Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/11/1989 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items DATE: July 7, 1989 1. Attached is the monthly calendar for July. 2.. Attached is the Business Update from City Hall. Delete 3. Attached is the Building Activity Report for June. [not done] Canceled 4. Attached is the July 12, 1989 agenda for the Downtown Committee meeting. 5. Attached are the June 21, 1989 minutes of the Downtown Committee. 6. Attached are the June 7, 1989 minutes of the Community Development Commission. 7. Attached are the May 25, 1989 and June 8, 1989 minutes of the Planning Commission. S. Attached are the June 8,- 1989 minutes of Board of Adjustment and Appeals. 9. Attached are the April 24, 1989 minutes of the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board. 10. Attached are the March 27, 1989 minutes of the Cable Communications Advisory Commission. 11. Shakopee Area Catholic School has applied for a gambling license. They meet the requirements of the City code. 12. Attached is a letter dated June 23, 1989 from the Commissioner of Revenue regarding effects of a new tax bill for 1989 and Jean Good regarding the Governor's field hearings. 13. Attached is a Newsletter for July from Ehlers and Associates. 14. Attached is a memo from LeRoy Houser regarding the purchase of the stove for the hi-rise. 15. Attached is a memo from Councilman Joe Zak regarding a couple of issues which surfaced at the July 5th Community Development Commission Meeting. DRK/jms July 1989 UPCOMING MEETINGS SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 July 4th - 5:00pm CDC 7:30pm City Hall Planning Closed Commission 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 6:00pm 7:00pm City 7:45am Boards & Council Downtown Commissio- Committee ns Picnic 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 7:00pm 7:00pm City 7:00pm Community Council Energy & Recreation Transp. 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 5:00pm Employees Picnic 7:00pm Cable Committee 30 31 June flugus t S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 25 26 27 28 29 30 27 28 29 30 31 BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL Vol. 3 No. 7 Dear Chamber Member: July 1, 1989 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT On June 20th the City Council approved the final plat of Meadows Second Addition. The 31 single family residential lots are expected to be developed later this year. The Energy and Transportation Committee will be holding a public hearing on July 19th at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers to hear comments from Shakopee residents regarding a major amendment to Section 3 . 15 of the Shakopee City Ordinance - Refuse Collection. The proposed amendments will require Shakopee residents occupying single family units up to and including four-plexes within the City's refuse collection service area to utilize the City's refuse collection service. The proposed ordinance amendments would also establish a penalty for those persons unlawfully taking recyclable materials from residents recycling containers. On July 24th the Shakopee Cable Communications Advisory Commission will be holding a public hearing at 7: 00 p.m. in the Council Chambers to hear comments from Shakopee residents regarding the sale and transfer of the Shakopee cable television system now operated by Zylstra-United Cable Television to Amzak Cable, Midwest, Inc. COMMUNITY RECREATION (SCR) Shakopee's Municipal Swimming Pool, located in Lions Park, is a one acre sand bottom and beach facility with a complete re- circulation, chlorination, and filtration system which is fenced and staffed just as any standard swimming pool. Families particularly enjoy using this pool because they not only feel safe, but it feels like they are at a lake. The public is invited to use the pool during open swimming hours seven days a week through August 20th. The pool is owned and operated by the City of Shakopee. SCR, through its office and staff, assists in the scheduling of the activities that occur. For further information call 445-2742. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT .._ Bids will be opened on June 30th for both the Third Avenue Proiect and the Upper Valley Drainage Proiect. Staff will go to Council on July 11th for their approval of the bids with construction starting approximately two weeks later. Minutes of the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee City Council Chambers Shakopee, MN June 21, 1989 Chairperson Keen called the meeting to order at 7:50 A.M. with the following persons present: Gary Laurent, Melanie Kahleck, Terry Forbord, Ruben Ruehle, Jim Stillman, Mary Keen, Charlie Fonder and Theresa Roehrich. Also present was Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant and Councilman Zak. Commissioner Wermerskichen was absent. Chairperson Keen welcomed Theresa Roehrich and Charlie Fonder as the two newest members of the Downtown Committee. Chairperson Keen questioned if there were any additions to the agenda. Forbord/Kahleck moved to approve the agenda as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Laurent/Stillman moved to approve the minutes of the May 10, 1989 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock stated that several months ago the City initiated a property inventory of the downtown area. The data collected so far included information on the following: Market values per square foot, net and gross property tax per square foot, building location, historical significance, and overall building condition. Mr. Stock stated that much of the information gathered at this point is statistical and factual. However, some of the information is purely subjective in nature. For example, when ranking historical significance, much of what can be determined as historical rests in the eye of the beholder. Mr. Stock stated that he generally dated all buildings built before 1920 as having a high degree of historical significance. Anything constructed between 1920 and 1950 has a medium level of historical significance and any thing after 1950 as having no historical value. Mr. Stock then went through his ranking of the key intersections in the downtown area in terms of location when the mini by-pass is complete. Mr. Stock noted that he felt that the intersection of Lewis Street and First Avenue would be the key intersection because it would be located at the bridge head. Mr. Stock noted that he ranked the intersection of Holmes and First Ave. as the second best intersection followed by the Sommerville/First Ave. intersection. Commissioner Kahleck questioned whether or not the areas in which people could enter into the downtown area off of the mini by-pass would be more critical than the Lewis/First Avenue intersection. Mr. Stock stated that he felt those two areas were important but 1 that the Lewis/First Avenue intersection served as the focal point of the entire downtown area due to oximitwhat s t staff the bridge head. Commissioner Forbord - 4uestion evaluation of the intersections was based on. Mr. Stock stated that his locational decisions were based on the current use of the properties in the downtown area, and shopping patterns in downtown shopping and the view of the Downtown Area from persons traveling on the mini by-pass. Commissioner Forbord stated that he was surprised to hear that there would not be egress out of the downtown area on the Western side of the by-pass. Commissioner Stillman stated that he was always under the impression that there would only be ingress on the Western side of the by-pass. Commissioner Forbord asked staff to clarify if there would be a stop light intersection at Fuller Street. Staff responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Forbord then stated that there would still be egress except that it would have to occur at Fuller Street. Staff responded in the affirmative. Discussion ensued on staff's ranking of the intersections in the downtown area in regard to locational importance. Commissioner Kahleck questioned the importance of ranking the intersections in terms of their locational consideration. She stated that in her opinion the main area of focus would be whatever the City of Shakopee wants it to be. Mr. Stock stated that determining which areas were key in worms ld of location a higher played a role in determining which property ranking in terms of acquisition, condemnation, demolition and/or rehabilitation. Commissioner Forbord stated that he disagreed with Ms. Kahleck in that he did not think the City could ti cause whichthatntersewhat ction would be the key intersection just wanted. He noted that there are many components that should be evaluated to determine which area would be utilized as the key focal point of the downtown area. Many of those components the City of Shakopee has no control over and therefore it makes it ould be considered the key very difficult to determine what area w Commissioner Forbord intersection or area in the downtown. stated that the property inventory should also acknowledge sical property owners willingness to sell as well as p Y constraints that may exist with some of the properties He noted that the original downtown concept plan talked about critical entry points into the downtown area as well as a focal point. He felt that the Committee could identify a number of key areas that might work well as key points of arrival. Commissioner Stillman stated that he felt that the bridge head traffic fromethree key directionsarrival meet atthe that tocation.because 2 �, a-Vor 9 Commissioner Keen stated that at the Sommerville and First Avenue intersection there would be both ingress and egress and therefore more traffic than the Holmes and First Avenue intersection. She questioned if that should be ranked higher than the Holmes/First Avenue intersection. Mr. Stock stated that what Ms. Keen had stated was correct but that he felt the Holmes Street/First Avenue intersection would be more attractive due to the pedestrian underpass in that area as well as the traffic generators (Marquette Bank) that are located in close proximity to that intersection. Commissioner Kahleck stated that another reason for making the First Avenue/Lewis Street intersection the key intersection was because people heading across the bridge would need to see something that would welcome them and encourage them to enter into the downtown area. Commissioner Forbord suggested that one of the factors that should be considered in weighing which parcels should serve as key entry points is the travelers view and feeling about the properties in the downtown area. Commissioner Kahleck questioned what would be located North of the area in which the five houses presently sit that will be removed. Mr. Stock stated that North of the mini by-pass on the East end is Huber Park. Mr. Stock stated that this area will hopefully be landscaped in conjunction with the completion of the mini by-pass. He stated that this will provide an ascetically pleasing entry point into the downtown area. Mr. Stock then went through his preliminary ranking of the properties in the downtown area in terms of acquisition, condemnation, relocation, and rehabilitation. Mr. Stock stated that based on the preliminary analysis of the information gathered to date, he has found that if one keeps in mind the mission of the Downtown Committee was to create a historic river town atmosphere, that the Gene Brown lot and property located on Block 24 ranks highest in terms of demolition. The City Hall block would seem to rank highest in terms of historic preservation. Mr. Forbord requested staff to clarify what he meant by rehabilitation and the historic preservation of the City Hall block. Mr. Stock simply stated that the facades located on the City Hall block do have some historic integrity which is applicable to the historic river town theme. He noted that perhaps the facades could be maintained and the buildings from the facade back could be rehabilitated or perhaps demolished. Commissioner Forbord stated that he felt one of the priorities of the Downtown Committee was to create usable retail space. He doubted whether the buildings located on the City Hall block could be restored to meet that criteria. Discussion ensued on the historical value of the properties in the downtown area. 3 --)r- Commissioner Forbord suggested that staff get in contact with the consultant who is completing the Comprehensive Plan to see what ideas he has for the downtown area in terms of it's market viability. Commissioner Fonder stated that in his opinion the main objective of the Downtown Committee's plan should be to create usable retail space no matter what the outcome is. If some historical buildings have to suffer as a result of the ultimate goal to create usable retail space then so be it. He stated that we may be making it more complicated than what we need to by evaluating all these factors. The key issue is to get people into the downtown area and the only way to do that is with useable retail space. He stated that if our end product happens to look like a river town that would be great but that if it gets to be economically unfeasible then we have to reevaluate our original mission. Commissioner Kahleck suggested that we focus on the four blocks in the downtown area (Blocks 4, 23, 24 6 3) and develop a plan for those blocks. It was the consensus of the Committee to narrow the focus of the property inventory to the four blocks as suggested by Ms. Kahleck. Mr. Stock then shared with the Committee a property acquisition and condemnation policy that had been adopted by the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority in 1986. He noted that the policy sets forth a process in which acquisition and condemnation proceedings would occur by the City. He suggested that the Committee review the policy and make suggestions and/or amendments where necessary. Commissioner Forbord questioned what type of appraiser would be hired by the City. Mr. Stock stated that an M. I.A. appraiser would be the normal qualifications of the appraisor to be solicited by the City. Commissioner Forbord stated that there are several different qualifications for appraisors and appraisor guidelines. He stated that the type of guidelines the City wants followed should be clarified in the policy. Mr. Stock stated that this could be done and would be incorporated into the policy. Mr. Stock stated if there were no other changes to the policy that no additional action was required by the Downtown Ad Hoc Committee. Mr. Stock then gave a brief report on the development status of Arnie's. Bar. Mr. Stock noted that the property owners are in the process of bringing the property up to code and intend on reopening it as a bar. Councilmember Zak stated that the property owners have received Council endorsement of their project and they will be proceeding with the improvements in the near future. Mr. Stock also reported that an upholstery shop was being located in the Hergott building on the West end of the City Hall block. 4 d --�/0/1?1 Mr. Stock noted that this would be the first time in five years that all the buildings on the North side of First Avenue in the City Hall block were occupied at one time. Mr. Stock then shared with the Committee the highway project update. Mr. Stock stated that there was an error in the timing status of the Downtown Mini By-Pass as listed in the memo. He noted that the project would be starting in 1991 and completed in 1993 . Mr. Stock also shared with the Committee a memo from Dave Hutton regarding the mini by-pass and a second BEBO on the East end of the mini by-pass. Rahleck/Laurent moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:10 A.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock Recording Secretary /o/ y 5 MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION City Council Chambers Shakopee, MN June 7, 1989 Chairman Joos called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. with the following members present: Commissioners Jane DuBois, Terry Joos, Jon Albinson, Mark Miller and Charles Brandmire. Comm. Furrie was absent. Also present were Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant and Christen Converse, Chamber Executive Director. Albinson/DuBois moved to approve the minutes of the May 10, 1989 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock reported that at the last meeting of the CDC he stated that Arnie's Bar in Downtown Shakopee was sold. The interested parties have applied for a liquor license. If City Council gives preliminary approval to the license they will pursue the necessary building improvements. Minimum improvements to the building will include complete rest room refurbishing, electrical and heating systems replacement, and window and surface improvements. The estimated minimum cost to make these improvements is $20, 000. The interested property owners have met with the Building Inspector and they have been informed of the improvements that will be necessary before the building can be opened and operating with a liquor license. Commission DuBois questioned whether or not liquor establishments had to meet certain standards in order to be eligible for a liquor license. Mr. Stock responded in the affirmative. He noted that there is a certain dollar amount that must be placed into furnishings and fixtures in order for an establishment to be eligible for a liquor license. Mr. Stock also noted that persons requesting a liquor license are also investigated by the Police Department. Mr. Stock reported that the Mebco Project is moving ahead as planned. Industrial revenue bonds and tax-increment financing documents are in the process of being drafted and approved. Mebco plans to break ground some time in July. They still intend to complete the building before December 31, 1989. Mr. Stock reported that another business has inquired about locating it's company in Shakopee, the name of the firm is called Robert's Automatic Products, Inc. They are currently located on a two acre site in a 26, 000 sq. ft. facility in Edina. They presently have 85 employees. The average wage for the company is $10.50 an hour. They expect future employment growth to be approximately 125 employees. They are looking at several 4-5 acre sites in the industrial park and are intending to initially 1 construct a 40,000 sq. ft. facility with future expansion plans of 50,000 - 60,000 sq. ft. The value of the building which they are considering is approximately $1.6 million. The business owners have requested tax increment assistance. They also informed us that they were looking at sites in Chaska and Chanhassen. They noted that Chaska will provide them with 8 years of tax increment assistance in the form of a land write down. Mr. Stock noted that the company has not finalized their site selection but he was hopeful that they would consider Shakopee in light of the proposed highway improvements planned for this areas. He noted that their locating in Shakopee would be contingent upon their receipt of tax increment financing. They have not requested industrial revenue bond assistance. Commissioner Albinson stated that he has been approached by a firm that would like to construct a medical waste incinerator in Shakopee. Commissioner Albinson stated that the company will be making a presentation to City Council at their June 20, 1989 meeting. Commissioner Albinson stated that he hoped that City Council would remain open minded when listening to the company's proposal. He hoped that City Council had not drawn any conclusions prior to hearing a complete presentation. Commissioner Albinson stated that from what he has heard, the emissions from the incinerator will produce no more pollution than 3 Ford Bronco Pick-ups. Commissioner Miller questioned whether or not the plant would incinerate nuclear waste from medical facilities. Commissioner Albinson stated that he thought nuclear waste had to go to a special dump site. He did not expect that they would be incinerating nuclear waste. Mr. Stock questioned the value of the facility to be constructed. Commissioner Albinson stated that the approximate value was over $3 million. Commissioner Miller questioned whether or not the company had requested tax increment financing assistance. Commissioner Albinson responded in the negative. Commissioner Albinson noted that the facility would initially employ approximately 25 persons. Commission Albinson also noted that the facility would be used not only by other hospitals in the area but also by St. Francis. Commissioner Albinson noted that St. Francis is already incinerating some medical waste at the hospital in Shakopee. Mr. Stock stated that the Downtown Committee has not met since the CDC's last meeting. He noted that they will be meeting on June 21st. Commissioner Albinson gave a brief report on the Transportation Coalition. He updated the Committee on the status of the three major highway projects in Shakopee. Commissioner Albinson stated that he would distribute a memo to each of the Commissioners regarding the proposed time tables for the construction of the projects. Discussion then ensued on development and growth in Shakopee. Commissioner Miller questioned whether or not growth 2 could simply go around Shakopee. Commissioner Albinson stated that Shakopee will foresee significant growth within the next 10 years. Mr. Stock stated that he concurred with Commissioner Albinson but that he felt it would all hinge on the development and completion of the County Road 18 Project. Mr. Stock stated that he expected residential growth to remain relatively stable during the next 10 years. Commissioner DuBois stated that she felt that when the County Road Project is complete we will see more development on the East end of Shakopee that will move to the West. Discussion ensued on the availability of sewer and water to the County Road 18 Southerly By-Pass intersection. Mr. Stock stated that prior to expanding the Metropolitan Urban Service Area, the Metropolitan Council would have to be convinced that there was limited space available within the current MUSA Line for development. Commissioner Miller reported that he has not been able to spend much time on the park development planning process. He requested Mr. Stock to send him a copy of the park inventory. Commissioner Miller stated that he hoped to have a meeting of the subcommittee prior to the Commission's next meeting. Commissioner Albinson stated that he has not been able to coordinate a meeting of local business persons. He stated that he would organize a business appreciation breakfast meeting within the next two weeks. Mr. Stock stated that in today's paper there was an article regarding the sale of Canterbury Downs. He noted that there were several interested buyers. Commissioner Albinson stated that he was not at liberty to say who the interested buyers were in the racetrack. He did expect that a sale could be completed prior to the end of this season. Commissioner Albinson then shared with the Committee a marketing piece that Prior Lake had produced. He noted that Prior Lake is aggressively seeking commercial and industrial prospects to their community. He stated that at this time, he felt Shakopee was not in the position to pursue extensive marketing of the community. Commissioner DuBois stated that she felt we should do something. She stated that it does not hurt to continually ask City Council to fund a marketing program for our community. Commissioner Miller suggested that we initiate a press release campaign. He stated that whenever anything positive happens in our community we should send a press release to the major newspapers in this area as well as out state. Mr. Stock stated that he felt this was an excellent idea and that it could be pursued. Commissioner DuBois questioned when the new City Administrator would be selected. Mr. Stock stated that City Council would be narrowing down the list of finalists to three within the next week. He expected a decision within the next month. 3 Commissioner DuBois questioned staffing levels for 1990. She stated that she felt Shakopee City Hall was already under staffed in the Community Development and Planning areas. She requested staff to place this issue as well as the issue of a new City Hall on the Community Development Commission's next agenda. Discussion ensued on the establishment of a marketing program. Commissioner Albinson stated that perhaps it would be possible for the future owners of Scottland and the City of Shakopee to work together in developing a marketing campaign. Mr. Stock stated that he projected that the cost for a marketing campaign could be in excess of $20,000. It was the consensus of the Committee to place this issue on the Community Development Commission's next agenda. Commissioner DuBois offered to contact other communities in the area to determine how much they spend on marketing and promotions. Discussion ensued on the Comprehensive Plan update. Commissioner Albinson stated some concern about the pro development nature of the comp plan. He questioned whether or not City Council would approve the plan as it is currently drafted. Commissioner Miller stated that he doubted whether or not the plan would be approved immediately. Commissioner DuBois requested staff to explain the process that would be followed in approving the comp plan. Mr. Stock stated that once the Committee has approved the plan, he expected City Council to hold a public hearing on it. Following the public hearing, City Council could either approve or amend the plan. Once City Council has approved the plan it has to be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for approval. Mr. Stock stated that if everything went smoothly, the plan could be approved by the end of this year. Mr. Stock stated that the next meeting of the Committee would be on July 5, 1989 at 5:00 P.M. Albinson/Brandmire moved to adjourn the meeting at 6:30 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Barry A. Stock Recording Secretary 4 7 PLANNING COMMISSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SPECIAL MEETING MAY 25, 1989 COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Forbord, Kahleck, Rockne, Stafford, Allen COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Czaja, Foudray OTHERS PRESENT: Doug Wise, City Planner, Sharon Swenson, Recording Secretary I. Roll Call Chairman Forbord called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M. and roll call was taken as noted above. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Allen/Stafford moved that the agenda be approved as submitted. Motion passed unanimously. III. CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR DOROTHY LOONAN'S REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A DAY CARE FACILITY AT 1142 CANTERBURY ROAD. MOTION: Rockne/Allen moved to continue the public hearing for the conditional user permit for the day care facility. Motion passed unanimously. Wise gave a brief summary of the request. He stated the ordinance was now in effect that governs this item, so it can be acted upon this evening. Wise indicated that the outdoor play area would result in the loss of 8 parking spaces. Forbord quoted a previous statement from staff findings that noted a concern for traffic in the area. He asked why the play area was in the middle and not in the node area where there is less traffic/parking. Loonan answered that the area Forbord suggested near the node would not always be owned by the present owner. The Commission discussed other possible locations for the play area. Commission members expressed their concerns about the safety of locating the play area in the parking lot. 1 Kahleck asked how other children would be kept out of the area. Loonan answered that it would be locked when not in use. Forbord expressed concerns about locating the play area in close proximity to underground fuel tanks in front of the gas station. He added he did not feel this was the best situation for the children. Wise said the fuel tanks were approximately 150 feet away and the Fire Chief had reviewed the request. Jon Albinson, Scottland Inc. , came forward and said that Mrs. Loonan is controlled by state guidelines on the life/safety issue. If the gas pumps were a problem, they would not issue her a license to operate. MOTION: Rockne/Stafford moved that the public hearing on the Loonan request be closed. Motion passed unanimously. MOTION: Rockne/Stafford moved that Resolution #563 for the day care center be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The facility shall be licensed by the Minnesota Department of Human Services and provide the City with a copy of the license. 2 . The facility shall meet all fire and life safety codes. 3 . The outdoor play area must be completely fenced and sturdy barriers provided between the play area and the parking lot. Said barriers must be approved by the City Building Inspector. 4. The crosswalk between the facility and the outdoor play area shall be identified with signage and striping painted on the pavement. Roll Call vote: Ayes: Kahleck, Rockne, Stafford, Allen Noes: Forbord Motion was passed 4-1. IV. DISCUSSION A. PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURES AND EDUCATION Wise said Chairman Forbord has suggested four items relating to procedures and education of the Commission: 2 1. Jointly going to another Planning Commission meeting - it could be a useful lesson on their operation and business procedures. 2. Government Training Service has a program for Planning Commissioners. They do have in-house sessions also. A one day in-house session is about $800.00. An in-house session should involve the Planning Commission, City Council, and staff involved with Planning issues. 3 . A note book system could be set up for the Commissioners to make information more readily accessible when questions arise. The notebooks would be delivered to each Commission member the week before the meeting and each Commissioner would leave the notebook at the end of the meeting. 4. A registration card and informational sheet could be used for attendees who wish to speak at public hearings. Forbord noted that by such methods, the way the meetings are conducted could be improved. He felt too much time was spent discussing the issues. The procedure needs to be strengthened. The Commission discussed the various items suggested. An informal voice vote on the 4 areas of education and procedures was taken: Item 1: 4 aye, Rockne - no vote. Item 2 : 5 aye Item 3 : 5 aye Item 4: 3 aye, Allen-Rockne - no vote. B. CODE REQUIREMENTS re• ALLOWING METAL BUILDINGS Forbord felt there was a problem allowing metal buildings in B-1, B-2, and the Industrial Park area. He cited the example of Savage and asked the Commissioners if that was what they wanted. Savage has since amended their code regarding these buildings. Forbord felt it would be desirable to eliminate metal buildings (in areas other than agricultural) for appearance reasons. Allen said he did not like the corrugated metal buildings, but he had seen some that were tastefully done. He felt he would not be willing to say no to metal buildings. Concrete buildings are not always attractive either. 3 Forbord said he agreed that even concrete block was not attractive. Wise suggested that this issue be forwarded to the consultant working on the comprehensive plan update and that he make recommendations to the task force. Jon Albinson, Scottland Inc. , came forward and said that the proposal to not allow metal buildings would be in the best interest of everyone. At the present time, Chaska requires textured block on 3 sides. All the commissioners were in favor of having the consultant review the issue and to see what standards have been adopted by other communities. V. OTHER BUSINESS A. RECORDING OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Wise noted that state statutes say that these permits should be recorded, but even if they are not, they are still valid. The Staff met to outline procedures to move ahead with this. It will be more difficult with torrance property, but this is only about 10% of property. The changes will be reviewed by the attorney and County Recorder before being implemented. B. HORSES IN THE R-1 DISTRICT Forbord noted that this question has come up two times in the last year. The matter needs to be looked at. Wise said that horses are currently allowed on 2 1/2 acres with a conditional use permit. One option could be to expand the minimum acreage to 5 or 10 acres. An opinion could be gotten from the consultants working on the comprehensive plan. Allen suggested other communities be checked with also. Rockne noted that he was here when the existing plan was put into effect. Many hours were spent on this matter at that time. Forbord felt regulation could come through zoning and the amount of acres required for such use. Maybe a sunset clause could be incorporated. He suggested Wise check into this and get back to the Commissioners at a later meeting. 4 7 C. ATTENDANCE AT COMMISSION MEETINGS Forbord noted that there had been a problem with attendance. Each Commissioner needs to ask him/her self if they are acting as originally intended. Six members should always be in attendance - preferable seven. Allen said that this is no longer a community of shop owners. Many residents have complex jobs and commute long distances. Forbord said often times the discussion could have been better if more members were present. He would request an arrival time of at least 10 minutes early. V. CHANGE IN MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 1989 Forbord noted the change in the date for the July meeting (to July 6th) . VI. ADJOURNMENT Kahleck/Allen moved that the Commission adjourn. Motion passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:25 P.M. 5 7 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE PLANNING COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, MN June 8, 1989 Chrmn. Forbord called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M. , with Comm. Czaja, Foudray and Kahleck present. Late: Comm. Allen and Rockne. Absent: Comm. Stafford. Also present: City Planner, Doug Wise and City Engineer, Dave Hutton. Kahleck/Czaja moved to approve the agenda with addition of the "Discussion" items, as suggested by Chrmn. Forbord. Motion carried. Kahleck/Foudray moved to approve the meeting minutes of May 4, 1989. Motion carried with Comm. Czaja abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONING OF SHIELY PROPERTY -- Foudray/Kahleck moved to open the public hearing to consider the rezoning of property located in the NW 1/4 of Sec. 11 and p/o the SW 1/4 of Sec. 2, Twn. 115, Range 22, from I-1 to I-2 . Motion carried. City Planner gave a background report stating the reason for the rezoning request is to allow for a possible conditional use for Hardrives to locate an asphalt processing plant on the property to the south of the existing processing yard. Bob Bieraugel, representative from Shiely, was present for discussion. Comm. Czaja questioned how approval of the rezoning might affect the existing conditional use permit for Shiely to operate the mine. He was informed that nothing would change. Comm. Czaja also questioned the committee which had been formed to study the reclamation process and if the rezoning would change the goals of that committee. He was again informed that nothing would change relative to the existing conditional use permit to Shiely. Chrmn. Forbord asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Foudray/Kahleck moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Foudray/Kahleck moved to recommend to the City Council that the 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 from I-1 to I-2 . Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING (CONT) - CONDITIONAL USE PERMT FOR HARDRIVES, INC. Czaja/Kahleck moved to continue the public hearing to consider approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a hot mix asphalt plant and structures in excess of 45 feet in height to be located upon the J. L. Shiely property at 6898 East Highway 101. Motion carried. Proceedings of the June 8, 1989 Planning Commission Page -2- city Planner stated that after opening the public hearing of May 4 , 1989 and discussing the request the Planning Commission passed a motion to continue the public hearing until their meeting of June 8, 1989 to allow consideration of a rezoning request. Because the action on the rezoning had just been recommended, the public hearing should be continued to the July 6, 1989 meeting to allow action by the City Council on the rezoning request. Comm. Allen arrived at 8: 00 P.M. , and took his seat. Comm. Czaja asked that the noise issue be addressed in the staff report for July 6th. Chrmn. Forbord questioned the controls of emissions from this plant. Steve Hall, Hardrives, was present for discussion. Chrmn. Forbord asked if there were comments from the audience. There were none. Foudray/Kahleck moved to continue the public hearing on the Hardrives request for a conditional use permit for a hot mix asphalt plant to the July 6, 1989 meeting. Motion carried with Comm. Allen abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR HORSES (HAYES) Czaja/Kahleck moved to open the public hearing to consider approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the keeping of horses on Lot 2, Block 1, Kubes 2nd Addition in an R-1 Zone. Motion carried. City Planner stated that a maximum of eight horses is allowed on a 10 acre parcel in an R-1 zone. He also stated this parcel lies on the outskirts of the City. Chrmn. Forbord asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Foudray/Allen moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Foudray/Allen offered Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 564, and moved for its adoption subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall keep no more than eight horses on the site at any time. 2. The horses shall be confined to a fenced in area with the minimum height of the fence at 3 .5 feet and to be constructed of wood, wire or other durable materials. Motion carried. Proceedings of the Shakopee June 8, 1989 Planning Commission Page -3- PUBLIC HEARING - AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 241, BETASEED City Planner stated that the applicant is currently under an existing conditional use permit granted January 24, 1980. He stated the existing conditions of the conditional use permit will stand other than well inspection by the City Engineer. This is now the responsibility of the City Building Inspector and the conditional use permit should so reference. He further stated the applicant will be required to meet the current landscaping ordinance by January 1990 (five years after it was adopted) . Duane Melling, President of Betaseed, Inc. , was present for discussion. He stated he believes they currently are in compliance with the Landscaping Ordinance other than the planting of a tree every 50 feet in front of the facility. He explained the procedure of their research on the Cercospora Leaf Spot Fungus and its being of no danger to the environment. Chrmn. Forbord asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Comm. Rockne arrived at 8:25 P.M. and took his seat. Forbord/Allen moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried with Comm. Rockne abstaining. Czaja/Fordray moved for approval of the amendment of Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 241, subject to the following conditions: 1. The exterior storage of equipment be screened from residential properties. 2. The provision of a DNR permit for a well, or if no permit is required, the applicant must satisfy same criteria as required by the DNR to the satisfaction of the City Building Inspector. 3 . Provision of a statement from the State Department of Agriculture or the University of Minnesota Extension Service ensuring that the communicability of the Cercospora Leaf Spot Fungus does not present a hazard to surrounding people or plant life. 4 . No additional access to the property from County Road 17 shall be allowed to accomodate this expansion. 5. No work shall occur within County Road 17 right-of-way without an approved permit from the Scott County Highway Department. Proceedings of the June 8 , 1989 Shakopee Planning Commission Page -4- 6. Eight additional parking spaces shall be required at the site to bring the total number of spaces to 32 . 7 . Landscaping be brought into conformance prior to the issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy. Motion carried with Comm. Rockne abstaining. PUBLIC HEARING -- AMENDMENT TO CODE Czaja/Foudray moved to open the public hearing to consider amending the City Zoning Code to allow: 1. Animal hospitals and veterinary clinics in the B-2 District; and 2. Amend Section 11.03 , Subd. 3 to add "Lots may be excluded from the width and area requirements if party walls are utilized or if the adjacent buildings are planned to be constructed as an integral structure". Motion carried. City Planner stated that at the April 20, 1989 meeting, Mr. Clete Link appeared before the Planning Commission requesting changes to the B-2 zoning district to allow for construction on his property located in this zone. Mr. Link requested that animal hospitals and veterinary clinics be allowed in the B-2 zone as a conditional use and also that changes be made to the Code to allow for the construction of a buildings with party walls between individually owned parcels of property within the B-2 zoning district. Clete Link was present for discussion. Discussion ensued on party wall exterior facade until adjoining facilities would occupy the balance of the site. Comm. Kahleck raised several issues of concern in not being able to see the overall plan. A PUD was suggested for this site. City Planner stated that each individual Building Permit would have to meet their own criteria. Discussion continued on the combining of the two amendments in one public hearing and the recommendation of one specific action for both requests. Chrmn. Forbord asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Mr. Link stated that the animal clinic should be office facilities for "pets" . It was the concensus this had to be defined in Code. Foudray/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion failed. Proceedings of the Shakopee June 8, 1989 Planning Commission Page -5- Foudray/Allen moved to close the public hearing on Item #1, to consider amending Code to allow animal hospitals and veterinary clinics in the B-2 district and to continue the public hearing on the amendment to Sec. 11.03, Subd. 3 . Motion failed. Rockne/Czaja moved to continue the public hearing to July 6, 1989 with directives to staff to address the issues as two separate actions with more comprehensive information. Motion carried. Foudray/Czaja moved for a 5-minute recess at 8 :55 P.M. Motion carried. Allen/Kahleck moved to reconvene at 9:00 P.M. Motion carried. FINAL PLAT OF MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION - The City Planner reviewed the proposed final plat with the Commission. He stated that the City Engineer has recommended an additional condition be added requiring the developer to provide a North/South storm sewer easement between the Upper Valley Drainageway and the proposed by-pass. Joel Cooper, Pioneer Engineering, was present for discussion and responded to the condition recommended by the City Engineer for a north/south storm sewer easement, as has been suggested by MnDOT. He stated he didn't believe the owners were currently in a position to grant this easement. Foudray/Rockne moved to recommend final plat approval of Meadows 2nd Addition, subject to the following conditions: 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 rquirements of the SPUC Manager. B. Water system to be installed in accordane 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 requirement of the design criteria and standard specifications of the City of Shakopee. Proceedings of the June 8, 1989 Shakopee Planning Commission Page -6- 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 foot 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 be constructed in accordamce 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 than 10 percent 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. Motion carried. FINAL PLAT APPROVAL OF CANTERBURY PARK 3RD ADDITION - City Planner stated that at the May 4, 1989 public hearing, the Commission recommended approval of the 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 a final plat. Jon Albinson, Scottland Inc, had questions on the execution of an agreement or petition giving the City the right to construct all sanitary and storm sewer improvements necessary to serve Lot 2 and the statement of "at such time as it is in the City's best interest". He added this condition appears that the applicant is giving up their rights. City Engineer responded stating the applicant had the alternative of putting in the improvement at the time of platting. Mr. Albinson said he was amenable to the condition as presented. Proceedings of the June 8, 1989 Shakopee Planning Commission Page -7- Foudray/Allen moved to recommend final plat approval for Canterbury Park 3rd Addition, subject to the following conditions: 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 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. Motion carried. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS FOR 1990-95/C.I. BUDGET - City Planner stated all information was not available for tonight's meeting and this item should have been deleted from the agenda. Proceedings of the June 8, 1989 Shakopee Planning Commission Page -8- Czaja/Kahleck moved to table any recommendation on the Capital improvement projects until the July 6, 1989 meeting. Motion carried. DISCUSSION - Discussion was held on changing the ordinance to require public hearings notices be sent to all residents within 500 feet rather than the existing 350 feet. City Planner stated that this could be an added expense not only to the City but to the applicant as well and that the City was complying with State Law. Foudray/Rockne moved staff research this and bring back to the Planning Commission for further discussion. Further discussion ensued. Comm. Foudray called for the question. Motion carried. Discussion was held on information presented to the Planning Commission which was not inclusive for the case. It was stated that additional material should be available at the time of Planning Commission consideration or the item should not be placed on the agenda and that this be indicated to the applicants. Foudray/Kahleck moved that staff supply the Planning Commission the application forms for review and additional comments. Motion carried. Discussion was held on the adoption of a Development Review Committee within City Staff. This committee composed of Department Heads would meet with all applicants to go over the application and keep the developer updated on all items necessary for the Planning Commission. Czaja/Foudray moved that City Staff bring back written information as to the procedure and functions of this Committee and staff's recommendation as to this being a viable body and giving specific examples as to where this Committee would be useful. Motion carried. City Planner stated that the consultant is finalizing the first draft of the new Comprehensive Development Plan. Comm. Czaja voiced code enforcement concerns in the rural areas where they are being treated with urban guidelines. He will pursue this issue at a later date. Proceedings of the June 8 , 1989 Shakopee Planning Commission Page -9- Foudray/Rockne moved to adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10: 10 P.M. Jane VanMaldeghem Recording Secretary PROCEDINGS OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS Regular Session Shakopee, MN June 8, 1989 Chrmn. Forbord called the meeting to order at 7: 30 P.M. , with Comm. Czaja, Foudray and Kahleck present. Absent: Comm. Rockne, Stafford, and Allen. Also present: City Planner, Doug Wise. Cjaza/Foudray moved to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried. Foudray/Kahleck moved to approve to meeting minutes of May 4, 1989 . Motion carried with Comm. Czaja abstaining. There was no business to conduct. Foudray/Kahleck moved to adjourn. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7: 33 P.M. Jane VanMaldeghem Recording Secretary MINUTES OF THE HOUSING ADVISORY & APPEALS BOARD REGULAR SESSION SHABOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 24, 1989 Newton Parker, Housing Inspector, called the meeting to order at 7: 00 p.m. with Board members, Jim Link, Randy Laurent, Gene Juergens, Bob Turek, Dale Dahlke in attendance, and Leroy Houser, Building official also attending. The agenda was approved unanimously. Laurent/Turek moved that Jim Link be appointed Board Chairman. Roll Call: Ayes: Laurent, Juergens, Turek, Dahlke Noes: Link Motion carried. Dahlke/Turek moved the Gene Juergens be appointed Vice-Chairman. Roll Call: Ayes: Link, Laurent, Turek, Dahlke Noes: Juergens Motion carried. Laurent/Turek moved that Dale Dahlke be appointed Second Vice- Chairman. Roll Call: Ayes: Link, Laurent, Juergens, Turek Noes: Dahlke Motion carried. Mr. Parker gave a brief presentation to inform the Board on their duties. The main point Mr. Parker talked about was the responsibility of the Board to rule on the side of safety. He explained the buildings must meet the codes enforced at the time of construction (or last remodeling) and that they must provide a reasonably safe living environment for their occupants. If a past code is now considered hazardous, then the building must be corrected to a reasonably safe condition concerning that item. Reasonably safe, however, may mean something less than the present code. Mr. Parker then asked for questions from the Board members. Mr. Link asked about field inspections. Mr. Parker replied that under certain circumstances field inspection would be made. It is a case by case determination. Mr. Turek requested more lead time if an on-site inspection were needed. Mr. Parker responded that more advance notice will be provided in the future. This meeting was put together under short notice because of the hearing. A two week minimum advance notice will be given. He also suggested that a meeting be held regularly at two month intervals. Housing Advisory & Appeals Board April 24, 1989 Page -2- Mr. Laurent asked about Board member liability. Mr. Parker responded that a good faith effort on the Board's part would shift all liability to the City. Mr. Houser, Building official, added that the City is fully responsible for Board action. He further stated that the options considered are usually limited. Mr. Parker closed by saying Board members should feel free to call about cases to be heard, for more information, and for explanations of items not familiar to their expertise. Mr. Parker presented the Board with rules outline for discussion. Juergens/ Dahlke moved that the meeting be conducted following Roberts Rules of Order, newly revised, and, that the hearings be conducted following staff outline (items 1-10) found in memo dated 4-24-89. Roll Call: Ayes: Link, Laurent, Juergens, Turek, Dahlke Noes: None Motion carried unanimously. APPEALS PUBLIC HEARING - DAVID CHASE Laurent/Turek moved to open the Appeals Hearing on Mr. David Chase. Roll Call: Ayes: Link, Laurent, Juergens, Turek, Dahlke Noes: None Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Parker presented the case as outlined in the brief included in the Board packet. Staff recommended the vent be brought up to the State Code. Mr. Houser presented some alternatives without recommendation, (though he emphasized that a permanent vent is best) for the Boards consideration: 1. Install loop vent that loops under floor to main vent. 2. Require maintained program on existing atmosphere vent. 3. Install standard code approved vent. Chairman Link asked for Board's comments. Hearing none he asked for appellants remarks. Mr. David Chase presented his case asking for approval to use the existing atmospheric vents. He would welcome a semi-annual plumber check of the valves if allowed. His main concern is ripping through existing structure, some of which is brick. Housing Advisory & Appeals Board April 24, 1989 Page -3- Mr. Juergens ensued discussion on the possibility of using a loop vent. Mr. Houser suggested three options: 1. Regular venting. 2 . Loop vent. 3 . Inspection maintenance program. Mr. Turek commented that if allowed the atmospheric vents must be replaced by code approved venting if and when the building were sold. [Staff Note: Rental property is inspected periodically and therefore would not necessarily be inspected at time of sale. An inspection would be made at sale if 3/4 of the inspection period had passed, if there were any complaints against the property, if the type of occupancy was changing, or if the property file stipulated an inspection at sale due to special circumstances such as the proposed maintenance agreement] Discussion ensued on termination of maintenance agreement if building were to be sold. chairman Link and Mr. Turek expressed concern about dragging out or postponing an inevitable permanent correction. Mr. Chase was very interested in the loop vent idea and stated that he would look into the possibility with his plumbers. Mr. Turek stated that codes should be followed as closely as possible for consistency and to enhance the reputation of housing in Shakopee. He also stated he is in agreement with the loop vent if workable. Mr. Laurent asked about mechanics of the maintenance option. Mr. Houser said Mr. Parker would draw up specifics on administering a maintenance program. Mr. Parker would allow a limited maintenance program (up to 3 years) where upon permanent venting must be in place. Chairman Link favored an immediate permanent solution. [Staff Note: The maintenance program would consist of a deposit of $230 . 00 and a requirement for the owner to submit proof (invoices, report or other) that valves were inspected by licensed persons. If proof is not obtained on time then the City would have their own plumber inspect the vents, and the maintenance program would terminate as of that date, and permanent venting within 10 days would be ordered. Costs for any City inspections would be charged against the deposit] Housing Advisory & Appeals Board April 24 , 1989 Page -4- Turek/Juergens moved to: 1) allow Mr. Chase the option of using a loop vent if cost is under $750.00, and if over that amount, he may still do the loop vent; or, he may choose to go on a semi- yearly maintenance program, as directed by staff, for a term of two years from today - where upon an approved permanent venting system must be in place; 2) Mr. Chase has 30 days from today to report to the Building Department with his decision and he must submit at that time his plans for permanent venting, if that option is chosen. Roll Call: Ayes: Link. Laurent, Juergens, Turek, Dahlke Noes: None Motion carried unanimously. Turek/Laurent moved to close the hearing. Roll Call: Ayes: Link, Laurent, Juergens, Turek, Dahlke Noes: None Motion carried unanimously. Hearing Evaluation: Mechanics of the hearing was discussed. Dahlke/Juergens moved to adjourn to Monday, June 26, 1989 at 7: 00 P.M. Motion carried unanimously. Newton Parker Recording Secretary PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS ADVISORY COMMISSION Regular Session Shakopee, Mn March 27, 1989 Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. with Commissioners Davis, Moonen, Abeln and Harrison present. Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; Steve Stolen, United Cable Manager, Bill Lepley, Christopher O'Brian and Mike Schmitt were also present. Harrison/Moonen moved to approve the minutes of the January 23, 1989 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Stock stated that the request for proposal deadline for the operation and management of the public access studio was March 15, 1989. Two proposals were received. Proposals were submitted by Mr. Bill Lepley representing New Frontier Productions Inc. and from Mr. Mike Schmitt representing M.S. Enterprise. Mr. Stock stated that in an effort to determine which proposal should be recommended to the committee, he established in consultation with Mr. Ziegler and Chairman Anderson a set of evaluation criteria to rank the proposals. Mr. Stock stated that based on his preliminary analysis, and the ranking system utilized, Mr. Lepley's proposal received the highest ranking. Mr. Stock stated that he has set up interviews with each of the prospective providers for the Commission this evening. Mr. Stock then introduced Mr. Bill Lepley representing New Frontier Productions Inc. Chairman Anderson suggested that we go through the proposal on an item by item basis and address questions to New Frontier Productions as they come up. Mr. Lepley then went through the studio staffing plan as specified in his proposal. Mr. Stock questioned how much use there was of the studio between 12:00 noon and 4:30 P.M. on Saturdays. Mr. Lepley stated that quite a few individuals utilize the afternoon on Saturday to pick up and return equipment. Mr. O'Brian also stated that on Saturday afternoons there is quite a bit of editing that goes on in the studio. Commissioner Harrison questioned the educational background of the studio managers. Mr. O'Brian stated that Beth Griffin and himself both have communications degrees. Commissioner Anderson questioned whether or not the reports as specified in the proposal have been submitted by New Frontier Productions. Mr. Stock responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Anderson questioned whether or not New Frontier Production was planning on meeting one group a month to promote the use of the studio. Mr. Lepley stated that it is their goal to meet with one community organization each month but in all reality, sometimes they meet with two organizations in one month and none in the next. Mr. Lepley stated that next year they are looking at initiating a video club for students at the Junior High. Commissioner Moonen questioned whether or not Mr. Lepley has seen any growth in the use of the studio as compared to previous years. Mr. Lepley stated that he has seen tremendous growth in the use of the studio since it has been taken over by the access corporation. He noted that when the cable company was operating the studio they did not have any desire or commitment to keep it running. Mr. Lepley also noted that in the last six months the physiosophy of operating the studio has changed some what. In the past, public access studio managers were developing programs for individuals upon request. At the present time, the existing studio management is attempting to have interested persons pursue developing programs on their own. The primary purpose of the studio personnel is to assist and teach Shakopee residents how to use the equipment so that they can pursue broadcasting on their own. Mr. Anderson stated that under contract costs, New Frontier has not listed a price for the second year of the contract. Mr. Lepley stated that the second year contract price would be negotiated at a later date. Mr. Stock noted that if the Access Corporation desires to increase New Frontier's contract cost in year two, the City Council would also have to approve it at that time. He suggested that a price be negotiated at this time. Mr. Anderson noted that the proposal specifications specified a two year contract. He suggested that the second year price be determined at this time. Mr. Lepley then agreed to maintain the first year contract price for the second year of the contract. Mr. Anderson questioned whether the equipment that was listed on the attachment was the property of the Access Corporation or New Frontier Productions. Mr. Lepley stated that the equipment was the property of New Frontier Productions. He also noted that New Frontier Productions was more then willing to share any equipment purchased by them with persons who may have the need to utilize the public access studio. Mr. Anderson then thanked Mr. Lepley for submitting a proposal. Mr. Schmitt arrived for his interview at 7: 45 p.m. Chairman Anderson stated that he would like to go through Mr. Schmitt' s proposal in the same fashion that was utilized in the first interview. Commissioner Harrison requested Mr. Schmitt to state the background of the individuals who will be staffing the studio in his proposal. Mr. Schmitt stated that he intentionally left out the names of the persons who would be operating the studio because he felt it was more important to put forth in the proposal what could be done with the studio in terms of production and operation as compared to who the people are that are running it. He did state however that Steve Anderson would /6 be the principal studio manager. He noted that Mr. Anderson has a communications degree and good marketing background. Mr. Schmitt stated that Greg Osterdik and Mike Patchin would be hired for play back operation. Commissioner Harrison requested Mr. Schmitt to explain how he proposed to operate the studio in terms of the provision of assistance to Shakopee residents who may have a need to use the equipment. Mr. Schmitt stated that his major focus in operating and managing the studio was to provide public access programing support. He was not that interested in the business end of it where he would utilize the equipment for business purposes. Mr. Schmitt proposed to assist persons in developing their program for a fee. He noted that, Shakopee residents would of course have the option to develop their program on their own with technical assistance provided from M.S. personnel at no cost. Mr. Schmitt felt that this approach would provide the Access Corporation with funds to acquire new equipment. He also noted that this would help insure that more programing would be done. Mr. Schmitt then addressed how revenues would be handled that were collected by M.S. Enterprise. He stated that his proposal was based on 50% of net revenues. He stated that he was flexible and would be willing to donate 10% of gross which ever the Cable Commission and/or Access Corporation preferred. Commissioner Abeln questioned whether or not they could legally charge residents who were interested in doing programing. Mr. Schmitt stated that he was not charging for the actual programing or staff time that would be required by M.S. Enterprise, the fee would be for the rental of the equipment. Mr. Stock stated that he thought this approach would be legal and that it was no different than what New Frontier Productions does when they lease equipment to private companies. Chairman Ziegler questioned that if New Frontier would be generating revenues from persons who would pay to develop programs for public access, what would M.S. Enterprises incentive be to encourage persons to do programing on their own. Mr. Schmitt responded by stating that he felt the most important thing that they could do would be to make it known that this equipment is available and that it was fairly simple to operate. He felt that once people see how easy it is to operate the equipment they will not want to pay M.S. Enterprises for the production. They will rather pursue the production on their own with their own volunteers. Mr. Schmitt then noted one other major difference between his proposal and what was requested in terms of a financial performance security. He stated that he was proposing to utilize the $1500 performance security to buy equipment for the studio that would become the property of the Access Corporation. He did not feel that there was a need to have $1500 sitting in an escrow account for non compliance on their part. Mr. Schmitt then summarized his proposal and stated that he would not come back personally to operate the studio in the future but that he was looking at the possibility of relocating to the Metropolitan Area in the future and that he planned on pursuing his computer career. Mr. Schmitt thanked the Commission for the opportunity to present his proposal. Mr. Stock then suggested that the Committee go through the evaluation form. Mr. Stock stated that he has changed his mind on the ranking for revenue generation with the new information that was presented in the interviews. He felt that since M.S. Enterprise was willing to contribute 10% of gross that they should be ranked #1 in this category and New Frontier should be ranked #2 since they are only willing to offer 5% of gross. Mr. Stock did note however that this would not change the overall ranking and that New Frontier Productions would still be ranked as the best provider. The Commission concurred with Mr. Stock's analysis in this area. Discussion then ensued on Mr. Schmitt's proposal for operating the studio and providing assistance to residents for a fee. It was the consensus of the Committee that this was a good concept but that they felt Mr. Lepley's approach would be more attractive to Shakopee residents. Commissioner Davis also expressed concern about who would actually be running the studio with Mr. Schmitt living in Iowa. Concern was also raised over Mr. Schmitt's proposal to not provide a financial security but cash for equipment. Mr. Ziegler stated that he felt as Chairman of the Access Corporation he would rather have a fund to draw on in the event of non compliance. The Commission concurred with staff's ranking and analysis of the proposals. Discussion ensued on the current condition of the studio in terms of appearance. Mr. Stock suggested that contract language be drafted to insure that the studio is kept up and maintained in a fashion which is respectable. The Commission directed staff to include language in the agreement to address this issue. Discussion then ensued on the staffing proposals of each of the providers. It was the consensus of the Commission that Mr. Lepley has greater knowledge and understanding of the equipment and that the staffing proposed by Mr. Lepley is a known quantity. Harrison/Abeln moved to request the appropriate City officials to negotiate an agreement with New Frontier Productions Inc. for the provision of public access studio management and operation and recommend to the Public Access Corporation that they enter into an agreement with New Frontier Productions Inc. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Steve Stolen, Manager of United Cable Television of Shakopee and Chaska then gave a brief update on the cable transaction with Nortel. Mr. Stolen noted that things are moving ahead and he expected Nortel to begin negotiating with the City within the /Z) next month. Mr. Stolen stated that he has not made a commitment to either Nortel or United Cable Television in terms of future employment. Commissioner Moonen questioned whether there would be any adverse impact on the City as a result of the cable sale. Mr. Stock stated that the City of Shakopee had the final say to approve or deny the sale. Prior to approving or denying said sale, the City would attempt to negotiate with Nortel to insure that there would not be an adverse impact on our current cable operation and subscribers. Mr. Stock stated that he felt the only thing the City would have any control over would be the continued provision of equipment and operation of the access studio. The remainder of the City's authority to regulate cable was stripped by the 1984 Cable Communications Act. Mr. Stolen then gave an update on the extensions plan and for this year. He also noted that subscriber rates would be increased effective April 1, 1989. Mr. Stock stated that the Shakopee Showcase would be held on April 17, 1989. He questioned whether or not the Cable Commission would like to have a booth at the Showcase. Mr. Stock suggested that the Cable Commission booth be held in conjunction with the Shakopee Public Access Corporation. It was the consensus of the Commission to combine the booths. New Frontier Production staffing would be requested to staff the booth. Mr. Stock then questioned whether or not the members of the Cable Commission had any objection to becoming members of the Shakopee Access Corporation. Mr. Stock proposed that the Access Corporation could then meet prior to any Cable Communications Advisory Commission meetings. This would provide a regular forum for the Access Corporation to meet and discuss business. Mr. Stock stated that he felt the responsibilities of the Cable Commission and Access Corporation over lapped and that it was ridiculous to have two separate groups. It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff to investigate whether or not an amendment had to be made to the Access Corporation Charter and/or By-Laws to allow the proposed change. Mr. Stock stated that he would investigate this issue and bring it back to the Cable Commission for their discussion at their next meeting. Davis/Moonen moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Barry Stock Recording Secretary avIERTy STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE INCA. JUN!2 ' - 1339 June 23, 1989 GIT'( -' '-- To: Mayors, City Managers and City Clerks of all Minnesota Cities As you know, Governor Perpich has vetoed the omnibus tax bill passed by the 1989 state legislature. The Governor has said that he will call a special session of the legislature in September to consider another tax bill for 1989 if he and legislative leaders agree in advance on provisions to reform Minnesota's property tax system. The veto of the 1989 tax bill and the possibility that a special session of the legislature will pass a new tax bill for 1989 will affect: • state aid amounts for property tax payable in 1990 for all cities; • levy limits for payable 1990 for cities with populations over 2,500; • levy limits for payable 1990 for cities with populations under 2,500 which are receiving aid from taconite production tax revenues; and • actions which cities with populations over 2,500 are required to take in connection with the preparation by counties of truth in taxation notices — also referred to as proposed property tax bills. In general, the veto of the 1989 tax bill means that unless the legislature in a special session•, passes and the Governor signs another tax bill, cities will receive state aid amounts and will be subject to levy limits and truth in taxation provisions which were set for payable 1990 by the law now in effect — the tax bill enacted in law in 1988. The attached summary and instructions explain what cities must do in going through the budget-setting process for payable 1990 and in fulfilling their responsibilities in connection with truth in taxation as required by the 1988 tax law. Beyond that, you will notice in the instructions that I have used the authority granted by law to the Commissioner of Revenue to extend deadline dates by which local governments are required to certify proposed and actual property tax levies to the county auditor. While you are required to go through your budget-setting process on the basis of aid amounts and levy limits specified by the 1988 tax law, I think it's highly likely that there will be a special session of the legislature and that it will pass legislation which will include the same levy limits which were in the vetoed 1989 tax bill. AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Mayors, City Managers and City Clerks June 23, 1989 Page 2 As a result, I encourage you to develop budgets for payable 1990 based on two contingencies — one in which the levy limits in the 1988 tax law apply, and one in which the levy limits in the vetoed 1989 tax bill apply. To provide you with the information to plan for both contingencies, on August 15 the Department will certify each city's property tax levy for payable 1990 based on the 1988 tax law. And, in addition, on September 1 the Department will notify each city of its property tax levy for payable 1990 based on levy limits in the vetoed 1989 tax bill — the same levy limits which I expect to be enacted into law by a special session of the legislature in September. If— as I expect — the special session enacts the levy limits which were in the vetoed 1989 tax bill, I would also expect the legislature to further extend the deadlines by which local governments are required to certify their proposed and actual property tax levies. This will make it easier for local governments to respond to the new legislation, and will permit them to prepare and mail property tax bills in sufficient time for taxpayers to be prepared to pay their first-half property tax bills on May 15, 1990. Please observe the enclosed instructions. In particular, you will want to be sure to observe the truth in taxation instructions fully in order to avoid being required to limit your property tax levy for payable 1990 to no more than the amount you.levied for payable 1989. If you have any questions about what you are required to do, please don't hesitate to call the Department's Local Government Services Divisions at 612-296-5138. Sincerely, John James Commissioner l � Minnesota Department of Revenue Summary of Property Tax Developments and Instructions to Cities June 23, 1989 (Numbered for reference) 1 The veto of the 1989 tax bill means that all provisions of the tax law passed by the 1988 state legislature concerning state aid amounts for all cities, levy limits for cities with populations over 2,500, levy limits for cities with populations under 2,500 which are receiving aid from taconite production tax revenues and truth in taxation requirements for cities with populations over 2,500 remain in effect. State aid amounts for all cities 2 On August 15 the Department of Revenue will certify state aid amounts to cities for payable 1990 which were set for payable 1990 by the 1988 tax law. 3 If the special session changes state aid amounts for payable 1990, the Department of Revenue will certify the new aid amounts for cities as soon as possible after the special session. Levy limits for cities with populations over 2,500 4 The 1988 tax law specifies levy limits for cities for payable 1990. These are the limits which are now in effect On August 15, the Department of Revenue will certify the dollar amount of property tax which these levy limits permit each city to levy for property taxes payable in 1990. 5 However, because there is a good chance that the legislature — in a special session - - will adopt the lower levy limits which were specified in the vetoed tax bill, by September 1, the Department will also notify each city of the dollar amount of property tax which the lower levy limits specified in the vetoed bill would permit each city to levy for property taxes payable in 1990. This will allow each city to develop an alternate budget for payable 1990 — based on a levy limit which would result in a reduced amount of property tax. 6 The 1988 law now in effect permits each city to increase its levy limit base for payable 1990 — the amount of its levy limit for property taxes payable in 1989 plus the amount of its local government aid for 1989 — by three percent over the previous year plus whichever is greater: the percentage of increase of the city's population or the percentage of increase in the number of its households. Summary and Instructions to Cities / Page 2 7 The vetoed 1989 tax bill would permit each city to increase its levy limit base for payable 1990 by three percent over the previous year plus whichever is greater: one-half of the percent of increase in the city's-population or one-half of the percent of increase in the number of its households. 8 If the special session changes levy limits for payable 1990, the Department of Revenue will certify the new levy limits for cities as soon as possible after the special session. 9 If a city used reserve funds in 1989 to reduce the amount of property taxes it levied for payable 1989, the city cannot apply to the Commissioner of Revenue to increase its levy limit for payable 1990. However, if a city used reserve funds in 1988 to reduce the amount of property taxes it levied for payable 1988 and it did not apply to the Commissioner in 1988 to increase its levy limit for payable 1989, the city can now apply to the Commissioner to increase its levy limit for payable 1990. 10 The deadline for cities to certify their or000sed property tax levies to the county auditor is changed from August 1, 1989 to October 1, 1989. If a special session of the legislature changes this deadline, the Department of Revenue will notify all cities immediately. 11 The deadline for cities to certify the final property tax levies to the county auditor is changed from October 25, 1989 to November 9, 1989. If a special session of the legislature changes this deadline, the Department of Revenue will notify all cities immediately. 12 The amount of the final property tax levy which each city certifies to the county auditor on November 9, 1989 cannot be greater than the amount of the proposed property tax levy which the city certified to the county auditor on October 1, 1989. Truth in Taxation requirements for cities with populations over 2,500 13 The 1988 tax law requires counties to prepare and mail Proposed Property Tax Bills to property owners this year. However, because it is impossible for cities to certify their proposed property tax levies to the county auditor until October 1, 1989, counties cannot prepare and mail proposed property tax bills before the budget hearings of cities. As a result, there will be no proposed property tax bills this year. 14 Although counties cannot prepare and mail proposed property tax bills this year, to provide property owners with advance notice of proposed property taxes payable in 1990, each city with a population over 2,500 is required to take the following actions according to the following standards before its 1989 public budget hearings: a at least five weekdays before each city's public budget hearing, each city must publish an advertisement which includes: i the hour, date and place of the hearing; Summary and Instructions to Cities Page 3 ii the total dollar amount of the proposed property taxes to be levied by the city for payable 1990; iii the percentage of increase or decrease this amount represents over the amount collected for the previous year; iv a statement inviting all citizens to attend and participate in the hearing; b the advertisement must be published in the newspaper of general paid circulation published at least five days a week which is received by the greatest number of people in the city; c if the newspaper of general paid circulation received by the greatest number of people in the city is published less frequently than five days a week, the advertisement must be published in the next most-frequently published newspaper of general paid circulation; d the advertisement cannot be published in a section of the newspaper where legal notices and classified advertisements appear; e the advertisement must be no less than one-quarter page in size; f the headline of the advertisement must be printed in no smaller than 18-point type; g if the budget hearing is recessed, the city must place another advertisement in the same newspaper announcing the time and place for the reconvened meeting; and h the announcement of the reconvened meeting must appear at least two days but no more than five days before the reconvened meeting. 15 Cities may schedule their public budget hearings on any day except Sunday. 16 Cities must schedule their public budget hearings after 5:00 p.m. unless the hearing is to be held on a Saturday; 17 When certifying its budget for payable 1990 to the county auditor, each city must mail to the Commissioner of Revenue a copy of the newspaper advertisement announcing its public budget hearing. 18 If the Commissioner of Revenue determines that any city has not substantially complied with the above requirements for holding public budget hearings and publishing an advertisement of the meeting, the Commissioner will notify the county auditor of the county in which the city is located. The county auditor will then require the city to use a tax rate for payable 1990 which will result in the city collecting the same amount of property taxes it collected for payable 1989. 1989 Property Tax Certification Timetable for Cities Cities with populations over oand tonsreei ving July 15 revenues from taconite podutinthe Department of Revenue their payable 1989 levies for E Services not the operating costs of region?al levy for property taxes previously claimed as a spec payable in 1989 Department of Revenue certifies local government August 15 aid amounts to cities and towns which were set for Payable 1990 by the 1988 tax law Department of Revenue will certify the payable 1990 D evy August 15 1 ep limits under the 1988 tax bill to cities with from opts taconite pro2 500 and duction taxes ns receiving revenues Se tember 1 Department of Revenue will certify local government P aid and levy limits under the vetoed tax bill to cities �,5roduction taxestowns �eivmg with populations over 00 revenues from taconite p Cities certify proposed property tax levies to county October 1 auditors November 9 Cities certify final property tax levies to county auditors J — 183 University Ave.East St.Paul,MN 55101-2526 League of Minnesota Cities (612)227.5800(FAX:221-0986) June 27, 1989 TO. Bulletin Subscribers FROM: Jean Mehle Goad RE: Governor's Field Hearings* GOVERNOR SETS REFORM TIMETABLE, PLANS FIELD HEARINGS To solicit the advice of citizens and local government officials on property tax reform issues Governor Perpich is planning 10 field hearings in the state. The League encourages city officials to participate. Any city officials interested in testifying should contact the League (see registration form) . Please send a copy to the League. The League plans to testify at two of the regional hearings. The tentative schedule is: DATE TIME LOCATION June 28 9:00 - 11: 00 a.m. Duluth Area Paulucci Hall 350 Harbor Drive June 28 1:00 - 3 : 00 p.m. Moorhead Heritage Hjemkomst Interpretive Center 202 - 2nd Street North July 6 10:00 - Noon Rochester Kehler Hotel Windsor Ballroom, Subway Level 20 - 2nd Avenue Southwest 2: 00 - 4 :00 p.m. Worthington Worthington Community College Cafeteria 1450 College Way DATE TIME LOCATION July 11 10: 00 - Noon Brooklyn Park Community Center, Community Room 5600 - 85th Avenue North 2:00 - 4:00 p.m. Bemidji Holiday Inn July 20 10: 00 - Noon Marshall Southwest State University Lecture Center, Room 217 2: 00 - 4: 00 p.m. Bloomington Creekside Community Center Minnesota Valley Room 9801 Penn Avenue July 25 10:00 - Noon St. Cloud Civic Center Opportunity Suites 10 - 4th Avenue South 2 :00 - 4:00 p.m. Minneapolis Minneapolis Community College 1424 Yale Each hearing will last about two hours, with one in the morning and one in the afternoon. According to Perpich, he and his staff plan to develop property tax and local aids reform options through July. The governor said he expects to approve a reform plan and transmit it to the Legislature by August 10. Legislative hearings will probably take place through mid-September. The property tax plan might see further refinement after the August 23 revenue forecast which could mean additional state funds would be available for property tax relief. Finally, the governor has stated that if he has prior agreement on a compromise tax bill from legislative leaders then he will call a special session by September 30. *PLEASE NOTE: The attached registration form was omitted from the June 23, 1989 Bulletin. Testimony Registration for Governor's Hearings on Property Tax Reform The governor is holding hearings to collect the ben of the general public are encouraged to public's views on the property tax system. The testify. If you wish to testify, please fill out information will be used in developing a plan this form and send it to the address below. for reform,which he will present to the special In the space below, please be sure to write session of the legislature. your comments or questions on the topics of Representatives of interested groups ormem- interest to you. City where hearing will be held Date of hearing Your last name ring name and initial Daytime phone number Your street aadress City or town Zip code Name of organa ion you represent any Please check to show the issue or issues of concern to you: ❑ 1. Property tax rates on: ❑rental housing ❑homes and farm homes ❑business property ❑cabins and recreational property ❑ other property (list type): ❑ 2. Differences in property taxes on similar properties in dillerem areas of the state ❑ 3. The roles of state and local governments in financing local services ❑ 4. State aid programs and payments to: ❑counties ❑cilias ❑towns Cl school districts ❑ 5. State-paid credits and refund programs for homeowners and renters ❑ 6. Other(please explain below) Briefly state your comments or questions on the topics)you have checked above: Mall this testimony mgistration form to: Governor Rudy Perpich • Governor's Office • State Capitol • St. Paul, MN 55155 Ehlers andAssociates. IEAaEAS IN PURLI FINANCE NEWSLETTER 1 1 `-' OFFICES IN MINNEAPOLIS AND WAUKESHA VOL 1MP�ER 4 ME: Financial Specialists: Ehlers and Associates,Inc. Please distribute to governing body members IDLY 1989 INPFdtM RATES DROP Bond prices continue to improve with the BBI (20 year, g.o., tmx xempt yields) down to 6.95% as of Rune 12. Most of the improvement is attributable to the FED's manipulating lower interest rates to reflect reduced concern about inflation. (Apparently five percent inflation has been institutionalized.) Tax,exempt rates had not risen as much as taxables and fell faster because of dramatically reduced supply. SIMPLY OF EAPiSREDUCED This is especially gratifying because we had been criticized by a New York writer for suggesting that over supply bad made tax-exemption an inefficient subsidy to local governments and could lead to loss of tax-exemption. The same writer now talks about how efficient tax-exemption of municipal bond interest has become with the reduced supply. The danger is that pressures on Congress win minflate the uses and supply of tax-exempt "public" finance. RPPINANCING WITH LOWER RATES With reduced rates many issues are candidates for refunding. If you think your community's bonds are eligible let us take a look without obligation - even if, especially if, - another consultant has examined the possibility. We are super refunders. SOME BONDS DO NOT REOIIIRE E ECnDf4S We've worked closely with Independent School District #197 (West St. Paul) in funding the repair of the now well-known vandalism. With the efforts of local lawmakers,the Legislature, and the Governor, the District, along with other districts which may be similarly afflicted, obtained authority to issue bonds by board resolution for health and safety (asbestos) needs. District#197 also secured a $500,000 grant Superintendent Bruce Anderson, Director of Business Affairs Luis Rockney and Board members are doing yeoman work restoring the school for fall occupancy. The bonds were issued at 6.49%. THF VAL E 0���'► TVE BOND SALES When are competitive bond sales appropriate? Answer: In practically every case. Many bonding bills are drafted giving the option of selling bonds at private sale or competitively even though in other purchases of consequence, except for personal service, local govenunents must solicit bids- Why legislators feel that borrowing money should be an exception is a mystery. Underwriters say that some bond issues are too complex, too small or too large to take to public sale and that they can get money cheaper at private sale. The evidence is contrary: Private sales cost issuers about 1% higher interest rates. On a$1 million, 20 year issue a 1% lower interest rate will save about $140,000. The solution is to require that bond issues be first offered at public sale and, if that is unproductive or unsatisfactory, then at private sale. We can help you compete. 2950 Norwest Center•90 South Seventh Street•Minneapolis, MN 55402-4106.612-339-8291•FAX 612339-6659 TAX INCREMENT FINANCIN ONE DIFFER ^1 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is a valuable development too] but not all TIFs are the same. Municipalities and counties may issue bonds to finance sites or improvements sr reimburse the developer for having advanced those costs. The risks and benefits to both the community and the developer are quite different. And then there are tax-exempt and taxable TIF bonds. Ail of the economic possibilities must be examined before entering any TIF project. Ehlers and Associates are very good T1Fers. LEASE FINANCING Direct leasing can be a way to finance important public improvements without elections but the interest factor can be up to 290 higher than with bonds. Some underwriters see leasing as a way to finance privately, without going to lower cost competitive sales. But we've lease-financed a number of projects competitively using local non-profit corporations instead of leasing companies at interest rates comparable with regular bond rates. We are excellent lease financers. ARKIRAGE REGS OUT The 243 page, 2 5/8#arbitrage regulations are out but fully understood by few. In fact the regs may be a fertile field for a whole new line of consulting. Local governments really didn't need all this federal regulation. Some arbitrage is still available but issuers need to be aware of the limits. Ehlers and Associates know their way thomgh the arbitrage thicket. CONGRATULATIONS: To Dilworth, Eveleth, Lake Benton, Mahrmmen County, Morton, Ortorrville, Sandstone and Stewart - Ehlers clients receiving Small Cities Development Program Grant awards. To Foley and Ogilvie School Districts who were awarded significant maximum effort capital loan funds by the 1989 Legislature following voter approval; to Glenwood/Starback/Villard School Districts who will be receiving a $6,000,000 secondary facilities grant to help fwd a tri-district high school; to the City of Buffalo Lake for obtaining grants and loans to reactivate a meat processing plant; to Watertown-Mayer School District whose voters approved a $6,000,000 building issue; to Decorah, Iowa School District whose voters approved a$4,985,000 building issue. It was great seeing so many at our open house. If you couldn't make it come in whenever you are mar. Norwest Center is a fabulous building. And of course we saw so many of you at the recent conferences and conventions. They are special to us because we do get to renew old friendships and meet new people coming into government. With warmest personal regards, we are Very truly yours, EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 4we&� Robert L. Ehlers SUMMARY OF AREA BOND SALES Bond Net Boyer ft., bb tni ci RaDate TV,, of Bonds amount Motor i tv RateInd - _ RatinO Iowa �,. Hembol d 04/05/89 Mater Revenue Bonds E 300M 1990-1998 7.17% 7.64% MR Muscatine 04/06/89 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds BIS, 1990-1999 7.10% 7.64% Al Nevada 04/17/89 G.O. Library Bonds 600H 1990-2001 7.15% 7.54% Al Tipton 04/17/89 G.O. Sewer Improvement Bands 800M 1990-2004 7.21% 7.54% MR Bondurant-Farrar Co.. SO 04/18/89 Capital Loan Notes 350M 1990-1997 7.1% 7.54% Baal Hondurant-Farrar fun. SO 04/18/89 G.O. School Bonds 2,720M 1990-2009 7.39% 7.54% Baal Pella 04/18/89 G.O. Bands 4,1O N 1991-2005 7.14% 7.5" A Adel-0e Soto Coma. S/0 04/24/89 G.O. School Bonds 4.950M 1990-2009 7.30% 7.44X A Cedar Rapids Cpm. S/0 04/27/89 G.O. School. Building Bands 4,900M 1990-1999 6.84% 7.44% Aal Altoona 05/01/89 Street Improvement Bonds 415M 1989-1998 9.36% 7.40% NR Osage 05/01/89 G.O. Improvement Bonds 660M 1991-2005 7.24% 7.40% MR Ties Maine, Area Cam. 05/09/89 New Jabs Training Certificates 2,990M 1991-1998 ].12% 7.36% Aa College State Board of Regents 05/10/89 Utility System Revenue Bands 16,50DM 1990-2013 6.75% 7.36% Al Dubuque 05/15/89 G.O. Bonds 4,15011 1991-2000 6.70% 7.36% Aa Nevada Community SID 05/15/89 G.O. School Bonds 3,950" 1996-2008 7.08% 7.36% A Rockwell City 05/15/89 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds 340M 1991-2005 7.04% 7.36% NR Garner 05/16/89 Sewer Revenue Bonds 235" 1989-1998 6.95% 7.36% NR Davenport 05/17/89 Taxable G.O. Corporate Bonds 3,525" 1990-2004 9.46% 7.M% Aa Davenport 05/17/89 G.O. Corporate Bonds 4,400Y. 1990-2004 6.82% 7.36% Aa Woodbury Central 05/23/89 G.O. School Bonds 3,100M 1990-2009 6.95% 7.18% MBIA Community SID De, Moines 05/31/89 G.O. Bonds 12,500H 1991-2009 6.91% 7.I1% Aaa/AAa Ottumwa Community S/0 05/31/89 G.O. Anticipatory Warrants 2,250H 1990 6.59% 7.I1% NR Webster City Conan. S/0 05/31/89 G.O. Capital Loan Notes 1,440M 1990-2000 6.78% 7.11% MR IFn mtae Fergus Falls Port Auth. 04/03/89 Taxable G.O. Bondi 645N 1991-2000 10.12% 7.64X A freeborn County 04/04/89 G.O. Capital Improvement Bonds 1,000M 1991-2006 7.2M 7.64% AT I.S.D. #270 Hopkins 04/06/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 4,625M 1992-2004 7.16% 7.64% Al Melrose 04/06/89 G.O. Sewer Revenue Bonds 450M 1990-2001 7.17% 7.64% Baal Larberton 04/11/89 Gross Revenue Nursing Home Bond, 505M 1990-2005 8.1% 7.56% MR Virginia 04/11/89 G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds 985M 1991-2008 ).4]% 7.56% Baa Virginia 04/11/89 G.O. Tax Increment Refunding Bonds 1,7901 1994-2008 7.47% 7.56% Be. Alexandria Lake Area 04/12/89 G.O. Sewer Interceptor Bonds 400M 1991-2000 7.01% 7.56% A Sanitary Distict Alexandria Lake Area 04/12/89 G.O. Improvement Bonds 620H 1991-2010 1.34X 7.56% A Sanitary District Big Lake 04/17/89 G.O. Advance Ref. B Imps Bands 1,135N 1991-2002 B.00Y ).54Y. Be Credit River 04/17/89 G.O. Improvement Bonds 200M 1991-2010 7.67% 7.54% NR d466 Oassel-Cokato 04/17/89 G.O. School Building Bonds S,000M 1991-2010 7.35% 7.54% MBIA Minnesota State 04/18/89 State University System Fund Bonds 1,SSOH 1990-2019 10.05% 7.54% MBIA University Board (Taxable Insured Series 19698) Minnesota State 04/18/89 State University System Fund Band, 18,450M 1990-2019 7.33X 7.54% MB 1A University Board (Tax Exempt Insured Series 1989A) I.S.D. 0278 Orono 04/24/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 2,]351 1992-2010 7.21E 7.44% Al St. Peter 04/24/89 G.O. Hospital-Nursing Home 1,200" 1990-2004 7.20X 7.44% Baal Refunding Bonds Young America 04/25/89 G.O. Temporary Improvement Bonds 1.230H 1992 6.89X 7.44X NR Minnesota Higher Ed. 04/26/89 Revenue Bonds 4,415M 1990-2014 7.33% 7.44% BIG Facilities Authority (College of St. Thowas) lover Grove Heights 05/01/89 G.O. Improvement Bond, 1,65011 1992-2007 7.04% 7.40% A mp Inver Grave Heights 05/01/89 G.O. Water Revenue Bonds 3.475" 1991-2005 ).04X 7.40% A take County 05/01/89 G.O. Capital Improvement Band, 1,000" 1990-2009 7.32% 7.40% Baal Shoreview 05/01/89 G.O. Park Bonds 2,235" 1994-2003 6.95% 7.40% AT Anoka County 05/08/89 G.O. Capital Improvement Bonds 12,675M 1990-2009 7.15% 7.36% AT Mankato 05/08/89 G.O. Bonds 3,260" 1991-2000 6.87% 7.36% AT Winnebago 05/08/89 G.O. Grant B Loan Antic. Cert,. 1,04011 1989 8.00% 7.36% NR Hutchinson 05/09/89 Nursing Hone Revenue Bonds 830M 1991-2004 7.90% 7.36% NR Minneapolis 05/09/89 G.D. Bonds 29.51011 1990-2009 6.98% 7.36% Aaa/AAA Minneapolis/St, Paul Area 05/09/89 G.O. Sewer Bonds 16,300M 1991-2007 6.97% 7.36% Aaa/AAA Metropolitan Council 475M 1990-2004 7.08% 7.36% A Woodbury 05/10/89 G.O. Water Revenue Bonds 4,525" 1991-2000 6.86% 7.36% A Woodbury 05/10/09 G.O. Iwprovement Bonds Bond Net Buyer Mun_1cipalit Date Type of Bonds amount Maturity Rate Index Rating Minnesota cont. 1 Suburban Hennepin Reg. 05/18/89 G.O. Bands $ 3,8001. 1991-2004 6.75% 7.36% Aal Park District Grand Marais 05/22/89 G.O. Bonds 700M 1991_2000 6.83% 7.18% Be. Narroad Port Authority 05/22/89 Tax Increment Housing Rev. Bonds 900M 1994 7.49% 7.18% NR Dodge County 05/23/89 Certificates of Participation 2,8251 1990-2010 7.10 7.18% Be. Minnesota Higher Educ. 05/24/89 Revenue Bonds, Series Two-T 5,10511 1990-2014 7.22% 7.IB% Be. Facilities Authority (College of 5t. Scholastica) Morgan 05/30/89 G.D. Nater Revenue Bonds 335M 1991-2008 2.12% 7.11% NR Perham 05/30/89 G.O. Grant Anticipation Bands 11500H 1991 6.76% 7.11% HR Verndale 05/30/89 G.O. Grant A Loan Antic. Bonds 530H 1991 6.771 7.11% NR Wisconsin Maple Dale- 04/10/89 G.O. School Bands 2,60011 2000-2009 7.34% 2_56% Aa Indian Hill S/D Milton 04/18/89 Sewer System Mortgage Rev. Bonds 355H 1990-2004 7.69% 7.54% NR Neenah 04/19/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 1,425M 1990-1999 6.96% 7.54% An Milwaukee 04/18/89 G.O. Airport Bonds 29,3ZSM 1991_2008 7.47% 7.54% Aa/AA- Oshkosh 04/20/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 8051 1990-1999 7.IN 7.54% Al Oshkosh 04/20/89 Taxable Corporate Purpose Bands 1,000M 1995-2008 10.15% 7.54% Al Milwaukee Metropolitan 04/24/89 G.O. Capital Corp. Purpose Bonds 50,00011 1997-2001 7.09% 7.401 Aa/AA Sewerage District "oskego 04/25/89 G.O. Promissory Nates 775" 1991-1999 6.98% 7.44% A Hartland-Lakeside 04/26/89 G.O. In,rovement Bands 2,520M 1991-2004 7.15% 7.44% A Joint 5/D p3 Madison Area VTAE 04/26/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 4,500H 1990-1993 6.81% 7.44% Aal/AAA Green Bay 05/02/89 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds 3,130M 1990-2008 7.10% 7.40% Aa/AA State of Wisconsin 05/03/89 G.O. Bands 71,415M 1990-2009 7.13% 7.40% Aa/AA Ashland 05/09/89 G.O. Promissory Nates 1,0451 1992 6.96% 7.36% NR Outa9amie County 05/09/89 G.O. Airport Bands 1,9511 1990-2008 7.352 7.36% Aol Outagamie County 05/09/89 Taxable G.O. Airport Bands I,600M 1990-2008 10.114% 7.36% Aal Torah 05/09/89 Nater System Mortgage Rev. Bonds 735M 1990-2004 7.39% 7.362 NR Wausau 05/09/89 Sewerage System Revenue Bands 6,9001 1992-2011 7.28% 7.36% AMBAC Waukesha County 05/11/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 9,940M 1989-1998 6.76% 7.36% Aaa Monona 05/15/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 1,04511 1990-1997 6.80% 7.36% AT Wadi son 05/16/89 G.O. Promissory Nates 8,ODON 1990-1999 6.76% 7.36% Aaa Milwaukee 05/16/89 G.O. Corporate Purpose Public 22,220M 1990-2004 6.90% 7.36% Aa/AA. Improvement Bonds Milwaukee 05/16/89 Short Term Promissory Notes 32,500H 1990 6.72% 7.36% Waukesha 05/16/89 G.O. Community Development Bonds 900M 1993-2004 6.84% 7.36% Aa Waukesha 05/16/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 3,77011 1991-1996 6.66% 7.36% Am Oshkosh 05/18/89 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds 2,635M 1990-2004 6.89% 7.36% Al Milwaukee Area VIAE 05/22/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 500H 1990-1993 6.59% 7.18% Aa/AA Verona 05/22/89 G.O. Corporate Purpose Bonds 1,D50W 1991-2005 6.82% 7.18% A Marshfield 05/23/89 Electric System Revenue Bonds 2,400M 1991-2009 6.88% 7.18% An Sparta Area S/D 05/23/89 G.O. School Building Bonds 3,850M 1991-2009 7.01% 7.18% A Blair 05/30/89 G.O. Promissory Notes 2251 1990-1998 6.94% 7.11% NR North Dakota State Board of Higher Ed. 04/04/89 Student Center Revenue Bonds 900" 1990-2009 7.68% 7.64% NR (Mayville State Univ.) North Dakota State 04/25/89 facilities Improvement Rev. Bonds 3501 1990-1997 7.19% 7.44% NR Board of Higher Ed. Minot S/D Building Auth. 05/01/89 First Mortgage Revenue Bonds 1,0251 1990-2001 6.99% 7.40% A Minto 05/01/89 G.O. Refunding Improvement Bonds 540M 1990-2004 7.23% 7.40% MR MEMO TO: City Council FROM: LeRoy Houser, Building Official RE: Purchasing Policy DATE: July 6, 1989 I have attached a copy of the purchasing policy which Council enacted. You will note that for items under $2,000.00 a purchase order or contract can be issued by the department head. Council approval is not required. Quotes and proposals over $2, 000.00 require Council approval. Items over $5,000. 00 have to be sealed bids with required advertising. Regarding the stove in the hi-rise, it was an emergency situation. I had no choice but to order Scott Carver Council to shut it down. They found the replacement for me and had it installed. There will be situations where staff will not be able to comply with Council's purchasing policy. If the pool pump disintegrated two days before the 4th of July, we would have to close the pool a minimum of 30 days if we complied to the letter of Council's purchasing policy. The point I want to make is there is a potential for occurrences that would make it economically unfeasible to follow your directions to the letter. In this particular case, I did comply with the purchasing policy. The only reason I had to request Council approval was to have the budget amended. Irrespective, I obtained the funds from our local Lions organization to pay for all the equipment including the new range for this facility. I think it is time for Council to review their involvement in the operation of the hi-rise and decide whether or not they want to continue funding this program or if they want to abandon it. MEMO JO: All Department Meads FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Procedures .for Seeking Quotes or Proposals DATE: June 10, 1982 S.O.P. for purchase of miscellaneous equipment , maintenance work, purchase of government building equipment and equipment parts . 1 . The City shall publish a notice (regular notice or legal notice) in the local newspaper requesting all interested parties to provide quotes on any part of, or all work required by the City or piece of equipment . The notice can be supplemented by a mailing to all local suppliers . 2. Information regarding work to be' completed or equipment to be purchased will be available at City Hall , 129 East 1st Avenue, Shakopee, MN. (Contact appropriate department head. ) Proposal or quote information will be written down and be the same for all potential suppliers . It will briefly identify the needed equipment or work, any special conditions , and the date, time and place of opening of the proposals and anyone can attend. 4. In the event that two or fewer suppliers or contractors have responded within five days of the date for opening, all known local contractors or suppliers in the effected trade will be recontacted by phone. , 5. After the opening of quotes or proposals for items under $2000 a purchase order or contract will be executed. Quotes and pro- posals over $2000 require Council approval . Two persons shall be present at the opening. JKA/Jms MDU TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John K. Anderson/City Administrator RE: Procedures for Seeking Quotes on Proposals DATE: Jure 30, 1982 . Introduction - The attached S.O.P.Jor procedures for seeking quotes on proposals had not been discussed by staff because we didn'tget enough department heads at the 6/16/82 meeting. At the .last staff meeting 6/30/82, several department heads expressed concerns about the proposed procedures. Concerns Department heads felt that it was unnecessary to establish cumbersome procedures for a policy that has worked fine for many years and now are being changed be- cause of one recent problem. Problems discussed related to the newspaper ad which would probably be clipped and bring in numerous proposals from out of town to the process actually amounting to the same thing as formal bids which require that the lowest bidder be accepted unless them is a preponderance ott provable reasons not to pick a particular low bidder. Both of these problems and a number of othersmentioned could cause real problems because many of the items purchased now are repeat items that require parts and convenient local servicing. Recommendation i As an alterative to the suggested procedures, dedxartment heads felt that simply by restating the requirement that all equipment (excludes emergency building and equipment repair or replacement) purchases over $2,000 be run through the purch.asing camnttee. The committee can then simply ask if all local vendors had been contacted for a proposal. Action Requested Motion to remind department heads that all equipment purchases from $2,000- $10,000 need to be run by the Council Purchasing Committee and all local vendors should be contacted for a proposal. JKA/cu Attachment i i STo: 15- To: Shakopee City Council Members From: Joe Zak Subj: Community Development Commission Date: JULY 7, 1989 The Community Development Commission meeting of July 5 brought a number of issues to the surface which will eventually need council action but at this time certainly deserve (and need) some thought. I will be glad to discuss any or all of these issues at our regular Tuesday , (July 11th) meeting: 1. City Hall - A sub-committee has been formed to begin a re-analysis of the issue and will report back to council with preliminary findings. This would be a legitimate item for discussion as a council work session item and we probably should begin a new round of discussions on this controversial but sorely needed facility. 2. Marketing - We are in need of a revamp of the community marketing brochure. If we are to market the community in the 1990's we certainly need to keep our marketing plan up to date. There will be a proposal forthcoming. 3. SPEAKING OF WHICH. . . . I have included a letter to the Chamber from John Wedekind of Universal Lumber (which is a new business in Shakopee) . I have responded to Mr. Wedekind but this certainly points to a lack of business awareness on the part of the city. This sort of absent-mindedness can easily be construed as "hostility", which of course, it was not. The CDC is working on a Welcoming situation which would include not only the Chamber, but the council so that new businesses in town would be properly welcomed. If we do gQg handle this properly RM , there may M= be a need to do this in the future. Suggest we take care of business. �o Z k June 8, 1989 UNIVERSAL LUMBER LINE Shakopee Chamber of Commerce c/o Ms. Kristen L. Converse 1801 Trunk Hwy 101 1570 East Highway 101 P. O. Box 203 Staldopee,MNs5379 Shakopee, MN 55379 Telephone(612)9963080 A natiorrune network of Dear Ms. Converse: wilding m irahad distribution centers,indroactunng 1.1hies Since we are currently only employing a staff of 22 full-time and wood treatmem plants people, which utilizes only the upstairs area of our building, servand ngthehoesing,canmercial and since we are unable to project accurate) our sales from ending thehlmhng.c y MANUFACTURING A OKFRIBUTION this location, I have elected to invest $170. 10 towards the CENTEBB Shakopee Chamber of Commerce as our first year's annual Gun,Nadine contribution which corresponds to our current fair share E Spencer,North Carolina Marshall Floma investment factor of 7 to 8. This will also allow Universal Moultrie,Georgia Lumber Line to become better acquainted with both the Grange( Indiana Betheromn,itimuchuseNs Chamber of Commerce and the City Council of Shakopee as Gordon,Pennsylwnla we consider how best and to what extent we intend to utilize Granduaw Teras warrens,Waconwn this, our newest facility. As Mr. Felix pointed out in our 7 Windsor.Colosimo brief meeting, we at Universal Lumber Line are extremely Chambc Minna Huntington Beach,Colomb concerned about the blatant Indiscriment levying of taxes slocMon.California throughout the area, as well as the apparent discrimination Eatoman,Gere is ON Moines.law towards tax credit applicants and overall general anti-business s bodsone,Minosuob attitude of Shakopee's City Council. This latter observation is Niagara ries,Oram Canada reinforced by the fact that no city official has taken the time WGOG TREATMENT FACIIJTIES to stop by to even unceremoniously welcome us to town. It Auburndale,Florida should be pointed out here that both the cities of Jordan and UnionCppGaorgat Bloomington have been over on separate occasions to politely Gordon, nnsho ma rrmhu,,Indiana say goodbye and see our new facility---impressive to say the/ Bekliertwvn.Massxhusells least. waldsor,Colorado Janesville,wiswnsin Ranson,West Will Universal Lumber Line and I will be watching in the days to Saginaw,Tens come to see how the Chamber approaches these and the many other areas of concern related to the Shakopee area's general commerce. A . UNwnY TO: MS. KRISTEN L. CONVERSE June 8, 1989 Page 2 Just as in business, we expect a return on any investment and this investment in the Chamber of Commerce of the City of Shakopee is no different. In reviewing our past month's direct expenditures to the City of Shakopee business community, excluding such services as electric, gas, trash removal and employee expenditures, we have paid out in excess of $100,000 to date to such companies as: Link Builders Redfield Electric Joppen Super Value Shakopee House Wild Iris Flowers Real Gem Trophys Expert Construction MGM Liquor Business Outfitters Caterbury Inn CGH Carpenter First Citizen Bank Etc. , Etc., Etc., Etc. So it is very easy for me to see both directly and indirectly (employees moving in, eating, banking, etc. ) what affect we have on the Community. I would like now to see what both the City of Shakopee and the Chamber of Commerce, with our support, can do for us. If I or any of Universal's other resources can assist you in facilitating some plan of action, please do not hesitate to call me. Yours truly, UN I VERSA LIAIMBER LIINNEE John N. Wedekind Director Sales E Marketing rj cc: C. Felix TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JULY 11, 1989 Mayor Dolores Lebens presiding 11 Roll call at 7:00 P.M. 21 Recess for H.R.A. Meeting 31 Re-convene 41 Liaison Reports from Councilmembers 51 RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 61 Approval of Consent Business - (All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. ) *71 Approval of Minutes of June 19th and 20th, 1989 81 Communications: *a] Harold & Carol Armstrong re: recent recall of school referendum *b] Tom Brownell, Chief of Police, re: resignation *c) Earl Fleck, Juvenile Officer, re: resignation *d] Cora Hullander, Building Sec'y.,, re: resignation 9] Public Hearings: None 101 Boards and Commissions: None 11 ] Reports From Staff: a] Joint Council/SPUC Meeting *b] Installing Lights on Softball Fields at Tahpah Park *c] Authorizing Hiring A Patrol Officer d) Appointing An Acting Chief of Police *e] Warning Siren Purchase *f) Sale of Surplus Property *g] Payment to Arthur J. Hatch for Appraisal h] Prohibiting Promoting A Public Nuisance i] Prorating Liquor License Fees j ] Property Tax Study *k) Fire Service Agreement with Jackson and Louisville Townships 11 Ambulance Service Agreement Between The City of Shakopee and St. Francis Regional Medical Center TENTATIVE AGENDA July 11, 1989 Page -2- 11] Reports From Staff continued: *m] Bloomington Ferry Bridge *n] Alley in Block 81 o] Sidewalk at 238 East 4th Avenue p] Shakopee Bypass (Southerly) q] Approve Bills in Amount of $2,874,766. 19 r] City Administrator Position s] Condemnation of Uninhabitable Residence 121 Resolutions and Ordinances: a] Res. No. 3076 , Final Approval of MEBCO $2, 300,000 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds *b] Res. No. 3074, Declaring Cost to be Assessed & Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessments for 11th Avenue, Project No. 1988-5 *c] Res. No. 3073, Negative Declaration of Need for EIS for Upper Valley Project No. 1987-5 *d] Res. No. 3077, Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Ordering Preparation of Proposed Assessments for Vierling Drive from CR-17 East + 3200 feet, 1988-1 e] Res. No. 3078, Approving Plans & Specs & Ordering Ad for Bids for 1989 Pavement Preservation - Sealcoat ing, Project No. 1989-10 f] Res. No. 3075, Receiving A Report on Boiling Springs Lane, Project No. 1989-9 *g] Res. No. 3080, Accepting Bids on Upper Valley Drainage, Project No. 1987-5 *h] Res. No. 3079, Accepting Bids on 3rd Avenue Recon- struction, Project No. 1989-5 i] Ord. No. 268, Deferment of Special Assessments 13] Other Business: a] b] C] 14] Adjourn to . . . Dennis R. Kraft Acting City Administrator TENTATIVE AGENDA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA Regular Session July 11, 1989 Chairman Gary Scott presiding 1. Roll Call at 7:00 P.M. 2. Approve the Minutes of June 6, 1989 Meeting 3. Bergquist Request for Tax Increment Financing Assistance 4. Resolution No. 89-3 - 1990 Tax Levy Resolution 5. Other Business a. b. 6. Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft Executive Director OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REGULAR MEETING SHAKOPEE, MN JUNE 6, 1989 Chairman Scott called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. with Comm. Clay, vierling, Wampach and Zak present. Also present were Mayor Lebens; Dennis Kraft, Executive Director; David Hutton, City Engineer; Julius A. Coller II, . City Attorney; and Judith Cox, City Clerk. Vierling/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of May 2, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Zak questioned whether or not an ordinance was being drafted which would prohibit or fine someone who moves a structure onto property and lets it sit there; like the building which was sitting at the intersection of CR-83 and CR-16 for a long time. Zak/Clay directed the appropriate city official to pursue drafting an ordinance to make it prohibitive to promote a public nuisance with a minimum $200 per day fine. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 7:03 p.m. Dennis Kraft, Executive Director Carol Schultz Recording Secretary $*3 MEMO TO: Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: Bergquist Request for Tax Increment Financing Assistance DATE: July 6, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The Bergquist Company has filed an application for tax increment assistance with the City of Shakopee. The Bergquist Company has also requested that an additional 33 ' of right-of-way for Research Blvd. be dedicated. If the Shakopee HRA feels that the Bergquist Company qualifies for tax increment assistance then it would be appropriate at this time to direct staff to take the necessary steps to schedule a public hearing to hear comments regarding the formation of a new tax increment financing district. BACKGROUND: Last Fall, the Bergquist Company approached the City of Shakopee with their development plans that included the construction of a 66,000 sq. ft. building at a value of approximately $3 million. On November 1, 1988 the Shakopee HRA moved to direct the appropriate City officials to inform Bergquist Company that the City of Shakopee would like to offer industrial development revenue bond financing and tax increment financing in an amount equal to three years of gross tax increment capture. At this time, Bergquist Company is proposing to construct a 22,000 sq. ft. warehouse facility. The approximate value of the proposed building is $700,000. This facility will initially employ approximately 30 persons. Bergquist officials have informed staff that they plan to expand the facilities in Shakopee to the originally proposed 66,000 sq. ft. within the next five years. Bergquist proposed project meets all the criteria set forth in the City's Industrial Development Incentive Program with the exception of 50 full time job equivalents. If City Council wishes to offer tax increment financing assistance to Bergquist Company, it would be in conflict with our current policy guidelines. Therefore, staff is recommending that Bergquist's request for tax increment assistance be denied. City Council may wish to waive the 50 full time job equivalents guideline and offer tax increment assistance to Bergquist Company. The second issue for City Council to consider is whether or not they wish to grant to Bergquist an additional 33 feet of right- of-way to the North to the existing right-of-way for Research Blvd. This property is currently owned by the City of Shakopee and is adjacent to the City's wells. Bergquist is requesting the additional 33 ' so that they can construct a ascetically pleasing entrance into their company. Council should keep in mind that if the additional 33 ' of right-of-way is granted and the street improvements are done under the 429 improvement process that the City of Shakopee would be subject to the assessments associated with this project. Therefore, it might be appropriate to grant the additional 33 ' of right-of-way with the understanding that the City of Shakopee will only be responsible for the assessments associated with a typical 66' wide street and that Bergquist would be responsible for the maintenance and up keep of the center aisle in perpetuity. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Direct staff to take the necessary steps to set a public hearing on the proposed Bergquist Tax Increment District and offer the additional 33 ' of right-of-way North of Research Blvd. with the understanding that the City of Shakopee will only be responsible for assessment costs associated with a typical 66' wide street and that Bergquist would be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the center aisle in perpetuity. 2. Do not set a public hearing for the creation of a new tax increment district and do not grant the additional 33 ' of right-of-way. 3. Do not set a public hearing for the creation of a new tax increment district but grant the additional 33 ' of right-of- way North of Research Blvd. with the understanding that the City of Shakopee will only be responsible for assessment costs associated with a typical 66' wide street and that Bergquist would be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the center aisle in perpetuity. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative #3. ACTION REQUESTED: Do not set a public hearing for the creation of a new tax increment district but grant the additional 33 ' of right-of-way North of Research Blvd. with the understanding that the City of Shakopee will only be responsible for assessment costs associated with a typical 66 ' wide street and that Bergquist would be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the center aisle in perpetuity. - fY s blin l - Z S / } S Z KAW..a-54k - SITE I ---- -- - ----- - - - - ---- - -- --- - - ---- --- - --- - - - - - - ----- - -- - i- RESOLUTION NO 88-3 A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSENT TO THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL TAX BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 at. seq. , as amended, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes 1965, Section 462.545 designates all the territory within the area of operation of the authority as a taxing district for the prupose of levying and collecting a special benefit tax, and WHEREAS, Section 462.545 states that the governing body of the municipality must give its consent to such a tax levy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority hereby requests the City Council of the City of Shakopee to consent to the special tax levy of $31,000 payable 1990 by the Housing and Redevlopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee. Adopted in session of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of 1989. Chairman ATTEST: Executive Director Approved as to form this day of 1989. City Attorney #y TO: Dennis Kraft, HRA Director FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: 1990 Tax Levy Resolution DATE: July 7, 1989 Introduction and Back rg ound Attached is Resolution Number 89-3 which requests the Shakopee City Council to consent to the tax levy for the HRA. The levy is the one third of a mill allowed which is estimated at $31,000. Actio Offer Resolution Number 89-3, A resolution requesting the Shakopee City Council to consent to the levy of a special tax by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee, and move its adoption. OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MN JUNE 19, 1989 Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Clay, Vierling, Scott, Zak and Wampach present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; David Hutton, City Engineer; Judith Cox, City Clerk; Barry Stock, Administrative Assistant; and Julius Collar II, City Attorney. Wampach/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on the proposed Special Assessments for the Downtown Streetscape Phase I, Parts 1 and 2, Project No. 1987-2. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer reviewed the two phases of the downtown streetscape project. Phase I had two parts the first part was constructed in 1987 and the second part was constructed in 1988. Phase II is scheduled for 1991 or 1992. He said he prepared the assessments based on the actual construction costs of the project. Only 258 of the actual cost is to be assessed which will be $225,819. 00. He said single family and two family residential properties shall be deferred with no interest until the property is converted to commercial. All properties received a 0.88 credit for oversizing curb and gutter and wider sidewalks. Cncl. Scott said he feels there should be a time limit put on the deferred residential properties up to 10 years maximum or until commercial whichever comes first. Cncl. Wampach asked about deferred assessments for senior citizens like Mr. Leo McGovern, the City Engineer responded. Cal Brown, 956 So. Holmes, said he will not benefit anything from the downtown project. He has an assessment now and when they do 3rd Avenue he will have another assessment to pay. The City Engineer explained the block project method which uses the zonal assessments . All blocks adjacent will pay for that side street. Dick Stokes, 135 So. Atwood, wanted to know if he had received a utility assessment on his property. The City Engineer replied that he did receive a utility assessment. Jeanette Gilles, 126 So. Atwood, said she has been maintaining the railroad property right next to their property and has asked the City to block the road off that they now have going through there. The City Engineer replied that since there is a depot located there it is holding up the project because it is owned by the railroad. She is also appealing their assessment of $4, 600. Wampach/Vierling moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Cncl. Scott said he has a problem with the deferral of residential properties and feels it should be brought in line with the whole program and be assessed on a 10 year plan. Proceedings of the June 19, 1989 City Council Page -2- Mr. Stock pointed out that people owning residential property probably did not come to the hearing tonight because they have been told that assessments against residential properties will be deferred. Consensus of the Council was to continue the public hearing to July 18th and that another notice be sent to property owners advising them that Council will discuss the possibility of not deferring the assessments for residential properties . Vierling/Clay moved to reconsider the motion closing the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Wampach moved to amend the motion by continuing the public hearing to July 18, 1989 at 7: 00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Scott/Vierling moved to give the Scouts $5, 000 of the $7, 500 the Scouts had turned back to the city. Roll Call : Ayes : Unanimous Noes : None Motion carried. Vierling/Clay moved to adjourn to Tuesday, June 20th, at 7: 00 p. m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8 : 00 p.m. �;di C4; City Clerk Carol Schultz Recording Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ADJ.REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUNE 20, 1989 Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with Cncl. Vierling, Clay, Wampach, Scott and Zak present. Also present were Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator; David Hutton, City Engineer; Judith Cox, City Clerk; and Julius A. Coller II, City Attorney. 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 change the consent item of approval of Damile Inc. application for on sale non intoxicating malt liquor license to table this item. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay moved to approve the consent business. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Clay moved to approve the minutes of May 22, June 6 , and June 9th, 1989. (Motion approved under consent business) . Clay/Vierling moved to receive the letter from Herb Dallmann regarding high taxes. Motion carried unanimously. Dennis Kraft reviewed the League of Minnesota Cities ' Municipal Amicus Program. The cost is less if the City Attorney joins the City Lawyer Exchange Aid and Depositary (CLEAR) Program. Instead of 10% of the League dues, the cost is only 5% of the League dues ($235.00) plus the CLEAR dues of $170. 00 for a total of $405.00 Cncl. Scott said he feels the City has not benefitted very much from the League. Cncl. Zak said he feels the City has not utilized the League to its full benefit. The City Attorney said he feels the League does benefit the City but does not feel the need to join CLEAR. Clay/Wampach moved to join the Municipal Amicus Program and authorize the City Attorney to join CLEAR in the amount of $405.00. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Zak, Wampach and Clay Noes: Cncl. Scott and Mayor Lebens Motion carried. Dennis Kraft reviewed the request from the J. L. Shiely Company that a portion of their property located in the NW 1/4 of Section 11 and Part of the SW 1/4 of Section 2, Township 115, Range 22, currently zoned I-1 be rezoned to I-2. He said the City does not differentiate between Il and 12 districts. Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -2- Vierling/wampach offered Ordinance No. 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, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Dennis Kraft reviewed the proposed Final Plat of the Meadows 2nd Addition. He reviewed the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Wampach/Zak offered Resolution No. 3068 (with the change of date for the easement agreement being executed prior to December 31, 1989 not 1990) . A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of the Meadows 2nd Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/wampach offered Resolution No. 3069, A Resolution Approving the Final Plat of Canterbury Park 3rd Addition and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling moved to open the public hearing on public improvement to the alley in Block 102, lying between Sommerville and Spencer and between 7th and 8th. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer reviewed the petition that was received signed by all the abutting property owners along this alley. There are no public utilities running along the alley. The total cost estimate for this project is $5,600, which would consist of new pavement for this alley. Assessments are 100% assessable to abutting property owners. The properties that do not front on the alley will not be assessed. Charles Luebke, 317 E. 8th, had a concern on the drainage in the alley. The City Engineer replied that they plan to put concrete approaches on each end of the alley which should prevent water from getting in. Walter Rollin, 716 Spencer, said the alley has never been graded very well and would like the City to slope the alley so it will get the water down to the catch basin. Mayor Lebens acknowledged a letter from Mr. Johnson who is in support of the improvement. Mayor Lebens asked if there was anyone else who wished to speak on this matter. There was no response. Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -3- Vierling/Wampach moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Vierling offered 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 moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Wampach moved that lot assessments be applied to the project. Motion carried unanimously. The City Clerk reviewed the application from Gregory Ries and Kenneth Cryer known as Corp-Tool, Inc. , for on sale and off sale and Sunday liquor licenses. She said they are currently working on the purchase of Arnie's Friendly Folks Club and are asking a consensus of the Council before they make final purchasing arrangements. Cncl. Scott said he feels that it would be an asset to the City to have Arnie' s fixed up and brought up to code. Cncl. Wampach had a concern on the condition of the upstairs. The applicant replied that he will board that portion of the building up until they start on remodeling. Consensus of the Council was favorable. Scott/Vierling moved to propose to Council 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 Council grant Corp-Tool, Inc. 122 East First Avenue, on sale, off sale, and Sunday intoxicating liquor licenses, at this meeting? Motion carried unanimously. Wampach/Scott moved to table the applications of Corp-Tool, Inc. 122 East First Avenue for on sale, off sale, and Sunday intoxicating liquor licenses. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Scott moved for a 10 minute recess. Motion carried unanimously. Zak/Vierling moved to reconvene at 8:10 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. The City Clerk reviewed the application for on-sale and Sunday Intoxicating Liquor Licenses by Centennial Investment Corporation. She said everything needed for granting the liquor license is in order but the question of the fee. Council received a letter a couple of meetings ago requesting Council give some consideration to the fee, which is clearly stated in the City Code shall be one-half the licensing fee if the balance of the year is less than 6 months. The fee required for the balance of this period until July 1, 1989, is $5,385. There was Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -4- some discussion as to if it would be legal to pro rate the $5, 385 fee. The City Attorney said they must follow the City Code. Vierling/wampach moved that the fee remain the same for the 1/2 year license for on sale and Sunday liquor licenses pursuant to the City Code for Mr. William Krueger, Centennial Investment Corp. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. wampach, Vierling and Mayor Lebens Noes: Cncl. Zak, Scott and Clay Motion fails Mr. Flanagan, Centennial Investments Corp. , suggested Council amend the City Code to permit monthly proration of fees with a retroactive effective date. Clay/Zak moved to have staff come back to Council with alternatives and some background on the present licensing fee structure. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Flanagan delivered a check for the full 6 month fee to the City Clerk. Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant on-sale and Sunday intoxicating liquor license 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. Motion carried unanimously. The auditors report on the 1988 Annual Financial report was reviewed by Jaspers, Streefland and Company. Mr. Streefland emphasized the importance of purchase orders and filing them in the proper time and place. He urged the City Council to take a look at their policy #64 and require department heads to follow the policy and that purchase orders be done for everything. Scott/Vierling moved to receive and approve the Auditors report on the 1988 Annual Financial report. Motion carried unanimously. The City Engineer reviewed the alternatives considered on improving all roads within the Killarney Hills Subdivision. The cost of maintaining the road thus far this year has been $960 and Public works will have to go back in this fall for further maintenance and another 20 tons of material and 2 hours of labor. The cost estimate to convert this road to a good gravel base is approximately $50,000. Another option would be to convert this to a rural section rather than urban which would be 28 feet of pavement on a gravel base and would have ditches rather than storm sewer. The cost is about the same as the urban section proposal. He said the assessment policy is to assess 100% of the cost to the property owners. Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -5- Todd Bladow, 1456 Sharon Parkway, said the roadway has been this way for 17 years and he does not feel that they should be assessed for a new road. The City Engineer replied that the City could give credit to the property owners for what is out on the road now. Cool. Vierling said she feels the Council should be consistent with what has been done to the other parts in town and that it should be assessed at 1008. Roger Sames, 1459 Sharon Parkway, said he thought that the road met City requirements when he bought his property and he feels that it should be considered a replacement road not a new road and should be assessed at 25% instead of 100%. Wade Kohlrusch, 1448 Tyrone Drive, stated that he believes that Council set a precedent with only assessing Eaglewood 25%. He would rather leave the road as is than to be assessed 100%. There was some discussion on assessing the outlots. The City Engineer said at this time they cannot assess the outlots but when the outlots are developed the City could recover some costs. Cncl. Clay said he feels the outlots should pick up some cost of the road and recommended the property owners be assessed at 75% instead of 100%. Larry Freeman, Lot 5, Block 2, asked about the front footage formula that was used to get the park assessment. City Engineer explained the calculations used to get this assessment. Paul Schmitz, 1401 Tyrone Drive, spoke on the price of the lots being cheaper. He said they also had to put in septic and well so the actual price of the lots cost more. Clay/Vierling moved to reduce the assessment of the lots in Killarney Hills by 258 and transfer the 258 to the outlots to be assessed whenever those outlots are developed. City would pay the 25% assessment and try to recover it at the time the outlots are developed. A 3% credit will also be given for the existing tar on the road. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Wampach, Vierling, Clay and Mayor Lebens Noes: Cncl. Scott Abstain: Cncl. Zak Motion carried. Mr Hutton, City Engineer, pointed out that there must be a 4/5 vote to order the project. Clay/Vierling moved to table action on the Killarney Hills improvements to July 18, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. (Mr. Hutton was asked to prepare new assessments figures showing assessments at 758, 508, and 25%. ) Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -6- Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant a 1989- 90 License to only allow consumption and display of intoxicating liquor to Jim & Lucy's Inc. 201 West 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant a 1989- 90 License to only allow consumption and display of intoxicating liquor to Damile, Inc. , 2400 east 4th Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant a 1989- 90 License to only allow consumption and display of intoxicating liquor to Fraternal Order of Eagles, 220 West 2nd Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an 1989- 90 on Sale Wine license to Cedar Fair Limited Partnership, One Valleyfair Drive. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale and off sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Jim & Lucy's Inc. 210 West lst Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to table the application for an on-sale non- intoxicating malt liquor license to Judy A. Berg, 222 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Art Berens & Sons, Inc. , 123 West 2nd Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Superamerica Stations Inc. , 1155 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Cedar Fair Limited Partnership, One Valleyfair Drive. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to J.H.F. Inc. , 823 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Holiday Stationstores, 444 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -7- Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Pizza Huts of the Northwest, 257 Marschall Road. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Gateway Foods of Minneapolis, Inc. , 615 Marschall Road. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to table the application for on-sale non- intoxicating malt liquor license to Damile Inc. , 2400 East 4th Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Tom Thumb Food Markets. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Fraternal Order of Eagles, 220 West 2nd Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Gateway Foods of Minneapolis, Inc. 1147 Canterbury Road. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Paul E. Schwaesdahl, 230 Lewis Street. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Kieu Ky and Hong Khong, 237 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an on- sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to racing Promotions, Inc. , One Checkered Flag Blvd. , pending acceptance by the County of a check in payment of the first one half property taxes for 1989. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant an off- sale, Sunday, and On-sale intoxicating liquor license to Bretbecca, Inc. , 124 West 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant and on- sale, Sunday and Off-sale intoxicating liquor license to XX Corp. Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -8- & wittles Inc. , 1561 E. 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant an on- sale, Sunday, and off-sale intoxicating liquor license to Clair- s Har, Inc. , 124 South Holmes. (Motion approved under consent business) . vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant and on- sale and Sunday intoxicating liquor license to C.R.E. Restaurant Co. , 1583 E. 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant an on- sale and Sunday intoxicating liquor license to J & D of Shakopee Inc. , 911 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant an on- sale and Sunday intoxicating liquor license to Centennial Investment Corporation, 1244 Canterbury Road. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant an on- sale, Sunday and 0££-sale intoxicating liquor license to Minnesota Concessions, Inc. , 1100 Canterbury Road. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale intoxicating liquor license to Family Dining, 6268 Hwy 101. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale intoxicating liquor license to Riverside Liquors, Inc. 507 E. 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale intoxicating liquor license to Valley Liquor, Inc. , 1104 Minn. Valley Mall. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant an off- sale intoxicating liquor license to Spirits of Shakopee, Inc, 471 Marschall Road. (Motion approved under consent business) . vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant a Sunday and Club on sale intoxicating liquor license to The American Legion Club Post No. 2, 1266 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant a Sunday and Club on sale intoxicating liquor license to Veterans Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -9- of Foreign wars post No. 4046, 132 East 1st Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the applications and grant a Sunday and Club on sale intoxicating liquor license to Knights of Columbus Home Assn. , Inc. , 1760 East 4th Avenue. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved 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. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to authorize the public works Dept. , to sell surplus equipment with the approval of the Administrator. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to authorize advertising for a four month planning internship position for the time period August 15 to December 15, 1989. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to hire Mr. Jeffrey Swenson as Engineering Tech II at the starting salary of $19,285/year effective July 5, 1989 to fill the vacancy created by Molly McCarthy declining the position. (Motion approved under consent business) . Zak/Vierling moved to approve the purchase of Novell Netware Assurance operating system software upgrade from PC Express at a cost of $995. Roll Call: Ayes: Cncl. Vierling, Zak, Clay and Wampach Noes: Mayor Lebens Motion carried. Vierling/wampach moved to approve the bills in the amount of $366,405. 96. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Clay moved 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 $179.213.00 (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to approve the application and grant a temporary on sale 3.2 beer license to the Shakopee Jaycees at Tahpah Park for June 24 and 25, 1989, and one for July 28, 29, 30, 1989. (Motion approved under consent business) . Vierling/Clay moved to offer Ordinance No. 266, an Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending the Shakopee Code Proceedings of the June 20, 1989 City Council Page -10- 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 "Environmental Protection" and amending Chapter it entitled "Land Use Regulation (Zoning) by repealing Subd. 12 entitled "Soil Erosion and 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 reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 11.99 and 12. 99 which among other things contain penalty provisions, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling offered Resolution No. 3070, A Resolution Accepting Work on Heritage Place Improvements Project No. 1987-14 and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Wampach Offered Resolution No. 3072, A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2989 Adopting the 1989 Budget and moved for its adoption. Roll Call: Ayes: Unanimous Noes: None Motion carried. Vierling/Zak moved to appoint Jeanette Shaner as Acting City Clerk from June 23 to July 3, 1989. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Clay moved to 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. Motion carried unanimously. Vierling/Zak moved to have the next Regular City Council meeting on July 11, 1989, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Clay/Vierling moved to adjourn to July 11, 1989, at 7:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. J fix. Clerk Carol L. Schultz Recording Secretary June 22, 1989 JUNz °1989 Mayor Lebens and Council Members CITY OF SHAKOPEE Shakopee City Hall 129 E. First Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Mayor Lebens and Council Members: We are writing to voice our concern and disappointment regarding the recall vote of the school referendum. We believe it will be detrimental to the future of the Shakopee community. Our family recently moved to Shakopee with the hopes of living, working, and raising our children in the same community. Since we see our children as the hope for the future, we must now face the dicision of whether to live in another community, which can offer a more quality educa- tion, or to settle in Shakopee with the hopes that educa- tion will not see the drastic cuts that are proposed. As parents, we would not choose the type of education that will now be offered to the children of Shakopee, nor do we find it inviting to bus our children to other school districts to get a quality education. With either decision, our children will be the ones who suffer. Young families looking for a place to settle may choose to live elsewhere because of the education issue. If our community is to continue to grow at a healthy rate, we must offer an education to our children that keeps pace with other quality school systems. Sincerely, Harold and Camstrong 1409 E. Shakopee Ave. , Apt. 5 Shakopee, MN 55379 RECOMMENDED ACTION' Move to receive and file the letter dated June 22, 1989 from Harold and Carol Armstrong regarding the recent recall vote of the school referendum. CONSENT To: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator From: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police Re: Resignation Date: June 22 , 1989 I will be resigning my position as chief of police effective August 1 , 1989. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to accept the resignation of Tom Brownell, Chief of Police, with regrets. ' Q r To: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator From: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police Re: Resignation Date: June 22, 1989 I am submitting my thirty day notice of resignation, as required by city Policy, to become effective at the end of the work day July 21, 1989. City of Shakopee pKO o POLICE DEPARTMENT y'r M 676 South Gorman Street QOLICF SHAKO Tel. MINNESOTA 55379 Tel. 612/445.6666 1 NESOSP CONSENT July 4, 1989 TO: Tan Brownell, Chief of Police Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Earl Fleck RE: Resignation I hereby resign from my position as the juvenile officer with the Shakopee Police Department. This resignation is effective at midnight, July 31, 1989. Earl Fleck RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to accept the resignation of Earl Fleck as juvenile officer with the Shakopee Police Department, with regrets. 9. cCrsve sro ln-wt t CONSENT MEMO TO: LeRoy Houser, Building Of 1 FROM: Cora Hullander RE: Resignation DATE: July 5, 1989 I hereby submit my resignation effective at the close of work July 19, 1989, due to the fact my husband has accepted a company transfer out of state. I will be availabe for work on call July 24th, 25th and 26th. Action Requested Move to accept the resignation of Cora Hullander with regrets; and authorize the filling of the position. TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Lou Van Hout, Utilities Manager RE: Joint Council/SPUC meeting DATE: 7/5/89 At the previous joint Council/SPUC meeting, it was decided to have the next meeting in July. i The Utility Commission would like to meet on the next regular Council meeting date July 18, if that is convenient. If that is not convenient, they would suggest having the meeting in August. I M E M O C0N&___ N TO: SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL V IJ FROM: SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY RECREATION STAFF, GEORGE MUENCHOW, DIRECTOR MARK MCQUILLAN, PROGRAM SUPERVISOR SUBJECT: INSTALLING LIGHTS ON SOFTBALL FIELDS AT TAHPAH PARK DATE: JULY 6, 1989 INTRODUCTION It has been a long time goal of the Shakopee Adult Softball Association to someday install lights on three of its softball fields at Tahpah Park. There are presently 90 adult softball teams that use the nine ballfields four nights of the week. Weekends are generally reserved for tournaments and makeup games. BACKGROUND Many years ago, the Association recognized that slo-pitch softball in Shakopee would someday become a popular leisuretime activity for men and women of our community, and subsequently established a Residency-Work Rule which requires players to either live or work (full-time) in the commmunity. For awhile, this kept the number of teams using our fields at a reasonable level so new ballfields wou7r' not have to be built. However, the community is on a growth pattern and the number of new residents coming into our programs is having a "squeeze" effect on our facilities. An effort was started three years ago by the Shakopee Adult Softball Association to raise funds to install lights on three softball fields at Tahpah Park. It is more feasible to put lights on the existing ballfields than having to purchase land and build new ballfields. On June 23, 1989, representatives of the Shakopee Softball Association and the Shakopee Rotary Club met to discuss a cooperative venture that would provide the Adult Softball Association the financial means to begin plans for installing lights at Tahpah Park this fall. At this point in time, there is enough money in the Shakopee Softball Association's "lighting funds" to hire an electrical engineer consultant to design the lighting system for three ballfields and install lights on at least one ballfield this year. No money is being requested from the City for this project. Since the "lighting project" for Tahpah Park" is being privately funded by the Shakopee Adult Softball Association and the Shakopee Rotary Club, we are requesting that the Shakopee City Council grant permission to these organizations to hire and electrical consultant to develop a plan to light three ballfields. When the electrical engineer consultant's plans are completed, the Association will come to the Council asking that you authorize the bid process for installing lights at Tahpah Park. ACTION Authorize the Shakopee Softball Association, in consultation with appropriate staff, to hire an electrical engineer lighting consultant, at no City expense, for the purpose of preparing a lighting plan for Tahpah Park Softball Fields. IIG CONSENT To: Mayor, Councilmembers From: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police Re: Authorization to Hire Patrol Officer Date: June 27, 1989 Introduction Officer Earl Fleck has submitted his resignation effective July 31, 1989. This will create a vacant funded police officer position. Background Council has previously authorized the department to hire one police officer effective May 1989. Due to the lack of applicants in the system the process has been delayed until August Of 1989. Recommendation Authorize the department to replace the position of police officer vacated by Officer Fleck. A large number of qualified applicants will be available during the August hiring process, which will result in the department having the opportunity to hire the most qualified persons. Council Action Requested Authorize the police department to hire one police officer to fill the position vacated by Officer Earl Fleck. ll� MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Appointment of Acting Police Chief DATE: July 6, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The City Council should appoint an Acting Police Chief to serve until a replacement for Tom Brownell has been hired. BACKGROUND: As City Council is aware Chief of Police Tom Brownell has resigned effective July 21, 1989. It is necessary that someone be appointed as Acting Police Chief during the interim period until a new Chief is on the job. I 've had an opportunity to discuss this with Chief Brownell and it is our joint recommendation that Assistant Chief John DuBois be appointed as Acting Police Chief. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Appoint John DuBois as Acting Police Chief until a replacement for Tom Brownell has been hired. 2. Appoint another police officer as Acting Police Chief for the interim Period of time. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative #1 is recommended. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to appoint Assistant Chief John DuBois as Acting Police Chief for the City of Shakopee beginning July 21, 1989 at 4:30 P.M. �0NI lbEN T /lam To: Mayor, Councilmembers From: Tom Brownell, Chief of Police Re: Warning Siren Purchase Date: June 21, 1989 Introduction The department has budgeted $14,000 in capital equipment funding for one civil defense warning siren. Background The budgeted siren will replace the existing unit at the junior high school location which is thirty-five years old and does not meet present-day standards. The city has not enhanced the warning system for twelve years. Sousing development in the area has experienced substantial growth and a warning unit is essential. The city of Savage will be obtaining bids for the units with a clause to allow additional cities to purchase from the bid which should reduce the per unit cost. Recommendation Authorize the police department to purchase one warning siren using budgeted 1989 capital equipment funding. Council Action Requested Authorize the police department to purchase one warning siren using budgeted 1989 capital equipment funding. CONSENT TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Sale of Surplus Property DATE: July 3, 1989 Introduction/Back round The property listed below is considered surplus and Council needs to declare it surplus in order that it may be sold. The sale will be by auction or bids. The City has bought replacement vehicles for the three cars and the fire truck. The hose expander has been replaced and the Honda is not used. 1982 Aries - Blue #1B3BD26DXCF170694 1982 Aries - Brown #1B3BD26B3CF170695 1980 Oldsmobile - Green #3R69FAM447987 1984 Honda - 4 wheeler 1947 American Lafrance - Red #L3224 Hose Expander Action Reauested Move to declare the following property surplus and that it be sold by auction or bids. 1982 Aries - Blue #1B3BD26DXCF170694 1982 Aries - Brown #1B3BD26B3CF170695 1980 Oldsmobile - Green #3R69FAM447987 1984 Honda - 4 wheeler 1947 American Lafrance - Red #L3224 Hose Expander Phillip R.Krass• �� V R A SS �II Iuir Dennis L Mone -a J^\ Ll..`ll\l,l\J lachlan B.Moir ®q. James B.Goff Barry K.Meyer `gyp V J Fi i Jay D.R.Userli G V MON ROE Orlin D.'2 Sinn, 9evor R.Nmsten map eM Pa rna A.Whe,, Made J.Moxrxssx am;rm ow nw spmal.a Draw M.Carlson ♦Usi,wivvm mSOW pYaa June 21, 1989 The Honorable Mayor and JUN2 2 city council 158 City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue CITY Or SHAKOPEE Shakopee, MI 55379 Re: Upper Valley Drainage Project Our File No. 1-1373-210a Dear Mayor and Council Members: I was visited and have been called by Mr. Arthur Hatch, one of the owners of property condemned in the Upper Valley Drainage District. For reasons unbeknownst to me, the condemnation panel awarded Mr. Hatch the $2,840.00 our appraiser thought appropriate, but neglected to provide him the $500.00 statutory amount authorized for the appraisal Mr. Hatch obtained from Newcombe & Hansen Appraisals, Inc. Under the law, Mr. Hatch is entitled to the $500.00 and although we were not ordered to pay him that amount, that failure was an oversight. I am recommending that you authorize payment of $500.00 to Arthur J. Hatch in partial compensation for the $700.00 appraisal fee he paid out, a copy of which I include with this letter. Please contact me if you have any questions. Very truly yours, WipR. TERED PRE:m1v Enclosure ACTION REQUESTED: Authorize payment of $500.00 to Arthur J. Hatch in partial compensation for the appraisal he obtained from Newcombe & Hansen Appraisals, Inc. Wanly m.Marschall Road Business Cemcr.327 Marwhall Road.P.O.Box 216,Shakopee.Mm55379 Telephone:(612)4455080 FAX(612)4457640 Snumpoint Center.Suite 1100, 1650 Nkat 82nd Strw1.BloominDon.Min rc. 55431 klephow:(612)885 5899 FAX(612)0855969 NEWCOMBE & HANSEN APPRAISALS, INC. 530 NORWEST MIDLAND BU I 1-DING.401 SECOND AVENUE SOUTH,MINNEAPOLIS.MINNESOTA 5540, 1512-3380400 STATEMENT #20333 August 17, 1988 #20333 / Mr. Arthur Hatch Rubber Industries, Inc. p25262� 200 Cavanaugh Drive S32 X82 PO Box 6 11P . Shakopee, MN 55379 N R °, RE: 200 Cavanaugh Drive �S w Shakopee, MNQZL s� y S� Vf Appraisal Services: $700 This appraisal was paid 12/2/88 MAKE CHECK PATABLE O:NEWCOMBE s HANSEN APPRAISALS.INC. THE AMOUNT OF TAN STATE...-. 1.-UPON MRIEURTAIMI..THANK I., PLEASE NOTE: A FlNANCE CHARGE OP 1 12% PER NEAT.,WHICH 1s U.—TO AN ANNUAL PEREENTAOE RATE OF 10YwrtL BE AOOEO TO THIS eluJF NOT vAIO WrtNIN 300Avs. IRS ACCOUNT NUMBER EL-At-0160487 11;J JULIUS A.COLLER, II JULIUS " ArTOH%EY AT LAW �� aiz-ons-i SHA%OPEE.MINNESOTA Ah 55379 J01V3 `19 June 29, 1989 .. C/Tr OF.syAk89F� The Honorable Dolores Lebens and Members of the Shakopee City Council At a Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting on June 6, 1989 members Zak/Clay offered a motion that the appropriate City official direct an Ordinance to make it prohibitive to promote a public nuisance with a minimum of $200 per day fine. The matter was referred to the undersigned as City Attorney but before proceeding further I need further direction and perhaps the Council might want to reconsider the direction. A nuisance is defined as "anything which is injurious to health or indecent or offensive to the senses or an obstruction to the free use of property so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property." MSA 561.01 and the law provides remedy to the injuried party. Minnesota Statute 609.74, a copy of which is hereto attached, deals with public nuisances and declares the offense a misdemeanor. Misdemeanors are punishable by a fine of up to $700 or 90 days or both. Petty Misdemeanors are punishable by a fine of up to $100. MSA 609.02 Subd 3 6 4a also 412.231 It is not possible to exceed the statutory authority as far as levying a penalty is concerned. It appears that the Shakopee City Code 10.26 gives the City several options under the heading "Disorderly Conduct" and provides a remedy for situation therein described and which I believe would be the mischief that the intended proposed ordinance is directed at. Perhaps if the City Code 10.26 is not inclusive enough, it could be amended rather than an entirely new provision. In any event please review the directive of June 6th and then advise me. Very truly yours, Juli s A. Coller, II Shakopee City Attorney JAC/nh SEC. 10.26. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. It is unlawful for any per- i son, in a public or private place, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know; that it will or will tend to, alarm; anger or l disturb other's or provoke any assault or breach of the peace, to do or permit upon -premises owned or controlled by him, the following: (1) engage in brawling or fighting; or, (2) disturb an assembly or meeting, not unlawful in its character ; or, '(3) engage in offen- sive, obscene or abusive language or in boisterous and noisy con- duct tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger or resentment in others; or, (4) willfully and lewdly exposes his person or the private parts thereof, or procures another to so expose himself; and any open or gross lewdness or lascivious behavior, or any act of public indecency; or, (5) voluntarily enters the water of any lake, river or City public swimming pool between the hours of 10:00 o'clock P.M. and 8:00 o'clock A.M. except with specific permission; or, enters such water without being garbed in a bathing suit sufficient to cover his person and equal to the standards generally adopted and accepted by the public; or, (6) races the motor of any motor vehicle; or, (7) causes the spinning or skidding of wheels or tires causing tire squeals or similar noise; or, (8) causes the making or production of an unnecessary noise by shouting or by any other means or mechanism including the blowing of any automobile or other vehicle horn; or, (9) use a flash or spotlight in a manner so as to annoy or endanger others; or, (10) drinks or displays any intoxicating liquor or non-intoxicating malt liquor in or about any premises where such drinking or display is prohibited by law; or, (11) causes defacement, destruction, or otherwise damage to any premises or any property located thereon; or, (12) strews, scatters, litters, throws, disposes of or deposits any refuse, garbage, or rubbish unto any premises except into receptacles provided for such purpose; or, (13) enters any motor vehicle of another without the consent of the owner or operator; or, (14) — fails or refuses to vacate or leave any premises after being requested or ordered, whether orally or in writing, to do so, by the owner, or person in charge thereof, or by any law enforcement agent or official; provided, however, that this provision shall not apply to any person who is owner or tenant of the premises involved nor to any law enforcement or other government official who may be present thereon at that time as part of his official duty, nor shall it include the wife, children, employee or tenant of such owner or occupier; Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-78 (15) to enter or assist another to enter or attempt to enter any theater performance or show, or athletic contest, or amusement park, or any other entertainment or amusement, or a public gathering to which admission or entrance charge is made without having paid such charge or fee or without the express permission of the person in charge of the event or his authorized representative. This provision shall not apply to law enforcement or other emergency personnel entering the premises in the performance of their duties. Source: Ordinance No. 10, 4th Series Effective Date: 8-10-78 r' 1 _ F §609.725 CRIMES, CRIMINALS Note 6 State v. McFarland, 1905, 96 Minn. 482, 105 N.W. 187. 609.735. Concealing identity A person whose identity is concealed by the person in a public place by means of a robe, mask, or other disguise, unless incidental to amusement or entertainment, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Laws 1963,c.753. Amended by laws 1971,c.23,§ 73,eff.March 5, 1971; Laws 1986, c. 444. Advisory Committee Comment This contains the substance of MinnSt. § 615.16 which will be superseded. The presumption contained in the latter section has not been retained in view of State v. Higgin, 1960, 257 Minn. 46, 99 N.W.2d 902. Hlstortd Note Derivadom The 1971 amendatory act substituted the Mirm.St.1961, § 615.16. specified penalty of misdemeanor for a former SL1927,§§ 10300, 10301. penalty of imprisonment for not more than 90 Gen.SL1923, §§ 10300, 10301. days or a fine of not more than $100. Laws 1923, c. 160, §§ 1, 2. Cross References Misdemeanor,penalty when not otherwise provided, see § 609.03. Library References Disorderly Conduct e=1, 15. C].S. Disorderly Conduct §§ 1(1) a seq., 9. 609.74. Public nuisance Whoever by an act or failure to perform a legal duty intentionally does any of the following is guilty of maintaining a public nuisance, which is a misdemeanor: (1) Maintains or permits a condition which unreasonably annoys, injures or endangers the safety, health, morals, comfort, or repose of any considera- ble number of members of the public; or (2) Interferes with, obstructs, or renders dangerous for passage, any public highway or right-of-way, or waters used by the public; or (3) Is guilty of any other act or omission declared by law to be a public nuisance and for which no sentence is specifically provided. Laws 1963,c.753. Amended by Laws 1971,c.23, § 74,off.March 5, 1971; Laws 1986, c. 444. ( Advisory Committee Comment The present Minnesota statute on the subject of public nuisance is§ 616.01, which reads: "A public nuisance is a crime against the order and economy of the state and consists in unlawfully doing an act or omitting to perform a duty, which act or omission shall: "(I) Annoy, injure, or endanger,the safety, health, comfort,or repose of any considerable number of persons; 498 J MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City ClerkC4,� li RE: Prorating of Liquor License Fees DATE: July 6, 1989 INTRODUCTION: On June 20, 1989, City Council asked for alternatives and background on the present licensing fee structure. This memo is in follow up to that request. BACKGROUND: On June 20th, Council considered the request of Mr. William Krueger, Centennial Investment Corporation, to reduce the minimum six month fee for a ten day on sale liquor license. Because the city code specifically provides for a minimum six month fee when a new application is made (even if the balance of the licensing year is less than six months) Council did not reduce the fee. Mr. Flanagan, Centennial Investment Corporation, asked Council to consider amending the city code to allow prorating and make it retroactive. The city code as currently written does provide for the proratinc of beer, wine, and liquor license fees. It does, however, limit the prorating for on sale liquor license fees to a minimum of a six month fee. This minimum has been in effect since 1978 when the city ordinances were codified, and possibly before. According to Mr. Coller, the minimum six month prorated on sale liquor fee has been in existence since the late 30 's. It was instituted because many beer parlors were changing hands and starting up every other month. I checked with the League of Minnesota Cities and learned that most cities do prorate license fees through the balance of the year. I also questioned the legality of changing the fees or city code and making it retroactive. Although making a change retroactive is legal, I was cautioned about what date the retroactive change would go back to. A change must be done fairly and be across the board for everyone. What criteria would be used to select how far back in time a retroactive change would go? I •checked our records and went back as far as 1985 to see what changes in liquor licenses have occurred since then. Prorating Liquor License Fees II r July 6, 1989 Page -2- 1] In 1985 the Plonski's acquired the stock of Clair's Inc. beginning with the July 1st licensing date. In 1986 the stock of Clair's Inc. was sold to Stan Davies and Larry Ricklick also around the beginning of the licensing year. Prorating the fee less than six months in either case was not an issue. 21 Minnesota Concessions obtained on sale, off sale, and Sunday liquor licenses in 1985 for the period beginning June 14th through June 30th. They paid the full one-half year license fee. 3] Scottland Hotels Inc. obtained on sale and Sunday liquor licenses beginning August 1, 1986. Since this was for an eleven Month period, prorating the fee less than six months was not an issue. 41 J & D of Shakopee (formerly R. Hanover Inc. ) obtained on sale and Sunday liquor licenses beginning November 1, 1988. Since this was for an eight month period, prorating the fee less than six months was not an issue. ALTERNATIVES: 11 Status quo - minimum of 6 month on sale liquor fee 21 Prorate on sale liquor fee with a minimum of 3 month fee 3] Prorate on sale liquor fee with a minimum of 2 month fee 4] Prorate on sale liquor fee with a minimum of 1 month fee 51 Prorate on sale liquor fee with a minimum of 6 month fee based on the smallist on sale liquor fee - Our fees are based on the size of the customer used floor area. They range from $3,705.00 to $10,570.00. 6] Make any change effective when ordinance is published 7] Make any change retroactive to July 1, 1988, previous licensing year 8] Make any change retroactive to an earlier date - RECOMMENDATION: Discuss the issue and direct staff to prepare an ordinance to incorporateanychanges desired. L.0. MOSS & BARNETT A NO� L Ason. au,.,axxxw 48W NORW T CEWER L J.c .n : rvneux l.Lu wl_L 1. Y 90 So.S..snug , N6•�sipeF Mn i" `"'"N"" p-'� MI"MPOLI6, M1NNE A 554024119MIC �"` p1 ® amu,.iw.m"uN TecMQM (612) 349-0300 .A uui-i error�"w ] ..R (612) 339-6686 Na,_coaw. Nwu r wx,unc Imu outs 1.umm "m" o _ June 27, 1989 '�:.I.N u w :,n. 1. J, 347-0271 i�N�rx.n I.ma wu r.ewuuxua uuu...L.uu is ew Julius A. Collar, II City Attorney 211 West 1st Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Culler II: This is a follow-up to the June 20, 1989 City Council meeting on Centennial Investment Corp.'s liquor license. As I stated at the Council meeting, a strong case can be made that the current Shakopee liquor license provision covering pro rata payment of fees is subject to challenge. A recent Minnesota case held as follows: "Licensing ordinances must be reasonable, .. .or they constitute a tax and are illegal" " A reasonable license fee should be intended to cover the expenses of issuing it, the services of officers, and other expenses directly or indirectly imposed." State of Minnesota vs. Northam Raceways Corporation, February 18, 1986, 381 NW2d. The principle set forth in this 1986 case is well settled law. The Court also held that the City Council has discrestion in determining what is reasonable but that there are limits on that discretion. I would be very surprised if any Court would conclude that a $5,000.00 fee for ten days was reasonable. On that basis, I suggested that you amend Section 5.02 subd. 4(b) of your ordinance and pro rate the fee monthly and further that you make the change retroactive effective June 1, 1989. A monthly pro rata fee would meet the reasonableness test. Enclosed is a suggested draft. Very"truly o rs, Michael F � Michael L. anaga MLF:kw Enclosure cc: Delores Lebens, Mayor Gary Scott, Council Member Dennis Craft, City Administrator CITY OF SHAKOPEE moves to amend Section 5.02 subd. 4 (B) of the City Ordinances as follows: 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 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 it shall be pro teen rated on a monthly basis and the share shall be not less than one-half twelfth of the annual on-sale liquor license fee. Licenses shall be valid only at one location and on the premises therein licensed. Effective date: This ordinance shall be retroactively effective to June 1, 1989 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: The Proposed Property Tax Study for the City of Shakopee, Scott County and Independent School District No. 720 DATE: July 6, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The City Council authorized the distribution of requests for proposal to several accounting firms for the purpose of attempting to determine why property taxes in the City of Shakopee rose so dramatically during the past year. The results of the process is described in the attached letter from Dr. Gayden Carruth the Superintendent of Independent School District No. 720 and Joe Ries, the Scott County Administrator and myself. The costs of the proposed study came in appreciably higher than the earlier estimate. Because of the financial conditions of the taxing jurisdictions the conduct of the study would appear to be financially infeasible at this time. While there are questions which remain unanswered relative to the vexing property tax situation, the costs involved in this study are very high. It is anticipated that Independent School District No. 720 will take action on this request on July 10th and that the Scott County Board of Commissioners will take action during the morning of July 11th. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Agree to pay 1/3 of the $103,000 cost plus expenses for the property tax study. 2. Do not agree to participate in this study at this time because of the cost of the study. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City of Shakopee decline to participate in this study at this time solely because of the cost of the study. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to notify the County Board of Commissioners and Independent School District No. 720 that the City of Shakopee has decided to not participate in this study because of the cost of the study. Attachments OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR (� SCOTT COUNTY COURTHOUSE 110 U SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1382 (612)937-6100 JOSEPH F.RIES Administrator CLIFFORD G.McCANN Deputy Administrator BARBARA NESS Executive Asst. June 30, 1989 Independent School District 720 Board of Education 505 South Holmes Street Shakopee, MN 55379 Shakopee City Council 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Scott County Board of Commissioners Scott County Court House 11110 Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Property Tax Study Pursuant to the authority and direction of the Independent School District 720 Board of Education, the Shakopee City Council and the Scott County Board of Commissioners, a Request for Proposals for an Analysis of the Property Tax Situations and Practices For the Jurisdictions of the County of Scott, the City of Shakopee, Independent School District 720 and the Townships of Jackson and Louisville was circulated to seventeen (17) major accounting firms with offices in Minnesota. On June 26, 1989, the chief administrative officers of the school district, city and county interviewed the two (2) responding firms of Olsen, Thielen & Co., Ltd. and Coopers & Lybrand and found both firms to be equally competent to perform the study. Given the financial condition of the respective taxing jurisdictions, the least expensive of the alternatives was selected by the consensus of the interview team. The estimated cost of Phase I only proposed by the firm of Olsen, Thielen & Co. Ltd. is in the sum not to exceed $103,000 plus expenses. An Equal Opportunity Employer - While the interview team fully realizes that the financial conditions of the taxing jurisdictions cannot accomodate an expenditure of this magnitude, we felt duty bound to return a recommendation in this matter. Respectfully,, Dr. Gayden F. Carruth Superintendent of Schools Independent School District 720 Dennis R. Kraft Acting City Administrator City of Shakopee ` py Ries nis tratornotyAcott cc: Norbert Theis, Chairman, Jackson Twp. Bd. of Supervisors William Dellwo, Chairman, Louisville Twp. Bd. of Supervisors GFC:DRK:JFR:bn OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR SCOTT COUNTY COURTHOUSE 110 id SHAKOPEE, MN. 553791382 (612)937-6100 JOSEPH F.RIES Administrator CLIFFORD G.WCANN Deputy Administrator BARBARA NESS Executive Asst. TO: Dr. Gayden Carruth, Superintendent of Schools 720 Dennis Kraft, Acting Shakopee City Administrator SUBJECT: Property Tax Study DATE: June 26, 1989 Dear Gayden and Dennis: Enclosed is the letter to our respective boards conveying our recommendations on the property tax study in the text agreed upon on Monday. In the interest of the confidence in which we would like this matter handled at this point, I am having this document hand-carried by Barb Ness to your immediate offices. I£ possible, I would appreciate your immediate review and execution so that my copy of our report may be returned for safe keeping with Barb. This arrangement will also spare us from an additional trip or two to your jurisdictions so I would truly appreciate this consideration. This will still require Barb's return to the school district after Dennis's sign off but we will be happy to provide this service. In light of the somewhat limited time frame in which to coordinate this effort, I will need my fully executed copy not later than noon on July 5th, but will really appreciate your accomodation at this time if possible. I will take this opportunity to thank you both for the enjoyable experience of working with you on this task. j s,esstrator JR:bn An Equal Opponunity Employer A3000 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Fire Service Agreements with Jackson and Louisville Townships DATE: July 6, 1989 INTRODUCTION• Discussions have been held on the subject of standby fees for fire protection services between the City of Shakopee and Jackson and Louisville Townships. BACKGROUND: A series of meetings held between Jackson and Louisville Township officials and members of the Shakopee City Council and staff. The result of these discussions is that there will be no change in the formula for funding fees for fire suppression services. The standby fees are based upon the ratio of property values in each Township compared to the total value of both Townships plus a total value of real property within the City of Shakopee. Jackson Township property values represent 3.9% of the total value and this equals an amount of $10,552.00 when applied to the Fire Department budget. Louisville Township has a value which represents 4.03% of the total or an amount of $10,875.00. These figures were provided by the Deputy Scott County Auditor and are as of March 15, 1989. No fiscal disparities or tax increment adjustments have been made to these figures. This contract will continue for a period of three years. The City negotiating team members included Mayor Dolores Lebens, Councilmembers Gloria Vierling and Gary Scott, Finance Director Gregg Voxland and Acting City Administrator Dennis Kraft. It was further agreed that the City would meet with the Townships in May 1990 to review the provision of fire protection services under this contract. Attached please find budget related information on the operation of the Fire Department and a break down of the pro-rata cost for the City of Shakopee and Jackson and Louisville Townships. Also attached is some information relative to a survey which was conducted by City staff relative to how other communities are paid for the provision of fire suppression services. No official action is needed on this contract at this time unless the City Council would like to change the contract. No change in the contract is recommended at this time. r� k MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Julie A. Kellerman, Planning Intern RE: Fire Services Contract Survey DATE: June 21, 1989 INTRODUCTION• Recently, I conducted a short telephone survey of 10 outlying cities to determine how other cities are dealing with the contracting of fire services to surrounding townships. The cities that were contacted include the following: Chaska, Farmington, Hastings, Lakeville, Mankato, Owatonna, Prior Lake, Rochester, Waconia, and Willmar. BACKGROUND: See attached memo from Gregg Voxland dated May 25, 1989 for background information. DATA COLLECTED: Mankato does not currently contract with any townships. The Finance Director with the City of Farmington was out of town and therefore no information was collected from them. Five of the remaining eight cities base the cost of providing fire services to townships on assessed valuations. Each township served pays a percentage based on these valuations. Rochester -- Almost all costs are included in the total that is later divided proportionately between those served. The Finance Director feels that this system is a good deal for the townships because they could not maintain the buildings and equipment for the amount that they now pay. Chaska -- Current cost is set at $40.00 per single family residence annually. This figure is based on a percentage of the assessed valuations. Lakeville -- The amount is negotiated. The starting point is the assessed valuations. The Finance Director feels that the best way to levy the costs is based on a formula from the League of Minnesota Cities. (The League has been contacted and is sending a copy of this formula. ) Prior Lake -- The Finance Director stated that levying the fees based on assessed valuation works out well for them. The townships do not incur the costs of Capital Equipment. Currently, Spring Lake Township (17%) and Credit River Township (15%) are served by the Prior Lake Fire Department. Waconia -- A copy of the contract that the City has with the Township has been included. Assessed valuations are a part of the formula that is used. Two cities contract with a Rural Fire Board. Hastings -- The Rural Fire Board consists of 5-6 townships. The Fire Chief then negotiates with this Board. About one-third of the Department's budget is used to subsidize the cost of the fire service. The Finance Director stated that the Board is nice because you only have to work with one entity instead of several. Owatonna -- The City contracts with the Rural Fire Association Board. The Board handles all billing. The City provides, as part of the contract, building rents, utilities, maintenance, and the housing of the equipment. Willmar -- The City uses a formula based on the number of sections served and the number of calls. They feel that this is a good deal for them because they then recoup their costs. OPTIONS -- PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION TO TOWNSHIPS 1) Continue to pay their proportionate share based upon assessed value. 2) Townships don't pay for ladder truck -- barn fires, ladder truck doesn't respond. 3) Provide no service -- they would buy service elsewhere or provide it themselves. 4) Townships buy their own trucks, we would man it. 5) Negotiate independent fee -- flat fee. 6) Townships pay a fixed amount per single family residence and another amount per commercial/industrial building. 7) Base fees upon the proportionate area of each entity. 8) Base fees upon the proportionate share of population of each entity. City Shakopee Projected Fire Service Shared Costs June 1989 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 ------------------------------------------------------ Budget Personnel 74,185 77,152 80,238 83,448 86,786 90,257 Supplies & Services 60,950 63,388 65,924 68,560 71,303 74,155 Capital (w/o big trucks) 23,900 56,500 12,100 15,700 11,000 12,000 ------------------------------------------------------ Subtotal 159,035 197,040 158,262 167,708 169,089 176,412 Less Fuel (3,500) (3,640) (3,786) (3,937) (4,095) (4,258) Less Total Wages (61,500) (63,960) (66,518) (69,179) (71,946) (74,824) Plus Officer Salary 9,950 9,950 9,950 9,950 9,950 9,950 ------------------------------------------------------ Subtotal 103,985 139,390 97,908 104,542 102,998 107,280 Less 1980 Tanker (4,000) (4,000) (4,000) Add 1987 tanker 20,683 20,683 20,683 Add 1985 pumper 43,534 Add 1986 Rescue 32,164 32,164 Add 1991 ladder 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 Add 1993 pumper 45,000 45,000 ______________________________________________________ 196,366 188,237 169,591 159,542 202,998 207,280 Add prior budget overage 73,495 0 0 0 0 0 Less prior budget underspent 0 0 0 0 0 0 ------------------------------------------------------ Total to allocate 269,861 188,237 169,591 159,542 202,998 207,280 City share 92.068 248,434 173,291 156,125 146,875 186,880 190,822 Jackson share 3.919 10,552 7,360 6,631 6,238 7,937 8,105 Louisville share 4.039 10,875 7,586 6,835 6,430 8,181 8,353 Assumes assessed value 9 stays the same Assume officer wages stay the same Assume budget is balanced Assume 49 increase in costs MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator RE: Ambulance Service Agreement Between City and St. Francis Regional Medical Center DATE: June 30, 1989 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a contract for the provision of ambulance service for the City of Shakopee by the St. Francis Regional Medical Center. BACKGROUND: For the past several years the City of Shakopee has been providing a subsidy to St. Francis for the purpose of providing ambulance service to local residents. The City is a participant in an agreement which also includes the City of Savage and the Townships of Jackson, Louisville and Sand Creek. The agreement is known as the Scott Francis Ambulance Agreement. St. Francis has recently added a second advanced life systems ambulance unit to provide a higher level of service to the subsidy area. The annual contract amount for 1988 was $1.69 per capita or an amount of $18,086.50. The annualized amount for the first six months of 1989 was $19,829.00. The proposed subsidy for the three year contract, running from July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1992 represents a rate of $2.12 per capita per year or an amount of $24,874.00. The ambulance subsidy proposal covers part of the net annual loss of $101,934.00. The communities would cover 508 of this loss and St. Francis would cover the other 50%. The share each governmental entity would pay is based upon that entities portion of the total population of the subsidy area. The three townships have previously agreed to this contract, and the City of Savage will consider this agreement at their July 13th meeting. The agreement provides for a maximum ambulance response time of 10 minutes for a minimum of 90% of the ambulance calls. The City of Shakopee will receive annual financial reports and detail information on the ambulance operation and will be able to conduct a review or audit of the financial records if it so desires. The agreement cannot be changed without both the City of Shakopee and St. Francis approving the changes. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the contract as submitted to the Council. 2. Direct additional negotiations and provide parameters to the Acting City Administrator. RECOMMENDATION: Alternative No. 1 is recommended. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to approve the Scott Francis Ambulance Agreement for the provision of ambulance services for the period from July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1992; and authorize the proper City Officials to execute the agreement. DRK/tiv DRAF SCOTT/FRANCIS " AMBULANCE SERVICE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Cities of Savage and Shakopee and the Townships of Sand Creek , Louisville and Jackson , Scott County, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as Scott/Francis ) are authorized under Minnesota Statutes , Section 471 . 476 to provide ambulance service by contracting with any person , firm or other political sub- division upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon , and , WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes , Section 471. 59 , permits two or more governmental units to jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the governmental units (such as providing ambulance service as above described ) , and , WHEREAS, St . Francis Regional Medical Center has submitted a pro- posal dated June 16 , 1988 for which ambulance service would be provided for three years beginning July 1 , 1989 and ending June 30, 1992 , for a per capita per annum charqe as indicated in Section B . WHEREAS, the Scott/Francis communities desire to jointly -assure that adequate ambulance service is available and recognize that a public subsidy is necessary for the purpose of receiving adequate ambulance service , NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements of the parties hereto , said parties hereby agree as follows : A. St. Francis Reaional ,ledical Center ( hereinafter referred to as St . Francis ) anrees as follows : 1 . That it will operate an ambulance service in a pro- fessional and businesslike manner durino the term of this A/ka 11 Agreement including, but not limited to , its other commitments herein contained. 2 . That it will , at all times , provide and have available within the jurisdictions of the participating communities two ( 2 ) properly equipped ambulances meeting all current state licensing requirements . Two (2) of said ambulances ( primary) shall be continuously staffed twenty-four hours per day with two ( 2) nationally registered paramedics . This shall not be construed as an obligation of St . Francis to have , at all times , two ( 2) ambulances in said area if one or both leave said area for the purpose of transporting to a medical facility a patient load that originated within said area. If one or both Units are out of said area for purposes previously described, there exists mutual aid agreements with surrounding communities for back-up support . 3 . That it will , notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement , provide ambulance service in such a manner that the response time in the City of Shakopee , City of Savage and Jackson and Louisville Townships shall be a maximum of ten (10) minutes ninety percent (9001) of the time and to Sand Creek Township shall be a maximum of fifteen (15 ) minutes ninety percent ( 90%) of the time . 4. That the rate schedule described in Section B shall re- main in full force and effect for the term of this Agreement . 5 . That it will furnish on a quarterly basis , a report to Scott/Francis Communities , itemizing , on a community by community basis , data related to all responses including, but not limited to , date , nature , point of origin , de- stination and response time . 5 . That it will furnish annually to each Scott/Francis community, financial information , itemized in reasonable A/ka Page -2- detail , on its ambulance operations . Additionally, it agrees to permit , at reasonable times , the Chief Ad- ministrative official of each Scott/Francis community or their designated representative , to review and/or audit its financial records . ). That it will hold harmless each Scott/Francis community from any and all claims or legal action resulting from operation of the ambulance service . St. Francis shall file with Scott/Francis , upon execution of this Aaree- ment , a certificate of insurance naming each Scott/Francis participant as an additional insured under St . Francis ' insurance policy in the followinq minimum amount :. General Liability - $300, 000 Single Limit and $100-,000 Property Damage ; Auto Liability - $250 ,000/ 500 ,000 and $100,000 Property Damage . 8. That it will coordinate basic first responder education for the Shakopee and Savage Police Departments , and the Scott County Sheriff Department . This is not to be construed that St . Francis shall be responsible for the training and/or skill levels of these first responder units . 9. That its Ambulance Service , upon a patient request , will take the patient to the facility of .his choice within a forty (40) mile radius , unless it is in the best interest of the patient to take him elsewhere as determined by the ambulance personnel or monitoring physician . 10. That it will call a meeting of representatives of the Scott /Francis Communities and St . Francis at such times that it feels changes in its Ambulance Program are necessary, such as additional staffing, additional services , purchase of additional major equipment , etc . If the outcome of said meeting indicates lack of support for the change by the Scott/Francis communities , it is understood that St . Francis would bear the total expense A/ka Page -3- of the proposed change should it be implemented . 11 . That it will call a meetina of representatives of the Scott/Francis communities and St . Francis at such times as principal parties to this agreement might be added or deleted thereby changing the financial share arrangement . B . Scott/Francis Communities agree as follows : 1 . To pay St . Francis , upon receipt of invoice , once every three (3 ) months during the term of this Agreement a de- signated per capita sum from each Scott/Francis entity for ambulance services described herein beginning 7/1/89 through 6/30/92 . a . The amount shall be determined each year by using each jurisdictions ' current population as established i yearly by the Metropolitan Council on April 1, mul - tiplied by a per capita per annum amount , as deter- mined by the following procedure : 1 ) St . Francis shall prepare a projected operating statement for the ambulance service for the hosoital fiscal year ended 6/30/90 ( for first year of Agreement ) , for 6/30/91 ( second year) , and for 6/30/92 ( third year) . Components of this state- ment are described below. 2) Gross revenues shall be based on the projected activity level for said fiscal year. 3 ) Gross Revenues shall be reduced by actual bad debts on ambulance service revenues and third party payor discounts to arrive at Net Revenues . 4) Gross Direct Expenses shall reflect expenses directly related to the operation of the ambulance service , such as salaries , employee benefits , de- preciation , supplies , reoairs & maintenance , etc . 5 ) Gross Direct Expenses shall be reduced by the salary costs for time worked in other areas of the hospital by the ambulance personnel to arrive at Net Direct Expenses . A/ka Page -4- Paae -5- 6 ) Indirect Expenses for the ambulance service shall not be taken into account . 7 ) The Net Direct Expenses shall be subtracted from the Net Revenues to arrive at the Operating Profit or (Loss ) of the ambulance service. 8 ) If there is an Operating Profit , there shall be no per capital charge to the Scott/Francis commun- ities . If there is an Operating Loss , the Scott/Francis communities and St. Francis shall share equally in covering this lass . 9) The per capita per annum amount shall be deter- mined by dividing the Scott/Francis communities share of the Loss by the total population of the Scott/Francis communities as established by the Metropolitan Council on April 1 of each year. b . Based on the above calculations , the per capita per annum for the year July 1 , 1989 through June 30, 1990, is projected to be 52. 12. (This is based on April 1, 1988 census figures . C . A meetina of representatives of the Scott/Francis communities and St . Francis will be called in June of 1990 and June of 1991 to review and discuss the operating statements and projections applicable to the per capital amount for each upcoming contract year . C . Agreement Term: 1 . This Agreement shall became effective upon the approval and execution of the Agreement by St . Francis and all five (5 ) communities within Scott/Francis . 2 . the term of this Agreement shall be July 1 , 1989 through June 30 , 1992. A/ka Page -5- Page -6- D. Cancellation : Either Scott/Francis or St . Francis have the riqht to terminate this Agreement , with cause , by providing the other party with ninety (90) days written notice by Certified Mail . E . Equal Opportunity Employer : St . Francis recognizes that the Scott/Francis communities are equal opportunity employers and hereby agrees to adhere to a policy of non-discrimination and equal employment opportu- nity. x x x x z x x x x r r r x x r x x x x r x r x x r r r r z r x r x Approved this day of , 1989. ST. FRANCIS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER BY : Gerald L . Hart , President Approved by Scott/Francis Communities as follows : Shakopee by Mayor Administrator Date Savage by Mayor Administrator Date Sand Creek by Chairman Clerk Date Louisville by Chairman Clerk Date Jackson by Chairman Clerk Date A/ka Page -6- StRancis REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER TO: Dennis Kraft, City of Shakopee j Mark McNeil , City of Savage William Dellwo, Louisville Township Norbert Theis, Jackson Township Cycil Wolf, Sand Creek Township FROM: Brian Weinreis, VP Finance Md SUBJ: AMBULANCE SUBSIDY DATE: June 19, 1989 In preparation for our meeting scheduled for Tuesday, June 20th, I have out together some history of the last couple years regarding the operation of our ambulance department and some statistics regarding ambulance runs by area. I apologize for the delay in getting this letter out to each of you. At the meeting we will review the Service Agreement currently in effect. Please review the existing Agreement so any questions can be answered. Below is a history of Ambulance Runs by Area: 3 Year Average SUBSIDY AREAS: 1986(j) 1987(j) 1989(2) Average % 1989 Shakopee 471 551 505 44 % 40 % Savage 144 146 166 13 13 Sand Creek 33 36 56 4 % 4 Jackson 29 29 40 3 % 3 % Louisville 22 16 32 2 3 % TOTAL SUBSIDY 699 778 799 66 % 62 % Non-Subsidy Areas 363 388 479 34 38 (includes Jordan, New Prague, Prior Lake, Chaska, Chanhassen & Eden Prairie) TOTAL 1062 1166 1278 100 % 100 % (1) Period from October 1st to September 30th. (2) Period from May 1, 1988 to April 30, 1989. A full year of data for the two ALS Units in service. A/ka 325\fest Fifth Acenue.Shakopee.\linnewm 553791612I445-2322 Afti aii.,A.uon Emld:.n A mrn:vgf:h.p.+:.:::nn.H,.I h Enna l(� NOTE: The period from October 1, 1987 to April 30, 1986, is not shown above due to St. Francis ' chanqing year end & the need to reflect a full year with two staffed units. In addition, when St. Francis added a second unit, we were able to facilitate patient transfers to nursing homes, other hospitals (Level I patients and patient choice), etc. St. Francis had 254 transfers from the period May 1 to April 30, 1989 in which we were able to generate additional revenue for the Ambulance De- partment. Below is a summary of the financial data of the operation of the ambulance department for the last four years: (in thousands) 1986 1987 1988(l) 1989(4) Gross Revenue 247 281 344 588 Allowances (2) [Bad debts, HMO's, etc] < 7> <12> <28> <76> Net Revenues 240 269 316 512 Direct Expenses: Salaries 199 201 215 438 Employee Benefits 50 51 54 109 Drugs & Medical Supplies 7 4 6 8 Equipment Operations 25 33 34 49 Other 24 15 21 29 TOTAL DIRECT EXPENSES 305 304 330 TOM LOSS PRIOR TO ALLOCATION OF INDIRECT EXPENSES (3) <65> <35> <10 <121> (1) Eight months actual projected for 12 months. Excludes the addition of the second unit. (2) Hospital averages used for calculation. Actual exoerience would be higher for ambulance department due to the nature of this department. (3) Some indirect expenses include building depreciation, insurance, interest, administrative, data processing, plant, and laundry. Information is available per the 'ledicare cost reports, but is not included per section (B) (1) (a) (6) of Subsidy Agreement. (4) Based on 11 months actual , projected for 12 months; first year of two units. Below is a summary of the 1989 Ambulance Department Budget: BUDGET YEAR 1989(1) BUDGET YEAR 1990 Gross Revenues S 439,974 $ 688,629 Allowances <39 598> <110,165> NET REVENUES 37 400, 6 S 573,464 Direct Expenses: Salaries 411,702 465,222 Employee Benefits 102,925 116,306 Materials & Supplies 14,868 17,411 Equipment Depreciation 46,047 52,837 A/ka OTHER 29,139 28,622 $ 604,681 $ 608,398 LOSS-Prior to Allocation of Indirect Expenses <204.305> <101.934> (1) 1989 budget included to show comparison to actual 1989 year. SUBSIDY PROPOSAL (Calculated based on the established formula): Below is a proposal for ca cu ating the per capita per annum amount for the period beginning July 1, 1989 through June 30, 1990: Estimated Loss of Ambulance Department . . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . . . $ 101,934 Per current Aqreement, any loss in the Ambulance Department shall be shared 50/50 with Hospital and Scott County. Loss Allocated to Subsidy Area . . . . ... .. . .. . . .. . . . . .. .. .. .. $ 50,967 Population of census area (1988 estimate) .. . ... . . . .. .. .. ... $ 23,949 Per capita per annum .. . . . .. . . . . ... .. . . . .... . . .... .. . . .. .. . . 2.12 1988 Estimated Population 1990 Total Subsidy SHAKOPEE 11,733 $ 24,874 SAVAGE 8,251 17,492 SAND CREEK 1,585 3,360 LOUISVILLE 890 1,886 JACKSON 1,490 3 159 23.949 S 5 NOTE: At the neetino we can discuss other methods to calculate the subsidy if you think it is appropriate. CONCLUSION: We believe that the price of $2.12 per capita per annum for 24 hour ALS coverage _ with the guaranteed response times of 10 minutes 90 percent of the time, with the highest level of ambulance coverage, is very reasonable when compared to other surrounding communities. Other communities can pay up to $4.00 per capita for BLS coveraoewith no time guarantees and a different class of service. We believe this is easily justifiable to people you represent. If under the subsidy arrangement, St. Francis was not allowed to back-up the other BLS services, the loss would be much qreater, as these runs generate significant revenue with a very small increase in exoense due to the existing staff coverage for subsidy areas. If we did not back them up we would also have a community inane problem. We have started to work with the BLS services as instructed by EMSAC (Scott County). A/ka I hope the above data provides a history of the Ambulance Departments revenue and expenses for the last couple years, along with the projection for the 1990 fiscal year. This data can be reviewed and discussed at the luncheon which we have scheduled at St. Francis for Tuesday, June 20th in the Health Education Room (next to the hospital cafeteria). Any Chances necessary to t e greement can be made at this meeting. cc: Rick Wagner Jerry Hart A/ka CONSENT �� J MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City EngineCi.�^"__ SUBJECT: Bloomington Ferry Bridge (County Road 18) DATE: June 29, 1989 INTRODUCTION A BACKGROUND: Staff has received the preliminary layout for the interchange of County Road 18 and the Shakopee Bypass from Scott County. The County is requesting the City of Shakopee' s comments regarding this proposed layout. The layout will be available at the Council meeting for further discussion. Within the next several months, the County will be holding public hearings to solicit additional comments on this layout as well as receiving comments from other townships, cities and also the State Department of Transportation. Staff will point out the key features of the layout and the potential problems with it at the Council meeting. ACTION REQUESTED: Move to direct the appropriate City officials to submit a letter to the Scott County Highway Engineer regarding the City Council' s meeting on the proposed interchange layout for County Road 18 and the Shakopee Bypass. DH/pmp FERRY Mr. David Hutton Page Two 5. Other areas in which the potential for significant effects may exist could include impacts on historical resources in the Mill Pond area, undesirable - physical alteration of fish habitat, and increased pollutant loadings to the Minnesota River. - Given the project as proposed and the limited information in the EAw, it appears that the project has the potential for significant adverse environmental effects. It is believed that these issues meet the criteria in Minn. Rules Part 4410.1700 warranting further investigation through the preparation of an environmental impact statement. Thank you for the opportunity to review the EAS4. If you have any questions, please contact Craig N. Affeldt at 296-7796. - Sincerely CYff'ford T, Anderson Director Office of Planning and Review CTA:mfl c: Gregg Downing, Environmental quality Hoard F vt Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyIMP a -t 's July 11, 1988 Mr. David Hutton y City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 1st Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Hutton: Re: Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer and Appurtenant work The environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) on the referenced project has been reviewed by staff of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPGA) . The staff wishes to make the following comments. -' 1. The EAw does not provide an adequate physical description of the proposal. This is particularly true with respect to the intended alteration of Mill Pond Creek. This has severely handicapped our ability to comment on the potential environmental effects of the project. 2. The possibility may exist that the proposed project will not comply with Minn. Rules Ch. 7050 in that the provision for nondegradation of the quality of surface waters (Mill Pond Creek) may be violated and water quality standards violations may occur. Despite this possibility, the City of Shakopee has not provided the information and analysis necessary to demonstrate the extent to which the project may affect surface waters or the trout fishery present in the creek. The project description also does not provide sufficient information on the elements of the project which will act to protect water quality. 3. It is believed that the potential may exist for adverse effect on the ground water which feeds springs discharging into Mill Pond Creek. other effects on the flows in the creek may also occur due the expected dramatic increase in peak runoff rates in the creek as well as reductions in base flows. Information should be developed which will accurately assess the effects on the hydrology of this watershed and lead to the identification of appropriate mitigation. 4. It is believed that other alternatives should be considered which will afford greater protection to Mill Pond Creek and its environs. Mitigation measures should be developed which will act to effectively control increased sediment and nutrient transport and ensure that hydrological conditions in the creek are not disrupted. Phone: 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Regional Offices • Duluth/Brainerd/Detroit LakeslMarshall/Rochester Equal OPPPnunity EmPloyer In view of the inaccuracies in the EAW, the lack of project design information, and the potential for adverse impacts on a sensitive natural resource, we recommend that you revise the EAW to more - - - -- -' accurately evaluate the project. You could then resubmit the RAW for further review. r Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. If you have _ questions regarding these comments, please call Don Buckhout of my - staff at 296-8212. Sincerely, Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor T.R. Planning and Review Services c: Kathleen Wallace Ron Lawrenz Laurel Reeves Gregg Downing-EQB - Robert Welford-USFWS 0880212 dont/DEANN C'C ' Jc� i�is�2 — `!� /.L cj ti fltDEPARTMENT ��Sr�1IT2AAT2EE OF /�11�.J I E Z D 4� OF NATURAL RESOURCES 500 LAFAYETTE ROAD ST. PAUL. MINNESOTA • 55155.40_ - --- --- DNR INFORMATION (61 2) 2964157 July 13, 1988 Mr. David Hutton City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 - RE: Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer Project Euvironmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Dear Mr. Hutton: The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the above—referenced document and we offer the following comments for your consideration. As you are aware, DNR staff have previously discussed the potential impacts of this project with you. Many of the comments expressed below are restatements of concerns expressed during those discussions. Basically, the EAW fails to accurately assess the expected impacts on the trout stream that will result from the discharge of up to 940 cfs of stromwater into its headwaters. Several responses to the EAW items are inadequate for a proper evaluation of the project's impacts. For example, our copy of the engineers' plan describes the project drainage area as 8,437 acres, much larger than the 5,700 acres reported in the EAW. The response to item 14 does not adequately identify the affected land cover types. Item 16 should have indicated that the project area includes steep slopes, shallow limestone formations, and artesian springs. The impact of these geologic hazards on the project, and vice versa, should have been evaluated in the EAW. The proposed separation of the stormwater channel and trout stream using sheet piling may, or may not, be allowed through DNB's permitting process. Additional design information is needed to prove that this method would work. Given the potential for extremely high volume flows there should be an evaluation of flow abatement methods, such as upstream retention basins, in addition to the sheet piling proposed in the EAW. We think the EAW would be more accurate if item 28 indicated that ecologically sensitive resources (a trout stream) and unique resources (artesian springs) could be impaired by the proposed project. Also, for your information, item 18c is not correct. The project is not in a wild and scenic river district. AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Z � Minnesota Department of Transportation O a Transportation Building, St. Paul, MN 55755 1l OF TPP�Z July Ill 1988 Phone 296-1251 - - Mr. David Hutton, City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 First Avenue East Shakopee , Minnesota 55379 Re : Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer and Appurtenant Work Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) District 5 (Shakopee , Scott County) Dear Mr . Hutton : The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has completed a review of the above-referenced EAW and offers the following comments : As you know, since highway drainage of the future Shakopee bypass will outlet through the area , Mn/DOT is serving as a cooperating agency on this project. Mn/DOT will participate in storm sewer costs and in mitigation costs . Ellen Anderson , District Hydraulics Engineer, has been working closely with the city to protect resources and assist in developing mitigation. In addition, Greg Busacker, Aquatic Biologist from Mn/DOT' s Environmental Services Section, is available to provide assistance at ( 612)296-1651. If you require additional information from Mn/DOT, please contact Carl Hoffstedt, Transportation Planning Engineer at our District Office in Golden Valley, telephone number ( 612) 593-8540. Sincerely, Patricia Bursaw Environmental Coordinator Environmental Services Section An Equal OCPonun,EmCloyn reviewed and analyzed to provide assurances that the project would not impact the springs feeding Mill Pond Creek. Following the submittal of this information, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has indicated they have no serious objection to the project as proposed. 4. Metropolitan Council The Metropolitan Council submitted comments indicating concern regarding the project's impact on increasing rates of flow and degrading the quality of water associated with this discharge. Furthermore, the Council indicated the need for additional information on the methods that the City would use to mitigate the impacts of the non-point source loading to the Minnesota River. Response: The City of Shakopee prepared a Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan that addressed the rate control and treatment provisions to be implemented within the watershed to provide rate control and treatment of stormwater runoff discharged from this watershed. Since this information was submitted to the Metropolitan Council , a letter has been received from the Council finding the EAW complete and indicating their acceptance of the supplemental analysis for the Upper Valley Drainage and outfall project. S. Minnesota Historical Society Although the Minnesota Historical Society submitted no formal comments at the time the EAW submitted, the scope of the project was expanded in order to provide suitable mitigation to the satisfaction of the MPCA and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. To assure that no sites of historical significance were impacted, the Minnesota Historical Society was contacted and an archaeological investigation was completed in the immediate vicinity of the expanded project area to assure that no historical or archaeological properties or significant artifacts were to be impacted as a result of this project. Following completion of this study, the project was reviewed and slightly modified to assure that no sensitive areas were impacted. IV. The extent to which the environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) previoiusly prepared. The environmental effects associated with this project are generally related to water quantity and quality concerns. Environmental studies were undertaken by the City of Shakopee and non-point source treatment technology was utilized based on information previously developed for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This EAW, and the preparation of EAW or Environmental Impacts Statements on other similar projects serves to identify the potential for significant adverse environmental effect due to the construction of storm sewer improvements. COMMENTS Four letters of comment (attached) were received concerning the Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer project. 1. Minnesota Department of Transportation The Minnesota Department of Transportation commented that they are serving as a cooperating agency on the project and that they would be available to assist in developing any necessary mitigation. Response: No direct response provided. 2. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources indicated that the EAW failed to accurately assess the expected impacts on the trout stream and expressed concern that the proposed separation method may not provide for adequate protection to the trout stream. Response: A Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan was prepared for the drainage basin tributary to the storm sewer outlet which addressed peak anticipated stormwater discharge rates and stormwater quality issues. As a result of the preparation of this information and the development of additional design details in the downstream Mill Pond area, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources now feels comfortable with the project and will be issuing a permit for the project as presently proposed. 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency expressed concern that the project could impact the quality of water present within Mill Pond Creek, could have the potential to adversely effect the groundwater which feeds the springs discharging into Mill Pond Creek, and that the anticipated stormwater discharge could increase pollutant loadings to the Minnesota River. Response: The Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan for the Mill Pond watershed within the City of Shakopee was prepared to specifically and adequately address the rate control and treatment concerns identified by the Agency. A review of the groundwater flow regime in the region was also i,;?- FINDINGS OF FACT UPPER VALLEY DRAINAGE STORM SEWER AND APPURTENANT WORK ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Shakopee is planning to construct a trunk stormwater conveyance channel that will be utilized in the future to provide a more defined and stable outlet for stormwater discharged from selected areas within the City of Shakopee and Jackson Township. Additionally, a berm will also be constructed to separate an existing and future stormwater discharge from entering a trout stream located at the downstream end of the project. The project will be fully completed in 18 months. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION An Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared for the project in accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1000 Subp. 3(A), which states that a discretionary EAW be prepared when a governmental unit with approval authority over the proposed project determines that the nature or location of the project may have the potential for significant environmental effects. Because the project had the potential to disturb an area that was designated as a trout stream by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the City of Shakopee made the decision to prepare an EAW in accordance with Minnesota Rules parts 4410.0200 to 4410.7800. The EAW was distributed to all persons on the Minnesota Environmental Review Program distributioni list and the notice of availability for review was published in the EO8 Monitor. CRITERIA 1. Type, extent and reversibility of environmental impacts: The EAW and subsequent information prepared in response to comments received from the EAW fully describes the project and analyzes the possible environmental impacts associated with the project. The results of this analysis are that no significant adverse or irreversible environmental impacts will occur as a result of this project. II. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects: No related projects or anticipated future projects are anticipated other than those which were addressed in the EAW. As such, no cumulative effects beyond those analyzed in this EAW are anticipated. III. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority: The City of Shakopee has outlined a number of mitigative measures that will be implemented both as part of this project and as part of future development within the drainage basin served by this storm sewer project. Public regulatory authority is being exercised on this project by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and Minnesota Department of Natural Resources through their permitting programs. received the DNR permit for this project , which staff had previously submitted to the City Council, and will be receiving the MPCA permit in the near future. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3073 • 2 . Deny Resolution No. 3073 • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to adopt Resolution No. 3073 which makes a Negative Declaration of Need for an EIS. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No . 3073 , A Resolution Regarding Negative Declaration of Need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer Project, Project No. 1987-5 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3073 0 cJ MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engined + SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Project 1� DATE: June 27 , 1989 CON SEN T INTRODUCTION: ' Y V Attached is Resolution No. 3073, which states that the City of Shakopee is making a Negative Declaration of Need for an Environmental Impact Statement relating to the Upper Valley Drainage Project and its impact on the Millpond. BACKGROUND: Staff has been working extensively over the last year or so with the Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency regarding obtaining the necessary permits to discharge the Upper Valley Storm Sewer Project into the Millpond area, which is considered a trout stream by the DNR. As part of the permit process the City was required to submit an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on the project to the Environmental Quality Board. The EAW was submitted to the EQB in June of 1988 and was subsequently reviewed and commented by all concerned agencies including the DNR, MPCA, Mn/DOT, Metropolitan Council, U.S. Fish & Wildlife and the State Historical Society. At the conclusion of the 30 day review period for the EAW, it was apparent that the City had not submitted enough information for the agencies to complete their review. Staff requested an extension of the 30 day review period and for the past 9 months our consultant has been submitting information to the various agencies in order to complete the EAW. The City has now received the approval of the project by all agencies, but action is still needed on the original EAW. The City of Shakopee is now in a position to make a Negative Declaration of the Need to complete an Environmental Impact Statement. Staff has attached the following information for Council review. 1 . Resolution No. 3073 , which makes a Negative Declaration of Need for an Environmental Impact Statement. 2 . The findings of fact that justify the City Council' s action in making a Negative Declaration. 3 . Copies of all letters submitted to the City in response to our original EAW. Staff is also enclosing a copy of the Metropolitan Council' s June 19 , 1989 letter approving of the EAW. The City has already 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 RESOLUTION NO. 3074 A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessments for 11th Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Construction Project No. 1988-5 WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of: 11th Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Construction and the contract price for such improvements is $69 ,395 .20 , the construction contingency amounts to $4 , 136 .78 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvements amounts to $12 ,121 .94 so that the total cost of the improvements will be $85 ,653 .92 and of this cost the City will pay $7,988.47 as its share of the cost. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be $77 ,665 .45. 2. The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1 . That a hearing shall be held on the 1st day of August, 1989 , in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7:30 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvements and proposed assessments will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two weeks prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed notice of such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. 3 . Adopt Resolution No. 3074 but set a different date for the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 to adopt Resolution No. 3074 and set the date for the public hearing to be on August 1 , 1989 at 7:30 P.M. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3074, A Resolution Declaring the Cost to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for 11th Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Construction, Project No. 1988-5 and move its adoption. DH/pmp HEM3074 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engine4iEJ � SUBJECT: 11th Avenue Assessments D /AJ�1_ ONDATE: June 27 , 1989 CONSENT I INTRODUCTION: ' l'! Staff would like Council to set a date for the public hearing on the proposed assessments for the 11th Avenue Street and Storm Sewer Project adjacent to the Meadows Subdivision. BACKGROUND: During the construction of the streets within the Meadows 1st Addition, the developer petitioned the City to construct 11th Avenue between County Road 79 and Minnesota Street. Consequently, a feasibility report was completed, the project was ordered and on September 6 , 1988 a contract was awarded for this work. The project was extensively worked on in the fall of 1988 but was not completed. The final wear course of asphalt was completed in May of 1989 and the project is now essentially 99% complete . Staff would like to set a date for the public hearing to consider the proposed assessments. The total construction costs for the project are $73 ,531 .98 . The total engineering and administrative costs are $12 ,121 .94. This makes a total project cost to date at $85 ,653 .92 . Of this amount, the City will pay $7 ,988 .48 and the remainder of the projects costs will be assessed. The street costs proposed to be assessed 100% to all abutting property owners. The storm sewer will be assessed 25% to the property owners that abut on the north side of 11th Avenue while the property owners that abut on the south side will be assessed 100% for the storm sewer improvements. The utilities (sewer and water) were installed by the developer and was not part of this project. Staff will further explain the assessment calculations at the public hearing. Attached is Resolution No. 3074, which declares the cost to be assessed and sets the date for the public hearing. Because of the official mailings required, the earliest date that the public hearing could be held on is August 1 , 1989 • ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3074 . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 3074. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) 55 . COUNTY OF SCOTT ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota (the "City") , do hereby certify that attached hereto is a compared, true and correct copy of a resolution giving final approval to an issuance of industrial development revenue bonds by the City on behalf of Mebco Industries, Inc. , duly adopted by the City Council of the City on July _, 1989, at a regular meeting thereof duly called and held, as on file and of record in my office, which resolution has not been amended, modified or rescinded since the date thereof and which resolution is in full force and effect as of the date hereof, and that the attached Extract of Minutes as to the adoption of the resolution is a true and accurate account of the proceedings taken in passage thereof . WITNESS My hand and the seal of the City this _ day of July, 1989 . City Clerk (SEAL) Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota was duly held at City Hall in said City of Shakopee, on the _ day of July, 1989 , at _ O' clock P.M. The following Council members were present : and the following were absent: zzz zzx ::x Council member then introduced the following resolution and moved the adoption thereof, which motion was seconded by Council member verified the information in the official Statement and takes no responsibility for, and makes no representations or warranties as to, the accuracy or completeness of such information. 6. The Mayor and City Clerk and other officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Trustee when the Bonds are issued, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officers ' custody and control or as otherwise known to them. 7. In the absence or disability of the Mayor or City Clerk, any of the documents authorized by this resolution to be executed, including the Bonds, shall be executed by the Acting Mayor or Acting City Clerk or by such other officer of the City as, in the opinion of the City Attorney, may execute suzh documents . Voting Aye: Voting No : Adopted this _ day of July, 1989. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: Approved as to form this City Clerk day of July, 1989. -6- City Attorney proposal of the Purchaser to purchase the Bonds at the price and upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Bond Purchase Agreement is hereby found and determined to be reasonable and is hereby accepted. The Mayor and City Clerk are authorized and directed to prepare and execute the Bonds as prescribed in the Indenture and to deliver them to the Trustee, together with a certified copy of this resolution and other documents required by the Indenture, for authentication and delivery to the Purchaser. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Bonds shall cease to be such officer before the delivery thereof, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes . The Trustee is hereby appointed authenticating agent with respect to the Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475 .55, Subdivision 1, and as paying agent for the Bonds, such appointment as paying agent to be effective upon receipt by the City of written acceptance thereof. 4 . The City hereby elects to issue the Bonds in a principal amount in excess of $1, 000, 000 as provided by Section 144(a) (4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. 5 . The City hereby consents to the circulation by the Underwriter of the Official Statement in offering the Bonds for sale; provided, however, that the City has not participated in the preparation of the Official Statement or independently -5- unless paid from proceeds of the Bonds or amounts realized from properties of the Company, are payable solely from the revenues and payments received pursuant to the Loan Agreement and pledged to the payment thereof pursuant to the Indenture; and no Bond shall constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation; provided, however, that nothing contained in this paragraph (e) shall impair the rights of the Trustee or the Bondholders to enforce covenants made for the benefit thereof as provided in the Act. 2 . The forms of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture and the Bond Purchase Agreement referred to above are approved. The Mayor and City Clerk are authorized and directed, in the name and on behalf of the City, to execute the Loan Agreement, the Indenture and the Bond Purchase Agreement . The documents shall be executed in substantially the form hereinabove approved, subject to additions thereto and deletions therefrom approved by the officers executing the same, which approval shall be conclusively presumed upon execution thereof . 3 . In anticipation of the collection of revenues under the Loan Agreement, the City shall proceed forthwith to issue its Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Mebco Industries , Inc. Project) , Series 1989 , in the aggregate principal amount of $2, 300, 000 , in the form and upon the terms set forth in the Indenture, which terms are for this purpose incorporated in this resolution and made a part hereof . The -4- (d) The loan repayments required of the Company under the Loan Agreement are fixed, and required to be revised from time to time as necessary so as to produce income and revenue sufficient to provide for the prompt payment when due of the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds , and the Loan Agreement also provides that the Company is required to pay all expenses of the operation and maintenance of the Project, including, but without limitation, adequate insurance thereon and all taxes, if any, and special assessments levied upon or with respect to the Project payable during the term of the Loan Agreement ; and (e) Under the provisions of the Act and as provided in the Indenture, the Bonds are not to be payable from nor charged upon any funds of the City, other than the revenues pledged to the payment thereof; the City is not subject to any liability thereon; no holders of the Bonds shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay any of the Bonds or the interest thereon, nor to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City, except the revenues under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof; the Bonds shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City, except the revenues under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof; each Bond issued under the Indenture shall recite in substance that the Bonds, including interest thereon, -3- J�L- ci (d) a Preliminary Official Statement dated June 20, 1989, and form of final Official Statement, including the Appendices thereto (together the Official Statement) , describing the offering of the Bonds, and certain terms and provisions of the foregoing documents; (e) a Disbursing Agreement, dated as of July 1, 1989 , proposed to be entered into between the Company, the Trustee and Title Insurance Company of Minnesota; and (f) a Bond Purchase Agreement (the Bond Purchase Agreement) , proposed to be entered into between the Company, the City, and Miller Securities, Incorporated (the Purchaser) . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . It is hereby found, determined and declared that : (a) The City is authorized under the Act to issue the Bonds; (b) The financing of the Project, the issuance and sale of the Bonds and the execution and delivery of the Loan Agreement, the Indenture and the Bond Purchase Agreement are being undertaken by the City pursuant to the Act; (c) It is desirable that the Bonds be issued by the City upon the terms set forth in the Indenture, under the provisions of which the City will grant to the Trustee, as security for the payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds , a security interest in all of the City' s right, title and interest in the Loan Agreement, except for certain rights of the City for its fees , its expenses and indemnification; -2- RESOLUTION NO. 3076 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE AND ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT AND APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS WHEREAS, it is proposed that the City of Shakopee issue its $2,300,000 Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Mebco Industries, Inc. Project) (the Bonds) , to provide financing for a project under the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes , Sections 469. 152-469 . 165, as amended (the Act) , on behalf of Mebco Industries, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation (the Company) , consisting of the acquisition of land in. the City and the construction and equipping thereon of an approximately 60,000 square foot manufacturing facility (the Project) ; and WHEREAS, the proposal calls for the City and the Company to enter into a Loan Agreement wherein the City will loan the proceeds of the Bonds to the Company and the Company will agree to undertake, operate and maintain the Project and pay all costs thereof and to repay the loan from the City by loan repayments to be fixed and revised from time to time as necessary so as to produce income and revenues sufficient to provide for the prompt payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds and all costs and expenses of the City in connection with the Project and issuance and sale of the Bonds; and WHEREAS, copies of the following documents relating to the Project and the Bonds have been submitted to this Council and are now on file in the offices of the City Clerk: (a) a Loan Agreement (the Loan Agreement) , dated as of July 1, 1989, proposed to be made and entered into between the City and the Company; (b) an Indenture of Trust (the Indenture) , dated as of July 1, 1989, proposed to be made and entered into between the City and First Trust National Association, of St. Paul, Minnesota, as trustee (the Trustee) ; (c) a Mortgage and Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement (the Mortgage) , dated as of July 1, 1989, proposed to be given by the Company, as mortgagor, to the Trustee, as mortgagee; MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Barry A. Stock, Administrative Assistant RE: MEBCO I.D.R.B. Approval - Resolution No. 3076 DATE: July 5, 1989 INTRODUCTION: MEBCO Industries, Inc. and the City of Shakopee' s Bond Counsel have been working for the past three months to complete the Industrial Development Revenue Bond (IDRB) transaction. The appropriate applications, agreements and documents have been completed and all that remains is final City Council approval of the Industrial Development Revenue Bond transaction. BACKGROUND: On April 4, 1989 Shakopee City Council approved Resolution No. 3036 granting preliminary approval for IDRB's for the MEBCO Industries development project. Shown in attachment #1 is Resolution No. 3076 authorizing the sale and issuance of the I.D.R.B. 's and the subsequent provisions granting Council approval and authorization for the execution of the necessary legal documents. The amount of the bond sale is $2. 3 million. MEBCO Industries intends to construct a 60,000 square foot manufacturing facility within the Shakopee Industrial Park within the next six months. MEBCO Industries will initially employ 75+ employees and plans to eventually employee in excess of 200 employees. Staff would like to point out that in the event of default on the part of MEBCO Industries on the bonds, the City of Shakopee and Shakopee residents will not be responsible for the retirement of the debt. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Offer Resolution No. 3076 approving the sale and issuance of the I .D.R.B. ' s under the Municipal Industrial Development Act and approving and authorizing the execution of the documents. 2. Do not approve Resolution No. 3076. 3 . Table action pending further information from staff. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative No. 1. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3076 , a resolution authorizing the sale and issuance of Industrial Development Revenue Bonds under the Municipal Industrial Development Act and approving and authorizing the execution of documents and move it' s approval. DWELLING Year built 1 � e_X�Lsq. ft. stozry-1l?eig1%r Stq Atar ' :• 1 no. rooms X+ V -' 'F no. baths '6 4 '17 no. bedrooms 2— basement percent Po�1 p; basement fin. _0 _ �� d'•` l heat electrical - Wilt ins " - _- — ` •f rooms carpeted o a . Lot size SU X 1e GARAGE JZ._X i% = 0-0 (a _ _ - attached Yes_m 1�1 single wall No U P\ U double wall wired Yes no . OBSERVED CONDITION: Exc. Good Fair Poor P 042 932 089 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED :AA1L Iq tx;uaucE LP/fPPpE'MwnM IR FOP IXiFXXFiIGNt AN, See Reverser ' SHAKOPEE sncx PosrpGE srpyars ra nrincs rc cr:ar s:.3r fiER11RFJ111W`HE.ARD CHARGES HR n::':3E_:i]]i't , MINNESOTA 553]91316 I612I d463660 A You want thB reUiPt ppaMalkM.stick fs cam.P1 st^,' 'ecelpl mladhed and pmsent the eudde at a Pas:"Rice se ezre charge) f you do nm wam this rePeilit posM2rked.stkk June 27 , 1989 zfPla,ate,deeaeh as reten the recipt. Il you wam a Rturn'_'Pt'writs Ne elpl Gtd,FPM 3811,MdaOzo it M ,. ,t to noe,aRh to aek of atli Lisa Schneckenberger aGPttothe number. Heigl Mortgage and Financial Corp. P you ,"ad Of 3601 Minnesota Drive, Suite 310 3snecro oeuv Edina, MN 55435 ETer(Us for Gimis rtgu Dear Ms. Schneckenberger, sa e This is to inform you that the property at 211 Filmore Street, Shakopee, has been posted to prevent occupancy due to unsafe and unhealthful conditions. Furthermore, the City of Shakopee orders that all trash, appliances and garbage be removed from the premises by July 12, 1989, or the City will cause the removal and assess the property for the costs of the clean-up. There are a number of critical problems with this property that prevent its use as a residence. You should talk to the Building Official, LeRoy Houser, for further information. If the property is not repaired within a reasonable length of time, or if it continues to cause a nuisance, then the City will consider condemnation proceedings for the purpose of demolishing the structure. Thank you for your cooperation. Let me know if you have any questions or if I can be of assistance. Sincerely, ���,r Newton Parker Housing Inspector City of Shakopee cc: Craig Marta #17 Rita Lane, Bonnevista T.C. Shakopee, MN 55439 The Heart Of Progress Valley AN EOUaL OPMRTUN)rYEMPLOYEP i I / 2 _ ACTION REOUESTED• Authorize the City Attorney to pursue condemnation and demolition of the residence at 211 Fillmore Street, Shakopee , as directed by the Building Official . Such authorization should stipulate that the Building Official may quit said action if the conditions prompting the condemnation are abated by the owner of record which satisfy the Uniform Housing Code , and City Ordinances . 113 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Newton Parker, Housing Inspector RE: Condemnation and Demolition of Residence DATE : July 7 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Staff is seeking permission from the Council to pursue condemnation and demolition of a one family residence that is presently posted as unfit for habitation due an accumulation of putrefied refuse and due to other damage inflicted on the property by the previous C.D. owner. The City Attorney requires Council ' s permission to proceed, which may be as early as July 13 , 1989 . Due to the increasing health hazard compounded by the hot temperatures of late , staff wishes to move on this as quickly as possible . BACKGROUND : Over the past three months , staff has received four separate complaints regarding violations of housing and zoning ordinances at the residence at 211 Fillmore Street . While some of the complaints were exaggerated, there were in fact violations noted and the home owner was cooperating in our efforts to correct the situation. The violations involved running an auto repair shop in a residential neighborhood, parking excess numbers of vehicles , and repairing autos and storing parts in an unscreened area outside . Sometime over the weekend of June 24, the C.D . owner abandoned the house , dismantling and taking with him the cupboards , appliances , and an outside deck. Left behind were auto batteries , parts , wrecked appliances , garbage , and trash. Attempts to locate the owner were futile , and the fee owner was notified of the abandonment and the condition of the property, and was given until July 12 , to clean up the premises and commence repairs . (See enclosure) . As is , the property is an attractant for rodents , and an inviting nuisance for children and vagrants . The Building Official feels that the house is not salvageable and should be demolished, and I would concur. If left in its present state , the property would pose a health risk to the neighboring properties , while shedding a bad light on the City in general . Memo To: Mayor Lebens and City Council Members From: Marilyn M. Remer, Personnel Coordinator Re: City Administrator Position Date: July 7, 1989 Introductio The in-basket testing results of the City Administrator candidates has been received and distributed to all Council members for their review. Backeround The results of the oral interviews and in-basket tests have been received completing the process established for selecting a City Administrator. At this point, no reference or background checks, nor psychological tests have been done on any of the candidates. Council is asked to set a date to hold an executive session to discuss the results of the oral interviews and in- basket exercises, name the successful candidate, and discuss salary and other conditions of employment to be offered the successful candidate. Action Reauested Move to hold a Council Executive Session on (date) at (time) to discuss negotiations necessary to fill the City Administrator's position. ,may S m 0 S S N O O N� a 8 N %C N N M H D\ -O X tl} y U N Y X 0 0 G iY-1 W C C N N b O X N I T 6 G O N X U N Y 0 m u 3 � O 0 O W U v O O O E N G Vl ��y [s C� E N U _ _ _ 2 O (4 C4 U 0 = O M � U NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N NNN N N N N N ON` NN W > w W U ti 0 0 L j 0 6 Y O 0 00 h U 04 N cz X; W y, ri 6 Y V Y Y Y Y b N U EI 0. O 7 N ro O E E E E E E E E E fwi SFi U In 0 0 o a � U a u Ym m M�z tiUm N N NppSSY MMS � O it S N O O No C �6 NM," N1{ 4 N A4 ;%6 g "moi O�N� lam- 0 0 O� > N O 1 N �D11 N H N M N DODO M C 07 N Y W cE a o � F C 6 3 T 0000000000000000 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 o da v � 0020000000002000 0 0 O O 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 NNHNNNHNHNH .iNN 00000000000 .+ 0000 o m mmm m m m m m o 1-r 'F•. o .a i-m � 8 888 8 8 8 8 8 tib S p888 8 8 8 8 8 tib 000000000000 NNO�O O N NNN M M N N N N H p Z Y .iNNN .i i-INHHHHNMMOO��ttUU NNNNNNNNN MMMN NIM M O� M�O\ ' Z � 11?1111111111111 1 1 111' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1M s c .i ti .i .i .i .ti .i .i .i rl .i vi .i .i ri .i 4 .i -i .y ri ti 4 .i 4 rl 4 4 ri OOOOOOOOOOO . 0000 0 mmm m m m m m 0 1-1- S SC� 8 8 8 8 o 8 8 N N O\ O 1 to N M O N M mw [� y N D\ N M N D\ 4 N D\ N rj N Y � U W m W m F O Y X m W Ot m ttl E Y >a O m w 0 O C 0 N T N m I>�, p0p V O b I m W I G C F U U {a Q m F 3 w m m W O 1 N m O GJ 00 L G a> 1 I G 4 aU O �+ m O 0. O >a L X v U m 'O m mOm' m E p�O0' N m U F M > W E LL E G > U E = c h W 5 Z tel] �l U U U O Z In In � N c0 M D\D\ 00 M D\ O T � W V V y o a F E �Opp MO NO W vw NOIh.Y 00 N 4 �Y O m N y W W S W t G v v ^ S NC M - W W N O E E W O E E E E E P. O m F O Nml F F F m m m N G C M' to U � N � to W NJ o x U Q U N 88 1? 8 'm om U' lO UO 8 8 S e o rn 8 8 rn o O O O N N a Nti w y a �i M G U Y F N Q 7 F Nyy W N ti N E E O m C N 3 Y Q F 7 0 0 m N G E 7a > m U 00 0 0 0 000 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O v O m m C S V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N FOU W W H Y 6 00 0 0 0 000 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N G I 1 I I I I cFi �Om� m .Ni m mmm mo m �m m o 0 0 o wo .N.mmmn� 88 8 mN 8 888 81 8 8 8 0 8 8 rn oN "7 8 � 88 $� 8 8 8 8 p�p 8G O O N N N M� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N Y M M O M O\ O\O\O\ O\N M M N M M M M M N M + N N N .Y 1 -Y.>.Y J Y N N N N CU N 1 1 s . R N 8 m 8 0 o . 8 8 8 & 8 O 01 O O P O N O >O N w M ON O N O O M 6 Y � U • O N 0 0Vi 0Vi d .d r � w m 0 a m t C L m d! C ❑ N V O ...� N IO U UJ IA 6 m 'i 0, N Y Y C S mCm mGm Y \ 6 O G O O m m 0 G O F .Oi h V .�•� W S U •p U U {. ul' m d m O W P. ppN��N NN N N N NN N NDN m N N N N N N (V N N N N N N N � U N N N N O Ea jU N 0 M N m 0 H U 0 V O N d Y > O ¢ EF F U '�O m>a 4yvi 6 C m v V +Y+ v m C u > W � W ❑ GW. U 2 L m 0 m G �+ y Z X¢; �' v v v v V V v v d •+ v C F C Y O VV O W o x U GL V Y p p pp Y R mcN O O N O O m O N S C O�� N 8 8 0 N 8 00 - C O O\ \6 �00 v\ > O N > O. 1D N N MA N N C) M Q R R O 6 ti M C�,s rl S C\ 0\ M N U 6 Y V O O 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000000 0 0 0 00 O 00 O 6 0 0 0 00 0 0 H .-I •4 H N N H .•� nl N r-I .i N •I �I H ri N N N N N .i O O O O O O O M O 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 O 02 p U w m Comm m m m m 000000000000 O CD O 00 O 00 O g 88 5888 88 88 88 88 8 88 88 M�M� NmNWN . » � � � m Y O O 080 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .moi �+Mis H.�i n� .N-IMM O V 6 0 4 66 .i F N M �p 10 N D\ ��.•I N H N H H N .-I O O pp O O nl ��D\01NNNNNN N N 10 O 10 NN O� tpp+1 � • Y � D\ 01010\ O\ � � � O1 01 01 SSSS MM NNNNNN M M M MM O� MM M F � S SSS 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3331` 33333333 S N S SS S SS S 44 ni .i .i I� N Y U O W Q 0 N + Q N 6 � N O 0 o m wm m 0o a roe NW -1 Nw J z ov e o ee < � 00 0 N NN O e av a ae U Q O o0 0 00 f U O W Y LL ti F O w I- ¢ z a w wN ti Z FNJ o WQQ F On~ p ¢Y6 6 F !-7 7 2 60Q62 O W ZZ LL 16 N G QW NJW6¢ wp F Fa 6 6f f ¢N FYZ F w w a WQ Q JJ w¢¢Qo¢Ww W U U 00 Of2UNpwN F N O i W U ¢ Z 6 Y w 2z O ZY JJJJJJJJ p LL ww o ww QQQQQaQQ 2 j O ¢¢ (.l NN 00000000 N W W w NN FFFf'-�-Ff O p ~w F JJ HONtiWNmN p ££ U 00 OrrNNNmn 2 W as W WW O_p_pp__p.00 > _ LL z _ Q 66 JJ FF LLLLLLLLLLLL== ~ W Z JJ LLLL O 6 66 N jj ~ O + 1Om mm o0o WOV10 NWm0 O 10, NN NON NWI�OOOnO WW mm mmC NONnnW mNW WOO meNtiWNm _ 00 NN 00 NN Wm We £J NN 1�1+ .y.y N •YW 1+ eW Q W m WW W WW Y Q m NN N NN N m mm mm � a o 00 o po 00 0 > o r z U Y WW NN U S Wm U f0 N N N N Y Y Y Y U U U V U Q c £ m � a o ^� 0 O o a ti r o 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � ry N m NN m N O a e a as a a a a a U p .• .y 0 0 ti .• .r .• .v a o 0 0 o m o 0 0 z � O N .Ni N F J N > p m O O O r y O m N U > m m ¢ N d rZn N N N 7 O W 6 2 N 6p 6 Z 6 O O O 7 6 p O Z w O T r OJ S O O i O p O O N p p Nm N U N 4 W W N H m U N F N 1 o a > N 6 K m Z0 2 Q m O £ X £ U' V J Q U p G 6 T S w N Z U 6 w Y ¢ U D J N j Z NN ti O 7 N N £ N w YY 6' 6 N Z W Y J y J Z UU K F � £ Y •+ 6 6 V Q 00 00 0o mom Q0 00 00 • 00 00 00a 00 00 0 e0a a o0 00 00 00 0o ava oa o0 0 na NO m a mm ON NN NN 0O OOb -� Oa mm A mm m mm Z -•ti NN O £ ¢ Y m m mm N m N N N N N N N N m N b b \ \ b\ \ \ S W \ \ \ bb b m 0 b 10 b b b N r b m m Q O O O 00 O O O O O O O O O O O O LL O O T O T z At" C ( C� ti METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mean zad C�m. 230 rte,FiJA s,mer, s- roY1, MA'. 55101 cn 291-45M9 RECEIVED) r ORR-SCHELEN MAYERON A ASSO(------a July 15, 1988 COMM. -38�/S•!O - JUL 1 8 1988 John Anderson, Administrator - City of Shakopee '- 129 - 1st Avenue East P - Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer and Appurtenant Work City of Shakopee Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14531-1 Dear Mr. Anderson: At its meeting on July 14, 1988, the Metropolitan Council considered the EAW for the Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer and Appurtenant Work. This consideration was based on a report of the Environmental Resources Committee, Referral Report No. 88-45• A copy of this report is attached. The Council approved the following recommendations contained in the above report: 1. Find the EAW incomplete; 2. Ask the city of Shakopee to submit the requested information in order that the Council can determine whether an impact on a metropolitan system is likely to occur. Sincerely, C v tEL:z/� Steve Keefe Chair SK:ll Attachment cc: Greg Downing, Environmental Review Coordinator, Environ. Rev. Sec., EQH David Hutton, City of Shakopee Peter R. Willenbring, P.E., Manager, Water Resources Department Minnesota Pollution Control Agency James Hiniker, MWCC Gary Oberts, Metropolitan Council Staff Metropolitan Council Meeting of July 14, 1988 Business Item: E 1 �, ¢ -4 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL :-Maa t Suite 300 Metro Square Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 291-6359 :] REPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE Referral Report No. 88-45 "F.r DATE: July 8, 1988 TO: Metropolitan Council 5* , SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer EAW City of Shakopee Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14531-1 Metropolitan Council District 14 - BACKGROUND r At its meeting of July 5, 1988, the Environmental Resources Committee considered the staff review of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer project in the City of Shakopee. ISSUES AND CONCERNS Committee members emphasized the need for an overall watershed surface water management framework to be in place before a large drainage project such as that proposed proceeds. The committee also encouraged the city to adopt a .. _. ._ water quality control strategy related to the project so that allowable load -- levels would not be exceeded in the Minnesota River leading to more stringent treatment requirements at Seneca and Blue Lake. RECOMMENDATION W. That the Metropolitan Council : - ..y 1 . Find the Environmental Assessment Worksheet incomplete; and 2. Ask the City of Shakopee to submit the requested information in order that the Council can determine whether an impact on a metropolitan system is likely to occur. -'s y Respectfully submitted, , . Josephine Nunn, Chair METROPO LI TAN COUNCIL MEARS PARR CENTRE, 230 E. 5TH ST. . _ 17 ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 -. DATE: June 28 , 1988 TO: Environmental Resources Committee , . FROM: Gary Oberts, Natural Resources Division . - -i Subject: Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer EAW City of Shakopee, Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14531-1, District No. 14 INTRODUCTION The city of Shakopee is proposing to construct a trunk surface water drainage system that would drain 5,700 acres through a single outlet. The drainage system would serve the Mill Pond watershed tributary to the Minnesota River at Shakopee (Figure 1) The upper reaches of the system would be open channel flow, with the lower end of the system confined to a concrete pipe storm sewer until discharge near the river. The current path of discharge from this watershed is via a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources designated trout stream. The proposal by the city includes a partial hydraulic separation through the installation of sheet piling in a series of two ponds. Some modification of the ponds would be needed to improve the habitat :. for trout. The Shakopee Basin Watershed Management Organization (SBWMO) is the designated WMO for the larger scale watershed in which the Mill Pond subwatershed lies. Tho SBWMO has not completed its watershed plan, but the city plans to operate the proposed system in conformance with the policies and regulations of the plan when it is adopted. The city of Shakopee is represented on the board of the SBWMO. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) prepared under the Minnesota Environmental Review Program must be submitted to the Metropolitan Council and other agencies for review. The city of Shakopee submitted the drainage proposal as a discretionary EAW. Any recipient of an EAW or member of the public may make comments and recommendations to the responsible governmental unit (RGU) , which in this case is also the city of Shakopee. Comments are to address the accuracy and completeness of the EAW information, and potential impacts that may warrant investigation and/or the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) . The Metropolitan 2 Council also reviews EAWS for impact on regional systems and for conformance with Council policies as contained in the Metropolitan Development Guide. ANALYSIS The EAW submitted by the city of Shakopee for the proposed drainage project contains a minimum amount of information about the nature of the work to be undertaken and the potential for impact on the Minnesota River. Supplemental information was requested from the city and received, but this information also contained no discussion of the impact of the project on the water quality of the Minnesota River. The EAW for the Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer and Appurtenant Work is therefore incomplete, given the potential for impact on the quality of the Minnesota River and the trout stream that currently drains the watershed. The proposed project would discharge storm+ater at a 100-year frequency design rate of 893 cubic feet per second (cfs) ; the volume of additional discharge from the project is unspecified. Discharge from the project occurs into the Minnesota River which is the subject of a major improvement effort by the Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. The current rate of discharge to the Minnesota River from the Mill Pond subwatershed is unknown because of the lack of flow monitoring for the basin. Discussions with the engineer for the city indicate that approximately 100-150 cfs could discharge through the existing conveyance system at the subwatershed outlet before flooding and railroad track over-topping would occur. A flow simulation done for the city indicates that approximately 552 cfs would occur if development proceeded in the entire subwatershed under the assumption of no allowed increase in runoff rate, that is, ponding of runoff would be required throughout the entire basin. The scenario for development chosen by the city, however, precludes ponding in the lower portions of the basin, hence the additional 341 cfs under design conditions. Reasons for selection of the "no ponding" alternative include lack of existing detention locations, easy conveyance of runoff to the Minnesota River, timing of flow peaks and cost. The difference between a ponding and a no ponding alternative is $500,000. The EAW contains no analysis of the methods proposed to separate a potentially large volume of runoff from the MDNR designated trout stream. The supplemental information does, however, include a schematic of the proposed sheet piling system. The major item of omission in the EAW from the Metropolitan Council ' s viewpoint is the failure of the city to include an analysis of the water quality impacts that could be expected from a major discharge of the type proposed. First, there is no 3 statement of existing or expected discharge volumes, so we. are not able to determine what the actual impact or change from - present volumes is likely to be. This is critical because flow volume is required in order to do an analysis of nonpoint - -- — pollution loading from the subwatershed. - - In order to assess the impact of this proposal on the Minnesota = River, the EAW should contain information on the discharge volumes expected for average annual and 100-year frequency events, as well as the change that these figures represent from current conditions. The EAW should follow this flow analysis with an analysis of the water quality that will be discharged to the Mill Ponds. Specific interest in this analysis should be paid to solids, nitrogen and oxygen-demanding substances. The EAW should also include an indication of how the city proposes to reduce, in accordance with the discussion in the next paragraph, the high nonpoint source pollution loads that will be carried by surface waters draining a watershed of this magnitude and discharging to the Minnesota River. This proposal has potential impact on one of the metropolitan systems that the Council is charged with maintaining. The MPCA issued permits for the MWCC-owned treatment facilities at Blue Lake and Seneca in December 1967. These permits established discharge limitations that are based on an expected nonpoint source pollution reduction of 40 percent for the Minnesota River basin. A failure to meet this expected reduction in pollution load by the next permit issuance in 1992 will likely result in stricter discharge limits for the two plants and, therefore, increases in capital expenditures and operating costs to meet the necessary treatment levels at the two plants. The reason for this is that a maximum allowable waste load has been determined for the plants based on the MPCA-determined nonpoint source pollution reduction. Growth in the communities served by these plants and the resulting volumes of sewage to the plants mean that nonpoint pollution reductions must proceed as anticipated to keep below the maximum allowable loads determined by the MPGA. In order to determine if a metropolitan system impact will result from this proposal, the information noted previously on hydrology, water quality, and load mitigation must be submitted. p CONCLUSIONS 1. The EAW submitted for the Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer -. and Appurtenant Work by the city of Shakopee contains an insufficient amount of information for the Metropolitan Council to properly review its potential environmental impact. 4 2. In order for the Council to conduct a thorough review_of the .EAW and to determine if an impact on a regional system is likely to occur, the city will need to provide information on the following items: - a hydrologic analysis of the proposed discharge regime t and an indication of how this varies from the current discharge conditions, including volumes for the - average annual and 100- year frequencies; - a water quality analysis of the solids, nutrient and oxygen-demanding substances loading expected under the above conditions; and .. - the methods that the city intendsto use to mitigate the impact of the high nonpoint source pollution loads normally occurring with this type of discharge from a large watershed--this in accord with the MPCA mandate to reduce existing nonpoint loads to the Minnesota River by 40 percent. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Metropolitan Council: 1. Find the EAW incomplete; and 2 . Ask the city of Shakopee to submit the requested information in order that the Council can determine whether an impact on a metropolitan system is likely to occur. ) � � METROPOLITAN COUNCIL mm Pak co m. 23o&w rthn sneer, sr. rma, mv. ss/oi 612 2966359 'June 19, 1989 David Hutton City Engineer City of Shakopee 129 East 1st Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Shakopee Upper Valley Drainage Project Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14531-2 Dear Mr. Hutton: At its meeting on June 8, 1989, the Metropolitan Council considered the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) on the proposed Upper Valley Drainage and Outfall project. This consideration was based on a report of the Environmental Resources Committee, Referral Report No. 89-48, A copy of this report is attached. The Council approved the following recommendations contained in the above report: 1. Accept the supplemental analysis prepared by the City of Shakopee for the Upper Valley Drainage and Outfall project. 2. Find the EAW complete. Sincerely, Steve Keefe Chair SK:ll Attachment cc: Gregg Downing, Environmental Review Coordinator, Environ. Rev. Sec., EQR Peter R. Willenbring, P.E., Manager, Water Resources Dept., OSM Administrator, City of Shakopee Gene Soderbeck, P.E., MPCA Gary Oberts, Metropolitan Council Staff Metropolitan Council Meeting of June 8. 1989 Business Item: E-1 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth; 6359 t, St. Paul , Minnesota 55101 REPORT OF THE EN ITTEE KeferraNTReportONoCE 89e b8 DATE: June 1 , 1989 TO: Metropolitan Council SUBJECT: Shakopee Upper Valley EAW Metropolitan Council Referral file No. 14531'} BACKGROUND At its meeting on May 31 , 1989. the Environmental Resources Committee considered the above mentioned report. ISSUES AND D CONCERNS No issues or concerns were raised by the committee. RECOMMENDATIONS That the Metropolitan Council : 1 . Accept the supplemental analysis prepared by the City of Shakopee for the Upper Valley Drainageway and Outfall project. 2. Find the EAW complete. �h Respectfully submitted, ; Michael McLaughlin, Chair "- METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 730 East Fifth Street, St. Paul. Minnesota 55101 DATE: May 23, 1989 TO: Environmental Resources Committee FROM: Gary Oberts, Natural Resources Division SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainageway and Outfall Project City of Shakopee Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14531-1 INTRODUCTION The City of Shakopee prepared an EAW on the proposed Upper Valley Drainageway and Outfall project and submitted it for Metropolitan Council review in July of 1988. The Council found that the EAW was incomplete and that the project had the potential to impact the regional sewer system because of the large size of the outlet to the Minnesota River. The Council asked the city to analyze several aspects of the project and to report back to the Council after this work was complete. DISCUSSION The City of Shakopee responded to the Council's request for additional evaluation of the drainage project and have restructured the entire project. Initially, the city proposed no detention of stormwater within its boundaries. In the new submittal, the city has included extensive detention facilities designed according to Council and MPCA guidelines. The city has also evaluated the water quality impacts of its proposal and responded accordingly. As a result of these efforts, the city has prepared a complete EAW which addresses ail of the Council's concerns. RECOMMENDATIONS 1.) That the Metropolitan Council accept the supplemental analysis prepared by the City of Shakopee for the Upper Valley Drainageway and Outfall project 2.) That the Metropolitan Council find the EAW complete. RESOLUTION NO. 30T3 A Resolution Regarding Negative Declaration of Need For An Environmental Impact Statement for the Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer Project Project No. 198T-5 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Shakopee is the official governing body of the City of Shakopee; and WHEREAS , pursuant to the rules of the Minnesota Environmental Review Program, the City of Shakopee has submitted an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed Upper Valley Drainage Storm Sewer Project to the Environmental Quality Board ( EQB ) and to the members of the Minnesota Environmental Review Program distribution list for a 30-day review period; and WHEREAS, during this comment period, comments were received from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Department of Transportation, and the Metropolitan Council ; WHEREAS , based upon the record established by the EAW documents and comments, the City Council of the City of Shakopee finds the following: t . The EAW document establishes that no significant adverse or irreversible environmental impacts can be anticipated from the proposed project. 2. The EAW document establishes that no cumulative effects beyond those analyzed are anticipated. 3 . The EAW document identifies mitigative measures which will be employed to alleviate possible impacts and indicates that mitigation of possible impacts will be required as a part of the project implementation by the City. 4 . The EAW document serves to identify the potential for significant adverse effects. 5 . There were no comments or other evidence received regarding the project that would introduce or identify any unanticipated adverse environmental effects which would warrant preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) ; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SH6%OPEE: That it finds that the Upper Valley Drainage Way Storm Sewer Project has no potential for significant environmental impact for and makes a negative declaration with regard to the need for preparation of an EIS. 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 ; ONSENT Iz� MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: David Hutton, City Engine SUBJECT: Vierling Drive Assessments Project No. 1988-1 DATE: July 5 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Staff would like Council to set a date for the public hearing on the proposed assessments for Vierling Drive, Project No. 1988-1 . BACKGROUND: Vierling Drive, between C.R. 16 and C. R. 17 was constructed in two phases under two separate contracts. The eastern half of the street through the Hauer' s Addition was constructed in 1987 and 1988 by S.M. Hentges and Sons, Inc. The assessments for this project have already been adopted by Council and certified to the County. The western half of Vierling Drive is the subject of this memo. This petition of the street was constructed during the fall of 1988 , with the final wear course of asphalt and restoration work completed in June, 1989 • This portion of Vierling Drive crosses through properties owned by Scottland, Inc. No other property owners are involved. The project is essentially complete ( 99% ) and all final quantities are known. The total construction costs for the project are $379 ,532 .87 . This consists of $174 ,694.05 for storm sewer construction and $204 ,838 .82 for street construction. The total engineering and administrative costs to date are $149 , 173 .60 or 39% of the construction costs. This includes an amount of $89 ,200 .00 for right-of-way acquisition costs. The total project costs are summarized below: Construction Costs $ 379 ,532.87 Engineering and Administrative Costs $ 149 .173 .60 Total Project Costs $528,706.47 The feasibility report prepared for this project indicated that all abutting properties should be assessed 100% of the costs for the equivalent of a 36 foot wide local street. (Note : Vierling Drive was constructed as a 50 foot wide collector street) . In addition, the storm sewer would be assessed 100% based on the runoff created by the entire drainage area and local street versus the runoff created by the oversizing of Vierling Drive. Using those parameters, it was calculated that $405,357 .09 should be assessed to Scottland, Inc. Staff will further explain the assessment procedures and calculations at the public hearing. Attached is Resolution No. 3077, which declares the cost to be assessed and sets the date for the public hearing. Because of the legal notice requirements for the official mailings, the earliest date that the public hearing could be held is on August 1 , 1989 . The resolution sets the public hearing for that date. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No . 3077 , which sets the date for the public hearing on August 1 , 1989 . 2. Adopt Resolution No. 3077 , but set a different date for the public hearing. 3 . Do not adopt Resolution No. 3077 . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to adopt Resolution No. 3077 and set the date for the public hearing on August 1 , 1989 at 7:30 P.M. or thereafter. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3077 , A Resolution Declaring the Cost to be Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for Vierling Drive from County Road 17 Easterly for + 3200 Feet, Project No. 1988-1 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3077 RESOLUTION NO. 3077 A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessments For Vierling Drive From County Road 17 Easterly For + 3200 Feet, Project No. 1988-1 WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of: Vierling Drive by Street and Storm Construction and the contract price for such improvements is $379 , 532 .87 , the construction contingency amounts to $ 0 and the expenses incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvements amounts to $149 , 173 .60 so that the total cost of the improvements will be $528 ,706 .47 and of this cost the City will pay $123 ,349 .38 as its share of the cost. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITT OF SHAKOPEE, NINNESOTA: 1 . The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed is hereby declared to be $405 ,357 .09 2 . The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law , and he shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public inspection. 3. That the City Clerk shall, upon the completion of such proposed assessment, notify the City Council thereof. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1 . That a hearing shall be held on the 1st day of August, 1989 , in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 7 : 30 P . M . to pass upon such proposed assessments and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvements and proposed assessments will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. 2. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two weeks prior to the hearing and he shall state in the notice the total cost of the improvements. He shall also cause mailed notice of such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing . Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of _ 19 Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST. City Clerk Approved as to form this day of 19 City Attorney MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineer\Lst -f- 1 SUBJECT: 1989 Pavement Preservation Program Project No. 1989-10 DATE: July 6 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Staff is requesting permission to advertise for bids for the 1989 Pavement Preservation Program. BACKGROUND: The Engineering Department, in cooperation with Public Works , is finalizing the proposed 1989 Pavement Preservation Program. The Public Works Department has an annual budget of $95 ,000 for the Pavement Preservation Program. Normally , the Pavement Preservation Program consists of a sealcoating contract and an overlay contract. In 1988 , only an overlay contract was run due to the numerous streets that were beyond sealcoating and the fact that most sealcoating candidates could wait 1 more year . Staff has now reviewed the condition of the streets in Shakopee. Again, due to the lack of any pavement management system which was eliminated from the 1990 City budget by Council , staff had to resort to a "windshield inspection" of the streets to determine which blocks needed sealcoating , overlay or reconstruction . Based on this inspection, it appears that there are a group of streets that need sealcoating and another group of streets that are beyond any preservation and in need of rehabilitation , but there are very few streets in need of overlaying. At this time staff is proposing to only bid out a sealcoating contract for various streets, as listed in Attachment 1 . The majority of these streets were last sealccated in 1984 and are in need of another sealcoat . ( Every 4-5 years is the industry standard) . The estimated costs for this contract is as follows Construction Costs $52 ,200 .00 Engineering/Admin . (25%) 1 ? ,000 .00 Total Cost Estimate $65,200 .00 This is well below the $95 ,000 budgeted for this program, but staff would like to keep somewhat of a reserve in the budget for miscellaneous work such as paint striping, small overlays, etc . In addition , once the contract is awarded for the sealcoating project , staff would like to possibly run a small overlay contract if there is adequate funding remaining . Since a sealcoating contractor is completely separate from an overlaying contractor, the bids would need to be let separately anyway. During the process for the 1990 budget, staff had requested $60 ,000 for the purpose of utilizing a pavement management system to provide a sytematic method of evaluating streets for the proper method of maintenance ( overlays vs . sealcoats vs. reconstruction) . This cost included $30 ,000 for the field collection of data and $30 ,000 for the computer software to develop strategies and manage the data. Of the $30 , 000 data collection cost, $15 ,000 is for all urban streets and $15,000 is for the rural streets. Staff had recommended that rather than spend the entire $60,000 at one time the expenditures could be divided into several years by collecting the data one year, buying the software the next, etc. Council did not approve of any expenditures in the 1990 budget. Staff would like to propose that using dollars from the Pavement Preservation Program that is already budgeted to start purchasing this system is an excellent use of that money . Without a pavement management system, trying to select streets for our preservation program is basically a "guessing game". From the surface, a street may appear to be preservable and worthy of an overlay, but below the surface the gravel base could be shot and overlaying that street will not solve the problem. The City is conceivably wasting money in those cases. Staff is proposing to schedule an in-depth discussion on the pavement management system at a future Council meeting or perhaps at a special meeting to discuss the merits of these systems. A representative from the consultant that staff is proposing to utilize can also be made available to talk to Council. At this time, staff is requesting permission to advertise for bids for the sealcoating project and also permission to arrange for an in-depth discussion on the proposed pavement management system. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3078 , authorizing staff to bid the 1989 Pavement Preservation Contract (sealcoating) . 2 . Deny Resolution No. 3078. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . Staff is also requesting that Council determine if they can devote approximately 1 hour at a regular Council meeting to discuss the proposed pavement management system or if Council would prefer to hold this discussion on a separate evening. Staff feels that the issue is important enough to hold this discussion on a separate night in order to fully answer all questions and so that a hasty decision is not made. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3078 , A Resolution Approving Plans and Specification and Ordering Advertisement for Bids for the 1989 Pavement Preservation Program - Sealcoating, Project 1989-10 and move its adoption . DH/pmp MEM3078 ATTACHMENT N0. 1 Proposed Sealcoat Contract Street Mame Limits. Polk Street All Tyler Street 13th to 12th Harrison Steet 13th to 12th, 11th to 10th Presidential Lane All Presidential Circle All 13th Avenue Harrison to W. of Polk 11th Avenue Tyler to Adams Monroe Street 12th to 10th Madison Street 12th to 10th McDevitt Avenue All Thomas Avenue All Hennes Avenue All Menke Avenue All Pierce Street McDevitt to Menke Scott Street S. of 10th Atwood Street S. of 10th Fuller Street S. of 10th Sibley Street All Ramsey Street All Swift Street All Miller Street All Merrifield Street All Merrit Street All 10th Avenue Marschall Rd. to Shakopee Ave. 11th Avenue Marschall Rd. to Shakopee Ave. Hawthorne Hts. Subdivision All Streets Riverview Estates Subdivision All Streets RESOLUTION NO. 3078 A Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Ordering Advertisement For Bids For The 1989 Pavement Preservation Program - Sealcoating Project No. 1989-10 WHEREAS, David Hutton, City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for the 1989 Pavement Preservation Program- Sealcoating and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file and of record in the Office of the City Engineer, are hereby approved. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertise- ment for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The Advertisement for Bids shall be published for ten days, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be received by the City Clerk until 10 :00 A.M. , on August 8 , 1989 , at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers of the City Hall by the City Clerk and Engineer, or their designated party , will then be tabulated , and will be considered by the Council at 7:00 P.M. , or thereafter on August 15 , 1989 , in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier' s check, bid bond or certified check payable to the order of the City of Shakopee for not less than five (5$ ) percent of the amount of the Bid. 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 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator I FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engine���, SUBJECT: Boiling Springs Lane DATE: June 29 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3075 , Receiving a Report and Calling for a Public Hearing on Drainage Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane. BACKGROUND: On April 27 , 1989 City Council ordered the preparation of the feasibility report for drainage improvements to Boiling Springs Lane by Resolution No. 3035. The feasibility report has been completed and the report is attached for Council review. Attached is Resolution No . 3075 , receiving the feasibility report and calling for a public hearing on the proposed improvements. The resolution sets a date of the public hearing for August 1 , 1989 at 7:30 P.M. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Adopt Resolution No. 3075 and hold a public hearing on the proposed improvements on August 1 , 1989 • 2 . Do not adopt Resolution No. 3075 • RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 . ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3075 , A Resolution Receiving a Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to Boiling Springs Lane , Project No. 1989-9 and move its adoption. DH/pmp BSPRINGS i RESOLUTION NO. 3075 A Resolution Receiving A Report And Calling A Hearing On Drainage Improvements To Boiling Springs Lane WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 3035 of the City Council adopted April 27 , 1989 , a report has been prepared by David Hutton, City Engineer, with reference to the improvements of Boiling Springs Lane by Drainage Facilities, and this report was received by the Council on duly 11 , 1989 • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The Council will consider the improvement of Drainage Facilities to Boiling Springs Lane in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting and benefitted property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $24 ,500 .00 . 2 . A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 1st day of August, 1989 , at 7 : 30 P . M . , or thereafter, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, at 129 East 1st Avenue and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. 3. The work of this project is hereby designated as part of the 1989-9 Public Improvement Program. 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 FEASIBILITY REPORT DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS TO LOTS SERVED BY BOILING SPRINGS LANE EAST OF C. R. 89 IN THE NE QUARTER OF SECTION 13 TOWNSHIP 115 SOUTH, RANGE 22 WEST SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Date 6 Registration No. 19133. JULY 1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS DESCRIPTION PAGE NO. Feasibility Report Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Proposed Improvements . . . . . . . . . . 1-2 Estimated Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Drainage Easements . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Assessment Procedure and Funding . . . . . 3 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . 3-4 INTRODUCTION The City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota ordered the preparation of a Feasibility Report by Resolution No. 3035 on April 18, 1989 for drainage improvements to lots served by Boiling Springs Lane, east of County Road 89 in Scott County, Minnesota. BACKGROUND Boiling Springs Lane (originally 16th Avenue and 90th Street) was constructed as a gravel road prior to the City assuming jurisdiction through annexing Eagle Creek Township. The City of Shakopee improved the roadway in 1983 by constructing bituminous pavement. This work was requested by the abutting property owners through a petition. This area has developed into 2 .5 acre lots. Some of the lots were developed when the area was part of Eagle Creek Township and some lots were developed under the City of Shakopee ' s _ jurisdiction. Little thought was given to drainage during the development of this area and subsequently there is a low area located east and south of the Boiling Springs area. This low area has existed for many years. In the feasibility report for the roadway improvements, an alternative to provide adequate drainage was considered but apparently rejected due to the difficulties associated with making this improvement. In March, 1988 the property owner at 9186 Boiling Springs Lane contacted the City Council and requested that the drainage improvements be made . The City Council ordered a feasibility report on the improvements on April 18 , 1989 by Resolution -' No. 3035• PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The only outlet for the standing water located west of Boiling Springs Lane is to construct a small swale easterly to Eagle Creek, located in the City of Savage. The proposed Swale would be 2-3 feet deep with a 4 foot bottom and 3: 1 side slopes. The swale would be constructed at a 0 .55 grade from the existing culvert on Boiling Springs Lane to Eagle 1 Creek. Once constructed, the swale would be sodded. Rip rap would be placed in the swale at the discharge point at Eagle Creek to control erosion. The construction of the swale may not eliminate all of the standing water, but would reduce the depth of water during major — storm events . The exact elevations of the swale will be determined during the design phase of the project. The swale would be approximately 1100 feet long , with the easterly 500 feet of it being located within the City of Savage. The City of Savage has been contacted regarding this project and would be agreeable to allowing the City of Shakopee to proceed with the project under a joint powers agreement . They have indicated that the City of Shakopee should pay for the construction, acquire all necessary easements and permits, and agree to maintain the swale once completed. COST ESTIMATE A cost estimate for the project was prepared and includes the following work: Ditch Excavation Sodding Riprap _ A detailed cost estimate of the proposed improvements is found in the appendix and can be summarized as follows: Construction Cost $13 ,450 .00 10% Contingency $ 1 .750 .00 Subtotal $14,800 .00 25% Administrative Fees $ 3 .700 .00 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $18,500.00 DRAINAGE EASEMENTS A permanent 30 foot wide drainage easement is needed to construct the swale. The easement would be located along property lines in the Boiling Springs area and would also pass though a single larger parcel of land in the City of Savage. A total of three property owners would be involved in the easement acquisition. The cost estimate to acquire the permanent drainage easement is $6 ,000 .00, which would be assessed back as part of the project costs. Adding this amount into the construction cost estimate of $18 ,500 .00 makes the total project costs $24 ,500 .00 . 2 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES AND ALTERNATIVES The City of Shakopee' s Stormwater Drainage Utility Policy states that those properties that benefit from storm water drainage improvements would receive a Special Benefit Fee. This Special Benefit Fee shall be 25% of the total project cost. The remaining costs would be funded from the General Storm Sewer Utility Fund. There are two alternatives for considering the benefitted area. The first alternative would be to consider all lots in the area as the benefitted area. This would be a total of 30 lots. The rationale for using this area is that if the grading and drainage had been carefully considered and included in the original site grading or road construction, all lots in this subdivision would have paid for the drainage facilities through the price of the lots. Since that wasn ' t done, though, it would be extremely hard to show any benefit to those lots that are removed from the area subject to flooding . This report does not recommend this alternative. The second alternative would be to assess only those lots that receive a direct benefit by reduced ponding and eliminating flooding. A total of 13 lots would be included in this area as shown on the map in the appendix . The assessment is estimated at approximately $500 per lot. A complete assessment breakdown can be found in the appendix. A third alternative would be to use the Storm Sewer Utility Fund to pay for the project 100% and not assess any of the costs. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This situation is a good example of development occurring without overall consideration of all aspects, including drainage . Today' s developers are required to submit an overall grading and drainage plan to the City and this situation would not be allowed to occur. The City must determine if they have any obligation to correct this drainage problem, that was created by development. The area has a severe flooding problem every spring and during heavy rainfalls and the City cannot expect the adjoining property owners to pay an annual storm sewer utility bill while being subject to annual flooding. 3 With the adoption of the Storm Sewer Utility Ordinance in 1985 , the City now has a means of correcting and funding storm drainage problems . This report recommends utilizing the storm drainage fund to make the necessary improvements and assess 25% of the project costs to all benefited lots in the area as a Special Benefit Fee. . q APPENDIX Iter _Page No. Project Location Map Property Identification and 2 and Assessed Area Map Typical Ditch Section 3 Project Cost Estimate 4 Assessment Calculations 5 Assessment Table 6-8 W,i�71�J� ■'rte 'IM IUM Mr. ■�� '. u �1� DAVID a KAREN HOWARD E. LARSON RAYMOND KONEN GREGORY 27-913025-0 27-913027-0 DANIEL 0. LAUBE FRED N. REIN TIMOTHY 0 BONNIEPLATT 2T-913033-0 27-913092-0 2]-9113D2323-0 27-913093-0 BOILING - _ - SPRINGS FRED S. STEINART :�' 2z sxlana2 p .;: fiaxaE.a psYi Apb3E� 'E314F�g�#y 2]-913019-0 WAYNE a KAREN C. MILLER 27-913038-0 iti.. r""` r � t i �, i flONNE q�kAYRit.AF •AAN3'El3 l: RNpG�.d JNatTnµKLA�'�k � Z? B13Ct28 .q aottN Mc�tavERn Lfk � JWf.EE 0u$.dry }) CL$TU$ KING 4 E7 ?#13020 I fY �4 �. . hf., .OM1' ` Y ROBERT YOUNG CHARLES RITEHART r 27-913044-0 27-913015-0 27-913003-0 y Z m ALBERT 27-1130" o RT T BERG LEONARD J. WIIDMER Ey B STANLLIN, 913045 0 um 27_91300R9 BEIREIS GLOR/A jy GARY S. KALLENBACH 27-,13"2-WOLF 27-913035-0 0 ASSESSED AREA JEFFEREY B VALARECE CLAYPOOL 27-913029-0 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSED AREA MAP TYPICAL DITCH SECTION 2 N _ 3:� r w 3'•� a w a a a• ' 3 BOILING SPRINGS LANE _ DRAINAGE DITCH COST ESTIMATE ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL Common Excavation 1600 C.Y. $5.50 $ 8 ,800 .00 (Ditch Grading) Sodding 1500 S.Y. $2.50 $ 3 ,750 .00 Niprap 600 S.F. $1 .50 $ 900 .00 Total Construction Costs $13 ,450 .00 10$ Contingency 1 .350.00 Subtotal $14,800 .00 25% Engr. & Admin. Fees 3 .700.00 Total Project Estimate $18,500.00 Plus Permanent Easement $ 6 .000.00 (See Calculations Below) TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $24,500.00 Permanent Drainage Easement Cost Estimate Area of Easement Needed = 30 ' wide x 100 ' Long = 30 ,000 S.F. Cost Per Square Foot = $0 .20/S.F. Total Easement cost = $0 .20/S.F. x 30 ,000 S.F. _ $6 .000 .00 4 ASSE33KENT CALCULATIONS _ Total Project Costs = $24,500 .00 Assessable Costs = 25% X $24 ,500 .00 = $6 ,125 .00 — Total Number of Assessable Lots = 13 Cost Per Lot = $6 ,125.00/13 = $471 .15 Per Lot 5 ASSESSMENT TABLE i i i i i _ 1 PSD : PROPERTY OWNER i DESCRIPTION : ASSESSMENT 1 i ! 127-913020-0 (Cletus King & Wife 113 115 22 ! $471 .15 1 11723 C.R. 18 14.155 DOC1553841 I I :Shakopee, MN 55379 15.24 A IN N 1/21 ! ! ! INE 1/4 EX 1A : ! ! !EX .085 RD ! ! : :27-913026-0 :John & Judith McGovern 113 115 22 4.8951 $471 .15 1 1 : 1685 C.R. 18 15A IN N1/2 N/E 1 i !Shakopee, HN 55379 11/4 E OF CR 89 i ! !EX . 105A RD ! I : ' : 127-913034-0 !Donald Cowan & Wife 113 115 22 2 .4241 $471 .15 1 11655 C.R. 18 :COM NE COR NE :Shakopee, MN 55379 : 1/4,S 20441NW : I i ! 11320 ' ,N380 ' NW 1 ! : 1169 ' W TO W RD 1 ! ! !ROW N 5881TOPOBI ! :NW 2101 ,E5821 , 1 IS198' E 511 ' TO ! ! 1POB EX .076 RD 1 - 1 ! I I ! 127-913001-2 !Fred Hein 113 115 22 2 .33 : $471 .15 1 1P.O. Box 308 :2.4A IN NE1/4 : I 1 :Detroit Lakes, MN 56501 IEX .07 RD COM 1 INE COR,NW ALONG : ! ! ! !N LINE 2246 .261 : ! !TO W' ERLY ROW 1 !OF CR 89 ,S' ERLY : i !ALONG ROW 406 ' 1 1 !E 635 ' ,S165.75' : ' 1W582 ' TO W ROW 1 1 :N' ERLY TOPOE : I :EX .07 RD 127-913032-0 :Ronald Johnson & Wife 113 115 22 2 .5 1 $471 .15 1 1 18708 Boiling Springs Lane :COM NE COR : ! !Shakopee, MN 55379 :S 2044' NW TO ! ! !W ROW OF RD NW ! ! :960' E 511 ' TO 1 i ! (POB N 362 ' E ! ! ! 1 1300 ' S 363 ' W 1 ! ! 1 1300 ' TO POB IN ! ! ! ! INE 1/4 ! i ! 1 -I-! 6 ASSESSMENT TABLE PID i PROPERTY OWNER 1 DESCRIPTION i ASSESSMENT 1 1 1 , � I 127-913037-0lROnald Paschke ! 13 115 22 2.5 ! $471 .15 1 I 18736 E. 16th Ave 196 .16 ' 2362.56 ' ! ! 1 ;Shakopee, MN 55379 Ix 319.86 z I I 1330 .51 ' x223 .831 I I i Ix 30 .77 IN NE ! ! 11/4 TRACT 22 1 I i i i I i 127-913001-0 ! James Thomason 1113 115 22 2 .461 $471 .15 i 14142 W. 126th St./Apt. 209 !TRACT 23 IN NE 1 I (Savage, MN 55378 11/4 COM NE COR 1 I 1 ISEC 13 , SE I I I I 12044.47 ' , NW I I 11320 .33 ' , NE I I I ! 1380 .051 , NW I ! ! 1169 .9 ' , E ! 122.52' , N I — ! 1583 .771 , E I ! 1223 .83 ' TO I ! 1 !POB, NE330 .51 ' 1 1 ISE 273.83 ' , SE 1 ! ! ION CUR 77 .39' 1 ! ! ISE 280 .421 , W 1 I ; 1330 .23 ' TO POB I ! 1 127-913001-1 !Bruce & Judith Kupfer 113 115 22 2.5 1 $471 .15 1 1 19130 Boiling Springs Lane !TRACT 24 IN NE 1 I — I !Shakopee, MN 55379 11/4 195 .89 X I ! 1554.06 X 195 .931 ! I !X 557 .79 1 127-913030-0 !Reed Otterblad 113 115 22 2 .5A 1 $471 .15 1 19186 Boiling Springs Lane !IN NE 1/4 TRACT ! I ! !Shakopee, MN 55379 119 ! 127-913031-0 ! Jerome Johnson Jr. 113 115 22 2 .5A ! $471 .15 � 1 19230 Boiling Springs Lane !TRACT 18 COM I I !Shakopee, MN 55379 INE COR. OF NE 1 11/4 N 193 .30 ' 1 ' , 1E561 .50 ' , S ! ' ' 1193 .34 ' W ! ! I 1565.18' I 1 7 ASSESSMENT TABLE I PID I PROPERTY OWNER ! DESCRIPTION 1 ASSESSMENT 127-913028-0 !Ronald & Patricia Martens 113 115 22 2 .5 1 $471 .15 1 19129 Boiling Springs Lane ICOM NE COR SE 1 !Shakopee, MN 55379 !ON E LINE ! i { ! 1735.171 TO BEG. ! IPT. ,SE 1781 , NW! 1612.07 ' ,NW 17811 'SE 612.07 ' TO ' !BEG IN NE ! ' 127-913040-0 ;Lon & Julie Dugan 113 115 22 2.5 1 $471 .15 1 19177 Boiling Springs Lane !P/O NE 1/4 COM 1 !Shakopee, MN 55379 1913 .17 ' SE OF 1 i ! ! 'NE COR SEC 13 , 1 i ISE 178 ' , NW ! i 1612.07 ' ,NW 178 ' 1 1SE 612.07 ' TO 1 !POB 127-913039-0 !Kenneth & Patricia Motz ' 13 115 22 2.5 1 $471 .15 1 19225 Boiling Springs Lane !NE 1/4 COM NE ' !Shakopee, MN 55379 'COR E 1091 .17 ' 1 1 : !TO PT. OF BEG. 1 i 'S 178' , W ! ' !612.07 ' , N 178' 1 i !E 612.07 ' TO 1 :POB TOTAL : $6 ,124.95 1 8 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City Engineerpe-, SUBJECT: Upper Valley Drainage OdJJ Project No. 1987-5 DATE: July 7 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3080 , A Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding the Contract for the Upper Valley Drainage Project No. 1987-5. BACKGROUND: On June 6 , 1989 the City Council of Shakopee ordered the advertisement for bids for the Upper Valley Drainage Project. On June 30, 1989 at 10:00 A.H. bids were received and publicly opened for Project No. 1987-5 , Upper Valley Drainage Project. A total of 8 bids were received and summarized in the attached resolution. The low bids are tabulated below: Contractor City Total Bid Barbarossa & Sons Osseo $1 ,404,188 .00 Richard Knutson Inc. Savage $1 ,404,486 .24 S.M. Hentges & Sons Shakopee $1 ,419 ,483 .50 A 9th bid was also received but since the submitted bid was not signed it was rejected. The Engineering Department has reviewed all bids for completeness and also the qualifications of Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , the low bidder, and have determined that they are able to perform the work as described by the plans and specifications. The engineer ' s estimate for this project was approximately 2 . 1 million dollars . Since Mn/DOT is paying a portion of this project, the cooperative agreement between Shakopee and Mn/DOT states that Mn/DOT must concur with the low bidder prior to the City awarding the contract. Staff has submitted the appropriate paper work to Mn/DOT so that they may concur with the bids and they have indicated that this concurrence will be submitted by the July 11th Council meeting. If they do not concur by July 11 , 1989 the City will have to postpone the award of the contract until they concur. ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Accept the low bid and adopt Resolution No. 3080 awarding the contract to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. 2 . Reject the low bid and award the contract to the 2nd low bidder or another bidder. 3 . Reject all bids and rebid. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 to accept the low bid and award the contract to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc . of Osseo, MN contingent upon Mn/DOT' s concurrence with the bid. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution No. 3080 , A Resolution Accepting Bid on Upper Valley Drainage Project No. 1987-5 and award the contract to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , 11000 93rd Ave. MN. , Osseo, MN 55369 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3080 RESOLUTION 90. 3080 A Resolution Accepting Bid On Upper Valley Drainage Project Project No. 1987-5 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Upper Valley Drainage Project, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. $1 ,404 ,188.00 Richard Knutson, Inc . $1 ,404,486 .24 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc . $1 ,419 ,483 .50 Lametti & Sons, Inc. $1 ,425 ,050 .00 J.P. Norex #1 ,443 ,204.80 Minn-Kota Excavating $1 ,498,033 .50 Brown & Cris $1 ,543 ,919.00 Progressive Contractors, Inc. $2 ,320 ,589 .50 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , 11000 93rd Ave . North/P . O. Box 367 , Osseo, MN 55369 is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITT OF 3BAR OPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , in the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Upper Valley Drainage Project , according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2 . The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. 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 CONSENT i2, l2 MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Dave Hutton, City EnginKr�„Q/ SUBJECT: Third Avenue Reconstructio JJ"" Project No. 1989-5 DATE: July 7 , 1989 INTRODUCTION: Attached is Resolution No. 3079 , A Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding a Contract for the Third Avenue Reconstruction Project. BACKGROUND: On June 6 , 1989 the City Council of Shakopee ordered the advertisement for bids for the Third Avenue Reconstruction Project. On June 30 , 1989 at 10:30 A.M. bids were received and publicly opened for Project No. 1989-5 , Third Avenue Reconstruction. The total of five bids were received and are summarized in the attached Resolution. The three low bids are tabulated below: Contractor City Total Bid Barbarossa & Sons Osseo $777 ,425 .00 Hardrives, Inc . Maple Grove $809,399 .70 S.M. Hentges & Sons Shakopee $825 ,000 .00 The Engineering Department has reviewed all bids for completeness and also the qualifications of Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , the low bidder and have determined that they are able to perform the work as described by the plans and specifications. The engineer' s estimate for this project was approximately $820 ,000 .00 . ALTERNATIVES: 1 . Accept the low bid and adopt Resolution No. 3079 awarding the contract to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. 2 . Reject the low bid and award the contract to the 2nd low bidder or another bidder. 3 . Reject all bids and rebid. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 , to accept the low bid and award the contract for the Third Avenue Reconstruction Project to Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. of Osseo, MN. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer Resolution NO. 3079 , A Resolution Accepting Bid on Third Avenue Reconstruction Project No . 1989-5 to Barbarossa & Sons , Inc. , 11000 93rd Ave. , Osseo, MN 55369 and move its adoption. DH/pmp MEM3079 RESOLUTION NO. 3079 A Resolution Accepting Bid On Third Avenue Reconstruction Project No. 1989-5 WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Third Avenue Reconstruction Project , bids were received , opened and tabulated according to law , and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement : Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. $777 ,425 .00 Hardrives, Inc . $809 ,399 .70 S.M. Hentges & Sons , Inc . $825,000 .00 Alexander Construction $909 ,550 .20 Northdale Construction $931 ,375.35 AND WHEREAS, it appears that Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , 11000 93rd Ave . North/P . O. Box 367 , Osseo, MN 55369 is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA: 1 . The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Barbarossa & Sons, Inc. , in the name of the City of Shakopee for the improvement of Third Avenue by Street Reconstruction, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2 . The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. 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 MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Deferment of Special Assessments DATE: July 6, 1989 INTRODUCTION: At my request, Mr. Coller has prepared the attached ordinance which amends some criteria for the deferment of special assessments for senior citizens. BACKGROUND: Section 2.82 of the City Code, attached, sets forth the criteria for senior citizens who wish to have special assessments against their property deferred. It was last amended in 1983 , and I believe that Council may wish to consider updating it. There are two criteria I believe should be considered for updating. First is the requirement that the assessor's market value of the applicants homestead parcel shall not exceed $60,000.00. Second is the requirement that the applicant shall not have gross assets in excess of $36,000.00. (This $36,000.00 figure also includes the gross assets of anyone else who has some ownership in the parcel. ) I talked with Bob Schmitt in the county assessor's office, and he advised me that the average market value of homes in Shakopee is $75,000.00. He also stated that most senior citizens live in areas which have been developed for sometime and that this should cover most of them. Considering the appreciation of property over the past six years, he also said that $75,000.00 was an accurate figure to use in adjusting the market value. Increasing the $36,000.00 value of gross assets by 5% over six years, accumulatively, would raise this figure to $48,243 .00. Council may wish to round this figure off to $48,000.00 or to $50,000.00. At any rate, _ I believe that it too should be increased. Minnesota State Statutes 435.193 provides for senior citizens or retired and disabled persons hardship special assessment deferral. It also states that the city may establish standards and guidelines for determining the existence of a hardship. Other than the two criteria mentioned above, I believe that the criteria contained in the city code is reasonable. Deferment of Special Assessments July 6, 1989 Page -2- ALTERNATIVES: 11 Make no changes 21 Amend the city code to increase the assessor' s market value to $75,000.00, and increase the gross assets to $48,000.00 31 Increase the assessor' s market value and assets to some other figure RECOMMENDATION: Alternative No. 2 , increase the assessor' s market value to $75,000. 00 and increase the gross assets to $48,000 .00. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Offer Ordinance No. 268, An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Chapter 2 Entitled "Administration and General Government" by Adjusting the Assessor's Market Value as set by Section 2 .82 D and Amending Gross Asset Figure as Setout in Section 2 .82 C and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2 .99 which Among Other Things Contains Penalty Provisions, and move its adoption. deem proper to protect the City's interests, nor shall anything contained in this Section limit any right of power possessed by the ( City over existing franchises. Subd. 6. Term of Franchise. No exclusive or perpetual franchise shall ever be granted. No franchise for a term exceeding twenty (20) years' shall be effective until approved by a majority - of the electors voting thereon. Subd. 7. Exception. Nothing in this Section shall pertain to the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-78 SEC. 2.81. PARTIAL PREPAYMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS PERMITTED. Subd. 1. Partial prepayments of special assessments for local improvements may be made after the adoption of the assessment and prior to the first certification thereof to the County Auditor. Subd. 2. There may be only one partial prepayment and it must be in an amount not less than $100 .00 . Source: Ordinance No. 82, 4th Series -- Effective Date: 12-24-81 _ SEC. 2.82. DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. ni sv.-. - =i Subd. 1. The Council may defer the payment of any special assessment on homestead property owned by a person who is 65 years of age or older, or who is retired by virtue of permanent and total disability, and the City Clerk is hereby authorized to record the deferment of special assessments where the following conditions are met; but nothing herein contained shall be construed to prohibit the determination of such a hardship on the basis of exceptional and unusual circumstances not covered by these stan- dards and guidelines where the determination is made by the Council in a nondiscriminatory manner that a deferment should be granted when such deferment does not give the applicant an unreasonable preference or advantage over other applicants: A. Any applicant must be 65 years of age, or older, or retired by virtue of permanent and total disability, and must own a legal or equitable interest in the property applied for which must be the homestead of the applicant; B. The applicant and any other owner of said prop- erty who resides therein with the applicant shall not have an annual gross income in excess of the Section 8, low income limits in effect at the time of the application. (As established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development) . Income specified in the application should be the income of the year preceding the year in which the application is made, or the average income of the three years prior to the year in which the application is made. (8-15-83) -28- C. The applicant and any other owner of said property who resides therein with the applicant shall not have gross assets (excluding the homestead property) in excess of $36 , 000 .00 . D. The Assessor's Market Value of the applicants homestead parcel shall not exceed $60,000 .00 . E. The limitations on an applicant's assets , and property market value may be adjusted on an annual basis upon recommendation of the City Administrator and motion of the Council. F. Unless otherwise provided under the resolution adopting said assessments, all such deferred assessments shall bear interest at the rate of 8 percent per annum. G. This procedure shall not apply to any assessment of $100 .00 or less. Subd. 2. The deferment shall be granted for as long a period of time as the hardship exists and the conditions as afore- mentioned have been met. However , it shall be the duty of the applicant to notify the City Clerk of any change in his status that would affect eligibility for deferment. Subd. 3. The entire amount of deferred special assess- ments shall be due within sixty days after loss of eligibility by the applicant. If the special assessment is not paid within sixty days, the City Clerk shall add thereto interest at 88 per annum from date assessments were adopted through December 31 of the i following year and the total amount of principal and interest shall be certified to the County Auditor for collection with taxes the following year. Should the applicant plead and prove, to the satisfaction of the Council, that full repayment of the deferred special assessment would cause the applicant particular undue financial hardship, the Council may order that the applicant pay within sixty days a sum equal to the number of installments of deferred special assessments outstanding and unpaid to date (including principal and interest) with the balance thereafter paid according to the terms and conditions of the original special assessment. Subd. 4. The option to defer the payment of special assessments shall terminate and all amounts accumulated plus appli- cable interest shall become due upon the occurrence of any one of the following: A. The death of the owner when there is no spouse who is eligible for deferment. B. The sale, transfer or subdivision of all or any part of the property. C. Loss of homestead status on the property. D. Determination by the Council for any reason that there would be no hardship to require immediate or partial payment. Source: Ordinance No. 121, 4th Series Effective Date: 8-4-83 28-1 (8-15-83) ORDINANCE N0. 268 Fourth Series An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Chapter 2 entitled "Administration and General Government" by Adjusting the Assessor's Market Value as set by Section 2.82 D and Amending Gross Asset Figure as Setout in Section 2.828 and by Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2.99 Which Among Other Things Contains Penalty Provisions THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAROPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: SECTION I• REPEAL Subdivision C and Subdivision D of Section 2.82 are hereby repealed. SECTION II: A new Subdivision C adopted The applicant and any other owner of said property who resides therein with the applicant shall not have gross assets (excluding the homestead property) in excess of $ 48.000.00 SECTION III: A new Subdivision D adopted The Assessor's Market Value of the applicants homestead parcel shall not exceed $75,000.00. SECTION IV: Penalty Provisions Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions" applicable to the entire City Code including Penalty for Violations and Section 2.99 entitled " Violations a Misdemeanor" are adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim herein. SECTION V: When in force and effect After the adoption, signing an attestation of this Ordinance it shall be published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in full force and effect on and after the date following such publication. 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 Approved as to form this 29th day of June, 1989. City Attorney MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting City dministrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: On Sale 3.2 Beer License amile, Inc. DATE: July 11, 1989 INTRODUCTION: The application for an on-sale beer non-intoxicating malt liquor license for Damile, Inc. , 2400 East 4th Avenue, is now in order. BACKGROUND: On June 20, 1989, Council tabled the application for a 3.2 beer license from Damile, Inc. because the taxes and the Shakopee Public Utilities were delinquent. Payment of the utilities bill has been made, and the ownership of the property has changed hands. The City requires the payment of taxes on property when the applicant also owns the property. The City cannot hold up approval of an application for a license from an applicant due to the non-payment of taxes, when the applicant does not own the property and has no control over the payment of the taxes. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Remove the application for an on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license from Damile, Inc. , 2400 East 4th Avenue, from the table. 2 . Move to approve the application and grant an on-sale non-intoxicating malt liquor license to Damile, Inc. , 2400 East 4th Avenue. JSC/tiv 13b MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, Acting C' Administrator FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk RE: Youth Organizations Buildin DATE: July 11, 1989 INTRODUCTION: Mr. Ed Dressen, Administrative Coordinator, Youth Organizations Building, has requested that the City issue a check in the amount of $5,000.00 for completion of the sod and fireplace for the Community Youth Building. BACKGROUND: At Councils meeting on June 19th, Council authorized $5,000.00 for the Scouts for completion for work at the Community Youth Building. Mr. Dressen is asking that the check be written out to the Youth Organizations Building Fund rather than to the Scouts. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Move to reconsider the motion of June 19, 1989, to give the Scouts $5,000.00 of the $7,500.00 the Scouts had turned back to the City. 2. Move to amend the motion to issue a check in the amount of $5,000.00 to the Youth Organizations Building Fund. 3. Roll Call vote on the main motion as amended. JSC/tiv 3t- FROM: EDWARD G DRESSEN ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR IZATZ0N8 HUIL.DING 126 EAST FIRST AVENUE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 TO: CITY OF SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL 129 EAST FIRST AVENUE SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 JULY 10, 1989 COUNCIL AS THE CITY COUNCIL KNOWS, THE YOUTH BUILDING THAT WE BEGAN IN APRIL OF 1988, AND THE BUILDING THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL IN JUNE OF LAST YEAR, IS COMING TO COMPLETION. AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL, IF THEY WOULD HELP US WITH COMPLETION OF THE BUILDING. TO DATE WE HAVE HAD 84 DONATORS DONATE CLOSE TO $170,000.00 IN MATERIALS, LABOR, AND MONEY. WE ALSO HAVE HAD CLOSE TO 300 PEOPLE DONATE 6000 HRS OF THEIR TIME TO THIS GREAT EFFORT. WE STILL NEED $5000.00 TO SOD AND COMPLETE THE FIREPLACE. PLEASE CONSIDER THIS REQUEST, FOR OUR YOUTH AND THE GENERATIONS TO COME WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT TO THIS POINT. IT HAS BEEN GREATLY APPRECIATED SINCERELY ED DRESSEN