HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/07/1992 TENTATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA APRIL 7 , 1992
Mayor Gary Laurent presiding
1] Roll Call at 8: 00 P.M. after the polls close
2 ] Approval of Agenda
3 ] Recess for H.R.A. Meeting
4] Re-convene
5] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
6] Mayor 's Report
7] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS
8] 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. )
9] Approval of the Minutes of March 10th and 17th, 1992
10] Communications:
a] Petition for Improvements to Muhlenhardt Road
11] Public Hearing at 8: 00 P.M. on the proposed improvements
to: Apgar St. between 1st and 6th; Shumway between 2nd
and 3rd; Pierce between 2nd and 3rd; 2nd between Pierce
and Apgar, Project 1992-3 - Res. No. 3563
- BRING FEASIBILITY REPORT -
12] Boards and Commissions: Park & Recreation Advisory:
a] Municipal Facility Needs Assessment Subcommittee Proposed
Action Plan
13 ] Reports from Staff:
*a] Law Enforcement Service Agreement
gib] Stormwater Management Policies, Nationwide Urban Runoff
Program (NURP) and Best Management Practices (BMP) - Res.
No. 3567
c] Coordination of Local Governmental Units, City of
Shakopee and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District
- Res. No. 3566
TENTATIVE AGENDA
April 7 , 1992
Page -2-
13] Reports from Staff continued:
d] Fleet Size Recommendation
*e] Clean-up Day Concession Sales
f] Vacant Police Sergeancy - tabled 3/10/92
g] Mielke Driveway
K 2 *h] Purchase of Front End Loader
*i] Shakopee Basin Water Management Organization
*j ] Commissioner Redistricting for Scott County
4k] Additional Summer Inspector
*1] Approve Bills in the Amount of $100, 062 . 52
{m] Purchase of Furniture from Marquette Bank
*n] Hiring Procedures - Budgeted Temporary/Seasonal Employees
o] Off Track Betting - memo on table iSd
14] Resolutions and Ordinances:
*a] Res. No. 3564 - Ordering Report for Minnesota Street
Improvements Between 5th and 7th
*b] Res. No. 3565 - Declaring Cost to be Assessed for 5th
Avenue Improvements, Project 1989-4
15] Other Business:
a] S ( ( t;AYakitb‹!•
b] li -e, a-z 1""41-.f ,
../( c]
d
] i
SfXli , vs
16] Adjourn to Tuesday, April 21, 1992, at 7 : 00 p.m.
Dennis R. Kraft
City Administrator
FUTURE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETINGS:
April 14 , 1992 at 7 : 00 P.M.
April 16, 1992 at 8 : 30 A.M. at Marquette Bank
April 28, 1992 at 4 : 00 P.M.
April 28, 1992 at 7 : 00 P.M. at Jackson Town Hall
April 30, 1992 at 7 : 30 A.M.
MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
RE: Non-Agenda Informational Items
DATE: April 3 , 1992
1. Attached is the April calendar of Upcoming Meetings.
2 . Attached is the April Business Update from City Hall.
3 . Attached is a memorandum from the City Planner regarding
background information for discussion on levels of service.
4 . Attached is the 1991 Local Government Salary Study prepared by
the Office of the State Auditor Research and Government
Information Division.
5. Attached are the March 3, 1992 minutes of the Shakopee
Coalition meeting.
6. Attached are the March 18, 1992 minutes of the Energy and
Transportation Committee meeting.
7 . Attached are the March 18, 1992 minutes of the Community
Development Commission meeting.
8. Attached is the Police Newsletter for Council review.
9 . Attached is a memorandum from the City Attorney regarding
special assessments on Green Acres property.
10. Attached is the Building Activity Report for March.
11. Attached is a memorandum from the Assistant City Administrator
regarding a community picnic.
12 . On March 11, 1992 staff received a telephone call from Mary
Ann Schmidt representing Louisville Township. At that time
she stated that the Louisville Township Board reconsidered
their participation in the City of Shakopee's clean up
program. Since Council initially did not have a problem with
allowing Louisville Township to participate, staff indicated
to Ms. Schmitt that there would not be a problem allowing
Louisville Township residents to participate. Louisville
Township agreed to submit their County grant proceeds for
community clean-up programs to the City of Shakopee.
13 . Last year the City of. Shakopee negotiated a Township
contribution formula for recreation services with the
Louisville and Jackson Town Boards. At the April 21, 1992
meeting staff will be presenting several alternatives for City
Council to consider in regard to the Township contribution
formula. It appears that there were some flaws in the way the
formula was calculated in 1991 which could significantly
impact the Township rates for 1992 (increase) . Additionally,
the annual recalculation of the Township contribution amounts
seem to be cost prohibitive in terms of the amount of dollars
actually being received. Staff will be proposing several
modifications to the Township formula for Council ' s
consideration at the April 21, 1992 meeting.
14 . Attached are the March 30, 1992 minutes of the Cable
Commission meeting.
15. Attached are the March 30, 1992 minutes of the Shakopee Access
Corporation meeting.
16. Attached is a legislative update on transit issues from Diane
Harberts Southwest Metro Transit Administrator.
17. Attached are the agendas for the April 9, 1992 meetings of the
Planning Commission and Board of Adjustment & Appeals.
18 . - • -re he March 5, 1992 minutes of e - g
C01111 . ' • • - •• _ • • ' 9 u - • •- - - - • .
April 1 1 9 9 2
Upcoming Meetings
SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 g 10 11
4:30pm Public 8:00pm City 7:30pm Planning
Utilities Council Commission
Meeting
Primary Election
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
7:00pm 5:30pm City Hall Closed
Committee of Community - Good Friday
the Whole Development
Commission
7:00pm Energy &
Transportation
r
1 g 20 21 22 23 24 25
EASTER Shakopee 7:00pm City
Showcase Council
Meeting
26 27 28 2g 30
7:00pm Park & 4:00pm 7:30am
Rec. Board Committee of Committee of
the Whole the Whole
7:00pm Meeting
w/Townships
March May
S MT W TF S S MT WT F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
BUSINESS UPDATE FROM CITY HALL
Vol. 6 No. 4
Dear Chamber Member: April 1, 1992
Building
On March 26, 1992 the Shakopee Building
Department served as host to the 13th Annual On April 6th, City staff and representatives from
Developers and Builder Meeting. This meeting is the Shakopee Community D e v e l o p m e n t
co-sponsored by City of Shakopee, Scott County, Commission will be meeting with the Shakopee
City of Prior Lake and City of Savage. The Public Utilities Commission to discuss the possible
purpose of the meeting is to share concerns undergrounding of the overhead utilities in the
regarding the building trade industry and also to downtown area. The 1992 Capital Improvement
update local builders and building officials on Program includes reconstructing the alleys within
recent changes to the Building Code and State the downtown area this year. The Community
Statute. Over 150 persons attended this year's Development Commission believes that if the
meeting, alleys are to be reconstructed at this time that an
analysis of the possible undergrounding of the
overhead utilities should also be considered.
City Clerk On March 17, 1992 the Shakopee City Council
directed the appropriate City officials to develop an
VOTE April 7th. Polls will be open 7:00 am to 8:00 ordinance amendment to the Shakopee City Code
pm. All voters will be required to sign and that would provide for the location of Brambilla
indicate their party choice on the polling place Motors in the industrial park adjacent to Hwy. 101
roster before receiving a ballot! as a conditional use permit. The Shakopee
Planning Commission will be discussing this item
on April 9, 1992.
Community Services
On March 10, 1992 the Shakopee City Council Park & Recreation
directed the appropriate City officials to submit a
grant application to Scott County for funding the On March 23, 1992 the Shakopee Park and
annual Spring Clean-up Program. This year's Recreation Advisory Board reviewed the work
program will be held on Saturday, May 2nd from plan proposed by the Municipal Facilities
7:30 A.M. to 12:30 P.M. at the Shakopee Public Subcommittee Task Force. The Park & Recreation
Works building located on Gorman Street. Due to Advisory Board approved the sub-committee's
the lack of funding availability, this year's gate report and will be forwarding a recommendation
fees will be increased to $20.00 per car and $30.00 to City Council for consideration on April 7,1992.
per pick-up load of refuse. A 4 tire and 2 The subcommittee's work plan recommends that
appliance limit will also be imposed for each the City utilize a professional survey research firm
vehicle. to conduct a study to identify Shakopee residents
municipal facility needs and their willingness to
pay. The Park & Recreation Advisory Board is
recommending that funding for the facility need
portion of a survey be funded from the Park At this same meeting, the Planning Commission
Reserve Fund. The committee is also recommended to the City Council approval of the
recommending that the scope of the survey be final Planned Unit Development for Beckrich Park
expanded to-include community wide issues. The Estates. This development will be located on
intent of utilizing an outside consultant firm to County Road 79, just south of Hillwood Estates,
develop and conduct the survey is to generate and contains 35single family lots.
survey results that are viable and unbiased.
The Planning Commission also recommended to
Shakopee Park and Recreation is finalizing its the City Council the approval of two preliminary
plans for the 18th Annual Shakopee Showcase plats. The proposed plat for Dominion Hills
which will be held on Monday, April 20th 6:30 contains 24 single family lots and will be located
p.m. - 8:30 p.m. at Canterbury Downs. This east of County Road 17,south of Hillside Drive. The
year's Showcase will involve between 70 to 80 proposed plat for Minnesota Valley 7th Addition
different area service organizations, social groups, contains 27 lots and will be located east of the
governmental agencies and leisure oriented Shakopee Town Square Mall. This proposed plat
businesses exhibiting what they have to offer to also involved the vacation of an unconstructed
the community and also answer questions. portion of Polk Street, and the rezoning of a
portion of the proposed plat from Multi-family
Discussions are underway between the City of Residential (R-4) to Mid-density Residential (R-3).
Shakopee, the Shakopee Chamber of Commerce The Planning Commission recommended approval
and the Matt Blair's Celebrity Promotions to of both applications to the City Council.
conduct the 2nd Annual Twin Cities Celebrity
Softball Classic on June 20, 1992 at Tahpah Park in The Planning Commission also considered a
Shakopee. There will be at least ten professional zoning ordinance amendment which would
sports teams from the NBA, NHL, NFL and AWA clarify retail sales in the Heavy Industrial (I-2)
competing along side with the local media. The district. However, action on this amendment was
press corps includes WCCO-TV, KMSP-TV, KFAN tabled pending additional information from staff.
radio, KQRS radio, 'CARE 11-TV,KSTP-TV, KDWB
radio, Pioneer Press, Star Tribune and Star 96.
The participating pro-sports teams will involve the Public Works
Timberwolves, the North Starts, the Vikings, the
Red Wings, the Capitals, the Flyers, Da-Bears, the On March 17, 1992, the City Council of Shakopee
Packers and the New Jersey All-Stars. Proceeds ordered plans and specifications for the
from this one day tournament will go to benefit construction of Vierling Drive, between C.R.17and
Second Harvest, the national food bank, a non-
C.R.79. This project will be constructed in 1992.
profit organization that supports the local food
banks and food shelves. The bid to do the swimming pool repair project
The Shakopee High School band will also benefit has been awarded to Global Specialty Contractors
of Fergus Falls for a cost of $114,580.00. This
from this event. They will be operating the project consists of replacing the pool liner and the
concession stand and the profits from that facility sand filter system.
will be theirs to keep.
A public hearing has been scheduled for April 7th
at 8:00 P.M. to consider street improvements to
Planning Apgar St., 1st Avenue to 6th Avenue, including
Shumway St., 2nd Avenue to 3rd Avenue; Pierce
At their meeting on March 5, 1992, the Planning St., 2nd Avenue to 3rd Avenue, and 2nd Avenue,
Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to Apgar St. to Pierce St.
allow 1st Avenue Pet Hospital to relocate their
animal hospital and veterinary clinic to the The City Council has authorized the advertisement
Shakopee Town Square Mall. for bids for a new front end loader for the Public
Works Department to replace an older one.
# 3
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner (,
RE: Background Information For Discussion On
Levels of Service
DATE: March 27 , 1992
NON-AGENDA INFORMATION ITEM:
At the March 17 , 1992 meeting, City Council identified the need to
review level of service issues at a Committee of Whole meeting.
Attached is a copy of a section from the draft 1990 Comprehensive
Plan on the Allocation of Financial Resources. This section of the
Comprehensive Plan provides general direction for the City' s
efforts in guiding the physical development of the City. Numerous
questions are raised in reference to capital and operating costs
and the effects they have on the City' s tax base. Please refer to
the draft Comprehensive Plan for additional information.
a)
O --I C C ZS w to• c'LS >, C 'LS 0)
4-) •,.I •r{ - O 'L5 0 -r{ La-ri ri ri 4J
(0 '0 U) U 4-) 0) $4 0 0 >, A --I
4-) C ri 4-) • C (1) ZS I ZT '0 0 0 O 0 C
l C a) (0 a) >•i .0 W C C is • a) .0 -,-I >, • N a) 0
W a 4-) M4-) U Q E -•i C O 4i .0 U) U) r-1 4-) 4J > $a 4-)
U) E U) ••-1 0 'O ••i as 4-) a-) .SC 0 aJ a) (.0 0 0 -•i a) ••i 0 $4
W 0) > 4J 0 U a) X 3-1 C C ri 01••4 .4 a $a ON 0
U .-t r-1 A ••i 10 al •r1 >,'L3 ri $4 0 0 'L, a) •
LY a a) rtS U) >. 0) 'LS a E .0 a) r-1 O A 0 > >1. ••i O >, $a •
a E C 0.,•r{ ri 0 .0 $.1 C a) a 4-) .0 •r{ A (0 3 $a 4) $a as +) a) o
0 •r.1 4-)•.i r-1 3 4J 0 a) TS •1-1 aJ $-1 a-) O W -,i a •,.1 C
to O V) RS 4-) W a C va (0 ,-•{ U) E U) O >,U 4- C
W .-1 C •••1 C 0 .0 a.0 t7' 0 0 E RS a) 10 0) a-) •.i
a O ••i C 0 C 0) .1-3 'c5 Q U a) +)-•i 4- $a 0 0 .0 ••i a)
W 0•r1 C C•r1 0) RS >, $-1 -r1 (0 W U) C 4J U .0 'O N
L7 U) 'O E U) RSH 3 a W ''LS (t) U) a a 10 ri 0 +) C }J
Z to a) •.-1 0 • C 3 r-1 0 U) 0 -r-4 0 C
H a) .0 3-4 O •IJ a) ri 'ZS 4J 10 0 b O ••i 3 .-•1 RS a O a)
E UNOtll a) • U a) a) 0) RSU) 0) >, .C >, O RSCva) E
Iii U •r1 W TS Lr Si C > a M LT 0 a (1) a-) 4J R) ri C C (1) to aJ
U 0 .-1 'D 0 RS W 0 'LSC to a 0 .0 •.4 E 1-1 0 C .sC U)
o to A 4-) a) 0 a) 'CS 'O ri O'el $a 0 ,-1 .N U - 0 •ri ,ar O
A RSC U) CG >, $a W Ca 4-1 a) $4 W U) .N w 4) 0 • >
A 0) a-) W 0) 0 to > W W a > ro tU N H 0 a) iJ U) C .
R t to E 4 r-1 4-) U •.i a) ON 0 W a) C 4 N 4-) $4 .0 a)••i
4-1 a) 0 RS X U 'o C 4 o 4) 'Ls RS •SJ U R5 0) 4-1 $4 U
U 4-) W 10 C ••i to tU 0 • .0 a a)-r1 0
•• 0 C 0 M -,-1 C (0 CO 4.) C tr C E W $-I P4-) 0 C 'L3 >-•i
H 4.) O 'D C a C r•1•r1 RS O 10 'O a) 10 0 a CD •,i $a $a •
✓ -.i •,i as al •..1 II, 34 Si ri C a) $a Zr to 4) 0 0) a)
L9 >, U) M x U A --- a) 0 a A A >T ta E Z3 .-1 C 'O (.0 4) .
G a) ••I CIO aJ 'O )a a a 4-) 0 a) RS C 10 a) a) C RS .
• .X > ••i E 0 a) ( HO 0 W -4 A U) E N •r•1 U $4
W 'LS C $-I 0) U W C C 10 a U 0'1 0 0 U) •r1 4-)
(0 $4••i $4 'CS --I 10 >,`.. a) a-) •.i ,C --4 O ZT a O O a) r-1 U)
a a) C 0 C .0 a .0 to 4) .4) ,-1 S4 C 0 0 $a C A
Q U) 'O is W RS 4J a) 0 E 4.) 4.) W RS .X C O a••-{ $4 'O a O O
• •.i RS ••i $a > 0 -•i O r-1 Si a) a 4J a X 'O • -•
Z 0 ,i to 4•) 3 a ••i $4 Si W 0 E aJ 0 to 0 a)
Z ti) >a10to a) 4-4 00 $4 $i3a) CI) C >aw •,-1 WU3a
Q 0 A 34 O LT $a 0 0 G, TS 0 (1) > A • a) a) 0 .0 CU A ••i 0 rn
C.) aJ U V C >a RS S4 -•i 4J W E O •IJ CO E a 4J A U) 4) •
W )-10./ C0 C 0 t0 a O a 0 RS )•i 4) a) O to aJ 10 0 t;
x 0 A a) $4 C U N • en RS $a a to C > -J W 0 to A W N
E O 4.) U a O 4 3 4) E .0 >144 E aL a) O tU-r{ O 0
to tT dJ a) C RS O 0 RS ••i C E fa A Sa E a)
0 a) 4 tU 'LJ C 0 0) IT a) fa t-1
' 3 >, •'{ a 1) a) a) V) A
E $- d ••{ 0 E >s N 4.) ra ri U) E E > C 4-) U) 4-)
N 't3 0 W 0 E •1'4 a) •,i RS 0) •••i C ••i 0 RS ri
Z r 13 •r1 0 'O 0 A > $a RS r ,-1 $4 a-) 4) > ••i W aJ -•i .0 RS tU
4 RS to W $4 a) as o a ).1 .IJ a o ••i-r1 C ,-1 .0 O 4) .4) 0 a
a -,-1 as a) W N 0 3-ILT E •- a ••-1 Rs 'L5 4-) a) 0 sT RS
PI U • E 'L5 a o >, 3 a+) o C ••i $a RS - 4-) a) •r-, t0 to .0
C C 0 Oat 4-1ECW ••1 toCLUCri •,.I '0t3+ A M $4U)
W IO 10 U >, O••i H a) al, 0 RS a C C 0 W C 0
> C r•1 a) r-1 C $.1 U W 14 TS >, 0) $4 ••i 4) R5 O •rr-41 0 ••i r
H •.i CL A S-1 RS a .0 ri $4 M a) .-1 ,C 10 .4)••i U W to 1t3 : N
to W RS .--4 +) RSO C A $a E a) O a U) • C U) 4J '0 ••i
Z OCW U) U) KS +) U••i ••i-•i >, 00 0) U) 0ta RS a) C3
W U) > 0 ri a••-I 0 w•,i a-) $a 10 U A ,-•1 U $4 N U a)
x •,.I •r1ri0 • 0 C 044WIO OW • 0 >, 4.) 10CI) a) U) N -r43- A •
W )a U) r•-1 is C Rs C $a to >, > 4-) 0 U) ••i .0 a) IO N 4) U t--
Ix VJ C 4 ri a) C RS C U 4J 0) a) 0 4J -•i ••i 4) C o 'L3 4) -.4 ri RS -r1 ri
P4 as W to Its > ••I 0 a b •,i W U •.4 a 0 U O A CI) A
Z 4i A ••i 0 W b a) -r1 (1) W O "O U - 0 Si •.i M 3 a)
o IOa) .1~ • tT '0C4 4J40 .4C a) )aC a) $404 r-40WC $-+
U -.i $aa-) 0) a) 4 RSA 4) $-10a) ^ 010 U) aW4) O3U) R5toO
)a a 0 U) a) a a) 3 C 0 .0 4.) W r-I O ••i a.IJ 0 $-1 C 01
LII a E - a- a) to 'L5 Sa - 0 a) 3 is a a) .X 3 C I 0 •-i
x 0 0 C 0 >, a a) U •.i E W C W U) to aJ $4 x - U) +) tr••i G.,
E 3.1 U CO . 4J 0 >, E a) > +) E-•i W 0 W a) 4J RS 0 CP $a to a) C aJ
II ,-i 10 ••-I `1. iJ 34 a) t3) $a $a 0 'LS 0 -•i > •,-I O 3 C 0 r I N a) 0 O 0
1 i a a) a .0 U RS ••i a) .0 13 a) RS S-1 C 4) iJ ••i ri 4) •r1 3 RS 0 $a ri 10
o as W to .0 U 4.) • aJ 0 > a w a) U) C •r+ to 0 RS E .P U o a RS
ar >, O > C . 3 >, 3Xi RS C 0 0 >, U) 00 g 0 0 W $4••U-{ c00 O4 a) 0 $4 0
H 4J .x •••I-rI 1) W 0 ri ri -rI ri C .) O 04,-1 .0 C w r-I 34 W Cl. 44 RS W
S:11 -,i RS U) 0 .0 a) RI RS 10 •r1 >, al 0 $a d 0 0 W [Li .0 a) U) C a)
V) U 4 C U) Cr) > W -P -P $a 4) .-1 a $a •.i 4-) 'O C +) .X .0 U) 0 a
Z CO a) C C >, >,••( 4.) to ••I to N 0-•i til W a 4) C 0 > $a iJ a)•..1
o a) .0 0 ••i aJ 44 i.) Its ••i a a) at •,i U C > i7+ E ••'1 'O RS U 4-) a) 0 •'•{ 4-)
H .0 a) a) .r{ > •r1•,-1 U 4-) to RS TS 0 $4 •,•I a) C 0 Z3 a) •r1 .sC 3 -'t3 tU •
H iJ -C Yi U) U U -) O U) to U •r1 r I W JJ C 'tf •.i U 13 N O (1) S4 125 CD +) W $a U)
Ic„" aJ S:1,••4 -..1 C ri RS > 0 O C 4) 0 O 'O ,-4 0 E E U) R) O RS
4 3 E O .0 a) a) r 4 '0 W 0 > a) 0 1113 0) .4J a) •.I •,.I -.i RS S-1 is U) a)
W
04-400) 0 = 1:10C 04 $4 a) 44 .-s4 of .0 CW O .0 $a 0 $4 ••i W •••1 Sa
a - 0 U 'O as E ••-+ O RS H +) II,73 E-4 Rs a 4-) N -P 1-4 .Q M 3 a "r w 44 Si 13 0
J
L9
H
C7U z 1n
v 0
CO H0
U U k
0HcHcOW 0
co a 0 4- >, O
cna O CCOHw 34
k 0
u • 4, -r1 4i
• k • 4J • k a)
> • E a)
• a) • a Cr
C,
• U ••-i • C.1 44
0 • 44 -r1 • k • 0 N Cr ---4 • O q
W • ,--i > U) • r-1 --1 r" •
••-i • ft k a) r-; • 0 U) -r1 0,, • •�ri H
a • a) a) � MI • > C 4-) •
W •• �" U) 4 • '.0 00 C 0 l) L.25 • •. .0
0 • 1a a) X C) . a) .c° -� > Q) • X 0 0
>1 • 0 Q) RS U • rt CT i1, k U) -r>1 E 1) • a) •� 3
4-3 • U) 34-) • .Qa C1) 15 00E .a, m
•.-1 • -,4 C • k •,-1 W 44 o > 4-) •
,--IW at� r•i• ) >, 3 • Z k 0 a) O ' •r1 . e+H 0
(C • .Q 4) 0 • W b 4 r-1 O E • *FA Q) k
• .-I ••-i 4-) • ' W k •,'"i > E • w a w
of • asa) a) :; • a >; 4-) a) o zoo •
a) • -4 C O 00 • 0 .Q 04 q U •
U • 0 (C k T3 • U) k E k CT
C • •,., H a • C a) s).,-.-4 ■ ■
cC • : 0 k • CO -i E 0
C • ESC Q1 •• a>i . o Hc
w • a) 1t U • •,-; 4-) .c
■ ■ -
4-) • -•-1 ..Q >1 0 • 0 G •r;
0 • CO 1C 44 q • < 0 3
C) • 4-) .L) --1 •
J-) • •C O..1H �p M [H
0 • •r1 C) r,3 ■ ii ■ ■ t 0 t11Ii
S-4 • Z 0 a' c zAm
• it in 0 q KN
CD CA 47
M ■ ■ ■ ri
0 0 0 H Z
C7 r•1 Z H
a a
Z
•.:,,.. :.}:•:.v• RJ !d :,v•h•.}:• :•r:v•. •. •.v• v• a) W
1-i CV '''r' C7 C7 :{4'•.v:
{ti. .::4::4 {{i{v:titititi4:{i: a) :•:i:
0 'cn a) �
0 H :.:•./..:.;••••:.:,:•:.:.:•:.:•:•:,:,:.:,:,:•:.:.:.
E' A U
C7 C7 a a 0 k iL E W
a) a) M al 0 44C7
0 0 > > a) at0 0 a D
'-'4 '-I •'i -'-I k 0 U C7 q
a P4 C) Ca n, o cn 4.1 _
>0 a)> CO
a) a) N 0 C7 ■ ■ � > H H
•,� -r4 a) I a) o,
U >'i k z 3 U
(1C) Co� E E )4at4 C14 0II ■
a) 4C) Z U U0 CD 0 w
1-1
EE 1-4 ■ ■ ■ ■ a
U U >0 0 0
■ ■ ■ ■ �. •�
k a
0
a
Z
CI
c�7 a) a t-
A 0 0 C) J, --1
>, 4) ^ c0 .^.
r-1 a >, C) 31 •'c1 r.r01 171. 31 J3
Oa - w3 •
N (0 O O E .0 J-) 4) to • 31 0 '0CNC c a)
SI a-4-4 3a (J .-1 (0 to c 4) U RS 10 C) (0 -41 0-'-1 4) .0
O H to A 43 r-1 (0 3.1 a-r1 >, a)•r1 31 to C U a '0 U 43
.X U a a••i 5.4 w 0 43 is r-4 c O c tT f6 N .0 C C)
RS A a A c0 to tT a-r1 '0 A 0
t6 C n'0 a r3 •n w
LI M 3a > C -41 CO A 3.1 0 0 rI C C -r1 S-+ 4-1 > 0 U 0
to 4-1 w a c6 a C 3a 0 .Q a a 4-4 16 tT 34 O 0-•-1 C C 3-4-I16 O a U•r1 '0-'-1 r-1 c 0 0 43 4-4 a s en N
C 0 10 0 M E J, 4-4 34 r-4 ri C) 04•14 43 3.1 .0 U C) a E
•r1 tT Cr) COW a '0 a 0 a4 16 RS > • to ---1 O to a 3 a J, c6
C (034 (..5 A < tr0 4.) 34 •4-1u) a0C w •n • J, ARS34
'0 C•ra tT 34 4 '0 .0 a-r1 C) to V) J, 0 0 43 A 0 Cl) .1-) 3a is
O 0 T >, 0 >, O 04 ac C a ax E to (0 O CA 4) 0
.0 4-4 •ri 43 >, O C) 4- Ca E-4 al a a U 43 a E 0 to U 5.4
CO a > •r1 4J CO E-,-4 to U tT A 0-4-1 •r1 3a ' •.1 4) H a
•r1 0 C•4-1 C) 0 U b CO 3.1 r 4 C ON 3a O c N 0 a
4--1 C) 31 0 31 3.1 U • a • 't '0 31 04••1 0 C 0 w RS •r1 0 '0
A > a E O a s d.) a c c c a U•r1•r1 tT U • 43 c
R) •41 E-•1 r-1 .C2 A C .0 16 (6 RS E tT 16 .1.) 4) a a to a '0 C a
4-100 03.10 E-tC) r-1 0C11-1160) 4) 4C) 'CS C) c0
to c A U a-4-1 r-1 E 43 a IT •• U••1 43 CT 115 Ei-•1 J3 C) CO to
(5) a 43 U '� 0 C C '--4 4) 0 $.1 'C3 C.) U .-1 34 E a a
A a s c -•1 • U 0) a•1-1•••1 0 0) 4) 0 0 - -0 0 4 .1-1
C) C) 0 SUro 3C) 0E > 430 .0tT a a . r
A 31 4) 43 t6 c a '0 43-11 a c 443 10 3-t CO .c 43 0 U a a-r1
a a-r1 C a 3+ to 31 0 O a C •• E-1 c a C a > 34 r-1
'CS E a C 114 16 0 to 16 c a 0 c A '0 0 tT a RS A C 0
.-i 0 J) ••1 a r-1 ,S4•'-4 a a 110 -•1 34 $1 c E •• C -.4 43 a .
O U RS ••- ' a a .0 a .0 O '0 0 E1-'-1 • 4) to •'-1 '0 -r1
O r•1 to C) .0 43 '0 a >, to C E 4) 34 •-1 w '-1 U C)
.c r-1 C) 4 0 4) a Cr') 31 4.443 03 a c - E C 16 a 0 •r1 V)
10 r-1 31 C 4 a > c N a 0•r1 C) •'-1 a 16 a a 0 to 0 is a J3
a 0) U en •'-1 c 0 0 E U 30) Di 0 34 E a at - .0 0) O 1
to W to E a '0 0 -r1 a 0 0 tT a C '0 0 is J3 '0 >, CO .3) '0 0
CD a r-1 -n 0 c 0•r1 U C -•1 C 0 34 c 43 a +)
••-1 > 0 to O A C) to 31 -r1 c E C !6 '0 31 rs ..^- a -•-1 0 3.1 31
30
40 034 .CC 'CS 0a) a0 r3C Ca 0) 0 •-4 U •-4 30 •-4 H
a w 31 16 .• 16
•r., tT > a) 0 a > .0 0-•-1 a 0 a (6 m , 1 r-
3a X C 0 3+-r1 CO 4) r-1 to CP r•1 to •.a 3.1 '0 CO CO to
0•r1 0 •,.1 w a m 0 a a CO 0 a a 0 C) .0 0 0 N 0 t`
•r1 to 3 0 4) E-'i A A • >•+-1 34 -'-1 • w >, >, > .3) a a a c0
34 43 U c 0 U 4.) to 0) E a'LS U a 43 A -r1 0 3.1 U 0
a CO -r-1 34 0 U a 3.1 0 '0 E a -•a • TS -•1 to ON 3.1 O -•{ 3+
A 4) tT 0) 0 '0 0) E .0 0 a 43 r-{-•1 a C.) T1 c C aa
1 tT E-1 0 a A E a 0) 0 43 0) U .^. 16 0 - CO a s ••1 to )4
t6
c 3.1 43 E ...I t3+ >, 31 .0 J3 0 a 0 ,C 43 ,_ .X -13 a a a
-.-1 -.•1 ca c .4) C w •43 ss -'-1 to U to a Al U v 0 .0
C • 34 c a r1- a 'o c 0 't� >,4) a t6-,-4 s0) E a•'i +)
w x 4.) .c -'0 .0 31 c a•r1 43 31 43 c A a r-1 a •(-1 > >,
0) 54 a • tO W 4) M C 4 016 43 c 0-'-1 a E = 0 30) 34 0
a0C >, A as 43 0C r-400E0 >, W0 •r13.1CI) a••1
O 3 Ei 43 OE-4C J3a3.1roto0R3 0) U CO to A 34 U a to to
a •r4 4) 0 0 0 0 34 a r•1 H '-1 O r-i r-1 0 '0 0 '0
ON E 3.1 C.) w 4)-.-1 a s r4 to 43 a RS '0 w w a •• U a a
C 0 • 0 a • to •'-1 r•♦ to 13 > a a a 0 N 0 -r•1 U C
•r1 3.1 Ag•r1 4 to '0 '0 0 tC-r-1••i a a ).4 4.1 to c '0 a 34 0 to 0 a tT
4) 443131 0M = caaC34 .0 RS000r-1 0ac a aRSc••i
16 o a r-1 c a -,1-.-4,4-,-( O 0 4J 0, 43 r-1 0 ,-I .0 0 3.4 a 0 A r4
34 >, 3 a •14 a U 4) E-r1 43 to a a 0 a a-)-1-4 0 A 0 RS
C1) 4) a 43 34 a a g •r1-r1 '0 44 0 to CO r-1 .0 > 4) V 34 34 U
04-f-1E N 0 '0 30) C 34 Q a'0d3 a a a a 0 a s RS a T 04a9r1 >i
O 310031 X0 000 a -r1U $4E '034U 0 •-1 00r-1
0 3.1•r1 •'-1 31 31 3 E-•i >, a to E 3.1 U 0 C RS -r1 0 0 c 4) 0 a
'0-r1 44 w to tT 40 a 3.1 43 CO 0 a 0 0 is N 0 a r-1 31 0 0 •r1 A to
C 3-1 CO E 3.1 11-r1 a .0 CT U) C r-l 30) 43 a a A -ria 0
Cl) a s >,w .c >, >, CO 0 U .c a J3 a -'-1 a s RS a s U) 4) a r-1 c,-
a J3 0 tT 43 31 - to 4) A a '0 .0 in t6 • c 0 --'0 U c
-r.1 r-♦ N -r1 0 ••1 .0 Ci• •r1 a CT to RS : c . a U) '0 Cl) 0 0 0 to •r1 CO
J3 a••1 34 a 0 34 U 43 .0 .0 .0 '0 c a) 0 +) a > J3 0 a to -•-1 a.-I a > 3 '-1
-r1 4) .0 O )4 ). 0 t0 >, C .13 43 ri-'l -r•1 a ••-'-1 0) A 4) a 43 a s 0 0 0 0)
30) •. 443 -r1 1t) .0-r1 a .i) 0) a -r1 0 J3 34 J3 0 to C to Cr) a U 0 J, > to 31
O 1:140 3 i 43 31 ii1,.. E c C 3 013 0 a 43 0 c '0 II� O 0 to a a a a
.r.1 a O a '0 a V 0 •r1 JJ :-r1 1T >,-r1 a 0 c 3.1 SJ r-1 r-1 >
31 0 4.) c a 0) U E a to E 0) '0 r-1 4) 43 .0 • A -r-1 a s 0 r-1 a 0 0 r•r1
a a t6 a s .c 0 31 C U A 4.) 0 a-r1 4O Q) J3 O > CO .0 .3) 4) 0)
r-1 $4 r 3i a to '0 a E c .X 0 CO A J3 U ow 3a 0 TT to 3.1 >, W 3-+ J3 0 C c
c c 43 to .0 $.1-•4 J3 0 t6 31 to Uc c a••1 C 3a a 3a a 3 '0 0) 0)c0)••1 aJ3 .0 tTa U E 0 ' a 3 a EJ, -r0) a at6 r-1 C W43 a E .-'-1 •r1 '0 3U J3 a C b 3.1 0) J, e6 E O E O a J3 a t6 J3 RS 0) 0 31 J, a'030) O-r1toE -•-1 Loaf a J3 (0ZaU0 t6O 0) 31 is a •0U) 3-t
1:5
c •r1 0 r•{ > •-1 0 O J3 '0 r-1 U w E O «-C 10 r-1 '-4 $1 A tT a 0) N 0 a a
a C 0r-4 31 16 J, U -r1 r-1-r1 0 t6 w 0 a c a a a CO a s 4) V a) 0 a a CD > E
O U0a OCU too-•1 . 0310) 0 tCOaEA > aA -r10 C) 3J3 .cacO
v) X t6 w to L -r1 a 'E tT 3 3 U t:+ A 10 U w to •r1 0)3 a O 43 3 A t.7 E i 0 30)••1 U
J
Z
CD
r. • -I 3a
- 1 > 3N -1 --I $-i V aUS fa a)) 01
U) 4.) --4 a) O C .0 3'a
-I - N 4-) .0 C 4.1 RS i) 10
.i.) A.0 00 0 T5 0 mC H
0 `a.0CCOa 4 .O w 73 05 0
O 3-I • N O 10 0 0 � ri 'o >t 0
C9 0.4••-s .0 E .0 TS Rs H .Q
'0 • 0 >,.4..) a) 0 -r-I a H 7 r-I
a) r-1 >, O N 4-) > f0 U) r•{ 0 O J-i 10 f0
3 0 4- 34 M-ri 4- 0 (1) C RS w U 0 4-)
WM ---I t7 0 U C 3a 0 > 0 --1 tyl
--1 0 1.i C R) a a) O a) co C c•• a C
> a o >, a) its 4) E $.4 O M O U) c0 --I
a) O •r-1 4) > 3-I H 0 a) ri a)-•-I 4 0 4
3a 3-I 3a •,i•,i O O 0 .Q RS U) x 41 N 0
Ca GLS.I � � a.-1UI )4 4 100 o r1 4)
O U C E 10 >t 0 •ri 1) 10 0 10 -r1
W
W . 0-.4 0-r-I-ri 4) 0 RSC 3.1 C U)
0 U .0 34 w -.-i 4 E 0 0 0 0 '-I O U)
10 waw 'Is 0 a tr a) 2S 4-) c0 --I 0
0 00340 .0 .0 C 4) 4) U
0 W 0) I 4.) O U O O 0 C 0 > ••-I -r1 0
> 0 0 4.) 4) 34 E -rl -•-I H . O ••-1 a 'C3 C
RS 4.3 --I to a) 0 .0 .0 4-) H 03.1 10 'CS
'CS C CU C 0LO 4 TS 3 3R .i.) 0, U 10 0
N 0 O-rs 0 ,C U1 C r•I >t.0 0 fa U
f--4•rl U 10 w 4.) E 10 a) 4) to .0 0 34
RS r♦ 0 W • 0 0-r I 0 3.1 -•-I 0 4-) w 0
U) a 4) a.) to 3a 3 E U 0 O
O a C U rI N a) 4.) -rl f.4 C 3a >•, 'CS V)
a 10 --I 0 4-rl Ts C E o -•-I W W . 14-4 C) 0
o •n 4) -r-1 0 3a a) 4-10".. 4.) .•. I a) u
34 a) 'D 0 >, U) E 0 .0 '0 .N 4.) C
0414 03.100Ca4-I 4) is a) >, U) N (0 N
10 ••-1 a'0 COO C •4-1 3-+ H C U) 0 N
J-) 44 0 O .-I tel k-1--I 4-I O 0 -n TS .0 (4.4 4.)
U 0 -rI .-i 0 E O C O x -r1 w 4 C 4) 0 U)
0••-I W c0 i) 0 > H C 4-) M 10 0 0 0
-n 34 U)-•-I U) .Q 0 . a) RS N N 4)-.-I w 11-1 C U N
O 0 (0 4) 'O - V C E >a 0 4) C W rN. 0 O '"I
3.i 4.) ,-a C a) >, >, 10 0 •r, 0 0 a TS .0 C) 0 -r-i tr t`
04-I U0m4-) RsH $- U) '0 a) E0 0 tr 'C .0 4) C
34 4.3 0-r♦ E Cs 3.1 'C3 In 0 34 -r1 C -f-i 4•) 10 -r-1
140 C0 U 0 '0 0) 10 C0 > a w 0 m -•-I $.4 4)
a) a) a a) to C $i 0 '0 10 3'a 0 a -4-1 C 4-) 3 0 0 •
3.) m 0 3.Ia) Er) C10 -r10 04 3-I10 .v a) 0 H 1.4 )
4-4 to .10 ie 10 .0 010 '0 w RS >, a to 0 U) $.i a)
c0 a) 0 4- C C -•44) S.4 a) E0 0 tr C) 0 a
C U) .0 .. 0 0 0 4-) U) 0 4) -rl 34 -n C 4 > .t) 0
C 0 RS4 3r-1 > .C4-) C m 11S O O C - I C!
0 > .0 0 0 r-1-.1 4) 0 0 0 U) > r•I E U) •-1 00 4) 'O C)
-•-I-r1 •--1 a) 1C3 V . 0 •r•I 0 U U N
a-) 4.) 4) 0 0 3 U .0 RS U) •r4 4) U 1.4 4) TS V) 4-) H 0 'o -f-1
O 0 U .0 .Q 0 4-) U) 0 a -•-4 - 0 U w in C) E
C 0 0 4 3 w•rH 0 C) m w C a > U 0 -r1 .0 .3.) -r-I
Hw -(-1 '0 04-134) C C 0 b 10 0 •n C 0 0 C
0 W 0 0 0 .0 0 10 0 0 i) C U-•-I H 0 Ct 14 -ra
> 0 3-1 4.3 .1•) 0 > -r1 4) U) 10 .0 10 3.4 -.-1 U) O g
O I a U) U) .I-) • $.1.ri 43 C 0 >t O a-) 04 U) dii if P-
4.)
4) C-r1 O N .I-) U .N U) 0 U U )a 10 -.-( •r1 0 0) 3-a
S.i N ri O r-I U) O O U 0 E -r1 RS 04 C) C) U 3a O
a) 0 R) -.I N U 0 r-I 0 0 a 1 .4 '-I U) 0 10 .0 t) 0 U C
.0 U 4) a) - C) •n 4--1 4-1 0' 0 0 .0 to .Q U 4) 0 > RS 4-1 0
-r1 0 0 34 4-•1 0 --I U-4 .-I 4-) 0 0 34 C) 0 U
3a c.,,-(•.-+•rI a 0 )4 3 a) w 0 -..1 a 0 U) 10 w 0 -.-1 C W 0
O 04 1 C 14 X a 1 0 > 04 0 0 0 0 > .0 --1 b
w 0 U 34 0 C) U) w .1-) 0 10 a) C > U) C) U 0 (1)
.I-) 4) i) 3a 4-4 U) 4-) Z3 U H -r1 0 0 .-1 0 4) 4 34
V) U) r-s C--4 4-) U 10 10 0 U) .0 0 •L) N a w HI
0 RI-rt 3.1 10 C) r•1 43 U -•-I 0 U) 10 U >, 0 H 4) .)-) 0 4.)
'O N --I C.) ''' 0. 0 U) .-i S - sa f-40 4) 14 r-I U U U) C N U
•.-I -.-1 1.7 TS U) O U) 4) 4 10 10-n••-1 a C) C) 0 --4 4-) 0
> .'' C 0 to 10 -•-1 >,4- t) U) 0 a to .0 14 •--I .1-1 -n N 3.I U) -n
O a) O x m a 4) 4).r-I C C 4 O E 0 0 0 C) 0 0 O U) 4) 0 0
34 w C 0-rI 0 3.I -ri •0-1.•-i U) in 0 04 .0 3a 4.4 3.1 3.4 a) >, to 0 3-I
a C O 10 C .0 .0 RS U C 3 0 0 U 0 to .i-) 0 0 a a 34 (0 0 04
H as•a0towa 0 0C U 31 s-i - 0 U) = •� U 0+
0 > C •-1 0 .. a $.1 041-4 CO r-I C 0 0 4) C) C 0
3 RS 0-rI 0 w >, E 4) r-I-•-I to H Cl IC H .0 .0•r-I TS •--I ••4 .0
EI • .04.7-ri O C RS U 00) 0) RS 0 . ) to U 0 0 .3.) 4-) T.1 RS 4-) •L)
U1 34 U .I-) 10 34 0 (4-i 0 0 .) .0 4) .0 0-r1 3 .0 C ZS 4) (0
Q.--i0 4-) 010 0 ts)-r, H O -,4 4 0 4) a•-4 4-) U) r-1 a) .-1 -r-1 34 r-1
0 U) 4 Mil-if-4E1400 WOO a 0 .0 3 0 H a 0 a 0 •--1
410 14-1O4-1C) 003a34 4C3.I 0 to0 m3.i0 0 O 0 HX 0 04 H
Lo .0 •C E 0 34 to w a a H -'-i a U (-4 .3.) (-I a s «., H C 3 a) 3 U 0 3
•
Z
4 C H
0 TO O a) •
a) a) 0 .0
TS N a M '0 31 4 4.)
•� N > 0 4) .0 co -r1
in C a) r-1 3 0 .0 0 C•
i -e 4 44 > 3a -- s.40
Sa c . C c . 0 a) 0 $ U
ZT N 0 N •,i $4 C C Rt a)
a 0 $4 HN U0 C •0 0) $4
a) r.• •,- 0 0 •r1 - 01 a
RS TS 3'0.1 M0) 0 �U) $ U) 10 r-I
O N° St C •H In Cl) -X '0 > 0
•r.1 a C 0 3 a) S4 •r-1 H '0
4) X) •� MS 0' W C r-1° U U •
ffl
Cc . >
'0 U) a) 4-) (CS C•rl H C a) •r•1 ••••I
'0 01 C CO H 4) trl •41 •r1 -n .0 '0
RS C- •� a) ° 3 m O •C •
O RS C.) X •H 0 U M U >. en 4a •
4-1 34 RS it 4-1 4.) C CO a) a.) 0 0
•
b a a) '� ° a) '° 4) HC'• •0 C 0) C •
a) 0 4-) N C -. r-1 0 4J 3-1 0
a) RS - 0 - 0 a) $4 0 a a) RS •rl
C. C >. > >. -r1 0 O a) > 4-)
co 4-) •,.1 •-) U) $4 3 TS X in a) a) C RS
4-) a) •ri ).a --1 C 0 c0 0 4) •r•1 0 4-) •
CO .0 C.) a U RS 4.1 4) a) 4 )a 0 C
O a it In a > C. U 7:3 a)
U C '0 M a) X TS .0 Rt a) •r1 N RS N E
4.) •H C a) .0 a) 0) 4.) CO C a) $4 a) U) a) r)
010 0 U) 4) $4 4) .0 a > 0 c'. 0 .--1
C 0 a) Rt w C U -44 4 C U a •
�,
•r•1 C CO U i2 C 0 0 C C C $ 4-) 0 0 0 N
a.) 4.) RS •,-10 -n0 0)•r1 0 4.1 0 U $4 -.I 4-1 •4.1
RS -r1 0) H X RS C 0 0 a) a) 4-
Sa 3 )4 4 RS 4.) 0 U) 4) 00 .k U -n T3 RS N a)
• a) U 0 4) U -r•1 N CO U 4) ••••1 Q $4 C - .0
a U) C a 0) a) '0 U (U RSH H O 0 -I U 4-)
O 0) •r1 U) 4.1 U) > 4 .0 0 4 '0 0)
> Sa 4.1 0 4- C U) 0 U) C 34 •n 4-1
C •,.1 TO a) >+ 0) 0 •r1 •r1 X >+ 0) 04.- •ra 0 0 •r1
O 4.) a) .0 4-) U RS •r) 3-1 >, 0 $-1
U 4) •r1 0 C 0) 4) 34 $4 +) H U a TS
0) 0) RS 0 U C $4 0) -P 0 RS N •r1 Rt 0)
> •n 3-I 0 > RS 34 a .0 O •,.1 TO )a U
RS .0 a) .0 a) 0) 0) > 0 O U) 4) -P 0) a) 0
.0 0 H 4.) C. .s: > C •H 4-1 3-1 Rt 0 0) C 0) .^, TS
0) -r'1 N 4) 0 0 Sa aC 0) C 4) 0 n•
4-) CO U 3 0) .0 •r1 C a H a) .0 +) N 0 )4 '0
U a•) U $4 4) U) 10 0 0 0 4) (a $4 a)
0) -H RS V 0 U $4 C U CO •H •.i H •ri ZT 0) 0 a) a) 4-)
•n a) 4-) a) 0 as--1 44 41 H RS 3 C U .Q Rt
O (1) C 4) •,..1 41 a 41 it C .0 > --I bT 0) )a C
$4 > RS b '0 •• 4a 0) X -rI r-1 a) 0 TS > C $4 0 U) •r-1
a n) C C CO a) C.) a) C 0 +) a C a) a) -r1 •r1 4-1 UJ b
•.1 C •rl a) V) 0 Cr) E 0 •r1 t1•H 0 C a) 31
a) 4 -r1 '0 a RS 4) TS 0) •r1 •H a RS .0 tU 01 -r1 C O
.0 U 31 X CO U 0) E N 4-) 0 0 .. U 0) 0) 0) 0
4) RS 4.) 0 0) a) $ 0 U) a) a N U RS U 34 3a > U
r I 0 X •n N 0) .0 c'- Rt RS RS •r••1
H .P c'• 0 U is Rt 0 4.) U) +) 41 U) 4) a) a C a 4) 4-) 4) 4-)
r-1 U U) N C E-( 3-+ U 0) RS U Sa U 31 •r1 U U U 0
-r1 a) V 0) 4) •r1 a (1) U 0) 0) 0 0 0) 0 4..) .1•) 0) a) a) C
3 •n U) $4 U a-) 0) In 0 $4 •n U 4) -n C U N U -n n 4-4
O 0 a) RS .0 a) 0 '0 U O O U O•r1 a) N 0) 0 0 4-1 a)
4-) Sa U >, •n 3.1 41 .0 3.1 0 C $4 '0 0 3.1 •n a) -n 34 $ a) Sa
U a Rt 0 0) 4) a $•H 04 0 4-1 aN0 C 0 a a a)
it 0, r-1 Sa $4 a C a 0) iT $4 U )a U) 3
a a) C (1) 04 0 0 r•1 0) n) a) H O •r4 C a > a Cl) a) 4)
E C-r1 '0 H .0 4 N .0 >. 0 C 4.) -H •r•1 .0 .0 •r1 a)
•r1 4) 4.) O In 4) •r1 4.) •r4 RS H C 4.) 3.1 2T a) a-) a) 4-) •I) 01
0 TS .0 - U 3 .0 4) 31 0) RS .0 U .0 '0 RS
.P H Sa H 4) >r a) H H r-1 RS Q) H a . 4) 0) 4.) U) U) r-I aC
RS H a) 0 4 41 3 r1 r-1 X r•1 0 4) 1--1 O U 4-1 a) 0) 0 U
3 3 O 0 H U 4-1 0 --1 •� Rt -H $4 X -H $4 RS N 4.1 U) 0 0 0 RS
3 3 4.) 3 0' O 3 04 a 1.1 0) 1-+ 0 0. 3 04
Z
C9
Z
CD
(•
� 4-)
U) 0 �
C. •-I U) .,.1
3 Z
0 en r-1 VS
O f>-4 U) 1N 0.4 �f'l.,
0
0
04 N al I 04 RS N
3-1 O 0 0 01 ..,-1U) C
0 RS
U) U) a, a O O
-•-I 0 34 U
.) 01 0 0 0
0
• SO.1 a) a crl � 4 ••N•4
C) ili 0 -i
•o-1 0
M
Sa - al 0 C.) U
•r•1
41
.,"4 0 10 C M C. •C
U) 4.) 41 C a 0 0) • S y
••1 ••4 Cn ••-I
X r--1 C 0 0 S], O 0 U) Ul
0 -U 4.) c U ) U) co 3 � 501
W RS N 0 C C •••1 a) 04
O W •,-1 •,-I
>1 2T X z 4-)� S40 U) •3 C Q)
O C C 3-1 0 .0 0 I 3 >
N
C 0 4-) 0 >~ a) -� 1
•r-4 N C 0 U) 0 •,.1 0 .4-)
C) •
•r"1 X 4.) U 0 0 -•0•I 4 U y0-1 .� cv
w 0 w O U) C -- r0-I 0 >, "4 N 3
a) w 0 4 N 'C3 -•I $a C 4-) Sa
0 0 a) 4 en
0 0 0 0 >, U 04
• { 4 A 0 30- 1 M •-I-M -.-1 0 .�
S>-1 •U .0 � 4.) 0 aa) 4�) 0 4
UO) S1, E 3.1 O 0 •C 0 W
ccI a)0 U W 0 0a 0 1~ 0 n- 0 ,.1
3
4)) 0 � U n• �V) 0+ >T 0 ••TS N C O,
4) +) 0 0 TS a) 0 C U •RS S>-1 cU
U 0 4) C 0 •C 3 0 0 U 0 ,C
W
01 CE 4-)
U) 0 0 -0 , 4 >, a 4-) r� U) MS
W Cl) 4- U) O CO 0
0 0 0 •..i .4 > a) .0 0 0 A 0
J-1 TS S-1 W 0 3-1 > a-) > > >
4.) U 0 S1,W 0 0 $a $.1 $a r-1 Sa 4-)
U C Z3 0 0 3 U) 0 •) 0 0 •-1 0) C)
C) •n N 0 4-) ,-1 3-1 U) W CO U) ••I U) 0
aa) 0 U U C 0) N •�••4 C � 0 0 1:53 a.) o
••-1 04 0 4-) 0 V) M U) 0 0) 0 •-1 0 C•• 04
U •n U •n U) d•) b fl, U) A U) 0 •n i2, •n N
--I 0 0 0 O cU -••1 0 0 0 0 Cl) 0 0 O 'C a)
44-1 •C 5+ -n •• S.t E 0 3-1 0 4) 0 34 0 34 0 .0
W a-) 04 r 0 +I f1 0 e Z o., 'c) •,4 73 U) o., a o., 0 4
• 1 0 4) a a) a) U .-1 0 •.•I N H a) 0) >1 0 U)
0 ••I .0 C .0 4) RS .0 H 0 .-1 0) .0 C .0 Sa 0
C.) •ri 4.) 0 0 4-) 4.) 0 0 C 4) 0 0 0 Z 4) cU 4-) tU 0
•'•1 3 'O .0 -••1 0 .0 0 3 T5 3 e r-1 'II
> U) -,.1 4-) E U) -n 4-) N N
3-1 3 0 U) a a) 0 3.1 0 3 3 3 CU 0N) 3 •H-t -,-1
0 0 0 0 U) 0 0 3-i U) 0 0 0 0 0 3.1 0 0 •r1 -4 0
CO .•, 0 3.1 H U Cl f14 H f14 O +. x = Q 0 3 U) w
Z
CD
�-y
1991
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SALARY STUDY
Office of the State Auditor
Research and Government Information Division
March 1992
PREFACE
«::axc, ww.:•, ;..ucw:waow:su«�uu :<ws.:vwwauwcu.:<wxo-:axwa:ww:al.:,>:iv::,a::>xuuwk.,•xcwecaw<u�::wcw•:..x<.xa»owwwoaar.:oo
This study of salaries and wages paid to employees of Minnesota's local governments has
been prepared by the Office of the State Auditor as mandated by Laws of Minnesota (1991),
Chapter 345, Article I, Section 20, Subdivision 4. In pertinent part, the mandate requires:
By February 1, 1992, the state auditor, with the cooperation of the
commissioner of employee relations, shall report to the legislature on the
salaries of the positions subject to the political subdivision salary limit in
Minnesota Statutes, section 43A.17, subdivision 9. This report shall included
analysis of total salaries, highest salaries, comparisons with other states and
public and private sectors, and any other information the state auditor considers
appropriate regarding salaries and other potential efficiencies and cost savings
in political subdivisions. Political subdivisions shall cooperate with the state
auditor in providing the information necessary for this report.
This Report is the culmination of seven months of extensive data collection, research and
analysis of Minnesota's local government salaries. The report was prepared by the Research
and Information Division of the Office of the State Auditor. The division is headed by Mr. Jim
Gelbmann, Assistant State Auditor for Research and Information. The study, and preparation
of the Report to the Legislature, was directed by Ms. Dorothy Bliss, Director of Research. Mr.
John Jernberg and Mr. Dan Medenblick conducted much of the research for this study and
assisted in drafting the report. Assistance was also provided by Mr. Robert Paolina.
The Office of the State Auditor could not have completed this project without the
assistance of Commissioner Linda Barton of the Minnesota Department of Employee Relations
and her staff, Ms. Jan Wiessner, Assistant to the Commissioner, Mr. Jim Lee, Director of
Compensation, and Ms. Liz Koncker, Personnel Representative. The Commissioner and her
staff assisted our Office in designing the methodology for the study, as well as providing insight
on a number of issues related to public employee compensation.
The Office of the State Auditor also extends its appreciation to Commissioner R. Jane
Brown and the staff of the Minnesota Department of Jobs and Training. Commissioner Brown
made available data on Minnesota's private sector salaries and wages collected through the 1990
Annual Salary Survey conducted by the Department of Jobs and Training. This data base was
a key component of our analyses of local government salaries.
The Office of the State Auditor would also like to thank the Association of Minnesota
Counties, the Minnesota School Boards Association, the League of Minnesota Cities and the
dozens, of local government officials who provided input for our study. These individuals
provided us with technical assistance to facilitate our analysis of the wage and salary data. They
also responded to our inquiries as we sorted through the many issues related to the wage and
salary comparisons. The associations designated individuals to serve on an advisory council
established by our Office for this study. (The membership of the Advisory Council, in addition
to the over 50 individuals who took the time to provide input into the many issues addressed by
this study, are identified in Appendix A.)
Finally, we would like to extend our most sincere appreciation to the hundreds of local
government officials who took the time to complete our surveys and respond to our requests for
clarification of the information provided.
This Report is hereby respectfully submitted to the Minnesota Legislature in compliance
with Laws of Minnesota (1991), Chapter 345, Article 1, Section 20, Subdivision 4.
Mark B. Dayton
State Auditor
March 1992
ii
•
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
During the 1991 Minnesota legislative session, an article in the St. Paul Pioneer Press
on local government salaries caught the Legislature's attention. The article focused on the
number of St. Paul city employees earning over $50,000 per year. It generated so much concern
that the Legislature considered language freezing non-represented local government employee
salaries. One proposal froze all salaries over $50,000; another went even further and froze those
salaries above $35,000. In conference committee the language freezing salaries was omitted.
In its stead, the Office of the State Auditor was directed to do a study of local government
salaries.
To do this study, we looked both at groups of employees earning over and those earning
less than $50,000 per year. For employees earning over $50,000, we conducted a survey of
over 650 cities, counties, school districts and special services districts with at least one employee
earning more than $50,000. For employees earning less than $50,000, we relied on data from
several local government surveys. We compared this local government data to salary data for
similar private sector occupations.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Employees Earning Over $50,000
In our research we found that as of June 30, 1991, over 4,800 local government
employees earn more than $50,000 per year. Based on the Census Bureau's 1989 count of
137,071 full-time local government employees statewide, this means that approximately 3.5
percent of all full-time Minnesota local government employees earn over $50,000 annually.
Five percent of Minnesota state government employees earn over $50,000. For all employees
in Minnesota, in both the public and private sectors, six percent earned over $50,000 per year
in 1990 (CPS data).
Almost 70 percent of the local government employees earning over $50,000 are in
administrative, managerial, or supervisory positions. Other positions paying at that level are
highly trained professionals, such as attorneys or engineers. In addition, a significant proportion
of city employees (26 percent) paid over $50,000 are police and fire personnel.
Insufficient data made it impossible to compare every position earning over $50,000 with
similar positions in the private sector. Where comparisons are possible, however, we find that
most local government professionals make wages comparable to their private sector
counterparts. Some occupations, such as social worker or librarian, earn more in local
government. Others, such as attorneys, engineers, and accountants, may be able to earn more
in the private sector.
iii
One area in which the private sector clearly pays more than the public sector for
comparable positions is in senior management. We compared the salaries of a limited number
of top metropolitan local government managers (i.e., county administrators, executive directors,
and mayors) to the salaries paid to senior executives in selected Minnesota corporations. (See
Table C-1 on page 65.) These comparisons show that private sector senior executives earn
several times more than comparable top executives in local government.
We were not able to make similar comparisons for lower-level managers or for the
administrators of medium to small local jurisdictions. The responsibilities of administrators,
managers and supervisors in both the public and private sectors can vary widely. More focused
research would be needed to make adequate public-private comparisons for these jobs.
Local Government Executives - National Comparisons
The International City Management Association publishes annual comparisons of the
average salaries of local government executives (e.g., city managers, county administrators,
finance directors, police chiefs) for all states. Our review of Minnesota's local government
executive salaries for 1990, relative to other states, found that Minnesota ranks from fifteenth
for the average salaries of assistant managers, to seventh for the average salaries of parks and
recreation directors. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (1990) reports that Minnesota ranks
fourteenth among the states for average salaries of all public and private sector employees.
Minnesota's national rankings for local government executive salaries, therefore, are
comparable to its national rank for overall salaries.
Employees Earning Less Than $50,000
When we looked at local government employees earning less than $50,000, we found that
the lesser-paid employees of local governments tend to earn more than their private sector
counterparts. Our comparison of benchmark occupations indicates that local government
salaries for a number of jobs seldom fell behind the private sector average. Metropolitan area
jurisdictions, especially, generally out-paced the wages of the private sector.
Significant Disparities in Local Government Salary Structures
In addition to wages, we examined the salary structures of local government jurisdictions
by comparing the percent of full-time employees paid over $50,000 between cities, counties and
school districts of similar characteristics. We found that metropolitan area cities have the
greatest disparities in their salary structures, ranging from no employees paid over $50,000, to
10.48 percent of the employees of the City of St. Paul earning over $50,000. Greater Minnesota
city salary structures range from no employees earning over $50,000 to 6.1 percent of
Rochester's work force earning more than $50,000 per year.
iv
All metropolitan area counties pay some employees over $50,000. Carver County pays
3.5 percent of its work force over $50,000, while Ramsey County pays 10.53 percent of its
employees over $50,000. Greater Minnesota counties appear to have the most uniform salary
structures, ranging from no employees earning over $50,000 in 37 counties, to 2.7 percent of
Sherburne County employees earning over $50,000.
All metropolitan area school districts employ at least one person at $50,000 per year or
more. Their salary structures range from one percent in the Norwood school district to eight
percent in North St. Paul. At least 187 Greater Minnesota school districts employ one or more
individuals at salary levels of $50,000 or greater. Their salary structures range from less than
one percent of employees over $50,000 to seven percent of employees earning over $50,000 in
the Kenyon school district.
The results of this analysis show a general lack of consistency in salary structures
for cities and school districts. For example, the results of Table 3 on page 16 show that there
is no apparent relationship between city size, expenditures, and the salary paid to the city
manager. Table 4 on page 19 reveals that some large cities pay a smaller proportion of their
full-time employees more than $50,000 than do other, smaller cities. This discrepancy is also
true for school districts, and the salaries paid to school superintendents (see Table C-2 on page
70). Counties, on the other hand, seem to follow a more consistent pattern: larger counties
usually pay higher salaries than smaller counties.
Public Employee Unions Impact Salaries
Part of our survey research involved asking whether a position was represented by a
bargaining unit. We found that almost 85 percent of employees earning over $50,000 in the
City of St. Paul are represented by a union. Over half of the City of Minneapolis' employees
at that level are represented. Nearly a third of Hennepin and Ramsey county employees over
$50,000, and over 40 percent of high-paid school district employees are organized. The levels
of unionization in the suburban metropolitan area, and in Greater Minnesota, are much less.
Levels of unionization are clearly related to salary levels. A study by the National
Conference of State Legislatures found that the states with the highest average earnings for state
and local employees also are highly unionized; the states with the lowest average earnings have
low unionization.
Benefits Range From Good to Excellent
After analyzing local government employee salaries, we opted to review employee benefit
packages as well. We found evidence of good, and often excellent fringe benefits. For
example, 14 percent of private sector employees receive over 25 days of paid vacation per year,
regardless of their length of service. In contrast, almost 28 percent of Greater Minnesota
v
cities over 2,500 offer more than 25 paid vacation days
per
s of
service. One bargaining unit in the City of Mountain Iron receives r40 days of paid vac, after 15 to 30 ation
(eight weeks) after 25 years of service.
Another area where the public sector benefits clearly exceed private sector levels is in
paid holidays. Only 28 percent of the full-time employees in the private sector receive more
than ten paid holidays; in contrast, 76 percent of the Minnesota cities and counties in our
sample provide more than 10 paid holidays.'
In the area of sick leave and health insurance, local government employees also fare
better than the private sector. Many private sector employees have a limited number of days
to use for sick leave each year, while local government employees may carry sick leave accruals
over from one year to the next. Virtually all local governments in our study offer some level
of health coverage. For counties and non-metropolitan cities over 2,500, about 78 percent pay
the full premium for single coverage. For metropolitan cities over 2,500, 93 percent pay the
full premium for single coverage. Many private sector employers offer health insurance, but
only 48 percent of workers have the full cost of coverage paid for by their employers.
The combined effects of good pay and great benefits means that local government
employees overall fare better than their private sector counterparts.
THE NEED FOR COMMON GOALS TO ACHIEVE COST CONTA1NM cT
Our findings indicate there is sufficient reason for concern about the salaries and benefits
being provided for many local government employees. For cities over 2,500, salaries and
benefits comprise approximately 54 percent of total city expenditures. For Minnesota
counties, salaries and fringe benefits account for approximately 38 percent of total
expenditures. (The lower county percentage is a result of the large amounts counties spend on
payments to individuals for various public assistance programs.) Efforts to contain local
government costs cannot ignore areas of overly generous employee compensation.
A number of different groups are involved in, or affected by, the salary setting process.
To address the friction inherent in efforts to contain local government spending through controls
on local government salary levels, and the desire of local governments for autonomy in salary
decisions, we considered both the spoken and implied goals of each of these groups. They
include: the Legislature; local governments; unions; both public and private sector employees;
private sector employers; and the taxpayers of Minnesota. The principal goals of these groups
are:
'Ten paid holidays are mandated by state law (MN Statutes 645.44, Subd. 5).
vi
1) maintain or improve service quality;
2) cut the costs of doing business, or keep costs low;
3) keep taxes, individual and corporate, from rising;
4) improve working and employment conditions; and
5) control government spending.
Many of these goals are shared by more than one of the parties listed above. These goals
also reflect the tension between the forces for saving and those for spending. Our most
important finding in this exercise, however, is that one important group may not share the goal
of reducing government costs, particularly if it affects wages. Public employee unions rightfully
exist for the purpose of protecting and enhancing workers' rights, wages, and benefits. They
share no responsibility for reducing public spending. Because of their size, and therefore
influence in the public sector, they are an important counterweight on the drive to control costs.
Public employee unions representing essential employees (e.g., fire, police) have a unique
influence on local government salaries. If a local government and an essential employee
bargaining unit are unable to negotiate a contract, the matter goes to arbitration. In arbitration,
a neutral third party is chosen to decide the contested issues. The decision of the arbitrator is
binding on both employer and union. The effect of the binding arbitration process is to place
decisions about salary levels in the hands of individuals with no direct accountability to local
taxpayers.
Because of their size and influence, unions have another effect on the salary setting
process. State and local elected officials are reluctant to conflict with employee unions, which
wield considerable political clout. For example, the Minnesota Senate last year approved a
proposal to freeze local government salaries over $50,000 -- but only for non-represented
employees.
Locally elected officials also may have difficulty challenging the salary requests of public
employee unions. Public employee unions can be a significant factor in the outcome of local
elections because of their ability to turn members out to vote, combined with the relatively low
general voter turnouts for local elections. Elected officials need the direct involvement and
cooperation of public employee unions if local government salary levels are to be addressed.
It may also be in the best interest of public employee unions to become involved in
attempts to balance local government salaries with those in the private sector. Failure to address
excessive disparities in local government and private sector salary structures where they exist
will breed increasing levels of taxpayer discontent. Minnesota taxpayers may opt to register
their discontent at the ballot box. Forcing government cost containment through the election of
candidates committed solely to reducing government spending could result in significant public
sector employee layoffs and critical reductions in public services.
vii
THE EIIECT OF STATE POLICIES
The statute creating this study directs the State Auditor's Office to compare local
government salaries with the private sector. The Legislature has directly indicated, however,
through policies enacted in statute, that there are at least two areas where they clearly do not
want public sector salaries to mirror private sector salaries. The first is in traditionally female-
dominated job classes. Through passage of landmark pay equity laws in 1983 and 1984, the
Legislature made it clear that their goal is to correct market-based inequities in pay between
male-dominated and female-dominated jobs of comparable worth. As the policy succeeds, the
expected result is to find an increase in the difference between private sector and public sector
pay for the affected occupations.
The second area where public sector salaries differ from the private sector by design is
in top-level public sector jobs. The legislatively mandated salary
of
95 percent of the governor's salary indicates the Legislature's bel of that nobpubl clicempemp employee
should aspire to earn more than the highest-ranking public employee. While exceptions to this
rule are made for physicians, the Minnesota Legislature has effectively sent the message that
employment in the public sector is in large measure service, and that there is a reasonable limit
to what public servants can expect to be paid.
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
Based on the findings of this study, we draw these main conclusions:
1) Local government employees overall are adequately, and often amply
compensated relative to the private sector as a whole.
The fact that local government employees fare well in a comparison of average salaries
with the private sector does not mean, however, that every local government employee is
overpaid. Nor do we conclude that most local government employees earning over $50,000 are
overpaid. In fact, we found no reason to focus concern about salary levels only on employees
earning over$50,000 per year. If over-compensation of public sector employees is suspected,
it should be investigated on a jurisdiction by
applies to the examination of overgenerous benefits,�astw ll,obb class by job class basis. This
2) The level of unionization among local government employees earning over
$50,000 in the metropolitan area is so high that any blanket approach to
controlling salaries, if it focuses only on non-represented employees, will mics
the mark.
viii
Despite their concern about local government salaries, the Legislature did not propose
a salary freeze for union members. We heard several times from local government officials that
a selective freeze on only non-represented employees would only provide the necessary
motivation for groups of currently non-represented local government employees to organize
(e.g., department heads and professionals). The only group of employees left unorganized in
the metropolitan area could eventually be those statutorily prohibited from doing so.
3) The apparent lack of consistency in salary structures for Minnesota cities and
school districts points to the need for greater understanding of the factors
influencing salary levels, and the need for more accountability to the
taxpayers in those areas.
The findings relative to salary structures for all jurisdictions are preliminary. We have
made this conclusion based on our comparison of the percent of employees paid over $50,000,
local government size, population, and fiscal capacity. We found a fairly consistent salary
pattern for counties: larger counties tended to have a larger percentage employees paid over
$50,000. When we compared cities of similar size, however, some had many more employees
paid over $50,000 than others. The numbers and salaries of full-time and part-time employees
also varied quite dramatically for cities of similar size. The percent of employees paid over
$50,000 also did not appear to be related to the total number of pupils in a school district.
We do not know every reason for this variation in the number and percent of high-paid
staff. However, state and local officials, and Minnesota taxpayers, should take note of these
differences and determine if the salary structures of individual jurisdictions are appropriate.
4) The extent of health and pension coverage offered by local governments is
commendable, as it meets the goals of social policies. Local government
employee paid leave benefits for some jurisdictions, however, are extremely
high compared to those offered in the private sector.
Local government fringe benefits vary somewhat between jurisdictions and bargaining
units, but are uniformly generous. Health and pension benefits help to meet the goals of
government, by taking care of employees who need assistance in illness or advanced age.
Overly generous paid leave compared to the private sector, however, only contributes to the
public impression of inefficiency and wastefulness in government. These disparities need to be
addressed and analyzed in relation to other factors in public employee compensation.
5) To be successful in keeping public sector salaries in line with private sector
salaries, some means must be found to encourage public employee unions,
especially those of essential employees, to share the goal of government cost
containment.
ix
For unions, increasing constraints on spending in the public sector have already created
some difficulty. Fringe benefits, such as health insurance, while generous in the public sector
compared to the private sector, have been affected. Unions are feeling the pressure of trying
to maintain the status quo.
Nonetheless, public employee unions may need to adjust their responsibilities toward
members. "Good" might no longer be defined as across-the-board annual increases in wages
above the cost of living. Instead, more compensation might be given according to individual
performance and productivity. Opportunities for merit pay could be increased, with unions
ensuring that the measures of performance are clear, consistent, fair, and equitably applied. All
employees should have the opportunity to excel. Unions would have to be willing to allow
members to shoulder the responsibility for turning in a job performance that merits an increase
in pay -- and be willing likewise to allow some members not to receive an increase.
SUM.BIARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Affirm the salary cap and pay equity laws.
Both the statutory salary cap and the pay equity requirements are repeatedly raised as
significant issues by representatives of local government, although neither of these two policies
have anywhere near the effect on local government salaries as do public employee unions.
The salary cap has been reached by only two local government employees, indicating that
at its current level it is not a problem for most local governments. This statute prohibiting
public sector employees from earning more than 95 percent of the Governor's salary is one of
the few checks the Legislature has successfully placed on the growth of local government
salaries, and should be retained.
The Department of Employee Relations reports that the average cost of implementing pay
equity for local governments is about two percent of payroll, although this percentage may vary
considerably from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. This policy plays an important role in defining
the nature of public employment, and should not only stay in place but be reaffirmed.
2) Do not impose a blanket freeze on local government salaries at any level.
There are many factors to consider when trying to discover if local government
employees are overpaid. These include the population served, number of people supervised, size
of budget, and other individual responsibilities. When public sector employees are generously
compensated compared to their private sector counterparts, there may be rational and justifiable
explanations for the differences. The mere existence of differences in public and private sector
salaries does not necessarily reflect capricious overcompensation on the part of local
x
governments. The possible factors should be considered, and instances of overcompensation
investigated on a regional and job class basis.
3) Require local governments to report periodically on their overall salary
structures to the Legislature and to local taxpayers.
Though we found that many local government employees, especially highly trained
professionals, are paid salaries comparable to those found in the private sector, and that senior
executives are sometimes paid less, we could not ignore the fact that some local government
employees are overpaid relative to the private sector. Local governments should be allowed
considerable discretion in establishing salary policies. But it is reasonable to expect that there
should be some relationship between salary levels and other factors, such as the quality of
services provided. At a minimum, there should be public accountability in local salaries.
Local government salary data is public information and is available upon request. Many
local governments report salary information annually. This information, however, is not always
readily available or understandable to the general public. Overall local government salary
structure information should be periodically provided to the Legislature and to local taxpayers.
Comparisons of salary structures between similar units of government will make it possible to
identify areas of overcompensation that are not caused by the implementation of state policies.
Such information will allow local taxpayers to determine if the salaries of their local government
employees are comparable to the salaries paid by other local governments with similar
characteristics.
4) Institute reasonable limits on paid leaves for local government employees.
Benefits for local government employees are even more generous, compared to the
private sector, than salaries. Fringe benefits levels in local governments are almost always
above the private sector average. This is especially true in the area of paid leaves: vacation
days, holiday, and sick leave. Because these policies essentially pay employees for not working,
local governments need to take steps wherever possible to correct excessive leave policies,
including accruals.
5) Ensure that all employers offer adequate health and pension benefits.
A significant portion of the cost of inadequate health and pension benefits for working
Minnesotans is clearly borne by the State. While the provision of generous health and pension
benefits is another factor setting local government employment apart from the private sector,
these benefit levels may be viewed as fulfilling the Legislature's policy goals. Rather than
reduce these benefits to private sector levels, private sector employers should be encouraged,
if not required, to offer adequate health and pension benefits to their employees.
xi
6) Develop incentives for public employee unions to participate in cost-
containment efforts.
The issue of union settlements was pervasive throughout our discussions with local
government representatives. Part of the issue of high union salaries is historical: earlier
generous settlements continue to carry the whole structure forward at a higher level. Another
part of the problem is that the binding arbitration process does not have to take costs into
account. Public employees are organized to a much greater degree than private sector
employees, and even more are poised to organize if a salary freeze is imposed. Solutions to
high salary costs for local government will not work unless unions participate. Unions need to
recognize that it is in the long-term interests of their members to share in efforts to contain the
costs of government.
DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE STUDY
The issues of salaries and occupations are immensely complex. We have given an
overview, with specific focus on local government salaries over $50,000. But the possibilities
for analysis are endless. This is in part because salaries are a moving target: always changing.
It is also because every job is to some degree as unique as the individual that holds it. Future
studies of local government salaries could take several directions: comparisons of specific local
government jobs to similar private sector occupations; comprehensive data collection on a few
benchmark occupations for all local units of government and a private sector sample; or an
analysis of the relationship between government organization structures and salary levels. The
goals, or purpose of any such research needs to be clearly spelled out, however, before the
resources to do a study are expended.
xii
$ 5
(11114r- SHAKOPEE COALITIONY..T
1100 East Fourth Avenue • Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
"Pounded in 1983" • ; .92
ci
Meeting Minutes for March 3 , 1992
The meeting was called to order by Chairman.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Barry Stock (City of Shakopee) , Bonnie Sokolov
(American Cancer Society) , David Eckart (Rotary) , Claude Kolb
(Lions & K.C) , Ed Marek (Amer. Red Cross/Rotary) , Judson Kenyon
(CAP) , Chuck Dustrud (Human Services) , Sister Esther Wagner (SACS) ,
Dave Resch (Scott Co. Extension) and Brian Norris (Citizens State
Bank) .
Bonnie Sokolov - Looking for a Vice President and Advertising
public relations individual. March 17-23 Dafadill promotion.
Storing all the flowers at Wild Iris for free. Thank you Wild
Iris. Residential crusade is coming up in April . Making great
strides with St. Francis Hospital. American Cancer Society is
providing a nurse here with some training.
Claude Kolb - Lions had District Governor at last week club
meeting. KC is having regular fish fry.
Ed Marek - Pancake breakfast was great success. Board looks at
donations four times a year. March 12 is next time. Contact Randy
Laurent with requests.
Dave Resch - Extension office is having a home study lawn care
program. SAVI next meeting is March 24 , 2 : 00 PM. Program is
working with the media.
Judson Kenyon - This month is food share. Match is made by large
corporations. Goal is $35, 000 and 35, 000 pounds of food. Don
Startley was featured in recent Prior Lake paper.
Chuck Dustrud - Unemployment rate in the county is higher than the
rest of the state.
Dave Eckart - Working on getting the developmentally disabled
going. Getting a new name and also going to the Shakopee Showcase.
Next meeting is after regular Shakopee Coalition. Need small
amount of money for postage.
Barry Stock - April 20 is Shakopee Showcase. Can still get a
booth. Residential development plats are coming in. Looks like
a five year high for these. City is looking at doing a telephone
survey on the proposed projects. Could include request on where
cuts should be made.
-2-
Sister Esther - New parish center is reaching final stages.
Next meeting is Tuesday, April 7 , 1992 in the Citizens State Bank
Community Room at 4 : 30 PM.
Respectfully Submitted
Brian Norris, Secretary
MINUTES OF THE
SHAKOPEE ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Regular Session
March 18, 1992
Chairman Drees called the meeting to order at 7 : 00 P.M. , with
Commissioners Ward, Drees, Kelly, Otto and Reinke present.
Commissioners Case and Mars were absent. Barry A. Stock, Assistant
City Administrator and Terry Sandbeck, Assistant City Planner were
also present.
Ward/Otto moved to approve the minutes of the February 19 , 1992
meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock stated that at their March 10, 1992 meeting, the City
Council directed the appropriate City officials to submit an
application with Scott County for a spring recyclable material
collection day. Staff was requesting that the Energy and
Transportation Committee review and comment on the components of
the proposed grant application, prior to it' s submittal to Scott
County. Mr. Stock stated that he wanted to go over the major
changes over last year. The biggest change was the fee structure.
In order to keep cost down, staff is proposing that they limit the
number of tires or charge one dollar per tire. Staff is also
suggesting a $5. 00 charge for purely recyclable loads. Mr. Stock
stated that there were two reasons for this fee. One was that
landfill tipping fees have increased by 30%. The second reason is
that the grant amount that would be issued to the City this year is
far below what it was last year. Commissioner Ward asked what
would happen if there was a mixed load brought to the spring
cleanup day. Mr. Stock responded that there would be a $20 . 00
charge with a mixed load. There would be no additional $5 . 00 fee
for the recyclable items. Mr. Stock also stated that before staff
submits the grant application, he wants to speak with the garbage
hauler and make sure of the charges. Chairman Drees suggested that
the same map be used on the pamphlet as last year, which showed the
route that the vehicles should take into the Public Works facility.
Ward/Reinke moved to request staff to submit the grant application
with the map change suggested by Chairman Drees. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mr. Stock stated that Item #6 of the 1992 Goals and Objectives for
the Shakopee Energy and Transportation Committee was to conduct a
Dial-A-Ride survey to determine ridership needs and satisfaction.
A draft survey had been designed to help determine the needs of the
current riders and staff was requesting that the members of the
Committee review this draft survey and provide suggestions for
improvements. Once the design of the survey is finalized, staff
would ask that the Dial-A-Ride drivers distribute them to the users
of the service. They would also be distributed at the Shakopee
Showcase. Mr. Stock stated that one of the most important
questions on the survey is whether or not to expand the service
area and to which areas. He stated that eventually we may expand
service to the Burnsville Center and other regional shopping areas.
Commission Reinke stated that there is currently no service to the
township area but that they often don't realize that the townships
have to service their own areas. He suggested that another item be
added to the options, questioning which additional areas should be
considered for service expansion.
Mr. Stock stated that another interesting question is to determine
how many people are using the service that live outside of the City
limits. He suggested asking for the address of the person
completing the survey. Discussion ensued on the various regional
centers that should be included in the survey. Chairman Drees
asked if we need to be concerned that we're bussing people to other
areas to shop.
Kelly/Reinke motioned to distribute the present survey with the
modifications as discussed. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock discussed item 5a on the agenda, which was a copy of a
letter from Representatives Becky Kelso and Sidney Pauly to Mr.
Gregory Andrews, Executive Director of the Regional Transit Board.
Mr. Stock stated that according to this letter, the RTB isn't
calculating the City' s available local transit funds in a fair
manner. According to the letter, there is approximately $15 , 000
available that the City has never been able to obtain before. If
this legislation is approved, we may be able to get this money, or
a portion of it, to help acquire equipment. Another possibility is
to allow the city' s transit systems more flexibility to try
different things. Perhaps a fixed route could be established to
see how things go for a certain period of time.
Mr. Stock also stated that, according to the monthly reports, the
Dial-A-Ride is looking very healthy. The Vanpool and the Saturday
Dial-A-Ride are also looking good. He stated that the Recycling
Report for February will no longer show a County Perc. The City
will no longer be receiving recycling revenue from our hauler.
Mr. Stock informed the Commission that the next regular meeting is
scheduled for April 15, 1992 . However, if there is nothing on the
agenda, they would send out a notice of the meeting' s cancellation.
However, he did expect that at least some of the Commissioners
attend the Shakopee Showcase that is scheduled for April 20th.
Jane Ward stated that she would not be able to staff the Energy and
Transportation booth since she will be working in the American
Cancer Society booth.
Reinke/Ward motioned to adjourn at 7 : 30 P.M.
Terrie Sandbeck, Assistant City Planner
01F- rl
SHAKOPEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MARCH 18 , 1992
Chairperson Mars called the meeting to order at 5: 30 p.m. with the
following members present; Jon Albinson, Bill Mars, Charles
Brandmire, Mark Miller, Cole Van Horn, Mike Phillips and Elmer
Otto. Barry Stock, Assistant City Administrator and David Hutton,
Public Works Director were also present.
Albinson/Phillips moved to approve the minutes of the February 19 ,
1992 meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock stated that he would like to have added to the agenda the
election of officers for 1992 . Mr. Albinson nominated Bill Mars
for the Chairperson and Charles Brandmire for the First Vice
Chairperson position. Mark Miller nominated Jon Albinson for the
Second Vice Chairperson. There were no other nominations.
Albinson/Miller moved to appoint Bill Mars as Chairperson, Charles
Brandmire as First Vice Chairperson and Jon Albinson as Second Vice
Chairperson for the Community Development Commission in 1992 .
Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Stock gave a brief economic development update on the Brambilla
project. He noted that on March 17 , 1992 the Shakopee City Council
requested the Planning Commission to consider an ordinance
amendment that would allow Mr. Brambilla' s project in the I-2
Zoning District as a Conditional Use. Mr. Stock explained that Tax
Increment Financing was not a viable option for the Brambilla
project because there was no blight associated with the project.
Mr. Stock stated that the ordinance amendment would be relatively
restrictive in terms of what would be permitted as far as temporary
signage, street access and screening. Mr. Stock also stated that
the item would be placed on the April Planning Commission agenda
for the Planning Commission' s review and consideration.
Mr. Stock stated that earlier today Mr. Van Hout, Shakopee Public
Utility Manager called to inform him that he could not attend
tonight' s meeting due to another meeting conflict. Mr. Stock
suggested that the Commission go ahead and discuss the downtown
alley improvement and utility issue and prepare a list of concerns
that can be presented to the Shakopee Public Utility Commission at
their April meeting. Mr. Hutton then gave a brief presentation on
preliminary data that he has assembled for his feasibility study
report on this project. Mr. Hutton noted that the alley
reconstruction is in the 1992 capital improvement program. Mr.
Hutton stated that the typical alley cost for this reconstruction
is $7600. 00 per block. He noted that he has gathered some
preliminary information regarding the underground conduit. Mr,
Hutton stated that when Phase I of the downtown improvement project
was completed that the City paid for the conduit underneath the
streets at the alley mid points. He stated that the total costs
for the underground conduit in conjunction with Phase I of the
Official Proceedings of the March 18 , 1992
Community Develoment Commission Page -2-
downtown project was $80, 000. 00. Mr. Hutton stated that he
projected that the cost of the underground conduit for a typical
block would be $9, 000. 00. Mr. Hutton stated that Shakopee Public
Utility Commission requires their conduit to be encased in
concrete. Mr. Hutton stated that his cost estimate did include the
encasing of conduit in concrete. Mr. Hutton stated that in
conjunction with installing the conduit that rock excavation may be
necessary. He projected that in conjunction with the
undergrounding of conduit rock excavation in a typical block might
cost in the area of $2300. 00. Finally, Mr. Hutton stated that
there maybe some storm sewer work in some of the alleys. He
estimated that a typical storm sewer alley cost per block would be
between $4 , 000-$5, 000. 00. Mr. Hutton also noted that he was not
sure at this time whether or not all the alleys would need storm
sewer improvements.
Mr. Hutton then went through several of the alternatives assessment
methods. He noted that typically on a new street construction the
City' s policy is to assess 100%. On a street reconstruction
project, the City' s policy is to assess 25%. Mr, Hutton stated
that he felt that the alley improvements would fall under the
reconstruction assessment policy. He did note however that at this
time the City does not have a policy that relates directly to
alleys. Mr. Hutton stated that in terms of the alley surface, he
was leaning towards a 25% assessment policy. He then shared with
the Committee the possibility of utilizing a front foot and zonal
assessment method for assessing the overall alley improvements. He
stated that while not all property owners within a block directly
abut an alley they do incur some benefit.
Discussion ensued on who should pay for the conduit and rock
excavation. Mr. Brandmire shared with the Committee the experience
that he had in Jainesville, MN when they did a similar project. He
noted that in Jainesville the Utility Revenue Fund was utilized to
underground the overhead utility lines. Mr. Brandmire stated that
he felt that the conduit and undergrounding costs should be picked
up by Shakopee Public Utilities. Mr. Hutton stated that the
Shakopee Public Utility Commission would possibly argue that they
do not receive any direct benefit by undergrounding the utilities.
Mr. Brandmire stated that he felt that contrary to the Shakopee
Public Utilities Manager' s position that there was less maintenance
on an underground system as compared to an overhead system. He
also stated that from a public safety standpoint, underground
systems were much safer.
Discussion ensued on the storm sewer costs. Mr. Hutton stated that
he believed the storm sewer fund should be used to cover any storm
sewer costs associated with the alley improvements. Discussion
ensued on the alley surface assessment policy. Mr. Hutton stated
that he wanted to avoid establishing a separate policy for alley
improvements. He felt that the 25% reconstruction policy would
adequately address this improvement project.
Official Proceedings of the March 18 , 1992
Community Develoment Commission Page -3-
Discussion ensued on the cost of the individual property owner
electric services. Mr. Hutton stated that this cost could be
substantial in some cases. Typically, the cost to connect to an
underground service would be the responsibility of the property
owner. Mr. Albinson questioned why the downtown property owners
would want to incur additional cost to underground the overhead
utility lines. He stated that the only benefit that they would
receive would be from an aesthetic standpoint. He doubted whether
the downtown property owners would want to participate in the cost
of the alley improvement as well as the cost of replacing their
electric services. Mr. Brandmire stated that there were other
benefits to the downtown businesses including less disruption in
service and improved safety as a result of new services being
installed.
Discussion ensued on the various assessment alternatives.
Discussion ensued ont he possibility of the City paying 100% of the
alley pavement costs, SPUC paying 100% of the undergrounding cost
and the property owners paying 100% of their service cost. Mr.
Albinson suggested that this type of an assessment breakdown might
be more palatable for the downtown business owners to cover.
Discussion ensued on the use of tax increment financing funds to
cover some of the costs. Commission Miller questioned whether or
not tax increment financing could be used to cover the costs
underground service up to a buildings service connection point.
Mr. Stock stated that the questions of using TIF dollars to cover
service costs would have to be investigated further.
Mr. Brandmire stated that SPUC should be reminded that the City
paid for the conduit under the north-south streets at the alley
points. Mr. Brandmire again stated his position that he felt the
conduit, wire and undergrounding were utility costs that should be
picked up from the utility revenue fund account.
Mr. Hutton explained that SPUC is separate quasi independent entity
and that Council can not direct them to pay for any of the costs.
Mr. Hutton explained that another option would be to install the
conduit in the alleys at this time using tax increment fund dollars
in the hopes that SPUC would pursue undergrounding at some later
date. Finally, Mr. Hutton stated that in his opinion in a worse
case scenario would be to have the downtown alleys reconstructed
with no other imporvments pursued this year.
It was the consensus of the Commission that staff should prepare an
outline of the issues discussed this evening an present them to
SPUC for discussion at their April 6, 1992 meeting.
Discussion ensued on the Municipal Facility Sub-Committee. Mr.
Miller questioned when the Sub-Committee' s Work Plan will be
presented to City Council. Mr. Stock stated that the Sub-
Committee' s Work Plan will be presented to the Park Advisory Board
Official Proceedings of the March 18 , 1992
Community Develoment Commission Page -4-
on March 23 , 1992 . It will then be forwarded to City Council for
action on April 7 , 1992 . Mr. Miller stated that funding seemed to
be a critical issue in terms of pursuing a survey. Mr. Miller
questioned whether or not the townships have been approached to
share in the cost of such a survey. He noted that the townships
utilized many of the City services and that they would benefit from
participating in a survey that would determine what types of
facilities are going to be pursued. The survey results will
provide direction in regard to future facility development and
design.
Miller/Van Horn moved to recommend to the Park Advisory Board to
consider approaching Jackson and Louisville Townships in terms of
sharing in the cost of any proposed survey. Motion carried
unanimously.
Van Horn/Otto moved to adjourn the meeting at 6: 45 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Assistant City Administrator
MEMORANDUM *9
TO: MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Karen Marty, City Attorney
DATE: March 31, 1992
RE: Special Assessments on Green Acres Property
ISSUE: At the last City Council meeting the Council asked
two questions relating to special assessments on "Green Acres"
property: (1) whether the interest on special assessments could
be waived instead of deferred; and (2) whether the property owner
could elect to pay the special assessment and interest, rather
than deferring them.
DISCUSSION: The "Green Acres" law, Minn. Stat. Sec.
273 . 111, provides that the payment of special assessments
"together with the interest thereon shall, on timely application
. . . , be deferred" . Each reference to special assessments
includes language indicating that the deferral includes the
interest.
The language on special assessments must be read in
conjunction with Minn. Stat. Sec. 429.061, which establishes the
procedure for adopting special assessments and interest thereon.
Subd. 2 provides that "All assessments shall bear interest at
such rate as the resolution determines. " If the City Council
elects not to impose any interest, then there would be no
interest to defer. If interest is imposed, then it will continue
to accrue against deferred special assessments. (A.G. Op. 408-C,
May 30, 1978 . ) Whether a greater benefit to the public exists
by waiving interest or imposing interest is a public policy
decision to be made by the City Council in its resolution
adopting the special assessment.
Under Minn. Stat. Sec. 429.061 and Sec. 273 . 111, the
property owner retains the right to pay the special assessment
and any interest, rather than face deferral. Under each statute
the property owner must make application in order to have a
deferral, and if proper application is not made, the special
assessments and interest are not deferred.
CONCLUSION: The interest on a deferred special assessment
cannot be specifically waived. Any interest on special
assessments on "Green Acres" land will be deferred. However, if
the City Council decides that no interest shall be imposed on a
given project's special assessments, then there would be no
interest to defer. A property owner has the right to pay special
assessments and any interest when first imposed, and not have the
special assessments and interest deferred, regardless of whether
the property is "Green Acres" property or not.
Signed - /L),_
12_____
Karen Marty, City Attorney
KEM:bjm
[31MEMO2]
-2-
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT - MARCH 1992
March 1992 March 1991
No. No. Valuation No. No. Valuation
Month Y.T.D. Y.T.D. Month Y.T.D. Y.T.D.
Single Family-Sewered 15 27 2, 186, 681 14 29 1, 972 , 300
Single Family-Septic 1 2 240,400 1 1 72 , 900
Multiple Dwellings 1 5 510, 143 3 279 , 600
(# Units) (YTD Units) (2) (10) - (-) (6)
Dwelling Additions 7 8 90, 283 6 7 31, 000
Other - 1 1, 500 1 4 20 , 780
New Comm. Bldgs - 1 85, 000 1 1 150, 000
Comm. Bldg. Addns. - - - - - -
New Industrial-Sewered - - - - - -
Ind. Sewered Addns. - - - - _
New Industrial-Septic - - - - -
Ind. Septic Addns. - - -
Accessory/Garages 1 1 9, 000 1 2 9 , 900
Signs & Fences 3 8 23 , 915 5 9 39 , 042
Fireplaces/Wood Stoves - - - 1 1 4, 200
Grading/Foundation - - - - 1 200, 000
Moving -
Razing - 1 12, 380 - 1 1, 500
Remodeling (Res. ) 1 7 17,760 - 7 59 , 900
Remodeling (Inst. ) - -
'Remodeling (Comm/Ind. ) 4 12 1,200, 000 6 11 1, 237 , 297
TOTAL TAXABLE 33 73 4, 377, 062 36 77 4 , 078 , 419
TOTAL INSTITUTIONAL - - -
GRAND TOTAL 33 73 4, 377, 062 36 77 4 , 078 , 419
No. YTD. No. YTD.
Variances - - - 22 3
Conditional Use 1 2
Rezoning 1 1 1
Electric 26 91 26 65
Plumbing & Heating 42 109 43 101
Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted
to date 4 , 651
Jeanette Shaner
Building Department Secretary
CITY OF SHAKOPEE .
BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN MARCH, 1992
9347 Armin Koepp 2649 Hauer Trail Windows 1, 000
9348 Novak Fleck 1212 Dakota Street House 63 , 861
L 9 B 1, Meadows 6th
9349 Meadow Wood Builders 1104 Dakota Street House 107, 675
L 1 B 4, Meadows 5th
9350 Jim Blettner 1403-1409 E. 4th Ave. Decks 3 , 900
9351 Patrick Lebens 1216 Limestone Drive Addn. 19, 000
9352 Warren Feece 1126 Prairie Court House 89, 357
L 3 B 2, Prairie Estates
9353 Novak Fleck 1141 Naumkeag Street House 81, 697
L 1 B 1, Meadows 5th
9354 Laurent Builders 2664 Lakeview Drive House 165, 000
L 4 B 2, Stonebrooke 1st
9355 Banitt Construction 1420 Prairie Lane House 107, 626
L 3 B 1, Prairie Estates
'9356 J & D Drywall 1280 Sapphire Lane House 85, 416
L 25 B 2, Heritage Place 2nd
9357 Valleyfair One Valleyfair Drive Comm. 50, 000
9358 Jedi Enterprises 1208 Vierling Court Deck 3, 997
9359 Monnens Custom Bldrs. 1156 Naumkeag Street Deck 2, 500
9360 Bob Hinkel 2063 Bridge Crossing Deck 3,500
9361 Stan Pint 534 East 5th Avenue House 80, 000
L 3 B 1, Mulberry Meadow
9362 Metro Prairie Const. 815 Larkspur Court House 120, 754
L 9 B 2, Meadows 6th
9363 Novak Fleck 803 Larkspur Court House 64 , 564
L 6 B 2, Meadows 6th
9364 Novak Fleck 949 Goldenrod Lane House 64, 725
L 12 B 2, Meadows 5th
9365 Novak Fleck 95u Goldenrod Lane House 87,857
L 6 B 3 , Meadows 5th
9366 Francis Menden 2544 Lakeview Drive Addition 44 , 686
9367 Valleyfair One Valleyfair Drive Comm. 95, 000
9368 S. 0. Ventures 5244 Valley Ind. Blvd. Comm. 15, 000
9369 New Century Const. 1241 Sapphire Lane House 71, 975
L 6 B 5, Heritage Place 2nd
9370 New Century Const. 630 East 5th Avenue House 71, 975
L 2 B 2, Mulberry Meadow
9371 Peggy Dircks 452 West 1st Avenue Sign 365
9372 Novak Fleck 1147 Goldenrod Lane House 68, 849
L 3 B 4, Meadows 6th
9373 Mathew Lehman 815 East 8th Avenue Garage 9, 000
9374 Logeais Homes 1216 Ruby Lane House 75, 476
L 1 B 1, Heritage Place 2nd
9375 C. I . Realty 1494-1498 Roundhouse Cir Twinhome 105, 036
L 7 B 2, Eagle Creek Junction 3rd
9376 Russell Fox 2058 Heritage Drive Deck 700
'9377 Scenic Sign Corp. Shakopee Town Square Sign 1, 250
9378 Valleyfair One Valleyfair Drive Comm. 35, 000
9379 Sign Services Inc. 380 So. Marschall Road Signs 15, 000
Total: $1,811,741
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator
RE: Community Picnic
DATE: April 3 , 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Over the past several years the VFW has sponsored a community
picnic at Veterans Park. The VFW generally used pull tab funds to
off-set picnic expenses. The State of Minnesota Gaming Division
has determined that this is not a valid use of pull tab dollars.
The State Gaming Board has stated that if the City of Shakopee
serves as sponsor of the event that pull tab funds could be
contributed to the City to off-set costs associated with the
picnic.
BACKGROUND:
On March 31st, staff met with representatives from the VFW to
determine if they would be interested in continuing to provide
volunteer support in organizing and administering the picnic. The
VFW representatives responded in the affirmative. The VFW would
like to schedule the picnic for Sunday, July 26, 1992 .
Staff also suggested that perhaps the American Legion and the VFW
could go together to co-sponsor the event in terms of providing
volunteer assistance and financing. The VFW representatives
appeared to be in favor of contacting the American Legion to pursue
a joint effort.
Staff would like to propose that the City take advantage of this
opportunity to put together a citizen recognition program in
cooperation with the community picnic. Over the past two years,
the Council has discussed establishing some type of program that
would recognize community volunteers and outstanding citizens.
Staff believes that the community picnic concept could be expanded
to meet the desires of City Council in terms of a recognition
program. Additionally, the American Legion and VFW have the
volunteer resources and funding support to make this type of event
a very positive experience for all parties involved.
Staff is currently working on the actual dynamics of a City
recognition program that will be presented to City Council at a
later date. The amount of staff time that will be allocated to
putting together the community picnic/citizen recognition program
will be very limited. City staff will primarily be involved with
marketing the program and scheduling games for children on the day
of the event. VFW and American Legion volunteers will be
responsible for ordering supplies, food preparation, serving and
clean-up. Staff is proposing that the temporary recreation
assistant be utilized to put together this activity. The proposed
program will not cost the City any thing other than limited staff
time.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Inform staff if you believe the approach taken by staff in regard
to this issue is inappropriate.
[ fr
OFFICIALS PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CABLE COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 30, 1992
Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 7 : 10 p.m. with
Commissioners Moonen, Bastyr, Anderson and Scannell present.
Commission Harrison was absent. Barry Stock, Assistant City
Administrator; Bill Lepley, New Frontier Productions; Doug
Hamilton, Studio Manager; and Rusty Rein were also present.
Moonen/Bastyr moved to approved the minutes of the January 27 , 1992
meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Bastyr questioned whether or not Mr. Harrison was
interested in continuing as a member of the Cable Commission. Mr.
Anderson stated that he felt that there was a policy which stated
that if a member missed more than two consecutive meeting that they
could be removed from the Commission. Mr. Stock stated that he
would call Mr. Harrison to determine if in fact he wishes to
continue on the Commission. If not, Mr. Stock would suggest that
a letter of resignation be submitted at this time.
Discussion ensued on the location of the Public Access Studio. Mr.
Stock noted that the Commission has discusses this issue on several
occasions in the past. Mr. Stock noted that at the present time it
does not appear that there would be adequate space in the new City
Hall to accommodate a full fledged Public Access Studio. Mr. Stock
stated that were also problems with the City Hall space due to the
relatively low ceiling height.
Mr. Stock also noted that at the last meeting the Shakopee Access
Corporation made a motion to extend the existing Studio Lease
Agreement with Mr. Bill Lepley for an additional six (6) months.
Mr. Lepley original lease was to expire on March 31, 1992 .
Mr. Stock stated that he would like the Cable Commission to put a
closure on the issue of whether or not the studio will be
relocated. Mr. Stock then reviewed the advantages and
disadvantages of the current studio arrangement. Commissioner
Anderson stated that one of the disadvantages of the present
arrangement is the potential conflict of interest between the
building owner and access supplier. Mr. Anderson stated that Mr.
Lepley' s ownership of the property and contract is more of a
perceived conflict of interest rather than an actual conflict of
interest. Mr. Anderson stated that if everyone is aware of the
situation up front that in his opinion a conflict of interest does
not exist.
Mr. Anderson stated that the Cable Commission and Access
Corporation also have limited control over the Access Coordinator.
He stated that generally this is a disadvantage. However in the
alternative, it would be necessary for the Access Corporation to
hire a person and that there would need to be more direct
involvement on the part of the Access Corporation members in
Official Proceedings of the March 30, 1992
Shakopee Cable Commission Page -2-
managing the studio. In terms of the past record keeping
procedures, Mr. Anderson suggested that the Commission should
inform Mr. Lepley of just what is actually expected in terms of
record keeping. Mr. Anderson suggested that a Sub-Committee be
created to identify exactly what the Commission would like to have
in terms of record keeping and reports. Commission Anderson,
Zeigler and Bastyr volunteered to serve on the Sub-Committee and
report back at the next Cable Commission meeting.
Discussion ensued on the communications between the Access
Corporation and Cable Company. Mr. Lepley stated that he did not
feel that there was a communication problem but that his approach
to public access was in conflict with the Cable Companies position.
Mr. Lepley stated that he believed his role is to serve as a
watchdog to insure that the Cable Company is providing what was set
forth in the original Cable Franchise Ordinance. Mr. Zeigler
stated that he admired Mr. Lepley for his commitment to access but
that on occasion Mr. Lepley tended to push the Cable Company to
hard and perhaps a more tactful approach could be used in
accomplishing access objectives. Commission Scannell stated that
he felt communication between both parties needed to be improved
and that it was a two way street with room for improvement on each
side.
Discussion ensued on the advantages of the existing studio
arrangement. Mr. Anderson stated that the studios existing
location and the consistency of the contract with Mr. Lepley' s
expertise are certainly an advantage. Mr. Anderson went on to
state that the current activity level is encouraging. Mr. Lepley
stated that he felt an additional advantage that was not listed is
that the present facility would be able to accommodate a remote
control arrangement for running the Council meetings at the new
City Hall from the existing Public Access Studio space.
Discussion then ensued on ideas for improving the present
arrangement. Mr. Anderson stated that he felt that a contract
could be drafted that would include performance objectives that are
in line with the objectives of the Corporation. If the performance
objectives are met a bonus arrangement could be specified in the
contract. Mr. Anderson stated that he would like to see the
Commission investigate the development of a production club. Mr.
Anderson stated that there are numerous organizations within the
community that could take advantage of the public access studio but
they lack the technical expertise. He felt that a production club
would be beneficial in encouraging greater programming. Discussion
ensued on how to encourage students to become involved in a
production club. Commission Moonen suggested that perhaps a
scholarship type of arrangement could be developed in which
students could get extra credit for being members in the production
club. Mr. moonen also suggested the possibility of paying members
of the production club a brief stipend amount to encourage their
Official Proceedings of the March 30, 1992
Shakopee Cable Commission Page -3-
participation. Mr. Stock suggested that perhaps a system could be
established that would reward production club members based on how
many hours of actual local origination they produce. Mr. Stock
also stated that he felt that if a production club was created that
many community organizations in Shakopee would utilize their
talents and perhaps be willing to reimburse the Access Corporation
in the form of grants.
Mr. Anderson suggested that perhaps a Sub-Committee should also be
created to develop a production club format that could be
incorporated into the next contract. Mr. Bastyr stated that he
would be willing to serve on the Sub-Committee. Mr. Zeigler stated
that since the Commission and Access Corporation are relatively
small in terms of numbers that perhaps we should just set another
meeting in April to discuss some of these issues. It was the
consensus of the Commission that a Access Corporation meeting
should be established for April 27 , 1992 .
Discussion ensued on the correspondence from Mr. Kazma regarding
the rate increase and possibility of eliminating the Shakopee Head
End. Mr. Moonen questioned whether or not the Cable Company could
unilaterally remove the head end without the City of Shakopee' s
approval. Mr. Stock stated that he would draft a correspondence to
Mr. Kazma informing him of the need for a Cable Franchise Ordinance
Amendment. Mr. Stock stated that the Cable Franchise Ordinance
does not specifically mention a head end but talks about the cable
operation in Shakopee as a system. Mr. Stock stated the since the
head end is a critical part of the system that he felt an ordinance
amendment would be necessary. Mr. Stock stated that while it may
be in the best interest of all parties to combine head ends with
Chaska that the issue should be addressed before the Cable
Commission. Mr. Stock stated that technically the Shakopee and
Chaska cable systems are separate and under the franchise authority
of two separate communities. If the head ends are combined, a
joint powers agreement may be necessary between the City of
Shakopee and Chaska in terms of the cable system. Mr. Moonen
stated that he felt Mr. Stock has correct. He went on to state
that if the cable company removed the Shakopee head end and at some
point in time the City of Shakopee wished to manage and operate the
Shakopee cable system that it would be essentially impossible
without a head end. Hence the need for the joint powers agreement
between the City of Shakopee and Chaska.
Mr. Anderson questioned the status of the City Council Chamber
development in the new City Hall. Mr. Stock stated that a meeting
has been set with the architect for tomorrow to finalize the
location of the Council Chambers. Mr. Stock stated that he did not
believe the architect would be putting together a package for
broadcasting the Council meetings. Mr. Anderson stated that he
felt that it was critical for the Cable Commission to insure that
the new Council Chambers is designed with a camera and sound set up
Official Proceedings of the March 30, 1992
Shakopee Cable Commission Page -4-
that will provide for quality broadcasting of the Council meetings.
Mr. Anderson went on to state that the Council meetings continue to
be one of the most widely viewed programs on the public access
channel. He felt it would be a shame if the City did not put in
the appropriate equipment at this time. Mr. Anderson went on to
state that he felt the equipment should come out of the same fund
that is being used to acquire and equip the new City Hall. Mr.
Moonen stated that the new City Hall should also be equipped with
a character generator and separate modulator to activate the
government access channel. Mr. Anderson questioned what approach
the Committee should take in making a formal presentation to City
Council. Mr. Stock suggested that perhaps the Commission could put
together several equipment packages for the City Council to
consider at a Committee of the Whole meeting. Mr. Moonen and Mr.
Lepley volunteered to put together several different equipment
schemes in terms of cost and effectiveness that could be applied in
the new City Hall. Mr. Stock stated that he would inform City
Council of the Commissions desire to appear at a Committee of the
Whole meeting to discuss the cable equipment needs in the new City
Hall.
Moonen/Bastyr moved to adjourn the meeting at 8 : 30 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE ACCESS CORPORATION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 30, 1992
Chairman Bastyr called the meeting to order at 8 : 30 p.m. with
member Moonen, Anderson, Zeigler and Scannell present. Mr.
Harrison was absent. Barry Stock, Assistant City Administrator;
Bill Lepley, New Frontier Productions; Doug Hamilton, Public Access
Studio Manager; and Rusty Rein were also present.
Zeigler/Moonen moved to approve the minutes of the January 27 , 1992
meeting as kept. Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Zeigler gave a brief treasure' s report. He noted that there
was $12 , 351. 92 in the general fund account and $3 , 088 . 50 in the
utility/rent account. He noted that a large portion of the general
fund account was allocated for new equipment purchases at the last
Access Corporation meeting. Mr. Zeigler questioned when the new
equipment would be ordered. Mr. Lepley stated that it would be
ordered within the next two weeks. Mr. Zeigler questioned when the
camera would be ordered to replace the camera that was lost last
year. Mr. Lepley stated that the camera would be ordered in
conjunction with the other equipment.
Discussion ensued on the electrical installation of the studio.
Mr. Lepley stated that Lucas Electric has not been paid for the
electric work in conjunction with the relocation of the studio to
it' s present location. Mr. Stock stated that he did not feel that
the issue of Amzak' s non-payment of a bill to Lucas Electric
concerned the Access Corporation. Mr. Moonen concurred and stated
that he felt it was a matter between Lucas Electric and the cable
company. Mr. Lepley stated that he had given a copy of the Lucas
Electric bill to Mr. Kazma. Mr. Kazma stated that he felt that the
bill had been paid. Mr. Lepley stated that Mr. Lucas contends that
the bills has not been paid. It was the consensus of the
Corporation that this matter did not involve them.
Mr. Stock stated that the cable studio and equipment has been
listed on the City' s certificate of insurance by Amzak Cable. Mr.
Anderson questioned whether or not to the Commission could receive
a copy of the Certificate of Insurance. Mr. Stock stated that he
would include it with the next agenda packet.
Discussion ensued on the $500. 00 Eagle' s gift. Commissioner
Zeigler suggested that a plan be developed for promoting the
production club and that upon adoption of the plan a request be
submitted to Shakopee City Council requesting the $500 . 00 Eagle
contribution to offset costs associated with establishing the
production club. Mr. Zeigler stated that he felt the production
club efforts were marketing and would be a valid use of the
funding.
Mr. Lepley gave a brief report on the studio operation and
programming.
Official Proceedings of the March 30, 1992
Shakopee Access Corporation Page -2-
Discussion ensued on equipment issues. Mr. Lepley stated that he
did not see a need for any immediate equipment purchases at this
time other than those that were approved at the last meeting. Mr.
Anderson suggested that at one of the future meetings a discussion
be held on the year two purchases as outlined in the 5 year capital
equipment plan. Mr. Zeigler stated that we are currently in year
two and have only approved the acquisition of one piece of
equipment at this time. Mr. Stock stated that when the Corporation
looks at the five year equipment plan they should also consider
revising the plan to bring it up to date in terms of a complete
five year plan. (1992-1996)
Mr. Bastyr questioned whether or not a Cable Commission meeting
would be needed in April. Mr. Stock stated that if Mr. Kazma
submits a request for a Franchise Ordinance Amendment a Cable
Commission meeting would be necessary. However, if a ordinance
amendment is not requested, a Cable Commission meeting was not
needed. Mr. Stock stated that he would not be able to attend the
Access Corporation meeting scheduled for April 27, 1992 due to a
Park Advisory Board meeting conflict.
Mr. Lepley stated that when the studio lease arrangement with New
Frontier Productions was drafted it included the establishment of
a $1, 500. 00 Escrow Account to be drawn upon in the event of non
performance on the part of the contractor. Mr. Lepley requested
that the $1, 500. 00 Escrow Account requirement be eliminated at this
time. Mr. Stock stated that he did not feel the $1, 500 . 00 Escrow
Account was needed at this time. He stated that if the contractor
is not performing the Access Corporation could always withhold the
bi-monthly payment. It was the consensus of the Commission that
the $1, 500 . 000 Escrow Account was not needed.
Anderson/Scannell moved to release the $1, 500. 00 Escrow Account for
Studio Manager Performance. Motion carried unanimously.
Moonen/Anderson moved to adjourn the meeting at 8 : 55 p.m. Motion
carried unanimously.
Barry A. Stock
Recording Secretary
vv
March 27, 1992 SOU7NWESTMETROTRANSIT
MEMO TO: SMTC and Interested Individuals 7600 Executive Drive
FROM• Diane Harberts Eden Prairie,MN 55344
(612)937-74
RE: Legislative Update as of March 25, 1992 Fax(612)937-7411
Please find attached a legislative update report from George Bentley. Highlights of his report are
as follows:
1. Senate File 2144, House File 2191 (RTB Capital Needs Bonding)
RTB bonding bill has passed all of the policy committees in both the House and Senate and is in
tax committees. This bill contains $6.5 million for opt-out transit capital policy.
2. SF 1759, HF 2605 (MVET Transfer, Gas Tax)
The MN Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) transit funding concept is dead. MVET is too big of a bite for
the legislature and the governor to swallow while facing a budget deficit. As a replacement to
MVET is proposed a sales tax on vehicle repair labor of 6.5 percent. Some stiff objection being
voiced to this proposal.
Dedication of gas tax still possible: Proposal is 1 cent dedicated to transit beginning in 1993
and increase each year by 1 cents up to a maximum of 3 cents. A similar proposal for highway
funding is also included.
3. Moves to Abolish the RTB have not recently surfaced since the amendment failed in the
House on an eight to seven vote. Similar moves could come up in floor debate in both the House
and Senate before the 1992 session ends.
4. SF 1993, HF 2219 ( Transit Policy Bill)
The transit policy bill, which includes a travel demand management (TDM) program and tax
incentives for employer and employees for transit use is in tax committees. All of the mandates
for employer compliance with TDM were stripped from the bill in the House.
5. SF 2145, HF 2304 (LRT Bonding) and SF 2510, HF 2510
(LRT Governance)
A bill which would finally establish who is responsible for various stages of LRT planning and
construction has passed to the floor of both the House and Senate.
LRT bonding has passed through the policy committees in the Senate, but was not heard in the
House. This measure would provide $92 million in bonding authority (down from the original
request of $350 million). This is considered to be the minimum amount in order to start the
federal matching process which could be as high as eighty percent (fifty percent is more
likely.)
6. ALLOWING ALL RTB FUNDS (Capital and Operations) TO BE USED FOR
• PRIVATE PROVIDERS
An amendment is being proposed on the floor of both the House and Senate which would remove
all restrictions on transit funds to private-for-profit providers. (These current legislative
restrictions have been a significant hurdle for both the RTB and opt-out transit transit
programs with regard to opt-out paying twice for capital. The change in legislation is being
proposed by a private-for-profit consortium. Opt-out transit programs are only monitoring
these activites.)
If you would like further information please contact George Bentley at his office number of
897-1919 or me at my office number of 934-7928. •
Thank you.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE
FOR OPT-OUT TRANSIT
March 25, 1992
Transit legislation and transit issues have become top
items of discussion at the legislature. Not only are
committees in both houses busy with transit-related bills,
but the media has picked up the debate over transit funding
and has greatly increased the dialogue.
RTB CAPITAL NEEDS BONDING
The RTB bonding bill has passed through all of the
policy committees in both houses and is in the tax
committees. This bill, which contains $6. 5 million for opt-
out contract capital, will be heard on Friday, March 27th in
the Senate Tax Committee, and is not yet scheduled in the
House Tax Committee.
This bill appears to be on track for passage, with only
token objection due to the property tax impacts. However,
until it is passed by both houses and signed by the governor
anything can happen. We will continue to monitor this bill
closely through the process.
TRANSIT/TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
This issue has received the greatest media attention
recently, including a front page story in the Minneapolis
paper today (March 25th) . It is far from a done deal at this
point, with a very difficult road to follow.
The original transit funding concept, the MVET transfer,
is dead. MVET is too big a bite for the legislature and the
governor to swallow while facing a budget deficit.
In its place Sen. Kieth Langseth, the primary proponent
of transit funding, is proposing a sales tax on vehicle
repair labor of six and one-half percent. This proposal is
meeting with stiff objection, particularly from labor
interests, and will require support from leadership in both
houses and from the governor to stand a chance. Such support
•
does not appear to be forming.
The proposal which has been given the greatest attention
recently is a two percent sales tax on gasoline. This sales
tax would generate roughly the same revenue as the sales tax
on repair labor and has the governor's support.
If passed, the funding would involve a one percent sales
tax in 1993 and a two percent tax in 1994, dedicated to
transit by legislative fiat. It would also include a
gasoline tax increase for highways of one cent per year for
three years.
Legislative Update - Page 2
The future of this funding proposal is also uncertain
since outstate interests have voiced a concern over its
fairness. Their objection is centered around the difference
in gasoline prices between the metro area and outstate.
Gasoline is cheaper in the metro area, and outstate
legislators see the sales tax as unfair to them.
One solution might be to peg the price of gasoline on a
standard basis at the beginning of each year statewide and
charge the sales tax on this price regardless of pump prices.
Objections to the gasoline sales tax have also come from
trucking interests, so nothing is yet agreed on by the
leadership of the legislature. One thing appears relatively
certain - there will be no highway funding this year unless
transit funding is included in the package.
MOVES TO ABOLISH THE RTB
There have been attempts through legislation and through
amendment to abolish the RTB by January 1, 1993. The most
serious of such attempts was made by Rep. Iry Anderson in his
House Local Government and Metro Affairs Committee.
Rep. Anderson proposed an amendment to the LRT
governance bill which would have deleted all reference to the
RTB in state law by 1993, and would have passed the RTB's
duties largely to the Metropolitan Council. This amendment
failed on an eight to seven vote.
Similar moves could come up in floor debate in both
houses as an amendment to virtually any bill, so we are
monitoring this closely.
TRANSIT POLICY BILL
The transit policy bill, which includes a travel demand
management program and tax incentives for employer and
employees for transit use, is in tax committees. All of the
mandates for employer compliance with TDM were stripped from
the bill in House Metro Affairs.
This same committee removed the no right turn in front
of buses language from the bill as well because no one could
adequately explain how drivers would be able to differentiate
between buses that were loading passengers and those that
were just stopped to get on schedule or were broken down.
The Senate Tax Committee will hear this bill on Friday,
March 27th. It is expected that this committee will remove
the tax incentives for transit use from the bill due to a
higher than expected revenue impact contained in a fiscal
note from the Department of Revenue.
Legislative Update - Page 3
LRT BONDING AND GOVERNANCE
A bill which would finally establish who is responsible
for various stages of LRT planning and construction has
passed to the floor of both houses. This is a complicated
piece of legislation which I will not attempt to describe
here, but if anyone is interested in a copy of the bill
please let me know.
LRT bonding has passed through the policy committees in
the Senate, but was not heard in the House. This measure
would provide $92 million in bonding authority for the
central corridor LRT line, representing twenty percent of the
cost. This is considered to be a minimum amount in order to
start the federal matching process, which could be as high as
eighty percent (although fifty percent is more likely) .
Unless this bonding request is added by amendment on the
House side it will likely be dead for this session.
TORT LIABILITY LIMITS FOR THE MTC
Although in principal no legislation is dead until the
final gavel comes down, this bill is going nowhere. It has
not been heard by any committee and seems to have no support.
Because of the potential impacts for opt-out transit, I will
continue to keep my eye on this bill until the legislature
adjourns.
ALLOWING ALL RTB FUNDS TO BE USED FOR PRIVATE PROVIDERS
An amendment is being proposed on the floor of both
houses which would remove all restrictions on transit funds
to private for-profit providers. This amendment was
originally attempted in the House Transportation Committee as
an attachment to the RTB bonding bill. Because of our
concerns over the potential impact on our $6.5 million
contained in the bonding package, the authors agreed to carry
this amendment to the floor and attach to a different bill.
If anyone would like further information please contact
Minnesota Valley Transit (431-4311) , Southwest Metro Transit
(934-7928) , or me (897-1919 office, 949-2681 home) . Thank
you.
George Bentley
Legislative Liaison
TENTATIVE AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION
Regular Session Shakopee, MN April 9 , 1992
Chairperson Melanie Kahleck Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M.
2 . Approval of Agenda
3 . Approval of the March 5 , 1992 , Meeting Minutes
4 . Recognition by Planning Commission of Interested Citizens.
5 . Election of Officers
6. 7 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for the
preliminary and final plat of Beckrich Park Estates, lying
east of County Rd. 79 and north of County Rd. 78 .
Applicant: Dale Dahlke
Action: Preliminary and Final Plat Approval
7 . Final Plat: To consider the final plat of The Meadows 7th
Addition, lying south of the Goldenrod Lane cul-de-sac.
Applicant: Gold Nugget Development, Inc.
Action: Final Plat Approval
8 . Final Plat: To consider the final plat of Prairie Estates 2nd
Addition, lying west of Prairie Estates 1st Addition and south
of 11th Avenue.
Applicant: Vierling Partnership
Action: Final Plat Approval
9 . 7 : 40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a zoning ordinance
amendment which would allow limited retail sales as a
conditional use in the Heavy Industrial (I-2) district.
10 . 7 : 50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for the
preliminary and final plat of South Parkview 2nd Addition,
lying directly north of 13th Avenue and west of County Rd. 15 .
Applicant: Cletus Link
Action: Preliminary and Final Plat Approval
11. 8: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for a
conditional use permit to allow retail sales upon the property
located at 4908 Valley Industrial Blvd.
Applicant: Minneapolis Northstar Auto Auction, Inc.
Action: Conditional Use Permit No. 630
12 . 8 : 10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider a request to rezone
approximately 1/2 acre of the un-constructed Polk Street,
lying on the east border of Shakopee Town Square and north of
12th Avenue.
Applicant: Laurent Builders, Inc.
13 . Final Plat: To consider the final plat of Minnesota Valley
7th Addition, located east of Shakopee Town Square, between
11th and 12th Avenues.
Applicant: Laurent Builders, Inc.
Action: Final Plat Approval
14 . 8 : 20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for the
preliminary plat of Maple Trails Estates, lying on the east
side of County Rd. 17 across from Timber Trails Addition.
Applicant: Laurent Builders, Inc.
Action: Preliminary Plat Approval
• 15. 8 : 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider a zoning
ordinance amendment which would clarify retail sales in the
Heavy Industrial (I-2) district.
16. 8 :40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED: To consider an
application for a conditional use permit to construct an
industrial waste treatment plant at 800 W. 1st Ave.
Applicant: Rahr Malting Company
Action: Conditional Use Permit No. 627
17. 8:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for a
conditional use permit to allow the construction of the Hwy.
169 Bridge in the Floodplain District.
Applicant: City of Shakopee
Action: Conditional Use Permit No. 631
18 . 9: 00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: To consider an application for a
conditional use permit to allow the construction of the
Bloomington Ferry Bridge in the Floodplain District.
Applicant: City of Shakopee
Action: Conditional Use Permit No. 632
19 . Easement Vacation Continued: To consider the vacation of a
portion of the drainage and utility easement on Lot 1 of Block
3 , Evergreen 1st Addn.
Apolicant: Laurent Builders, Inc.
Action: Recommendation to City Council
20 . Initiate rezoning of property south of Vierling Dr. on the
southeast side of Shakopee from a R-2 to a R-3 district.
21 . Reviews:
A. NBZ CUP Review
22 . Other Business
A. Schedule Second Meeting
B.
C.
23 . Adjourn
Lindberg S. Ekola
City Planner
NOTE TO PLANNING MEMBERS:
1. If you have any questions or need additional information on
any of the above items, please call Terrie or Aggie on the
Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting at 445-3650 .
2 . If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the
Planning Department prior to the meeting.
TENTATIVE AGENDA
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Regular Session Shakopee, MN April 9 , 1992
Chairperson Terry Joos Presiding
1. Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M.
2 . Approval of Agenda
3 . Approval of March 5, 1992 , Meeting Minutes
4 . Recognition by Board of Adjustments and Appeals of Interested
Citizens.
5 . Other Business
a.
b.
c.
6 . Adjourn
Lindberg S. Ekola
City Planner
NOTE TO THE B.O.A.A. MEMBERS:
1. If you have any questions or need additional information on
any of the above items, please call Terrie or Aggie on the
Monday or Tuesday prior to the meeting.
2 . If you are unable to attend the meeting, please call the
Planning Department prior to the meeting.
SCOTT COUNTY
HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT
i
600 COUNTRY TRAIL EAST
JORDAN, MN 55352-9339 (612) 496-8346
FAX(612) 496-8365
BRADLEY J.LARSON
Highway Engineer
DANIEL M.JOBE
Asst Highway Engineer-Design
DON D.PAULSON
Asst.Highway Engineer-Construction .
MEMORANDUM
DATE : April 2 , 1992
TO: Those on Attached List
FROM: Brad Larson, County Highway Engineer
SUBJECT: Temporary Closure of CSAH 17 (Marschall Rd. )
between CSAH 14 ( 150th Street) and CR 42 ( 140th
Street) in the City of Shakopee
On Monday, April 20, 1992, CSAH 17 (Marschall Rd. ) will be closed
to through traffic between CSAH 14 ( 150th Street) and
CR 42 ( 140th St. ) for road construction.
A marked detour will be provided via CR 82 , CR 83 , and CR 42 ( see
map enclosed) .
The temporary closure will be in effect for approximately two
months .
CSAH 17 will be under construction between CR 82 and CSAH 14
until approximately May 4 , 1992 . Traffic may experience slight
delays in this area.
CSAH 17 between CSAH 12 ( 170th Street) and CR 82 is paved and
open to traffic.
All roads should be hard surfaced with the final paving to be
completed by summer, 1992 . ,
If you have any questions or would like any further information,
please contact this office .
BJL/kmg
Enc .
An Equal Opportunity/Armative Action Employer
•
•
•
TO: Scott• CountyEmergency Service
Board of Commissioners • St. Francis Regional
County Administrator Medical Center
Sheriff ' s Dept. Queen of Peace Hospital
•
• Sheriff' s Dispatch
Emergency Management Municipalities/Townships
City of Shakopee
MN Dept . of Transportation - City Administrator
District Engineer - Fire Chief
- Police Chief
City of Prior Lake
Prior Lake Schools - City Administrator
Superintendent - Fire Chief
• Transportation Director - Police Chief •
Spring Lake Township Clerk
Shakopee Schools
Superintendent •
Transportation Director Media
Southwest Suburban
Scott County Highway Dept. Jordan Independent, Editor
Arnita Novotny, Maint. Prior Lake American, Editor
Joan Sticha, Admin. Shakopee Valley News, Editor
Belle Plaine Herald, Editor
New Prague Times, Editor
Radio Station KKCM
• Radio Station KCHK
PRIOR LAKE
i
i -rilF Tr-,.,, -Ma- *
•
..
1
, ; . . I\u, :s7-----He
.1t
. I " e
e ._. __ ...
. .
. . .
. . .
- . .. :
__ w
w
0
.
-_ .
o .
- z
0
U
D
M
H
Li cn
N- B ^v, z a Lu
_- O� �. D O Z 1.4_,
r I . , 0
-.-.uuuu10 -
(I
1............_ co H H Q
Q LL. ,Q
0 0 Q
U O Ci) o A
--- - w
LLIw
J V
TENTATIVE AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting April 7 , 1992
1. Roll Call at 8: 00 P.M.
2 . Approval of the March 17 , 1992 Meeting Minutes
3 . Other Business
a)
b)
4 . Adjourn
Dennis R. Kraft
Executive Director
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF. THE HOUSING. AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 17, 1992
Chrmn. Sweeney called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. , with Com.
Vierling, Laurent, Beard, and Lynch present. Also present: Dennis
Kraft, City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Barry Stock,
Assistant City Administrator; Karen Marty, City Attorney; Dave
Hutton, Public Works Director; and Lindberg Ekola, City Planner.
Lynch/Vierling moved to approve the meeting minutes of March 10,
1992 . Motion carried unanimously.
The Assistant City Administrator stated that City staff has
explored the tax increment alternatives in respect to the Brambilla
proposal, and is recommending different alternatives rather than
tax increment financing (TIF) , which does not appear to be the best
way to resolve this issue.
Vierling/Beard moved to request the Shakopee City Council to
initiate a zoning ordinance text amendment to the Heavy Industrial
zoning (I-2) subdivision regulations to allow for limited retail as
a conditional use in an I-2 zone. Motion carried unanimously.
Rod Krass was present and expressed his agreement with the actions
from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
Laurent/Lynch moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 7: 20 p.m.
Dennis R. Kraft
Executive Director
Jane VanMaldeghem
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 10, 1992
Vice Mayor Vierling called the meeting of the Shakopee City Council
to order at 7:00 p.m. , with Cncl. Beard, Lynch, and Sweeney
present. Absent: Mayor Laurent. Also present: Dennis Kraft,
City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk; Karen Marty, City
Attorney; Barry Stock, Assistant City Administrator; Dave Hutton,
Public Works Director; and Lindberg Ekola, City Planner.
Sweeney/Beard moved to approve the agenda with the additions to
"other business" of: 15a) Communications from A Business
Conference-Call, Inc. ; and 15b) Impact of Governor's local aid cut
and the inclusion to the Executive Session (#16) of collective
bargaining. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Council recessed for the meeting of the Shakopee Housing
and Redevelopment Authority at 7: 05 p.m.
The City Council reconvened at 7:25 p.m.
Cncl. Beard reported on attending the meeting of the Minnesota 2000
and the Scott County Transportation Commission; discussions were on
education and on the Bloomington Ferry Bridge project,
respectively. Cncl. Lynch reported on the meeting held at Murphy' s
Landing where a new director has been hired. Cncl. Sweeney
reported on his meeting with the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission and that he was given the engineer' s report on the
electrical systems study and the preliminary long range water plan
for the City. Cncl. Vierling reported on the Metro Council Chaired
Advisory Committee and the two things on their agenda were the
Metropolitan Development Investment Framework and the
Transportation Plan; and on the AMM Board of Directors, and the
legislative issues was the main topic of discussion, the Orfield
Bill and the expansion of the Met Council role versus over budget
for the different metropolitan agencies.
Vice Mayor Vierling recognized anyone in the audience wishing to
speak on any item not on the agenda.
Ralph Goode was present to discuss the City Council action relative
to the Muhlenhardt Road improvement project, and how this project
specifically relates to his property. The Public Works
Director/City Engineer will meet with Mr. Goode before the road is
vacated and the "dog leg" is constructed to discuss Mr. Goode' s
concerns.
Wayne Cronkhite was present to discuss his concerns relative to
Council action on the Muhlenhardt Road improvement project and how
this project affects his property. Mr. Cronkhite stated that
County Road 18 is a main road for the Bloomington Ferry Bridge, and
has concerns regarding the "dog leg" road from Muhlenhardt to
Official Proceedings of the March 10, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -2-
County Road 18 and what the result will be to his property. He
asked to also be included in the meetings with the Public Works
Director.
Vice Mayor Vierling asked for further comments from the audience on
any item not on the agenda. There were no further comments.
Lynch/Beard moved to approve the consent business. Motion carried
unanimously.
Lynch/Sweeney moved to approve the meeting minutes of February 4,
1992 . Motion carried with Vice Mayor Vierling abstaining.
Lynch/Beard moved to approve the meeting minutes of February 18,
1992, with the correction under "liaison reports", the meeting with
Cncl. Sweeney and the County Board where primary discussion was on
the Orfield Bill, not the "Boland Sewer Bill" . Motion carried
unanimously.
Vice Mayor Vierling opened the public hearing on the proposed
vacation of drainage and utility easement within Lot 1, Block 3 ,
Evergreen 1st Addition (Resolution No. 3555) .
The City Planner stated that a petition had been received from
Renden Development and Laurent Builders, Inc. , to vacate a 10 foot
drainage and utility easement along the eastern lot line in Lot 1,
Block 3 , Evergreen 1st Addition. He stated the Planning Commission
had tabled this item and recommended the City Council continue the
public hearing.
Vice Mayor Vierling asked for comments from the audience.
Tom Anderlik, Evergreen Homeowners Assn. , requested an explanation
of this petition. The City Planner responded.
Vice Mayor Vierling asked for further comments from the audience.
There were none.
Beard/Lynch moved to continue the public hearing for the
application to vacate the drainage and utility easement within Lot
1, Block 3, Evergreen 1st Addition until April 21, 1992 . Motion
carried unanimously.
The Public Works Director stated the Shakopee Public Utilities
Commission had stated they require a 6 foot easement for the
electrical lines, and in response to this, the applicants have
changed their request from a 10 foot vacation to a 4 foot vacation
request.
Vice Mayor Vierling opened the public hearing on the proposed
improvements to Vierling Drive between County Road 79 and County
Official Proceedings of the March 10, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -3-
Road 17 by street, curb and gutter, and storm sewer (Project No.
1992-3) .
The Public Works Director stated this item should be tabled until
all members of the Council could be in attendance.
Beard/Lynch moved to continue the public hearing on improvements to
Vierling Drive between County Road 17 and County Road 79 (Project
No. 1992-3) to March 17, 1992 . Motion carried unanimously.
Lynch/Beard moved to approve the Community Development Commission' s
One and Five Year Work Plans. (Motion carried unanimously under
consent business) .
Discussion was held on the City's recycling program. The Assistant
City Administrator stated that in 19::-A. the City received $15, 850
from Scott County to off-set costs associated with specific waste
abatement activities. He added that according to the Scott County
Environmental Health Manager, $5,073 will be available for the 1992
recycling program. He also reported on the request from Louisville
Township to be included in this program.
Cncl. Sweeney stated he does not want any costs of this program
charged back to the City budget.
Lynch/Beard moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
submit an application and execute an agreement with Scott County
for a Spring Recyclable Material Collection Day. Motion carried
unanimously.
Sweeney/Lynch moved to authorize staff to enter into an agreement
with Louisville Township to allow them to participate in the spring
recyclable material program if they agree to contribute their grant
amount to the City. Motion carried unanimously.
Lynch/Beard moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
enter into a two year third-year option agreement with Van Pool
Services, Inc. , for the provision of van pool services in Shakopee.
(Motion carried unanimously under consent business) .
Lynch/Beard moved to adopt the Dial-A-Ride Minimum Ridership Age
Policy No. 23 . (Motion carried unanimously under consent
business) .
Sweeney/Lynch moved to remove the Police Sergeant vacancy from the
table. Motion carried unanimously.
Sweeney/Lynch moved to table the Policy Sergeant vacancy to the
April 7, 1992 City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Official Proceedings of the March 10,1992
Shakopee City Council Page -4-
Lynch/Beard moved to grant the developer of Valley Park 10th
Addition an additional one-year time frame for preliminary plat
approval of the plat for Valley Park 10th Addition. (Motion
carried unanimously under consent business) .
The City Planner stated that due to significant environmental
issues, staff is recommending the hiring of Orr Schelen Mayeron and
Associates, Inc. , (OSM) to serve as consultant in the City's role
as the Responsible Governing Unit (RGU) in preparing the EAW for
the proposed expansion of the Shakopee mining operation at Shiely
Company.
Sweeney/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate persons to prepare
and/or sign the necessary documents to hire OSM, at a not-to-exceed
cost of $4,400, to prepare the EAW for the proposed west expansion
of the Shiely Mine. Motion carried unanimously.
Sweeney/Beard moved to direct staff to enter into an agreement with
the railroad company (Chicago and Northwestern Transportation
Company) to signalize the railroad crossings at Minnesota Street
and at Market Street and open Market Street and close Naumkeag.
Motion carried unanimously.
Sweeney/Beard moved that in the event the cost for signalization is
not paid for out of the State Municipal Aid Fund, the tax increment
fund (TIF) surplus funds be used for these purposes. Motion
carried unanimously.
Lynch/Beard moved to authorize the purchase of a sewer jetter truck
from Flexible Pipe Tool Co. , Wayzata, MN, for the total amount of
$73 ,944 with funding provided by the Capital Equipment Budget of
the Sanitary Sewer Fund. (Motion carried unanimously under consent
business) .
Sweeney/Lynch moved to authorize the advertisement for bids for a
new front end loader as outlined in the specifications, using both
the guaranteed payback option and outright purchase option. Motion
carried unanimously.
Lynch/Beard moved to set the mileage reimbursement rate for the use
of personal vehicles for City business at $. 28 per mile effective
March 1, 1992 . (Motion carried unanimously under consent
business) .
Lynch/Beard moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$215,410. 63 . (Motion approved unanimously under consent business) .
Lynch/Beard moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
enter into the State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety,
Computerized Criminal History Information Access Agreement.
(Motion carried unanimously under consent business) .
Official Proceedings of the March 10, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -5-
Beard/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
execute a letter of agreement from Short-Elliott-Henrickson, Inc. ,
to increase their contract for the Comprehensive Sewer Plan from
$110, 000 to $130, 000 for cleaning and televising the river
interceptor, with funding to come from the Sanitary Sewer
Enterprise Fund. Motion carried unanimously.
The Council recessed at 8:45 p.m. and reconvened at 8 :55 p.m.
Lynch/Beard moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
renew the existing Software Maintenance Agreement with Quest Data
Systems of Bloomington for the year 1992 at a cost of $750.
(Motion carried unanimously under consent business) .
Lynch/Beard moved to declare the 33 old Fire Department pagers
surplus property and authorize the City Administrator to sell them
in accordance with the City Code. (Motion carried unanimously
under consent business) .
Lynch/Beard moved to delete the term "Acting" from the title given
to Jerry Poole, thereby designating him as Deputy Police Chief.
(Motion carried unanimously under consent business) .
Sweeney/Lynch offered Resolution No. 3558 , A Resolution Declaring
The Adequacy Of Petition And Ordering The Preparation Of A Report,
Receiving The Report And Ordering An Improvement And Preparation Of
Plans And Specifications For 12th Avenue Sewer And Watermain
Improvements, Between County Road 83 And Valley Park Drive, Project
No. 1992-4, and moved for its adoption. Motion carried
unanimously.
Lynch/Beard moved to authorize William R. Engelhardt Associates,
Inc. of Chaska, MN, to prepare the plans and specifications for the
12th Avenue Sewer and Watermain Project for a maximum fee of 6
percent of the construction contract and to do the construction
staking for a maximum fee of 3 percent of the construction
contract. Motion carried unanimously.
Lynch/Beard offered Resolution No. 3553 , A Resolution Appointing
Judges Of Election And Establishing Compensation, and moved for its
adoption. (Motion carried unanimously under consent business) .
Lynch/Beard offered Resolution No. 3554, A Resolution Establishing
Procedures Relating To Compliance With Reimbursement Bond
Regulations Under The Internal Revenue Code, and moved its
adoption. (Motion carried unanimously under consent business) .
Lynch/Beard offered Ordinance No. 332 , An Ordinance of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending City Code Chapter 5, Liquor, Beer and
Wine Licensing and Regulation, by Adopting a new Subd. 2 to Sec.
5.45, Consumption and Display of Liquor, Specifying the Term of the
Official Proceedings of the March 10, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -6-
License and moved its adoption. (Motion carried unanimously under
consent business) .
The Assistant City Administrator reported on correspondence dated
March 9, 1992, from Daniel L. Barber, Vice President/Owner, of A
Business Conference-Call, Inc. , stating their interest in
purchasing property located east of, and adjacent to, the library.
Sweeney/Lynch moved to direct staff to discuss with Mr. Barber the
possibility of their entering into negotiations to purchase the
"Brown lot" and subsequently trading this parcel with the City for
the lot on which they are interested (Registered Land Survey 135,
Tract A) . Motion carried unanimously.
The City Council recessed at 9: 10 p.m. to the Executive Session to
discuss litigation and collective bargaining.
Vice Mayor Vierling reconvened the Council meeting at 9:44 p.m. No
action was taken during the executive session.
Beard/Lynch moved to adjourn to Tuesday, March 17, 1992 at 7: 00
p.m. Meeting ad 'ourned at 9:44 p.m.
•
Jtl ith S. Cox
q' y Clerk
Jane Van Maldeghem
Recording Secretary
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE SHAKOPEE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA MARCH 17, 1992
Mayor Laurent called the meeting of the Shakopee City Council to
order at 7: 00 p.m. , with Cncl. Vierling, Lynch, Sweeney, and Beard
present. Also present: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator; Barry
Stock, Assistant City Administrator; Judith S. Cox, City Clerk;
Dave Hutton, Public Works Director; Karen Marty, City Attorney;
Lindberg Ekola, City Planner.
Sweeney/Lynch moved to approve the agenda with the deletion of item
16, "recess to an Executive Session" . Motion carried unanimously.
The Shakopee City Council recessed for the meeting of the Shakopee
Housing and Redevelopment Authority at 7 : 03 p.m.
The Shakopee City Council reconvened at 7 : 20 p.m.
Liaison reports were given from the Councilmembers.
Mayor Laurent gave his report of meetings attended and upcoming
meetings he will be attending.
Sweeney/Vierling moved to add to the City Council agenda the action
of the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority regarding a
proposed text ordinance amendment for the Heavy Industrial Zone (I-
2) , which would provide limited retail as a conditional use in the
I-2 zone. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Laurent asked for comments from the audience on any item not
on the agenda. There was no response.
Vierling/Lynch moved to approve the consent business. Motion
carried unanimously.
Mayor Laurent opened the public hearing on the proposed
improvements to Vierling Drive between County Road 79 and County
Road 17 by street, curb and gutter, and storm sewer; Project No.
1992-3 .
Cncl. Vierling excused herself from the Council table due to
conflict of interest.
Public Works Director presented the feasibility report for the
improvements to Vierling Drive between County Road 79 and County
Road 17 .
Discussion was held on the request by the developer of Meadows 1st
Addition for consideration of the oversizing cost to the culvert
that will be installed under Vierling Drive.
Mayor Laurent asked for comments from the audience.
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -2-
Paul Cherney, Pioneer Engineering, spoke on the box culvert stating
that the upper valley drainage area is contributing to the need for
an increase in the culvert size. He added he did not feel it was
equitable for the developer of Meadows 1st Addition to be
responsible for the full cost of this oversizing. Wayne Fleck,
Gold Nugget Development, questioned the City's policy on
reimbursements of roadway crossings. He stated they (developers
for Meadow 1st Addition) should not have to pay for a drainageway
or crossing not needed as a part of their development.
Discussion was held on both issues.
Mayor Laurent asked for further comments from the audience.
Jerome Vierling, 1461 County Road 79, questioned the access from
Prairie Estates and if there would be a limitation to the number of
intersections allowable in a plat. He also questioned the
assessments to platted property that was still being farmed and
still zoned Agricultural (AG) . He stated the interest on the
assessments for AG land should be "forgiven" at least until the
area is developed or sold.
The City Attorney responded to this issue and explained the "green
acres" statute.
Mayor Laurent asked for further comments from the audience. There
were none.
Mayor Laurent closed the public hearing for Project No. 1992-3 .
Beard/Lynch offered Resolution No. 3556, A Resolution Ordering An
Improvement And The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For
Vierling Drive, Between County Road 17 And County Road 79; Project
No. 1992-3, and moved for it adoption.
Discussion was held on whether or not the green acres statute gives
authorization for the Council to waive the interest.
Cncl. Sweeney called for the question.
Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling absent for the vote.
Sweeney/Lynch moved to direct the City Attorney to investigate the
green acres statute whether or not this statute gives the City
Council the authority to waive interest charges. Motion carried
with Mayor Laurent voting "no" and with Cncl. Vierling absent for
the vote.
Sweeney/Beard moved that the oversizing cost of the box culvert be
paid for out of the City funds in the same way the City pays for
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -3-
oversizing costs for streets. Motion carried with Cncl. Vierling
absent for the vote.
Cncl. Vierling took her seat at the Council table.
Mayor Laurent passed the gavel to Vice Mayor Vierling and excused
himself from the Council table due to conflict of interest on the
proposed vacation of Polk Street.
Vice Mayor Vierling opened the public hearing on the proposed
vacation of Polk Street between 10th and 12th Avenues.
The City Planner stated that staff received a petition from Mr.
Randy Laurent of Laurent Builders, Inc. , to vacate that portion of
Polk Street adjacent to the proposed plat of Minnesota Valley 7th
Addition, in order to meet the 30-foot setback requirements; the
remaining 30 feet would be given back to the mall. The City
Planner stated that the Planning Commission recommends approval of
this vacation.
Vice Mayor Vierling asked for comments from the audience.
Julie Meloche, 1057 Tyler, questioned when Vierling Drive would be
constructed in this area in order to relieve the traffic pressures
on Tyler. She also questioned the number of blocks taken into
account when the traffic count was conducted.
Cncl. Sweeney stated that this proposal and a subsequent rezoning
request to R-2 will ultimately reduce the traffic in this area
because it's currently zoned for R-4 (multi-family) , which could
bring about a lot more traffic.
Julie Meloche stated she was not addressing the zoning issue, but
is concerned with the traffic pattern, which the vacation of Polk
Street will add to 12th Avenue and Tyler Street.
The Public Works Director reported on the results of the traffic
counts conducted in the area of Tyler Street and 12th Avenue.
Vice Mayor Vierling asked for further comments from the audience.
Bill Krouse, 1047 Tyler, stated that if homes are going to be added
in this area, this will increase the traffic on Tyler Street and
therefore, Polk Street must not be vacated but should connect with
10th Avenue.
Richard Soderberg, 1048 Tyler, stated he understands the
developer's need to vacate the portion of Polk Street adjacent to
the proposed plat, but he added this street is being used by the
church and at the time the church was constructed, the residents
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council -- Page -4-
had been promised by the City that the construction of the church
would not increase the traffic on Tyler.
The City Planner responded that the portion of Polk adjacent to the
church would not be vacated; just the portion adjacent to the
proposed plat of Minnesota Valley 7th Addition.
Bill Krouse stated the development may have to lose a lot by not
vacating this section of Polk Street, but at least this may prevent
someone from getting hurt on Tyler if Polk is vacated and the
traffic on Tyler is increased.
Cncl. Sweeney questioned what traffic volumes the residents would
feel is adequate for a local street.
Cncl. Beard questioned how strongly the developer felt about
maintaining all the lots proposed for Minnesota Valley 7th
Addition.
Randy Laurent, 128 South Fuller, stated they explored several
different options for roadways, and believe this alternative to be
the best.
The Public Works Director stated that MnDOT will not allow another
street to come on to 10th Avenue in this area. He added that the
realignment of Highway 300 and Highway 169 is in the project future
by MnDOT, but he hasn't received the details.
Richard Soderberg requested clarification of the proposal for the
vacation of Polk Street and exactly how much is to be vacated. He
also requested that the traffic count meter be placed at 10th
Avenue and at 12th Avenue. He questioned what the City would do
with the traffic going to the north from the proposed plat.
The City Planner responded to his concerns, adding that with the
bypass and the construction of Vierling Drive, new traffic patterns
would be developed for this area, which should relieve some of the
traffic on Tyler Street.
Bill Krouse questioned if 10th Avenue was going to be realigned by
the mall entrance.
The Public Works Director responded that the City has not yet
received any print-outs of the proposed realignments.
Vice Mayor Vierling closed the public hearing.
Beard/Sweeney moved to direct staff to prepare the appropriate
resolution for vacating the easterly 60 feet of Polk Street along
the eastern edge of Valley Mall 1st Addition, upon receipt by the
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -5-
City of the recorded plat from the developer. Motion carried with
Mayor Laurent absent for the vote.
Mayor Laurent took his seat at the Council table. Vice Mayor
Vierling passed the gavel back to Mayor Laurent.
The City Council recessed at 9: 20 p.m. and reconvened at
9: 30 p.m.
The City Planner reported on the preliminary plat for Dominion
Hills, a proposed 24-single family lot plat located east of County
Road 17 and south of Hillside Drive.
Robert Smith, R. P. Smith Land Planning Consultants, Inc. , gave the
presentation on Dominion Hills.
Vierling/Beard moved to approve the preliminary plat of Dominion
Hills, subject to the following conditions:
1. Approval of the title opinion by the City Attorney.
2 . Execution of a developer's agreement for construction of
required improvements:
a. Street lighting to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
(SPUC) .
b. Storm sewer system shall be installed in accordance with
the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the
City of Shakopee.
c. Local streets and street signs within the plat will be
constructed in accordance with the requirements of the
Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the City
of Shakopee.
d. Street signs will be constructed and installed by the
City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of $250 each
per sign pole.
e. Cash payment in lieu of park dedication shall be
required.
3 . Approval of the preliminary plat is contingent upon the
applicant receiving a Certificate of Exemption (Wetlands
Conservation Act of 1991) or receiving approval by the City
with appropriate minimization/replacement measures.
4 . The applicant must submit a ghost plat sketch illustrating the
future urbanized redevelopment of the subdivision prior to the
final plat approval.
5. A variance to the subdivision regulations allowing over length
cul-de-sac streets (1, 630 feet and 1, 340 feet) is granted to
allow the dedication of right-of-way of the proposed south
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -6-
cul-de-sac street to the east property line. The applicant
shall not construct cul-de-sacs in excess of 1, 000 feet until
the land to the east of the plat is developed and street
connections can be made between the two developments.
6. An access permit will be required from the Scott County
Highway Department prior to approval of the final plat by the
City Council.
7. Prior to approval of the final plat, final construction plans
for all public improvements must be submitted and approved by
the City Engineer.
8. The non-exclusive easement for ingress and egress that
currently exists along the southerly portion of the plat must
be vacated prior to the recording of the final plat.
9. The name of the street proposed as "Heritage Pointe" must be
changed to a name that is less similar to that of an already
existing street within the City. Street names in the plat
shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering and Planning
staff prior to submittal of the final plat.
10. The developer shall be responsible for grading of the plat as
shown in the preliminary drainage plan.
11. The final plat must show all drainage and utility easements
around the lot lines, as well as drainage easements for all
drainage ditches and retention or detention facilities as
needed that will cross private property.
12 . Stormwater run-off calculations must be submitted to the City
Engineer and approved prior to approval of the final plat by
the City Council.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Lynch moved to approve the 1992 Planning Commission Work
Program. (Motion approved unanimously under consent business. )
The City Planner reported on the request for final approval of
Beckrich Park Estates Planned Unit Development. He stated that on
February 18, 1992 the City Council approved the preliminary plan
for the Beckrich Park Estates Planned Unit Development (PUD) and
the Planning Commission, at their March 5, 1992 meeting,
recommended approval of the final plan for the proposed PUD.
Dale Dahike, developer, was present for discussion. He requested
that the street names for Parkview Circle and Parkview Drive remain
as proposed. He added that the City Engineer stated that these
names would not create an addressing problem.
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -7-
Mayor Laurent questioned the golf tees crossing the greens and
walking path. He added that this may be a safety issue. He also
questioned the location of the well and the maintaining of the well
system.
Mr. Dahlke stated his agreement with the safety issue and the golf
tees. He added they have plans for a backup well system. He
stated that the golf area on the plat would be private. He advised
Council that the County Road access permits have been received.
Mayor Laurent requested that the notation of "final PUD" be noted
on the plan and that County Road 78 be name appropriately.
Cncl. Beard questioned the potential liability to the City if
someone got hurt in the golf area after the City had approved the
plat.
Vierling/Lynch offered Resolution No. 3560, A Resolution Approving
Beckrich Park Estates Final Planned Unit Development and moved for
its adoption, subject to the following conditions:
1. A variance to the lot size requirement of 2 . 5 acres in the
Rural Residential Zoning District is hereby granted with this
approval by the Shakopee City Council as shown on the final
PUD plan.
2 . Approval by the Building Official of the sewer plan, the
analysis of soil conditions, and the design standards for each
residential site.
3 . Approval of the final plat is contingent upon the applicant
receiving a Certificate of Exemption (Wetlands Conservation
Act of 1991) or receiving approval by the City with
appropriate minimization/replacement measures.
4. A street lighting plan must be approved by Shakopee Public
Utilities.
5. Prior to approval of the final plat by the City Council, final
construction plans for all public improvements must be
approved by the City Engineer.
6. Execution of a developer's agreement for the construction of
the required improvements; prior to recording of the final
plat:
A. Water system to be installed in accordance with the
requirements of Shakopee Public Utilities Commission
(SPUC) .
B. Street lighting shall be installed in accordance with the
requirements of SPUC.
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -8-
C. Storm sewer system shall be installed in accordance with
the Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the
City of Shakopee.
D. Local streets and street signs within the plat will be
constructed in accordance with the requirements of the
Design Criteria and Standard Specifications of the city
of Shakopee.
E. Street signs will be constructed and installed by the
City of Shakopee at a cost to the developer of $250 each
per sign pole.
F. Cash payment in lieu of a land park dedication shall be
required for each lot ($430. 55 per lot based on a 40
percent credit for open space - refer to Sec. 11. 40,
Subd. 4E) .
7. The developer shall be responsible for grading of the plat as
shown in the preliminary drainage plan.
8. A revised final PUD must be submitted which shows all drainage
and utility easements around all lot lines, the information
table, and any proposed development signage.
9 . County Road access permits will be required from Scott County
prior to the final plat approval.
10. Consideration be given to the realignment of the green space.
Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Beard moved to authorize the appropriate City officials to
enter into the development agreement for Beckrich Park Estates
Planned Unit Development, as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Planner stated that the Planning Commission is
recommending approval of the preliminary plat for Dalles 1st
Addition, subject to conditions. He added that this proposed plat
for 36 single family lots and two outlots is located south of
Vierling Drive and east of Marschall Road and zoned Urban
Residential (R-2) . He added that staff believes that preliminary
plat approval is premature due to unsettled issues regarding noise
impact and the south lot line.
Discussion was held on the noise impact from the bypass to the plat
and any policy that should be adopted relative to installation of
noise walls and/or berms.
Discussion was also held on the designation of the southerly plat
line, which is yet to be determined.
Official Proceedings of the March 17 , 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -9-
Dale Dahlke stated he wants to do something with this piece of land
as soon as possible and has already suggested to City staff the use
of berms as a source of noise abatement.
Discussion was once again held on the noise impact, possible noise
barriers, who would be responsible for maintaining the 30 foot
strip of land between the bypass and any constructed noise barrier
wall, and the possibility of rezoning to a higher residential
density to serve as a noise barrier. Discussion was also held on
the need to relocate the gas easement and the setbacks for corner
lots.
Beard/Vierling moved to table action on the preliminary plat of
Dalles 1st Addition. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Lynch moved to authorize the appropriate city officials to
execute the Software Maintenance Agreement (for $750 per year) and
the Software License Agreement with Quest Data Systems of
Bloomington. (Motion carried unanimously under consent business. )
Vierling/Lynch moved to authorize and direct the appropriate city
officials to enter into an agreement with Bob McAllister to provide
animal control services for 1992 at the rate of $600 for January
and $700 a month for the remainder of the year. (Motion carried
unanimously under consent business. )
. Vierling/Lynch moved to receive and file the memorandum from the
Chief of Police dated March 9 , 1992 regarding liquor law violations
at "Cheers 2 Ya" . (Motion carried unanimously under consent
business . )
The City Administrator reported on the bids received for a fire
service pumping engine. He stated that the lower bid received from
Smeal Fire Equipment did not meet the specifications.
Vierling/Beard moved to award bid to Custom Fire Apparatus in the
amount of $227 , 530. 00 and authorize the City Administrator to
authorize the sale of a 1000 GPM 1962 Ford fire apparatus after
possession of the vehicle requested. Motion carried unanimously.
Assistant City Administrator stated that the temporary recreation
assistant' s contract will expire on April 8 , 1992 and requested
that the contract be extended to August 28 , 1992 .
Discussion was held on the State local aid cuts currently being
proposed and how these cuts could effect City services and City
employees.
Vierling/Lynch moved to extend the temporary recreation assistant ' s
employment through August 28 , 1992 .
Official Proceedings of the March 17, 1992
Shakopee City Council Page -10-
Vierling/Sweeney moved to amend the extension for 60 days, or to
June 8, 1992 . Motion carried unanimously.
Motion carried on the main motion as amended.
Vierling/Lynch moved to direct staff to pursue the possibility of
the City having access to the county computer system for special
assessment information and to view the property data base. (Motion
carried unanimously under consent business. )
Vierling/Lynch moved to approve the bills in the amount of
$148, 359 . 12 . (Motion carried unanimously under consent business. )
Vierling/Lynch moved to authorize the purchase of a wing, snow plow
and sander attachments for the new truck from McQueen Equipment,
Inc. for a total cost of $14, 167. 00. (Motion carried unanimously
under consent business. )
Vierling/Lynch offered Resolution No. 3561, A Resolution Accepting
Bid on the Municipal Swimming Pool Improvements, Project No. 1992-5
and moved for its adoption. (Motion carried unanimously under
consent business. )
Vierling/Lynch moved to approve a contingency amount of 10 percent
of the contract for use by the City Engineer in authorizing change
orders for Project No. 1992-5. (Motion carried unanimously under
consent business. )
. Committee of the Whole meetings were scheduled for March 31st at
7:00 p.m. , April 14th at 7:00 p.m. , April 28th at 4 : 00 p.m. , April
28th at 7: 00 p.m. with the Townships, and April 30th at 7 : 30 a.m.
Staff will determine the priority levels of items for discussion at
each meeting.
Vierling/Lynch offered Resolution No. 3559, A Resolution Receiving
A Report and Calling a Hearing on Improvements to Apgar Street, 6th
Avenue to 1st Avenue; Shumway Street, 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue;
Pierce Street, 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue; and 2nd Avenue, Pierce
Street to Apgar Street (Project No. 1992-6) and moved for its
adoption. (Motion carried unanimously under consent business. )
Vierling/Beard moved to refer the zoning ordinance text amendment
for limited retail as a conditional use in the Heavy Industrial (I-
2) zones to the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously.
(This text amendment was requested by the HRA. )
Beard/Vierling moved to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
AAL - 21r ;
J ith S. Cox
C' y Clerk
Jane VanMaldeghem
Recording Secretary
/0
The following Shakopee property owners request the Shakopee city
council to:
-initiate actions to pave Muhlenhardt road from Horizon Drive to
C. R. 16 during 1992
-establish the paved road width at 28 feet and consider any other
options to minimize costs
-adopt a funding method for this road work that in consideration of
the unique history of Muhlenhardt road does not assess the adjacent
property owners in excess of 25% of the cost
(signatures)
difIC-2p.,1)-4,-,?-t_ 5"473 - yys-go r
,o i vita j l#4,k- eti. q414- /V/
/ c Ci. '4'�'S'"7 17
4.,:7 :411 . 4)13Y
c.. 1444 IIs 7i1 _ yys- 7- /?
,,f 0; 8S
C'el- t -- Li6-7, 7
v I , ' - "Vta-t- -it -n-I ?eft )6J/6e&fe,{1A-77/2: 3 .,aC,a- //g, -/I7
�� '' -03
GYM c-6tAAr't Lt r-
g73 C7 N'1 c 6�.�� cf-
�-
9..: . -- k..,z_.\./ /
,,,,), A ,,,4,_.„... - • gi,z- /7/4,-_,--5-3,3
-,-,_,,.,.,:„.„„,,,,,, _. e` =.I
<'-:.la PIE
ms. \------..
APR - 21922 - i !-�� �'&.
Circulator fifeti 796'
1/
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Apgar Street
DATE: March 30, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution NO. 3563, ordering an improvement and the
preparation of plans and specifications for the Apgar Street
Project.
BACKGROUND:
On January 7 , 1992 the City Council ordered the preparation of a
feasibility report for street improvements for the Apgar Street
Project. The project limits include Apgar Street, between 1st
Avenue and 6th Avenue, Shumway and Pierce Streets, between 2nd and
3rd Avenues and 2nd Street, between Pierce Street and Apgar Street.
The project consists of reconstructing Apgar Street to replace the
existing pavement and add curb & gutter and storm sewer. The
project also includes upgrading the existing gravel streets in this
area, (Pierce Street, Shumway Street and 2nd Avenue) by adding
pavement and any necessary sewer and water utilities.
This project was City Council initiated rather than petitioned for
by the abutting property owners.
The feasibility report has been completed and was submitted to the
City Council on March 17 , 1992 . Subsequently, a public hearing has
been scheduled for April 7, 1992 to consider the improvements.
PLEASE BRING YOUR COPY OF THE FEASIBILITY REPORT FROM YOUR
MARCH 17, 1992 COUNCIL PACKET.
Staff will give a presentation on the feasibility report at the
public hearing. There are several watermain related issues that
will be discussed by the Shakopee Public Utilities Commission at
their April 6th meeting. Staff will present any action taken by
SPUC to the City Council at the April 7th public hearing.
At the conclusion of the public hearing, if the City Council
determines this project should be constructed, attached is
Resolution No. 3563 , ordering plans and specification prepared for
the project.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 3563 , ordering plans and specifications
prepared for this project as outlined in the feasibility
report.
2 . Adopt Resolution No. 3563, but revise the project scope from
the feasibility report.
3 . Table Resolution No. 3563 .
4 . Determine that the project should not be constructed and deny
Resolution No. 3563 .
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3563 , A Resolution Ordering an Improvement and
the Preparation of Plans and Specifications for Apgar Street, 1st
Avenue to 6th Avenue; Shumway Street, 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue;
Pierce Street, 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue and 2nd Avenue, Pierce
Street to Apgar Street, Project No. 1992-6 and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
MEM3563
RESOLUTION NO. 3563
A Resolution Ordering An Improvement And
The Preparation of Plans And Specifications For
Apgar Street, 1st Avenue To 6th Avenue;
Shumway Street, 3rd Avenue To 2nd Avenue;
Pierce Street, 3rd Avenue To 2nd Avenue
And 2nd Avenue, Pierce Street To Apgar Street
Project No. 1992-6
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 3559, adopted on March 17 , 1992 , fixed
a date for Council hearing on the proposed improvement of Apgar
Street, 1st Avenue to 6th Avenue; Shumway Street, 3rd Avenue to 2nd
Avenue; Pierce Street, 3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue and 2nd Avenue,
Pierce Street to Apgar Street by pavement, sanitary sewer and
watermain; and
WHEREAS, ten days published notice of the hearing through two
weekly publications of the required notice was given and the
hearing was held on the 7th day of April 1992 , at which all persons
desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. That the improvement is ordered as hereinafter described:
Apgar Street, 1st Avenue to 6th Avenue; Shumway Street,
3rd Avenue to 2nd Avenue; Pierce Street, 3rd Avenue to
2nd Avenue and 2nd Avenue, Pierce Street to Apgar Street
by pavement, sanitary sewer and watermain.
2 . David E. Hutton, Public Works Director, is hereby
designated as the engineer for this improvement. He shall prepare
plans and specifications for the making of such improvement.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of
• , 19
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
/ a.
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator/Community
Service Director
RE: Municipal Facility Needs Assessment Sub-Committee -
Proposed Action Plan
DATE: March 24, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Last December, the Shakopee City Council directed that a
Municipal Facility Sub-Committee be created to investigate
alternative survey methods to identify community needs and
residents willingness to pay. On March 23 , 1992 the Sub-Committee
presented their recommendation to the Park and Recreation Advisory
Board for review and comment. At that time the Park and Recreation
Advisory Board made several modifications to the Sub-Committee's
proposed action plan and subsequently moved to recommend Council
approval of said plan as amended.
BACKGROUND:
The objective of the Municipal Facility Needs Assessment Sub-
Committee was to investigate survey method alternatives and
determine community facility needs and respondents willingness to
pay. Over the past three months, the Committee has discussed
several different survey techniques and methodologies. The key
point that continually came to the surface in the Sub-Committee' s
discussion of the various survey alternatives was - credibility.
No matter what survey technique is utilized or how a survey is
administered, the Sub-Committee felt that we would undoubtedly
encounter persons who feel that the survey results are biased. The
Sub-Committee felt that the best we could do was attempt to select
a technique and format that will limit the amount of bias.
The second key point that was continually addressed throughout
the process was in the area of cost. Cost concerns were discussed
in both the area of staff time, volunteer time and actual cash
outlay for administering and generating a survey.
In regard to survey methods and techniques, the consensus of
the Sub-Committee was that it would be in the best interest of the
City to utilize an outside firm specializing in the area of survey
design and implementation. The Sub-Committee felt that this type
of approach would yield the most positive results in terms of
credibility. One negative element of the consultant approach was
in the area of cost.
The Committee did discuss the possibility of contacting
community organizations to determine if they would be willing to
participate in offsetting a portion of the cost of a survey. After
analyzing the possibility and informally discussing the issue with
several community organization leaders, the Committee felt that it
was doubtful whether or not the entire amount of funds could be
raised through organizational contacts. The Committee did not rule
out the possibility of further analysis of this funding option.
The Committee did feel that there was a general perception from
many of the organization members that they have already contributed
significant dollars, especially in the area of park development.
On March 18, 1992, the Shakopee Community Development
Commission moved to recommend that the Park and Recreation Advisory
Board consider contacting the Townships for funding support in
exchange for including their geographic area in the survey sample
size. The Park and Recreation Advisory Board chose not to pursue
this funding alternative due to the limited funding available from
the Townships and the fact that a comprehensive survey would focus
more on Shakopee issues as compared simply to recreation issues.
The Board is recommending the use of the Park Reserve Fund to
finance that portion of a comprehensive survey that focuses on Park
and Recreation issues. The Board is recommending that the
remaining portion of the survey be financed utilizing whatever
other funding source that the Council deems appropriate.
Shown in Attachment #1 is the Municipal Facility Needs
Assessment Sub-Committee Proposed Action Plan approved as amended
by the Park and Recreation Advisory Board. The action plan
basically recommends the utilization of a professional consultant
to design and implement a telephone survey of Shakopee residents.
This approach would also rely heavily upon the members of a
proposed Research Survey Sub-Committee that would be created to
assist in the survey design and format. Upon completion of the
survey, the Sub-Committee recommends that a town meeting be held to
present the survey results and solicit additional input from
Shakopee residents.
While the Committee was discussing community and facility
needs, it became apparent that perhaps it would be in the best
interest of the City to take a more comprehensive look at the
community and pursue a survey that would address in addition to
recreational service needs other community issues. The Committee
felt that in light of the fact that several major highway projects
are underway that it would be in the best interest of the City to
solicit community input regarding community wide development issues
such as economic development, downtown redevelopment, police
protection, fire protection, recreation programs, etc. The
Committee also felt that in light of impending State funding cuts
that it would be beneficial to solicit community input to determine
were Shakopee residents feel their tax dollars can best be
maximized.
The cost estimate to pursue a focused survey to identify
municipal facility needs and respondents willingness to pay ranges
between $4, 000 - $6, 000. The cost for a more comprehensive survey
varies depending on the number of questions desired in the survey.
Comprehensive surveys range anywhere between $6, 000 - $30, 000.
At the present time, there is only $1, 500 in the Planning
budget and $1,750 in the Recreation budget for professional
services. These funds could be used and applied to the cost of a
consultant but would essentially drain these two division of any
further professional service assistance needed during the upcoming
year. Other possible municipal funding sources for this type of
project would include the City's Contingency Fund and the Park
Reserve Fund. At the present time, there is approximately $50, 000
within the City's contingency appropriation account and over
$100, 000 in the Park Reserve Fund. The Municipal Facilities Sub-
Committee recognizes that there may be State budget cut backs but
feels that the survey results for a comprehensive survey would
benefit the City of Shakopee in the long term. Therefore, the Sub-
Committee is recommending the use of the City's Park Reserve Fund
to cover the cost of a comprehensive survey that relates to Park
and Recreation planning and the balanced to be covered by a funding
source to be determined by Council.
Representatives from the Municipal Facility Needs Assessment
Sub-Committee will be present at our meeting to discuss their
proposal in greater detail.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Move to approve the Municipal Facility Survey Needs Assessment
Sub-Committees Work Plan and direct staff to proceed as
outlined in the plan.
2 . Move to approve the Municipal Facility Survey Needs Assessment
Sub-Committee Work Plan and move its adoption.
3 . Tables action pending further information from staff.
4. Do not pursue a survey to identify municipal facility needs at
this time.
5. Move to expand the scope of the survey to cover comprehensive
community issues with funding for this portion of the survey
to be allocated from the City's contingency appropriation
account.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative #1 & #5.
ACTION REQUESTED:
1. Move to approve the Municipal Facility Survey Needs Assessment
Sub-Committees Work Plan and direct staff to proceed as
outlined in the plan.
2 . Move to expand the scope of the survey to cover comprehensive
community issues with funding for this portion of the survey
to be allocated from the City's contingency appropriation
account.
BAS/tiv
TAMI/ADMIN/WORKPLAN
ATTACHMENT #1
Municipal Facility
Needs Assessment Sub-Committee
Proposed Action Plan
Objective: Identify a survey method that will determine
community facility needs and respondents
willingness to pay.
1. Obtain quotations from professional survey research firms to
develop and administer a telephone survey of Shakopee
residents the purpose of which will be to determine community
facility needs and respondents willingness to pay. Funding
for the Park and Recreations portion of the survey to be
allocated from the City' s park reserve Fund.
2 . Enter into an agreement with the survey research form
exhibiting the qualities necessary to conduct a valid survey.
(by 4/22/92)
3 . Appoint a Research Survey Sub-Committee comprised of between
20 and 30 persons (representatives to include service clubs,
organizations, business, city committees, residents, etc. ) to
work with the selected survey research firm in developing the
survey questionnaire. (by 4/22/92)
4 . Research Sub-Committee and Consultant meet to develop survey.
5 . Sub-Committee approve final survey questionnaire. (by 5/22/92)
6 . City Council approve final survey questionnaire. (by 6/2/92)
7 . Conduct survey and prepare final report. (by 7/22/92)
8 . Upon completion of the survey, hold a town meeting to present
the survey results and solicit additional input from Shakopee
residents. (by 7/28/92)
In addition to the proposed work plan the Sub-Committee members
wanted to go on record in support of the development and
implementation of a comprehensive community survey. Funding for
that portion of the survey whihc does not relate to Park and
Recreation to be covered by a funding source as deemed appropriate
by City Council.
CO \5SENT
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Law Enforcement Service Agreement
DATE: 03 23 92
INTRODUCTION:
The Police Department has upgraded the Law Enforcement Service
Agreement used to arrange for contract overtime by local
individuals or organizations.
BACKGROUND:
The City Attorney has determined the form in use is not in the
best interest of the city and has recommended a unilateral
agreement similar to the one attached to this memo.
The City Attorney has also determined that the appropriate
Department Officials should seek authorization to activate this
agreement which qualifies as a contract.
The fee charged has been raised a dollar an hour from last year.
The $36.00 per hour charge reflects the average cost to the City
of supplying officers to work contract overtime including fringes
and payroll administration costs.
Officers working under this agreement are actually on duty which
means they are subject to and Department Rules and Regulations
and are covered by City Insurance. •
ALTERNATIVES:
! . Approve and authorize Law Enforcement Service Agreement.
2 . Do not approve or authorize Agreement.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Alternative # 1.
ACTION REQUESTED;
Approve the attached Law Enforcement Services Agreement and
authorize the Chief of Police or the Officer-in-Charge of the
Police Department to provide approved law enforcement services as
requested.
cc: City Attorney
LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES AGREEMENT
The Shakopee Police Department has been asked by the
undersigned to provide law enforcement services as subject to the
approval of the Chief of Police or Officer-In-Charge of the
Department.
Service requested:
The undersigned agrees to pay the City of Shakopee for these
services at a rate of $36. 00 per hour per officer, with a two (2)
hour minimum for each officer. officers are being requested.
The undersigned will pay for services rendered within fourteen
(14) days of receipt of an invoice from the City.
This agreement remains in effect for one calendar year from
the date of execution.
Executed this day of , 199—.
(Signature)
(Title)
(Organization)
(Billing Address)
(City, State and Zip Code)
(Telephone Number)
/ 3k
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner
Dave Hutton, Public Works Director
RE: Adoption of Resolution No. 3567
Stormwater Management Policies
Nationwide Urban Runoff Program (NURP) and
Best Management Practices (BMP)
DATE: March 31, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
As a part of the implementation strategy developed by the
Metropolitan Council to meet the 40 percent reduction of non-point
pollution in the Minnesota River, local governments are being
requested to adopt stormwater management practices. The
Metropolitan Council is requesting that these standards be adopted
by June 30, 1992 .
BACKGROUND:
Attached is a copy of the Metropolitan Council ' s proposed
implementation strategy for meeting the 40 percent non-point
pollution reduction goal. The first two strategies would require
that all local governments in the metropolitan area within the
Minnesota River watershed adopt stormwater management standards.
The first strategy requires that the City adopt the Nationwide
Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards established by the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) .
The second strategy would require adoption of the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency's (MPCA) Best Management Practices (BMP) .
What is the NURP? The National Urban Runoff Program establishes
design standards for detention ponds necessary to achieve the
maximum amount of phosphorous removal and water quality. The
standards were developed by Dr. William Walker and have been used
by the EPA. The Metropolitan Council supports the construction of
stormwater management ponds utilizing NURP standards.
What are BMP' s? The Best Management Practices are methods to
control erosion and non-point pollution into rivers and lakes.
BMP' s include construction site erosion practices (e.g. silt fence,
hay bales) , housekeeping (e.g. good street sweeping program) , and
improved agricultural practices. Attached is a summary of BMP ' s
from the MPCA.
DISCUSSION:
The NURP standards have been incorporated into the two previously
adopted stormwater management plans in the City, namely the Mill
Pond Watershed Stormwater Management Plan and the Blue Lake
Watershed Stormwater Management Plan. The two plans cover a large
area in the City but there are areas in the City which would not
fall under the guidance of these two documents. To apply the NURP
standards citywide the adoption of these standards is necessary.
The BMP have been used informally by staff as a guide in reviewing
development proposals. The City did not formally adopt either of
these standards in the two stormwater management plans. To apply
these standards citywide adoption of the BMP is also necessary.
Because both documents are lengthy in nature and both have been
used in the development review process already staff did not
include these documents as attachments. If Council members wish to
review these documents or have questions, they should contact
staff.
A third strategy identified in the Met Council Implementation
Strategy involves the adoption of new Shoreland standards (See
strategy number 3) . As of this date the Department of Natural
Resources (DNR) is still revising their model ordinance. Staff
will bring a revised Shoreland Ordinance to the Council at a later
date.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt the NURP and BMP standards.
2 . Do not adopt the NURP and BMP standards.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution 3567 , a resolution which adopts the Nationwide
Urban Runoff Program (NURP) and Best Management Practices (BMP)
standards citywide, and move its adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 3567
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE NATIONAL URBAN RUNOFF PROGRAM
AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR
THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
WHEREAS, the City Council of Shakopee desires to preserve and
enhance the water quality of the Minnesota River and associated
lakes, wetlands and other natural resources located within the City
of Shakopee; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shakopee lies entirely within the
Minnesota River drainage area; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has established
as a goal reduction in non-point pollution by 40 percent in the
Minnesota River by July 1, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has prepared an
implementation strategy to meet the 40 percent reduction goal which
includes the adoption of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program and
Best Management Practices standards; and
WHEREAS, it is the City of Shakopee' intent to comply with the
Metropolitan Council ' s implementation strategy by adopting a policy
which establishes these standards citywide.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota hereby adopt the Nationwide Urban
Runoff Program and Best Management Practices Standards for the City
of Shakopee, a copy of which are on file with the City Clerk.
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.
City Attorney
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
REVISED DRAFT
(February 3, 1992)
WATER QUALITY IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT
NONPOINT SOURCE POLLUTION TO THE MINNESOTA RIVER
Summary of The Policy Issue
In 1990 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA) agreed on a goal to reduce nonpoint source pollution in the Minnesota River by
40 percent from pre-1980 levels. The two agencies have set 1996 as the target date to achieve this
goal. To accomplish this goal, current land development and agricultural practices must be altered
to restrict nonpoint source pollutants from entering area water bodies.
The Problem
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) in 1990 established a goal of reducing nonpoint source pollutants in the Minnesota River
by 40 percent from pre-1980 levels to meet state water quality standards. This goal is to be
accomplished by July 1, 1996. See exhibits A and B. If this goal is not reached by 1996 the EPA and
MPCA may require:
PP
1. a moratorium on land development within the Minnesota River Basin; or,
2. expensive improvements to the Blue Lake and Seneca Wastewater Treatment Plants
which will only have a minimal positive impact on the Minnesota River. It is possible
that water quality standards will not be met even after the facility improvements are
made. These facility improvements, however, will be paid for by all existing and
future sanitary sewer users in the metropolitan area; or,
3. the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission to pay
a fine for failure to make efforts to accomplish the 40 percent reduction goal; or,
4. a combination of the above three (3) options.
The Metropolitan Council has documented an increase of nonpoint source pollution to area water
bodies. These added pollutants reduce the recreational value and accelerate the eutrophication of
area water bodies. Water quality standards in the Minnesota River are violated as a result of
nonpoint source pollution generated from Greater Minnesota as well as the Twin Cities Metropolitan
Area. Exhibit C Iists those local governments in the Minnesota River Basin.
The increase of nonpoint source pollutants to area water bodies can be traced to two primary sources:
land development and agriculture practices. Land development or urbanization, generally increases
1
•
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
both the volume of runoff as well as the concentration of pollutants in the runoff. This happens with
the conversion of land to hard surface and by the destruction of wetlands. Detention ponds or
artificial depressions can help mitigate these impacts. The best designed ponds, however, will not
reduce the increased volume of runoff following urbanization nor will they totally remove the
additional pollutants following urbanization. An increase in runoff volume, total phosphorus and
other pollutants are the results of urban development.
Agriculture is the predominate land use in the Minnesota River Basin and the major contributor of
nonpoint source pollutants. Nonpoint source pollution from agriculture occurs as a result of intensive
land cultivation and husbandry practices and shows up in three basic forms: soil erosion; agriculture
supplements such as nutrients, pesticides and herbicides; and animal waste products. Each of these
sources fill area water bodies smothering aquatic life,change the aquatic environment by limiting light
penetration of the water, and result in the transmission of toxins to area water bodies.
Existing Legislative and Policy Structure For Addressing the Nonpoint Source Pollution Problem
The Minnesota Legislature
Two pieces of legislation have been passed in the last decade that set a framework for addressing the
nonpoint source pollution issue. However, it will take several years to put this framework in place
and will require local governments to extensively revise their surface water management plans and
activities.
• In 1982 legislation was passed requiring Watershed Management Or.ganizations (WMO) to prepare
watershed plans that addressed water quality issues. Under this legislation each WMO is to prepare
a plan that states objectives and policies for water quality and identifies alternatives for improving
water quality and methods of implementation. These plans are to be reviewed by the Metropolitan
Council "in the same manner and with the same authority and effect as provided for the council's
review of the comprehensive plans of local government units" (Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.231
subd.8 (1990)). The Council is required to determine whether the watershed plan conforms with the
management objectives and target pollution loads stated in the Council's water resources plan
prepared pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 473.157.
As a part of the WMO planning process described under Minnesota Statutes,section 103B.201,each
} local government will be required to prepare a local water management plan, capital improvement
program and official controls necessary to implement the watershed plan. As part of the local water
management plan, the local government will need to define water quantity and quality protection
methods adequate to meet performance standards established in the watershed plan. Local
governments will also be required to amend their local comprehensive plans to reflect the contents
of the watershed plan. Local governments will have two years to amend their comprehensive plans
from the time the WMO planning process is complete. Under rules currently proposed by the Board
of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR), WMOs have until 1995 to complete their plans. The earliest
local governments are required to revise their comprehensive plans is 1997. It could take several
years beyond 1997 to implement local government plans.
2
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
The second piece of legislation is Minnesota Statutes, section 473.157, that requires the Metropolitan
Council to prepare a water resources plan that includes management objectives and target pollution
loads for watersheds in the metropolitan area. From this plan WMOs will advise local governments
of their target pollution loads. Local governments will revise their stormwater management plans to
include implementation steps that assure the target pollution loads are met.
The Metropolitan Council has set as a priority developing the target pollution loads for watersheds
tributary to the Minnesota River. This is a priority because of the urgency to meet the EPA/MPCA
reduction goal of 40 percent by 1996. Target pollution loads for Bevens, Carver, Chaska and Sand
Creek watersheds will be developed by 1992. Pollution loads for other watersheds in the Minnesota
River Basin will be developed by mid-1993. The Council will also be actively pursuing the
development of target pollution loads for all watersheds in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is in the middle of a multi-year river basin-wide assessment
project to evaluate the current condition of, and source and type of pollutants entering the Minnesota
River. The Minnesota River Assessment Project (MRAP) is designed to identify the sources of
pollution threatening the health and vitality of the Minnesota River. The study involves over a dozen
organizations working in concert with local governments from Lac Qui Parte County in southwestern
Minnesota to Jordan. The goal of MRAP is to assess the water quality, aquatic communities and
current land uses in the Minnesota River system. This information will be used to develop specific
water quality goals and to identify programs and best management practices that can help reduce
nonpoint source pollution.
An implementation plan will eventually be developed that comprehensively addresses the nonpoint
source issue in both the metropolitan and outstate areas of the Minnesota River Basin. It will take
the MPCA until mid-1993 to complete the assessment phase. The MPCA is also now forming an
implementation committee (MRIP) comprised of various interest groups throughout the Minnesota
River Basin. The implementation committee has been directed to develop a strategy that most
efficiently reduces nonpoint source pollution to the Minnesota River.
The Board of Water and Soil Resources
The Board of Water and Soil Resources is the primary state agency responsible for surface water
planning and is the lead agency responsible for carrying out many of the administrative aspects of the
recently passed Wetland Conservation Act of 1991,better known as the"no-net loss"legislation. The
act provides landowners with three options for preserving or enhancing wetlands: the wetland
preservation areas option; the permanent wetland preserves option; and the wetland establishment
and restoration program. If a land use practice requires the taking of a protected wetland the
legislation requires a 1:1 and a 2:1 mitigation of wetlands in rural and urban areas respectively.
Wetlands perform essential hydrologic and water quality functions such as lowering of flood peaks,
providing interchange between surface water and groundwater, and filtering and absorbing pollutants.
Because of these functions,wetlands are critical for reducing nonpoint source pollution to area lakes
and rivers.
3
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
The Metropolitan Council
In September, 1988 the Metropolitan Council adopted its Water Resources Management Wastewater
Treatment and Handling Policy Plan (hereafter the policy plan). Local governments were notified
of the policy plan contents in the April, 1989 systems statement and pursuant to the Metropolitan
Land Planning Act, had nine months to amend their comprehensive plans. The need to reduce
nonpoint source pollution to the Minnesota River Basin through regulating land development is
documented in the Council's policy plan:
[I]if nonpoint source pollution in the Minnesota River is not dealt with effectively, the Blue
Lake and Seneca Wastewater Treatment Plants would possibly have to continually increase
their treatment level to where the costs would far exceed the benefits in improved water
quality. This would result in very substantial outlays for both capital and operations to
compensate for insufficient reduction in nonpoint source pollution. Local units of
government must understand that use of land can have important and damaging impacts on
water quality. The impacts must be prevented or at least minimized through land use
regulations and proper water runoff management (p. 9).
Policy 1-1 of the Council's Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan states:
[TJ treatment levels required for wastewater treatment plants in the metropolitan system
should clearly recognize the need to control both point and nonpoint sources of pollution
from within and outside the Metropolitan Area (p. 9).
The Council has actively pursued the implementation of its policy to reduce nonpoint source
., pollution to area water bodies. The Council's policy plan outlines the responsibilities for
implementing policy 1-1. These include, but are not limited to:
1. working with watershed management organizations (WMOs) and the MPCA on
monitoring and managing nonpoint source pollution programs; and,
2. evaluating the efforts of WMOs and local governments to control nonpoint source
pollution and their impact on river water quality and effects on treatment plant
effluent limits. (p. 10)
The Council has also used its authority under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act of 1976 to review
and comment on comprehensive plan amendments and environmental reviews to implement its policy
on reducing nonpoint source pollution. These comments have generally focused on the need to
reduce nonpoint source pollution and the possible tools that may be used to accomplish this task.
A related issue is the Minnesota River Basin extends beyond the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
The Metropolitan Council has no planning or regulatory authority in Greater Minnesota. This makes
it difficult for one governmental agency such as the Metropolitan Council to coordinate water quality
planning activities in the Minnesota River Basin. The solution to nonpoint source pollution will
require the involvement of all levels of government throughout the basin. The Metropolitan Council
is committed to work with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Board of Water and Soil
4
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
Resources and other state and regional agencies to ensure that appropriate steps are taken in Greater
Minnesota to achieve the 40 percent reduction in nonpoint source pollution to the Minnesota River.
Proposed Interim Strategy
An interim strategy is needed to address both the nonpoint source pollution issue and to implement
the Council's policy 1-1 of the Wastewater Treatment and Handling Policy Plan, and the EPA and
MPCA goal of 40 percent nonpoint source pollution reduction to the Minnesota River by 1996.
The Council is committed to working with WMOs and local governments through the planning
process outlined in Minnesota Statutes, section 103B.201. The Council also recognizes its
responsibility to prepare and adopt a water resources plan pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section
473.157. In the last year Council staff has met with all of the WMO boards in the Minnesota River
Basin to seek cooperation in achieving the EPA/MPCA 40 percent reduction goal. In addition, the
Council staff has formed a technical advisory committee made up of local government officials and
other interested parties to seek advise and disseminate information on nonpoint source pollution in
the Minnesota River and its tributaries. However, it will take several years for the Council, WMOs
and local governments to prepare and implement the above referenced plans. In the interim, steps
should be taken that allows local governments and WMOs to take immediate action to reduce the
adverse impacts of nonpoint source pollution on area water bodies, specifically on the Minnesota
River.
The following interim strategy is designed to make progress toward meeting the EPA and MPCA goal
of 40 percent nonpoint source pollution reduction to the Minnesota River by 1996. This interim
strategy is a minimum that the Council will accept as part of any local government comprehensive
plan. It should be recognized by local governments that more comprehensive revisions to stormwater
plans may be required once the Council and WMOs complete their planning under Minnesota
Statutes, section 103B.201 and 473.157 in order to meet the EPA/MPCA 40 percent reduction goal.
1. Local governments must adopt design standards for stormwater ponds that will reduce
the contaminant loadings from surface water runoff. One set of design criteria that
is widely accepted is from the National Urban Runoff Program (NURP). These
criteria, or similar specifications which are equally effective, should be incorporated
in the stormwater plan of every local government in the Minnesota River Basin.
2. Local governments in the Minnesota River Basin must also include in their
stormwater plans the MPCA's urban "best management practices," titled Protecting
Water Quality in Urban Areas or an equivalent set of standards. These standards
are to be used for all new or redeveloped land development.
5
DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
3. All local governments in the Minnesota River Basin must adopt the Department of
Natural Resource shoreland regulations as found in the Statewide Standards For
Management Of Shoreland Areas (Minnesota Regulations Parts 6120.2500 -
6120.3900). These local governments must also notify all residents of the EPA/MPCA
40 percent reduction goal, "best management practices" to achieve this goal and
available resources if additional information is needed.
4. All local governments in the Minnesota River Basin must adopt as part of their
comprehensive plans and official controls the measures described in items 1 and 2 by
June 30, 1992. In addition, all local governments in the Minnesota River Basin must
adopt as part of their comprehensive plans and official controls, or have implemented
through administrative action the measures described in item 3 pursuant to the
timeline prescribed in Minnesota Regulations Parts 6120.2500 - 6120.3900.
5. After June 30, 1992, the Council may require modification of plan amendments that
involve land use activities that would generate surface water runoff, unless the local
government has adopted the interim measures described in items 1 through 3. The
Council will not require a plan modification regarding nonpoint source pollution if a
local government has adopted NURP standards and MPCA's "best management
practices" by June 30, 1992, and the DNR's Statewide Standards For Management Of
Shoreland Areas as prescribed by the timeline in Minnesota Regulations Parts
6120.2500 - 6120.3900.
6. The Metropolitan Council will continue to develop target pollution loads for all
watersheds in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
7. The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and the League of Minnesota Cities
will advise its member cities of the urgent need to implement runoff and land
management practices that improve the quality of direct and indirect runoff discharges
to the Minnesota River and of the consequences to the region of failing to meet the
EPA/MPCA 40 percent reduction goal by 1996.
8. The Metropolitan Council and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities will
work with State of Minnesota agencies to reduce nonpoint source pollution to area
water bodies in Greater Minnesota.
9. The Metropolitan Council and the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities will
monitor the effectiveness of the above-mentioned interim steps to address the
nonpoint source pollution problem in the Minnesota River Basin. If sufficient
progress has not been made by 1994 to reduce nonpoint source pollution to the
Minnesota River, the Metropolitan Council and the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities will jointly sponsor and support state legislation designed to meet the
EPA/MPCA goal of 40 percent reduction by 1996.
GAUSERWE1702S\REV(S E-g;?„03.92
6
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
-PREFACE
Minnesota's lakes and streams are one of our miles of rivers and acres of lakes in Minnesota that
greatest resources. They provide recreation for are affected by point and nonpoint source pollution.
thousands of state residents and visitors, support Nationally,nonpoint source pollution is responsible
tourism, and are used for industrial activities. But for 73% of the oxygen-demanding loadings, 84% of
these waters are fragile resources that are vulnerable the nutrients,98%of the bacteria counts, and 99%
to pollution from a wide variety of human activities. of the suspended solids polluting our waters today
Water quality has become one of the most important (Gianessi and Peskin, 1981).
environmental issues facing our state today.
Many people believe that runoff from urban areas is
In many areas of the state, lakes and streams are "clean,"and it does not harm water quality. This
increasingly vulnerable to pollution. Game fish perception is understandable since the amount of
populations have declined and shallow lakes have pollution from any one spot is usually so small that it
filled up with sediment, making many lakes would be insignificant if it were the only source. But
unsuitable for swimming and fishing. Moreover, when all these small amounts are combined,they can
there is increasing concern about the quality of cause big water quality problems. Almost without
Minnesota's ground water, which serves as the exception, urbanization will significantly increase
drinking water supply for 75% of the state's pollutant loadings in runoff.
population.
As an undeveloped area is converted to urban land
use,natural cover is removed,many areas are paved
over, and natural channels are modified to remove
... the amount of pollution from any runoff faster. This creates more runoff while
one spot is usually so small that it reducing the opportunity for natural treatment.
Whenever it rains or snows,runoff from urban areas
would be insignificant if it were the
washes pollutants off the land and into storm sewers
only source. But when all these small or other drainage areas. Urban runoff may contain
amounts are combined, they can salt,heavy metals and organic chemicals from streets
cause big water quality problems. and parking lots; sediment from construction sites;
and fertilizer,pet wastes,leaves and grass clippings
from residential areas.
In the past,efforts to improve Minnesota's water
have concentrated on controlling pollution from This handbook is designed to help people become
point sources—municipal or industrial facilities aware of urban nonpoint pollution problems and to
discharging to state waters. We have made good provide detailed information about management
progress in controlling pollution in recent years, practices to help prevent and control it The first
largely through the construction of new wastewater chapter of the handbook describes the major
treatment facilities for cities and industries. But nonpoint source pollutants found in urban areas, and
Minnesota's lakes, streams and ground water their effects on water quality. Chapter 1 also
continue to be degraded by pollutants that are carried provides a brief explanation of the hydrologic
in runoff or infiltration from land areas. These forms changes that occur with urbanization. Chapter 2 is a
of pollution are called nonpoint source pollution. discussion of urban runoff characteristics.
Nonpoint source pollution has become a serious Chapter 3 is designed to help the reader select
problem, affecting many of Minnesota's lakes and appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to
rivers. The figures opposite compare the number of control urban nonpoint source pollutants. It provides
vi 10/89
a discussion of how careful site planning of new source pollution. The practices are divided into three
developments can help prevent pollution, and how areas: storm water management practices,
storm water management strategies can be used to housekeeping practices and sediment and erosion
trap urban pollutants. This chapter also describes a control practices. Each practice contains
process for selecting best management practices to information about target pollutants, effectiveness and
correct existing water quality problems. Many of planning considerations. Design recommendations
these principles and practices can also be used to are provided for the practices whenever possible.
control urban point source pollution. Chapter 7 explains methods of determining runoff
• and peak discharge and provides a simple procedure
• Chapters 4, 5 and 6 contain the best management for flood routing.
practices that can be used to control urban nonpoint
We can all help keep our lakes, streams and ground
water clean by understanding how urban activities
can cause pollution, and by selecting appropriate best
management practices. Used wisely,these practices
can help protect Minnesota's waters for future
generations.
783 miles
2,107 miles
Affected by:
. point sources
•
�/. noncoint sources •
Waters not supporting designated uses
(River miles in Minnesota)
64,396 acres
172,449 acres
Affected by:
■ point sourcesEl
nonooint sources
Waters not supporting designated uses
(Lake acres in Minnesota)
10/89 vii
/!.3
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Lindberg S. Ekola, City Planner
Dave Hutton, Public Works Director
RE: Adoption of Resolution No. 3566
Coordination of Local Governmental Units
City of Shakopee and the Lower Minnesota
River Watershed District
INTRODUCTION:
The Board of Managers of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District (LMRWD) want to develop an appropriate working
relationship with the City of Shakopee with respect to the Wetland
Conservation Act of 1991.
BACKGROUND:
Attached is the letter from Mr. Bruce Malkerson, attorney for the
watershed district. The district had initially adopted the local
governmental unit (LGU) designation when the Wetland Conservation
Act was put into effect at the beginning of this year. Since that
time many cities like the City of Shakopee have also taken on the
LGU designation.
The LMRWD covers the northern portion of Shakopee. A map of the
watershed organization in Scott County has also been attached.
DISCUSSION:
As described in the letter the LMRWD is wanting to build a working
relationship with each city. The cities would continue to take the
role as LGU and the LMRWD would serve as the review agency. The
LMRWD is in agreement with this concept, provided that the
appropriate development proposals are forwarded to the LMRWD
Engineer with sufficient lead time for review. City staff has made
it a practice in the past to forward all development proposals in
the LMRWD to the LMRWD Engineer. Staff will continue with the
practice and look for additional ways to build communications with
LMRWD. Attached is a copy of the proposed resolution which would
describe the relationship between the City and LMRWD.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt the resolution which would establish the working
relationship between the City and LMRWD for those areas of the
City which are in the District.
2 . Do not adopt the resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative 1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3566, a resolution which adopts a working
relationship for the Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 between the
City of Shakopee and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District,
and move its adoption.
POPHAM HAIK
SCH NOB RICH & KAU FMAN. LTD
U.S.OFFICES: SUITE 3300 INTERNATIONAL OFFICES:
•
2 22 SOUTH NINTH STREET LEIPZIG,GERMANY
DENVER,COLORADO -
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TEL 01137-41-4918471
TEL 303-693-1200 TEL 612-333-4800
MIAMI, FLORIDA FAX 612-334-8888 STUTTGART.GERMANY
TEL 01149-711-296303
TEL 303.530-0050
BRUCE D.MALKERSON, ESQ.
VVASMINGTON, D.C.
DIRECT DIAL(612)334-2695
TEL 202.962.8700
March 19, 1992
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379-1376
Re: Wetland Conservation Act of 1991
Designation of Local Governmental Unit (LGU)
Dear Sir/Madam:
The Board of Managers of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District have received requests from various cities within the
District requesting that they be designated as LGU. When we
discussed this matter with the City of Bloomington they agreed that
it would be appropriate to develop a working relationship with the
Watershed District relating to the Interim Guidelines to make sure
that we can assist each other where possible.
In that connection, enclosed is a copy of our understanding
with the City of Bloomington. The District would appreciate being
able to work out the same sort of relationship with the City of
Shakopee. Please call the undersigned to discuss this matter .
Very truly yours,
2;,-( L_A_,_ V/ - 1
Bruce D. Malkerson
Attorney for the District
312BDM/44 : sam
Enclosure
cc: Board of Managers
Mr . Larry Samstad
WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT OF 1991 INTERIM PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION
The Managers discussed the request of the State Board of
Water and Soil Resources regarding administration of the interim
program between January 1 , 1992 through July 1, 1993 . The staff
reported that the only inquiry has been from the City of Bloomington.
Following discussion it was moved by and
seconded by that :
BE IT RESOLVED that the Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District Board of Managers requests the Minnesota Board of Water and
Soil Resources to designate the District as the local governmental
unit responsible for administering the Wetland Conservation Act of
1991 except in the case of the City of Bloomington. In the case of
the City of Bloomington, the District is willing not to request to
be the local governmental unit based upon the representation by and
the agreement with the City of Bloomington that the City will
present any such applications to the District with sufficient lead
time so the District ' s engineer can review the application and the
Managers of the District will have an opportunity to review the
application and submit its recommendations to the City of
Bloomington (the "LGU" ) before any final action is taken on the
application by the LGU or the LGU' s technical evaluation panel .
Upon vote, the motion carried.
285BDM
. <
§ 5
I i 1 I
-• 1 oft 1 2 i". ‘'.
9419 '. ilkma, I il
i ..""•,.
. . . 03004
':"-:i• 5
_;4 laillra7.
--" ...--
'
n )
\ 11111 loot L
, 1 :r.;:t1
0
\ l t
=
,-
• r
1— 1•
11 .
. • .....„,..-- 1 • s — , •-1
a-'44L . _J"1->•-•.!1;-'%1".V.- if i)"-'sJrI - . •— •._
- -.••.--,•• 1.4•17,...e:-,:• --, ) .1 .4,411 .. fr—T--..• 2 , — •;7* , 21 ,..,..
i ,yl."- r tk..i. .,,-1-.....;%,' ' -..1 ',. ..; • Ci.• F.' I .. .I. 7. .' • CC * ^ . 9
• ' e % 1
4 0009
... --
; ' --- ' .e.i, ---•— ., ;' '-",.61 1- 1% 151 • - . 1 zs. CT,
-••••1•1••• ••• •t 1.-- . I
• ...- • - :,..." ., ,.. I U I I
‘ i 1•,;' .-.;:ij•'` ,,. -• , ' iglik - .Ail541i-N .1 s.. tf.
..' 0.-+ , .r4* .. i
.-N 1,* --- , .. .i. • ..1- -c' or
-0. , •-
LI 1; ......*:::------ ,- ..., -s-
a . / .
t i 'C./
..16
•
.,-- , . • r-i . ....?-,• -:
••• - -- - ,.3.49•"1 .
i
I
. 3004
\ :le_i• _s.--
co , It. 31 I a. b9:•••,*.-'2411.:lik."' •••;:l.,el ••— 14
40
. i -•.1,11,I. r. a — ....;.".tcf......i. .,...- ... • . iq .X../\.-."...,
' 1 . ri......-•...‘1 if: . .'L-# '''9144 • '....• i 'b
. -
I 9 C.Nr.'4' ;'"7:1*-•4 A, a ir - a . 7 a. b.-.
1 i a . - ' Or . 3:.'.7,•--. ,'.-,.... 's-..ii-- - • _ 11 i—i‘..„...) , I
• ti rw- i-iiihms--.:-, -,2_--.-• - - 0 ,_:__ , • '.. -
L 1 ' i-ti 01 _.A.v.,-;',.." ' . •-• t
• as 'I'm161„.,,__ ,,,,,..... " ..At • %tt
_ •L. z 0 .-,..:-,k,„„,J. .---fli.... or 1 -. ,..-•,.. z , • -:-..., . _ ,..... —
-, 1.•-•":"-igr'wxt'\It .
;- ' -i4ithi. .____ • ,„ .. .... .... 0032 i
Z 0 e I ?•••i
• 1 ' • '
-.,
ft o--!. I ;?e ca Ls•.
_
4 t 1 3):
. !..,.. -
. _ • '' -i ••.•-.4_ -..-..,oco'• •I
r-N ' • • ..sv3
1— -- 117n:'`''. — • -..LU ' "1/4116911 -i 1-' .• 0 < 1 -'.
S3m
,F --- --.•• — /-.45 -er-
I e • -W-, ;I 7 E .,r
.
ei
__.„... • 4 ••
• Y “1. •
_____
: t.'Nr .•.. I%Zt .. 1 . •
i i" . •
.:Z.„ ' MIL- •••44\ .1 i agramilli
• - J CO
• - '':1•• -41' 1 ‘I) . i . . ''):. ; 'PI
L.... -
1 • 1 • • •
si - - 4 . A ...-
i . - e • go le,
• •
- .... .•
'- C , ZNv .-..i
.
.
. • ell.--W-: ., _ ........ 0:0C •
—
Et i ••c'''''''' '- r '&41;4. ' - i 4 : S.
1 4' Or '1 ar
i --..''.4k .I.. ,.„-,-:
ii ;t - \-. it 1. '•-• . . •' • i •i .1 • %roc-1:- x°'
. , 1 't• „ i
,
...„
tu v ,
It( 11 •
•••••. 4° ..:.- cr
- .
-
—•
li1-• •
4 . I
44111k•
g Cl) .
1. (1) I
.‘•. .. •5
9 . 111 ‘ •k ,irI. ....•
F- Z 5• •
•
.
.... L. 0,..
.
..... OF ' • . .
. .
< z IN
..*, "1
S ;
. .... 2 . . it 0306 -,
Fill 2 • 't Apar iiii
:...
z ..,
.
•• - •
O• 4 i 1 t4. 1, scoot
In 0 I 0 1 di 0 Z
VS Z= 0
O 0 ...r.•fraNI•
tu .4
1- a; -..,...i..-i : •
0'
1.... -N.-_-:"
i.§1.,..,..
_ ,.OCOCL
(1) /.. . t‘i
CO'
•
US ---000P.
I
. . :
1 .' 0
.11 0 2
ii '.,. 5
.. :
Z —
- . , -5°- ,-, - - 000•L
N ........_.,
Ft !
. - • , • . 000.,
• :
C•01 '
• %••...• 4r-1-"• -.
5 • ..s ‘..„
.....J( ,
U. ‘'....
- _
RESOLUTION NO. 3566
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A POLICY WHICH ESTABLISHES A
WORKING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND THE
LOWER MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT
FOR THE WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT OF 1991
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota adopted the Wetland
Conservation Act which requires the establishment of a Local
Governmental Unit (LGU) to administer the new wetland regulations;
and
WHEREAS, on February 4 , 1992 , the Shakopee City Council
adopted a motion in which the City assumed the responsibility for
administering the Wetlands Conservation Act of 1991 as the LGU; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Managers for the Lower Minnesota River
Watershed District has passed a motion in which the Board seeks to
assume responsibility as the LGU; and
WHEREAS, the City and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District have agreed that the City of Shakopee should serve as the
LGU, with the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District serving as
a review agency.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the
City of Shakopee, Minnesota hereby adopts a policy whereby the City
of Shakopee will present all appropriate applications to the Lower
Minnesota River Watershed District, and attempt to provide
sufficient lead time for the Lower Minnesota River Watershed
District' s Engineer to review the applications and for the Board of
Managers of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed District to make
recommendations to the City, before any final action is taken on
the application by the City as LGU.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the lCity
of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form.
City Attorney
I3k
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Fleet Size Recommendation
DATE: March 30, 1992
Introduction
Attached are fleet size recommendations that Council directed be prepared.
Background
One of the Management Analyst's recommendations was to set a maximum fleet
size and not exceed that size. The Committee of the Whole forwarded that
recommendation to the Council. Council directed staff to prepare recommendations
for the minimum and optimum and recommended fleet size.
Attached are recommendations from staff. These are organized by department
and show the current assignment by type of vehicle and recommended minimum and
optimum sizes. The city hall pooled car is included in Comunity Services
department for simplicity. Council has already directed that the car assigned
to recreation be sold.
Alternatives
1. Status Quo.
2. Reduce Public Works by 2 vehicles and 1 trailer and Community Services by 2
vehicles.
3. Other changes.
Recommendation
Discuss and give staff direction.
Action
Discuss and give staff direction.
Fleet Size Recommendation
March 12, 1992
Police Department
Currently;
7 Marked cars (including 4x4 Suburban)
5 unmarked cars
7 marked units assigned among 12 patrol officers; 5 unmarked units
assigned to 5 non-patrol officers.
Minimum; current assignment of 12 vehicles is judged to be the most
economical over the long run. The loss of one or two vehicles would
probably not affect the service delivery but would probably
adversely impact cost.
Optimum; current assignment of 12 vehicles. Additional vehicles would
probably not increase service levels until such time a an increase
of staff or implementation of an intern program occurs.
Recommended; 12 - Current assignment.
Community Services
Currently;
5 Vehicles
2 units assigned to Building Division (1 seasonal) , 1 to Recreation
Division, 1 to custodial staff and 1 City Hall pooled car.
Minimum; 2 - 1 unit for Building Official and 1 pooled car, all others
mileage reimbursement.
Optimum; 5 - Current assignment.
Recommended; 3 - 1 for Building Official, 1 for custodial staff, 1
pooled.
Fire Department
Currently;
5 Heavy Trucks
4 Specialty Trucks
2 Light Trucks
3 Misc vehicles
2 Trailers
5 Heavy Trucks - aerial, 4 pumpers; 4 Specialty trucks - tanker, air
compressor truck, equipment van, rescue truck; 2 light trucks - 4x4
grass rigs; 3 miscellaneous - Chief's car, officers/utility 4x4 (old
grass rig) and 1934 parade unit; 2 Trailers (boat and Hovercraft) .
Minimum; 16 - Current assignment
Optimum; 16 - Current assignment
Recommended; 16 - Current assignment
Engineering
Currently;
5 Vehicles
PW Director car, 3 trucks for 3 Engineering Technicians, 1 seasonal
Minimum; 5 - one for each Technician due to the equipment carried, the
surfaces driven on and the number of projects covered by each: one for the
seasonal inspector due to the questionability of being able to attract an
inspector if that person is to supply a vehicle on a vehicle allowance
basis.
Optimum; 5 - Current Assignment
Recommended; 5 - Current Assignment
Public Works
Currently;
7 Dump Trucks
10 Light Trucks/vehicles
5 Specialty Trucks
5 Trailers
7 Dump trucks - 6 first line and 1 standby; 10 light trucks - 2
pickups, 2 1-ton, 1 step van, 1 car, 1 jeep, 3 old C.D pickups; 5
specialty trucks - garbage packer, tanker, sewer jetter, sewer
rodder, sewer television; 5 trailers - sewer inductor, bobcat, large
flatbed, 2 old C.D.
Minimum; 6 - dump trucks with no standby for breakdowns which may result
in some snow plowing delays; 7 - light trucks with no car for general use,
no jeep and one less pickup; 4 specialty trucks - explore feasability of
deleting garbage packer and contract out for that function; 4 trailers
Optimum; 8 - dump trucks including one standby and one tandem for standby
and increased hauling capacity when needed; 10 light trucks/vehicles -
current assignment; 5 - specialty trucks which is current assignment; 5
trailers
Recommended; 7 dump trucks, 8 light vehicles, 5 specialty trucks, 4
trailers. Keep Houser's old pickup and Engineering's
replaced pickup for seasonal PW use and sell 3 old CD
pickups and the 1983 Jeep. Sell one trailer. (Keeping
old tandem dump truck for increased hauling capacity for
a total of 8 dump trucks was recommended by staff but
rejected by Council recently) .
City of Shakopee
Schedule of vehicles
Jan 92
Insurance
Description VIN Dept. Premium Assigned Primarily to
2 1982 Chev S-10 PU + cap, radio 39659 ENGIN 247 Eng. Tech
3 1983 Ford Ranger PU + cap, radio 33076 ENGIN 247 Seasonal
4 1987 Chev Nova 103626 ENGIN 270 PW Director
5 1989 Chev 510 PU 1924 ENGIN 247 Eng. Coord.
6 1991 Chev S10 89495 ENGIN 240 Eng. Tech
7 1934 Ford Fire trk - storage 1870656 Fire 134
8 1962 Ford Fire trk 211077 Fire 494
9 1968 Chev Fire trk 157059 Fire 370
10 1974 Chev 3/47 4x4 + grass pak 6732 Fire 355 Asst. Chief
11 1974 Mack fire trk 1588 Fire 683
12 1975 fiend. Aerial fire trk 7512608 Fire 1,258
13 1976 boat trailer 160179 Fire 102
14 1989 Trailer - Hoovercraft 35989 Fire 102
15 1975 Rend. fire trk 2612625 Fire 743
16 1983 Chev 3/4T 4x4 + grass pak 151763 Fire 350
17 1985 Rend. Fire trk 16384 Fire 1,213
18 1986 Spartan fire rescue 185961 Fire 1,262
19 1988 Mack fire tanker M001298 Fire 948
20 1990 Ford 1T 4x4 + grass pak 7493 Fire 468
21 1986 Ford Ltd Cr.Vic. Cold squad) 169130 Fire 270 Fire Chief
22 1991 Chev Step Van 3501 Fire 488
23 1984 GMC 1/2t PU 514580 INSP. 247 Seasonal/sell
24 1989 Chev S10 PU 3083 INSP. 247 Bldg. Off.
25 1987 Chev Caprice (old squad) 200707 Gvt Bld 270 Custodian
26 1974 Chev step van + equip 317352 Park 257
27 1984 Iveco 1.ST. garbage trk 201194 Park 319
28 1938 GMC 1T PU + Equip 530360 Park 257
29 1979 Homemade trailer 045 Park 102
30 1983 Ford 1T trk 41545 Park 253
31 1988 Pont Grand Am 12962 PLAN 270 City Hall Pooled Car
32 1990 Ford LTD Cr Vic Squad 1764 Police 431
33 1990 Ford LTD Cr Vic Squad 1765 Police 431
34 1990 Ford LTD Cr Vic Squad 1766 Police 431
35 1983 Ply Caravelle 222304 Police 431 Unmarked
36 1988 Subaru 5653 Police 431 Unmarked
38 1987 Chev Caprice 200159 Police 431 Unmarked
39 1987 Chev Caprice (old squad) 200703 Police 431 Unmarked
40 1987 Chev Suburban (squad) 149645 Police 431
41 1989 Ford LTD Cr Vic Squad 76247 Police 431
42 1989 Ford LTD Cr Vic Squad 76248 Police 431
43 1991 Ford LTD CR VIC Squad 72515 Police 431
44 1990 Dodge Dynasty 3364 Police 431 Police Chief
45 1985 Ford LTD 130989 REC. 431 Recreation
46 1952 GMC + sewer jet equip 458 Sewer 314
47 1958 Dodge 3/4 PU + rodder 50075 Sewer 247
48 1974 Intl 1600 step van + TV equip 10235 Sewer 247
49 1983 Jeep CJ5 + equip 51133 Sewer 247
50 1990 Chev 1T 4x4 dump + equip 3858 Sewer 316
51 1984 IME sewer cleaner trailer 16384 Sewer 163
69 1952 Amphibious trailer 1/4T 380359 Street 102
70 1952 Amphibious trailer 1/4T 382368 Street 102
71 1953 Dodge 3/4 PU 90851 Street 247
72 1954 Dodge 3/4 PU 61605 Street 247
73 1954 Dodge 3/4 PU 60686 Street 247
74 1978 Chev dump truck + equip 50985 Street 343
75 1988 GMC 1T PU 4x4 + Equip 533277 Street 257
76 1980 Ford dump trk + equip JA7106 Street 488
77 1982 Ford dump trk + equip VA47413 Street 402
78 1985 Ford dump truck + equip 68473 Street 446
79 1986 GMC TB 700 Flusher 3200737 Street 482
80 1987 Ford dump truck + equip 41924 Street 468
81 1990 Felling Trailer 72086 Street 319
82 1985 Ford LTD 175662 Street 270 PW staff
83 1989 Ford dump truck + equip 9287 Street 468
1991 IHC Dump truck + equip 390657 Street
I
i. n n•1
I.• :',..:.-a. _ - --•- 1-:::-:_:.1 SIZE . Td: :. HAI_U - .._ :IRE DET.: .
TI'._ SHA. -- YIRE D_ T . :. l . E T`S _.I:1_ THE - L E--1 1 w _ I II. :. ”:EIS
J a .i
DEPATNENT
7 tTHE
SAM7 .
1... 7 107 ! PIC IS F'--- BY THE .\ S '. ;H `r*' A:'D ' L -3
!e T 'S _ `
SP .D _`..S E'ILR T \CY '. _:i r__ :,'I_:: _ Wi: !.:; ..--f O
B FC' R [ E i.-iv' :O MOVE � % O 5 _O?_:S . I:. E
BAD FOR a��.1L ._�R i:...l _ Z.. LARGE 5:.,,
LAST TW) SNOWS STORMS , IT WAS USED TO ASSIST THE PARAMEDICS IN
GETTING TO PATIENTS THAT NEEDED EMERGENCY TREATMENT.
THE CHIEFS SQUAD IS N ,EDED TO GET TO Ti-F SCENT.-_ AS QUICKLY AND
SAFELY AS POSSIBLE TO ANALYZE THE FIRE SCENE, SO THAT -HE
CHIEF CAN ALERT THE REST OF THE DEPARTMENT TO WHAT IS NEEDED
OR TN CAS: OF FALSE ALARMS TO CANCEL THEM AS SOO AS
POSSIBLE .
- THE } E a`JY DUTY Fu: PFR r S USED AS AN ATTACH PUN_:ER . TEE SECOND
PUMPER IS USED '::"O DRINC MEN TO THE SCENE AND ALSO USED AS
BACKUP PUMPER IN CASE ANOTHER PUMPER IS NEEDED OR IN CASE OF
A MALFtNCTION OF THE FIRST.
SHAKOPEE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Department Memo
To: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
From: Frank Ries, Fire Chief
Date: February 10, 1992
Subject: Fleet Size
As per your memo date 2/5/92 the following is a description of each
unit by the record number on your memo.
Record #
7 1934 Ford Fire Truck
Uses:
Parade Truck
Historical Item
Goes to:
Fire Department Functions (i.e Derby Days, Home
Coming. )
8 Unit 9530, 1000 GPM 2-man pumper with 750 gallon water tank.
Uses: Grass fire response - has large water tank and is
maneuverable
Uses: Brush Fire Fighting
Pumper
Goes to:
Structure Fires and Grass fires
All calls
9 Unit Air 1, 1968 Chevrolet Air Compressor Truck
Uses: Fill Self Contained Breathing Apparatus on the
scene
Uses:
Supplies compressed breathing air on scene
Goes to:
Structure Fires
Responds upon request by association members
10 Unit 9570, 1974 Chevrolet Utility Pickup Truck
Uses:
Assistant Chiefs Initial Response Vehicle
Materials/Equipment hauling to and from the scene
Remote Scene Access (4 wheel drive) for manpower and
equipment
Winter Storm Chiefs Response Vehicle (4 wheel drive
no water tank)
Goes to:
Responds per request
11 Unit 9521, 1974 Mack, 1250 gpm, 750 gallon, 6-man pumper
Uses:
Supply Pumper
Backup Initial Attack pumper
Backup Rescue Responder (Auto Extrication)
Goes to:
All commercial fires
All calls
12 Unit 9580, 1975 Aerial 85 foot platform, 1250 gpm, 350 gallon,
4-man
Uses:
Ladder Entry
Ladder Rescue
Ventilation
Elevated Water Application
High level & Out-reach Rescue
Backup Pumper
Goes to:
All Structure Fires
Rescues and special problems
13 1976 Boat and Trailer
Uses:
Water Rescue (surface and diving)
Goes to:
Water Rescues
Environmental Spills
14 1989 Hovercraft and Trailer
Uses:
Water and Ice Rescue (Surface and SCUBA)
Goes to:
Water Rescues
Ice rescues
/ m
15 Unit 9520, 1976 Hedrickson, 1250 gp750 gallon, 4-man pumper gpm,
750
Primary Initial Attack Pumper
Goes to:
All Structure Fires
Car Fires
Grass Fires
Rescue/Wash-downs
All Calls
16 Unit 9571, 1983 Chevrolet, 2-man, grass fighting rig
Uses/Goes to:
Grass and Brush Fires
Farm Equipment Fires
Water Rescue - pull boat
Fires at remote locations
17 Unit 9522, 1985 Hendrickson, 1500 gpm, 750 gallon, 7-man pumper
Uses:
Primary Supply Pumper
Alternate Attack Pumper
Goes to:
All Structure Fires
All Car Fires
Heavy Foam application
Rescue/ Wash-downs
All Calls
18 Unit 9510, 1986 Spartan Heavy Rescue
Uses:
Fire and Overhaul Equipment
Rescue/Salvage Equipment
Command Post
Goes to:
All Structure Fires
Car Fires
Rescue/ Wash-downs
Hazardous Material Calls
Medical Calls
Water or ice rescue
All Calls
19 Unit 9560, 1988 Mack, 3000 gallons, 350 gpm, 2-man Tank Truck
Uses:
Water Supply in non hydrated areas
Goes to:
Non-hydrated Structure Fires
Car Fires
Grass Fires
All Calls
20 Unit 9572 , 1990 Ford, 2-man grass fire rig
Uses/ Goes to:
Grass and Brush fires
Farm equipment fires
Water Rescue (pull boat or hovercraft)
Fires at remote locations
21 Unit 9590, 1986 Ford Chiefs Squad
Uses:
Chiefs Initial Response Vehicle (quick size up)
Initial Command Post
Personnel Transport
Goes to:
Every Call
22 Unit 9511, 1991 Chev Heavy Rescue
Uses:
Equipment and manpower transport
Hazardous Material Calls (any industrial fire)
Major Spills
Environmental Hazards
High level rescue
Water Rescue (surface or SCUBA)
Ice Rescue (surface or SCUBA)
Goes to:
Industrial Calls
Water and Ice Rescue Calls
Upon request from command
All Calls are calls where high life or property loss is very
possible, such as the hospital, motels, apartment buildings etc. All
personnel are to respond to this type of call.
Recommendations:
I recommend keeping the fleet size at its current level for 1992 to
maintain the cities class 5 ISO rating and life safety of citizen and
fire fighters. All units are in use and respond based upon the nature
of the call per department procedures.
I recommend considering insuring number 7 (1934 Ford) only in the
summer time as this is when it is used at outdoor fire department
functions (parades, exhibits, etc. ) .
Sincerely,
Frank Ries
Shakopee Fire Chief
MEMO TO: GREGG VOXLAND, FINANCE DIRECTOR
FROM: DAVE HUTTON, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
RE : FLEET SIZE
DATE: FEBRUARY 10 , 1992
In response to your February 5 , 1992 memo regarding fleet size , I
would like to offer the following comments :
Engineering Department
With 3 full time technicians , 1 summer inspector ( 6 months ) and
myself a minimum fleet size of 5 is required at all times . In
the past , when a new inspectors truck is purchased, the old
inspectors truck is cycled down to the summer inspector and the
truck in the worst condition is sold at the auction . I do not
have a problem with maintaining this procedure , until such time
as my staff were to increase.
Park Department
The 5 vehicles listed are all used on a regular basis . The 1974
Chevy step van can be replaced with another 1 ton truck in the
future, since the van is extremely large and takes up a lot of
space . The van carries all our tools for making repairs to park
buildings , pool equipment, pumps, waterslide, etc. A 1 ton truck
with tool box compartments could accomplish the same thing.
The trailer is used for hauling equipment, such as mowers , around
and should be retained. We have several other trailers listed in
the Street Department , but all of the trailers are used in our
operations for such things as the bobcat, paver roller, etc .
Street Department
It is recommended that the 3 military trucks be sold. (Numbers
71 , 72 and 73 on your list) . In addition, there are 3 other
military trucks in our yard that have been cannibalized for parts
and should be sold as a package with the 3 operable trucks .
These 3 active military vehicles are used in the summer by our
summer help to haul equipment around and provide vehicles for
their use . If the 3 were not replaced we would not have enough
vehicles for all of our summer help to use. I would like to
suggest that the 2 light trucks scheduled to be sold (Engineering
and LeRoy' s) be replaced for that purpose. These 2 light trucks
would be suitable for summer employees and are in far better
condition that the military vehicles . Keep in mind, that summer
employees usually do not have their Commercial Drivers License
and therefore cannot drive the larger, dump trucks .
Other comments on the list:
*The 1983 jeep CJ5 ( #49 ) should be replace some day with a
light truck or a cycled down truck.
*The 1952 military truck and jetter ( #46 ) are being replaced
in 1992 .
*The 1978 Chevy dump truck ( #47 ) is being replaced this year
with a new dump truck .
*It is proposed to replace the last military truck ( #47 )
next year when we purchase a new .fetter/rodder to replace
the current rodder . we will then have eliminated all
military vehicles .
*The old bucket or cup machine should be sold.
The City Mechanic also makes the following suggestions regarding
the cars .
*The 1987 Caprice ( #25 ) should be replaced, possible with a
cycled down squad car . This is currently driven by the
custodian.
*The 1985 LTD ( #45 ) should be replaced, possibly with a
cycled down squad car. This car is currently driven by
the Recreation Director.
In the Mechanics opinion, the above 2 vehicles are no longer
mechanically sound and are costing the City more money than they
are worth to keep operating.
Please contact me if you have any questions or wish to discuss
these items .
TO: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Fleet Size
DATE: 02 05 92
In spring of 1990 I did not feel I could justify the number of
replacement patrol vehicles scheduled for purchase by the Police
Department. At that time, previous budgets and existing 5-year
equipment lists indicated that the police department purchased
replacement patrol cars on a schedule of 2 one year, three the
next, two, three, two, etc. A new unmarked administrative car was
also purchased each year.
At that time I implemented a system of vehicle assignments in which
two officers are assigned to a marked patrol car for three years
and detectives were each assigned a vehicle. Now, cars driven by
people who take good care of them are not driven by those who don't
and as a result they last longer than vehicles used by a the entire
group.
This plan reduced the number of replacement patrol vehicles
scheduled for purchase by 2 in 1991 and by 1 every other year
thereafter. The improved condition of some of our used patrol cars
will also reduce the number of unmarked administrative vehicles we
buy. In 1990 no unmarked car was purchased because we took over
the City Administrator's old vehicle and repainted an old patrol
car which was subsequently assigned to a detective. In 1991 we
purchased 1 unmarked car. In 1992 , we intend to fix up an old
patrol car to replace the one we repainted in 1990.
Although we will not complete an entire cycle under this system
until the end of the 1994 model year, it looks like this plan will
save the city money. We will be in a better position to tell for
sure as time passes. Until then, we are probably operating at the
most cost effective level possible with the number of vehicles we
currently have at our disposal.
Two impending plans that could impact this situation involve use of
Community Service Personnel and serving as a learning site for
Mankato State University. Neither of these plans are solid enough
to at this time to be considered when calculating the number of
vehicles needed by the police department.
J2-)
C 'ENT!
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Barry A. Stock, Assistant City Administrator
RE: Clean-Up Day Concession Sales
DATE: April 1, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Several weeks ago, staff received a telephone call from Ms. Barbara
Cordes representing the band boosters. She inquired whether or not
it would be possible for the band boosters to sell coffee and
donuts at this year's community clean up day.
BACKGROUND:
This year's community clean up program has been scheduled for
Saturday May 2 , 1992 . The program generally attracts a large
number of Shakopee residents who often times have to wait in line
for over an hour period. The band boosters would like permission
to sell coffee and donuts to those persons waiting in line.
Section 7. 08 of the Shakopee City Code states that it is unlawful
for any person to offer for sale goods on public property without
first having obtained a written permit from the Council. Staff
would propose to allow the issuance of a permit to the Shakopee
Band Boosters providing that they keep all sales within the
confines of the grounds occupied by the Shakopee Public Utility
Commission building and Public Works building. This would insure
that people are not walking up and down the streets soliciting
sales. This would also serve to keep the band boosters out of the
line of public traffic. Keep in mind that the line that is formed
to access the clean up day gate moves at a snail 's pace. Attached
is a map indicating how traffic will be directed once it access's
the Shakopee Public Utility building property. This year, we are
attempting to stack as many people as possible within the confines
of our property. This will hopefully limit the traffic problem
that generally occurs on 4th Avenue due to the large number of
persons waiting to access the clean up day site.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Issue a permit to the Shakopee Band Boosters for the sale of
coffee and donuts within the confines of the City property
around the utility and public works building.
2 . Do not issue a permit to the Shakopee Band Boosters for the
sale of goods within the area confined around the Utility
Commission building and Public Works building.
3 . Table action pending further information from staff.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to direct the appropriate City officials to issue a permit to
the Shakopee Band Boosters for the sale of coffee and donuts within
the confines of the City property around the utility and public
works building.
I-0
o
'7
CD
n 0
~' a
0 , co .--, --- 'I 1--.• rs- p)
't, 'Co '10 TEL—X 5:0 0 CD- a)
lcIuQ ItX3 `° .�'d a - Co
X io '� � C i Pb
X ..00 a; . CD r O
ooz
X/1,
m C� •-•. ,..3g:
�
o ! �'- m Y ° Q° K Di y C} o
� n � °AE) co CII P �
ca)
to �� fi r. `.<CO e4"
C7 /
i-
0 /
..j
l x X X X
� z%-x)(
c+ .`�. Q
/�� '- (U c r
X
X
/~
\ cri
�a t
O Ti
\ '- \ , . ' ' \ „-1 �,.
O \SHAKOPEE 'PUBLIC\ x n
_ tri
\
UTILITIES z ,.�
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\' X X X X X 0: a
L z X r
9
`cr a
g
as Cl).�
0
0 Ui
p)
a
)1:
n 0
XXX ;<
XXXX — —
4th Ave .
/5
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director(
SUBJECT: Mielke Driveway
DATE: April 1, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Council action is needed to initiate the vacation of the Mielke
driveway.
BACKGROUND:
On October 15, 1991 the City Council held a public hearing to
consider vacating three (3) unnamed driveways or cartways. These
three driveways had been inherited by the City of Shakopee as part
of the Eagle Creek consolidation in the early 1970 ' s. The 3
driveways are commonly referred to as the Mielke, Breeggemann and
Petsch driveways.
At the conclusion of the public hearing the City Council vacated
the Petsch driveway and abandoned (or ceased all maintenance) on
the Breeggemann driveway. The Mielke driveway was retained due to
the fact that vacating it would landlock two parcels, including one
parcel with an existing house on it (Stemmer) . Attachment No. 1 is
the background information on the Mielke driveway that was
presented at the original public hearing.
The Council directed staff to obtain the road easements from all
property owners along the Mielke driveway by March 31, 1992, or the
roadway would be vacated. (Attachment No. 2 is a copy of the City
Council minutes) . Staff has been unable to reach agreement with
the property owners and have been unable to obtain the easements.
Only 1 property owner, namely Stemmer, is willing to sign an
easement. The other property owners Goldberg and Theis (2 parcels)
refuse to sign the easement documents.
Based on that, staff is bringing this item back to Council for
direction. The original motion indicated that the road would be
vacated if no agreement is reached by March 31, 1992 .
The City Attorney has indicated that if the road were vacated, the
Stemmer parcel would become landlocked. Therefore, the City should
not vacate this road.
Staff has suggested that Theis give Stemmer an easement to cross
his land, but Theis has indicated that he would not be willing to
do that.
Based on the discussion to date and the previous Council directive,
staff is seeking additional Council direction and clarification on
this issue.
ALTERNATIVES:
Staff believes the following alternatives should be discussed.
1. Vacate the entire roadway.
This action would landlock the Stemmer parcel and the rear
Theis parcel and therefore is not recommended by the City
Attorney.
2 . Vacate the south half of the driveway only (south of the
Stemmer/Goldberg parcel) .
By retaining the easement from C.R. 42 to the Stemmer parcel
and to the boundary of the Theis parcel, no parcels would be
landlocked by this action.
The only negative situation is the old Mielke property, which
is now owned by the Sioux Community. While this parcel would
not be landlocked because it is contiguous to other Community
property abutting C.R. 21, there is no actual road or driveway
serving this property from C.R. 21. By vacating the south
half of the driveway, a new driveway would need to be
constructed to C.R. 21 to serve the home on the old Mielke
property or a private road easement would need to be obtained
from Theis.
3 . Purchase the necessary road easement.
Since no one is volunteering to dedicate the road easement,
the City could obtain appraisals on the land and purchase the
easement using the condemnation process. The City could then
elect to construct the road to minimum City standards (28 feet
wide pavement) and assess all costs 100% to the abutting
benefitted property owners (including the right-of-way
acquisition costs) .
Based on the low amount of development in this area, this road
would not have a high priority for upgrading, in staff' s
opinion. Without upgrading though, the annual maintenance
costs will continue to be higher on this road than normal.
4 . Do not initiate any vacation but maintain the status quo, as
far as maintenance goes.
5. Do not initiate any vacation, but direct staff to perform
"minimal" maintenance on this road adequate to allow the
residents living on it to use it.
If any portion of this road is to be vacated, the City Attorney has
indicted that another public hearing should be held.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the public response at the last public hearing, staff
feels that there would be substantial opposition to any further
attempts to vacate portions of this road. Frankly, staff does not
have the time or feel it is worth the expense to go through another
public hearing.
If the City Council feels that this road should be maintained and
treated like any other street, then staff recommends initiating the
actual acquisition of the road easement and putting this project on
the 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan for future consideration. Any
acquisition costs would need to be carried by the City until such
time as the project is built and assessed, though.
Another option is to wait until development warrants a road and the
City could then obtain the right-of-way through the platting
process. If that were the desire of the City Council, staff
recommends Alternative No. 5, which is to do nothing and to perform
"minimal maintenance" on this road. If the "minimal maintenance"
is unacceptable to the property owners along this road, they can
reach agreement to dedicate the road and petition for improvements.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Discuss the Mielke driveway issues and direct staff to take the
appropriate action.
DH/pmp
MIELKE
ATTACHMENT NO . 1 ( 4 Pages )
MIELRE DRIVEWAY
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
Physical Condition of Driveway:
This driveway extends south of County Road 42 for
approximately 1/2 mile. (See following map) . It is a dead
end driveway with no cul-de-sac.
The driveway is gravel and is approximately the width of an
alley (16 feet wide) . There is an existing electric line
along this roadway and, if vacated, an easement would need to
be retained for that utility.
Public Use:
This driveway appears to have been constructed to serve two
landlocked parcels, namely the Stemmer and Mielke parcels.
There is a house on each of those parcels that share the
driveway. The driveway also abuts 3 other parcels, namely two
Theis parcels and the Goldberg parcel . The properties
abutting the driveway are essentially agriculture in nature.
There is another parcel located in Prior Lake that is
landlocked just east of the southerly Theis parcel, but has
access to this driveway by virtue of a private easement with
Theis. This parcel is legally landlocked now and vacating
this road will not change that existing condition.
The Mdewakanton Sioux Community recently purchased the Mielke
property and will be using the driveway for certain community
events (i.e. pow wows, etc) . Since the Community owns
adjacent contiguous parcels which abut County Road 82 , this
property (old Mielke) is no longer landlocked, but rather
directly abuts County Road 82 . (See attached map on their
preliminary development proposal) .
Extent of City Maintenance:
The City maintains the entire 0. 5 miles of driveway by plowing
the road after each snowfall, sanding if necessary, grading (3
- 4 times annually) , adding several loads of gravel as needed
and weed mowing (as needed) .
Cost Savings Resulting from Vacation:
Maintenance costs are largely dependent on the severity of
winter. Based on existing salaries, equipment, and material
costs it is estimated that the City maintenance costs range
from $2 , 500 during a light winter to $3 , 500 during heavy
winters. Due to the narrow driveway it is sometime difficult
to plow without damaging the adjacent fields and ditches.
Status of Easements:
The status of any easement for this driveway are somewhat
confusing and difficult to ascertain.
It appears that originally, there was a private easement (50 '
wide) allowing the Mielke parcel to utilize adjacent Theis
parcels to access County Road 42 . It does not appear that a
public easement was ever obtained or recorded. By virtue of
maintaining the driveway, the City has assumed the public
interest but only that portion of the driveway being
maintained (16 ft. wide) .
In 1983 , when the City held the last vacation hearing, the
City Council informed the affected property owners that all
maintenance would cease unless a 50 ft. easement were
dedicated to the City and recorded. (See attached letters)
The subject easement was drafted but never signed or recorded.
The City, though, continued all maintenance.
Based on the property research, it is the City Attorney' s
opinion that there is a public easement (due to maintenance)
which is a minimum of 16 feet wide and maybe 50 feet wide.
The historical records are somewhat ambiguous making a
positive opinion impossible.
Landlocked Parcels:
The Mielke property is no longer landlocked due to a change in
ownership.
The Theis and Goldberg parcels abut County Road 42 and are not
landlocked.
The Stemmer parcel may or may not be landlocked now, but
certainly would be if the public easement were vacated.
Unless a private easement is obtained first, staff does not
believe that this driveway should be vacated. Prescriptive
•
easement rights may exist based on the years the driveway has
been used by Stemmer, but this law does not apply to public
easements, only private.
Other considerations:
The Sioux Community has submitted a preliminary concept plan
to develop their parcel by constructing roads to their
property from County Road 42 and County Road 83 (See attached
map) . Their proposal would be to construct those roads within
their boundaries with their own funds, but petition the City
to construct the connector roads outside of their property.
The Community' s proposal was just submitted to staff recently
and is still under review by the Community. No timetable for
the requested improvement is given.
Due to the fact that this road is substandard and does not
conform to City requirements and only wide enough for one
vehicle, staff does not feel that this road could be used for
major traffic generating events such as a pow wow without
first upgrading the road to minimum City standards. It is
also quite difficult to maintain in its present condition.
The City's existing policy for new road construction is to
assess them 100% to the abutting benefitted properties.
Comprehensive Plan:
This area is zoned R-1 and is essentially agriculture in
nature. It will probably remain rural for some time. The
City's Comprehensive Plan does not identify a future street in
this location, although the aforementioned preliminary
development plan should be considered.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Vacate the road.
2 . Cease all maintenance (abandon) .
3 . Do nothing - Keep maintenance as is.
4 . Upgrade this road to minimum City standards (28 feet of
pavement with 5 ft. shoulders) .
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the legal research done by staff and the preliminary
development proposal submitted, staff recommends No. 3, not
vacating the road.
Staff also recommends Alternative No. 4, but the timing of this
construction should be in conjunction with the proposed Sioux
Community development. Additional right-of-way would be necessary
to construct a City street. Consideration should be given to
placing this improvement on the City's 5 Year Capital Improvement
Program.
__)-- 7 F.:. \ 1 i .
I _____________\
::
1
29.7rf AVE. \ CORD c
t' XE:NAHDT ACRE.
c ADD'N Theis , Goldberg
r
:"..*1
r mmer
\.%L IKi5te
Theis
`� Jeurissen
EERVIE I
(29
Mdewakanto.
:..111.12:221________11
" MIELKE Sioux
Community
G ``
R TON D .
(Mdewakanton
G_ Sioux Community)
\ - __--__
\ .1
H 14 . i
\ \ —
1 .L1
L
/ :
1 ( 1 `4G`�4,0c
r.' -1 EAG `' O�iO t
Li ,A1C V2\ �— 1.
it
ATTACHMENT NO . 2
Official Proceedings of the October 15, 1991
Shakopee City Council Page -3-
MIELKE CARTWAY:
He said current maintenance consists of grading 2-3 times per year
and after a snow fall. He said there are two homes off of this
driveway, one is the Stemmer property the other is the Meilke
property. The Mielke property was recently purchased by the Sioux
Community.
Martin Theis, owner of two of the surrounding parcels, stated that
he would be willing to dedicate 60 feet to the city.
John Clifford, from the Dorsey, Whitney Law Firm representing the
Sioux Community, said this is the only road to the Mielke property
and they would like to keep this road the way it currently is.
Mrs. Goldberg, said she would rather have the City abandon the
road, because she does not need it, she has access to CR-42 . She
does not want to be assessed for it.
Jeanette Stemmer, said if the road is vacated they will definitely
be landlocked as that is the only road out of their property. They
want the city to keep maintaining it.
Rick Carlson, Eden Prairie, he owns the property to the east of the
Theis property and currently has a private easement through the
Theis property to this road. His land would be landlocked if this
piece is vacated.
Harry Weinandt, 1215 16th Circle, last Chairman of the Eagle Creek
Township, said he remembers that it was a township road and
believes that if it was still Eagle Creek Township, that they would
still be maintaining it.
Mayor Laurent recessed the public hearing.
Cncl. Vierling said she thinks it is premature to do any kind of
improvement to the roadway until the issue of the easements has
been settled.
Clay/Vierling moved that City Council continue maintenance of the
Mielke roadway as discussed contingent upon the City and the
property owners involved coming to an agreement and granting the
City an easement for the roadway by March 31, 1992, if at that time
it is not done, the roadway will be vacated. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mayor Laurent reconvened the public hearing at 8 : 15 p.m.
--0— — SCOTT COUNTY ROAD NO. 42
N — — — ,
Nn I
— _ — —
r/ 60' PANENT
- ,�-EASEMENTERM
kr,*,,, D�\ r\ 't
2, .cz: P \\
Dc \� r;
0 \` 11 2
\\
Y,'
I', I I
MARTIN A. & MARY L. THEIS �bIATRICIA R. GOLDBERG
27-929015-0 27-929014-2 I
i' I
I
PETER S. STEMMER & WIFE —L-0—
27-929019-0 I V,A MARTIN A. & MARY L. THEIS
I
I
I27-929015-0
VIA
__m 60' PERMANENT
kr) EASEMENT \`
C_ \\\'' I GI�
\v` ��
112
i (I' 'bc
Dc HU < \\
4 \\ rli
1,11
III — —
S
(flOU ;fl: u
MEMO TO: DENNIS KRAFT, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: DAVE HUTTON, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTO `_.
SUBJECT: LOADER PURCHASE
DATE: APRIL 1, 1992
INTRODUCTION
Staff is requesting authorization to purchase a front end loader.
BACKGROUND
On March 17 , 1992 the City Council authorized the advertisement for
bids for a new front end loader. The Public Works Department has
$88 , 300 budgeted in 1992 for a new loader plus attachments.
On March 31, 1992 bids were publicly opened for the loader. A
total of 5 bids were received and are summarized in Attachment No.
1. Both a direct purchase option and a guaranteed buy back after
5 years option was bid. Three of the bidders bid both options and
the remaining two bid the direct purchase only.
Based on staff' s analysis, Case Power and Equipment is the low
bidder on a Case 621, irregardless of whether or not the direct
purchase or guaranteed buy back option is used. Staff has also
reviewed the Case 621 and finds that it meets the requested bid
specifications exactly, with no deviations.
Our current loader is a Case 621 (1990) also. It is somewhat
advantageous having the same loader because no two loaders operate
the same or have identical controls, for operator safety and
consistency in controls.
The total amount needed for the purchase of the loader is $92 , 928 .
This includes $72 , 366 for the loader, $2500 for the 5 year
maintenance agreement and $18, 062 for the following options:
Wing and Plow - $14 , 176. 00
Adjustable Forks - 2 , 587 . 00
Asphalt Cutter - 1, 299 . 00
Total Options $18 , 062 . 00
The amount budgeted for a new loader plus attachments is as
follows:
Loader - $80, 000 . 00
Tree Clamp - 7 , 000. 00
Asphalt Cutter - 1, 300. 00
Total Budgeted $88 , 300 . 00
The bid amount is $4628 over the budgeted amount. The Public Works
Department also has $3500 in the Capital Equipment Budget for a new
office computer. A computer was purchased at the end of 1991, so
it is not felt that another computer is needed at this time.
Applying this amount towards the loader purchase reduces the excess
amount to $1128 . 00.
Staff has re-evaluated the tree clamp option and has determined
that a tree clamp is not vital due to the amount of trees removed
has gone down substantially from 5 years ago and continues to
decline.
ALTERNATIVES
Since the bid amount exceeds the budgeted amount by $1128 , the
following options are available.
1. Transfer $1128 into the Public Works Capital Equipment Budget
and authorize the entire purchase.
2 . Eliminate one of the attachments, thereby eliminating the need
to transfer any money.
The wing and plow attachments are vital to the department
operations and should not be eliminated.
The adjustable forks are desired because the current Case
loader does not have any forks. The old Fiat loader does have
forks, but they are non-adjustable and quite often do not fit
the items desired for loading.
The asphalt cutter is desired for improving the efficiency of
asphalt repairs, but this option could be postponed for
another year if necessary. it has been delayed for 2 years
already for budgetary deficits.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1, to transfer $1128 into the
Capital Equipment Budget and purchase the entire package. The
funds would be transferred internally from the Public Works
Department supply budget. If that is undesirable, staff recommends
eliminating the asphalt cutter from the package.
Staff also recommends using the Guaranteed Buy Back option rather
that the Direct Purchase option.
ACTION REQUESTED
1. Move to authorize the purchase of a Case 621 Front End Loader
from Case Power and Equipment, Shakopee, Mn for a total
purchase price of $92 , 928 and utilizing the guaranteed
repurchase option after 5 years.
2 . Move to direct staff to prepare a Budgeted Resolution
transferring $1128 from Public Works supplies into the Capital
Equipment Budget.
loader/equip
�, Y O
coO
O O O O
o U N
t m ci
N N 4 ,-co a)
ti § a) O O
EA r r r r
EA
o O O O O
N N ONO r too
O▪ o co N [t r EA
I.- V in O (OD N
ER r EA EA 1-
69
b9 EA
cn O 0 O O 0
Y.• 1 Co O N 0 O
n.
4' O r r. N r
0 c cO N c N N
Efl EA EA EA EA
O 0 0
r (\j .o Ce) (vj .o CD
O Q O p �I to m ON. m
Z m 1- V Ea.'
o z Tr Z
I- LL
Z 0
Lu >
Y o 0 0
o o o
< m M o o o mo
< CO C9 EA EA EA
m 0 0 0 0 0
d 2
cis LO N O N
EA EA EA EA
a
O O O O 0
0 0 0
Ell
co O M O
coO
o O
c U U Cr)vN Q) (D
al N °) o o o oi
co
a EA EA EA EA EA
*.
* Cl)
o" 73 n
o
Cr i >, >,
W
W Ell m Eu w c • v1
EC as Z
as ui CC a C• • rn as
oai — LL c LL
o r E 's N a> _ 2 c= E cd ()
Q. Q N LL _ y •� o L _ Q LL
W Y o .0 a 3 c c a) vi a`) t x a
co CO_ CO a = o al) a o CCS
0 v) 0 U) U) ii 2 m - N 2 0 E4 in u
r- N M 4 6
ice_ air
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works DirectorCali".
SUBJECT: Shakopee Basin WMO
DATE: March 30, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Staff is requesting City Council authorization to pay the City of
Shakopee's portion of the Shakopee Basin WMO's annual budget.
BACKGROUND:
The Shakopee Basin WMO has established a 1992 budget of $2, 500. 00.
This amount will be shared by the 4 entities comprising of the WMO,
per the joint powers agreement, using a formula comprised of 50%
area and 50% valuation. Based on that formula the City of
Shakopee' s share of the budget is $920. 00.
This amount will be funded out of the City's Storm Drainage Utility
Fund.
This is the first year that the WMO established an operating
budget. Past City contributions were solely for the purpose of
establishing the WMO and preparation of the 509 Stormwater
Management Plan. Since the WMO has no budget history, the board
estimated the amount of expenses it was felt would be needed to
operate in 1992 .
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to authorize staff to submit $920. 00 to the Shakopee Basin
Water Management Organization for the City of Shakopee's portion of
the 1992 operating budget, to be funded from the Storm Drainage
Utility Fund.
SHAKOPEE BASIN WATER MANAGMENT ORGANIZATION
STATEMENT
The following assessment to cover the WMO's anticipated expenses
for 1992 . The total amount is $2, 500. 00 to be shared by the four
members, 50% by area and 50% by value as follows:
ACREAGE
IN WMO % IN WMO
JACKSON 3 , 021 23 . 6 x 1, 250 = $ 295. 00
LOUISVILLE 3 , 738 29. 2 x 1, 250 = $ 365. 00
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 1, 200 9 .4 x 1, 250 = $ 117. 50
CITY OF SHAKOPEE 4 , 826 37 . 8 x 1, 250 = $ 472 .50
TOTAL 12 , 785 100. 0 $1, 250. 00
VALUE
IN WMO % OF VALUE
JACKSON 250, 672 22 . 2 x 1, 250 = $ 277. 50
LOUISVILLE 414 , 809 36. 7 x 1, 250 = $ 458.75
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 59 , 920 5. 3 x 1, 250 = $ 66. 25
CITY OF SHAKOPEE 403 , 959 35. 8 x 1, 250 = $ 447 . 50
TOTAL 1, 129, 360 100. 0 $1, 250. 00
TOTAL TO BE PAID BY EACH MEMBER
JACKSON 295 + 277 . 50 = $ 572 . 50
LOUISVILLE 365 + 458 . 75 = $ 823 . 75
CITY OF PRIOR LAKE 117 . 50 + 66. 25 = $ 183 . 75
CITY OF SHAKOPEE 472 . 50 + 447 .50 = $ 920. 00
Please make your check payable to the "SHAKOPEE BASIN WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION" and present it to your representative to
be submitted to WMO @ Treasurer at its April 4 , 1992 meeting.
0 P R ION HERITAGE COMMUNITY 9YJ VJY
� r
AN
1891 1991 2097
AGENDA
SHAKOPEE BASIN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
APRIL 9, 1992
7 : 00 P.M.
JACKSON TOWN HALL
1. Roll Call
2 . Approval of minutes from November 14 , 1991 Meeting
3 . Treasurer's Report
4 . Bills to be paid
5. Election of Officers for 1992
6. Approval of WMO Plan
7 . County Road 78 Improvement Project, and
Pipe Oversizing Cost Proposal
8 . Discussion of Wetland Interim Regulations
9 . Discussion of Lower Minnesota - 40% Reduction
10. Discussion of Adoption of Local Plans
11 . Unscheduled Matters
12 . Adjournment
(Agenda)
n
4629 Dakota St. S.E.. Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372 / Ph. (612) 447.4230 / Fax (612) 4474245
13 "
SENT
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Commissioner Redistricting for Scott County
DATE: March 31, 1992
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND:
On April 14th at 10: 00 a.m. , the Scott County Board will
consider a redistricting plan for Commissioner Districts in Scott
County, Minnesota. The proposed redistricting plan will place all
of the City of Shakopee in one Commissioner District - see
attached. This is an improvement over the plan which has been in
existence for the last ten years. It placed the East one-half of
Precinct 4 in the 4th commissioner district and that part of
Precinct 3 lying South of 11th Avenue in the 2nd commissioner
district.
City Council may wish to go on record in support of the
proposed redistricting plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1] Support proposed redistricting plan
2] Do not support proposed redistricting plan
3] Be silent
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the proposed redistricting plan for Commissioner
Districts in Scott County which plan places all of the City of
Shakopee in the Third Commissioner District.
NOTICE OF COMMISSIONER REDISTRICTING FOR SCOTT COUNTY
Pursuant to the Provisions of Minn. Stat. Sec. 375.025, notice is
given herewith that on April 14, 1992, at 10 o'clock a.m. , the Scott
County Board of Commissioners will meet in the County Board Meeting Room
(Room 109) at the Scott County Courthouse in the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota for the purpose of considering the redistricting plan for
Commissioner Districts in Scott County, Minnesota. The proposed
redistricting plan will be available for review prior to April 14, 1992 in
the Office of the County Administrator, Courthouse 110, Shakopee,
Minnesota 55379. All interested citizens are encourage to attend the
meeting.
Clifford G. McCann
Acting Scott County Administrator
PROPOSED SCOTT COUNTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS
Township & Cities Included: Population
District
1 Townships of Belle Plaine, Blakely, Jackson 11,403
Louisville, Sand Creek, and St. Lawrence.
Cities of Belle Plaine and Jordan
•
2 Townships of Cedar Lake, Southern Portion 11,114
of Credit River (S. of CR 68), Helena,
New Market, and Spring Lake.
Cities of New Prague, Elko and New Market
3 City of Shakopee 11,739
4 City of Prior Lake 11,482
5 Northern Portion of Credit River 12,108
(N. of CR 68) and the City of Savage
TOTAL 57,846
a. it
3 I-
- 3 _
CLI
•
•
0
11110 >
—
CC
... ou
3
II
-
so •
*o
a • z
c0 ...
4-#
C.) . i
- •
0.0 CO & Jt
0 a.
.g •
.,-,.. w ...1
2 .c
c. cp
. ...1
-
•
• I— _
-
0.
.3 .
Q
.7 rs.... h...
itt 0 .
. ... .
a. 1
, ei
,-- gi ' 3 it.
t„„, ..... I- 3
r I-
.
. •
-_---_) E • si 4,....-......,
a ,,..—...- 4 A.
.
•
Q 0 o
• a. ...
0
7
(.) 0
I- la 3
. •
1111111111 : •
. ....L...,
7,
— co
4—• — I
O -
= ,
0 0 0
...1 o
'a
o
10 ' ammidIM
0.
a) s
o I- a
o •
. s
t-
a .
•
o
so
a - A.
Cl-
-.1 -
a.
... • •
_ 1
• •
CO 0
a
3
r-
,..
•
*
ac
•
a:
® SENT
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Commissioner Redistricting for Scott County
DATE: March 31, 1992
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND:
On April 14th at 10: 00 a.m. , the Scott County Board will
consider a redistricting plan for Commissioner Districts in Scott
County, Minnesota. The proposed redistricting plan will place all
of the City of Shakopee in one Commissioner District • see
attached. This is an improvement over the plan which has been in
existence for the last ten years. It placed the East one-half of
Precinct 4 in the 4th commissioner district and that part of
Precinct 3 lying South of 11th Avenue in the 2nd commissioner
district.
City Council may wish to go on record in support of the
proposed redistricting plan.
ALTERNATIVES:
1] Support proposed redistricting plan
2] Do not support proposed redistricting plan
3] Be silent
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve the proposed redistricting plan for Commissioner
Districts in Scott County which plan places all of the City of
Shakopee in the Third Commissioner District.
I
NOTICE OF COKMISSTONER REDISTRICTING FOR SCOTT COUNT`:
Pursuant to the Provisions of Minn. Stat. Sec. 375.025, notice is
give^ :erewi:h that on oriI 14, 1992, at 10 o'clock a.m. , the Scot`_
County Board of Commissioners will meet in the County Board Meeting Roof::
(Room 109) at the Scott County Courthouse in the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota for the purpose of considering the redistricting plan for
Commissioner Districts in Scott County, Minnesota. The proposed
redistricting plan will be available for review prior to April 14, 1992 in
the Office of the Count;. Admin_strat:r, Courthouse 1_0, Shakopee,
Minnesota 30379. All interested citizens are encourage to attend the
meeting.
Clifford G. McCann
Acting Scott County Administrator
PROPOSED SCOTT COUNTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICTS
Township & Cities Included: Population
District
i Townships of Belle Plaine, Blakely, Jackson 11,403
Louisville, Sand Creek, and St. Lawrence.
Cities o= Belie ?Thine and Jordan
2 Townships of Cedar Lake, Southern Portion 11,114
of Credit River (S. of CR 68), Helena,
New Market, and Spring Lake.
Cities of New Prague, Elko and New Market
3 City of Shakopee 11,739
4 City of Prior Lake 11,482
5 Northern Portion of Credit River 12,108
(N. of CR 68) and the City of Savage
TOTAL 57,846
a 1
3
nh-
3
Y
•
> •
Ttgj .
• Q 3
P I = •
> • z
w
m -
a
— C\1
L0 ..le _. 1 _.
...
• • •
w
L O
00 C •
9
L. a •
Z �. c 0
09
Llw
Z p - . •Y a ms's
• •
Y • 11
0 0
U a
•
,,
•
,r. �+ - m I
O
°
U o .
U ...AM
a
Q) I- a
(4 • •
o ° I-
fl. C •
o
at
L I
a. J a a
• •
-
0 - -
•
0 O
a
3
)-
r
•
Y
w
0
i
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
A
i
FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director ,
SUBJECT: Additional Summer Inspector
DATE: March 31, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Staff is requesting City Council authorization to hire one
additional temporary summer inspector.
BACKGROUND:
Due to the increased level of development activity this year, staff
is seeking authorization to hire one additional temporary
engineering inspector for the 1992 construction season.
The Engineering Department is responsible for ensuring that all
street improvements are constructed to City of Shakopee
specifications, both City administered projects and private
development projects. Annually, one summer inspector is hired to
supplement the Engineering Department due to the project workloads.
One additional inspector is normally adequate to handle the
workloads and in fact one summer inspector was budgeted for 1992 .
Staff has observed an increase in construction activity this
spring, especially in the amount of private subdivision work.
Attachment No. 1 is a list of projects, both City and private, that
will need to be inspected this year. For comparison purposes there
were only 4 private subdivisions constructed all of 1991. The
number of City projects is basically the same as last year.
Staff does not feel that the current staff of 3 engineering
technicians and 1 summer inspector will be able to handle this
workload. In addition, the move to the new City Hall will
certainly disrupt normal activities, reduce overall staff
effectiveness and take time away from inspection.
Based on the projected staff workloads, staff is seeking one
additional summer inspector.
All time charged by the summer inspectors is for billable projects,
either private subdivision or special assessment projects. There
is almost no impact on the overall budget by hiring summer
inspectors, due to their time being recovered through assessments
or billing the developers. Historically, the entire Engineering
Department is usually 60 - 70% funded for the entire year, which
includes a lot of non-billable hours during the winter months. The
actual rate billed to developers for summer inspectors is 1.76
times the actual hourly rate, per the current fee schedule.
The current pay plan has a pay range of $10. 00 per hour to $11. 58
per hour for seasonal engineering inspectors. Based on a 6-month
work period and starting the inspector at the first step
($10. 00/Hr. ) , the total cost to the City for an additional
inspector would be $10, 400. 00. The only benefits impacting the
City budget would be 8% for Social Security. There is always the
possibility of unemployment compensation benefits for discharged
employees, also.
If this inspector worked solely on private subdivisions, the City
would receive an income of $18 , 300. 00 for the 6 months employed as
a summer inspector (See Attachment No. 2) . If the inspector worked
on assessable projects, this amount would be reduced as the maximum
amount charged on assessment projects is 100% of the inspector' s
salary (or as low as 25% assessed if inspecting reconstruction
projects) .
Administratively, staff will be able to control the projects the
additional inspector works on in order to maximize the income
received by the City for his services while minimizing the impact
on the General Fund Budget.
ALTERNATIVES:
Based on the amount of construction activity anticipated for this
summer, staff feels that there are 3 viable alternatives:
1. Hire an additional engineering inspector.
2 . Utilize the City's consultants to provide any additional
inspectors.
3 . Allow private developers to hire their own inspectors.
Alternative No. 1 was discussed previously in this memo.
Alternative No. 2 would increase developers costs. Consultants
charge anywhere from $35. 00 to $60. 00 per hour for technicians, as
compared to the City' s cost of $20. 00 to $36. 00 per hour.
Alternative No. 3 would be unacceptable to staff due to the loss of
control on enforcement of the City specifications.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to direct staff to prepare a Budget Resolution authorizing the
addition of one additional summer engineering inspector and
authorizing the advertisement and hiring of the additional
inspector.
.ATTACHMENT NO . 1
1992 CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
City Contracts
1. 2nd Avenue (Finish)
2 . Tahpah Park Watermain (Finish)
3 . Tahpah Park Sprinklers (Finish)
4 . 1991 Sidewalk Replacement Project
5. 1992 Sidewalk Replacement Project
6. JEJ Parking Lot (Finish)
7 . 12th Avenue Sewer and Water (Industrial Park)
8 . Swimming Pool Improvements
9. 1992 Pavement Preservation (Cracksealing)
10. Vierling Drive, C.R. 17 to C.R. 79
11. Tennis Court Reconstruction - Lion's Park
12 . Tahpah Park Parking Lot Extension
13 . Apgar Street Reconstruction (Public Hearing 4/7)
14. Muhlenhardt Road (Possible)
15. Alley Reconstruction Downtown
Private Development Contracts
1. Meadows 6th Addition (Finish)
2 . Meadows 7th Addition - New Plat
3 . Minnesota Valley 7th Addition - New Plat
4 . Dominion Hills - New Plat
5. Weinandt Acres 2nd - New Plat
6. Heritage 3rd - New Plat
7 . Eagle Creek 3rd (Finish)
8 . Stonebrooke (Finish)
9. Horizon Heights 4th (Finish)
10. South Parkview 2nd - New Plat
11. Beckrich Estates PUD
12 . Prairie Estates 2nd
13 . Maple Trails Estates
* May have several other plats submitted and approved yet this
year also.
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
Cost Impact on City' s Budget for One Additional Summer Inspector
1. Expenses
Salary = $10. 00 Per Hour x 1, 040 Hours (6 Months)
= $10,400. 00 Total
Benefits
8% Social Security = $832 . 00
Total Expenses = $11,232 .00
(Not Including Unemployment Benefits)
2 . Income
If inspected 100% Private Subdivisions
$10, 400. 00 x 1. 76 = $18, 300. 00
If inspected 50% Private Subdivisions/50% Assessed Projects
$10, 400. 00 x 1.76 x 50% = $ 9, 150. 00
$10. 00/Hr. x 1, 040 Hours x 50% = $ 5, 200. 00
Total = $14,350.00
Total Income = $14,350.00 - $18,300.00
13L
CONSENT
1992 is early in the year and there are no anticipated "budget
versus actual expenditure" problems at this point.
0 * 00 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 r
CO * CO(0 * CO * CO * CO * CO Co * CO * (0 * CO * (0 * tO 0 CD
O * 0 NJ * 0 R. 0
0 * 00 * 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 0 * O * 0 * 0 * 0 * O m N
CO * CO CO * CO * 00 * V * CA Cf * CA * A * r * r * r 0
CO * C...)I.d * r * 0! * NJ * N 1- * CO * V * CO * W * 0 7 C)
M
Z -4
O -<
ir
1 0
0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D
A AA A A A A A A A . A A. m =
0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
I.. r 1- r r r r \ O
CO CO CD Co CO CO CO CO CO CO CO f0 CO 13
NJ NN N NJ NJ N N NJ N NJ NJ N (mn
3
0
I.-r C
- - z
NJ N..N- CO co 0)O rr 1...I-• 1•••I-• -4
I . Aral WW 1•••.I-. WW 4-I- 03 CO CO(D C)C) WW WW 00
UI U11...A (JW a0 Co Co o0 0)0) C)C) I-.4-. NN A A CO CD 00
0 V N.)A. WW NN UI t11 C)0) 00 AA AA 03 CO (9(J 00
0 0(lf N C)CO A A AA AA I-r AA CO CO UI UI a0 co 00
* * * * * * * * * * *
0 0 0 0 C') Co co Cl w > D D D
O mm D D 0 C a D 3 0 3
3 r r- 73 N -< -1 -< C N < m 12•
I CO m m 4
CC z Z MI m G 1-1 CO <
O nDQ. - z 73 73 0 rn
X3 a -I a 00 0 CO 0 -13 -4 C O
0
C 7J A 1-+ 3 f= > 0
-4 0 0 a z c) -i 7:r -1
> z z 03 7( 2 V 00 0 -C m C)C
z m m0 R. -13
-13 73 N N r m
N -< rn 0
-< 0 ol 0 co ►+ C') 7<
M 4-4 N -4 Z rn
0
0 i3 C) C o f
I-1 73
`` N
t:.. 11
N
-4
in
a
A -4-..i
in m in N U) m N U) C) rn 4.1
m mm TO .0 0 C C O C C A .0 -t
Z I-1- C C C -0 z C v -o v C in
✓ m m 4-4 I-1 M ' - m 1.1 'C -o I-1 H 1
N -o -0 -0 'C r D -0 r r -1
" n m m r 3 m
m m 3
00 1 3* I N > N N rn I> n
mm m . 1-I I-t 3
z z z DZ 0 Z 73
-4 -I -I -4 --I C V N
4-4
M
0
z
0
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >
r 1•••4+ r r r r r r- - r - I- C)
I 1 I 1 1 I I I I II I A O
A A.A. A A A A A A A. A
CJ W W NJ NJ N NJ N N N N 1-. NJ C.3 C.3C
CON N CJ G) 4) r r (J 4- ).. N Z
0 1-1- NJ N NJ 0 N NJ 0 0 I I
1 I I I I I 1 I I 1
r WW A. A A r A CO r w w A Z
03 Nr A N A C) N NJ NJ r r A 0
✓ r r r CO r r V v1 a0 r r r
•
I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I
I-. W W A A. A r A 0) r W W A. I--1
Co Nr A N A CON NJ NJ I- r A. <
I- r tii 1.. N r .
0 0 N. V 03 fes .- V w as 0
✓ A r NJ A
0) V r A.
CO ao A 03 CO CD • 0
Co V 0 r
1
CO f
3C NJ t
1
in -
N D
* * * * * * * * * * N G)
* * * * * * * * * * > m
* * * * * * * * * * G)
I 1 1
1 1 rn
I 1 1 I 1 A 0
n C) n X X n z z X 7C
0
70 7: N N N N N s-
N N N 0 N 0 N
0 CO CO It CO * CO * CO s CO Nr (OO * 0 * O * 0 0 0 * 0 0 * (13
NN * N * NN * NJ * N * N * NJ CO * CO* fo(O(O * CO CO )4 C) (0
$
W W * (O N. u>- ss. W * r * r * r * I.- * rrr * 0•••••0-. * = ID
0303 * r * (0(O N. 0 * 33 * N * N * A 00 N NJ N * NN * X N
C)
M
(t Z -1
t 0 -<
0
00 O0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 00 D
A A A A A A AAA A A
\\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \\\ H N
00 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 000 00 m A
\\ \ •" N-N-1-- r r
CO CO CO m(\0 GOO GO GOO \ \ \\\ \\ 0
NN NJ NN N NJ N N N NNN CD CO CO CO CD NN m
m
A
3
r 0
-
OW 1-.1-. WW NN C
I . r V V N 2
NN V1 CO CO A r I-.t•-• VV 0)O I...I.. WW W N1
1-.C11 UI CO 0 N u1 0003 NN Of Of 0)cW NJ r
• • V1 Vi W W UI A A NJ r VI
CO 00) 00 00N V7 VI CO CO NN VI VI 00 W00f V r N.1
CO 0
00 U'U' 00 00 000000 rOOW 0
* * * * * * * * * *
rr 00 0 0 0 Cti C�4
CCZ Z 0 ii- 0 m v 0 CCC 00(1(1 < OA2 < MOOCCO n M M• • -4 OW m
-I-1H
-4-1 a rnm -c z -c a =_= mm m
G)0 Re Hm D
CIN Z Z 0m I-1 C 0 0 00 00 Z
-1--1 H mm 0 000 '1313 p
ZZ Z 7C 7C = I-I N -1 XXX '13 13 - .y
A 73 0 A
00 OO -4 (n D 0 =
H M
DD Z CO 00 XHH COD A n zz -< at<
0 r oo
= w m
f,: : V1 (
O
I-(
(I
--1
m
a
13-o -i 7-4 ao v m 0- N N N H73 73
73 073 73 r a 0 0 a73C
00 < m< 0m 0 Z I-1 ICI MD-0 vv m
m m -1 z<1- vv I
NCI r NI- N I SI —irn1-1 rr
«73 7J Re VI Re zi I-s D D ReRe N Cn Cl)In RI m y
C) < Z V H H SI
C OC COI 2 CO H C Z Z CCI X)
C 0 C CO -I -I W C 1-4
CO I-4/1 CO -0
N NCI I-1 H
_C -4 1 Z
Z
w0 0 00 r0 0 000 00 D
1...1.4. I.. 0 0
1 1 1 0-•1* VI r r I- r N..1-.1.... rr A
AA A AA A IA A A AAA AA 0
WW W WW W WWN NN C
/....I-• W Cow r W VI W W U1Wr rr
00 0 00 0 0 0 N NJ 000 00 1
I I 1 11
VIA r 0"./. r (4 (O I 1 I I 1 I I
Car NJ V V W W W rrr Ar
1.71 I-. r 0-.1.-.. I-- r r r r WWr rV Z
I I I I 1 I I fI r II rrr r I• 0
A A r r I.- I-. W CO I I f f I 1 1
i--I-. NJ V V CO 1.- I,- 1W+ i-. rrr Ar Z
W W r r V
N NJ NJ W G
V A 0 A
0 (0 w
0 W V N !k 0
CJIV A
CO N I
• 0
O r
{ I
CO
* (
N
I
* *
m -0
* * * X. * * Cl) D
* * * * * * * * * (I O
* * * * * * * X. * * D m
7C C) 0 0 0 C) C) C) C) C) m
Cl) CI N Cn N (I (I (I (I N NJ
O * 0 * 0 * 00 * 0 * O * 0 0 * 0 * 0 * 0 * r
CO * CD * CO * CO Co * CO * Co * (D Co * Co * (0 )4 Co * C) CD
N * N * N * NN * N * N * N N) * N * N * NJ * Z CO
C..) * G,) * 4) * W C.) * U) * N * NJ N * N * N * N * m N
U1 * A * 4) * W 4) * r * CD * Co CD * 00 * V * V * C)
CO * CO * V * 1-r r * V * CO * r 0 * C.) * U1 * 4) * 7 C)
w
2 -i
O
`
t''
0 0 S ..
0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >
A A A "A A A A 0. A A A A -4 _
O O O 00 O O O O O O O
r r r rr r I- r r r r 1- X
� �� "S ' - s, 0
cD CO CD c0 CO CD CO CO CO CO CO CO m
N N N NN N N N N N.) NJ N m
D
3
0
N N r C
Z
NN V V NN NN I-.I-• W W 0000 4) -4
1.-•1- CO 00 0000 0)U1 0000 CO CO AA WW U1 01 NN WW V
00 00 U1U1 AC)V VV VV cava 00 1-r i-•I-• VV 0)
0000 NN CO CO Woo CA 00 00 411 CA 00 00 CA CD W4) V
00 AA AA 00000 0000 00 00 00 00 00 00 A
* * * * * * * * * * * *
I Xi I XI I r r r r -1 0
1.1 0 1-4 H t-1 > 0 m m D m m
0 CO Z ZZ A C) 2 > C 2
C m Z z z O m N O 03 73 2
m m C > m C m -< C <
N —4 0 ()C) m 1-4 z m Z N m
30 m CO 73 7� 2
; N 3 z o, 00
t0/) D 0 33 m 0 0 m CO 0 > 03
C r O m C)2 0 1-.r T1 A
Z --r m
D 1-4 M U) 0 CO C )
r N - N > 0
m -1
.03 M 'X/
m m
CO 0
1-4
co)
M
03
N z -4 73 23 rn 0 c) 0 C) a xt 1-1
• = 0 H 00 C 0 0 m 0 0 > m
-n -t r 't1'1 w Tt N 'T) < 3
m
O U) *1 CO N C) V) IN C) N 1- 0
m m I.1 m m 3 G) m 0 F y
CO
m 7373 > 73 CO
< U) « ' < C ' <DZ Cl)N
—I
-I 0 C C- 1-4
XI N —I
1•y M M
Cl) 0
*1 -1 Z
0 0 0 00 0 A.
0 0 CO 0 0 >
r r r rr r r r A r r C)
1 1 1 1..1 1 1 , I 1 1 1 C)
A A A AA A tV A A N A A 0
N C.) W 4)4) N W W C.) C.) W W C
r r V N.1-• W 0 r CO 0 r W Z
U1 0 0 0 0 N NJ 0 r N 0 0 --1
I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I
A C.) 0) Cl)r A 0 0) A 0 4) r Z
N 0) N I--NJ A 0 A r 0 43 N 0
✓ r 00 1-r r 0 r r 0 r r
1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 I
A C.) 0) 43 1-- A 0 CO A 0 W I- H
N r N i•-•1....) A 0 A r 0 43 N 2
N NN c0 I-. Co
U1 NFV 1V 0 N.)
CO W 43 4) N CD 0 00
✓ V v 0o CO co
N...i-- CO -0 1
VV 0
0 r
1
( CO
it N
, I
Ill v
N >
* * * * * * * * * * N C)
* * * * * * * * * * > f11
* * * * * * * * * vs G)
t I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1n m
A C) A C) A C) CI 0 0 0
7 7 7 7 X 7 N CO N Cl) 4)
Cl) N CO Cl) Cl) Cl)
O * 0 * 0 * 0000 * 0 * 00 * 0 0 0 * 00 * 00 * r
CD * CO * CO NNNN ** CO * CO CO * (0 CO CO * CO CO * CO CO * C) CO
N * N
A * A * A * AAAA * A ** NN * N N N * NN * NN * _ Co
CO * (T1 * U) * WWWW * N * 1-.0.. * W W W It WW * WW * m N
I••. * V * U) * NNNN * CO * NN * 0) U) A * 00 * WW * X A
1-4
Z -4
• �,
0 -.0
0 (
0 0 0 0000 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 D
A A A AAAA A AA A A A AA AA -I C/)
\ \ \ \\\\
\ \\ \ \ \ \\ \\ m x
0 0
r r O 0000 0 00 0 0 0 00 00 D
r r r"r rr
\ \ \ COCO
\\\\ \ \\ 0
CO CO CO CO tOtD CD CO COW CO CO CO \\ \\
N N N N N N N N W W O W
1 NN N N N NN NN R1 m
M
>
3
0
C
I-I-. 0) NN 0,-.A NN 1-.1.. cWW -IZ
00 WW WNID CD rr (DNO) WW cc 00 4-001.. CDO)W
N MM AA NJCO CO CO U1 AA I-AV NN VV 00 Nr0 ANN
W AA 00 00000 WW 000 c)0) NN AA 000 A0A
0 AA 00 00000 0000 -4 CD CO CO VV VV 000 000
* * * * * * * * * *
0D m M`'M. D 00 Z N z ZZ 33
• S 0 D 0000 77 WO m m -i << Z Z
N 0 C) DDDD 0 3; C) m i 00 <
N m rrrr Q*Q* --I -� zz m
0 z3. 3 rrrr , < rr 3.D 0
0000 D DD \ mm <•< 0
Z 0 D ..70. N NN
x E U)U)CNU) N N0N0 Z 7<7< N-fl A C)
. D
0 \ 0 C)C) x 7,-0 m
Z 70 N I.•I 1••C 3 mm C)
00) 0 0
0 r A
is . N m
N Ca
r
U)
-i
m
70
0 N N 0000
) ,, C C
v
0 0 .0
II .rc cCCCc 00 < . n 0v m0 v v vvv-o 00 00 0 -o - ,„„ , rr N p 3 rwz Cn ,3 M H FHFM 7D m m mmmm m* w r 00 Dn mMN N NN00 /) .. m mC) NZ 0 UU ) .7 z C)- z m - - 78 Z 00
,.,
r 'I
-11 �
Cl)
M
M 0
in z
N
0 • 0 0 0000 0 NO 0 0 W coo, 00 D
r r r rrrr r Cnr r r CO AA rr f)
I I I I l t l I I I 1 I I A
A A A AAAA A Jail. A A A NN 1 1
N N N NNNN W WW W W g W W N N AAO
W r r rrrr 04-.1-. V V r Z
Z
0 0 0 0000 0 00 0 0 N NNP 00 -1
I I I I I 1 1I I I I I I II II
O W O AWWr A WA A A 0 00 rW Z
N r A 6-.,-. I-.
N Ni.. N N 0 00 WN 0
00 r r
I I I I I I I r 4-.1.. V V 0 00 Ni...
I I I I I I Il 1 1
CA CO M AWWr A AA A A 0 00 rW 4.1
N r A rNr U) N HH N NJ 0 00 00N Z
A UI <
N WW
N W 1...N
M A r r0 VO
CO v U) AA Orn *
A
-.40 M I
W • 0
0 r
( coL
st N t
3
in v
CII 3*
* * * * * * N C)
* * * * * * * X.
* * * * * * * * * C) m
I I I I I I I.I X. IF m
C) C) C)
0 7S
U) N U) N N 0 O) 0 N 0 N A
00 * 0 * 0 * 00 * 0 * 00000000000 * 0 * 0 0 * r
Co t0 * Co * CO * Co(0 * co * CO(O(0(0(o(0(D(0(o(0(0 * Co * Co CO * C) Co
NN * N * N * NN * N * NNNNNNNNNNN * N * N N * 2 Co
Ut Ut * 0 * Ut * Ut Ut * Ut * 00000000000 * UI * N A * m N
WW * W * N * NN * N * rrrrrrrrrrr * 0 * 0 W * C)
0)0) * W * V * AA * N * NNNNNNNNNNN * Ut * 0 (0 * 7C C)
M
Z -4
0 < r
!. 0 0 t
00 0 0 00 0 00000000000 0 0 0 v
AA A A AA A AAAAAAAAAAA A A A -I N
\\ \ \ \\ \ \\\\\\\\\\\ \ \ \ m =
00 0 0 00 0 00000000000 0 0 0 n
rr r r rr r r r r
\\ \ \ \\ \ \\\\\\\\\\\ \ '� \ 0
Co(0 co co CO(0 (0 CO(0(0(0(0(0(0 CD(0(0(0 Co CO (c; v
NN N N NN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N. m
m
D
3
0
A r NN Z
- 00N00 NNA W0)WA 0000 "4
ON rr rr U11W AA ANNrN00WAr0)Vr 0000 AA NN CO
NO) 00 00 U)(0.. Ut Ut NJOONOr V0NN UiWV WW 00 VV N
NW 00 (O(0 0I-.A 00 WAO0I oCOVNNIA WW 00 00 (ft
0)A 00 0)0) 0000 00 WNw000VAI0rNC) WW 00 00 0
* * * * * * * * *
C)0 Co N NN N NNNNNNNNNNN N N N
MM D C -(-i 2 vvvvvvvvvvv 2 m C)
-41 M v WM D CCCCCCCCCCC D Z 0
« >D m mm X C)C)0C)000C)C)C)C) X 0 - <
< v MM 0 0 Fi
00 mm N 3 ' m CoC ) Z
22 m
1 m MM m m m -1 0
NO 0 M mx1
nn X CM) NN 0 0 I-
n Z
D E
1 2
00 - m 0 00 m
N m C)
mm 0 N C D 7C
mm
C) m C a
m
0 m Ca v 0 = M
N
-4
M
XI
CC -4 m MO M CCCCCCCCCCC v O N M
1-1 m A OC m -•i 1--i 11-t-t 11-t 1 m 0 C -•4
M M a C Cm 0 M M N M M M M M M M M 0 Z 'O m
rr < M M'O '1 rr.....rr rr '*t V v 3
1�
M
'� vM r
N -I1-41-i1-4-i1-1-4 N !o M 0
NM 3 3m m 1-11-11.4I-I1-1MMMMMF-1 m m m
MM 20 D >0 = m m m m m m m m m m m 27 N N N
U)(/) M M < NNNNNNNNNNN < C) C)
N Z Z 2 M
C1 1 0 M
co v
N r -4
M N M
N 0
-4 Z
00 0 0 00 0 00000000000 0 0 I- A
rr r r rr r 11 11
11 I t I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t t I C)
AA A A AA A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 0
WW W N NN W (4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4(4 W W N C
-..1.-4 W W W r r ...4.-.4...4..4... ..1-.4 r (0 r Z
0 0 0 N N 0 O 00000000000 0 0 0 -i
1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
rr r W Ww W C)0C)C)AAWWWrr r r r Z
0000 N r rr r NNNNNN UiNr0000 N V (0 0
Nr r NJ rr W 000)ANVrrrrNr Ut r r
I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1
rr r W WW W 0)0)0)0)AA(WWrr r r r M
0000 N r rr r NNNNNNrN1-.0000 N V CO <
* 0
A
v I
• 0
0 ►'
I
CO
3
m v
N D
* * * * * * * * N 0
* * * * * * * * D m
* * * * * * * * O
I I I 1 I I 1 1 m
C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C)
co co N N co N co co Ut
00 0 0 0 0 * 0 * 0 * 000 * 0 0 * 00 * 000000 r
co CO CO CO CO CO * CO * CO * CO(O CO * (0 CO * CO CO * (0(0(0(0(0 CO C) CO
NN N N N N * N 0 N 0 NNN * N N * NN 0 NNNNNN = CO
O O 0 0 0 Q * CO * CJI 0 000 * CJI UI * V1 N * N 000 0 U1 m N
AA W N I- 0 * CO * N 0 000 * Oo V 0 COCO 0 0)Of1St O)O)CI) 7C C)
• H
z -1
0 <
{ o
if
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 00 000000 > m
41.4* A A A A A A 4.4*.* A A .2.4* A AAAA A -1 N
00 0 0 0 0 \ \ \- \ \ \\ \\\\\\ m m
0 0 0 0 r 0 00 0 00 0 O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 >
NN N N N N N (D moo CO CO CO CO Co(0 CO COo m
N N N N N N NN N N N N N N rn
M
D
3
A A CO N r C
00 WW AW rr I- CA Ni-.1-.C1 -C
NN NN AA vv rr 00 NN NWWUI AA AA AVV 0)N)-I-^0WA
Hr 0)0) AA 00 00 AA 00 0-.AOM 00 00 000 CoNUIrnw0A
00 VV 00 00 AA 00 AA NW000 00 00 ANN coCWVOCCo
00 NN UI U1 00 rr 00 CO CO CAAON 00 00 000 030A0VAC
0 0 * * * 0 * 0 0 * *
00 00 0 02. D. X < C CCC C C NN 000000
ZZZ Z -4-4 HHMHMM
-41 (*I M C) < H N HHH H N DD -1--1-1-1-1
« r M -100 p MM ««-«
M 0 H <
00 < 0 Z H m 000 m m -4-4
mm 0 Z > Z o X 0 mm mmmmmm 000000 Z
0 -4 mmm N N HI-1
V
D D 0O m = m z m
m Z Z z C 3 Z C 0303
SSS S A
m m D ,C_, 3 m -4-4-I Z D
ZZ >>>>>> n
<< X M > r >>> r CO MM 7000000 =
Z C rrr H -4 000000 m
HH vvvvmm C)
rr A > mmm H mmmmrn
rr
0 mm m mmm m mrnmmmm
<<< v m
1-4
fi_
H
M
73
00 to M 0 -'1 C -1 =WM CA v vv 000000 H
00Mc z D N m M1--f- C
vM r 100 M N CC
RI RCI Iii lei 1-1 1-4 Iii.4 m
H M 'I m ►r-I m HQ's I- > NN rrrrrr
rn 3 Q's r H = -I I-
r D HHHHH H
O CDD m m �� - -1���1 0
WC7 y N V) IN m HHHHHH o
N m HZZ O CC 00RIwoRI 0
-C-I CC NNV)NNN C7
00 -4 0 C 0 000 �
00 0 CO
N 0 H
rr r C7 X 00 y
ow N 4-o
3 H M H
om vv 0
-4 Z -i-1 Z
-4
00 0 0 0 0 r 0 moo 0 0 00 r00000 >
rr r r r r A r rrr r r rr 0
I I I 1 1 1 I I t l l I I t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 C)
AA
A N A A A A AAA A A AA AAAAAA 0
CO CO
Co CO r W CO W W NN N W WW WWWWWW C
00 O N N Wwt`) r N (O CO vv-V.1V Z
I I III
I 0 0 O r N O O O 0 r r 000000 -4
Al- ( A W W r I I I I I I I it 1 1 1 1 1 1
ACA A N r N W OAW CO W Ar rCO0)CA Aw Z
rr r CA r r A r ONr r r NN COrNrNN 0
CO r Orr CO r rr
I I1 I I I I I I I II I I I
Ar 0) A W W r W OAW W W Ar rCOO)CRAW H
NO) A N r N A r ONr 6- r NN 0rNrNN Z
rWrr r <
0 000 0
I- OO A A r
0) r00 r # A0
0)
'9 I
N • 0
F 0 r
4CO f
*t N I
Z
M
)F * 0 : * V) D
* * 0 * * N 0
* 0 *
X. * 0 D m
I I I I I Rpt
0 C) 0 0 0 C)
N N Cn N Cn (1) 0)
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 r
00 (O (0 (O (D (D (D W (D (0 CO CO (0 CO CO (O 00 (O (O C) W
NN N N N N N N NJ N N N N NN N N NN N N X CO
Co 00 Co CO CO Co CO Co CO 00 00 CO 00 CO Co CO CO 0000 CO CO m N
NN N r r r r r r r r r r 00 0 0 00 0 0 0
rr 0 CO 00 v O) U) A W N r 0 CO(0 00 V COO) U) A X C)
Z -1
O -<
. _ • 0 (,
00 0 0 0 --0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 >
AA A A A 'A A A A A A A A AA A A AA A A -4 N
\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ m =
00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 >
rr r r r r r r r r r r r rr r r rr r r X
\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \\ \ \ 0
00 (0 (O CO (O (O (D CO (O (D (O CO WW (D (O 00 (O co m
NN N N N N N N N N N N NJ NN N NJ NN N N m
D
3
0
WrN C
- z
C)C) rr AA I-. Ww rr r U)V) VAN -4
rr VV WM 0000 00 00 AA WW NN AA WW 00 00(0C rr rU1 O) NN 0)N
WA 00 WW VV WW 00 VV VV 00 00 UI U) 00 000 U)U UI(n CNC) AA Wr
Nr 00 rr 00 NN 00 WW 0)0) 00 00 00 00 000 00 00 0)00) -'>A 00
VW 00 NN 00 00 00 0V1 00 00 00 00 00 000 00 00 rOr :JW 00
s >F * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
00 E < C -+ Co G) C. z z 3 1 IX I I rr 0 0
-Dm E D = C) Z 0 r( Z m MM m C 1333. > r(
CC r U) 0 0 rn 0 z 3 -1 00 -i z 00 m -4
00 m r 3 -i Z -4 r C') m D D m 4-I m W 0 < <
0 -< H Cn m 0 00 0 0 N 0 0 0 0 m
r Ci) 0 0 •O -C m D a Co I XX r m z
2 0 -4 Z > C m N Cl) -1 C -< o mm m 0
m r 3 m m m -4 C -1 -/ Cn > < r O
m 0 D V < m N 4-1 0 0 -I r MM m D M
M Cl) Cl) C m r-( 0 C) -i >o m u) D> M 7c 0
I•( 1 0 z m Z X m 2 N 3 C)C) Co m =
Z m M D m > Co mm 0 < m
0 M G) D (n 0 (O -< r 2 Z 2 ii C)
= 1-4 m -4 0 N < 00 r X
2. m z m mM N D H r
1 m M
U) D ►. Co z m f'-.
O Z A 0 G) (
i. . 2 p.1
Co
-4
m
m
mm C) m -a u) 0 -4 m 0 0 0 m 00 0 0 N N -4 0 H
mm > A 0 C C XI O C C 0 0 00 > C mm z 0 -4
MM v C Cl) TJ m > C m m Z C ZZ -o m EE > z m
cc H 4-4 -4 0 Cl) < rl Cl) Cl) m 1-1 MM 1.4 Cl) m m < -'1 1
Nu) -a 0 > r m m m -4 mm m
mm > G) rr 2• r 2• 26 2• 2.2• b 2• r 2• m
0 0 r D m Co Cl) 2• D N N Cl) > N O r Co rn Co 2• Co Co
1.41-4 m M C /-I C C 0 I-I 00 m C 70 XI C) 0
NN 0 2 W Co Z W W = Z =_ 0 00 << 0 p=p M
MV C -1 Co C -4 Cl) Co 0 -4 00 C 0 z W O '
.a m . N a . 0r r 10 m . mm Co r -i
mm M N M M (n U)N M 00 M CO M
00 m Co - m m Co 0
-1 -4 -•1 -4 -1 -1 2
000 0 0 v0 r . 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 .4..., r 0 D
rr r r r W r A r r r r r rr r r rr A r A
11 1 { 1 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 I 11 1 I 0)
WW A A A A A A A A A A A AA A A WW A A 0
MM U1 N W N W W N W W W N WW 0 W MM W W C
U)UI r W N r (0 W W (0 co (0 W (0(0 4- (0 U1 U) W (0 Z
00 r N 0 0 r 0 N r r O N 00 r 4- rr O O -i
I I 4 I 1 I 1 1 I I I 1 1 of I 1 ii I 1
00 A A 0) V W r A W r r A WW r r 00 r O) Z
00 A N A W N A A r 0) O) A rr O) W 00 A A 0
00 r C) r r r W r r r r r Nr r r 00 W r •
11 I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 1 Ii 1 I I I 1 1
00 A A 0) V W r A W r r A WW r r 00 r 0 M
00 A N A W N A A r W O) A rr O) W 00 A A Z
A r0)
rn r
W U) N 0
0 W 0 r N. !i 00
U1 CO V W 0)
0 U10 0 'fl I
V r, • 0
0 I-•I
(n /
XC 1\3
l
3
m v
N D
N G)
> m
0
M
V
* 0 O i-
)4. CO CD C) CD
* N N 2 CO
* CO CO m N
* N N C)
* N 7C C)
N
Z -I
0 -G
1 f
0
0 C.
0 0 >
A A -1 V)
\ \ m 2
o 0 >
r t- X
� 0
CO CO 13
N N m
(11
D
I
W N 0
CO 1+ C4 f. p 0) C
co NW 43,-.1 i-.01•-WCD U1 Z
V CO W 0 1--O Cn N 0)V W V1 C)1 W I-. V
v1 OAW Co01—ACO Cr!oo 00 001•-
, 0 OWN8)13.0000)V0 00 A0
A 04:.NI--V0o0300o43 00 00
* *
C) N
0 Tmmm�1'T1TTimm 0 a
-4 CCCCCCCCCC C 0
> Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z -4 <
r 0000000000 m
a z
CO COV V1/1 W Nr 1-,0 0 0
Ar W►-coJ-cnvl p,1 1 0
M A
V-1-4-4-1 1-C-1-I-4 Z 0
0000000000 4-1 I
>>>>>>>>>> -(n1 Cm)
I-r r r r r r r r r A 7
>
-1 A
0 C)
r-1
N
-4
M
A
myCnNC01-02-40 r A tr
CnD-ImNcoAAAm m rn
C)1OZ1CO>>>Z G) - m
=XI A)*1Dr►r Zm > C I
003,3 Z NA r N
Z r r/-1> 1-1> rn 0
0'11330 -I I- -11 m
AC-ram I-I 0 ())
--4>Z A Al T1 r 4-4 C)
Alt-10000 C r C/) A
CZ <<> Z Z a 1.-1
Cn> mrn-a 0 0 A
-10 3 1-1 72
m m C)-I Ti '11 1�•1
Z• > m 0 0
C -,13r rn Z
-1 V)•
r 0 A
1.1 N 0
-1 Cg
-< m
C)
o o >
r 1•- C)
1 I C)
i* W O
W O C
r cn Z
O O 1
1 1
1•" 0 Z
0) 0 0
1- o •
1 1
1- 0 H
O 0 Z
it 0
A
13 1
• 0
0 1•-
1
f
OR N
I
m v
Cn >
* Cn G)
* > m
* 0
I m
C)
x
Cn Co
dc\& i6HHH HH'::, N% \ HH ,, IS- \►`aa l\ 0 x
4 4 4 4 4 4 444 :: 4 4 4 0-'-__ M
co co NO NO NO W W co NO \O VO \D \O VD\D \D W \O \O \O �D
N N N N N H NO NO N N N co IU N IV N NO N N N N
O O w H N O O O Co 1 —1 H OD N O H O O\ vt NA oN
n •
O\H O O O H O\4 O O O O O O O O W O O O O n 3
.p-Lo O O O - N N O O O O O O O O H O O O O Cl- A)
H H O O O O\ H H O O O O O O O O H O O O O n
O\N O O O H O\� O O O O O O O O W O O O O 0'
.F-W O O O —3 N N O O O O 0 0 0 O H O O O O
OD O 'i O O Co CO OD 0 O O OD OD CO CD OD Co OD Co 0 Co Co CO Co Cl
H H Z HH H H H H H H H H H H H H' H-' H H H H H H '1
C7 OOOOOO OOOOOOOO O O O O O O O a
Pa 0 H3 HH H H H H H H H H H H H H HH H H H H H A
P) a) O O O O O O O O O O O O O. O O O O O O O O O 0
<< H b
'i0 a a
I- � w
H N C)
1-3 'ti
11 Z
ci) R• H W
c+ O N 0 rD 4 H-' OD\O -WH
W
N.) 0 0 N W O H H 'O 'Ji H ON H H Hr co O W O\ O . H a
-4 0 H v1 OD CO vl \ 1 0 ON CD 0 0 v1 N 'O 0 OD NO NO O\ 0+
• 00OW - NOOOODO4 W OO ONOONNONO
- W0
Cl-
-
[Dr)�vt •C '-d w j O7 ro = C] 7l7 = t1 OJ VJ OJ :U W C] of 7d O -P" O\ m 3 3 3 O 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 J�,� c+ r• r• r• '+i F h r• r• r• r• r• r• r• '� r• r• r• r• 3c \O�D w �+ �+ cH c+ �+ �+ cH �+ cH cH �+ �+ �+ cl\ -� o CDD ro cn ' Jmrod ro '� '� O t x C) N H Wt� H H 'iCA t'i (D W CD H H H n 'h W O\N '-3 C] < C) ,U ''h �C R• n 3 3 a a o a PDI 0 C) a 0 m `D rn O 'i H 'i
H O H 'Pi H 0U) O CD o) H UI H H Ri
H
WWWWwwWWw wWWWwWWWWWWw c-1
CO CO CD CD CO OD CO OD OD C D OD OD OD CO Co ,7 —1 —1 —3 —3 x
OD Oo CD Oo CD -J --4 � - -1 -I -3-3-3 OO\ O\ O~\ O\ O\ '
w W N H 0 VO CO OD —1 O\ Nii 4 co co co -F- co N H 0 NO O
C LLi O ) O D L'i LLrJ = = P) O '9 'i Iv H Z CD
CD 7c7 3 'i O r• M/ bd 11 3
a 3 .0 < < a U) 'O 3 0
C)
D
Cl.
O Hwg° ) o O H.
w H) H• ' m
p) Cl) H)
3 j x H. c+ x W r• Nb\d H-
lD NGH
• rn w 0 P a) a
0 o
`} Cr) co
0 CD P)r 0
'i •
(D 'd N Z N lD
(D to CD H
CD 0 M a
'i
C)
X
H
(-1,!‘) -P" H 4'0 CO H i_..) B
O N W H O N `n H co O N NO W H H •
N N co 0 co 'i H a\ W W W O\ 0 4' co
ND H M a) OD 0 0 O\ CD 0 \O \O 0 OD NO \O O\
OOW4NO4O O\ OOO
CO O H O\ O '
o CD 0
L 0. y
W c+ x
H
o a
O A
H b
• 'I
O\ r•
-P" H
0 o n
H y
I a i✓
CD 0 a
0 0 0 n
CD P `�
P '_' a
H 0
VI
i .
H
a 9
0
0 z
o C+
0
0
F°
CS
A
0
w b 0 x C
00
o CD
w �
o cn ►s b
'I N ►a<
a
Di
P
P
0
M
w C) H-
CO Pi'
ODN
O
I
!
n
f.,• (CG
'1 0
n a
o
b
r•
N
N
P
el
x
-69- CS
w `+
8
0
0
is n
MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
RE: Purchase of Furniture and Equipment from Marquette Bank
DATE: April 3 , 1992
INTRODUCTION:
At the Special Council meeting of March 31, 1992 the City Council
authorized the City Administrator to negotiate for furniture and
fixtures from the Marquette Bank for the new City Hall.
BACKGROUND:
As a part of the move to the new City Hall the City will be
purchasing furniture and other related equipment. The Marquette
Bank has offered a significant amount of furniture to the City at
a very reasonable price. It is recommended that the City Council
authorize the appropriate City officials to purchase the following
equipment:
Two 10 ' X 48" large oak conference tables
One 7" X 42" oak conference table
Two matching 66" X 24" oak cadenzas
28 teal upholstered conference room chairs
27 guest chairs with arms, beige upholstery
Safe door
One refrigerator
One microwave oven
The negotiated price for all of the above mentioned items is
$10, 000. This amount represents a fraction of the new price for
this furniture and is consistent with the estimates that the City ' s
interior design consultants have calculated.
As an option an additional 10 sled-based teal upholstered chairs
could be purchased for an amount of an additional $1, 000 . While
these chairs are in good condition it is felt that they are
somewhat lower than would be desirable for comfortable use by older
individuals or those with physical handicaps. For that reason it
is not recommended that we purchase these chairs even though
financially the price quoted was reasonable.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Purchase the above mentioned furniture and fixtures for an
amount of $10, 000.
2 . Purchase the above mentioned furniture and fixtures plus the
10 sled-based teal chairs for $11, 000.
3 . Purchase none of the above mentioned furniture and equipment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Alternative #1 is recommended.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to authorize the appropriate City officials to purchase the
above mentioned equipment and furniture with the exception of the
10 sled-based teal chairs from the Marquette Bank in an amount of
$10, 000.
\~ ski N
MEMO TO: Mayor Laurent and Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
RE: Hiring Procedures - Budgeted Temporary/Seasonal Employees
DATE: April 1, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
It appears to be a gray area whether the City Administrator has the
authority to hire budgeted part time/seasonal employees without
prior approval from City Council. Staff would like to request that
City Council consider authorizing the City Administrator to hire
all part time/seasonal budgeted positions without prior approval
from Council.
BACKGROUND:
Each year the City of Shakopee hires numerous part time\seasonal
employees. These positions are generally budgeted. Examples of
part time/seasonal employees include pool employees, Public Works
employees, Recreation Department employees and a Building
Inspector. This year to operate the Shakopee swimming pool alone,
approximately 30 part time/seasonal positions will be filled.
Rather than getting Council approval to advertise and hire for each
group of employees, staff is requesting City Council to authorize
the City Administrator to advertise and hire budgeted part
time/seasonal employees without formal Council approval.
In the past, the general practice has been to simply advertise and
hire these employees without Council approval. However, in
reviewing our procedures, staff believes it would be prudent to go
on record formally authorizing the City Administrator to advertise
and hire budgeted part time/seasonal positions as deemed
appropriate.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Move to authorize the City Administrator to advertise and hire
budgeted part time/seasonal employees as deemed appropriate.
2 . Direct staff to bring each group of budgeted part
time/seasonal employee groups to City Council for formal
authorization to advertise and hire.
3 . No action pending further information from staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to authorize the City Administrator to advertise and hire
budgeted part time/seasonal employees as deemed appropriate.
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Minnesota Street, 5th Avenue to 7th Avenue
DATE: March 30, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 3564 , declaring the adequacy of a
petition and ordering a report prepared for street improvements to
Minnesota Street, between 5th Avenue and 7th Avenue.
BACKGROUND:
A petition has been received and approved by the City Attorney
requesting street and utility improvements to Minnesota Street,
between 5th Avenue and 7th Avenue. The requested improvements
consist of "extension of City services, blacktop and curb and
acquisition of right-of-way. "
The petitioner owns most, if not all, of the lands that the street
would go through.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Accept the petition and adopt Resolution No. 3564 ordering a
feasibility report.
2 . Deny the petition.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3564 , A Resolution Declaring Adequacy of
Petition and Ordering Preparation of a Report for Improvements to
Minnesota Street, between 5th Avenue and 7th Avenue and move its
adoption.
DH/pmp
MEM3564
mow
JASPERS1111 JASPERS.C.P.A.
DENNIS PATRICK MORIARTY
MORIARTY&
WALBURG,P.A. STEPHEN W.ERS,WALBURG
DAVID c BROWN
mmmm ANNE IIEIMKES TUTTLE
ATTORNEYS&COUNSELLORS AT LAW
March 16, 1992
City of Shakopee MAR 1 7 1992
129 1st Avenue E.
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379f}�E ;
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: lI i
Please find enclosed the petition for improvements to Minnesota
Street between 5th Avenue and 7th Avenue signed by Mr. Ed. R.
Siebenaler. Mr. Siebenaler owns most if not all of the property
which is need for right-of-way.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
Very truly yours,
JASPERS, MORIARTY AND WALBURG, P.A.
1-Dabik...&,_
David G. Brown
Attorney at Law
DGB:dl
Enclosure
206 SCOTT STREET•SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 55379•(612)445-2817
BELLE PLAINE OFFICE•(612)873-2988
FAX NO.445-0812
•
•
•
,"I a
PJ _y i. - - —
v • b > FJ} •i o) a (A.0, t+ 4 Q 1 U7 { a.•t4; .•} 3 to y •a'• r. _ , t h;4�, � M� �r x 7',
'.' _: s t-J d ,•rt.'.0 tD 'i.0, N ►e ID N 0,0' P. 04 • . t' 3i>' r ' + : • c._,.. r•
`x t =`'3 � -. O' 1y0 rD O r' 0 7 r n ` r rt tO•O : t_ '': 0, t.? .rr: m .A •7'`r, r�, t -
a, • :`~ O''t rD • trt)D f+ r('F b R, D, '�i r O al .V• (n r b '• �* i
+
-` p'' ' s p :t O O ►-• p9 U) r? •, fD a G3 : �1 O ^ Iti V ' • {
;:0A!,•3• •.. •t ti-R:-',a+ r M V 4.1 K'O a r•1 gi• 01.7 i• (C Lh rt a0 , tr >~ y . K J. . ." t
n O O - co "C Ft C" tr ,U* n` 0 a. t' :�• ' r "•t ''^qtr `a
O • 'd ►i ►+.K,`� r r4+ C cr. ,y a ,, rQ O 0 z,I
1'w# r' S t'' •''.
�:;.P.,.,44 O V O rt O ID K y 0 ft `� eJ to ID rt Co a N. to ►•f, N r. :
;� ��� �''' O'' t'�'C t t� O. . 0 �., n � 7 r' 0 n `S O • b +�y� '" • ' .r
x.. . •- O .. ft C.O tp 4► 0 O G- 4 O rt tO `.- ,...1,3•0_.
• 4;'' ,.F�• 4! rt !73 rD ID:O to 9 O C. n c 7 E '''L
;t �'# it
``" w $,tom o43 ID.a Q. c0 Q • O U• C o rJ a a y a f ro. + Y:.,L ,. y >;
•
-. s,`}'- 0 0 v3 t/1 O F.. 5 '+I a M C y to •• (f tO •� z .3.:••.:-:,
: a • •• '''•C a ' "I[+17 `ij�
t' r .. fD 0 N N ? t., tl a •I.-• .. 2 rt tD 0 1 , ' ,�' -'
` C; C1'to 1}. - Uf rt • • C, O t0 0 O IT7 rt rt y z M1, 1
fs. rDa3tLJ.+ , r, 44aO. O• tvrt `3-.--....t4:$11 ...;;‘,...„, t ti
r y ,:. to (D 11 7 to r J !D rt �' : 3.". o
ca
a��.i 4 ' Oo O W O. Qi ' 6 , rt O a Co tD O 0 a • x' t a
+:t.'.).. !� P . O tL W. O b O O fD a M o G Q 3g-,1,4•(•,';• •.1 3 _ ,,t
rs O F-+ M .6 :f7 M. ^' a.. !V tD !� a r0? O O rt Q ►'h ` _ 'f rl••
as t" rD+ dr. w
1
,t ▪ , 00 , 0 •r (l1 PS' 0 r ..J (D 0 (i) Q) to 5' et • • nr`}-•:-.1.`1,4,,,
x Y H
. •'♦ � .r#t•h O ,..,•1'4 M z rt Us O. 0 tr; ;L . ;* t) 4.0 O a tD M '' s•••%•-•1..,•,4,, r " t- "
x ,` x kt`�aJ't fi ;• O rlt N .tCo b•' :., M. M C J N y O to n �z
, 1R,..3.1..- 7 t rCt b t� y. Cr) t') Z tD iD a C _ fi
,°' x , • .� „p�. 3 .:`. r,,,,,i.
# : •.L. . .N , � Q...y 't'� � rmco CD 01• c) tnOaNOrt6 w `,. r,' ., ,�� , tR ' � f''
P;- `ate t- O 0 r.'}}� Q t) ,y, 3D n O• It. W 0 C PI AC V: ` x:.: r^. : r h' '4' -,.',.','.Vii ,;
ttt��� v t
, 4 ' W VI 0 O tt fD h tl, p ,+ rD c ro O • O ;tr, u 3y�r +~
,3.,I.:'
' tin t 1,.40 .',: c.1 ;* ( • CD0CD 63•..., � H o ' a0, 0 C 1 � it . t,Z!, V3F, �,y +�,
5' O ? rt Cs � rt O (J .o Z � N. Ot7 9 3 i . r ti w +� _
• N � N � i . r v �• y ,� �, Y �,}
; '� �:
lt- :4' .--,, '' i44-,;.•'''fika.,'Aii, '' .ri..-
rttovV Dara act r .M:..1111,1,' �
' �'' h w++ : � zrt0 a p a
rD rt. d� O 5 b P. rt rt 40 4~,, 0 0 a MOM rt
� , 1 ;' C .
-t' U7I. 1tD/ N wrt. O rA ►t7� 0 ^m Q v0t 0 ��1' i� n tD ^ • ,� ' ,,t �3 t''
,}.Is .{, y '7.• M (D s m t'J O Pi 0 VII VI rt CO .. , �,. 1 "• .-rn t••.: -i * '04
. • , r
1 �' p, + • 4..-.'•..- s' A.• b.•�.
�, � �1 '� wMWO fprt ►70 D �' J ? zC `7K0 v., c��. ,y •+ 7 �'• 4 •
j M •+t
+.. Co. '" M ttl C. 8, N C !� ►1 ? d t7• � t, } •r ,., .
p warale • ',
��: 0 �'tp O is O O t*7 O 5' to M d tD • t ' ; ,'�`� 3 ;;2' `;
� , ••• M rt t0.o a• ., Z Oro C to m w • 40 1 •tea , .
I{.• s d rt (D 3 Cfi M Z a d Mtn r , • r r •}i'' ••ot+ n, ,� „if• G+�
w• 9C w ,. r► rt b9 447fD c r•
•
i s Q N �C• b O t♦ CD rt to M M c0 e+ M O "''t .�,i' •,I a ,+ �' t J •-.414„.:,;,.,„. a.r..;
=• • o rt N to N rD 0 ID 0 w d!:,a pp 3a , ' r
1tilt+
,. r -•••• C ID r I: `"' rt H m fp O O ►'' rp 0 `' ` • , r �r s µ
i*,.:Wf,,,.,•,i',.;, Er) 0* Z
j ' to �+ .. ,,t•-•......r.. " � I fw 3
+ •,.t,r••,'„`•-.•.. ,. - ' r . { r j•,• t of 'kM. i... � C 4 4
ri #Je 11 a +��`,;� � +.Jt l } .),4*.?:• ' ''-I.} ?'. }f'si "H"� o ' i. , .. .
RESOLUTION NO. 3564
A Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition
And Ordering The Preparation Of A Report
For Improvements To Minnesota Street,
Between 5th Avenue And 7th Avenue
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE,
MINNESOTA:
1. A certain petition requesting the improvement of Minnesota
Street, between 5th Avenue and 7th Avenue by sewer, water, pavement
and curb & gutter improvements, filed with the Council on April 7,
1992 , is hereby declared to be signed by the required percentage of
owners of property affected thereby. The declaration is made in
conformity to Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 . 035.
2 . The petition is hereby referred to David E. Hutton, Public
Works Director, and he is instructed to report to the Council with
convenient speed advising the Council in a preliminary way as to
whether the proposed improvement is feasible and as to whether it
should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other
improvement and the estimated cost of the improvement as
recommended.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City
of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1991.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Date
We, the undersigned, owners of the following described real
property, abutting on the proposed improvement and benefitted
thereby, hereby petition the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
for the following public improvements:
Extension of city services, blacktop and curb and acquisition of
right-of-way thereof
on minneso tftreet/061444c, between 5th TeA/Avenue
and 7th It/Avenue, and request that the same
be made during the year 1992 .
In making this petition the undersigned understands that the
City of Shakopee, its agents or employee cannot guarantee the
amount of an assessment until a feasibility study of the improve-
ments has been prepared and accepted by City Council in accordance
with MSA Chapter 429.
PETITIONER LOT BLOCK
x ' (�, l_1..?�Ga.� See attached legal description
•
•
I, hereby, verify that I circulated the above petition and that
the above signatures of the property owners and petitioners were
affixed in my presence.
Circulator
Approved this day of , 1984
City Attorney
This instrument prepared & drafted by:
H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
ilr 5' 43
C jE
MEMO TO: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator 1.50441[
FROM: Dave Hutton, Public Works Directo
SUBJECT: 5th Avenue/Market Street Project
DATE: March 31, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
Staff is requesting authorization to set a date for the public
hearing to consider the proposed special assessments for the 5th
Avenue/Market Street Project.
BACKGROUND:
The 5th Avenue/Market Street Project has been completed and all
project costs have been identified. This project consisted of
constructing 5th Avenue between Spencer Street and Market Street,
constructing Main Street between 6th Avenue and 5th Avenue, and
reconstructing Market Street to Municipal State Aid Standards
between 7th Avenue and 4th Avenue.
The final project costs are $504 , 641. 06. This consists of
construction costs of $320, 196. 58, engineering/administration costs
of $124 , 267 .94 and right-of-way acquisition costs of $60, 176. 54 .
The original cost estimate for this project was $481, 800. 00. The
final project costs are approximately 4.7% higher than what was
orignally estimated. The increased costs are due to the right-of-
way acquisition costs being higher than what was originally
estimated.
At the public hearing ordering this project, the City Council
determined that the 5th Avenue and Main Street portion of the
project should be 100% assessed because this was new street
construction and the Market Street portion of the project would be
25% assessed because this was street reconstruction. All new
sanitary sewer and watermain construction would be 100% assessed
and any reconstructed watermain or sanitary sewer would be funded
by the City or Shakopee Public Utilities Commission. Based on the
final project costs and the assessment strategies, the assessment
calculations have been completed.
Prior to levying any assessments on this project a public hearing
must be held. Attached is Resolution No. 3565 which declares the
cost to be assessed and sets the date for the public hearing for
May 5, 1992 . Of the total project costs, approximately $326, 005. 56
will be assessed.
Staff will give a detailed presentation on the assessment
calculations at the public hearing.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 3565 which sets the date for the public
hearing for May 5, 1992 .
2 . Adopt Resolution No. 3565 but set a different date for the
public hearing.
3 . Deny Resolution No. 3565.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 3565, A Resolution Declaring the Cost to be
Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessments for
5th Avenue, Spencer Street to Market Street; Market Street, 7th
Avenue to 4th Avenue and Main Street, 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue,
Project No. 1989-4 and move its adoption.
DH/pmp
MEM3565
RESOLUTION NO. 3565
A Resolution Declaring The Cost To Be Assessed And
Ordering The Preparation Of Proposed Assessments
For 5th Avenue, Spencer Street To Market Street;
Market Street, 7th Avenue To 4th Avenue And
Main Street, 6th Avenue To 5th Avenue
Project No. 1989-4
WHEREAS, a contract has been let for the improvement of: 5th
Avenue, Spencer Street to Market Street; Market Street, 7th Avenue
to 4th Avenue and Main Street, 6th Avenue to 5th Avenue and the
contract price for such improvements is $320, 196 . 58 ,the
construction contingency amounts to $ -0- and the expenses incurred
or to be incurred in the making of such improvements amounts to
$184 , 444 . 48 so that the total cost of the improvements will be
$504 , 641. 06 and of this cost the City of Shakopee will pay
$159 , 742 . 29 as its share of the cost and the Shakopee Public
Utilities Commission will pay $18 , 893 . 21 as its share of the cost.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA:
1. The cost of such improvement to be specially assessed is
hereby declared to be $326, 005 .56.
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 she shall file a copy of
such proposed assessment in her 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 5th day of
May, 1992 , 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 she shall state in the notice the total
cost of the improvements. She 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:
City Attorney
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
Barry Stock, Ass't City Administrator
RE: SAC Credits
DATE: March 31, 1992
Introduction
MWCC has revamped the Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) system in the area of
credits for demolition or reduction of demand. Staff is seeking Council guidance
for the treatment of SAC credits.
Background
MWCC has revamped and tightened up the handling of credits in the SAC
system. Cities have treated credits in various ways and the result has been a
potential large scale problem for MWCC in terms of managing the capacity for the
sewer system and the financial impact of credits. Cities now have to identify
and account for all credits. Staff has researched and is finalizing the list of
credits on hand for Shakopee. MWCC will not refund cash to the City for credits.
A couple examples at this point may best explain the situation;
I. A house in the urban part of Shakopee is connected to the sewer
system and has either paid a sac charge to connect to the system or
is a pre-1973 house that is grand-fathered into the capacity of the
sewer system. A house is one sac unit and the current rate is
$700.00 per sac unit. We are talking about the capacity of the
sewer system, not the usage or the daily/monthly flow in the system.
Assume that this house is demolished, resulting in that vacant site
not being connected to the sewer system. There is now a sac credit
pending. It is pending until a new use for the site is established.
A) . A new house is built on the site and the pending credit is
applied to the new use of the site. No payment is made to
MWCC for the sac charge for the new house.
1) The city can either collect a sac charge from the
developer of the new house and keep $700.00 for sewer
improvements or 2) "apply the credit" and not collect
$700.00 from the developer.
B) . A paved parking lot is installed on the site. There is no
sac charge for the parking lot and the pending sac credit is
now available for the city to use.
1) The city can either keep the credit resulting in
having $700.00 for sewer improvements or 2) attempt to
refund the credit amount to the owner or 3) hold the
credit for a subsequent future change in use of that
site.
II. A commercial building with a sac value of seven units is demolished
and a new building with a sac value of five units is built on the
site, or a commercial building with a tenant with usage of a sac
value of seven units moves out and a new tenant with a usage of a
sac value of five units moves in.
A. The city can keep the seven units of credit and charge the
developer/owner for five sac units.
B. The city can apply five units of sac credit to the new
building/use and keep one or two units ($1,400) for sewer
improvements.
C. The city can apply five sac units to the new building and
save one or two units for future changes on that site.
D. The city can apply five sac units to the new building and
refund two units ($1,400) to the owner.
A complication to this example is when the tenant with the usage of
five sac units moves out and a successor tenant moves in with a
usage of 8 sac units. Does the City keep 2 units (7 > 5) and charge
the new use 3 units, or keep the 2 units site specific and only
charge an additional 1 unit?
According to MWCC staff, the larger cities that have gone through the sac
credit issue for development have elected to keep the "left over" credits
(dollars) for citywide benefit and not refunded them to the owners of the
property or reserved them for site specific use. The owners/developers may lay
claim to the credit units and want the refund. MWCC will not refund dollars to
the city but will carry credits forward against future sac payments due MWCC.
The city must make an irrevocable determination on a case by case basis to
either keep "left over" sac units site specific for future use or to have the
credits be applied for city wide benefit. The decision can be split for some
credits to be site specific and some city wide for any particular case. It is
suggested that a staff member be designated to make those determinations.
SAC changes for industrial users can be triggered by a three year review
(MWCC will make these reviews) to see if there are changes in processing or
operation that affect the use of the sewer system as opposed to changes in the
plant which would be need a building permit and therefore cause a SAC
determination.
Attached is a letter from Mr. Rod Krass on behalf of Link/Houser which
specifies their position with regard to the SAC credit issue.
Council is requested to review the issue and give staff guidance and
authority to make the site specific or city wide determinations.
Alternatives
1. Refund unused sac credits to property owners.
2. Keep unused sac credits site specific.
3. Keep unused sac units for city benefit.
4. Combination of above.
Recommendations
The following criteria is suggested for guidelines to be used by staff in
making SAC credit determinations.
1. City will not refund any dollars for SAC credits.
2. Multi use sites such as the mall or strip shops that are one site will
have any credits kept site specific.
3. Total new use (demolition and new building) for residential and commercial
will have any credits that are not used for the new application revert to
city benefit and will pay sac charges for any increase in SAC units for
the new use.
4. Industrial process change resulting in credits will be kept site specific
unless a certified alternative sewer system is made available to the site.
5. Industrial physical facility change will be kept site specific.
6. The Rahr situation is unique and should be separately determined.
Action
Move to set the following guidelines for staff to consider in making SAC
credit determination.
1. City will not refund any dollars for SAC credits.
2. Multi use sites such as the mall or strip shops that are one site will
have any credits kept site specific.
3. Total new use (demolition and new building) for residential and commercial
will have any credits that are not used for the new application revert to
city benefit and will pay sac charges for any increase in SAC units for
the new use.
4. Industrial process change resulting in credits will be kept site specific
unless a certified alternative sewer system is made available to the
site. .
5. Industrial physical facility change will be kept site specific.
-
km offices
Phillip R.Krass** ,lames B.Croft
I..Monroe J lC)S Orlin D.Te Slaa
Barry K.Meyer & Ritricia A.Weller
Marl, l\l wmv<
MON ROE Kathryn E.Kclby
Murray R.Kline Timothy F.Moynihan
chartered
Randy B.Fans *Certified Spraah.4
i Alwa Admitted in Nisn.nsin
March 19 19 9 2 :�� x Also Admitted in California
/ +:\lso Admitnd in South Dakota
ttAR2 u1992
Mr. Barry Stock
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379 Y
Re: Link/Houser Property
Our File No. 7947-1
Dear Barry:
This letter will confirm our conversation relative to the fact
that the property we have has paid for nine units of sewer
connection at a total of $3,825 . 00 when the initial building permit
was taken out back in 1980 . Since that amount of sewer
availability has been paid for, the property in question should
receive credit for that amount.
It is my understanding that the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission does extend such credit, although I have not been in
contact with them about this issue.
At any rate, I do not understand any rational under which the
property owner would not receive credit for SAC payments previously
made. These charges are certainly close cousins to any type of
trunk assessment and had it been a trunk assessment, we would have
received such a credit.
I understand that this matter is going to be submitted to the
City Council for a policy determination in the near future and I
would appreciate it if you could let the Council know our position
on this matter.
I would also appreciate it if you could let me know what the
present charges for such nine units would be, if that charge is
different than the amount paid in 1980 . Thank you.
Very trul yours,
1• ••'•O' ;i!TERED
Phillip •Krass
Attorney at Law
cc: LeRoy Houser
Don Link
Southpoint Center.Suite 1100. 1650 West 82nd Street.Bloomington,Minnesota 55431-1447 Telephone:(612)885-5999 FAX(612)885-5969
/St
MEMO TO: Honor Mayor and Council
FROM: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
RE: Fire Department Accident Insurance
DATE: April 7, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
The accident insurance policy for the Fire Department is due to
expire. The attached memos from the Finance Director and the Fire
Chief present two different points of view on the renewal of
insurance coverage.
BACKGROUND:
The background for this coverage is provided in the memo from the
Finance Director which is attached as a part of this Council
communication.
As the Finance Director has indicated in his memo the coverage
that' s currently being provided by the policy is about to expire is
essentially in addition to the work comp coverage provided to all
other part time employees. Also the Fire Relief Association
provides additional benefits.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Let the current policy expire and not obtain a new policy.
2 . Obtain a new policy with the same benefits coverage.
3 . Find a new policy with more benefits for the same or lower
premium.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the City Council disagrees with the recommendation of the
Finance Director, which is to let the current policy expire and not
obtain a new policy, direction should be given to the City staff to
initiate this coverage. Both the Finance Director and the Fire
Chief will be in attendance to present their points of view on this
subject.
SHAKOPEE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Department Memo
To: Dennis Kraft, City Administrator
From: Frank Ries, Fire Chief
Date: April 6, 1992
Subject: Fire Department Accident Insurance
This Memo is a response to the Memo from Gregg Voxland dated March 31,
1992 concerning Accident Insurance.
We believe the accident insurance in question is an appropriate
insurance policy for the members regardless how or when it started.
Firefighting is a high injury risk activity no matter how much
preparation is made for each incident, and how many measures are taken
to assure firefighter safety. The $20, 000 is a very small token
should a fire fighter be killed or dismembered in the line of duty.
While the $2, 266. 65 premium may look like a large sum, the price per
year per member is small. If the premium is divided by the number of
firefighters and then by 3 years, the cost per person per year is only
$21. 60. Considering what is given by the firefighters and their
overall compensation, raising the benefits should also be a
consideration. In view of the present economy we realize an increase
may be difficult, therefore we believe the present policy should
remain in effect.
Recommendations / Alternatives
1. Obtain new policy with the same benefit coverage.
2 . Find new policy with more benefit with the same or less
premium.
TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Fire Department Accident Insurance
DATE: March 31, 1992
Introduction
The accident insurance policy for the Fire Department is due to expire.
Council may wish to discuss obtaining a new policy versus allowing the policy to
expire.
Background
The City has had an additional accident policy for fire department personnel
for many years. I do not know the history of the policy and it may be a case
where this policy was obtained before workers compensation applied to volunteer
fire fighters. The principal sum of the benefit for accidental death and
dismemberment is $20,000 and $100.00 weekly disability benefit; the heart or
circulatory malfunction rider is $10,000 death benefit and a $500 maximum medical
expense benefit. The benefit level has been the same for at least 10 years.
Some of the benefits may be coordinated with work comp coverage. Fire
fighters are covered by work comp insurance but are not covered by the city's
health and life group insurance package.
The last premium for a three year policy was $2,266.65.
Attached is the current policy.
Alternatives
1. Let current policy expire and not obtain new policy.
2. Obtain new policy.
Recommendation
Alternative number 1. The coverage provided by this policy is basically in
addition to work comp coverage provided to all other part time employees. It is
also in addition to benefits provided by the Fire Relief Association which would
be the normal amount paid upon separation or death or disability. If Council
wishes to provide or continue to provide supplemental benefits to fire fighters,
a new policy should be obtained.
Special Risk
Accident Policy THE HARTFORD
Hartford Life Company We will pay the Weekly Benefit for each week of Tc
Hartford Plaza Disability of an Insured Person. Payment will not:
Hartford, Connecticut 06115 a) be made during the Waiting Period at the onset
(A stock insurance company)
the Total Disability;
Will pay benefits according b) exceed the Maximum Payment Period.
to the conditions of this
policy. Total Disability must:
al racult frnm injury.
Signed for the Company
TABLE OF CONTENTS
5 ' General Provisions
n Definitions
Covered Activities
Exclusions
Benefits
/7 -614— Claim Provisions
A
GENERAL PROVISIONS The certificates will state the features of this policy which
Consideration: We have issued this policy in consider- are important to Insured Persons.
ation of the payment of the Policy Premium in advance of Cancellation:This policy may be cancelled at any time by
the Policy Date. The Policy Premium and Policy Date are written notice mailed or delivered by us to the Policyholder
shown in the Schedule. or by the Policyholder to us. If we cancel, we will mail or
Policy Period: This policy takes effect on the Policy Date deliver the notice to the Policyholder at its last address
and continues to the end of the Policy Period. The dates shown in our records.
are shown in the Schedule.
If we cancel, it becomes effective on the later of:
Entire Contract: The entire contract between the Policy-
holder and us consists of this policy, and any papers made a) the date stated in the notice; or
a part of this policy at issue. b) the 6th day after we mail or deliver the notice.
Changes: No agent has authority to change or waive any If the Policyholder cancels, it becomes effective on the later
part of this policy. To be valid, any change or waiver must of:
be in writing, approved by one of our officers and made a a) the date we receive the notice; or
part of this policy.
b) the date stated in the notice.
Data Furnished By Policyholder: The Policyholder, with
our approval, may keep the important insurance records on In either event:
all Insured Persons. The Policyholder will give us informa- a) we will promptly return any unearned premium paid;
tion, when and in the manner we ask, to administer the or
insurance provided by this policy. b) the Policyholder will promptly pay any earned pre-
The Policyholder's insurance records will be open for our mium which has not been paid.
inspection at any reasonable time.
Any earned or unearned premium will be determined on a
Failure on the part of the Policyholder to: pro rata basis.
a) give us the name of an Insured Person will not
invalidate the insurance; Cancellation will not affect any claim for loss due to an
b) report termination of insurance of an Insured Per- accident which occurs before the effective date of cancel-
son will not continue the coverage beyond the date lation.
of termination.
Countersigned by
Certificates: If required by the laws of the state where this
policy is delivered, we will give certificates to the Policy-
holder for delivery to Insured Persons.
(Licensed Resident Agent)
Form 7692 (HL) Printed in U.S.A.
EXCLUSIONS
This policy does not cover loss resulting from:
a) intentionally self-inflicted injury, suicide or at-
tempted suicide, whether sane or insane;
b) injury sustained while:
i) in or on;
ii) boarding or alighting from;
iii) being struck or run down by;
any aircraft in motion except as an airline passen-
ger on an aircraft:
i) operated by a passenger airline;
Conformity With State Statutes: On the Policy Date, any ii) on a regularly scheduled trip over its established
part of the policy which is in conflict with a statute of the route;
state in which the policy is: c) war or act of war, whether declared or not;
a) delivered; or d) injury sustained while in the armed forces (land,
b) issued for delivery; water or air) of any country or international author-
is hereby amended to agree with the statute's minimum ity;
requirements. e) repair or replacement of existing dentures, partial
dentures, braces, fixed or removable bridges, or
INSURED PERSON PERIOD OF COVERAGE other artificial dental restoration;
f) repair, replacement, examinations for prescriptions
Effective Date: Each person becomes an Insured Person or fitting of eyeglasses or contact lenses;
on the date he or she meets the qualifications stated in the g) repair or replacement of artificial limbs or orthopedic
Schedule. braces.
Termination:Coverage of each Insured Person ceases on BENEFITS PROVIDED
the first to occur of:
a) the date the policy terminates; or The following benefits are provided under this policy only if
b) the date he or she ceases to qualify as an Insured an amount is stated in the Schedule opposite the name of
Person. the benefit. "None" shown in the Schedule opposite the
• name of a benefit means that the policy does not provide
Termination will not affect any claim for loss due to an that benefit.
accident which occurs before the termination date.
If an Insured Person's injury results in loss for which, in the
DEFINITIONS absence of this provision, we would pay an amount under:
a) the Accidental Death Benefit; and
Injury means bodily injury of an Insured Person which b) the Accidental Dismemberment Benefit;
results directly and independently of all other causes from we will pay the amount for only the one Benefit
accident which occurs while he or she is participating in a which provides the larger amount.
Covered Activity.
ACCIDENTAL DEATH BENEFIT
Loss resulting from sickness or disease, except a pus-
forming infection which occurs through an accidental If an Insured Person's injury results in loss of life within 180
wound, is not considered as resulting from Injury. days after the date of accident, we will pay the Principal
Sum for this benefit.
We, our or us means the Hartford Life Insurance Com-
pany. The amount of the Principal Sum is shown in the Schedule.
ACCIDENTAL DISMEMBERMENT BENEFIT
If an Insured Person's injury results in any of the following
losses within 180 days after the date of accident, we will
pay the sum shown opposite the loss.
We will not pay more than the Principal Sum for this Benefit
for all losses due to the same accident.
Form 7692 (HL)
The amount of the Principal Sum is shown in the Schedule. An expense is considered to be incurred on the date the
Medical Care is rendered.
For Loss of:
Both Hands or Both Feet ACCIDENT TOTAL DISABILITY BENEFIT
or Sight of Both Eyes The Principal Sum
One Hand and One Foot The Principal Sum We will pay the Weekly Benefit for each week of Total
Either Hand or Foot Disability of an Insured Person. Payment will not:
and Sight of One Eye The Principal Sum a) be made during the Waiting Period at the onset of
Either Hand the Total Disability;
or Foot One-Half The Principal Sum b) exceed the Maximum Payment Period.
Sight of
One Eye One-Half The Principal Sum Total Disability must:
Thumb and Index One-Quarter a) result from injury;
Finger of Either Hand The Principal Sum b) begin within 30 days after the accident; and
c) require the care of a legally qualified physician.
Loss means with regard to:
a) hands and feet, actual severance through or above If the Maximum Payment Period is "Lifetime", the Weekly
wrist or ankle joints; Benefit will be payable for as long as the Insured Person:
b) sight, entire and irrecoverable loss thereof; a) is alive; and
c) thumb and index finger, actual severance through b) remains totally disabled.
or above metacarpophalangeal joints.
For Total Disability of less than one week, one-seventh of
ACCIDENT MEDICAL EXPENSE BENEFIT the weekly benefit will be payable per day.
We will pay the Reasonable Expenses incurred by an The Weekly Benefit, Waiting Period and Maximum Pay-
Insured Person, in excess of the Deductible Amount, for ment Period are shown in the Schedule.
Medical Care if:
a) the first expense is incurred within 26 weeks after Total Disability means the complete and continuous in-
the accident; and ability of the Insured Person to:
b) the expense is incurred within 104 weeks after the a) perform all duties of his or her regular occupation
accident. until the Weekly Benefit has been paid for 104
weeks during the same period of continuous Total
We will not pay: Disability;
• a) more than the Maximum Dental Limit for all ex- and thereafter:
penses incurred for dental treatment, services and b) engage in any gainful occupation for which he or
supplies; she is or can be reasonably fitted by training,
b) more than the Maximum Benefit for all Medical Care education or experience.
and dental treatment, services and supplies;
as the result of any one accident. CLAIM PROVISIONS
The Deductible Amount, Maximum Dental Limit and Max- Notice of Claim: The person who has the right to claim
imum Benefit are shown in the Schedule. benefits (the claimant, beneficiary, or his or her represen-
tative) must give us written notice of a claim within 30 days
The Deductible Amount will be applied separately to each after a covered loss begins. If notice cannot be given within
accident. that time, it must be given as soon as reasonably possible.
Medical Care means necessary: The notice should include the Insured Person's name and
a) medical or surgical treatment, services or supplies; the policy number. Notice should be given to our agent or
b) hospital, nursing and ambulance services. sent to our office in Hartford, Connecticut.
Each item of Medical Care must be: Claim Forms: When we receive the notice of claim, we will
a) prescribed by a legally qualified physician; send forms to the claimant for giving us proof of loss. The
b) for the sole purpose of treating the injury. forms will be sent within 15 days after we receive the notice
of claim.
Reasonable Expenses means fees and prices which do
not exceed those generally charged for similar Medical If the forms are not received, the claimant will satisfy the
Care in the local area where received by the Insured proof of loss requirement if a written notice of the occur-
Person. rence, character and extent of the loss is sent to us.
Form 7692 (HL)
Proof of Loss: Proof of loss must be sent to us within 90 person. The other person will be one who we believe is
days after the date of the loss. If the claimant is not able to entitled to the payment and who is related to the Insured
send proof within that time it may be sent as soon as Person or the beneficiary by blood or marriage. We will be
reasonably possible without affecting the claim. relieved of further responsibility to the extent of any pay-
ment made in good faith.
The additional time allowed cannot exceed one year unless
the claimant is legally incapacitated. We may pay benefits directly to any hospital or person
rendering covered services, unless the Insured Person
Time of Payment of Claims:We will pay any daily, weekly requests other- wise in writing. The Insured Person must
or monthly benefit due: make the request no later than the time he or she files a
a) on a monthly basis, after we receive proof of loss, proof of loss.
while the loss and our liability continue; or
b) immediately after we receive the proof of loss Physical Examinations and Autopsy: While a claim is
following the end of our liability. pending we have the right at our expense:
(a) to have the Insured Person examined by a physi-
We will pay any other benefit due immediately after we cian when and as often as is reasonably necessary:
receive the proof of loss. and
(b) in case of death, to make an autopsy where not
Payment of Claims:We will pay any benefit due for loss of forbidden by law.
life:
a) according to the beneficiary designation in effect at Legal Actions: Legal action cannot be taken against us:
the time of payment; otherwise (a) before 60 days following the date proof of loss is
b) to Insured Person's estate. sent to us;
(b) after 3 years following the date proof of loss is due.
All other benefits due and not assigned will be paid to the
Insured Person, if living. Naming a Beneficiary: An Insured Person may name a
beneficiary or change a named beneficiary by giving a
Otherwise, the benefits may, at our option, be paid: written request to us. The Insured Person's request takes
(a) according to the beneficiary designation; or effect on the date it is executed, regardless of whether the
(b) to Insured Person's estate. Insured Person is living when we receive it. We will be
relieved of further responsibility to the extent of any pay-
If a benefit due is payable to: ment we made in good faith before we received such
(a) Insured Person's estate; or request.
• (b) Insured Person or a beneficiary who is either a
minor or not competent to give a valid release for Assignment:This insurance may not be assigned. Benefit
the payment; payments may be assigned as allowed in the Payment of
we may pay up to $1,000 of the benefit due to some other Claims provision.
Form 7692 (HL)
I
I
Or
SCHEDULE ITT HARTFORD
Initial Premium: $2,266.65 POLICY NO: 41 VP 240204
POLICYHOLDER'S NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
(Previous Policy No: 41 VP 240204 I Shakopee, MN 55379
This policy replaces the prior policy bearing the
above number as of the effective date of this policy.
Agent CodeI IForm numbers of the Policy, riders I
and attached papers at issue:
711488
7695 PA 6093
I I I
Initial Period: From (Policy Date): May 10, 1989 To: May 10, 1992
12:01 A.M. Standard Time at the address of the Policyholder.
Organization Name and Location: Same as above
Benefits Provided: The Policy provides coverage under any one of the following benefits
for each person within a class of Insured Persons, identified below and as defined on
page 2, only if an amount or the word "covered" is stated for that class opposite the
name of that benefit. The word "none" sC
It
��� ered opposite a benefit which is not
provided. t`ii[[�� ff LL V
,�,SE READ YO Class 1 Class 2
r• UeSt10nS.
%f you have Insured (Junior Fireman)
a6 1922 Persons Insured Persons
CaN 445-
Accidental Death and
Dismemberment Benefit: Principal Sum: $20,000.00 $5,000.00
Accident Medical
Expense Benefit: Maximum Benefit: $None $None
Accident Total
Disability Benefit Weekly Benefit: $100.00 None
Maximum Payment Period: to age 65 N/A
Accident Partial
Disability Benefit $Included None
HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Hartford, Connecticut ��/��✓"
uniti h.l:ardnrr..,..wruy I :w udo.:\ tiuN h.!'r•e itt''
Form PA-3878-0 (HL) Printed in U.S.A.
HEART OR CIRCULATORY ��� "t::"
MALFUNCTION RIDER #1 ITT HARTFORD
This rider is to be attached to and form a part of Policy No. 41 VP 240204 issued to
City of Shakopee and to any certificates of insurance furnished in connection therewith.
This rider is effective concurrently with the Policy to which it is attached and the
additional premium for this rider is included in the Policy premium.
The following provisions are added for Class 1 Insured Persons if the premium shown
above is paid when due.
SCHEDULE
Benefits Provided: Each Class 1 Insured Person is covered under the following benefits
for which an amount is shown opposite the benefit. This benefit replaces any other
benefits.
Class 1 Insured Persons
Benefit Benefit Amount
Principal Sum Benefit Principal Amount: $10,000.00
Medical Expense Benefit Maximum Benefit: $500.00
Total Disability Benefit Weekly Benefit: $None
Maximum Payment Period: N/A
BENEFITS
Principal Sum Benefit: We will pay the Principal Amount shown above if an Insured
Person :
(a) sustains Injury, as defined in this rider; and
(b) dies within 100 days of the date of Emergency Duty from such Injury.
Medical Expense Benefit: We will pay the reasonable expenses incurred by an Insured
Person for Treatment of Injury, as defined in this rider. Such expenses must be
incurred within 52 weeks after the date of Emergency Duty.
Payments will not exceed the Maximum Benefit shown above for expenses incurred as the
result of any one occurrence.
We will not pay expenses for which benefits are payable under:
(a) Worker's Compensation Law; or
(b) similar law.
Total Disability Benefit: We will pay the Weekly Benefit Amount for each week of an
Insured Person's period of continuous total disability. Such period of continuous total
disability must:
(a) begin within 30 days after the date of Emergency Duty; and
(b) result from Injury, as defined in this rider, which requires the care of a
legally qualified physician other than the Insured Person.
Rnur•U.Gard nrr.�,Yvrnnp
Form PA-6093 (HL) Printed in U.S.A.
Periods of less than one week will be pro-rated. 1114::
We will not pay this benefit: ITT HARTFORD
(a) after the number of weeks in the period of continuous Total Disability exceeds
the Maximum Payment Period stated in this benefit; and
(b) when a Weekly Benefit is payable under the Accident Total Disability Benefit in
the Policy.
With respect to the benefits in this rider:
Emergency Duty means the fighting of a fire or responding to any other emergency call
for the Policyholder.
Injury means a heart or circulatory malfunction if:
tea) the first symptoms of such malfunction are medically diagnosed:
(1) while the Insured Person is covered under the Policy; and
(2) within 24 hours of the Emergency Duty;
(b) the Insured Person is under age 65; and
(c) the Insured Person has not:
(1) been medically diagnosed that he has; or
(2) received any medical treatment for;
a heart or circulatory malfunction within 5 years prior to the date of the
Emergency Duty.
Treatment means:
(a) necessary medical or surgical treatment, services or supplies; or
(b) necessary hospital, nursing and ambulance services.
'Total disability means the complete inability of the Insured Person to perform each and
every duty of his or her regular occupation.
In all other respects the provisions and conditions of the Policy and certificates
remain the same.
HARTFORD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Hartford, Connecticut
Rm...I>.1';)nhwr..4,,,tof Inwud•.:\.Swilh.1'n•.cid.0
Form PA-6093 (HL) -2-
LiLSa.
MEMO TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S. Cox, City Clerk
RE: Gambling Exemption for Second Harvest
DATE: April 7, 1992
INTRODUCTION:
The Second Annual Twin Cities Celebrity Softball Classic will be
held at Tahpah Park on Saturday, June 20, 1992 . The proceeds from
this year' s event will go to benefit Second Harvest, the National
Food Bank Network, a non-profit organization that supports the
local food banks and food shelfs. Second Harvest plans to conduct
a raffle in conjunction with year's event.
BACKGROUND:
Earlier today, Amy Rothbauer delivered a copy of the application
for exemption from lawful gambling license to the City. The 30 day
reviewal period commences on this date. In order to obtain an
exemption in a timely manner, it was necessary for Ms. Rothbauer to
request a waiver of the 30 day reviewal period from the City.
The City has exercised waiving the 30 day review period in the past
in regard to this issue. Most recently in conjunction with the
Shakopee Ducks Unlimited Banquet held last Fall.
Second Harvest is requesting the exemption so that they can begin
to sell raffle tickets at several special events that are scheduled
prior to the actual Celebrity Softball Classic.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Move to waive the 30 day review period for the application for
exemption from Lawful Gambling License by Second Harvest for
June 20, 1992 at Tahpah Park in Shakopee.
2 . Do not waive the 30 day review period for the application for
the application for exemption from Lawful Gambling License by
Second Harvest.
3 . Table action pending further information from staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends alternative #1.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Move to waive the 30 day review period for the application for
exemption from Lawful Gambling License by Second Harvest for June
20, 1992 at Tahpah Park in Shakopee.
• a0 • I S cel
STATE OF MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT
COURT FILE NO.
James I . Rice,
Petitioner,
vs .
Carol Connolly, Mark Custer,
Dan Gustafson, Stephen Lawrence, MOTION OF THE CITY
Thomas Metzen, Richard Pemberton, OF SHAKOPEE AND
Cynthia Piper Schuneman, Robert THE COUNTY OF SCOTT FOR
Zevnick, each in their capacity LEAVE TO PARTICIPATE
as members of the Minnesota Racing AS AMICUS CURIAE
Commission, and Richard G. Krueger
Executive Secretary, Hubert H. Humphrey III,
Attorney General of the State of Minnesota,
Respondents , -
and,
Ladbroke Racing Canterbury Downs, Inc. ,
Intervenor-Respondent,
f and,
Wayne Simoneau,
Intervenor-Respondent,
and,
Gordon W. Bredeson, in his capacity
as Vice President of the Minnesota
Division of the Horseman' s Benevolent and
Protective Association
Intervenor-Respondent,
and,
Randall Sampson, in his capacity as
President of the Minnesota Thoroughbred
Association, Inc.
Intervenor-Respondent .
TO: [Attorneys for all parties]
Pursuant to Rule 129 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil
Appellate Procedure, the City of Shakopee and the County of
Scott jointly request leave of the Minnesota Supreme Court to
participate in the above-captioned matter with the filing of the
attached Amicus Curiae brief .
Applicants City of Shakopee and County of Scott have a
public interest in maintaining and developing the horse racing
industry in Minnesota for economic reasons . Since Canterbury
Downs was built in 1985 in the City of Shakopee, County of
Scoot , both applicants have made decisions which were based, in
part, on the continued viability of the racing industry.
Applicants' have a significant interest in maintaining a
competitive, growing business at Canterbury Downs .
Consequently, the City of Shakopee and the County of Scott have
a great concern in the outcome of the present case and its
impact on the City and County.
The filing of the attached Amicus Curiae brief by
Applicants shall identify for the parties those economic
interests and permit all parties to adequately respond.
-2-
Accordingly, the City of Shakopee and the County of Scott
request that the Supreme Court of Minnesota grant its motion for
leave to participate jointly as an amicus curiae.
Respectfully submitted,
ATTORNEYS FOR APPLICANTS
212:841
-3-
•
STATE OF MINNESOTA SUPREME COURT
COURT FILE NO.
James I . Rice,
Petitioner,
vs .
Carol Connolly, Mark Custer,
Dan Gustafson, Stephen Lawrence, BRIEF FOR THE CITY
Thomas Metzen, Richard Pemberton, OF SHAKOPEE AND
Cynthia Piper Schuneman, Robert THE COUNTY OF SCOTT FOR
Zevnick, each in their capacity AS AMICUS CJJRIAE
as members of the Minnesota Racing
Commission, and Richard G. Krueger
Executive Secretary, Hubert H. Humphrey III ,
Attorney General of the State of Minnesota ,
Respondents,
and,
Ladbroke Racing Canterbury Downs , Inc . ,
Intervenor-Respondent ,
and,
Wayne Simoneau,
Intervenor-Respondent ,
and,
Gordon W. Bredeson, in his capacity
as Vice President of the Minnesota
Division of the Horseman' s Benevolent and
Protective Association
Intervenor-Respondent ,
and,
Randall Sampson, in his capacity as
President of the Minnesota Thoroughbred
Association, Inc.
Intervenor-Respondent .
ARGUMENT OF AMICUS CURIAE
The recommendations of the District Court in the
above-captioned matter could have catastrophic affects on the
City of Shakopee and the County of Scott . Both amicus curiae
petitioners in this matter believe the recommendations of the
District Court are not in the public interest of the citizens of
the State of Minnesota, but particularly of the citizens of CCC-i_ MF pRTRKa
Scott County and the City of Shakopee.
Subsequent to the building of Canterbury Downs in ()VD
-*W4 ;ii�
_6143101
Shakopee in 1985 , the City -tto `�,,(i. _ c
DIETA
04
Similarly, based on the creation of an entirely new ,/fin-
entertainment industry, the County
All of these actions were taken in the belief that horse
racing had become a permanent structure in Minnesota ' s
entertainment landscape. The racing industry was unique and
innovative to the State, and it was assumed, by the amicus
curiae applicants and others, that the industry would change
over time to stay current in the modern world as any industry
must do to survive. roe
77F futp&
Attendance at Canterbury Downs has been declining in the
past few years, and the result has been a devastating economic
affect on the community. Canterbury Downs employs
people, many of whom live in the surrounding area . The
community has felt the decline in dollars spent in the area, and
-2-
an already depressed economy is suffering more than could have
been expected. In response to the changing times, therefore,
Canterbury Downs and the Racing Commission attempted to utilize
modern technology to boost attendance and participation in horse
racing through telephone account wagering and televised racing .
This is exactly the type of innovation we in the City of
Shakopee and the County of Scott need to revive a flailing
economy.
The recommendations of the District Court, however,
indicate that the words "on track" in the 1982 Amendment to the
Minnesota Constitution are to preclude Canterbury Downs from
expanding televised racing to permit other Minnesota residents
to participate in the events, an aspect of horse racing which is
done in many other states in the country. Amicus Curiae
participants are gravely concerned that without the adaptation
of the horse racing industry to modern times, Canterbury Downs
may have to close. Obviously, the impact of that would be
severe.
We urge the Court to find the laws related to telephone
account wagering and televised racing in 1991 constitutional .
Ideally, we would prefer to see racing fans from the entire
state coming to our County and City to Canterbury Downs, but
first and foremost is the revival of the racing industry. When
the citizens of Minnesota voted on the constitutional amendment,
they were voting for a viable addition to the entertainment
industry, and if the recommendations of the District Court are
upheld, the voters ' wishes shall have been ignored.
-3-
Respectfully submitted,
ATTORNEYS FOR AMICUS CURIAE
212MMt/4
-4-
TO: Dennis Kraft , City Administrator
FROM: Lou Van Hout , Utilities Manager ✓ �
RE : Pending Legislation HF 2940 , SF 2755
DATE : 4/7/92
The Utilities i lities Commission asked me to send a note to the City
Council through you, about their concerns with some pending
legislation .
As was mentioned in the notice you sent for my information last
week, this particular legislation would apply sales tax to all
local units of government . The Commission asks that the City
Council , in determining their position on the issue, consider the
affect of the legislation on SPUC as a part of the city
perspective .
Because of the amount of material we purchase for maintenance and
construction, the sales tax might have a heavier affect on SPUC
than on other governmental operations .
TO: Dennis Kraft , City Administrator
FROM: Lou Van ?lout , Utilities Manager 7
RE: Electric Service to North Side of Minnesota River
DATE : 4/7/92
By April 10 we have to advise the Department of Transportation
whether or not we want electrical conduits to be installed on the
new bridge across the Minnesota River at our expense estimated at
$32 , 000 .
The Utilities Commission believes that expenditure is not
warranted and does not plan to have the conduit installed but
wanted to advise the City Council in case they would foresee a
need to have electric power available on the north side of the
River.