Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 27, 1978 r , TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ .REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA JUt\E 27 , 1978 Mayor Harbeck presiding 11 Roll Call at 7 : 30 P.M. 21 Old Business : a] Res . No . 1270 - Accepting Bid on 78-2 Public Improvement Program (JEJ 2nd and Naumkeag) - tabled June 20th b] Res . No. 1272 - Accepting Bid on 78-3 Public Improvement Program (Deerview Acres) - tabled June 20th c ] Acceptance of Easement from William Pearson d] Request for conditional use permit for a group home in a A-1 zone , on a three acre tract lying in NE-4 of Section 18, South on Marschall Road - tabled 6/20 Applicant : Welcome Community Home , 13416 CR15, Mpls Action: Conditional Use Permit Fes . No. CC-167 e ] Request for variance for the resumption of a non conforming manufacturing use which has Peen discontinued for a period of at least 6 mos . in B-5 zone , L7&8, B48 Ori final Shakopee (old Rock Springs Bottling site) - tabled 6 Applicant : Ceram Traz Corporation, 6500 Oxford St . , Mpls . Action: Variance Res . No. CC-173 3] Other business : 41 Adjourn. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator d MEMO TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Douglas S . Reeder , City Administr6tor RE: Welcome Community Home DATE: June 22 , 1978 There are many concerns being brought up concerning the proposed establishment of this group home at the proposed location. I will attempt , in this memo , to bring your focus on the matters which I think are pretinent in your decision concerning whether or not this land use is compatible with adjacent land uses . A. Is the conditional use permit necessary? The question here is the determination of need for this land use . Does it serve a function which is needed in Shakopee or is there a better way to meet this need? I believe it does serve a needed function and that the applicant can supply the necessary statistics to show the need. B. Will the issuance of the Conditional Use Permit cause unreasonable hardships for adjoining property? You have all by now received much comment in this area. There is no question in my mind that the residents next door have some real fears concerning the effect of this use on them and their family. From the reseErch that Hugh Line has carried out in other cities , it is my conclusion that there are neighbors in other cities who feel that they are bothered by this type of use near their homes , although this feel- ing is by no means unanimous and some people who live quite close have no problems . The real key to this question appears to be the particular resident supervisors who are employed at a particular time . Some are good at their jobs and apparently have good control and others are not as good. I can not think of a way that the City Council can assure that they will have good employees . By means of the renewal of the permit , however , you can review the operation and deny its continuation if there are problems . I have not seen or heard of any hard data which relates the operation of this type of facility to any type of increase in crime or violent acts against the neighbors ar,d therefore I feel this threat is minimal . It is my feeling that the need for this type of facility may outweigh the risks involved in having poor management , especially with the chance to review the operation periodically. C. Will the proposed use diminish the property value of adjacent properties? Welcome Community Home June 22 , 1978 Page -2- It is probable that many home buyers will not want to live next to a group home of any kind and therefore the number of potential buyers for the adjacent property will be more restricted than usual . This does not necessarily say, however , that the value of the home next door will be diminished. This house is already unique because of its location and the group home will add to the uniqueness . It is my opinion that the proposed use can be controlled through the conditional use process enough so that there will be no measurable effort on the property value . In fact the various regulations which the group home will have to abide will cause them to in-prove the property . RECOMMENDATION: It is my recommendation that the conditional use permit be approved for the following reasons : 1 . It will provid a needed service to the community. 2 . This location may be one of the best possible because it will impact at most only one house . 3. Proper conditions on the permit can assure the operation in a manner which will protect the adjacent property owner. If the Council wishes to approve the permit , I would recommend the following conditions : 1 . The maximum number of residents (excluding the employees) at any one time be 10 and the ages range from 13 to 17 years . 2 . The residents be "predelinquent offenders" as defined by Scott County Fuman Services and not convicted felons or persons charged with violent crimes . 3. 70% of the residents of the home are from Scott County and the referrals from Scott County be given highest priority. 4. This conditional use permit is only to Welccme Home Inc. and can not be used by any other group home operation. S . No more than five vehicles be permanently kept on the property. 6 . The house be occupied and supervised by qualified house parents at all times . 7 . An acceptable agreement be reached with the Swansons to assure driveway access to their house and well usage . 8. A six foot high opaque fence be erected by the Welcome Home between their property and the Swansons at such time as requested by the Swansons , in such a way as to still insure the Swansons access to their driveway and garage . 9. The conditional use permit be renewed after six months of opera- t i n an0 r. e-ewed BLOOMINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS OAK GROVL JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL 1 300 West 106th Stieet Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 CHARLES V. RANDALL, Principal June 19, 1978 Shakopee City Council Shakopee, Minnesota Dear Council Members : I have been requested by Mr. Jay Angrist, of Welcome Home, Inc. , to briefly outline the relationship which our school , Oak Grove Junior High School , has had with the staff and students of Welcome Home during the past two years. I am most happy to comply with this request and hope that the ensuing information will be of benefit to you. During the past two school years , Welcome Home has placed with us approx- imately fifteen boys in all three grades with the majority of the boys being students in the ninth grade. During this time, it has been rewarding to see students who have come to us from Welcome Horne with a variety of backgrounds and a variety of problems , in the main, establish stable educational patterns. It is obvious from working with the boys that the expectations of Welcome Home for the performance of each of the boys is clearly stated and emphatically enforced. There has always been an adult contact readily available should a problem arise. The staff has extended itself to completely familiarize us with each of the incoming students and has supported us in all academic actions we have felt necessary for the benefit of the student. Furthermore, with the occasional disciplinary problem that might arise, the staff has both supported us and has worked with us in behavior modification where that course of action has been deemed necessary. At no time during the past two years has there ever been a complaint registered with my office concerning the outside activities of any of the Welcome Home partici- pants. The students have been well assimilated into our school population and have participated in a variety of activities, depending upon the interests of the individual student. The support and follow through of the Welcome Home staff has made, in just about every instance, the school experience a good one for the students involved. Quite often the level of interest and cooperation that the Welcome Home staff shows their students, along with the definitive guidelines for proper activity laid down for the students both within the school setting and within the home setting would be of benefit if applied to our "regular" students in individual cases. I cannot speak highly enough of the Welcome Home program and the support and relationships between Welcome Home and the school . 1 hope that the above will assist you in your deliberations and hope that you will feel free to contact me for any further information. I remain, Sincerely yours , Daniel E. e Assistant Prin ipal DEJ/md Family Services Uivi, ion =' �= A--16 Government (_.enter 3��`so• LG� HENNEPIN 300 South Sixth Street U Ll Minneapolis, MN 55487 June 20, 1978 Shakopee City Council 428 Holmes South Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Sirs: Cl 1 �l ' V I an writing in regard to your efforts to realistically evaluate they presence of a group home facility in your community as proposed by Welcome Homes Incorporated. As you may know, the Welcome Corporation has a number of homes in the Twin Cities and surrounding suburbs. As a senior social worker with Hennepin County Community Services, I have had the experience of working closely with these homes frequently, for a period of two and one half years. Their program is well thought out and administrated effectively. Not static, Welcome Homes makes changes to better service the communities in which they are located. Their ongoing research and resultant awareness of the social needs in an area enables them to do this as does their interest and cooperation in working with other professionals and interested persons. I have found the preplacement process as conducted by Welcome Home to be effective in several ways. The goals and methods of the program are well clarified for the prospective resident. The appropriateness of the program for this individual becomes a matter of (( mutual exploration, in which the juveniles problems, expectations and possible responses to the home are fairly and openly discussed. In this / way, the Home, Agency and Juvenile are able to make the crucial decision C{�� regarding the placement on a such more accountable basis. The initial adjustment period is lessened and can be more productive in helping the l�)1 resident to begin working on his or her problems. PPA� Maintaining a close link with the school or schools in the area is part k1 of the Welcome Horse program. In my experience, a number of my clients in G} �„ these homes have thus begun to use their school experience constructively as a factor in the resolution of their problems. As can be expected, � 14 r i 1 HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer Shakopee City Council - 2 .tune 20, 1978 school professional staff is quite positive about the facilities input. I have never been aware of any negative comments in regard to the homes run by Welcome, Incorporated, from schools or surrounding neighbors in the different areas in which they are located. Recognizing the Councils commitment to determining the visible and not so visible needs in your community, I wished to share my experience with the Welcome Home Organization as a Hennepin County Social Worker. Very truly yours, C Jean Bigelow, Sr. Social Worker Child Welfare Services JB:so I\ , �1 D I\ l Court Services 915 South 5th Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 Juvenile Probation Division i i i HeNNePIN COUNTY June 22, 1978 Mr. Douglas Reeder Shakopee City Council 129 East lst Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Mr. Reeder: I am writing this letter on behalf of Welcome Community Homes, Inc. , who are applying for permission to open a group home in Shakopee. As a probation staff member of Hennepin County Court Services Juvenile Division, I have on many occasions used their treatment facilities because I have felt good supervision and rehabilitation techniques were used at all times. The professionalism of their program has earned both the respect and good feeling of the Juvenile Division in Hennepin County. I would hope that your community will give serious consideration to their request, and realize as we do the asset it will be in helping your area handle some of its delinquency problems. Respectfully, Norman Harris Supervisor HCCS Juvenile Division NH:br RECEIM JUN 26 I9l1U CITY Of, SHAKOPEE �N INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT N0. Z79 DR. LE ROY V. NORSTED SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 1!�7 PARK CENTER HIGH SCHOOL Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 7300 Brooklyn Boulevard Phone: 612- 566-6700 June 22, 1978 Mr. Doug Reeder City Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 E. lst Ave. Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Mr. Reeder: I have been asked by the Welcome Community Home Administration to send a letter to you containing information about my experience with the group home students. I am an Assistant Principal at Park Center Senior High School. The group home in Brooklyn Center is within our attendance area. I would estimate that our school and myself personally, have had contact with more than 40 girls during the past five years. The school adjustment is undoubtedly the most difficult for the girls. I feel that school behavior problems have not been a concern on behalf of our staff or administration. Because of low skills , lack of motivation, or lack of past academic success, aca- demic progress has not always been good, but I do not feel the home is a contributor to this as much as the girls' background. I personally see a high need for group home settings. The family structure of the girls that I have seen at Welcome Home is usually disfunctional. This has caused the deviant behavior that results in the group home place- ment. I have been impressed by the selection of the girls for Welcome Home. It appears to me that they make an attempt to place girls in their home that have a potential for success. The above statement is in reference to that fact that some girls need a much more structured environment for the initial stages of rehabilitation. I strongly encourage your city officials to look favorably upon =he request of the Welcome Community Home Administration and not look at it as a liability but as an asset or resourcQ available to your locality. Sincerely, kVl,ar enz, jU1,� 26 Assistant Principal WY Ui SHAKOPEE RDL/mk L STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE OFFICE OF THE CENTENNIAL OFFICE BUILDING GENERAL COMMISSIONER INFORMATION 612/296-2701 ST. PAUL., MINNESOTA 55155 612/296-6117 June 23, 1978 Mr. Doug Reeder, City Administrator Shakopee City Hall 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Re: Welcome Community Homes' Application for Conditional Use Permit Dear Mr. Reeder: Bob Coder, Administrator of Welcome Community Homes, Inc., has informed me that some questions have arisen in connection with their application for a conditional use permit for operation of a group home for adolescent boys at the Patterson farm in Shakopee. I understand that these questions con- cern complaints about other group homes operated by Welcome Community Homes and other such program operators. Since February, 1977, I have been the Minnesota Department of Public Welfare residential licensing consultant responsible for all of the approximately 50 group homes and residential treatment centers for children in the seven county metro area which are subject to licensing by the State Welfare Depart- ment, including all four of the group homes currently operated by Welcome. This does not include community corrections programs, which are the respon- sibility of the Minnesota Department of Corrections, or any residential pro- grams actually operated by government agencies. As such, I thoroughly review each of these 50 programs at least once a year for licensing purposes, and also investigate any complaints that may arise during the rest of the year. I am, therefore, writing this letter to attempt to clarify the status and reputation of Welcome Community Homes. Welcome Community Homes has always given me full cooperation, and has con- sistently conducted highly professional programs for children with carefully selected and well-trained staff. Since I began as a residential licensing consultant one and one-half years ago, there have been complaints concerning five or six of the 50 programs I am responsible for, including just one con- cerning a Welcome group home. That complaint was very carefully and respon- sibly dealt with and corrected in full cooperation with all parties concerned. Prior to my tenure as licensing consultant, there was a dispute between the Welcome Homes management and one of their employees, which erupted into AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER gym" DPW-825 18-771 l Z4 Page Two Mr. Doug Reeder, City Administrator June 23, 1978 angry charges of fraud. However, I understand that this complaint was found to be without merit, and I know that there has been no further mention of it in any phone calls or correspondence in the past one and one-half years. I want to emphasize the importance of community programs such as Welcome Community Homes, to provide a constructive temporary home for children from troubled families. Most of these children should be placed in their own community, not only for their own benefit, but also to serve a pressing need of their community. The teen-aged boys to be served at this proposed new group home are not seriously delinquent or disturbed, and will usually respond very well to the efforts of the group home staff to guide them toward responsible citizenship, as well as stable and satisfying adulthood. This includes paying careful attention to their community and neighborhood be- havior, in order to develop their respect for the rights of others. This effort has been very effective in most group homes, and I expect that it would be in the proposed Welcome Community Home in Shakopee. I hope the above information will help clarify some of the issues and concerns surrounding this proposed new group home. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Si rely ours, eter J. iniker Residential Licensing Consultant 296-6851 GF/boo cc: Robert Coder, Administrator Welcome Community Homes, Inc. w RORER r J. SC10111 Z scnator 36th l?istt ict AAAL11'1, Nliruf�,OtI »±52 Oil icc. �jya� St i'aul_ n;linnc;uta `il>5 Snate June 22, 1978 State of N1hinesuta Mr. Douglas S. Reeder City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Dear Doug: In response to your letter regarding funds for a senior citizens' housing facility in Shakopee, it just happened that I have been in contact today with Jim Solem about a similar situation for the city of New Prague. As you know, New Prague is now in Region 9 and no longer will compete with the rest of Scott County for Housing and Urban Development money in the Metro Council ' s region. In my discussion with Mr. Solem I learned that funds for senior citizens' housing have become very scarce because of current federal policy setting priorities for funds to rehabilitate family-type housing. I feel that HUD and Congress are in error when they mandate how we should spend money they allocate to us because we certainly are in a position to better understand our area's needs than any agency in Washington, D.C. I suggested to Mr. Solem that the Fed's should understand that if we can provide adequate apartment-type housing for senior citizens in our communities, many of whom are single occupants of family-type homes , then these homes will be available to families thereby relieving the pressure for both senior citizen and family-type housing. I was informed today that presently there is no money available for senior citizen housing but that a new allocation will be made available sometime in November. I would suggest that you have your proposal prepared and sub- mitted to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency so that it can receive the priority rating I feel the city of Shakopee deserves in its effort to help correct its serious housing shortage. I am sending Mr. Solem a copy of this letter to alert himr of my total support for your proposal . Sincerely, RECEIVVD ��u JUN 26 1978 RJS:jd ROBERT J. SCHMITZ CC: Jim Solem CITE( Of, SHAKOPEE ( ONINI17" ELS Vic:: Chairman, Local GmClnlnCnt • liap"portation (;cncral I cgislation - Elections u TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Douglas S . Reeder , City Administrator RE: MAMA Police Arbitration Award DATE: June 27, 1978 Following is a breakdown of the arbitration award and comparison with our settlement . A. Salary Top patrol -- $1 , 520 (Shakopee -- $1 , 500) Time to cop -- all cities 30 months (Shakopee -- 30 months) B. Longevity The award gave officer choice of longevity or college incentive but not both . Percent of Longevity College Incentive Extra Salary 4-7 years 45-89 credits 3% ($45) 8-11 years 90-134 credits 5% ($75) 12-15 years 135-179 credits 7% ($105) 16 and over 180 or more 9% ($135) Shakopee 6-10 years $20 per month 1 . 3% 11-15 years $40 per month :� . 7% 16 and over $60 per month 4% C . Differential for Detectives Award -- $85 (Shakopee -- $75) The award included school liaison (Shakopee does not pay extra). D. Shift Differential The award gave no shift differential (Shakopee doesn' t either). E . Court Time The award made no changes -- 2 hours at 12 times salary (Shakopee has same). F . Severance Pay No award, local bargaining (Shakopee has conversion of sick leave to maximum of 120 days at � pay). G . Vacation The award gives no change in vacation (Shakopee is on same schedule). H. Holiday The award gives no change (Shakopee has same schedule). Il r I . Insurance The award denied dental and legal insurance , and gives $75 per month for health and life (Shakopee has $75 per month) . J . Injury or Death The award grants 90 days with 5 day waiting period (Shakopee has 60 days with 5 day waiting period). K. Shift Change Notice The award makes no changes (Shakopee is same). L . Insurance for Retired Employee The unicn withdrew request. M. Uniform Allowance The award says employer will provide uniform -- no cash (eliminates $200 payment). (Shakopee has $277 . 90 cash -- 2 for non-uniformed). N. Term of Agreement The award is for one year (Shakopee ' s for three years), Comment The award is not as bad as I thought it might be ; however, I feel our contract is better . DSR:meh