operations. The
the contractor. The Court also Court agreed with Supreme Court
said, 'Clearly, no public funds rationale stating, wit did not
were expended in connection want the threat of libel action
CF-196 ZONING AND SUBDIVISION: with the improvements. Based to become a public official's
CONTRACTOR'S BOND IN ?n the same reasoning, no 'excuse not to speak out in
DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES. public work' was being done performance of their duties.,-
requiring a bond because no
Cobb-Strecker-Dunphy a public funds were being used.• 3) The Court found the Carchedi
Zimmermann V. city of Lakeville Finally, the Court said the was a •public figure- and that
at al. provisions of Minn. Star. he would have to show the
4462.358 supersede general existence of -malice.- The
Facts: The City entered into provisions. Court stated that the plaintiff
development contracts with had stated no facts to indicate
developers, and the developers SUAwitted by: Roger Knutson, a real re aeon or a good faith
is, Grannie, Farrell d
hired a contractor to some Grannbelief that material [sets
of the development work.k. Knutson.The establishing malice would be
development contracts provided Documents submitted: city'sestablished by discovery.
that the developer wouldand
developcertain areas within Summary Judgment Memorandum and
For all of these reasons the
the city in accordance with the the CourOrder and court dismissed the plaintiff's
terms of the contract, vturn Memorandumdum.. p pp. 30. claims against the officers.
the city would approve the
plattings and improvements Submitted by: Cliff Greene,
involved. Pursuant to the Popham, Maik, Schnobrich 6
development contracts, the CF-197 LIABILITY: DEFAMATION Kaufman, Ltd, pp, 12,
developers obtained payment LIABILITY FOR STATEMENTS MADE
bonds from the contractor. The AS PART OF AN INTERNAL AFFAIRS CF-198 ANIMALS: REGULATION OF
plaintiff in the lawsuit who is INVESTIGATION. PITBULLS.
a subcontractor contends that
under Minn. Stat. 574.26 and Carchedi v. Lt. Carolen Ba ile Garcia v. Villa f T'1
.28 the city was obligated
to and other St. Paul Police 76J P.2d 355 (N. Max. 1988)
obtain a Contractor's bond from Otfrcers.
the contractor as the platting As some of you may have noticed
of the four areae constituted In the January, 1989 CLEAR
•public work• as that term is Newsletter we discussed the
used in the statute. arguments made in this case in Continued on Page 3
6 �
an Wunconstitutional taking of IIdwY[
property
the
eines the ordinance
was tl in furtherance of
the properproper exercise of the
city's police power. CAO-193 LIABILITY: SNOWAND ICE
CONDITIONS ON SIDEWALKS
February 1989 PAGE
The memo deals with the
in the newspapers, a Hennepin question of how to best deal
County Judge recently ruled with the situation of
unconstitutional a Minneapolis unshoveled public sidewalks in
Ordinance regulating the community from a liability
-Pit-bull' terriers. standpoint. The city has an
Coincidentally, the New Mexico ordinance requiring abutting
Court of Appeals recently property owners to clear snow
upheld a breed-specfic and ice from public sidewalks
ordinance regulating -Pit A TT ORN E within 12 hours after it stops
Bulls.' The decision is snowing. Because of extreme
wind conditions in a certain
summarized below.
OPINIONS area of the city, residents
Dog owners brought an action often are unable to get the
challenging the sidewalks shoveled.
constitutionality of a village
ordinance banning ownership or The memo looks at two
possession of pit bull dogs. alternatives from a liability
The District Court and the standpoint: 1) Imposing a
Court of Appeals upheld the moratorium on enforcement of
ordinance against a number of the ordinance, with potential
different challenges. CAO-192 PERSONNEL: OUTSIDE that most sidewalks in the area
EMPLOYMENT BY POLICE PERSONNEL would never be shoveled; 2)
The Court of Appeals found that Utilizing city employees to
the dog owners who owned or The document is entitled clear sidewalks and assessing
were involved with 'American 'PROPOSAL FOR INDEPENDENT the cost to the property
Pit Bull Terriers' had notice EMPLOYMENT APPLICATION.- It is owners.
that the ordinance banning a a form that must be filled out
certain breed of dog -known as and evaluated before a city The memo reaches the following
an 'American Pit Bull Police officer may engage in conclusions:
Terrier, '• applied to them, and outside employment. The
thus the ordinance was not information sought is intended a. There would be no liability
unconstitutionallyvague. Nor to be used by the City in concerning city council
was it vague in that it might evaluating the types of decisions due to discretionary
apply to owners of mixed breeds independent employment which immunity. The memo reasons
of dogs or other owners who did say (1) create a conflict of that the decision whether to
not know that their dog might interest with an officer's shovel sidewalks is a policy
,be known as an 'American Pit police employment; (2) decision.
Bull Terrier, '• since none of interfere with an officer's
these people were party to the ability to perform duties for b. There would be no liability
action. the department; and (3) expose for staff decisions on whether
the City to liability or civil to enforce the snow shoveling
The Court also held that the litigation. ordinance. Relying on a recent
ordinance was rationally case in which county Personnel
related to the legitimate The form also requires the made a decision to not salt
parson seeking outside certain roads for economic
purpose of protecting the
health and safety of village employment to acknowledge the reasons, the memo concludes
residents. There had been a independent nature of the work that staff decisions concerning
history of village residents and to voluntarily waive all shoveling may be discretionary.
claims, including claims for
being attacked by pit bull
doge. indemnification, against the C. Liability exposure for
city for lose, damage or injury clearing sidewalks depends upon
The ordinance did not violate arising out of the outside the location and use of the
due process or equal protection employment. sidewalk and whether City
rights since there roe employees affirmatively caused
substantial evidence that the The form requires the officer the condition. Recent case law
breed of dog presented a to agree to not wear the city has held that a city might be
special threat to residents of uniform or use any other liable for the manner in which
the city. articles or equipment belonging it plowed snow. The court has
to the city. The officer must reasoned that plowing snow can
The Court also upheld the further agree to not hold cause an artificial
ordinance's hearing provisions himself/herself outas accumulation of snow which may
against a procedural due performing police business. result In liability.
process challenge. Submitted by: Cliff Greene, Submitted by: Norbert P. Smith,
Finally, the court held that Popham, Haik, Schnobrich 6 North Mankato City Attorney.
the regulation did not involve Kaufman, Ltd. pp. 6 pp' 6.
C"KEAR
February 1989 PAGE 9
MOW TO USE THE BRIEF BANK
If you are interested in
having a document sent to you,
call or write, identify the
document by number (e.g.
CF-91, CAO 17) and by case
name if applicable.
You will be billed for
material ordered from our
brief bank at a rate of 50
cents per page. If you have
contributed materials to the
brief bank within the previous
year your cost will be only 25
cents per page.
If you want more information
about a document, please call.
By asking questions you may be
able to better determine which
specific documents or portions
of documents you actually
need.
If you need more information
on a particular subject, call
or write, specifying the
information needed. I will
access our computer databases
and let you know if we
currently have any material on
the subject. If no material
is currently available your
request will appear in the
next month's newsletter as an
information request.
IMANR YOUi s
Joke of the Month
All was quiet at the police
station. The police officers
were playing cards.
'What a week!• said Police
Officer O'Brien. 'No
robberies, no assaults, no
fights -- nothing. If it
keeps on like this, they'll be
cutting the police force!'
'Don't worry, things will pick
up,' reassured Police Officer
Anderson. 'You've mot to have
faith in human nature.-
PLEASE BRING THE FEASIBILITY REPORT FROM YOUR 6/6/89 COUNCIL PACKET
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engin
SUBJECT: Alley in Block 102
DATE: June 14, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3067 , Ordering the Improvement and the
Preparation of Plans and Specifications to the Alley in
Block 102.
BACKGROUND:
On May 16 , 1989 City Council accepted the petition and ordered
the preparation of a feasibility report for improvements to the
Alley in Block 102 of the Original Plat of Shakopee by Resolution
No. 3054 . The feasibility report was distributed to Council on
June 6 , 1989 and subsequently a public hearing was scheduled for
June 20 , 1989 •
At the conclusion of the public hearing, if Council wishes to
proceed with the project, Resolution No . 3067 is attached for
Council consideration . Staff will briefly go over the
feasibility report at the public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Determine that the project should proceed and order staff to
prepare the plans and specifications by adopting Resolution
No. 3067 .
2 . Determine that the project is not in the best interest of
the City and do not proceed any further with the project.
RECOMMENDATION:
Depending on the testimony received, staff recommends Alternative
No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3067 , A Resolution Ordering an Improvement
and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Alley in
Block 102 of the Original Shakopee Plat, Project No. 1989-8 and
move its adoption.
DH/pmp
MEM3067
RESOLUTION NO. 3067
A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And
The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For
The Alley in Block 102 Of The
Original Shakopee Plat
Project No. 1989-8
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3058 , adopted on June 6 , 1989 ,
fixed a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of
the Alley in Block 102 of the Shakopee City Plat; 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 20th day of June 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 :
Adding Bituminous Pavement to the Alley in Block 102 located
between 7th and 8th Avenues and Sommerville and Spencer
Streets
2. Dave 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 Attorney
Railer. Johnson
726 Spencer St.
Shakopee, ,4a. 55379
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
City Of Shakopee
As a home owner abutting the alley in Block 102 of original
Shakopee City plat I wish to voice my full support of the
plan to the bituminous pavement of said alley. I shall not be
able to attend the meeting being held on Tuesday June 20th.
Therefor I am taking this means showing my approval of this
35670.00 estimate to complete this improvement.
jY truly ours,
e 16 3,589
JUP151989
Pile
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Request to Rezone Property Located In the NW 1/4 of
Section 11 and Part of the SW 1/4 of Section 2,
Township 115, Range 22 (J.L. Shiely Mining Facility)
DATE: June 13, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At their meeting on June 8, 1989, the Shakopee Planning
Commission passed a motion recommending to the City Council that
the portion of the J.L. Shiely mining facility currently zoned I-
1 be rezoned to I-2.
BACKGROUND:
J.L. Shiely Company is requesting that the portion of their
property currently zoned 1-1 be rezoned to 1-2. The property is
currently split into two zoning districts, the Western portion
and the Northern approximately 450 feet of the Eastern portion is
zoned I-2 . The remaining portion of the property is zoned I-1
(see attached map) .
The existing development on the property is located in both
zoning districts, approximately 1/3 of the pit area is located in
the I-2 zoning district and approximately 2/3 in the I-1 zoning
district. Mining and gravel extraction is a conditional use in
both the I-1 and i-2 districts. The existing processing yard
adjacent to the pit is located in the I-2 zoning district.
The reason for the rezoning request is to allow Hardrives Inc. to
locate a asphalt processing plant on the property to the South of
the existing processing yard. Hardrives has applied for a
conditional use permit to locate the plant in an area currently
zoned I-2, but would prefer the site requested for rezoning. The
site requested for rezoning offers advantages for the location of
the processing plant over the currently proposed site. The area
to be rezoned is buffered from the highway by the existing
processing yard on the Shiely property and is not adjacent to
commercial development along Highway 101.
The City's Comprehensive Plan does not differentiate between
heavy and light industry in the goals or the land use map for the
Urban portion of the City. However, the map for the Rural
portion of the City does differentiate between heavy and light
industry and the boundary between the heavy and light industrial
areas conforms to the current zoning (see enclosed map) . The
City is currently in the process of updating it's comprehensive
plan, the proposed plan will not differentiate between heavy and
light industry and proposes industrial zoning for this area.
The purpose for the light industrial zoning district contained in
the City Code states that the district shall serve as a
transition between more intense industrial sites and residential
and/or business land uses. The area requested for rezoning is
surrounded by industrial uses on all four sides. The area to the
North and West is currently zoned I-2. The area to the South and
East is zoned I-1. The property to the South and East is
currently developed with an NSP substation which is an industrial
use allowed in both the I-1 and I-2 zoning districts. The
property proposed for rezoning does not buffer any residential or
business uses.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Offer and pass Ordinance #267 amending the zoning map to
rezone property located in the NW 1/4 of Section 11 and part
of the SW 1/4 of Section 2, Township 115, Range 22 (J.L.
Shiely Mining Facility) from I-1 to i-2.
2. Do not approve Ordinance #267 amending the zoning map to
rezone property located in the NW 1/4 of Section 11 and part
of the SW 1/4 of Section 2, Township 115, Range 22 (J.L.
Shiely Mining Facility) from I-1 to I-2 .
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At their meeting on June 8, 1989 the Planning Commission passed a
motion recommending to the City Council that a zoning map
amendment be adopted to rezone property located in the NW 1/4 of
Section 11 and part of the SW 1/4 of Section 2, Township 115,
Range 22 (J.L. Shiely Mining Facility) from I-1 to I-2.
The Planning Commission based it's recommendation for rezoning of
the property on the following findings:
1. The rezoning is consistent with community goals and
development policies in this area.
2. Rezoning of the parcel is compatible with surrounding land
uses and zoning.
3 . The rezoning of this parcel will enable the entire Shiely
property to fall within one zoning district (I-2) .
4. The rezoning will allow for the possible approval of an
asphalt plant within the area to be rezoned. The site
within the proposed rezoning is preferable to the current
alternative site being requested.
ACTION REODESTED:
Offer and move for approval of Ordinance No. 267 amending the
Zoning Map to rezone property located in the NW 1/4 of Section 11
and part of the SW 1/4 of Section 2, Township 115, Range 22 (J.L.
Shiely Mining Facility) from I-1 to I-2.
wuo.an.3.e^oi�3v.s�r� I • T
JwMLNtlld
$NOj1tle3d0 496l 33d0Avwit5
Q V
II L a— e. - - - =-- ---
5 •' ' in
I� is la .'�De1 (3 17
Ell
OJ
9i I s v
II l r--
6 -
y� t
cc s
■ :v4i a :� :1 -. 5= E � ❑
/ L
, x /
■ p■■ ■■4■Y■■■ '
ii Ju1,i�S.
UJI
a 04 1 LU
IL
ME
L-- Synu� V u■■i---� NOR J-1
�
r� ,
D� p✓
ORDINANCE #267
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Amending the
Shakopee City Code, Chapter 11 Entitled "Land Use REgulation"
(Zoning) By Amending Sections 11.32 Light Industrial (I-1) and
Section 11.33 Heavy Industrial (I-2) and Adopting By Reference
Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 11.99 which Among Other
Things Contain Penalty Provisions.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
SECTION 1: Reducing Area of Licht Industrial Zone
The light industrial zone is hereby reduced by removing
therefrom the following described areas, to-wit: the North half
of the Northwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 115, Range 22
West; and that part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 2 ,
Township 115 North, Range 22 West lying South of a line 450 feet
South of the Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis, and Omaha Railroad
line.
SECTION II Increasing the Area of Heavy Industrial Zone
The heavy industrial zone is hereby increased by including
therein the area described in Section I immediately above.
SECTION III• Adoption by Reference
The general provisions and definitions applicable to the
entire City Code including penalty provisions of Chapter 1 and
Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby
adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated
vertabim herein.
SECTION IV• When in Force and Effect
After the adoption and attestation of this ordinance, it
shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City Of
Shakopee and shall be infull force and effect on and after the
date following such publication.
Passed 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
Prepared and approved as to form
this _ day of 1989.
City Attorney
Sb
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Final Plat of the Meadows 2nd Addition
DATE: June 13, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At their meeting on June 8, 1989, the Planning Commission passed
a motion recommending to the City Council approval of the final
plat for the Meadows 2nd Addition subject to conditions.
BACKGROUND:
Gold Nugget Development Corporation has submitted a final plat
for the Meadows 2nd Addition located South of 11th Avenue and
East of County Road 79. This is the second phase of the
development and contains 31 single family lots on approximately
12 acres. The area is zoned R-2.
In the Spring of 1987, the developer received preliminary plat
approval for the entire plat. The preliminary plat was recently
amended by the City of May 2, 1989. The first phase of the final
platting (Meadows let Addition) was approved by the City on
November 17, 1987.
The upper Valley Drainageway is located adjacent to the Southern
boundary of the lots being platted in the proposed Meadows 2nd
Addition. The drainageway itself will be dedicated to the City
in a future final plat. The Meadows 1st Addition dedicated to
the City an easement for the drainageway.
Approval of the preliminary plat required dedication of land for
park purposes. The developer plans to phase final platting and
dedicate additional park land to the City in future phases.
Staff is recommending the developer furnish a check to the City
for the difference between the land to be dedicated with the
individual phasing and the amount of land required. When the
land is dedicated with the subsequent phase the check will be
returned. The first addition dedicated 58 of the land (trail
along County Road 79) or about 1/2 of the amount required. The
second phase will dedicate only 1.48 of the land (outlot C) and
will be required to pay the difference at this time.
Vierling Drive will have to be extended to serve the proposed
cul-de-sacs in this phase of the development. The developer may
either petition the City for construction of Vierling Drive and
be assessed for the portion equivalent to a 36' local street, or
the developer may construct the street improvement himself and
the City will reimburse the developer the difference between the
cost of a 36' local street and the collector street.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Offer and pass Resolution No. 3068 approving the final plat
for Meadows 2nd Addition subject to the conditions
recommended by the Planning Commission.
2 . Offer and pass Resolution No. 3068 approving the final plat
for Meadows 2nd Addition subject to conditions different
then recommended by the Planning Commission.
3 . Offer and pass a motion denying approval of the final plat
for Meadows 2nd Addition.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At their meeting on June 8, 1989 the Planning Commission passed a
motion recommending approval of the final plat for Meadows 2nd
Addition subject to the following conditions (alternative #1) :
1. No building permits will be issued to outlots within this
plat until they are replatted.
2. Execution of a developers agreement for construction
required improvements:
a. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
b. Water system to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in
accordance with the requirements of the standard design
criteria and standards of the City of Shakopee.
d. Local streets and street signs within the plat shall be
constructed in accordance with the requirements of the
design criteria and standard specifications of the City
of Shakopee.
e. The developer agrees to either construct Vierling Drive
or petition the City for construction of Vierling Drive
within the plat. The developer shall pay for Vierling
Drive equivalent to the costs for construction of a 36'
residential street.
f. The developer shall deed to the City Outlot C for park
purposes. The developer shall pay the City $6665 in
lieu of park dedication to account for the difference
between the land dedicated and that required by Code.
The payment in lieu shall be refunded to the developer
upon dedication of the remaining required land for park
purposes.
g. A sidewalk along Vierling Drive to be constructed in
accordance with the design criteria and standards of
the City of Shakopee.
3 . Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney.
4. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating
that not more then 10% of the plat within the R-2 zone will
be developed into twin homes.
5. No direct accesses from individual lots will be allowed to
Vierling Drive.
6. A mutual agreement by the developer, fee owner and City for
a north/south storm sewer easement be given to the City, as
requested by MnDOT for the Bypass. Said easement agreement
shall be executed prior to December 31, 1990.
7. Lots 6 & 7, Block 2; Lots 8 & 9, Block 2 ; Lots 4 & 5, Block
3 and Lots 6 & 7, Block 3, be sold and built upon together
as one parcel.
ACTION REODESTED:
Offer and approval Resolution No. 3068 approving the final plat
for the Meadows 2nd Addition.
RESOLUTION NO. 3068
A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of
the Meadows 2nd Addition
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did
approve the Final Plat of the Meadows 2nd Addition on June 8 ,
1989 and has recommended its adoption; and
WHEREAS, all notices of hearing have been duly sent and
posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given
an opportunity to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all
things.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that the Final Plat of the Meadows
2nd Addition, described as follows:
See Exhibit A Attachment
be, and the same hereby is approved and adopted with the
requirements that:
1. No building permits will be issued to outlots within this
plat until they are replatted.
2. Execution of a developers agreement for construction
required improvements:
a. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
b. Water system to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
C. Sanitary sewer and storm sewer to be installed in
accordance with the requirements of the standard design
criteria and standards of the City of Shakopee.
d. Local streets and street signs within the plat shall be
constructed in accordance with the requirements of the
design criteria and standard specifications of the City
of Shakopee.
e. The developer agrees to either construct Vierling Drive
or petition the City for construction of Vierling Drive
within the plat. The developer shall pay for Vierling
Drive equivalent to the costs for construction of a 36'
residential street.
f. The developer shall deed to the City Outlot C for park
purposes. The developer shall pay the City $6665 in
lieu of park dedication to account for the difference
between the land dedicated and that required by Code.
The payment in lieu shall be refunded to the developer
upon dedication of the remaining required land for park
purposes.
g. A sidewalk along Vierling Drive to be constructed in
accordance with the design criteria and standards of
the City of Shakopee.
3 . Approval of a title opinion by the City Attorney.
4. The developer shall provide a recordable agreement stating
that not more then 108 of the plat within the R-2 zone will
be developed into twin homes.
5. No direct accesses from individual lots will be allowed to
vierling Drive.
6. A mutual agreement by the developer, fee owner and City for
a north/south storm sewer easement be given to the City, as
requested by MnDOT for the Bypass. Said easement agreement
shall be executed prior to December 31, 1990.
7. Lots 6 & 7 , Block 2; Lots 8 & 9, Block 2; Lots 4 & 5, Block
3 and Lots 6 & 7, Block 3, be sold and built upon together
as one parcel.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk and
the same hereby authorized and directed to execute said approved
Plat and Developer's Agreement.
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
Exhibit A
Outlot C and Outlot D, THE MEADOWS IST ADDITION, as platted and
of record in the office of the County Recorder, Scott County,
Minnesota.
and that part of Outlot B, THE MEADOWS IST ADDITION, as platted
and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Scott County,
Minnesota describes as follows:
Commencing at the northwest corner of said Outlot B; thence on an
assumed bearing of North 89 degrees 40 minutes 26 seconds East,
along the north line of said Outlot B, a distance of 379. 65 feet
to the point of beginning; thence continuing North 89 degrees 44
minutes 10 second East, a distance of 605.14 feet; thence South 8
degrees 41 minutes 01 seconds West, a distance of 91. 77 feet;
thence South 73 degrees 19 minutes 21 seconds West, a distance of
111. 63 feet; thence South 37 degrees 30 minutes 42 seconds West,
a distance of 59 . 62 feet; thence South 70 degrees 27 minutes 47
seconds West, a distance of 143 .39 feet; thence North 65 degrees
16 minutes 25 seconds West, a distance of 264 . 51 feet; thence
North 89 degrees 52 minutes 26 seconds West, a distance of 113 . 60
feet; to the point of beginning.
9 C.,
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Final Plat for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition
DATE: June 15, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
At their meeting on June 8, 1989, the Planning Commission passed
a motion recommending to the City Council approval of the final
plat for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition subject to conditions.
BACKGROUND:
At their meeting on May 4, 1989, the Planning Commission held a
public hearing on a request from the Scottland Corporation for a
preliminary and final plat for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition.
After the public hearing the Commission recommended to the City
Council approval of preliminary plat only and directed the
developer to provide additional information regarding a sewer
plan for the area and drainage plans for the plat prior to
approval of the final plat. At their meeting on May 16, 1989 the
City Council approved the preliminary plat for Canterbury Park
3rd Addition.
The proposed plat would subdivide 5.6 acres located at the corner
of County Road 83 and 12th Avenue into two lots. The proposed
site contains the existing Canterbury Square shopping center and
the vacant property immediately to the South and East of the
shopping center. The property is zoned B-1. Scottland Inc. is
requesting approval of the plat in order to allow conveyance of
the undeveloped portion of the site to a separate corporate
entity.
The existing shopping center is served by City sewer located in
the NW corner of Lot 1. The sewer is not of sufficient depth to
serve Lot 2. The developer has submitted a sewer plan for the
area showing two alternative locations for construction of sewer
lines to serve this property. The sewer plan has been reviewed
by the City Engineer (see attached memo) .
Approval of the preliminary plat included a condition requiring
the developer to dedicate an additional 10' of right-of-way for
12th Avenue. The developer has requested that the City allow the
additional 10' to be dedicated as an easement rather than right-
of-way. The Planning staff indicated to the Planning Commission
that although dedication of an easement for additional right-of-
way is acceptable, it was the staff's recommendation that
dedication of the right-of-way as part of the street is
preferable. The staff felt that adequate land is available
within the proposed Lot 2 for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition to
allow for the dedication of the additional right-of-way without
substantially limiting the buildable area of the lot. The
Planning Cgmmission concurred with staff's recommendation.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Offer and pass Resolution No. 3069 approving the final plat
for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition subject to the conditions
recommended by the Planning Commission.
2. Offer and pass Resolution No. 3069 approving the final plat
for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition subject to conditions
different then those recommended by the Planning Commission.
3. Offer and pass a motion denying approval of the final plat
for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
At their meeting on June 8, 1989 the Planning Commission passed a
motion recommending to the City Council approval of the final
plat for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition subject to the following
conditions (alternative #1) :
1. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
2 . Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of
required improvements:
A. Installation of water system in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
B. Payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes
shall be required.
C. Apportionments of special assessments according to City
policy.
3 . Execution of an agreement or petition giving the City the
right to construct all sanitary and storm sewer improvements
necessary to serve Lot 2 of Canterbury Park 3rd Addition
when Lot 2 is ready for development or at such time as is in
the City's best interest. This agreement or petition shall
waive all rights to a public hearing and appeal of any
assessments for the improvements.
4. Prior to any site grading or issuance of a building permit
for Lot 2, the developer shall submit a final grading and
drainage plan which must be approved by the City Engineer.
Said grading and drainage plan must show existing drainage
patterns, proposed grading plans, proposed drainage
facilities, storm water detention ponds and erosion control
plans.
5. The developer shall dedicate an additional 10 foot of right-
of-way for 12th Avenue along the South property line as a
part of the final plat.
Y C,--
6.
6. A driveway easement across Lot 2 for the existing driveway
shall either be dedicated on the plat or recorded by
separate agreement.
7. No additional accesses shall be allowed to County Road 83
from this plat.
ACTION REODESTED:
Offer and pass Resolution No. 3069 approving the final plat for
Canterbury Park 3rd Addition.
MEMO TO: Doug Wise, City Planner
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engine 6�24L._.
SUBJECT: Canterbury Park 3rd Addition
Final Plat
DATE: May 31 , 1989
I have reviewed the drainage plan and sanitary sewer plan for the
above referenced plat and offer the following comments:
Sanitary Sewer Plan
The applicant has submitted a comprehensive sewer plan for the
entire area between 12th Avenue and the bypass. This sewer plan
was prepared in 1986 by a consultant as part of the service area
expansion request.
As shown on the sewer plan , there are two alternatives for
serving this area with sewers. Both of the alternatives show a
portion of the area draining east into the existing lift station
at the Canterbury Inn, with the remaining area going west .
Alternative No. 1 shows another lift station being required,
while Alternative 2 utilizes gravity flow ( except for the
existing lift station at the hotel) .
Because lift stations are extremely expensive to construct and
maintain , I recommend that Alternative No. 2 be implemented
because it would result in one less lift station than Alternative
No. 1 . Outside of that, I find this comprehensive sewer plan to
be generally acceptable, from an engineering viewpoint.
I have done some research on the existing lift station at the
hotel. One of the conditions of the plat approval for the hotel
(Canterbury Park 2nd Addition) was that the lift station would be
privately owned and maintained until such time as the City wishes
to take it over. I have attached a copy of this agreement for
your reference.
Therefore, the City cannot give the applicant of Canterbury Park
3rd Addition permission to use this lift station or require them
to use it because we don't own it. The City would either have to
exercise our right to take this lift station over or require that
the applicant execute an agreement with the owner of the lift
station in order to use it.
Normally, when a final plat is approved, the owner must construct
the necessary improvements, sign a developer' s agreement, submit
a letter of credit, etc. In this case, the owner is platting
this land for the purpose of selling it and is not the developer.
The owner has no idea what type of development will eventually
Y C.-
occur on this parcel. Therefore, I do not believe requiring the
applicant to construct the necessary improvements as part of the
final plat approval is the best course of action for the City.
My recommendation is that the applicant be required to execute an
agreement or petition giving the City the right to construct all
improvements when we feel it is in the best interest of the City.
This agreement/petition would also waive any rights to the public
hearings and waive any rights to appeal any assessments for the
improvements. This is standard language on petitions. The City
Clerk has indicated that this type of agreement has been done on
past developments.
Storm Drainage Plan
I have also reviewed the drainage plan submitted by the
applicant. The drainage plan is generally acceptable, although
it was prepared based on the vacant lot being developed into a
parking lot. Again, since the owner is not the developer, the
drainage plan could change considerably depending on what the
final use of this property is.
Again, I would recommend that as a condition of the final plat
approval the City Engineer should review and approve of the final
drainage and grading plan including erosion control measures
prior to issuing any building permits. This condition could be
covered in the same agreement/petition as outlined for the
sanitary sewer.
Please contact me if you have any questions or comments on either
of these two issues.
DH/pmp
CP3RD
1 `
DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS
This Declaration is made this 25th day of March, 1986 by
Valley Industrial Development Company II (hereinafter
"VIDCO II") .
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS VIDCO II is the owner of record of Lots 1 and 2,
Block 2, and Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 , Canterbury Park Second
Addition, Scott County, Minnesota;
WHEREAS when the City of Shakopee approved the plat of
Canterbury Park Second Addition, it did so on the condition that
VIDCO II file a recordable agreement, binding to each lot, that
VIDCO II will be responsible for the operation and maintenance
of the sanitary sewer lift station located on Lot 2, Block 2,
Canterbury Park Second Addition;
NOW THEREFORE VIDCO II declares as follows:
1 . VIDCO II shall build, own, operate and maintain the
sanitary sewer lift station located on Lot 2, Block 2,
Canterbury Park Second Addition, which lift station will
accept the sewer discharge from Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 , Lots
1 and 2, Block 2, Canterbury Park Second Addition, until
such time as the City of Shakopee agrees to assume
ownership, operation and maintenance of said lift station,
which shall be evidenced by filing a resolution of the City
Council of the City of Shakopee to that effect, in the chain
of title to Lots i and 2, Block 1 and Lots 1 and 2, Block 2,
Canterbury Park 2nd Addition.
� v
2. The present and future owners of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 and
Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Canterbury Park 2nd Addition agree
for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, to the
filing of this Declaration in the chain of title to said
lots.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the party hereto has executed this
Declaration on the above date.
VALLEY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CO. II
By ttland IVa gene ipartner
�^�
By
Bruce D. Malkerson
Executive Vice President
State of Minnesota )
S. S.
County of Dakota )
y 2s�dw Ham r1e6
The foreg ing Declaration of Protective Covenants was
acknowledged by Bruce D. Malkerson, Executive Vice President of
Scottland Inc. , a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the
corporation. `Tn
Notary Public
L19EDA L. LANCASTERState Deed Tax: Non Exempt WOTARYN�G-MINNE,50TADAKOTA COUNTYr Chen�m Jury u.Iasi
This Instrument was drafted by: ----
Scottland Inc.
5244 Valley Industrial Blvd. So.
Shakopee, MN 55379
RESOLUTION NO. 3069
A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of
Canterbury Park 3rd Addition
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Shakopee did
approve the Final Plat of Canterbury Park 3rd Addition on June 8 ,
1989 and has recommended its adoption; and
WHEREAS, all notices of hearing have been duly sent and
posted and all persons appearing at the hearing have been given
an opportunity to be heard thereon; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has been fully advised in all
things.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, that the Final Plat of Canterbury
Park 3rd Addition, described as follows:
The west 494 .00 feet of that part of the Northeast
Quarter of Section 9, Township 115, Range 22 , Scott
County, Minnesota, lying North of the centerline of
12th Avenue as described in Document No. 29522 in the
office of the Registrar of Titles, Scott County,
Minnesota. Excepting therefrom that part of said
Northeast Quarter lying within the plat of Valley Park
Third Addition.
be, and the same hereby is approved and adopted with the
requirements that:
1. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
2. Execution of a Developers Agreement for construction of
required improvements:
A. Installation of water system in accordance with the
requirements of the SPUC Manager.
B. Payment in lieu of land dedication for park purposes
shall be required.
C. Apportionments of special assessments according to City
policy.
3 . Execution of an agreement or petition giving the City the
right to construct all sanitary and storm sewer improvements
necessary to serve Lot 2 of Canterbury Park 3rd Addition
when Lot 2 is ready for development or at such time as is in
the City's best interest. This agreement or petition shall
waive all rights to a public hearing and appeal of any
assessments for the improvements.
� C,-
4.
4. Prior to any site grading or issuance of a building permit
for Lot 2, the developer shall submit a final grading and
drainage plan which must be approved by the City Engineer.
Said grading and drainage plan must show existing drainage
patterns, proposed grading plans, proposed drainage
facilities, storm water detention ponds and erosion control
plans.
5. The developer shall dedicate an additional to foot of right-
of-way for 12th Avenue along the south property line as a
part of the final plat.
6. A driveway easement across Lot 2 for the existing driveway
shall either be dedicated on the plat or recorded by
separate agreement.
7. No additional accesses shall be allowed to County Road 83
from this plat.
HE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Clerk and
the same hereby authorized and directed to execute said approved
Plat and Developer's Agreement.
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
9�
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City C1ercC'Ie_J
RE: Applications for On Sale, Sunday and Off Sale
Intoxicating Liquor Licenses by Corp-Tool, Inc.
DATE: June 15, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The City has received applications for On Sale, Off Sale and
Sunday intoxicating liquor licenses from Corp-Tool, Inc.
BACKGROUND:
Mr. Gregory D. Ries and Mr. Kenneth Cryer have established
the corporation known as Corp-Tool, Inc. and under this name have
made application for on sale, off sale and Sunday liquor
licenses. They wish to purchase Arnie's Friendly Folks Club and
wish Council to consider their applications before they make the
purchase.
As you may recall, Arnie's has been closed because repairs
need to be made to the building. Before a license application
can be approved, the building must receive a certificate of
occupancy and of code compliance, pursuant to the city code. The
applicant estimates that it will take a couple of months to make
the necessary repairs to the building. Because the business will
not be open for a couple of months, it is desirable to save the
insurance premium for liquor liability insurance until it is
needed. Because the applicant is not sure of the exact date he
will be opening, it is difficult to figure the license fee.
I have advised the applicant that the application,
certificate of occupancy, surety bond, insurance, and fee are all
due prior to Council granting a license. I have suggested to the
applicant that application be made for Council consideration so
that they can learn whether or not Council would grant the
licenses when all the requirements are met. If they have a sense
that the licenses would be granted, then they can purchase the
building, make the necessary repairs, obtain the surety bond and
appropriate insurance and come before Council when they are ready
to open to get approval of the licenses.
Council can not actually grant the licenses at this time.
This situation existed also when Scottland Hotels Inc. wished to
build the hotel. Attached is a copy of a memo from the City
Attorney explaining how their applications could be handled since
approval could not be granted until the building was complete and
the necessary insurance and surety bond were in order. This is a
non-binding procedure and is simply a concept approval. The City
Code does not provide for the reservation of a license.
4
Corp-Tool, Inc.
June 15, 1989
Page -2-
There are currently six licenses allotted for a Class A
liquor license (establishment under 4,000 sq.ft. ) After Council
renews the liquor licenses on the agenda June 20th, there will be
four issued. Therefore, it appears that there will be a license
available for Corp-Tool, Inc. , if they are ready within a
reasonable amount of time.
The Police Department has conducted the customary background
investigation and the Chief of Police is recommending approval of
the licenses upon compliance with the building codes. See
attached letter from Tom Brownell, Chief of Police.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Deny the applications. Although the applications are
not in order and denial is within Council's rights, this would
not give the applicant any indication as to Council's concept
approval.
2. Approve the applications. Approval would be
disregarding the City Code requirements.
3. Table the applications after proposing to Council a non-
binding informal vote, per City Attorney's recommendation. This
will provide the applicant with a concept approval so that he can
proceed with purchasing the building and making the repairs.
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternative No. 3
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1. Move to propose to Council for a non-binding informal
vote that if all of the required inspections were completed and
all certificates properly made showing full code compliance and
the necessary insurance, bonds, and fee filed, would the Council
grant to Corp-Tool, Inc. 122 East First Avenue, on sale, off
sale, and Sunday intoxicating liquor licenses at this meeting?
2. Table the applications of Corp-Tool, Inc. 122 East First
Avenue for on sale, off sale, and Sunday intoxicating liquor
licenses.
CORPTOOL
No 2631.1-��, asonamscown.,
"ON SALE"
Mate of Ainflegota,
COU,YTF OF . 5 C-8 H . ... ........ . MUXICIPAUrr or.
To TNR Go,EF.vjxa Ro, OF TRE dBOPE xv,,-D.vuxicir,,Lirr:
11"'ou.0 to Mopes, 46 of she Inws f.Ui.msoh,, of 1-933-4
11'a,fw'A Olol J. e—A-,v V-00 I I Xe,
hereby appt;45 fes.a Hessen,(or tht teem F, /Vant,r. , -.... ...
from the /_", - .. -._..day / -- - 19 to U i.t.,dentaf [duo's
de.fl.M by As.M retail-1Y fur—misfism"O-V rME
Or ed7.
-ia said....id,atity,as tuhish asmiss, I�-
Zel _.....anted
Rz end
. ...... end Is fund huo'eb,reurne.t. ad state
larS
rhentsaid .paduirk. ,
.. ........- ..........
dust and anni.tal-an eselasile Ula-'sual;
Tinst se"...-
proprietor and ounsage and the/allowing equipment end facilities,
aeh On
.......... ........... ...........
---------- ........ -1-1.............
..........-........... .......... ....... .......... ...........
......................................................----------------................................ ........
That asuit aW"a owes.
AAJ --ned'visenthe'ametranal
/age. �V -
f. baste
ojal`be oot been.,vIftd, been oomiefi,el of any o4lf-I W-Wfa--
mossafesta's"U'd""i or
jmr
proeeaaimn
huss ,bed"mid net as.reeaked:
That an omonfutta,or or ah.W.U, .!U .. or onstrd, or has any Anumnial tatesend b% U.
bods,. of.111aff injusloninif Us. at yetait on said Mmi., an,slaus, ,enact or esquire, bya.
" derA.ndme or otherwise, mid P,11ea.f.- to a
handle a. U out, . md.0 of such wmm-
,'
f,J,; '
1 .o-eohaienotal:
That as otbe, ee,ats,', bion. hm been, issand,di,ectl,a,isubi,eofll, to said-1111ol-t m`for
ouni neoaIse, that .tiomos,of-clans ahs' than hereby -plied fm`bm' been issued 'a "Y "" a
eard ad that mid ru-elaisr- are .,ffher �I
se,j e, .Mhed by out,perm-to-ham so Ileeme
,endd be issued:
Ti...I said P,enuse.are not within any open a-ithm sale which the le of infasiosting boners is Pm-
hibif,d by the Iona of the SWI of .M . .
mumsts, the psriof ... eharte, ,divus. or special Is.,
or th,aagh soling oMi-sams, P;Zndi a#.or U&I p.reffaball,held for that Pendens:
Thot -ki 11111heast I hereby agree _-.that any Neeme granted 1,11asof Inaeta -half In mm�
f,%msf,-bfe without roment of the noth.14 Issuing the same; that mid iteenae shenit "ad be offeetion
unfit peri,it A.11 be Wed ander she touro of the U.WdStabe,in too,1-h tido it I-required-ads'
-ul bou.,and that 6 i-<Y , aill keep said Ii,emu posted in a ewi�--place in mid iu`emion:
That ibis o,,jj,.(js. I. _.,I, emet'ubjent so.1tr the Ina.of MI-neseto, the Inn's of the
..
Ibe orvjjsomma sm, egol,,of sold asnateiolit,, acrd the �gaaturms of the Liquor
Va.hrd co... .isnions, of Jfiu.aoful "rating 1. the.1,and do.of sate of Wxte.tmg liques," all
,f,hiet, ,,,he,,eb,.,ad, . part herrof.and Whieh rr &I-Cyr, hareb,.Jree to observe and obey.
............
XI.4c,AA 4joei,,
Dales ,
f0tatit of lf�innc�ota.
couNrrop ----------.Ita.
_.._.L Ae,44c,#`-ACry.fif...................... duly nw.», as Path my that.-
-C-OrJ2 — VV9.1 -...........
the within.ppueant' '.." that Aa- f""and fir"he"kneeelaffs of the faob staled in
the will,in application a;ul of the butienar of&2M , W laeatioa theeoef, and the eonIeaft
of the.1thi» ad that the mialonexte made in axlei.,plsoatlow aro true of.
o.n k.o,.Wj, le, 4/ 4,
.
subscribed."Sworn to B./f. X.I.,..... ... ....
M ... ......
........ .............
ew. "'ef .... ............ .... .............
.. ........... ........
Sle-Ph"A.Theisen
-Wev Xotwry
pable .............. County.mi.. clftcv-71141
my C.Mi X,.Mese�
7R U
p
Is
;74
City of Shakopee
PK0A POLICE DEPARTMENT f
y� F� 476 South Gorman Street
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379
�pLZ Tel. 612/445-6666 i
NESO�
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Liquor License Application/Corp-Tool Inc.
DATE: June 8, 1989
Introduction
Corp-Tool Inc. has made application for ON SALE/OFF SALE Liquor Licenses
to he located at 122 East First Avenue. The licenses are currently held
by Arnold Theis - Arnies Friendly Folks Club.
Background
The Shakopee Police Department has conducted a background investigation
relative to the Corporate Officers and reviewed the required data. The
department finds no basis for the denial of the requested licenses.
Recommendation
Issue ON/OFF sale liquor licenses upon,compliance with the Cities building
codes.
�o cCesve �o Jnwfecf
9 �
JuLlus A. COLLEB.II
a ATroB EY AT "w
re 3Y-r9+OLE .r w[3i +v LnuC
SEAEOPEE.MINNESOTA
aaOZ9
McID0
To: Judy Cox, City Clerk
From:
From: Julius A. Collar, II, City Attorney
Date: April 30, 1986
In re: Liquor License Application
Background
Scottland Hotels, Inc. has made application for regular and Sunday On-Sale
Liquor License effective July 1, 1986. The proposed locale has not been
finished and of course not inspected by the Building Official, the Fire
Marshall and the Electrical Inspector to attest to the fact that the intended
locale is in full compliance with all of the Code provisions.
The applicant stresses the importance of affirmative action by the City Council
in order that it may safely continue with its construction and with its financing
development.
You ask - "What action can the Council take at this time to assure the applicant
it will get the required license later this year?"
Answer - Obviously Council cannot grant the applicant a license at this time.
None of the above listed inspections have been made and the City Code mandates
that there must be a certificate of occupancy and of Code compliance in effect
before the license can be issued. (Shakopee City Code Sec. 5.02 Subd 3 B-1 & 2)
and for obvious reasons the Council cannot safely at the present stage of devel-
opment grant a license for future delivery because the applicant is not now
entitled thereto.
Suggested Action
Council may at this time take one or more of the following steps if it so chooses.
1. Reject the application. This would not be helpful to anyone.
2. Lay the application on the table. Again this would not be helpful to
the applicant.
3. Propose the following proposition to the Council for a non-binding
informal vote: "If all of the required inspections were completed
and all certificates properly made showing full code compliance and
the necessary insurance and bonds filed, would the Council grant the
applicant the requested license at this meeting?"
If the vote is favorable the Council could than lay the application on
the table for future binding action, taking care that the application
is kept alive at future meetings until time for formal action.
4. Amend the Code by removing the above requirements. While this is a
possibility, I would seriously suggest that this not be considered.
9b
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City
Administrtor
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk l.�lli
RE: Appplication for On-Sale andUSunday Intoxicating Liquor
Licenses by Centennial Investment Corporation
DATE: June 16, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
The City has received applications from Centennial Invest-
ment Corporation for on-sale and Sunday intoxicating liquor
licenses for the hotel and restaurant located along CR-83 and
Secretariat Drive.
BACKGROUND:
The applications received from Centennial Investment
Corporation for liquor licenses for the hotel and restaurant
located at CR-83 and Secretariat Drive are for the period
beginning June 21, 1989 until June 30, 1989. Assuming that these
applications are approved, Council will be considering the
renewal applications received from Centennial Investment Corp.
for the license period from July 1, 1989 until June 30, 1990
along with all other liquor and beer renewals at a later time.
The application, surety bond, and liquor liability insurance
are in order. According to the Building Official, the building
meets the requirements of the city code. The customary
background investigation has been conducted by the police
department, and the Chief of Police recommends approval of the
applications, see attached.
Everything is in order for Council's consideration of the
applications, except for payment of the license fee. According
to the City Code, the license fee shall be paid prior to
consideration of any application for a beer or liquor license.
Also, the City Code provides for the pro rating of licenses as
follows: "For licenses issued and which are to become effective
other than on the first day of the licensed year, July 1, the fee
to be paid with the application shall be a pro rata share of the
annual license fee. Provided, however, that in the case of on-
sale liquor licenses, the pro rata share shall be not less than
one-half of the annual on-sale liquor license fee." Council
previously received a copy of a letter dated June 1, 1989 from
Mr. William M. Krueger, Vice President, Centennial Investment
Corporation, requesting waiver of the minimum fee for the interim
license, copy attached. A check for the license fees should be
delivered to the City Clerk, prior to Council action on the
applications. (One-half year license fee for Centennial
Investment Corporation for on-sale and Sunday liquor licenses is
$5,285.00 + $100.00 = $5,385.00. )
i
Centennial Investment Corp.
June 16, 1989
Page -2-
Because liquor licenses have already been issued for this
same location to Scottland Hotels, Inc. , they must be surrendered
before the new licenses can be delivered.
ALTERNATIVES:
1] Approve applications and grant on-sale and Sunday
intoxicating liquor licenses to Centennial Investment
Corporation, 1244 Canterbury Road for the period expiring June
30, 1989, upon surrender of the existing licenses for the same
location.
21 Deny applications for on-sale and Sunday intoxicating
liquor licenses from Centennial Investment Corporation, 1244
Canterbury Road.
3] Approve the request from Mr. William Krueger for a
reduction of the one-half year license fees for on-sale and
Sunday intoxicating liquor licenses.
4] Deny the request from Mr. William Krueger for a reduc-
tion in the one-half year license fees for on-sale and Sunday
intoxicating liquor licenses, pursuant to City Code.
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternatives 4 and 1. Deny the request for reduction of the
one-half year license fees and approve the applications.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
1] Deny the request from Mr. William Krueger, Centennial
Investment Corp. , for a reduction of the one-half year license
fees for on-sale and Sunday liquor licenses, pursuant to the City
Code.
21 Upon receipt of a check from Mr. Krueger for the license
fees:
Approve the applications and grant on-sale and Sunday
intoxicating liquor licenses to Centennial Investment
Corporation, 1244 Canterbury Road, beginning June 21, 1989 and
expiring June 30, 1989, upon surrender of the existing licenses
for the same location.
CENTENNI.AL
City of Shakopee I _
P POLICE DEPARTMENT r
.co '(C� y� 476 South Gorman Street
LIC
SHAKOPEE, MINN 55379
T l.. Tel. 612/445-6666fi666
4(NESO"
TO: Mayor, Councilmembers
FROM: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police
RE: Liquor License Application/Centennial Corp.
DATE: June 9, 1989
Introduction
Centennial Investment Corporation has made application for On Sale and
Sunday Liquor Licenses to be located at Canterbury Inn, 1244 Canterbury Road.
Background
The Shakopee Police Department has conducted a background investigation
relative to the Corporate Officers. The department finds no basis for
the denial of the requested licenses.
Recommendation
Issue On Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses to Centennial Investment Corporation.
90 se cr oee_e
CWpuiMx.uMFWia^ //
ft.M -ON Mr L. W MtIM te,
statt of Imune"A' "ON SALE"
couxTr or........__Ssott.......... I aruxicipairr of
TO THE rOVERNIXG BODI' OP TRE .IROVE X.LVED .11UNICIMUrn
Purw.nt to Chapter 46 of the In— Of 31im'sat-, -VIIM Vraia- Of 1.933-4
Centennial Investment Corporation _.._ ___
Aeby appliesfora Naeem,for the term of . ane.Rear
from the M day of—...June __I ...I I -I 1 19 89 to sell intoxicating liquors
a.d,#md by Am a retail Only for smamntion "ON THE PREJ[IRVT'drwibed as follows:
the hotel and restaurant owned.bythe applicant and located along.
County Road 83 and Secretariat Drive. See Exhibit A. ...... —
said applicant
4n sald m..idp.UtX On which Mi,. --rosstroffl. and operate a
rsp.t.aral
_hatej ;and Mthat end hereby rra..t andtals-
That sold masuctality, is class
...........
which has.Mlselation of
_.._and which does not Inai-mio,an crelusire Ulaw'Men;
That said applicant 1.an hani.g. resident
proprietor sad manager and the following equipment and fooilitirs, necessary equipment
to operate all food and beverage concessions and, restaurant, at the
pTemises.in which applicant has, investment in excess of $1,500,000d ... ........
to fistures.sqgIst ............... .............
........... ................. ............ ......................— ...........
.................. ........ ........... .............. ..................... .....................
............ ............
................................ .........................
__.....................-............ ............. .........................—.........................
That said applicant- —miss's__....Of the Ui"slow, ...........ovor tumatpone
year.of ago, Is . .. . Of good moral eh..t,, and repute, nal,sine the enoctownt
of the art abour Wiltd, been convicted Of any -Uf-I Violation of any to-Of the United Stains, or Of
the State of Minnesota,or of any laral ordinance, with regard to the manufacture, =In dilibutim, or
,woorssion for distribution or sale, of intminating, liquors, and that no Items,issued to, said applicant
sander said.1 has me,been revoked:
That On ow-af-does, or wholesaler will 0-- or mot"', a' Am any finaamial interest in, the
business Of selling inu,stoolglag liquors at stall on said;Oquass, me power W excret or re,.bre, by.-
fraet, anderstandin or Otherwise, said appUrant. to handle a,.11 only the Prod—t-Of moth--o-
farturr,ar wholesale,
That .. other retaileNs Her. has been leased,directly or imlirmly, to said-PIlicant a,/a,
saul premises; that no Itnem, of a class other than hrieby applied for Am been issued to any orms, at
saidPremises; are, that mid M.1ar, are .,!the, carnal 0,r,nabollod by may poesm in whom as lirome
could be based:
That said pre...i.are not withix any .1r- within which the sale Of i-tarle-ft-f It,—" is Ino'
Whited by the laws of the Stals of Alinnesota, the pranisions of any charter, ordinaneq or special law,
or through zoning ordinames, Proceedings,or legal process regularly held for that purpose:
That said applicant_____hereby 'gra -._.that an, license I..Md mram.t hecto shall be ma-
transferable without Oamont of the authority issuing the amm; that said licence -hall not be offerium
rami! . permit shall be Waa ander the I.. Of the United States is cam,vueh peruat is required under
.,i, lan,..,I lhafflaid applicant will kap said liana nubal in a rompicuona Place,in said vvrnbua:
That thin application i, ,,ad, Puraaant ami subject is all the In-- Of Alimeast-, the is-. Of the
(biped States the ardisawoe, and regulations of said alumiriMlify, and the regulations of the Liquor
Vaut...I ceoa�jsiam, of Mjamw,, alerting to the .11,nod plass of.1, of i.ta icatmj all
(Aero Ante ether nT,iromrs/a nJ7aeaE rogrdat7en,if aHyl
List of Officers of Centennial Investment Corporation
Kenneth Olson - President
Melvin Renner - Bxecutive Vice President
David Nelson - Vice President
Paul Lotzer - Vice President
Ronald Noratrem - Vice President
Million Krueger - Vice President
Delores Driscoll - Secretary
Robert Struck - Treasurer
List of Shareholders of Centennial Investment Corporation:
Minnesota FSL Corporation" 10OS
'Minnesota FSL Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of First Minnesota
Savings Bank PSB. 77 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, MN 55602
Cen{ewn;4l 1Nw 5('we.rF WrpOe<Itd'
IS i.-....._...I�fti........... 1�. !. S-n. .:..-.................
_-_-__._._.
*tate of Annegota, l„
COUNTr oe...Nm..ep;n......................... J
_0,I1ie.. . .._.__.... . . ...__-___._...._being daly ewor,a, on oath saY 5......thmt.__hs.. n
Aft6n�nl.. rMtl:sfwnf ... Gepara as .__.. ...................
the within applicant......._.; that.........1w._..._Aa_r._..f.0 and ftrd hand knowledge of the fart, stated in
the within application and of the Wei.of acid apPlioned _...__, the toeatiaa theroof, and the contents
of the within application; and that tAe statements made J.said app7ieation aro
one knowledge.
8nbeeribed and Sworn to
3Before _.................... ......_ _ ....
._....-............
Me tiaHdsyof__A`7 �. Zs�. ------_. _ _..._.........
.,srN„w,,.v,.n,,,,nn.+..vv..aw.,•
i/ FliN Erol N l: >
Ydnrg Pm. .....!'a^rn, e.r,._.. ..__Ceater,mina. Mavesw"��
XyQommiesion Ba/draa..._.._____g-_a_ ..-..rl. ......................_---.... s
A
y � � of o.
a
o
w Qo
—fid
1z First I'VEnnesata
June 1, 1989
Mr. Dennis Craft
Shakopee City Administrator
129 Hast First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Re: Canterbury Inn Hotel and Restaurant
Dear Mr. Craft:
On behalf of Centennial Investment Corporation ("Centennial"), who has acquired fee
title to the Canterbury Inn Hotel and Restaurant ("Hotel") from the Bankruptcy Trustee
of Scottland Hotels, Inc. ("SHI"), I am writing to request a waiver of the minimum fee
of approximately $5,000 specified for an interim liquor license. While Centennial does
not believe it is required to either apply for an interim license or pay an interim fee,
as a concession to the City of Shakopee ("City") and as a step in good faith to work
with the City, Centennial offers to pay a prorated portion of the annual fee for the
year ending June 30, 1989.
A brief history of the Hotel is that SHI was forced into an involuntary Chapter 11
Bankruptcy on February 6, 1989. First Minnesota Savings Bank, F.S.B. ("First
Minnesota") and Midwest Savings Association ("Midwest"), successor to Midwest Federal
Savings and Loan Association of Minneapolis ("Lenders") attempted to keep the Hotel open
and operating through the bankruptcy proceedings. These efforts benefitted not only the
Lenders, but also the employees of the Hotel and the City. Subsequently, Centennial, a
subsidiary of First Minnesota, purchased the Trustee's interest in the Hotel. In an
agreement dated May 1, 1989 ("Agreement"), copy attached, between Timothy D. Moratzka,
Trustee for Scottland Hotels, Inc. , First Minnesota and Midwest, the Trustee agreed to
grant the use of the liquor license to the Lenders' duly appointed agent, Centennial,
pending the issuance of a new liquor license to the Lenders effective July 1, 1989.
Mr. Julius A. Caller, II, Shakopee City Attorney, has indicated his desire that an
interim license be issued due to his concern over the transferability of the license
from the Trustee to Centennial. Centennial believes the Agreement with the Trustee is
not a transfer of the license, but does allow Centennial to operate under the current
license until June 30th. However, to cooperate with the City, we acted as quickly as
possible to obtain the information required by the liquor license application and
submitted the information to the City an May 30, 1989.
Therefore, due to the unusual circumstances surrounding the Hotel, the financial
hardships experienced by the Hotel and the number of individuals employed by the
beverage operation at the Hotel, we request that the City Council waive the minimum fee
for the 3 weeks ending June 30 and prorate the annual fee over this time period. We
believe this constitutes a fair and equitable solution for all parties involved.
�lSincerely,
W\fe `�
William M. Kr er, Vice President
Centennial Investment Corporation
WMR/wpc
18735
Ea,R F]._
LIQUOR LICENSE OPERATING AGREEMENT
This Liquor License Operating Agreement is made and entered into this
I7r day of May, 1989, by and among Timothy D. Moratzka ("Seller") , Chapter
11 Trustee, not on his own behalf but on behalf of the bankruptcy estate of
Scottland Hotels, Inc. ("Scottland") in the case of In re Scottland Hotels,
Inc. , Case No. BEY 4-89-509 (United States Bankruptcy Court, District of
Minnesota) ("Estate") , First Minnesota Savings Bank, F.S.B. ("First
Minnesota") , and Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association of Minneapolis
("Midwest") , both United States of America corporations (collectively,
"Buyers").
RECITALS
FIRST: In an Agreement by and among Timothy D. Moratzka, First Minnesota
Savings Bank, P.S.B. and Midwest Federal Savings and Loan Association of
Minnesota, dated April 7, 1989 ("Transfer Agreement") , Seller agreed to
transfer to the Buyers or their designee all of the Estate's interest in
certain real property, improvements and personal property thereon ("Property) ,
commonly known as the Canterbury Inn and Restaurant (Canterbury Inn) located
in the City of Shakopee, County of Scott, State of Minnesota, and a certain
liquor license issued to Scottland by the City of Shakopee ("Liquor License")
for the Canterbury Inn.
SECOND: On or about April 26, 1989, the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the District of Minnesota authorized the Seller to transfer the Property
to the Buyers or their designee, pursuant to the terms of the Transfer
Agreement.
THIRD: On page 5, paragraph 4 of the Transfer Agreement, the Seller
agreed, among other things, to designate the Buyers' designee as the Seller's
agent to operate that portion of the Canterbury Inn for which the existing
'.-
Liquor License has been issued by the City of Shakopee, pending issuance of a
new license for the Property to the Buyers or their designee by the City of
Shakopee.
FOURTH: The existing Liquor License expires on July 1, 1989.
FIFTH: The earliest practical date by which the Buyers or their designee
can obtain a hearing from the City of Shakopee on an application for a new
liquor license for the Property is June 6, 1989.
SIXTH: The Buyers and the Seller desire to enter into this Liquor
License Operating Agreement in order that alcoholic beverages may be continued
to be lawfully sold on the Property under the existing Liquor License until
such time as the Buyers or their designee have had a reasonable opportunity to
apply for and obtain a new liquor license for the Property in their own name
or names. -
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals which are made
part of this Agreement; the terms, conditions and mutual covenants contained
herein; and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency
of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1. The Seller agrees to permit the continued Lawful sale of alcoholic
beverages within the Canterbury Inn pursuant to the existing Liquor License
until it expires on July 1, 1989.
2. The Seller agrees to appoint Centennial Investment Corporation or
other designee of the Buyer as his agent to operate those portions of the
Canterbury Inn for which the existing Liquor License has been issued, and to
make such appointment effective from May 1, 1989 to July 1, 1989.
-2-
3. The Buyers agree to purchase reasonable insurance coverage for the
operation of an on-sale liquor establishment at the Canterbury Ian, and to
name the Estate as an insured under the policy or policies until the earlier
of July 1, 1989 or such time as the Buyers or their designee have obtained a
new liquor license for the Canterbury Inn.
4. Nothing herein requires the Seller or the Estate to renew the
existing Liquor License or to expend any of the Seller's or the Estate's funds
for the operation of an on-sale liquor establishment at the Canterbury Inn, or
to otherwise incur any liability as a result of said operation.
5. The Buyers agree to indemnify, hold harmless and release the Seller
and the Estate from any liability arising from or after May 1, 1989 from the
operation of an on-sale liquor establishment at the Canterbury Inn under the
existing Liquor License. -
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands as of the day
and year first above written.
TIMOTHY D. MORATZKA
CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEES SCOTTLAND HOTELS, INC.
�(/ivy
Timothy D. Mora zka
MIDWEST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN FIRST MINNESOTA SAVINGS
ASSLOCATION 0£ MINNEAPOLIS BANK, F.S.B.
By By
I Its % 7
/ By.
-3-
�d
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk CC,/
RE: Fees for On Sale Liquor Licenses
DATE: June 2 , 1989
Introduction
The City has received a letter from Mr. William M. Krueger, Vice
President of Centennial Investment Corporation, requesting that
the City waive the minimum fee requirements for a liquor license
for the balance of the year.
Background
Section 5. 02 Subd. 4B of the Shakopee City Code states that for
licenses issued and which are to become effective other than on
the first day of the license year, July 1, the fee to be paid
with the application shall be a pro-rata share of the annual
license fee. Provided, however, that in the case of an on sale
liquor license, the pro-rata share shall be not less than one
half of the annual on sale liquor license fees. As you are
aware, the on sale liquor license fees are based on the square
feet of customer floor area. The customer used floor area for
Scottland Hotels, Inc. doing business as Canterbury Inn is over
10,000 square feet. The annual on sale liquor license fee for an
establishment over 10, 000 square feet is $10,570.00. In addition
to the on sale liquor license fee, Scottland Hotels, Inc. also
holds a Sunday liquor license. The fee for a Sunday liquor
license is established by State Statute at $200.00 per year. As
drafted the City Code does not have any provisions for waiving
license fees as referenced herein.
The City Attorney will be present on the June 6th Council meeting
and will be available to respond to any questions Council may
have regarding this matter.
JSC/jms
5 5 . 02
2. Certificate of Occupancy and Compliance
Required for On-Sale Establishments.
(a) No license shall be issued if a
suitable location is not part of the application and there must be
a certificate of occupancy and of code compliance in effect before
a license is issued.
Source: Ordinance No. 160 , 4th Series
Effective Date: 3-14-85
(b) Prior to the issuance of any such
certification , the licensed premises shall be connected to public
sewer and water except within a Planned Unit Development and there
shall be posted therein an Occupant Load Certificate for a maximum
permitted occupancy computed by Table 33A of the State Uniform
Building Code.
Source: Ordinance No. 238, 4th Series
Effective Date: 12-24-87
3. Delayed Issuance of License. Notwithstand-
ing the foregoing provisions of this Subparagraph B, or Subdivision
4, Subparagraph B of this Section, the Council may, in its sole
discretion and in the case of a new facility, grant an application
for a license but direct that the license shall not issue until the
applicant has fully complied with all of the requirements of this
Subparagraph B and Subdivision 4, Subparagraph B of this Section.
The time lapse between Council action in granting the application
and the issuance of the license shall be limited to a 12-month
period and if compliance is not completed within such time a re-
application shall be required.
Source : Ordinance No. 195, 4th Series
Effective Date: 6-12-86
Subd. 4. Action.
A. Granting. The Council may approve any applica-
tion for the period of the remainder of the then current license
year or for the entire ensuing license year. All applications
including proposed license periods must be consistent with this
Chapter. Prior to consideration of any application for a license,
the applicant shall furnish a bond and insurance policy, pay
license fee , and , if applicable, pay the investigation fee .
B. Issuing. If an application is approved, the
City Administrator shall forthwith issue a license pursuant thereto
in the form prescribed by the City or the proper agency of the
State of Minnesota as the case may be. All licenses shall be on a
:' fiscal year basis, July 1 to June 30. For licenses issued and
which ars to become effective other than on the first day of the
licensed year, July 1, the fee to be paid with the application
shall be a pro rata share of the annual license fee. Provided ,
however, that in the case of on-sale liquor licenses, the pro rata
share shall be not less than one-half of the annual on-sale liquor
license fee. Licenses shall be valid only at one location and7 on
the premises therein licensed.
-116- (10-15-88)
EXCERPT FROM SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 30, 1981 1
IJ
Hullander/Leroux moved to take the Shakopee House Liquor license application off the
table. Motion came,' unanimously.
m
m
m
x
E+
w
0
r
-- w
0
r Discussion was held regarding the advisability and legality ofissuing a liquor
H z license to the applicant while the property taxes of the business are not paid.
¢ ❑
H The Asst City Attorney elaborated on the letter he had submitted on this subject
M o in which he recommended a compromise on the payment of the property taxes by the
o property owner. He stated that the liquor license was granted last year even though
¢ c 'the property taxes were not paid and the property owner assumed that this year the
H
case would be the saw. He pointed out that this was an over-;:fight by the City and
00 it should be corrected in the future. He stated th�:re was no authority in the ordi-
w nance for a waiver of the payment of the property taxes, but he recommended it as
zw a practical matter as the owner was not able to pay all the taxes at this short
notice. He said he didn't think the establishment would be able to operate without
F its liquor license, and then it would be longer until the City would be able to re-
z z ceive the takes. He also noted that the City has had no problem with this establish-
o ment relative to the liquor license, and this should be kept in mind relative to is-
suing a liquor license.
There was further discussion relative to whether the requirement of paying property
taxes before the issuance of a liquor license was an ordinance or state law require-
ment, and the Ass't City Attorney stated he would research that item.
Cool. Lebens stated she just couldn't go along with issuing a liquor license when
the property taxes were not paid. This is completely against the ordinance.
Cncl. Reinke stated he was surprised to find out that not only the 1980 taxes weren't
paid, but also the 19?9 taxes were delinquent, and he has a real problem with issuing
a liquor license when the property taxes are two years delinquent.
Cool. Lebens stated that our ordinance is taken from the State Statute, and the re-
quirement that property taxes be paid before a liquor license is issued is a State
requirement, and she can't we how we can ignore that.
There was further discussion about whether or not the requirement of paying property
taxes before a liquor license is issued is a State requirement or just a Shakopee
ordinance requirement. Both the City Attorney and the Ass't City Attorney said they.
thought it was just an ordinance requirement, but the Asst City Attorney said he
would research that further.
Cool. Reinke stated he cannot support granting a liquor license to property owners
not paying its taxes. He asked about the possibility of calling the bond.
The City Attorney said he thought the recommendation of the Ass't City Attorney was
reasonable and sympathetic, but did not think it would be possible for the Council
to grant a liquor license when the property taxes are not paid as long as this ozdi-
nance is in effect. He said 1£ the Council wanted to do that, it would have to re-
peal the ordinance. He said it could be construed as misfeasance of office to ignore
this provision of the ordinance. Further discussion was held.
Hullander/Leroux moved to adopt the recommendations of the Ase't City Attorney to give
Mr. Strupeck until December 31, 1981 to make the du:.inquent property tax payments
for 1979 and 1980.
Leroux/Hullander moved to amend the motion that in addition Mr. Strupeck be apprised
that 1981 and the first half of 1982 taxes must also be paid by May 31, 1982 prior to
anv is.¢uance of a liouor license for July 1, 1982. Motion carried with Cncl. Lebens
and Reinke opposed.
Main motion as amended Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Leroux, Harbeck
Noes; Reinke, Lebens
Motion carried.
Discussion was held regarding calling in the bonds previously issued for the liquor
license because of the delinquency of the tax payments. The Ass't City Attorney
stated that from his knowledge the bonding companies: will not pay the bond unless
sued by the City and they pay the bonds on the day the case does to Court, which is
probably a one year process.
The Mayor asked Mr. Strupeck if he or his attorney had any comments to make. Mr. John
Manahan stated he was representing Mr. Strupeck in this matter and stated he cannot
make the tax payments at this time and believes the r-stablichment cannot remain oper-
able without its liquor license. He 'xliuvec the compromise recommended protects the
City and allows the business to remain open at the same time. He stated he would be
scared about the ramifications to the owner if the bonds were called in at this time.
Harbeck/Leroux moved to table the motion on calling in the bonds in this matter.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hullander/Leroux moved to approve the application and grant an on sale liquor license
to the Shakopee House with the stipulations placed on it tonight regarding payment
of property taxes.
Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Leroux, Harbeck
Noes; Lebens, Reinke
Motion carried.
Hollander/Leroux moved to approve the application and grant a Sunday liquor license
to the Shakopee Eouse with the stipulations placed on it taright regarding payment
of property taxes.
Roll Call: Ayes; Hullander, Leroux, Harceck
Noes; Lebens, Reinke
Motion carried.
9c.
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Administrator
FROM: Gregg VOxland, Finance Director
RE: Auditors Report on the 1988 Annual Financial Report
DATE: June 14, 1989
Introduction
Council has retained the services of Jaspers, Streeflard and Company to
audit the financial report of the City for 1988. Representatives will be at
the June 20, 1989 Council meeting to make their report.
The Conprehensive Annual Financial Report for the City of Shakopee for the
Fiscal year ended December 31, 1988 is enclosed. If Council has any questions
they are encouraged to call myself or James Streefland.
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator /
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer'^
SUBJECT: Killarney Hills Subdivision
DATE: June 15, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
On June 6 , 1989 a public hearing was held to consider
improvements to all roads within the Killarney Hills Subdivision.
At the conclusion of the public hearing , Council tabled any
action and directed staff to explore several alternatives.
BACKGROUND:
Please refer to staff' s May 24 , 1989 memo from the June 6th
Council packet for a complete history and background information
on this subdivision.
Due to the continued deterioration of the streets in this
subdivision and the extremely high annual maintenance costs ,
staff initiated the feasibility report for this project and a
public hearing was held on June 6 , 1989 •
The feasibility report recommended constructing full urban
streets within this subdivision, including curb and gutter and
storm sewers. During the public testimony, the main objections
against this project were the estimated assessments and the fact
that no sewer and watermains are in these streets.
At the conclusion of the public hearing, staff was directed to
analyze other options for correcting the road deficiencies in
this area. Staff will discuss each alternative separately.
Do Nothing Alternative
Council directed staff to prepare an estimate on the annual
maintenance costs if no improvements were made to this road .
During the spring of this year , the Public Works Department
hauled in 60 tons of clean rock and 25 tons of Class III road
gravel in order to make this road passable. In addition they
spent 2 hours with a grader and 3 hours with a loader working on
the road . The total expense to the City for this working ,
including all labor and materials, was approximately $960 and
consumed about 1/2 day of the Public Work' s Department time.
The Street Superintendent has informed staff that due to the
settlement in the gravel and probable erosion, they will have to
work on this road a second time later in the year. It is
estimated that another 20 tons of material will need to be
brought in and another 2 hours of loader/grader time will be
needed. The total expense for this work is estimated at $440 .
In addition to the maintenance, the roads had to be plowed twice
last winter because the first time a snow plow attempted to plow,
it could not be done due to the poor condition of the streets. A
front end loader had to be brought in to plow the streets, which
takes more time than a plow. No actual cost of this additional
expense was calculated, but it is estimated at $100 - $200 in
additional labor.
It is anticipated that these maintenance costs will be similar
every year until something is done to the roads.
The total annual maintenance costs based on the above discussion
is around $1 ,600 per year. This compares to a normal City street
built to City Standards of around $100 - $200 for pothole
patching, etc. Another way to look at it is that the roads in
Killarney Hills are 8 times more expensive to maintain than other
City streets. Staff does not recommend "Do Nothing. "
Gravel Road
Another option for these roads is that since the asphalt is in
such poor condition , Council directed staff to explore the
possibility of stripping off all existing asphalt and
constructing a good gravel base.
The cost to do this properly and according to City Standards
would be around $50 ,000 which consists of removing the pavement,
excavating the sub-base in order to get adequate depth for the
gravel , adding 6 inches of Class V gravel and constructing
ditches along the road for drainage.
Due to the severe slope of this road, it is anticipated that some
of the gravel would erode away each spring and City crews would
need to spend a considerable amount of time every year correcting
the washouts , blading the road to alleviate washboarding, etc.
In addition to the high annual maintenance costs for a gravel
road, other problems that would ,be created are dust control and
general unsightliness.
City Council has recently indicated a desirability to eliminate
all gravel roads in Shakopee based on high maintenance costs and
dust problems . Staff does not recommend constructing gravel
roads in this area.
Rural Section
Council also directed staff to analyze constructing a rural
street section with ditches, rather than the full urban section
with storm sewers, as recommended by the feasibility report.
The total cost of the full urban section as listed in the
feasibility report was around $172 , 000 . 00 , which includes
construction costs, contingency and administrative fees. For a
standard rural section, the estimated costs are $176 ,860 as
follows
Construction Cost $128,630.00
10% Contingency 12.860.00
Subtotal $141 ,490 .00
25% Administration $ 35,170.00
Total Project Costs $176 ,860.00
As you can see, a rural section actually is higher than an urban
section. What is saved by not putting in curb and gutter and
storm sewers is actually used up by the extensive ditch system
need to provide adequate drainage for all streets.
Using the same adjusted front foot method as discussed in the
feasibility report, the estimated assessment for a rural road
section would be $50 .63 per adjusted front foot. This compares
to an assessment of $49 .23 per front foot for an urban section.
25% Assessment
Council also directed staff to research whether or not a 25%
assessment would be more appropriate for this project and to
specifically research the assessment for the Eaglewood
Subdivision.
The City of Shakopee has adopted an assessment policy for street
construction project based on two criteria: 1 ) New Construction
and 2) Rehabilitation. For new construction, the assessment
policy states that the abutting properties would be assessed 100%
for the improvements. For rehabilitations, the policy is for all
abutting properties to be assessed 25% , with the City paying the
remainder, if the street has exceeded its normal service life (20
years) . If a street has not yet reached its service life, the
assessment will be prorated accordingly.
In as much as the original construction in 1973 was simply to
install blacktop on the existing subgrade to control erosion and
since it was not constructed to any accepted standards , the
feasibility report recommended that the new street construction
assessment policy be utilized rather than the rehabilitation
policy.
During the public hearing, testimony was received indicating that
a similar situation existed in Eaglewood Subdivision and when
those streets were constructed , they were only assessed 25% .
Council directed staff to research this .
The streets in Eaglewood Subdivision were constructed in 1974-
1976 according to City Standards and assessed 100% back to the
developer and property owners. This subdivision was also platted
when it was part of Shakopee rather than inherited from the
township. In 1985, the streets in Eaglewood were reconstructed
due to pavement failure. Since the streets had not reached their
service life, the normal policy of assessing 25% was adjusted and
all properties were assessed 20% for this work.
The difference between these two subdivisions is that Eaglewood
was platted in the City, Killarney Hills was not; the streets in
Eaglewood were constructed to City Standards and assessed back
100% while the streets in Killarney Hills were not built to
anybody' s standards nor assessed.
One other recent example of the City' s policy on assessments was
the construction of 90th Street and 16th Avenue (now called
Boiling Springs Lane) . This subdivision was also inherited from
Eagle Creek Township, the streets were built substandard and in
1982 the City improved these streets and assessed all property
owners 100% for the work.
In both subdivisions, Eaglewood and Boiling Springs, the City was
consistent in enforcing the existing assessment policy. The
situation at Killarney Hills is almost identical to Boiling
Springs.
Staff continues to recommend that all street improvements to
Killarney Hills be assessed 100% , which is consistent with
current policies and past practices . Anything less will be
setting precedent for all future street improvements.
ALTERNATIVES:
Based on the above discussion , Council has the following
alternatives:
1 . Do Nothing and direct the Street Department to continue to
perform "Minimal Maintenance" on these streets.
2. Strip off all blacktop and construct gravel streets.
3 . Construct the streets to a rural section and assess all
costs back 100% .
4. Construct the streets to an urban section and assess all
costs back 100% .
5 . Construct either a rural or urban section but assess only
25% of the costs.
6 . Direct staff to take other action.
RECOMMENDATION:
As indicated in previous staff memos, the existing streets in
Killarney Hills are totally unacceptable and an embarrassment to
the City. During the spring vehicles were unable to use the road
and the post office would not deliver mail. It is uncertain that
fire service can ever be guaranteed because it is doubtful that
emergency vehicles can use these roads at all times. Heavy
trucks , garbage pick up, school bus traffic and other non-
automobile traffic is also severely limited by the condition of
these streets.
In staff' s opinion, something must be done to these streets now.
Staff recommends either Alternative No. 3 or 4. Since an urban
section is slightly less expensive, staff recommends Alternative
No. 4 . This also alleviates having to go in and redo the street
to an urban street at a later date if built to a rural section
today.
Another argument against improving the streets is that no
utilities are in this area yet. That line of thinking has
delayed this project since 1976 and the sewer and water still
aren' t out to this area. Nobody knows how long before utilities
get to this area , but it may be 10-20 years away. These streets
can' t wait that long.
There are several options to get around the sewer/water problem.
One would be to install the sewer and water now, but not connect
it up until the sewer and water are expanded to this area. The
assessments for the utilities could be deferred until such time
as they hook up . Another option would be to install the
utilities behind the curb and gutter in the boulevard to prevent
tearing up a new street. Either alternative would be acceptable
and would not affect any new construction done now.
In summary, staff continues to recommend that Council order this
project. If Council concurs, Resolution No. 3059 which orders
plans and specifications to construct urban streets is attached
for consideration.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3059, A Resolution Ordering an Improvement
and the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Roadways
Within Killarney Hills Addition Namely Sharon Parkway and Tyrone
Drive, Project No. 1989-7 and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
KILLARNEY
KILLARNEY HILLS
RURAL STREET CONSTRUCTION
COST ESTIMATE
UNIT
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY PRICE TOTAL
Remove Pavement S.Y. 5 ,000 $ 1 .30 $ 6 ,500 .00
Common Excavation C.Y. 3 ,500 $ 5.50 $ 19,250 .00
Class V Gravel TON 4 ,000 $ 6.40 $ 25 ,600.00
(Including Shoulders)
Bituminous Wear TON 860 $23 .00 $ 19,780 .00
Grading (Ditches) C.Y. 10 ,000 $ 2.00 $ 20 ,000 .00
Sodding S.Y. 12,000 $ 2.00 $ 24,000 .00
Rip Rap for Ditches S.F. 9 ,000 $ 1 .50 $ 13 .500 .00
TOTAL $128,630.00
Plus 10% Contingency $ 12.860.00
$141 ,490 .00
Plus 25% Engr. &
Admin. Fees $ 35.370.00
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $176,860.00
RESOLUTION NO. 3059
A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And
The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For
Roadways Within Killarney Hills Addition
Namely (Sharon Parkway and Tyrone Drive)
Project No. 1989—T
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3047 , adopted on May 2 , 1989 , fixed
a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of all
roadways within Killarney Hills Addition (Sharon Parkway and
Tyrone Drive) by pavement, curb & gutter and storm sewer; 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 6th day of June 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 :
The construction of bituminous pavement, curb & gutter
and storm sewer on Tyrone Drive and Sharon Parkway
located in Killarney Hills Addition
2. David E. 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 Attorney
0NSENT 9�
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Renewal of 1989-90 License to Only Allow Consumption
and Display of Intoxicating Liquor (Set-ups)
DATE: June 16, 1989
INTRODUCTION
The following applicants have applied for a 1989-90 Set-up
License. The applications are in order at this time, except
taxes have not been paid by Damile, Inc. They will be paid prior
to Tuesday night, and if not you will be advised. Please
approve.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the applications and grant a 1989-90 License to Only
Allow Consumption and Display of Intoxicating Liquor to:
Approve Jim & Lucy's Inc.
201 West 1st Avenue
Approve Damile, Inc.
2400 East 4th Avenue
Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles
220 West 2nd Avenue
JSC/jms
�WVSENT Yo
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Renewal of On Sale Wine License
DATE: June 16, 1989
INTRODUCTION
Cedar Fair Limited Partnership has applied for a 1989-90 On sale
Wine License. The application is in order. Please approve.
Damile, Inc. , 2400 East Fourth Avenue, has not reapplied for a
wine license.
ACTION REQUESTED
Approve the application and grant an 1989-90 On Sale Wine License
to Cedar Fair Limited Partnership, One Valleyfair Drive.
JSC/jms
CONSENT 9�-
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Renewal of Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor Licenses
DATE: June 16, 1989
INTRODUCTION
The following applicants have applied for a 1989-90 On and/or Off
Sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License. Staff has checked for
delinquent property taxes and utility bills. The Building
Inspector has advised me that all premises are in conformance
with the City Code.
All of the applications are in order for Council consideration,
except three.
Please table the application from Judy A. Berg. They will be
closing for remodeling and will have everything in order before
they reopen.
Damile, Inc. will be paying their taxes on Tuesday. I will
advise Council on Tuesday if they don't so that their application
can be tabled.
Racing Promotions, Inc. have delivered a check to the Scott
County Treasurer for payment of the first one half of the taxes
due in 1989. The envelope with the payment was dated May 17th
and the County is not accepting the check because it was late and
should include a penalty. Mr. Ostdiek is contesting the matter
and is scheduled to go before the County Board on May 27th. A
final decision will be made at that time on whether or not the
check should be accepted without a penalty or if it should be
returned for a new one which would include the penalty. Mr.
Coller has recommended that Council approve the appliation
pending acceptance of the appropriate tax payment by the County.
This action will allow staff to deliver the license when payment
is made and would not require Council to meet again. .
ACTION REOUESTED
Approve the application(s) and grant an On Sale and/or Off Sale
Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor License to:
Approve/
Table Applicant On Sale Off Sale
Approve Jim & Lucy's Inc. X X
210 West let Avenue
Table Judy A. Berg X
222 East let Avenue
Approve/
Table Applicant On Sale Off Sale
Approve Art Berens & Sons, Inc. X
123 West 2nd Avenue
Approve Superamerica Stations Inc. X
1155 East 1st Avenue
Approve Cedar Fair Limited Partnership X
One Valleyfair Drive
Approve J.B.F. Inc. X
823 East 1st Avenue
Approve Holiday Stationstores X
444 East let Avenue
Approve Pizza Huts of the Northwest X
257 Marschall Road
Approve Gateway Foods of Minneapolis, Inc. X
615 Marschall Road
Approve Damile, Inc. X
2400 East 4th Avenue
Approve Tom Thumb Food Markets X
590 So. Marschall Road
Approve Fraternal Order of Eagles X
220 West 2nd Avenue
Approve Gateway Foods of Minneapolis, Inc. X
1147 Canterbury Road
Approve Paul E. Schwaesball X
230 Lewis Street
Approve Kieu Ky and Hong Khong X
237 East 1st Avenue
Approve the application and grant an on sale non-intoxicating
malt liquor license to Racing Promotions, Inc. , One Checkered
Flag Boulevard, pending acceptance by the County of a check in
payment of the first one half property taxes for 1989.
JSC/jms
-uuNSENT 9�
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: 1989-90 Intoxicating Liquor Licenses
DATE: June 16, 1989
Introduction
The following applicants have applied for 1989-90 Liquor
License(s) . Staff has checked for delinquent property taxes and
utility bills. The building inspector has advised me that all
premises are in conformance with the City Code.
The following applications are in order for Council
consideration, except taxes have not been paid by J & D of
Shakopee Inc. They will be paid prior to Tuesday night. If they
are not paid, I will advise Council.
Recommended Action
Approve the application(s) and grant an Off Sale, On Sale,
Sunday, and/or Club Intoxicating Liquor License(s) to:
Action Applicant On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club
Approve Bretbecca, Inc. X X X
124 West 1st Avenue
Approve XX Corp. & Wittles Inc. X X X
1561 E. 1st Avenue
Approve Clair's Bar, Inc. X X X
124 South Holmes
Approve C.R.E. Restaurant Co. X X
1583 E. 1st Avenue
Approve J & D of Shakopee, Inc. X X
911 East 1st Avenue
Approve Centennial Investment X X
Corporation
1244 Canterbury Road
Approve Minnesota Concessions, X X X
Inc.
1100 Canterbury Road
On Sale Sunday Off Sale Club 1
Approve Family Dining g
6268 Hwy 101
Approve Riverside Liquors, Inc. X
507 E. 1st Avenue
Approve Valley Liquor, Inc. X
1104 Minn. Valley Mall
Approve Spirits of Shakopee, Inc. X
471 Marschall Road
Approve The American Legion X X
Club Post No. 2
1266 East 1st Avenue
Approve Veterans of Foreign Wars X X
Post No. 4046
132 East 1st Avenue
Approve Knights of Columbus Home X X
Assn. , Inc.
1760 East 4th Avenue
JSC/jms
CONSENT 9�-
Memo To: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
From: George Muenchow, S.C.R. Director
Subject: Swimming Pool Time Clock Purchase
Date: June 16, 1989
Background
Since the Municipal Swimming Pool was opened over 20
years ago staff time keeping utilized hand written
forms. At the present time there are over 20 full and
part time employees that work at that location. When
payroll is processed at the end of each two week cycle,
the processing of this hand written form. has become
very time consuming. A more streamlined method is
needed.
Recommendation
A TIME CLOCK is needed. This will greatly expedite the
payroll preparation process while at the same time
allowing a greater degree of management control.
Staff recommends that a time clock be purcased and used
for this time keeping purpose. The City's Finance
Department concurs with this recommendation. Since
this matter was not budgeted and will cost over $200.00,
and it is a capital expenditure, Council approval is
required.
Action Requested
Authorize the purchase of a time clock for usage at the
Municipal Swimming Pool at a cost of $ 279.00 with the
necessary funds to be transferred from the City's
General Fund Contingency Fund.
Alternative
Do not authorize this purchase and continue with the
status quo of processing hand written time sheets that
are recognized to be time consuming and permit a lesser
degree of management control.
Action
Move to authorize the purchase of a time clock for the
Municipal Swimming Pool at a cost of $ 279.00 with the
necessary funds to be transferred from the City's General
Fund Contingency Account to the Municipal Swimming Pool
Account.
CONSENI
MEMO
TO: DENNIS KRAFT/CITY COUNCIL
FROM: PUBLIC WORKS DEPT.
SUBJECT: SURPLUS EQUIPMENT
DATE: JUNE 15, 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Council approval must be obtained to declare and sell City
equipment or property.
BACKGROUND:
The Public Works Department has several potential buyers for
various pieces of City equipment. The department is requesting
Council to declare these items as surplus, and authorize their
individual sale at the best possible prices that can be obtained.
The following listed items are no longer usable to the
Public Works department:
1960 Vibra-pac roller. Replaced
1960 McGinnis vibratory tamper. Replaced
1974 electric/hydraulic truck hoist
Several non-usable chain saws
Electric stove (from Eagle Creek Town Hall )
Hydraulic hoist tank ( from Bay *11 ) Replaced
Hydraulic hoist cylinder (from Bay #10) Replaced
2 Myers grinder pumps ( replaced at Memorial park) Replaced
1974 Simplicity riding mower (not usable)
1973 Root underbody plow blade ( replaced in 1987 ) Replaced
1955 Huber alley maintainer (Not usable ) Replaced i
1960 Littleford pull-type sweeper ( engine gone)
6x6 Military truck frame and box. Burned out.
Several old snowplows - can be sold as scrap
All of these items are expendable and haven't been used for i
some time, and are worth less than $200 individually. We propose
to obtain the best possible price for each item. The Finance
Director informs me that these items can be sold under $500 with
the approval of the Administrator. Items which cannot be sold,
should then be disposed of as scrap material .
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Not sell the surplus items. j
2. Sell surplus items that are listed.
3. Add or delete any items from the surplus list.
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternatives number 2 and number 3,
ACTION REQUESTED:
Authorize the Public Works Dept. to sell surplus equipment
with the approval of the Administrator.
®NSENT 9' -Q
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Douglas K. Wise, City Planner
RE: Authorization to Advertise for the Hiring of a Planning
Intern.
DATE: June 15, 1989
INTRODUCTION•
The payroll authorization for Planning Intern Julie Kellerman
will expire on July 26, 1989. The Community Development
Department budget provides for a planning intern for the full
year of 1989. This is a request to advertise for the filling of
the intern position for the time after Ms. Kellerman's departure.
BACKGROUND:
In the City of Shakopee's 1987 Budget funding was included to
hire a full time Planner I position. The Community Development
Department requested authorization from the Council in the Spring
of 1987 to advertise for the filling of the Planner I position.
The City Council vote on the motion to authorize hiring of the
Planner I position was 3 to 3, therefore the authorization was
not approved. Following this action the City Council authorized
hiring a Planning Intern. In July of 1987, the City hired Jon
Glennie on a six month internship and renewed the position for an
additional six months. Beginning on September 26, 1988 the City
hired Julie Kellerman as a Planning Intern for a six month
period. In March of 1989, her internship was extended for an
additional four months until July 26, 1989 to coincide with her
expected delivery date.
The City's 1989 Budget allocation for the planning intern
position is $13,000. As of July 26, 1989, approximately $5,500
will remain unexpended for this budget item. The Community
Development Department is requesting authorization to advertise
for the filling of a four month planning internship position for
the time period from August 15 to December 15, 1989.
The Planning staff is only requesting a four month internship at
this time, ending before the end of the year, in order to provide
the City Council an opportunity to review the departments
staffing needs for 1990. After the hiring of a new City
Administrator, the council should review the staffing needs for
the entire Department and incorporate the changes into the 1990
budget.
ALTERNATIVES•
1. Authorize advertising for the filling of a four month intern
position for the time period August 15 to December 15, 1989.
2. Create a permanent planning position at this time and
advertise for the position to be filled.
3. Terminate the internship program effective July 26, 1989.
RECOMMENDATION•
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REODESTED:
Move to authorize advertising for a four month planning
internship position for the time period August 15 to December 15,
1989.
CogCNT 94n/Memo to: Dennie Kraft, Acting City Administrator
From: Marilyn Remer, Personnel Co ator
Re: Engineering Tech II Vacancy
Date: June 15, 1989
Introduction
At the May 2, 1989 meeting, Council authorized hiring Molly McCarthy to
fill the Engineering Tech II position effective June 19, 1989
Back rg ound
Forty-four applications were received for the Engineering Tech II
position, of which six were interviewed on April 24, 1989. There were
several excellent candidates. Based on education, experience and the
city's affirmative action the position was offered to Molly McCarthy,
which she initially accepted. She informed Personnel on June 13, 1989
that due to personal and financial reasons, she is now declining the
position.
Dave Hutton, City Engineer and the Personnel Coordinator reviewed
applications of the other candidates interviewed and are recommending
that Council appoint Jeffrey Swenson to fill the Engineering Tech II
position. He graduates from Dunwoody Industrial Institute on June 17th
with a 2-year degree in civil technology and land surveying. He was
previously in the military, has also worked with the MN DNR as a student
worker and references are commendable.
Personnel has contacted Mr. Swenson who is available to start the
position on July 5, 1989 at the starting salary of $19,285 ($9.27/hr.) ,
Step one of the 1989 Pay Plan with the customary six-month probationary
period.
Recommendation
Hire Jeffrey Swenson to the Engineering Tech II position at the starting
salary of $19,285/yr. effective July 5, 1989.
Action Recuested
Move to hire Mr. Jeffrey Swenson as Engineering Tech II at the starting
salary of $19,285/yr. effective July 5, 1989 to fill the vacancy created
by Molly McCarthy declining the position.
cc: Dave Hutton, City Engineer
CONSENT ?Mo/MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administ
FROM: Steve Hurley, MIS Coordinator
SUBJECT: Computer Network Upgrade
DATE: 6/13/89
Introduction•
The City recently purchased new computer hardware intended for
replacement of the existing file server on the network. It has
become apparent that an additional upgrade is necessary to complete
the installation of our system.
Background:
The new file server was ordered with an 80 Mb hard disk drive to
be used with an existing external hard drive, also 80 Mb, for a
total of 160 Mb disk storage. Since the two drives are of different
types they each need a controller board installed in the file
server. The existing Novell operating system also needs a board
moved from the old server to the new. What this means is that there
is no room in the new file server for the additional board needed
by the external hard drive.
There are three reasonable options available.
1. ) Upgrade the Novelle operating system software.
Our current software has been superceded by at least three newer
versions making maintenance more difficult because service
personnel are less familiar with the older versions.
An upgrade is essential at some point in the near future no matter
what direction is taken. This option eliminates the need for a
network key card and opens a slot in the server for the hard disk
controller board.
2. ) Upgrade the internal 80 Mb hard drive in the new file server
with a 150 Mb drive.
This would give us approximately the same disk storage as option
one but with only one controller card and would allow us to
continue using the existing Novell operating system.
3. ) Upgrade as in option two but with a 300 Mb drive.
This would simplify our system while giving us enough disk capacity
to last for 3-5 years. This would also require only one controller
card and allow us to use our existing Novell operating system.
Costs for the above options are 1. ) $995; 2 . ) $1300; 3. ) $2075
RENDED ACTION•
Alternate #1. Aside from being the lowest cost option it is also
the most essential. Funds to come from the contingency fund.
REODESTED ACTION•
Move to approve purchase of Novell Netware Assurance operating
system software upgrade from PC Express at a cost of $995.
W m PN p1UNO1PNN°'O10W WPWmmP WW WW W n m
U N N .010 NUUUNN NN UN N S
0 0 00 00000000000 000000 00 00 o m
OF UNNNNUUNNNN ...... WW N® n m
• N A a • mmmmmmmmmmm • WWWWW • 00 • 0 • W R O
2 ti
O <
O
rn m rnm wm000000000 000000
0000 00 00 D
PWW0W0PWq gg00WW WP
A pp ap0paapppAp papppp pp ap a 0
\ \\ \\mmmmmmmmm mm\\\\ \\ \\m \ O
m m mm mmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmm mm mm m
D_
C
NN
$
PYm Y N Y W
00 00 YW V VYmNO JpNV 00NpNANp
0o ap WN» WPmYyWmNmvPm WmmWmW o0o pp
00 YY v�NP VmOOmNmmNOAm NYWYWYW 000 NWS N
00 qW SVONNmPNWWOA ..W.W.N O00 000 UN
m m mm mmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmm aD as a
o c an ccccccccccc mmmmm AT yy cc ;
K A <K yww...»yyyy AAA A yy 11 T
__ T_m_T_m_m T_ $Z 00 A
D Z 2222222 <
C TTTmmmTTTTT yyNWNy ;; mm 0
oA'.O ..Wow...... mm
C C Qin NyyNyNmmm-- 11 22 -1 O
N RR 00000000000 OO AA a 9
9 \ ccoacccac.o ab N n
9 99 titititiN111-iJti ;; rr K S
p= -------- .0 CC y T D OC 22 yy n
n n CO ....11111 CC R
ti CC ..tititi-4.-111-1titi 99 2
nn mmmmmmmmmmm �� n a
11 AAAAA9p;AAA
F yN NyNNNNNyNyy « N
1
A
.OyyNy MWO.W yyyyNy 11 Ty N
m C Aa C>cO..aCccc C.acco Oc C 1
2 T 9999999999Y 999TV9 DD
m< �9 9 T
1 N TT 9M999999999 ����99 9 9 ;
y DD �lrrrrrrrrr rr m 9r r
P mm a»»»..»»»r» »»»»» rr ;m m
mrmmmmmmmmm »mmmmm •'
C 33 N wwOOww..w ..yyyy P( MN N N
mD O
11 C mm 1
A 9 yN 1
y Ny 0
1 2
O O 000
Y0000000000 00000 00 00 O a
SY»»»»Y»»»» n
n
A a pp APpPPpASppS NNNNNN Sp AA A O
NN NNNNNNNNNNN WW NN N C
O UN OY000000000 000000 00 NO O 1
N A ON Y.......... NWYYYmY Wp Z
N N a»YY�Y»»NN» Wmm NN 0
SJ 0NY0YY YPNYY
P S YWmWAWWWYYY pWrYYY Wp
N N NN pYYYNYYYNNY NYmWWW NY NN Y $
a
9
N \�
o a vJ
a m
3
N a
a
m
0
n n n n n n n m
s s s s s s s
�-
QW N W W 0W W N N N N 2 m
Vpy N e-YY YY x Y x O x O x O x N x
J x N x P a UUN pa W W O O Jt N
O C
O
O 5
mm p 000 00 P m m O O O D
W00 00 W O W ti m
mm m u mnm mm m m m m m m m
m
a
NN C
2
pm NN NN m0 ti
OmN YY YU VmW YY UN OW NN
NNm WW mN Ap
YmN WO 00 NV VY OJJm mV JV 00 NN JV
mYW NN pa NNoo m J mm
non on 0 a n n n m
as m ➢ 00 i C Sj y y
Wm m w xS2 2 r w $ m
g W C 2 p m = m
SD m W OOn O m
a2 2 aD➢ ➢D 2 D n N y 0
n < AAA CC D C
AA m Z 959 00 A O r D n %0
OO 0. n o rrr 00 0 o s m i
O m 333 Nm A r 5_ 2 n
0 mmm W 0 x
AAA n Am
m 0 m
Y D
y
l y
mm
m
A
ACA CCC DO O 9 5 A N O ~
O5l G m 555 CC C O 5 C 5 3
m YNM 55 5 W r n D m O
m z m m
C j
m y
N
N I
1
00 O O 000 00 D O O O O
fPJN W W NNN �N N W N N W p O
71
F C
W W 2
00 O N 000 N O D O O �1
WW o��W as a Y o r z
W W N O
a o
NN O O 0 i P
m
m
N D
W O
n m
m
n n
s s s N s s s s N
W U W m U N N N
Wq W q W WP NN 0WP q N � n �p
NN N N N NN
NN N N rr NN NNNN N
VJ J N P Y m
e:opm
m s n
Y 1
O <
O
rnrn rn w m mo 00 0000 0 o m n
q
~` p PA Pp PAPP p P p S
0
mm m m tl mm mm moms m m m 9
m
s
x
W Pmp C
Z
FY YJW Wj y
ON 00 YY 00 WNN N00 P 0 NN Py
Jq NN YY VV Ob00 000 vOP 00 yN 00
O 00 mm qW 000 YmOmN 00 00 00
ss S x xx xx xxxx O 0 0
as
00
pE n sn mm DDnn pp
ya x D D 000 zz xxxx G 6 D
yN 70000 G
y
PP Z O Y zzzz
s
$ y 0 TT NN NyNy D n O
_O_ N Z Ny OO x A
< '^ OO £mm£ Z n
00 Y y on m O x
TT 0 y n
no D S
SS O < A
as m
00 0
N
ti
S9A m N O Oy mT W.O. 0 9 9 N A
00 C 9 T xD CC 9999 Z O O 3
9T � y Tr X999 T
mm 9 P '-0n 99 rrr
'.O.S D N y O x3 TTTT p y m T
2 W YZ x
~ z <0 -�-, O w
O y
N
T O
ti Y
00 O O O WO 00 0000 O O O D
rr Y Y NY 0
WIS N N W NP NN NNNN P W W C
W 0 YA WW W Y
00 N O WN 0000 O O O
W Y mp WW wWNm p. N
PW J WY J O
WY YN qW YYNY p
PP W F. V NY J N N Z
0000 O
NNNN W i 0
WWWW Y
P 9
m O P
Y m
3
N D
m
O
n o 0 n o n o o m
s s s s s N s s s
N N N P y N y y W
m `w w mm W w `m `m Ywmm n
V a w V a 00 • � • Y • O • 0 V a U a N • 000 S O
2 ti
O �
0
O T
q qqm -1 N
W 0 Wm W \ \ \\\ m D
A P A AP P P A P P P PPP x
000 T
D
NN P O
Z
PP W YW
N N Y NN 00 N PP PP 00NW
p WW wWp 00 WW 00 00 WW 00
mm 0000 00 AP 00 o.00N
J 00 JV 010 00 00 00 UU Wm 00 00 U00
rr r ,Qr r D D m C AAA
O 9 -1NNN
IZ�1 A C YY N r m O m S NNN m
N O 2 99 r 2 r
O Z r w O Zb;; o
0 9T m O D 9 N 00 9
O 222 O
0 00
~ T OO 2 W 0 D Y TmT 0
O
r c0i 000 x
� O zAa m
� r y rtiti
000 N
y
A N 0 m N A99 9
C m TAS m C r O 9 J
Y C TT N T O N T �00 ;
~ N 9 NNN O
3 mm w C m D 3 m m mmm m
m N M 99 m 2 N = N < N GG< A
N Z y GG N O Y
ti 2
I 2 T
O �
00
0 O
N 2
01 N N WW W 0 N N N W N WWW- 00
W J N 2
O N 00 O P O O N O O 000 -1
Y p0 A W N N'N 2
W O
0
m Y YY Y O W w N Y 2
G
N 0 Y W N N
U N i O
N b0 O m
n N P
a m
o O
s io
3
N D
D m
T
n n n n n n n n n
s x s x s s x x s
N N N N N N N N N A
mm m »m q» q» m »m ommm rnNm»www» Q
NN U N N N N N NNUN UNNN S
AP P P F A W WWWW N W
AP F 0 mppP W WWWWWW T m
00 • w • O • U a N • • m s 00w • W • �VVVVV Q
m S O
Z Y
O <
O
qm rn w w O m O 0000 0 Oq mmOq 00 D T
w w gOwq qW m N
\ \ \\\\ \ \\\\\\ O
'°'° m m m m m m mmmm m mmmumm m
m
a
3
c
ww Wq mV m0 UN O»»W 00 O»wVrW» Y
mm PA NN 00 00 mhw»m qq PmmNwgO
m qW Op 001100 mW OWUgN NN wJ�VgWW
NO W pp 00 r» 00 pmW»P yN N Wmvm
as a m' +Qi Q m o 0000 0 333_3_33_
WYYYY A 2 Z
yW a N {7 q Z A 0000 222222
O T 3 = Y A]O'A.9 T mm TTTTTm m pppppQ
9999 aaaasa z
m 9 p9 D
AA O O W O n W 00N0N0N0g0N
9 00000 O
Z O
S 0
y2 L] A 0 0 A » 0 0
p W Y C N
N » Y
S
00 N 0 O z m
l r
N
Y
m
A
WN y y 9 y 9 q C 000000
C9C Cm C Q C QQQ� Y YYYYYY
99 T 0 O CCCO » »» Y
3
TT m 3 y y 333D Y YYYYYY m
WN y ➢ mm
y r� T TTTTTT
< < »»»Z N NNNNWN 0 0
Y yZZY
Y Yti
9
Y
O
2
00 o 0 0 ® 011
0000 op0000
N r Y W N NNNN WWWW C
W » WWWW
00 O N O O O NO O 000000 Y
m» w W W mwnW W.- z
N V N J W AN•-w A N»NN»m Q
q P A N »N
N J N W !- ANrm p 2
O N
G
O
R O
q
O O
O
m m
3
N D
N T
p
n n n n n n o n n m
s s s s s x x x s
N N N N N y N N N N
NNWWWW WWWW WW W W w WWm WWWWWW WWWW O m
UNUU NNUNN NN U N U ONN UNNNNN NNNN x
NNNNN NNUNN NN P W � mNN ➢PA➢➢➢ ➢PAP O tl
000000 mwwmm �� m x WW x WWWWWW x 0000 S M
tlWWWmm • x Y
2 ti
O <
0
0 T
..WWWW WWWW. 0W W W W WPW WWWWWW WWWW m N
rY YYYr D
AAA➢1P P➢PPO PP A P P AAP A\\\`� `=m
\\\\mw \mw wm \ \ \ \m mwwmm wmWw
0000.. 0000. .. . . . ..tl m....tl 0000 m
D
1A N
~ YW YY mYYYY
WWWYAW NUw1UY W.➢ UN
WWWNwW ONN..O PUW J.w .0 W. OONN YN.JJJN .WWWP
000000 wONUY. SFO N. Pm Pw m000 OYW...Y NJVJw
000000 OONN.O O N 00 0000 0000000 O.w.N
NNNNNN NNNNN NN N 9 A9A 999999 9999
xxxxxx 00000 Sx 0
D0D0n0D0D0D0CCCyC DnO a000
SS m 000n Wr.r.rWror.
000000 00 O r sASaASaZJC aAJC
O
000 ------ W.NN m
999999 £££EE 99 r
mmmmm mmmmm mm O O N 000000 0000 Z
mmmmmm NNNNN mm ti N S rrr mmmm O
tititititi a DDDDDD 9999 A
mmmTTm NNNNW Yr+ O m S 000000 w9'9'9 2
.9 A A.9 AA CCCCC mm O 233333
««« mmmmm r o nnnnna ziii m
yA99AA tiN1ti O
000000 AAAA PP m 2 .. S
mmmmmm mmmmm O m zzii m
WWNNNN D_n_DDD Da ti 2ZZ2 CC 0000
OO W
y
9
CCCCCC 9 999 mm 9 N m NNNNNNNNN 9999 �"�
NNr•N MN .9 YYA9 QO A 9 O CCC 9oCCCC mYNN m3
H 999 9999
22=1 2223 YY 9 999999 3222
titiYO� 99 9 r�Yw YYwwwrx ~~-�-� 0
m ml�im mm A11O0 DM A N N NNN NNNNWN 999 A
NWNNNN 9923 < Z CCC.
CCCNN 22 y mmmm Y
mmm ti�1 0
1
O
Z
000000 Y0000 00 O O O 000 000000 WWNO D
AYYYY .WUY �
PAIPAA ���PA NA A N N PNN NNNNNN WWWW C
WWWVWJ NNUYY NW Y W N Y Y NNNN 2
000000 OOOm. O O 000 000000 0000 ti
pNW WI�Y�- YYYYY P NA0 NWw��Y JJNW
AJWJV A NN YANYY PNY. �
YYYINY NYY.m YN Y YYY � � � � � X11
uNrmwm WW A N NNH Nrmmww Y�A"YY 2
AVWJJ NY U A <
NW m UUN O
p O 6
U N 9
p mmm
O
m 9
N D
N m
W
N W N N N m
~ WWW WWWWW WWW NUNNUWiW WWWWWWWmW ~ ~ O
N NNN NUUUN NNN NUNNNNNNUU U N y
e UNU NogoN NU NNNNNNFFNNNUU�N U N U
aPp NNNNN JVVVVJJJVVVJJ O n m
• N ppP a 00000 • mm2 VV • p • O m S O
Z y
O t
O
rn 092 O000W 220 0000000W 02 o rn s
W y y
~ ~ APAaP PPp aPOAPPPPPAaaPPA A p A S
\ \\ \9www \\\ mmmmmmmmmwmwm\\ \ \ \ O
m mmn mmlmm it: mmmmllmmmmmmmmm m m m m'
a
a P
AOAO p
O NON WWNI� Np n..NNWO NU W0
VV NONO
0000 ~ 9
9001
0200
mrrONU OrNU =mmUW
OO
WN 0000
AN
N 000AOWV020NNmP00 PP 00 00
1 0000 000000 ODOO NOOPmNWJmNONJN00 00 00 OO
N yNN 1=1 toy %%W&Ny22NNNNy y y y
$ 333 >pop> yyy 999999999999999 9 2 S
a mm2 aas9n ccccccccccccccc
9 asa m TT9 nnennnonnnnnnnn a o o <
rrr ics icss
Z TTT yNNyy DDD
s m i
nnnnn .n..nrn. c m m ee
g sai Rocco c n y
mm2 Roccoyyy
anann
y 000 .$..$.rzr mAm a s
10000 200 < m
0 000 OOc)W0 w m x
v mmm
000 y N a
r
y
y
A
y 000 WOWWW 999 L{CCCCCCCCCCCC9 N C
9 DD➢ r AAA ➢DyyYYYYYYyyyy9 C ; » y
r9ir9rH 00000 000 YyM0000�v-.MMwwrnO 9 9 m
9 00000 TTT mm Rrrrr-RRRRRRT 9 'A „ 'S
H yyy 3 A'-0MMM00000001-�I-1 � m
m Rrr �D�DD NTm yyYYyYyyyyyyN
an...+..Y..NN«N000m m y M m
N 000M m
DOO GG mmO=mmmmmmmmmN m W
D y A
CCC y
999 yy S y
N
O
0
002 20000 002 mw0000000000000 0 0 o a
0 0 WW00000YY1�1-e�000 2
P Pto
01 N NN
NNP 1pJNN gWPpAPPAPaaaPPP N 0 O
0 0WWWWWWWWWWNWW O C
WWWW 0WW WWJJJJJVVVVVVJO 1+ W v $
O 00000 000 N00000000000000 O O O y
P NruW W1J000 Fm0 OONNNNOPP WWW Oro W 0 N
A N =21 00 NNNNI-mow mN O O
000N0 pOmWN00V0000N00 O
0 000 NN20M 02WWWWWPPWWW110 O
P NNN mm Ymm OONNNN0NN0N0mmN 1-. O N $
PPP
NNN
JJJ O
WW W
PPa 9
o `a
m
N H
N O
D
O
s
N N N y y V
Y Wm-WW-WW W-W W NUNWWWWWmWWWmOWW ll
{/i WUNUNNUN NyW U NNNNNUNNNNNNN 2
m WWWWWWWWm WWW m N-N mm NNmmmmm-NU m
Y JVVWWWWWW WW m � • YYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY S „
• • JJJVJJ • 000
2
O K
0
0 m
w AmWmPnwWP m00 O ------------
0 mwA 0mm0Wamwm-m-® m y
p APPPPPPPP AAA P p ApAAPAPAPPApAAAP S
\ \\\q\\\\\\ mmm W m \mmmmmmWmmmmmmmm 9
m mmmmmmmmm mmm m m mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm m
a
u
N -t
Wmm WW Y Y YmY Y ti
YY JNYPOOYAWWYYY
WW mOWWWWWNNW mWm� OApPVmpPmmAWOrmAP
VpWmYA DOPY JV 00 mmNJYJYmmOAWmmm
00 NWpWpNNmmm mOWN 00 NWWWJNOmmNmNNYmWW
N KK<KKK<KK £££ w G CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
D DDDDDDDDD DDD D
(] 'A'2AAA9AAA yNN 2 yyNyyyyyNNNyNyNN
S CCCCCCCCC tiHti
y NNyNN0
000000000
N 3TT33T S 0 TyNTTNyT yTTyyTNTNI£�ITNTNTyTyTyTNTy TZ
NyyyNNNNN ___ y r 1'K ti-�1 titi-�ti-Itititiltiti O0
ZSZ QCS VSG SS pSpS DDD moo
00000000p3003030p30p300 A
ELEEEE££E 333 m33 3�I333�333
000000000 mmm r m S
000000000 yy? 2
W
m
0
y
ti
m
a
y WNN wo..Oo CC9 N 9 mtititi"�ti titiK«tiHK<1 M
C rCCGCCCCC N»A C A mmTTTmTTTTTTTTT -1
9 099999999 0 9 T TTTrf"rrrrrrrrrrr T
� 099999999 M«9 � TTTTTmTmTTTmT 3
Prrrrrrr _9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_9_
3�..�1-I r•YYYMr• �NN Y y O
m ammmmmmmm m m m 00000 o_0_O_000000002ZZ
m
y =NyNNNNyy yNG y G ZZ22Z ZZZ22 y
TTTmTTTTmmTTTTmT A
K
1
O
2
O 000000000 000 O O Y0000000000000
Y YYYYYYYYY YYY Y Y WWUYYY YYYYYYYYY 0
pN NNNNNNNNN W PNPNANANPPPApPPPApP O
G
WYYrYYYYr NNNNNNNNNNN Z
O 00000 0000 000 O 0 YYYYY 77-.-777"-7 K
W�PPAWW7 N W NNYpPWWWWYr�-Y YYY 20
A NNYWYm Y W WWmNYNWNYmJNWNNY
YWYYYNY Ym
pmYNNNYWYm NNY N W WWmNYYWNYmJNWNNY �
3 O
W
9 �
0 rP
A m
3
m 9
y a
a m
m
n n n n n n
s s s s s s m
y y N y N y
N N UUNN m N N � N U N N '1 m
2 ti
O <
O
pm o o W m p o m m Soon oW o o ® o o Wp o s
W W W WWW WW W W W 1 y
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ '1
A P P P P P ~ A PPAa A P P P P A A ~ D
O
m m m m � m m m mdnm m o m m m m m m v
D
Z
C
yU Wm rr mm on Z
PmP AP 00 VJ
o0 NN VrgWW 00 NU NN 00 ON NN Aa ~
WW NN yN 0NN OVgNN WW p0 W 00 NN
60 00 on
on no no 66
NN 00 00 on WW 00 00 OO ONNOO 00 UN 00 00 NN 00 WW 00
• • a x • a x • • • x • a r x • •
r r H z O z 2 O 323 S O 0 T 4 O m 3
GG p a a o c D
m 'x H w i O s mmmm s r m m m y w
m
y S N A C NyyN
y 2 ry O 2 m 0 m ~4titi S 2 9 T O y y Y
O � y D p P a y yyyy m ➢ W T � y
JC O C E S C O O C a p Z_ O
2 P O '.O D O A '9A AAAN •9 p OJi m
y T W M N A Y
y � < $OOCO O O 9 y JC
0 D < O 0 y yy NN w W v C m
O Y
O i
y
ti
i
y y W m 0 y O WyyN T m O O 9 y y y
O v O C C O D T CCpC ti m m y C 'S '�
'T m D n D ➢ r P mmmm ~ m P T m N !� O
yyyy O .C. 3 y O y y P
W
W y G z W v
N N0
y 9 y
y 2
O O O O O O O O 0000 O W p O O O O D
� r r r r r r rr rr P U 0
N N N W NNNN W W W N N C
O U O m 0 N r W y
N O O 0000 O O O O O
J A WN A O O O
N O 77 O O O
P N W O O r ti N 2
O V <
m J W mmmm m �
W AAAA 4 O
W N PAAP m W
W m W
W W 9
VVVV A
O a
a .c
3
m 9
y D
a0
m
p
n ^�
s
y b
W W A
N N 2
m
n
m m s N
2
O <
O
p T
0 o n
q < N
\ \ 2
a Y n
p s
\ \ O
' 9
m m m
m
D
v Y Yo
Yp N NO Z
O Ov YmYmm YY JJ ti
gWmOfJONWYYm mm mm
W OmNNWNANm NN fJ 41
m Op.mp O.V.N. 00 Wm
O TTTTTTTTTT S 2
_
I I C_C_C CC_2_CC2CC_CC
Z ZZ 2 O <
oopp000000p
um-umUmuNi Ninap- nW m 0
0000H-�11H11 N =
00000000000 � m
tilti y'ytitiHltiti 2
DDDDDDD➢DDD 2 O O
rrrrrrrrrrr O Jc
o
1
A
C9NYYYONStin N Y
tiDtimbWAOAAm C O ti
w<OmmmDyD=m C 3
y03mmvDm rmiD r� 9 m
<rA990Tr ~r N Y N
-�1Dp0lp�l f�< C 2 A
CC29< � DW Z �
m m2ti9
C ..l.
X09
O 0
2O
y 9
< `m
n
~ O O a
O
0
p A O
N C_
q 2
O
Y Y i
A P
A
i O
O O
O
O A
4 m
3
N D
N O
a m
p
m
� o
ww O O O
0 O O O OY YO
p
F F Y N N O
vOYi w �O w b Wm Yk wO WO ON ON wiF HF NF HF NF F c' WF 0O W mNO W Y N N N w 0 0 0 0 0 OF WNOO
0008 �
8080 mF on
0p00pS0SSS 00S0FH NNwY
0I 0 FN ar
y—
.
A
0 0 m m m m m m mmm Y O O O O O O O O O
Y Y ." Y Y Y Y Y Y . Y Y Y F . F" F Y �n O , Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y y
Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y '
H H 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 00 O O Y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OH O n
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80 ""0 n
�a
a
0
m
Y
�O F mm w Y mm D\m �O Ym Y H N
NvFOWO��NNbyOm
0SO0 w w M M OPS0 �p0SY0 S000 M 0 0 O O O m m
00
M
n a
� n
a 0
o ro m ro = H c
m m m m m m m ma e m o K e K� K
< C 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 A K O O O O E E g 0 9 O O O W
no
m o Y r K 0 o n < n c c m
m 3 w N PI m W F [+
b W W m
IO o m
F bSw w�b �NmpmY mm� mn mm w�mONphN8N m
O NnF
'Z
w N N Z
O
ro ro O
33 C a !U U) O W O NOWRWCm O3 O
=N 3 K < K C K W ry
3 3 K a >
I f] pJ Iq O Ffo 3W WO O Y K F K
m.
O
z a > > m m m m m m m m m m
O K m Y O �+ Y Y Y K Y 5
(A < N .T O F a
G m lA U] m F K m O n K
b S Na N 3 m N K a a
O m % 3 m
b b r O
m
N A K
M
7
� n
x
�O F W Y VI O Y Y N 91
W O N O O ON N0m 0 NO w000N m
O N 0\ 0 0 0 0 F 0 0 0 0 Y 0 0 m m 0 0 0 0 Y
'..o Y r m N N o 0 o
_ �, w N r
F F F F W W W F N N W H
• W VI w W O� 01 VI �O W W O\ R
W Y Y Y O N O O
p �O Op O 0 0
pOpp
N 0 N p 0 0 0 0 S O R
r w o r p p p p p p p
F'rww Hv�iOVNiw� � N w Nil O O O m WF WF w
I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 Y r r r Y r r Y Y r Y
p 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
n << O L ��W C 9 H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 9 4 9 0 S M a D
p
L r o +f a w K r Im
K C b 3 N Y
N
N9 '< P•
w � 3
R
-
� n
R R
m
S A
A
aG O
H O ro
O O M 3 3 0 0 L 3 N
m pt vwi O O N r k A y M M m 3 ti �y 'G
� OINW QIOBVoiH rw rW O] K < < m O W W 9
pp �
O� O�lr OOO�n dD� O < w P-f
R O
m
a
eI�d
Y Y r Y r Y r O O pp
r O OZ
g 3 3 Z < 3 ro Z O 4 <
R W C %• ro F R n � O m C.
ry e< A $P 7C N O Y N Ctl H
M O
F H h
Y
n x m µ W C
I K a w
< N Y
I °i ch
ro
O F
fH
N N 3
r r w r R
o O
O Y C W Y
O WO v O Vii v -O vii OJ N Obi
W T 0
CONSENT
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator 1
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director op!!!
RE: Property Liability Insurance
DATE: June 15, 1989
Introduction
Attached is a list of property/liability insurance premiums for the
renewal of the present coverages. Council concurred previously with the
renewal of current policies.
Background
The policies proposed are essentially the same as current coverages. The
permiums are almost the same considering that there are more items covered such
as the Youth Building and more vehicles.
Council did not budget for an umbrella policy nor has there been a request
for or discussion of getting another umbrella policy.
The League is expanding coverage for pollution type items and underground
storage tanks. We have five underground storage tanks and should hear more
from the League in the next few months. Some type of coverage is required by
October 1990, by Federal regulations.
The premium for the package renewal is $179,213 compared to $174,687 for
the expiring policies. The policies of course are not prepared, but there is
more detail available on the proposals for any Councilmember that desires it
Action ReQuested
Move to accept the property/liability insurance proposals of the League of
Minnesota Cities, Transamerica and Hartford as outlined by the Capesius Agency
for a total cost of approximately $179,213.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
COMPAN Y PREM 2 LIM COMPAR X SON
SUMMARY
1989-1990 1988-1989
PROPERTY $ 22, 762 $ 23, 289
INLAND MARINE $ 3, 682 $ 4, 619
MONEY & SECURITIES $ 270 $ 270
GENERAL LIABILITY $ 88, 772 $ 82,449
ERRORS & OMMISSIONS $ 15,938 $ 20,527
INVERSE CONDEMNATION $ 5,079 $ 1 ,992
AUTOMOBILE $ 34, 949 $ 33,829
PUBLIC OFFICIAL BOND $ 836 $ 787
BOILER & MACHINERY $ 6,925 $ 6, 925
TOTAL PREMIUM .$179,213 $174, 687
no� ��T
9
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. COX, City Clerk
RE: Application for Temporary 3.2 Beer License by
Shakopee Jaycees
DATE: June 9, 1989
Introduction and Background
I
The Shakopee Jaycees have made application for a temporary 3 .2
beer license for June 24 and 25 and July 28, 29 and 30, 1989 at
Tahpah Park.
The City Attorney has reviewed the application, surety bond and
certificate of insurance and they are in order.
Alternatives
1. Approve application.
2. Deny application.
Recommendation
Alternatives No. 1, approve application.
Recommended Action
Approve the application and grant a temporary On Sale 3.2 beer
license to the Shakopee Jaycess at Tahpah Park for June 24 and
25, 1989 and one for July 28, 29, 30, 1989.
JSC/jms
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator /(// / ou
FROM: Dave Hutton, City Enginey�
SUBJECT: Erosion Control Ordinance
DATE: June 14, 1989
INTRODUCTION A BACKGROUND:
On April 27 , 1989 the City Council adopted the proposed Erosion
Control Ordinance and directed the City Attorney to prepare the
appropriate revisions to the City Code. The City Attorney has
now prepared the appropriate ordinance adopting the Erosion
Control Ordinance as well as making any other revisions to the
City Code.
Ordinance No. 266 is attached for Council consideration and
adoption.
ALTERNATIVES:
1 . Adopt Ordinance No. 266 .
2. Do not adopt Ordinance No. 266.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Adopt Ordinance No. 266 , which amends the Shakopee City Code to
adopt the new Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance as
well as making the various amendments to the City Code as
discussed in the heading of the attached Ordinance No. 266 .
DH/pmp
ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE N0. ?66
Fourth series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending the Shakopee
Code Chapter 12 Entitled "Subdivision Regulation (Platting) by
Enacting a New Section 12.20 entitled "Soil Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Ordinance" and by repealing Section 12.12 entitled "Eviron-
mental Protection" and Amending Chapter 11 entitled "Land Use
Regulation (Zoning) by repealing Subd 12 entitled "Soil Erosion &
Sedimentation Control"; Subd 13 "Exposed Slopes" all of Section 11.60
and by repealing A and B of Subd 10 of Section 11.35 entitled
"Shoreline Zoning District" and by adopting by References Shakopee
City Code Chapter 1 and Section 11.99 and 12.99 which among other
things contain penalty provisions.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAEOPEE , MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION 12.20 Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance
The purpose of this section is to promote the public health, safety,
property and general welfare of the citizens of the City and to conserve
the sail, water and related resources and to control erosion and sediment-
ation caused by land disturbing activities.
Subd 1 Administration
The City Council hereby designates the Building Inspector or City Engineer
(depends on the land disturbing activity ) as the administrator of this
section of the City Code. Erosion control plans shall be covered under the
existing building permit process. A separate fee is not required for
erosion control plans.
Subd. 2 Activities Subject to Erasion Control Measures
a) Any land disturbing activity in residential, multi-family,
commercial or industrial zones shall be subject to erosion
control measures provided that:
1. An area of 10,000 square feet or greater will be disturbed
by excavation, grading, filling or other earth moving acti-
vities resulting in the loss of protective vegetation, or
- 1 -
io
2. Excavation or fill exceeding 500 cubic yeards, or
3. The installation of underground utilities, either public or
private, resulting in more than 300 linear feet of trenching
or earth disturbance, or
b) Any subdivisions as defined by Chapter 12 of this code which requires
plat approval or a certified survey map.
c) Agricultural lands used mainly for the production of food, general
farming, livestock and poultry enterprises, nurseries, forestry, etc.
are not subject to the provisions of this section.
d) Any other land disturbing activity for which the City Engineer
determines to have the potential for substantial erosion.
Subd.3 Erosion Control Plans -
a) All land disturbing activities covered by this section shall be
required to have an approved erosion control plan on file with the
City prior to anyconstruction starting.
b) The erosion control plan shall contain any such information necessary
for the Building INspector and City Engineer to determine that adequate
erosion control and sedimentation measures are proposed. As a minimum
a topographic map showing existing and proposed contours, location of
any natural water courses and drainageways, the extent of the land
disturbing activity and any erosion control measures should be shown
on the plans submitted and approved.
c) In addition to the plans, a narrative report summarizing the proposed
erosion control measures should be submitted. This report should
include language discussing the timing of the installation, phasing,
stabilization of all structures, maintenance and eventual removal of
all structures.
Subd 4. Performance Standards
a) General Standards
In general, this ordinance does not reauire the use of any partiCular
type of structure to control erosion and sedimentation. The City
Engineer or Building Inspector shall evalutate the proposed measures
to determine if they follow current accepted design criteria and
engineering standards.
1. Erosion control plans shall incorporate best management practices
to reduce soil loss during construction to 102 of the gross soil
loss as estimated by the universal silt loss equation.
2. The smallest practical area of land shall be exposed at any given
time during development.
3. When soil is exposed, the exposure shall be for the shortest period
of time. Within 30 days of the rough grading, the site should be
seeded and mulched. For areas that will be redistrubed in less than
2 years, a temporay seed mix shall be allowed.
4. All development shall conform to the natural limitations presented by
the topography and soil as to create the best potential for preventing
soil erosion.
5. Erosion control measures shall be coordinated with the different
stages of development. Appropriate control measures shall be
installed prior to development to control erosion.
6. The natural vegetation and plant covering shall be retained whenever
possible. Temporary vegetation, mulching or other cover shall be
used to protect critical areas and permanent vegetation shall be
installed as soon as practical.
b) Standards - Stormwater Runoff Erosion
1. The natural drainage system shall be used as far as is feasible for
- 3 -
/ t) 0--�
storage and flow of runoff. Stormwater drainage shall be dis-
charged to marsh lands, swamps, retention basins or other
treatment facilities. Temporary storage area or retention ponds
shall be considered to reduce peak flows, erosion damage and
construction costs. If the drainage area is over 5 acres, a
sediment basin shall be utilized.
2. Silt fence or hay bales shall be utilized to control erosion and
prevent sedimentation from leaving the construction site. These
structures shall be properly installed according to current
standards.
3. If needed, sod shall be laid in strips at intervals necessary
to prevent erosion and at right angles to the direction of drainage.
4. At existing storm sewer inlets, temporary sedimentation traps may
be necessary to prevent erosion from entering the storm sewer system.
5. Adequate provisions shall be made to prevent the tracking or dropping
of dirt or other materials from the site onto any public or private
street by the use of gravel pads at all entrances.
c) Exposed Slopes. The following control measures shall be taken to control
erosion during construction:
1. No exposed slope should be steeper in grade than three (3) feet
horizontal to one (1) foot vertical.
2. Exposed slopes steeper in grade than ten (10) feet horizontal to
one (1) foot vertical should be contour plowed to minimize direct
runoff of water.
3. At the foot of each exposed slope, a channel and berm should be
constructed to control runoff. The channelized water should be
diverted to a sedimentation basin (debris basin, silt basin or
silt trap) before being allowed to enter the natural drainage
system.
4 -
4. Along the top of each exposed slope, a berm should be constructed
to prevent runoff from flowing over the edge of the slope. Where
runoff collecting behind said berm cannot be diverted elsewhere
and must be directed down the slope, appropriate measures shall be
taken to prevent erosion. Such measures should consist of either
an asphalt paved flow apron and drop chute laid down the slope or a
flexible slope drain. At the base of the slope drain or flood apron,
a gravel energy dissipather should be installed to prevent erosion
at the discharge end.
5. Exposed slopes shall be protected by whatever means will effectively
prevent erosion considering the degree of slope, soils materials,
and expected length of exposure. Slope protection shall consist
of mulch, sheets of plastic, burlap or jut netting, sod blankets,
fast growing grasses or temporary seeding of annual grassings.
Mulch consists of hay, straw, wood chips, com stalks, bark or
other protective material. Mulch should be anchored to slopes
with liquid asphalt, stakes, and netting or should be worked into
the soil to provide additional slope stability.
6. Control measures, other than those specifically stated above may be
used in place of the above measures if it can be demonstrated that
they will effectively protect exposed slopes.
d) Dust Control Measures
1. Temporary mulching or seeding shall be applied to open soil to
minimize dust.
2. Barriers such as snow fences, commercial wind fences and similar
materials shall be used to control air currents and blowing soil
if the City Engineer determines it is necessary.
3. The exposed soil shall be watered to control dust, with frequency
- 5 -
lb
of watering repeated as necessary.
4. Permanent vegetation shall be established as quiday as possible.
Within 30 days after the rough grading has been completed the entire
area shall be seeded and mulched.
Subd.5 Maintenance of Erosion Control Measures
a) The owner or developer shall be responsible for maintaining all erosion
control structures in a condition that will ensure continuous function-
ing of those devices. If, after the installation of the erosion
control structure, the City Engineer determines that additional measures
are needed, they shall be installed at the expense of the owner.
b) Any erosion or sediment that runs off or blows off the site onto
adjoining properties, City Streets, storm sewers, etc. shall be the
responsibility of the owner or developer for clean up and restoration.
If the owner fails to properly clean up or restore all areas affected
by erosion the City will hire a contractor to complete the work and
bill the owner for the expenses associated with the clean-up.
Subd. 6 Technical Reference
The City of Shakopee officially designates the "Minnesota Construction
Site Erosion and Sedimentation Control Planning Handbook" prepared
by the Board of Water and Soil Resources and Scott County Soil and
Water Conservation Districts as the technical reference for this
ordinance. This reference will be used to ensure the proper placement
and installation of any proposed erosion control structures.
Subd 7. Performance Bond
The owner or developer shall submit to the City either a cash bond,
an irrevocable letter of credit or other financial security to guarantee
the faithful execution of the erosion control plan. This security
shall be in the amount of 1255 of the costs for construction of all
- 6 -
Ili
erosion control devices, including athe costs of City inspection and
administration ( as approved by the City Engineer). The City is hereby
authorized to draw against this security in the event the erosion control
plan is not followed.
Subd 8. Violations
In addition to the penalties provided in Sections 11.99 and 12.99 of the
City Code, any person, either by the owner or the occupant of premises
who violates, neglects or refuses to cmply with the requirements of this
section shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. In addition, if the
Building Inspector or City Engineer determines that adequate erosion
control measures are not being followed and there is little cooperation
on the part of the owner to do so, a "stop work" order may be issued to
the land disturbing activity until such times as adequate measures are
implemented. In all cases, the owner may appeal the "stop work' decision
to the City Concil for review.
Subd. 9 When in Force and Effect
After the adoption and attestation of this Ordinance and one publication
in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee, it shall be in full
force and effect from and on the date following such publication.
Passed 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
Prepared and approved as to form this
5th day of June, 1989.
✓ City Attorney ,� '
/`D b
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator
FROM: Ray Ruuska, Engineering Coordinator
SUBJECT: Heritage Place Improvements
DATE: June 15 , 1989
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is required for a Resolution Accepting Work and
Making Final Payment on Heritage Place Improvements.
BACKGROUND:
All of the work for this project has been completed in accordance
with the contract documents.
A signed copy of the Certificate of Completion is attached.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3070 , A Resolution Accepting Work on
Heritage Place Improvements, Project No . 1987-14 and move its
adoption.
RR/pmp
RESOLUTION NO. 3070
A Resolution Accepting Work On
Heritage Place Improvements
Project No. 1987-14
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City
of Shakopee on September 9 , 1989 , Widmer Inc. , Box 219 ,
St . Bonifacius , MN 55375 has satisfactorily completed the
Utilities, Streets and Appurtenant Work in Heritage Place Phase
I, Project No. 1987-14, in accordance with such contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the work completed under said
contract is hereby accepted and approved ; and
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
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
CONTRACT NO. : 1987-14 DATE: June 5 , 1989
PROJECT DESCRIPTION : Heritage Place Improvements
CONTRACTOR: Widmer, Inc .
Box 219
St. Bonifacius , MN 55375
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT , . . . , . , , , . , , $ 252 ,097.50
QUANTITY CHANGE AMOUNT , , , , , , , , , , , , , $ ( 17 ,281 .48)
CHANGE ORDER NO, _ THRU N0, _ AMOUNT . , , $ -0-
FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT , , , , , , , , , , , , , , S 234,816.02
LESS PREVIOUS PAYMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . t 234 .816.02
FINAL PAYMENT , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , $ -0-
1, hereby certify that the above described work was inspected
under my direct supervision and that, to the best of my belief and
knowledge, i find that the same has been fully completed in all
respects according to the contract, together with any modifications
approved by City Council . I, therefore, recommend above specified
final payment be made to the above named Contractor,
—�:z' 2E2Ao -�
Professional Engineer
MEMO TO: City Council
FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official
RE: Congregate Dining Gas Range
DATE: June 19, 1989
INTRODUCTION
The gas range at the Hi-rise must be replaced.
BACKGROUND
Since we first purchased the gas range we have had problems with
this unit. We have an excessive amount of raw gas in the kitchen
area and filtering out into the dining room. At times, it has
been severe enough to give the occupants headaches and nausea.
We have had the factory people out on many occasions and have
spend hundred of dollars trying to get it fixed. We have had no
luck to date.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend we replace the gas range. Our cost will be $1,900. 00
(Scott Carver will pay for the installation) .
ALTERNATIVES
1. Close down the senior nutrition program.
2. Purchase a new range.
ACTION REQUESTED
Offer Resolution No. 3072, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2989
Adopting the 1989 Budget, and move its adoption.
PLEASE NOTE•
The Shakopee Lions Club just paid for a new dishwasher, mixer,
meat slicer and twenty-six chairs for congregate dining for
$3 , 500. 00 at my request. I don't feel I can ask them for any
more money at this time.
LH:cah
RESOLUTION NO. 3072
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2989
ADOPTING THE 1989 BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a budget for the
fiscal year, and
WHEREAS, changing conditions and circumstances warrant
amending the budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the appropriations are
increased as follows:
Fund Category Division Amount
General Building Government $1,900.00
Maintenance Buildings
and the increases are offset or funded by decreases in the
following accounts:
Fund Category Division Amount
General Contingency Unallocated $1,900.00
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
alp
JULIUS A. COLLER, IT
J 1859isao w Aa1'OENHY AT LAW aiz-aes izw
SHAEOPEE.MINNESOTA
3639
June 14, 1989
Mrs. Judith Cox, City Clerk
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN. 55379
Dear Judy:
i
I received a City Council follow-up dated June 6, 1989 instructing me
to draft an ordinance amending parking regulations to restrict parking
on frontage road north of Highway 101 and east of Valleyfair for a
maximum of two hours and have this ready for the next Council meeting.
It is not necessary to handle this by ordinance. Section 9.08 of the
City Code Subdivision 2 provides that the Chief of Police may when
authorized by action of the City Council designate certain streets,
blocks or portions of streets or blocks restricted as to parking.
All that will be necessary for the council to do is pass a motion
requesting to post frontage road north of HIghway 101 and East of
Valleyfair for a maximum of 2 hour parking period and to advise the
Council when this becomes effective. It won't be effective, of course,
until it is actually posted.
If you have any questions call me.
Very tr\/uulllyy�' yours,
Julius A. Coller, II
Shakopee City Attorney
JAC/nh
ACTION REQUESTED:
Direct the proper city staff to post the frontage road north of Highway 101 and
East of Valleyfair for a maximum of two hour parking.