HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/1982 MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Non-agenda Informational Items
DATE: September 2 , 1982
1 . D. D. Heinz has submitted her resignation, its on the agenda,
effective October 1 , 1982 . D. D. had reviewed the "proposed"
pay plan with Tom Brownell and I which reclassified her posi-
tion from Administrative Assistant to Secretary , and made a
decision to move on. Tom believes this was only part of a
decision she had been considering for some time and that it
will be a good move for her.
2 . Paster Charles Dunning from a Minneapolis church called to express
support for our defending our obscenity ordinance .
3 . The Shakopee Professional Group sold bonds rather than mortgage
revenue notes . They originally planned on selling mortgage
notes according to their application, hence a condition of
final approval was that they sell mortgage notes and submit
an :architect ' s certificate of estimated value which shall be
equal to 90% of the total value of he notes issued. According
to the City' s legal counsel it doesn' t really matter whether
the sale is for notes or bonds .
4. In January of 1981 the City was given notice that Mr. William
Chard claimed damages from the City because work under the
contract with Richard Knutson, Inc. was not completed within
the 60 days . On August 31st the City was properly served a
sun ons regarding the damages claimed as a result of the delay
in completion of the work and also asking that the interest
being charged be reduced from 8-3/4% to 8% as provided in the
developers agreement and Mr. Chard be reimbursed for all
interest payments exceeding 8% per annum.
5 . The Lower Minnesota River Watershed District has reviewed
Shakopee ' s request for a grant for that portion of the
Minnesota River Valley Trail would tie into our downtown
plans . They liked what they saw but said their 1983 and
1984 grant monies were earmarked for Bloomington projects .
They did suggest we apply again in ' 83 ( for ' 84 ) in case there
are funding changes so we will follow-up with a ' 84 application.
6 . Jim Karkanen has completed the repairs to the shoulder in
Weinandt Acres and that completes the list of items Harry
Weinandt asked us to follow-up on.
7 . Budget follow-up materials :
a. Attached is a memo from Gregg explaining what debt service
surplus can be used for.
b. Attached is the expanded pay plan showing each individual ' s
longevity.
Non-agenda Informational Items
Page Two
September 2 , 1982
c . I have received the League of Cities ' State-wide Salary
Survey for cities over 2500 in population and will bring
it to our next meeting.
d . . We have had problems with the local survey of salaries
because businesses don' t want to give us the data . We are
trying another angle .
8 . Attached is a National League of Cities Legislative Letter on
Tax Legislation, please note the changes in Industrial Revenue
Bonds .
9 . Attached is a copy of the agenda for the Metro Waste Control
Commission workshop. Both the Suburban Rate Authority and
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities are sponsors of
the workshop. I urge everyone that can to attend.
10. Attached are three responses from our National Representatives
on issues Council has taken positions on.
11 . Attached is a letter from the DNR denying our request to use
copper sulfate to kill algae in the mill pond. Both George
and I met with DNR representatives Wednesday in an effort to
gee them to reverse their decision which, from the letter ,
appears to be based upon faulty information.
12 . Attached is a Northwestern Bell Telephone rate increase notice .
13 . Attached are the minutes of the July 21 , 1982 Suburban Rate
Authority ( SRA) meeting. Note the items checked.
14. Attached are the minutes of the August 5 , 1982 Board of Adjust-
ments and Appeals meeting.
15 . Attached are the minutes of the August 5 , 1982 Planning Commis-
sion meeting.
16 . Attached is the monthly calendar for September.
17 . Attached is the August Building Activity Report .
7c(_,
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Use of Surplus Debt Service Funds
DATE: September 1 , 1982
Pursuant to Council discussion of August 24, 1982 and your note
of August 31st , Ihave contacted our financial consultant and our
bond attorney regarding the use of "surplus" debt service monies .
The applicable statues are MSA 429 . 091 and 475 . 61 . The former
references to the latter which is excepted as follows :
. . . any surplus remaining in the debt service fund
when the obligations and interest thereon are paid
may be appropriated to any other general purpose by
the municipality. "
All of the above is in the context of having a separate sinking
fund for each issue, which Shakopee does .
Therefore, Council could utilize special levies for debt service
( i . e. 1967 improvement fund) to make up deficiencies and for funds
with surplus monies , transfer that surplus to the General Fund
rather than another debt service or the P. I .R. Fund. This could
provide for an occasional bump for the General Fund.
GV/jms
'
'd 'd 'd 'd
I• I I I
H H P-' H
O 0 H. 0
£ £ an £
v,
.-. � — — H H H tIl H 'rJ C CI)
Q v, .4- w N H O\ v, -- 0 \0 -I >t v, w H 0 c+
— ._. ... • . ap • . 0' cr p
••••• vF' H c+
m• 0 0 (\ H CD 'd P H C t'i (D hI 3 x N) Ni C" 0 n 0 0
'd a' OD 'i H m 0 O d (D H. CD CD I) ID H. •
(D cC H \n CD (D O m 'd CD c+ 'i 'i (D P 'i 'i as m
(D CD (D I P) c< H. 'i H. m -' c+ O R° U)
c 'Pi \..n H P (D I") UD GD cC d c+ P x c+ 0 II P
P 'd (D H. 0 'i a4 I d (D CD I?. x H 'i
'i m A 'i 'd m O 'd P H H H. tII CD 0 I.I H. Cl) H. C
• 0 H H• 'i P P. (D H. 0) .0 'd 'd 00 P c+ (D
O c+ A" CD O t' c+ Ni C d O (D (D 0 d R° I-''C
'-h CD (D m 'd H. H. 'I + (D CD H. 'i 'i H. CD
CD I-4)'+) 'd H. m A H) w ~U ) '•d a d w
(D H) H. H P 0, CD I H 0 (D H. H.
'i 0 'i )) c+ H. m 'n 0 'd O m O d CD
C 'i m Cl) •D £ Cl) H. cC d 'i (D ON (D a an m I c+ p) 0 'i • C 'i 11 H
(D P) 1-+) A' 0 A Cl) H. P+ r)) P+ P P
cn
(D H a4 P 0 0 H -, a 0 O aD 0 C) Cl)
'i 'i c+ a H. II 'i A. II CD H-
O H. 'i 'd 'd H. a "'
r. H.
H. CD N Om0 X H a a H_ ]. 'rx CD H ()
c+ H. H. 'd m RI H � 0 O P O p
ED
-69- m c+ (D
£ N H. 'i (D H I-I (D .-' H.
CD U) c+ 0 I-'• ¢ v ' ( 0
(D O Cl) 0' 0 c.< E/
Oz. d '.< 0 v
HI c+ 0
O c+ CD 0 c+ RNid ^ 0' P () 0 0 r" 0
c+ -w.- cC CD P" N HHHO H H H H R H I-' H H H H I-' H I—' Cl) x CD
H. C t=1r 0 Cl) 0 N ON 'mob 'T7 'd c+ tri H
m W 1-4) d H H 0 'd
c0 H 0 c+ •-•-•-3 • • P - a
IV hi
.d• 'i `C 'i c+
H - C H. C) -J a
O C HI 0 H- U) vi X <.
`C :�' d n d c+ {i+ ci Jl '
O H. 0.. (D - H H H H H H H H H H H H H H I-' H H W Z r_
(D c+ I cm+ cn -( w w \.n w w w R) N N NCV RD N 0 0 0 'i 0
£ (D d' O W Co OD U �' v1 vi 01 01 vl vi \n (s al O\ c+ '+,
0' 'i (D 'i '1 'd -I al G\ N.) (..k) 0 0 J -4 � -1 -1w w -4 -4 --4 C' 0
CD c+ 0 NH
It• 0 0 H.P H.
En U)
0' CD a c+ c+
H. H 0 H. H.
COa'
'i o � < -� 0
{A- H O
(D £ R H.a, .71H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H R H O
1-3
R 'I H) a, v1 (T -P" -P" "w wwwwww H H H K
a' H. P 0 CD ODEA) w 0) N (.0w 4 - - 4wwwww (D 0
c+ ON UHi H) n O\O\ 0\ ^ N00H HH HH H IO
- 4COCDD P H)
CD
c+ 'i H
P
'
• d CD 0 'd 0) O
H 'd
(D• s I•'• c+ \C)
(D m I 0H. I
O\
a cn H H H H H H H H H H R H H H H H H H O
CD CD (D 'd -4 n `i 0\O\ COVI O\0\� 01 vi \n vi N N 1\) £ ag
X P H £
WHH \0 \0000 OOOOOOCDCCDOD 0
0 P < `0 H- 0\O\ OD\O CO OD.P-- -P" -P-- -P" 4 .P -P-- H H H 0�
A 'i W CD 0 '.' - vH PD 3
m cC 'I cD
H. m m c+ 'o
N 0 H. £ 0 COC�� -4 0)0)
0 H. Cl) I I I I I I N
(D 'd c+ (D - . w H vl -F" .... ,
X P c+ .'Y .......... 0 v....
'd `-< A' H.
O\
(D (D (D H
CH.D P 0 C A' H H H H N H H H H H H H H H H H H H `d
A d Cl) 'i (D \O -1 -J H i l -4 O\ O\ON ON ON ON ON - 4 - II
C) • H. H• OD\O 0 -J CO OD--4 -4 -4 -4 1 1 -J CO N Co H
wvi `I C\ \0 1 1--4 0\ O\O\O\ ON H Hwww '0i 0
N
H. 0 c .�.-. O d
En• 0 CD 0 H H H H H CD
`< I I I I I P P
v, 'i c+
CD 0 .. H 0 --.1 m 0
c+ �� — J
P II 0 c
cc+ '-< at) C.)-"
'd
Fc
cy
i
H.
tia
1
.-. .. 4- .:- A a w w a N N 'd CD
Co 1 vi w N £ H ON vri 0 >C Oo :>G ON 0 0 c
O-
m COn IO-1) Oy ti Cl) CD x n CD a r CD Cr) ''d it CD 0 0
H. c+ H r• P £ CD r• P (D O c+ r4 O•QP P •
X CD O c+ r• H F-' Z 0 r• (D c+ ''i c+ c+
P. C) (D P c+ r• H H. 0 • (111 '-i 1R° Cn
a () c+ n 0 m 0 C Ot CD 0 0
c+ 'i H) c+ tri 0 ar• _ m c+ P o c+ CD
0 H.
cC P (~D 0 � c+ Oa O it N CG
r•
(D R c+ 'OY . a 11 R a P CD 0
1 c+ - \ H c+ m CD H•
N m (D m i-3 c (D R. aa 11 (D
x a
`° a• X v Co• °a Co c+ P'
n P c+ c+ a Co (D m
'1 oa H•0 P. H �+ a Cl)
H.
H)
a 0 0 11 0) P. 0 Cl) P.
.� n
c+ n 'd £ cm+ r (1) P
P. H. (D (D 0 c+
m (D m c+ E H) c+ r•
cP.
0
'-1 • 0+ 0 r + N Z
CD H c+ C ...
C) (D I-, c+ ''i H +
a• H. a c+ — 0 O a)E
CD m CD
P. a -., 1-1:1R. P N 11O
CD m • OONFH 1-' N O FHH1-, I-SOI--HHIJNNHHHH �
a, (D HF •
a 0 `+
H) r F.
O 0
11 Z
0
Cl)
c+ • CD r•
▪ e• + r•cC1
0 c< P) c+
(D 1 N H1-' HI-' F-' HI-, 1-, F-' H1-' 1-' F-' I-' P
3 a m OD-a ODS \O Co 0 COa)0oco1 v,v, v, .n v, v, v3 v, .n '1 0
`d (D P N VI N N —1 w - 1 ON ON ON ON 1-' vn v1 v1 '.n v1 v1 v1\si vi c+ H)
H c+ CO 4"N H H vn \0 Co vi \ I viw OD co OD ODOoODCDa) OD
O•• O 1P 1 O H0 0
'0
Cl) W .-N
< P c+ 1
(Da"
(DD 1 aP. m O
n ID +.. H N 1-, N h' H F-' 1-' 1-, F-' 1-' H 1-' H 1-, 1-, ~ o
P IN c+ 3 Co OD co co 0 OD N \O \O OD ON ON ON O\O\0\0\O\ON K
Z CD P. (D 1 0 -1 1 4 v0 H OD OD Co CDN ON ON ON ON ON O\ON ON ON CD 0
Cl) • 0 p ODN 'nv1 O 4 O\.o .0x '-01 N N IV N N N N N N P H)
01
P p i
O ~PP ON 'b
Cf) F-' H
'0 P P 1
N• P v0
O 11 FJN N N NNNN 1-' HNHHI-' F-' 1•-' H '30
P) \0VC) \0VD H 0 4• N N N N0 ODODOD000DODOD0)OD E BA
CO Co OD --.10 \Owwwwvi O\O\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\ 0
CDH)P CO w \n vi 0 ON LA) 1 1 1 -1 ON"SD'-0'O'-0\.0'-0'-0'-0 \-0 0
P) y
(1D 0 co 0 1
0
H. 'i 0
I
O• H. H
(D m
P.
c+ P.
' 0
I-•
It
1-' 1-' 1-, 1-+ HH N N NNNNNNNNNNNNN '0
O ''i 0000 w H -1 -P--- -- -r-- -- 1\) 000000000 II
P (D \0 0'-0\0 0 H -1 CD ODOoODOD111 -111 -1 -1 -J y 3
N Cow 0 OD O 0\ O\O\O\ '-1 -1 --I -3 -1-1 -1 - 1 -3 'moi PD
H) (D — -..-..-.-s .•.i-..-.i•.—- —i-..-. CD
O H 1\) 1\) 1N) 1‘) 101V1\) 1\) N1\) NNN CD
1 N. H ON -F- 4 w N N N F-' H I-' 1- ' O Cl)
\p\0 1 w N 0 0 OD OD OD OD VO '< c+
vi 'Ui ' iw 000wwNNNNOD (D P
I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W
ON F-' I-, H N 1-' 1-, 1-' N Co Co 1 ---.1 'n 'i c+
10 H ..p---- a\w 0 0—.�....-.� co 0
�.......-.., v v.-... .C.
C
Crq
'0
'0 'O
0" cc Cl
I I I
H H
H. 0 0
cm
N ---, f3 CD 4' -F' U) a C-i U)
O `O
'd2 •'0 0 H o
• P)
Ca) O l Cl) 0 CD m H• cc+
m CD H. U) CD c< U) U) c+ x C) 0 0
C) Cl) CD C) CD CD Cl) P H• P) • U
'O P g 0 cH• CD 0 HoC+ '1 (CD 0 H N Ho coC R° 0
c+ Ii 'O 'I P CD c+ 'i c+ C) y 'i
H• H 'i Cl) P 0 'O 0 H. <
O 0 0 Ci) of c Cl H cCf H<
(n• ~' CD 0 O (D CD Cl) N• CD
O (OD Cl 0 P Cl 0
CD ''i H. c+ I 'i CD CD H•
c+ < Cl) P 'O c+ 'O Cl CD
O N• 'i CY B P
• 0 £ ,< (D 'i C)
Fi 0 0 c+ B P
C) H CD Cl)
'i H. C U U Cl)
lD O CD CD cf f
a Qa Cl PHo xH.
' Cl) 0 P
0
£ 'i U £ cf
CIIE H 0
�' Cl U
H
0 H CD L.
O P
c+ Cl) HO
H. 0
Ho H) 0 N N H H m
Cl) r H'
(-) el-
0
+(D p H.
0
'0 H. 0
H O Cl)
t
(D p -
CD m (.1) vi
c+
o •O •O •O C O ; '-i O
CD• C/) N N N N 'U) • Cf M
• CD N N N N H N'3
Ft '-0
H. CD '0
O c+
CD p
Cl 'i H H CX)
Cl co co W o K
p Q wLo u.) ^ P O
�
m• p H VD o1-3
O CCT v, 'O
o ClCO
H) H. I I
Cr) N ,----q) ‹)(D
'0 (D N H•' H H 0 £ o
(D H. N 000 N 0
'1 U O 0\0\0\ H 0
K )
N• " CD
N
~ O
n I N lii m 'O
00 N
H. Q)) I
• P N
oa a • 0 - 1-3`•Po
H o I-, IJ H I-' H '0
PiH
`D " (CD
(D H
m 0N
'O (D c
OP)
H I C1-1 +
co
Cl v m 0'-
H'
H C
H.
c+ Q4
b
1--,'d 1-''d N 'd O''d
E c1 E O £ a1
,. rn rn o' rn v, 'J w w N H H H
w N H w N H 0 H \O H1-' \O NH .
�. ._. .
Hi Y m H 'C ^ Ds>'d Hi) B P) c+ O c+ H
cn `- O (D B m 11 O CD c+ O' C 0" O"
'i m m 0 P) H. O 'S O (D (D (D (D CD D. Ds. 0 'd 0 'i 'd CD 0 0 'd
(D H. c+ m 'i O £ C c+ P) '3 H. U) Cl H. H H. H. 0 J H. H• O
n m (D (D U1 N• N• H. H -.) (+ ) c+ U) 9 c+ P) '-'S O H H. cc N 0'
O c+ B B c+ C O O' F-b \n H £ C `C H. H'0 `C 00 n CD n H
• P) • c+ 0 0 O' cD O CDH. o O m
cH.
(DD c+ 0 H) `' c+ U) CRI
CSD a y o B P) Cl • 0 H. H) 0 m H 0 0 n
O 0 u) 0' "1 C m 'i Coo m (Xi D> (D 011 0 O Ot ,1
a o' O H CD £ N O H' (D O O P (D H' c+ m 'i 'd t7 O' cn H. 0
(D (D (D O 'S H. 'i c+ O zia 0 0 O m x' t7 W H. H. 'd 0 0 '1
P., n n < (-+ O tC O cc H. (f) O H'
B• �
H.
He rn0 ~)
¢) £ W O PCD H) ' CD CD
--
+ O PH n 0 7 PN U) W c+ 0" c+ (D U) n c+ 'S d .
-e9-m m CD I m tC O o O c+ '1 D P 0
d O' aW c £ oNaa P 0 c+ R° 0 0 0
UB O H N F 'i t a) c+ 9 c+ 0 '1 H d
0 O O m H.'d W D B c+ P a xi H. (D
b i H. H 'i W 'i D OCO N• n ii0 — CD o '1
D c+ 'i tC n W a O C (D 0 n N
.
O H. CO P c+ O' c+ c+ O H. P)
cO w d B '1 H. P H a O H.
m .�
c+ ;n 'd (D P O 0' O O P H'
cf-O' Pm •••-> 'S O O Ot) H O O O O b
0
'i O c< O c+O D £ g a Ma O F1 co
m ti Wd (D G PCD
o P O' 0' c+ 'd 'i 1-1) Cr c+
O
0 Cl ''S H. (D ' (D O 'i P) O cC H 0 c+
P O (n m PP) 'd 0 0 ''i P '1
n O 0 O `-- c+ a P) B o''d 04 c+ c+
x' m 'd O B (D m cC P O O (D P £ H.
O H. (D c+ 0 >4 m m I-' 0 0
O a' 'i O n 'd H. W (D H • O
(~D H. c0+ P m N 'O 0 a F
cF a � F- m
.- Cl) N O' B ~ • 0" 0
a c+ (D c+ �� 'd
Oti H. O F-' • H. (D m (D (D O (D 'i 0 p
(D (D a c< M B £ P P H) n
U) cD H' (D H' HP) O H. n
c+ • O H) n O c+ P) C c+ c+ (D H. H 0 H H H IJ H H H H O H x
0' c+ PPc+ O' '^S (D O O' H. Pc+ c o H
D dCD mO C. O O
Xl PH H. c+ c+ P
W c O O H. O' W 0'a O m 'd m
P., c+ a H• O O ''i ''h N O c+ H• O m H U.
c• O 0 O (D c+ a P c+'d O
O (D IJ c+ H m (D ''b (D 'i o O1-3
m 'i (D O O £ 'i O 'i c+ F-'• H a H G
c+ mo O m 'i H. m P) (D
B c+ m c+ P 0 'd H H O c+ 'i 0
D C c+ F-' D O c+ O Ot) q). H.
O W c+ (D H. a n O' O ' w I-, N N 1
2:
c+ O0o 0 Co--, Co--, H\ rO
Pm O '-h 0 O W O. \O Or• ,l`
a C
P 0 c+ (D H. P H 0 H \1 'b 0 vi vi 0a,
rn n < L=1
n C P O P) n 'i w P • O O www 0
O cD P O O 0ro m F o r 'i O H H 0 c 'i c+ Di ZH
(On P) 'd Cl, c+ P O .•. B 'd (D H c+ P) 'i H H.
H.011 0 'i O' a H• O (D O m H) O' O w Z H H N N N N N w N , N c-+D• c+ m O-
m (D 0' a (D c-.. O C c+ H (D a 0 "— OD O) v-t - q:, O VD '
9 -
ro
( H c_.. 'd Cl)UO) N 'i O cc+ >C 0' '-O O 0 N co -J \O w O' H CO H co O C
O O' n O P c+ H. n (D N C 0
E C 0O 0OOHO
c+ (D a ` BP) ✓ nOD D 0 COop 0 m it
(D
0 0 H. O 'd O n 'S `.
£ 'd O a 'd O a`• c+ cf C H.
H. 'i 'i (D H c1- O H. n (D c+ H U) '-e)c+ O x m P) m m O (D H. 'h 'i H. O
m nBO m '1 m 0 'i H) rH 0 H
(I) m O H• O D d a' CD 0 0 w N
co
y.
( cH. 'i 0 °C m c+0 0 0 w -.4 wN 9x
c+ aII c �O O O N w (D H
• D c+ H c+ Oa • --I o
d 0 O O' CDc Ft+ O D 0 OO PCT)
acn cm 0 HP N W C N(1) o m ' c+ N 1-3 O H. 'd v �.. P D
1-1 et
m F-'• 'i (D O' N• (D O' H) O 1-, O .-. 'i
H. c+- H. H. O CD O'd w Z H N N N N w w -P"w N m 0
011 H. 0 £ H 0 cC c)'L3 o \O H \O Cc) \O w w w
-4 Ft
O O PO' H. N d O O H
P 0 0 0 c+ n w c+ d 0 -J a\ \O N w vi vOD 0
I-W
c+ Cl H. ' 0 cC O 0 c+ 0H ) OW0
F 0 0 0
a H. c+ W 0' r• O 7> P) r• O m
c+ O' U) 'i (D m(D P c+ m O
d O' 0 c+ cC c+ m O P O H.
CD 0' c+ c0+ er`< (D N c+ n H. o o P
-P- w N N w w w l,.) N w w N
O' cD O' 0 O P O" F-' m B - ) w H 1--' N N w -4 \O Co "O
H.
0 I O N c+ O ) W P) I- a' vi `i 0 V) N H w - H 0 vi. w
'b CD U) 'i c+ c+ 0Co N 0 O.
OOO
> B G -- O Q4 H O P0 ON 0 ' 0 0 ~
• 0 N < i NO H. O
O
U) C O D H Fi O ' 'Y H-
0" (D (D 0 O m d £ ( N O OH.
D> H.
0' 0nC0 a \II ry '0 '0 1-,
cn Qc+ 0 ci CO O (D
ccn+ 0 0 CDH Fi O (D 'd O m a ni N t< N O F-' Co0^ m O m
• 'i O U Ft d O
' OIHm ClNP
0 d P m H3-'d O F-' c+ Cl
0" O O H• w 0 m 'S P) £ n a
H. m H) O H• P) (D a 'i H. H. H.
CD H. H. O O H £ CD c+ c+ c+ O
.-i N S P) cG UU)i 'pi 'd 0" �04
t
0• a H.• O P • Cl I+ m
0
RECEWED
National 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Officers: AUG 3 1982 F
,6?Pe" U u I Acilp League Washington,D.C. President
20004 Ferd L.Harrison
Mayor,Scotland
NizenTlyCoirCities (202)626-3000SHAKOPEE
irst Vice Presiden
Cable:NLCITIES Charles Royer
Mayor,Seattle,Washington
Second Vice President
LEGISLATIVE LETTER George LatimerMayor,St.Paul,Minnesota
Immediate Past President
August 27, 1982 William H.Hudnut,Ill
Mayor,Indianapolis,Indiana
Executive Director
Alan Beals
To: (1) Mayors and Managers of Direct Member Cities
( 2) Executive Directors of State Municipal Leagues
(3) Steering Committee Members
From: -George Gross, Director , Federal Relatione.t.d.°.
In this issue : Tax Legislation
On August 19 the House and Senate passed the Tax Equity and Fiscal
Responsibility Act of 1982, which will raise $98. 3 billion in
additional revenue over a three-year period (FY' s 1983-1985) . The
August 23 edition of Nation' s Cities Weekly reviewed the various
provisions of the Act of interest to city officials, but below is
a more detailed explanation of the amendments affecting industrial
revenue bonds and mortgage revenue bonds.
The other provision in the new• law that will have a direct impact
on the municipal bond market is the so-called minimum corporate
tax. After December 31, 1982, corporations will have to reduce by
15 percent the interest they deduct from their taxes on borrowings
that are used to buy or carry tax-exempt bonds. Corporations most
affected by this provision are banks, which currently hold
45 percent of all tax-exempt bonds. Both Treasury and the
Municipal Finance Officers Association have estimated that this
provision will drive up interest rates to issuers by reducing bank
demand--for--bonds. Treasury has estimated the increase to be . 50
to . 75 percentage points (50-75 basis points) ; the MFOA estimate
is 1.00 percentage point (100 basis points) .
An earlier proposal calling for a minimum tax on individuals that
would have directly taxed interest earned from tax-exempt bonds
was amended on the Senate floor to delete any application of the
tax to bond interest. The Act reflects this amendment.
Past Presidents:Tom Bradley,Mayor,Los Angeles,California•Henry W.Maier,Mayor,Milwaukee,Wisconsin•Tom Moody,Mayor,Columbus,Ohio•Jessie M.Rattley,Councilwoman,Newport
News,Virginia•John P.Rousakis,Mayor,Savannah,Georgia•Directors:Richard Arrington,Jr.,Mayor,Birmingham,Alabama•Carol Bellamy,Council President,New York.New York•Arne
Boyum,Executive Director,North Dakota League of Cities•Richard S.Caliguiri,Mayor,Pittsburgh,Pennsylvania•Malcolm Clark,Council Member,Port Arthur,Texas•Joanne Collins,Council
Member,Kansas City,Missouri•Thomas H.Cooke,Jr.,Mayor,East Orange,New Jersey•David Cunningham,Council Member,Los Angeles,California•W.Elmer George,Executive Director,
Georgia Municipal Association•Karen M.Graves,Commissioner,Salina,Kansas•Anne Gresham,Council Member,Grand Prairie,Texas•Paul E.Haney,Council Member.Rochester,New York
Jonathan B.Howes,Mayor Pro Tem,Chapel Hill,North Carolina•George M.Israel,Ill,Mayor,Macon,Georgia•Myra Jones,Vice Mayor,Little Rock,Arkansas•Christopher G.Lockwood,
Executive Director,Maine Municipal Association•Bob Martinez,Mayor,Tampa,Florida•Robert H.Miller,Executive Director,South Dakota Municipal League•Jack Nelson,Mayor,Beaverton,
Oregon•Mary Neuhauser,Council Member,Iowa City,Iowa•C.David Nuessen,Mayor,Quincy,Illinois•Hernan Padilla,Mayor,San Juan,Puerto Rico•Donald R.Peoples,Chief Executive,
Butte,Montana Martin L.Peterson,Executive Director,Association of Idaho Cities•Michael J.Quinn,Executive Director,Indiana Association of Cities and Towns•Vernon H.Ricks,Jr.,Mayor Pro
Tem,Takoma Park,Maryland•Arthur E.Trujillo,Mayor,Santa Fe,New Mexico•George V.Voinovich,Mayor,Cleveland.Ohio•Daniel K.Whitehurst,Mayor,Fresno,California•Don A.
Zimmerman,Executive Director,Arkansas Municipal League.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS IN TAX EQUITY AND FISCAL
RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1982 AFFECTING TAX-EXEMPT BONDS
Industrial Revenue Bonds
1. A public hearing and approval by an elected official
or legislative body or voter referendum are required
by both the issuing jurisdiction and the jurisdiction
where the facilities are located.
2. Facilities financed with bonds must be depreciated
on a straight-line basis using accelerated depre-
ciation (ACRS) lives. Full ACRS deductions would
still be permitted for low-income rental housing,
municipal sewage or solid waste facilities , pollution
control facilities for plants placed in service prior
to July 1, 1982, and facilities for which UDAG grant
has been awarded.
3. Information regarding the amount of the lendable
proceeds, the interest rate, term of the issue,
and principle users must be reported to the IRS
for bonds issued during the preceding calendar
quarter. (This requrement also applies to student
loan bonds and bonds for tax-exempt organizations
under Sec. 501 (c) (3) of IRC. )
4. The average term for maturity of bonds would be
limited to a period no greater than 120 percent
of the average economic life of the assets financed
by the bonds.
5. Small issue IRB' s (under $10 million) are not
permitted where 25 percent or more of the bond
proceeds are used to finance retail food and
beverage services (except grocery stores) , auto-
mobile sales or service, and the provision of
recreation or entertainment. No portion of the
proceeds may be used to finance any private or
commercial golf course, country club, massage
parlor, tennis club, skating facility, racquet
sports facility, hot tub facility, suntan facility,
or race track.
- 2
TAX EQUITY AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1982
6 . Small issue composite bonds are explicitly
permitted as long as all facilities in an issue
are located in the same state and no user (in-
cluding franchises) finances more than one
facility in the same issue.
7. Certain research and development expenditures
are excluded from the calculation of the capital
expenditure limits for small issue IRBs.
8. Bonds can additionally be used for the following
purposes: (a) gas distribution facilities in
service areas consisting of no more than a city
and a contiguous county; (b) local district
heating and cooling facilities; (c) acquisition
of existing pollution control facilities by a
regional pollution control authority which it
will operate; (d) advance refunding bonds for
certain bonds of the Port Authority of St. Paul;
and (e) ferries used in providing mass trans-
portation services.
9. $1 million or smaller "clean limit" bonds cannot
be issued as part of any other tax-exempt obli-
gations.
10. Small issues IRB' s cannot be issued after December 31,
1986.
11. In general, the above provisions apply to bonds
issued after December 31, 1982. Item #2 applies
to property placed in service after December 31,
1982 to the extent it is- financed--by bonds issued
after June 30 , 1982. Items #6 , 8 ,9 , and 10 are
effective after the date of enactment of the Act.
Certain exceptions are made for refunding bonds.
12. After December 31, 1982, all tax-exempt obligations
must be issued in registered form except those not
offered for public sale or less than 1 year in
maturity.
- 3 -
TAX EQUITY AND FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT OF 1982
IRB ' s for Multi-Family Rental Housing
1. "Individuals of low and moderate income" is defined
as 80 percent of the area median income.
2. The period over which 20 percent of the housing
units (15 percent in targeted area) must be made
available for individuals of low or moderate in-
come is the longer of (a) 10 years after one-half
the project is first occupied, (b) one-half the
longest maturity of the bonds, or (c) the date on
which any subsidy contract expires. (The current
requirement is 20 years. )
3. These amendments apply for obligations issued
after the date of enactment of the Act.
Mortgage Revenue Bonds
1. 90 percent (instead of 100 percent) of the lendable
proceeds must go to first-time homebuyers.
2. Proceeds can be used to purchase homes up to 110
percent (instead of 90 percent) of the average area
purchased price. The limit is 120 percent in
targeted areas (instead of 110 percent) .
3. The effective rate of interest on mortgages financed
with bonds cannot exceed the yields on the issue
by more than 1-1/8 (1. 125) percentage points
(instead of 1 percentage point) .
4. Reserves do not have to be sold at a loss in order
to meet the reserve liquidation requirement.
5. Cooperative housing can generally be treated as
single-family housing for purposes of bond financing.
(Other clarifications are made for cooperative housing) .
6. These amendments apply generally to obligations
issued after the date of enactment of the Act
except item #2 which is effective for obligations
issued after April 24 , 1979 to the extent proceeds
have not been committed prior to enactment.
- 4 -
SPOTLIGHT ON THE
METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION
8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. , September 24, 1982
Hopkins House, 1501 Highway 7, Hopkins
Sponsored by:
The Suburban Rate Authority
The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
The Council of Metro Area Leagues of Women Voters
The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission
The Metropolitan Council
The Citizens League
The St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce
The Greater Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce
The Metropolitan Inter-County Association
The organization of a conference on the MWCC began with a Resolution of the
Board of Directors of the Suburban Rate Authority to assemble such a conference
for the purpose of creating a forum for a discussion of MWCC operations, spending
and future sewer rates. The SRA also resolved to seek the assistance of others
whose perspectives would ensure that the conference will become known as an
example of metropolitan cooperation. The additional sponsors have participated
extensively in the planning and execution of the conference.
PROGRAM:
8:30 a.m. Late registration at the door.
9:00 a.m. Morning Session opening remarks.
Clayton L. LeFevere, Attorney, LeFevere, Lefler,
Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz, Morning Session moderator
9:05 a.m. Orientation to the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission; its
history, organization and the regulatory framework within
which it must operate.
Salsbury Adams, Chairman of the MWCC
9:30 a.m. MWCC costs, funding and the basis for sewer charges.
Richard L. Berg, MWCC Controller
10:00 a.m. Oversight of the MWCC; present relationships.
Representative Gordon Voss, Chairman, House Local
and Urban Affairs Committee
10: 15 a.m. Morning break
10:30 a.m. Panel discussion: Is there a need for additional oversight?
Is there a need for a dispute-resolution mechanism?
Representative Connie Levi, District 55A
Roger Martin, Director of Environmental Engineering, Sperry Univac
Charles Weaver, Chairman, Metropolitan Council
James Willis, City Manager, City of Plymouth
11:30 a.m. Question and Answer Session.
Morning speakers and panelists
Noon: Lunch (provided) .
1:00 p.m. Afternoon Session opening remarks.
Mary Anderson, President, Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities, Afternoon Session moderator
1:05 p.m. Requirements of the state and federal governments.
Louis J. Breimhurst, Executive Director, MPCA
Robert Foxen, Consultant and formerly with the EPA
1:45 p.m. Issues before the MWCC, capital construction, alternatives and
anticipated sewer rates.
George Lusher, Chief Administrator, MWCC
2:15 p.m. Afternoon break.
2:30 p.m. Panel discussion: Reactions to previous presentations.
Graydon Boeck, Consulting Engineer
Harold B. Field, Jr. , attorney, Leonard, Street & Deinhard,
former chairman, MPCA
Barbara Lukerman, consultant, former chairman, MWCC
Brad Robinson, Robinson Rubber Products Co.
Paul Scheunemann, Mayor, City of Burnsville
3:20 p.m. Question and Answer Session.
Afternoon speakers and panelists
4:00 p.m. Closing remarks.
Curtis Johnson, Executive Director, Citizens League
REGISTRATION AND INFORMATION
The $15 registration fee includes lunch. Registration without lunch is $10.
Refunds will be made if cancellation is received not later than September 17.
Registrations will be taken at the door, if space is available, but advance
registration is strongly suggested. Questions concerning registration should be
directed to Phyllis Letendre, 739-1781, 2148 Lamplight Drive, Woodbury, Minnesota
55125. Questions concerning the conference should be directed to Clayton LeFevere
or Glenn Purdue, 333-0543.
ADVANCE REGISTRATION SHOULD BE MAILED NOT LATER THAN SEPTEMBER 15.
MWCC Conference Send to: Phyllis Letendre
Registration $15 (without lunch $10) 2148 Lamplight Dr.
Checks payable to "MWCC Conference" Woodbury, MN 55125
Please register the following individuals:
Name Address Organization Fee
Name and phone number of contact:
Total enclosed $
A,;
'TON! HAGEDORN DISTRICT OFFICES:
2ND DISTRICT,MINNESOTA P.O.Box 3148
MANKATO,MINNESOTA 56001
COMMITTEES: (507)387-8226
AGRICULTURE Congre�l of the niteb tate
211 SOUTH NEWTON STREET
PUBLIC WORKS AND ALBERT LEA, MINNESOTA 56007
TRANSPORTATION (507)377-1676
30ou/e of RepreOentatibe1 RONALD K.ENCE
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
yy-" }Y �y �� ((�1� /� '] ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
2344 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING iJ(Ji a51jin ton,ri.6V. 205 L5
WASHINGTON,D.C. 20515 J !�
(202)225-2.472
August 23, 1982
RECE;5..VED
AUG 2 61982
Mr. John K. Anderson
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Thank you very much for your letter informing me of the City Council ' s
vote of opposition to H.R. 4929. I appreciate your taking the time to
share the Council ' s views with me.
H. R. 4929 was ordered reported out of the House Committee on Education
and Labor on May 11, 1982, after several days of hearings, subcommittee
mark-up amd full committee mark-up.
I can certainly understand your concern over excessive federal intervention
in areas of state and local control , and I support the President's efforts to
reduce federal bureaucracy and regulation and to return decision-making powers
to the States.
The purpose of this legislation is not to usurp proper state authority
over public pension plans, but rather to protect the interests of the participants
and beneficiaries as well as the federal taxpayers in regard to these retirement
programs.
Be assured that I will give this legislation my very careful attention,
keeping your concerns in mind, should it come before the full House for con-
sideration.
Again, thank you for writing. With kind regards , I am
Sincer y,
1 War-ci
TOM HAGEDORN
Member of Congress
TH/lb
BILL FRENZEL DISTRICT OFFICES:
THIRD DISTRICT,MINNESOTA MAYBETH CHRISTENSEN
180 FEDERAL BUILDING
WASHINGTON OFFICE: MDINEAFOus 55401
1026 LONGWORTH BUILDING Congrems of thetfliteb &tato 612448-5100
202-225-2871 �} �y �y (� IRIS SAUNDERSON
joou�e of 3epregeutatite� 3601T"�CENTER BOULEVARD416
ST.Louis PARK 55416
612-925-4540
'NatibilifitOns ri.C. 20515 7711 1 'rt
August 30, 1982
SEP 1 1982
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Mr. John K. Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
129 E. First Avenue
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
Thank you for contacting my office regarding the changes in the tax laws
governing the use of tax exempt industrial development bonds (IDB).
H. R. 4961 contains several changes in the use of tax exempt bonds.
Fortunately, unlike most of the proposals that were under discussion, the
provisions in the bill do not place undue restrictions on the use of this
important financing resource.
In general the bill requires public hearings and elected official approval for
all IDB issues. IDB financed property will still be able to take advantage of
most of the benefits of the ACRS depreciation program, although tax exempt
financed property will have to be depreciated over the straight line method.
Restrictions are placed on the use of tax exempts for certain private
purpose uses.
In addition, provisions have been included to allow the use of so-called
"umbrella" bonds, to allow tax exempt financing for district heating projects,
and to allow the Saint Paul Port Authority to revise its tax exempt bond
program. Student loan bonds and bonds issued by tax exempt organizations
were left unaffected. Also included was a provision which ensures that
projects that were grandfathered under the 1980 Mortgage Revenue Bond Act
will be exempt from the ACRS changes in this bill.
Overall, I think the changes in the use of IDBs was fair and reasonable.
Considering the alternatives under discussion, this may be the best proposal
available.
I voted for H. R. 4961 , as I felt it was necessary in order to reduce the
federal deficit. If you have any questions on any of the bill's provisions,
please let me know.
Yours very truly,
""ga)
Bill Frenzel
Member of Congress
BF:dr
THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS
'21Cnifeb .cifafes Zenafe
WASHINGTON. O.C. 20510
August 19, 1982
RECEPEEI
...
Mr . John K. Anderson
City Administrator AUG 2 3 1982
City of Shakopee
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Dear John:
Thank you for contacting me about anti-trust legislation,
the Boulder decision . I appreciate your interest in this matter .
In view of your inquiry, I am sending you the enclosed
information. I hope you find it useful .
Again, thanks for writing. Please feel free to contact me
again.
//
Sinc,eiel ,
Rudy Boschwitz
united States Senator
RB/mc
Enclosure
DNR-8 J/
��nn STATE
TATE OF
�r
U�JU�J �SO LIQ
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
August 5, 1982
PHONE: _ (612) 296-2959 File No.
RECEIVED
AUG 1 61982
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue CITY OF SH AKOPEE
Shakopee, MN 55379
Dear Sir:
We have completed review of your application for a permit to chemically
control filamentous and plankton algae in Shakopee Millpond in Scott
County.
Shakopee Millpond is considered flowing water. Paragraph 6 of Section
3(a) of Commissioner's Order No. 1938 which regulates the destruction
and control of aquatic vegetation in public waters, states that permits
shall not be issued except in very rare instances for chemical control
of aquatic vegetation in rivers or other flowing waters.
Paragraph 2 of Section 3(a) of Commissioner's Order No. 1938 also states
that permits will not be issued in most instances where vegetation does
not interfere with swimming, boating, or other aquatic recreational
activity. Esthetic objections alone are not considered acceptable
reasons for control of vegetation.
Shakopee Millpond is also managed as a trout stream. Our netting data
shows that this pond will support trout. Because of the sensitivity
of trout to chemicals we are reluctant to allow the use of any chemical
which could jeopardize this resource.
In view of these observations, your request for an Aquatic Nuisance
Control Permit is respectfully denied.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, feel free to contact
me.
Sincerely,y
Mark A. Ebbers, Aquatic Nuisance Control Specialist
Metro Region Headquarters, Section of Fisheries
1200 Warner Road
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55106
MAE/lb
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
55
ice)?
BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION E EV
Lillian Warren-Lazenberry Chairperson
Leo G. Adams Commissioner 7 1982
Roger L. Hanson Commissioner
Terry Hoffman Commissioner CITlr ®� �AKt�PEE
Juanita R. Satterlee Commissioner
In the Matter of the Petition
of the Northwestern Bell Telephone Docket No. P-421/GR-82-2u3
Company for Authority to Change
Its Schedule of Rates and Charges
for Telephone Service in Minnesota
RATE INCREASE NOTICE
TO: Each Minnesota County and Municipality Affected by the Captioned Petition
Notice is hereby given that on April 20, 1982, Northwestern Bell Telephone
Company filed a Notice of Change in Rates and Petition with the Minnesota Public
Utilities Commission to increase rates for certain intrastate communications
services offered by the Company to its Minnesota customers. According to the
Petition, the proposed rates would be effective July 20, 1982, and would increase
annual revenues of the Company by approximately $89.9 million. This amount was
subsequently reduced by the Company to $89.4 million. The Company also advised
the Commission that if the proposed rates were suspended by the Commission, the
Company would place a portion of the increase, $59.6 million, into effect on
July 20, 1982, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 1 237.075.
The Commission, by its Order dated June 3, 1982, has suspended the proposed
rates and has authorized the Company to place a portion of the increase, $59.6
million, into effect on July 20, 1982. These rates are subject to refund in a
manner prescribed by the Commission with interest if the Commission determines
that the amounts are in excess of rates which should have been charged during
the period of suspension.
About 89% of the increased revenue is generated from Local Exchange Services,
including the main residence and business lines, trunks and Exchange Access Ser-
vices. Examples of the present rates and the increased rates for some of the
services are shown below.
Outstate Metro I Metro II Metro III Metro IV
Residence One-Party
Present $ 8.68 $ 9.44 $10.00 $11 .44 $14.20
Increase Effective 7-20-82 10.76 11 .71 12.40 14. 19 17.61
Total sought 11 .81 12.84 13.60 15.56 19.32
Business One-Party
Present $22.77 $31 .69 $33.42 $37.90 $46.43
Increase Effective 7-20-82 28.26 39.33 41 .47 47.03 57.62
Total Sought 30.99 43.13 45.48 51 .58 63. 19
The remaining 11% of the increased revenue is from service charges and
certain miscellaneous services. The services affected are all being increased
approximately 24% effective July 20, 1982, under bond and would be increased
36% if the full amount requested is finally authorized by the Commission. Among
the services not being increased under bond are Series PBX, DIMENSION®, HORIZON®,
Key Systems , COM KEY®, CENTREX, Directory Assistance Charging, Telpak, Long Distance,
WATS, and Standard , Princess® and Trimline® Telephones.
You should note that specific rate increases for specific customer classes
and services may be greater or lesser than that proposed by the Company, depend-
ing upon the final action taken by the Public Utilities Commission on the
Company's request.
Any person interested in participating in either the evidentiary or public
hearings regarding the Company' s rate request is encouraged to contact Hearing
Examiner Myron S. Greenberg, 3rd Floor Summit Bank Building, 310 South 4th Avenue,
Minneapolis , Minnesota , 55415.
A copy of Northwestern Bell ' s Notice of Change in Rates and Petition and
supporting documentation has been filed with the Department of Public Service and
is open to inspection during normal office hours. A copy is also available for
public inspection at the Company's office located at 200 South Fifth Street,
Minneapolis , Minnesota.
Attached hereto and hereby made a part of this Rate Increase Notice is a copy
of the Notice and Order for Hearing of the Commission dated June 3, 1982.
This notice is being mailed by Northwestern Bell to all counties and muni-
cipalities in Minnesota affected by this rate increase, pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes § 237.075(1 ) and the Commission' s Order Accepting Filing and Suspending
Rates dated June 3, 1982.
,
BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Lillian Warren-Lazenberry Chairman
I Leo G. Adams Cc missioner
s Roger L. Hanson Commissioner
{ Terry Hoffman Commissioner
Juanita R. Satterlee Commissioner
In the Matter of the Petition of
Northwestern Bell Telephone Company Docket No. P-421/GR-82-203
for Authority to Change its Schedules
'11 of Rates and Charges for Telephone NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING
1 Service in Minnesota.
II
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
I I. JURISDICTION
The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (the Commission) finds that a
hearing is necessary in the above-entitled matter to determine the reasonableness
i ; of certain telephone rate increases proposed by the Northwestern Bell Telephone
Company (Bell or the Company). The Commission is authorized to conduct such a
1 t: hearing by M. S. § 237.075.
II. PROPOSED RATES
L
The rates proposed by Bell would generate an additional S39.4 million of
I
''. annual gross revenues.
. l r A copy of the Company's requested rates is on file in the offices of the
`- • Department of Public Service and is open to public inspection durino normal
office hours. Copies are also available for public inspection at the Company's
° I
business offices.
i The Commission has suspended the rate schedule filed by the Company pending
i
1 ,i
{ whe he;ring ordered herein. Hewever, the Ccreany has notified the Commission that
y it will exercise its statutory right tc place S59.5 million of increased rates
into effect on July 20, 1382. Such rates are subject to refund If the Canrrissien
ultimately orders a lesser increase.
fis ' •
III. PROCEDURAL OUTLINE
IThe hearing on the petition will be conducted by a Hearing Examiner appointed
.i
by the Chief Hearing Examiner of the State of Minnesota and will be held in corn-
; pliance with the applicable laws relating to the Public Utilities Commission, the
jj 1 q Administrative Procedure Act (M. S. 5515.3411-15.0E2), the Rules of the Office of
ii Administrative Hearings (9 MCAR §§ 2.201-2.222) and the rules of Practice of the
{ 1
Public Utilities Commission (Minn. Ree_. PSC 500-521), to the extent that they have
i
1i ' not been superseded by the ,'Rules of the Office of Administrative Hearings.
!
1 i
Y
i
l
t
These rules may be purchased from the CocumentsSection of the Department
of Administration, 117 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155, 512/247-3000.
The rules provide generally for the procedural rights of the parties
't
including: rights to advance notice of witnesses and evidence, right to a pre-
hearing conference, rights to present evidence and cross examine witnesses, and
rights to purchase a record or transcript. Parties are entitled to issuance of
1VI subpoenas to compel witnesses to attend and produce documents and other evidence.
i •
Any person intending to intervene as a formal party to these hearings
'I must submit a Petition for Leave to Intervene to the Hearing Examiner and serve
1 ti the petition on all existing parties. The petition must state how the Petitioner's
legal rights, duties or privileges may be determined or affected by the Commission's
decision in the matter and shall set forth the grounds and purposes for which
1 intervention is sought and shall indicate the Petitioner's statutory right to
4 ; '
L intervene, if one exists. All parties have the right to be represented by legal
i
f counsel, by a person of their choice or by themselves if not otherwise prohibited
3
• 1 as the unauthorized practice of law. _
f j 1A Notice of Appearance must be filed with the Hearing Examiner within
11 .
'1 20 days of the date of service of this Order if any party intends to appear at
the hearing. The Notice of Appearance is not required if the hearing date is
• less than 20 days from the issuance of this Order.
Potential intervenors shall attend the prehearing conference scheduled
II
below with the information which will facilitate the scheduling of hearings per
i a' j ' witting all of the parties to present their evidentiary views in a manner and
1111 !+ within a time frame which would be as fair and expeditious as possible. Matters
1 ; which may be discussed include: the reascnabie tiro period required to prepare
1 direct testimony for filing on all of the issues; the tine period for preparation
of direct testimony by intervenors' recocr2nded areas for hearings to receive
public input regarding the petition; time required for parties to prepare for
; depositions and other discovery; and other matters that will facilitate full
1 • and fair hearings on the petition.
If persons have good reason for requesting a delay of any hearing, the
1 `i request must be node in writing to the ;-fearing Examiner at least five days prior
,`` { to the hearing. A copy of the request must be served on the Commission and all
parties.
} .
1 f`
333✓
e
. 3y
I •
Failure to appear at the hearing may result in the issues set out herein
i being deemed proven. A possible result is that the rates proposed by Bell may
I be accepted by the Commission.
Following the contested hearing, the Commission may approve all of any
part of the proposed rate increase but may not approve an overall increase greater
•
than that proposed by the Company. However, the Commission may adjust rates for
classes of customers to levels greater than those proposed by the Company and make
Iiother rate adjustments based upon the testimony of otherparties. If no person
Y
1 ' contests the proposed rate increase at the hearing, the rates may be approved as
i i proposed.
,
Any question concerning informal disposition of this matter or discovery
1 of information should be addressed to Kenneth A. Nickolai, Special Assistant
Attorney General, 780 American Center 3uilding, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101,
i • 612/296-6030.
' , All other questions concerning this hearing should be addressed to the
. * ! Hearing Examiner assigned:
i
Myron S. Greenberg
! Administrative Hearings Office
i ` 3rd Floor Summit Bank Building
II
i 310 South 4th Avenue
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415
I 612/341-7607
' ORDER
I
1. A contested case hearing concerning this matter shall be held, com-
mencing with a prehearing conference at Room 8-44, Federal Building, U. S.
! 1 ; Courthouse, 110 South 4th Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401, beginning at
1I y I 9:30 a.m., July 1, 1982.
1 ! 2. Bell shall facilitate in every reasonable way the investigation of
0 t the Department of Public Service. All parties shall furnish adequate responses
within 10 days to all reasonable information requests from other parties.
t'-•- 3. The Company shall keep records of sales and billings under the present
1
! and proposed rates such that any potential refund can be determined by computing
Iwhat each customer's bill mould have been during the refund period had the
finally ordered rates been in effect and subtracting such amount from the amount
i _
I actually paid by each customer during that period.
Ii 1 4. This Order shall to seared on Sell who shall mail copies of the same
H ' j to all municipalities in its service area, all parties who filed petitions to
1 1 intervene (timely or untimely) in Its two most recent rate proceedings before
ithe Commission (Docket No. P-421/GR-80-911 and P-421/GR-79-388) and to such
; other persons as the Department of Public Service nay request.
M
• -
•
I-
1 ' 5. Public hearings shall be held at locations within Bell's service area.
1 6. In addition to the individual notification as ordered by the Commission
on June 3, 1982, the Company shall also publish notices of the ;rehearing con-
ference, evidentiary hearings and public hearings in the form of newspaper display
ads, at least 10 days prior to the dates of their commencement, in newspapers of
general circulation in towns within the Company's service territory. The heading
on the display ad, RATE INCREASE NOTICE, must be minimum 30 point bold face type.
7. This Order shall be effective immediately.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
i
• � Rand. ' Youn?
Executive -cretary
i SERVICE DATE:SUN 3 1982
( ( SEAL )
RDY:CKS:jyp
'
e
•
Ic
1 3
I
I
1 ,
MINUTES OF QUARTERLY MEETING OF SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY
July 21, 1982
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof a quarterly
meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at the
Ambassador Motor Hotel, in the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, on Wednesday, July 21, 1982 , commencing at
6 : 30 p.m.
1. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order
by the Vice-Chairman, Frederick Moore.
The board took note of the fact that SRA Chairman, Orvil
Johnson, had recently been a recipient of the C. C. Ludwig
Award for distinguished service and members expressed pleasure
and appreciation for Mr. Johnson' s achievement in rendering
such outstanding public service.
2 . Roll Call : Upon roll call attendance was found
to be as follows :
Brooklyn Park Graydon R. Boeck
Columbia Heights Gayle Norberg
Edina J. N. Dalen
Russell C. Hedlund
Excelsior Charles Thompson
Greenwood Wm. Schoell
Hopkins John J. Strojan
Lakeland Daniel Eichten
Lauderdale Raymond Shogren
Minnetonka Robert DeGhetto
Mound Karol Charon
New Brighton Jim Fornell
Osseo Catherine Goth
Plymouth Frederick Moore
Richfield Don Hassenstab
Victoria Raymond Hoag
Also in attendance were SRA attorneys Clayton LeFevere and
Glenn Purdue.
3 . Approval of Minutes : The Vice-Chairman called
attention to the fact that the draft minutes of the meeting
of April 21, 1982 , contained a reference to a legislative
meeting as being scheduled for May 7 , 1982 . He indicated
that this date should have been May 5 and suggested that the
draft minutes be revised accordingly. It was then moved by
Mr. Norberg, seconded by Mr. Shogren, that the draft minutes ,
as so revised, be approved. Carried unanimously.
4 . Treasurer's Report: J. N. Dalen, Secretary/Treasurer,
presented a financial report for the six months ended June 30 ,
1982 , showing that the SRA had a cash balance on that date
of $7 , 534.66 and investments costing $86 , 733 . 06 with a face
value of $91,000. It was moved by Mr. Norberg, seconded by
Mr. Schoell , that this report be approved. Carried unanimously.
5 . Report on MWCC Conference: Clayton LeFevere
reported on the efforts of the SRA to arrange a conference
in the fall of 1982 on the subject of the present functioning
of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and the issues •
facing the MWCC in the metropolitan area with reference to
that agency.
He indicated that the conference date has been set for
September 24 , 1982, at the Hopkins House in Hopkins.
Detailed information about the conference and about conference
registration will be forthcoming later.
He indicated that a number of organizations have agreed to
participate as co-sponsors of the conference. These include
the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, the Citizens
League , the Greater Minneapolis Area Chamber of Commerce,
the Greater St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce, the Association
of Metropolitan Counties, the Metropolitan Waste Control
Commission, the Metropolitan Council and the metropolitan
Leagues of Women Voters. All of these organizations have
participated very actively in the planning of the conference
and are cooperating fully with the SRA in the effort.
He reported on the subjects which the steering committee has
identified as its preferred subjects for the conference and
gave a listing of the presenters and participants whom the
committee hopes to secure. A number have already agreed to
participate but some of the persons that the committee
expects to invite have not yet been contacted.
Members of the board expressed satisfaction on the progress
of this effort and indicated that they felt that it would be
desirable to notify the suburban Chambers of Commerce about
the conference.
6 . NSP Electric Rate Filing Status Report: Glenn
Purdue presented a status report on the most recent NSP
electric rate proceeding for the Minnesota Public Utilities
Commission. A copy of his report is attached to these
minutes .
7 . Northwestern Bell Telephone Company Rate Filing-
Status Report: Mr. Purdue presented a status report on the
Northwestern Bell Telephone Company rate filing. He indicated
that the Suburban Rate Authority has filed an application to
-2-
intervene in that proceeding. He distributed a written
report relating to the proceeding, a copy of which is attached
to the minutes of this meeting.
Upon the conclusion of his report there was discussion about
li the extent to which the SRA should participate in this
proceeding. At the conclusion of such discussion, it was
moved by Mr. Norberg, seconded by Mr. Hoag, that the SRA, if
permitted to intervene, undertake to persuade the Commission
to discontinue the tier system of rates (which is based on
the location of wire centers rather than density) which was
instituted by the Commission in connection with the 1979
Northwestern Bell rate filing; that in so doing, the SRA
attorneys be authorized to engage expert testimony at a cost
not to exceed $15 ,000 to assist in this effort; that they
also be authorized to present testimony in opposition to
the tier system from one or more elected officials from SRA
communities , and the testimony being consistent with the
resolution passed by the board at its meeting on October 21,
1981; that the expense of such intervention be funded from
general funds of the SRA with the possibility of assessing
benefited communities at a later date and after further action
by the board; and that further direction to SRA's attorneys,
if needed, be given by the executive committee. Carried
unanimously. Mr. Norberg indicated his willingness to be a
policy witness on this question.
There was further discussion about whether the SRA should
concern itself with other issues in connection with this
rate filing such as optional measured service and extended
area service . It was decided that if there appears to be a
reason for participation by the SRA on any such issues or
other issues , the matter should be brought back to the SRA
board at a general or special meeting.
8 . Minneapolis Gas Company Rate Filing Status Report:
Mr . Purdue then presented a written status report on the Min-
neapolis Gas Company 's most recent rate filing . A copy of
that report is attached to these minutes . He reported that
the SRA has intervened in this gas rate filing in order to
protect the interests of the SRA. It was moved by Mr.
Hassenstab, seconded by Mr. Norberg, that such intervention
be ratified and approved. Carried unanimously.
Mr. LeFevere reported that he had been in contact with Mr.
George Hess , SRA's utility rate consultant, and that Mr.
Hess has agreed to review the Minnesota Gas Company rate
filing to determine whether there are particular issues
which he would recommend that the SRA actively pursue in
this proceeding. He indicated that this was a procedure
-3-
that had been followed in a number of other rate filings
and that the SRA attorneys would work with Mr. Hess on this
rate filing in the same way in the absence of objection from
members of the board. There was a consensus that this should
be done.
9. Determination Not To Assess SRA Members for
Calendar Year 1983 : The joint powers contract of the SRA
permits the board of directors to establish a budget and to
assess SRA members for financial support. Mr. LeFevere
indicated that when the Suburban Rate Authority was originally
organized the Minneapolis Gas Company (now Minnesota Gas
Company) had uniform franchises in its suburban service
territory. These franchises provided for regulation of the
company by the Suburban Rate Authority. The franchises
required the company to pay the SRA a specified sum of money
to cover the SBA' s regulatory expense. It was not necessary
for the SRA to use all of the funds paid to it by the gas
company. The SRA therefore accumulated a balance of funds
in excess of $100, 000 as a "war chest" in the event that a
major rate proceeding be necessary.
When the state legislature transferred the power of gas and
electric rate regulation to the state public utilities
commission, the Suburban Rate Authority began using its
funds to participate in proceedings before the PUC. The
present funds of the Suburban Rate Authority, therefore,
have originated, almost entirely, from funds accumulated
under the gas franchise. These funds were, in turn, collected
as gas expenses , by the company, from their consumers in the
suburban communities which then belonged to the SRA.
In short, the only communities which have made a significant
contribution towards the funds which the SRA has, are those
communities which were served by the suburban division of
the Minneapolis Gas Company, and who were members of the SRA
at that time.
(There is one exception to the foregoing. On one occasion,
approximately six years ago, the SRA assessed all of its
members a small amount for annual operating expenses. )
Mr. LeFevere indicated that it was his opinion that the SRA
has sufficient funds to conduct its operations, including
anticipated rate litigation, at least through 1983 . He
therefore recommended that there be no assessment of the
members .
It was moved by Mr. Dalen, seconded by Mr. Norberg, that
this recommendation be adopted, that no assessment of SRA
members be made for the year 1983 and that SRA members be
notified of this fact by separate letter. Carried unanimously.
-4-
//
PROCEEDINGS OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
Regular Session Shakopee, Minnesota August 5, 1982
Chrmn. Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 P.M. , with
Comm. Perusich, Czaja, Koehnen, Coller and Rockne present . Comm.
Stoltzman was absent . Also present were Jeanne Andre, Acting
City Planner; John K. Anderson, City Admr. , and Cncl . Vierling.
Koehnen/Czaja moved to approve the minutes of July 8, 1982 and
July 15 , 1982 as kept . Motion carried with Comm. Perusich and
Coller abstaining because of their absence at the meeting.
Public Hearing - Cragg Signs Variance Request (PC 82-30V) :
Perusich/Coller moved to open the public hearing regarding the
request for a 6 . 5 foot variance from front yard setback requirements
and a 24 . 5 foot variance from the sideyard setback requirements ,
on a corner lot , to install a business sign. Motion carried
unanimously .
Acting City Planner explained that the owner of the property is
Don Maxwell, 300 L. 1st Avenue, and that the sign was proposed to
be positioned similarly to an existing sign which was to be
removed. However, the location of the proposed sign does not meet
the provisions of the Sign Ordinance adopted in 1981, which now
requires a sign to be placed 30 feet from a corner to enable better
vehicular site range. She stated that if the bottom of the sign
was installed a minimum of 8 feet above sidewalk level, as is being
suggested by the applicant , this would aid in the visibility factor.
She stated staff is recommending approval because the area of the
sign is well within sign provision requirements and there had been
a previous sign at this location. She gave further descriptions
of the sign size and location relative to the building.
Discussion followed regarding placement of the sign, visibility
and site lines from the corner.
Chrmn. Schmitt asked if there was anyone present in the audience
who wished to comment on this matter. There was no response.
Comm. Czaja questioned if the sign couldn' t be placed at another
location on the property . He asked for a reason for the sign to be
placed at the proposed location. Applicant answered that his
proposed sign was just replacing the sign previously existing.
Acting City Planner stated that it was her opinion that if the sign
were moved to another location on the property, the applicant
would perhaps not obtain the full visibility desired of the sign
due to various obstructions.
Proceedings of the August 5, 1982
Board of Adjustment and Appeals Page -2-
Coller/Perusich moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Coller/Czaja offered Variance Resolution No. 312, which provides for
a maximum variance of 6. 5 feet from the front yard setback and a
maximum variance of 24 . 5 feet from the sideyard setback requirements
to install a business sign for a dental facility on Lot 10,
Block 25, Original Shakopee Plat and moved for its adoption subject
to the following condition:
1. The bottom of the sign be placed a minimum of 8 feet off the
sidewalk.
Motion carried unanimously.
Coller/Czaja moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously . Meeting
adjourned at 7: 42 P .M.
Jeanne Andre
Acting City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
jvm
PROCFFDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 5, 1982
Chrm. Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:43 P.M. with Comm. Koehnen, Czaja,
Perusich, Coller and Rockne present. Comm. Stoltzman arrived later. Also present
were Jeanne Andre, Acting City Planner; John K. Anderson, City Admr. and Cncl.
Vierling.
Czaja/Koehnen moved to approve the minutes of July 8, 1982 and July 15, 1982 as
kept. Motion carried with Comm. Coller and Perusich abstaining because of their
absence at the meetings.
PUBLIC HEARING - JOHNSON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PC 82-27C)
Coller/Koehnen moved to open the public hearing regarding a conditional use permit
to keep up to four horses on a 5.5 acre parcel with existing single family home in
an R-1, Rural Residential Zone. Motion carried unanimously.
1 Uiut City Planner stated the applicants are Brenda and Michael Johnson and the
Conditional Use Permit is being requested for 1970 Hilldale Drive; Lot 3, Block 1,
Zoschke' s Addition. She went over the considerations, stating staff recommends
approval with conditions. Considerable discussion ensued regarding how much of
the property might be affected by flooding and if there was still sufficient
room to keep horses.
Chrm. Schmitt asked if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to speak
on this item.
Denny Downs, 2056 Hilldale Drive, stated he lives right next door and said that even
with high flooding there would still be plenty of room for the building and horses.
He asked about the location of the fence, which was explained by the Johnsons.
Coller/Perusich moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Coller/Perusich offered Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 314, to allow raising
up to four horses on a 5.4 acre parcel in an R-1 Zone, and moved its adoption subject
to the following conditions:
1. Horses be confined to a fenced-in area.
2. Manure be handled so that it is not a nuisance to neighbors.
3. No horses be boarded.
4. The Planning Commission reserves the right to further review this Conditional
Use Permit if warranted by any additional information.
5. The Conditional Use Permit is terminated if the property should change ownership.
Motion carried unanimously.
Chrm. Schmitt informed the applicants that the permit would not be issued until after
the seven day appeal period.
PUBLIC HEARING - HANSON CONDITIONAL US, PERMIT (PC 82-31C)
Czaja/Koehnen moved to open the public hearing regarding the request for a Condi-
tional Use Permit to expand a current operation to include breeding and boarding
of up to 80 horses, and a riding academy on an approximate 80 acre parcel zoned R-1
and I-1. Motioncarried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission -2- August 5, 1982
Acting City Planner stated the current operation is located at 1+10 County Road 89
and consists of approximately 800 acres of leased and owned property. She
outlined the considerations and stated staff recommends approval subject to
conditions. She stated that approximately 17 acres is zoned R-1 (Rural Residential)
and the other 63 acres is zoned I-1 (Light Industrial) ; I-1 Zones do not make
provisions for horses, but added that the Hanson's Ranch has existed in the I-1
Zone for 10-15 years. In R-1 Zones provisions are made for horses of two per 2.5
acres and using this method of computation and allowing him the use of the
additional I-1 Zone, the applicant would only be allowed 61 horses. Discussion
followed regarding the location of the corral and exercise areas relative to the
requirement of keeping them 300 feet from the boundary of the property.
Acting City Planner stated that it might be less of a problem if the applicant
were to request to have his I-1 property rezoned to R-1 in order to make the use
more compatible with that zone. Discussion held.
Chrmn. Schmitt stated that the two different zones could be dealt with if it
were taken into consideration that the property owner does have contiguous
pieces of property zoned I-1 and R-1 and that the Conditional Use Permit would
cover the required parcels of property which is being governed by development
of rural/agricultural type use in nature as in R-1 Zone. This, he added, could
be controlled in that manner without a rezoning. He also stated that as long
as a Conditional Use Permit is issued to a parcel of property which is
suffficient in size to cover the number of horses to be raised and the stable
activity would take place on the R-1 Zone, this would then tie together the
entire parcels of land.
Discussion followed regarding the placement of the septic system and wells. Con-
sensus was this would be taken care of in the building permit process.
Chrm. Schmitt asked if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to com-
ment on this issue, and there was no response.
Mr. Hanson questioned the screening requirement around the parking lot. It was
clarified by the Acting City Planner.
Rockne/Perusich moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Perusich/Coller offered Conditional Use Permit Resolution No. 313, to allow a riding
academy and up to 64 horses in a Rural Residential 0-1) Zone and Light Industrial
(I-i) Zone on an 80 acre parcel and moved its adoption subject to the following
conditions:
1. Submission of lighting and landscape/screening plan for parking area and appro-
priate documentation of Minnesota Pollution Control Feed Lot Permit require-
ments prior to issuance of Building Permit.
2. Maximum occupancy of four horses at any one time per 45' x 135' corral within
300 feet of a neighboring property.
3. Provision of a minimum of 37 parking spaces for a 64 horse density.
4. Provision of a separate storage area for horse trailers to be screened from
the right-of-way and the adjoining properties by landscaping or an opaque
fence.
5. No parking on County Road 16.
6. Maximum of five employees at the site.
7. Hours of operation to be limited to 6:00 A .M. to 10:00 P.M. seven days a week.
8. Planning Commission reserves the right to further review this Conditional Use
Permit if warranted by additional information.
Shakopee Planning Commission -3- August 5, 1982
9. Change in conditions of operation would require an amendment to the
Conditional Use Permit.
10. Agreement on the part of adjoining property owners relative to placement
of corrals.
Motion carried unaimously.
Chrmn. Schmitt informed the applicant the permit could be issued after the
seven day appeal period.
Public Hearing - Fenske Conditional Use Permit Amendment (PC 82-32C)
Coller/Koehnen moved to open the public hearing regarding a request to amend
an existing Conditional Use Permit to operate a dance studio as a home
occupation. Motion carried unanimously.
Acting City Planner stated the applicant is Sharon Fenske, 64+2 Adams, who is
requesting to expand her operations one additional day and increase the weekly
enrollment from 50 to 125. She stated staff recommends approval of the extra
day of operations and a weekly enrollment of up to 96, subject to conditions.
Chrmn. Schmitt asked if there were any comments from the applicant. Ms. Fenske
stated she would be glad to comply with the requirements of the Building
Inspector and agreed with the recommendation.
Chrm. Schmitt asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to comment on
this item, and there was no response.
Coller/Rockne moved to close the public hearing. Motion carried unanimously.
Coller/Czaja moved to approve an amendment to the conditions of an existing Con-
ditional Use Permit Resolution No. 284, a dance studio as a home occupation in an
R-2 Zone, and allow for an additional day of operation, Monday through Friday, and
an overall increase of students to a maximum of 96, which maintains the maximum of
8 students/session, subject to the following conditions:
1. Staff review in March 1983.
2. Any changes in operation of the dance studio as proposed shall require an
amendment to existing Conditional Use Permit Res. No. 284.
3. Dance studio to be in the basement of her home with maximum occupancy of
11 persons in the studio.
4. Operation be restricted to the months of September through May.
5. Applicant be the only employee.
6. No exterior signage.
7. Classes be staggered 2 hour apart.
8. Install solid core or metal clad door in opening to furnace room.
9. Install egress window as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code.
10. Install hardwired products of combustion detection at stair landing.
Motion carried unanimously.
FINAL PLAT - EAGLE CREEK JUNCTION FIRST ADD'N (PC 82-21P)
General discussion was held regarding considerations of the Final Plat of Eagle
Creek Junction, located in the Southeast quadrant of County Road 17/16.
Rockne/Koehnen moved to remove consideration of the Final Plat of Eagle Creek Junction
First Add'n from the table. Motion carried unanimously.
Shakopee Planning Commission -4- August 5, 1982
Chrm. Schmitt asked if there were any comments from the audience, and there were
none.
Perusich/Czaja moved to recommend to the City Council approval of the Final Plat of
Eagle Creek Junction, 1st Add'n, subject to the following conditions:
1. Name of the plat be designated as Eagle Creek Junction First Addition.
2. Approval of a Title Opinion by the City Attorney.
3. Park dedication to be made in cash at the time of building permit issuance.
4. Execution of a recordable agreement agreeing to accept future assessment for
pedestrian walkway and extension of water service for improved fire protection
or looping and waiving all rights to a hearing on the improvements and assess-
ments, such agreement to run with the land and be binding on all heirs and
assigns of the applicant.
5. Execution of a recordable agreement providing for the joining of building
proposed for Lot 2, Block 1, preliminary plat of Eagle Creek Junction (portion
of Outlot A in First Add'n) to the building on Lot 1, Block 1 Eagle Creek First
A dd'n, or increasing the setback of the Lot 2 building by 20 feet or one-half
the height of the Lot 1 building, whichever is less.
6. Execution of an easement over the westerly portion of Outlot A , to allow access
to provide maintenance for the structure to be built on Lot 1, Block 1. This
easement would terminate upon construction of a building adjoining the build-
ing on Lot 1, Block 1.
7. Execution of a Developer's Agreement for the construction of the required im-
provements:
a. Water system to be installed in accordance with the requirements of the
Shakopee Public Utilities Commission.
Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - ZONING BOUNDARIES FOR PARROTT PROPERTY
The Acting City Planner explained that Don and Lorraine Parrott have requested
the boundaries of the re-zoning of their property be rechecked. She stated that
staff has researched the zoning of their property, which is split-zoned R-4 and
I-1, and there is no indication that an error was made in the zoning. Therefore,
recommendation is that any change desired in zoning should be accomplished through
an application for re-zoning by the applicants.
Considerable discussion was held between the Commissioners and applicants, as to
intentions at the time, possible reasons for the split zoning and what occurred
at the public hearings regarding the zoning.
Consensus was that the City could initiate the re-zoning process at a time when it
is convenient and could be worked in with other public hearings, etc. Otherwise,
if the Parrotts were in more of a hurry to have it re-zoned, they could apply for
the re-zoning themselves and pay the fees for the process.
Coller/Czaja moved to recommend staff investigate alternatives in zoning with the
Parrotts and work out an amenable solution to their request. Motion carried
unanimously.
DISCUSSION - MOBILE/MANUFACTURED HOMES
Discussion ensued regarding interpretation of the mobile/manufactured homes legis-
lation and what additional requirements or ordinances might be necessary.
Shakopee Planning Commission -5- August 5, 1982
Coller/Perusich moved to go on record endorsing requirements for mobile/
manufactured homes as follows:
1) Meet uniform Building Code;
2) Affix home to foundation and be taxed as a standard home; and
3) Present requirement of 5-year term for mobile homes on farmsteads be upheld.
Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion - Square Footage Indicated on Plats:
Coller/Czaja moved to set a public hearing for September 9, 1982 to amend
Shakopee City Code, Section 12.04, Subd. 2C, Item No. 6 and Section 12.05,
Subd. 1C, Item No. 5, requiring lot area to be indicated for each lot being
proposed in a subdivision and same to be made a part of preliminary and final
plat submission requirements. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion - Amendment to Elderly Highrise Redevelopment Project No. 1:
Acting City Planner gave some background as to why an amendment will be needed
to the Elderly Highrise Redevelopment Project No. 1, but added that due to a
recent technicality, the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority could
not legally refer this amendment to the Planning Commission at this time.
Coller/Czaja moved to table consideration of an amendment to the Elderly Highrise
Redevelopment Project No. 1. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion - Armstrong Conditional Use Permit Review:
Acting City Planner stated that pursuant to a condition of Conditional Use Permit
Resolution No. 282, adopted August 13, 1981 which was granted for a kinlien
profession as a home occupation, a staff review has been conducted. She stated
that when she contacted the applicant, Marcia Armstrong/Neely, regarding this
review, the applicant stated the home occupation had been discontinued in April
1982. She added the applicant has stated she would like to keep the Conditional
Use Permit in effect for the future if no additional fees were involved. The
Acting City Planner stated that in researching this request, she found the
language was not specific and now is recommending a more specific language
regarding time contraints which would apply the 6 month limit, as indicated
for a lawful, non-conforming use (Section 11.03, Subd. 2F) . Discussion followed.
Coller/Rockne moved to direct staff to set a public hearing for consideration of
code amendment to Section 11.04, Subd. 6C to indicate time constraints on the initial
and continued use of a Conditional Use Permit, to be done as a housekeeping item
when convenient and least costly. Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION - REQUIREMENTS OF LOTS OF RECORD EXISTING BEFORE APRIL 1, 1978
The Acting City Planner informed the Commissioners of the legal opinion regarding
requirements of lots of record on or before April 1, 1978.
Comm. Stoltzman arrived at this point, 9:45 P.M.
Discussion was held regarding whether or not these lots would be grandfathered in
after the change in lot size requirements. Discussion was held regarding setbacks
and if the lots would be buildable under the current requirements, and whether this
would be in effect grant automatic variances.
Shakopee Planning Commission -6- August 5, 1982
Coller/Perusich moved to set a public hearing to amend Shakopee City Code Section
11.03, Subd, 3 "Lot Provisions". Motion carried unanimously.
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Discussion was held regarding building on parcels not abutting a dedicated public
right-of-way. The Acting City Planner stated Mr. Carl Bohn will be applying for a
variance to build on his lot which is in this circumstance. Discussion was held
as to what requirements would be necessary to grant a variance.
Consensus was that as long as the applicant had dedicated roadway easement to his
property, a variance could be granted. The City would have no obligation to develop
that easement into a road unless it was requested by a property owner willing to
be assessed for it.
Chrm. Schmitt requested that the issue of hardship be specifically addressed when
a variance request is made, or a conditional use permit is requested, as that is
an important criteria that must be met.
Perusich/Colley moved to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned
at 10:16 P.M.
Jeanne Andre,
Acting City Planner
Diane S. Beuch
Recording Secretary
C,7
Li
1-
F
N F-` r'
Cr, N ill
CO '-rj cr, n
0 (D O9 td _
9 'U 9 n Y d
N • N
----.I O U.) (.
*
r• O r 1--,.
Ort Y 0 rt Ort 9 F]
0c< O 0 C O
n
'LJ o •L7 r• 'TJ n [•
• p • r • p U)
N O N r-` n K
HC rd '"d ----Iocl >
n rt G O •• 000cf)
or• Q' r' w9 £ CI
I-' F-. r• 09 X
•
v' r• r• 0 r• rt O t= H
• rt n (o W rt O n 2U2 CI
CD •• • (0 Ci) 01
- o UN N F-' - 0
,.0 N) Ln 9 •• •'p Oo _ -< F-'
• (U D
O Cb
N
---Io "d
.. p r'
w 9 W y-
O g 0
7
r•
. ,
• m CA
• O ✓'
L,-) N F- j
O W 1) N F
a 4 �-
nj
-iJ
Li
Y
N r-
.� • 0 - w
-
I
r3
0 \
.0 -.
•••
/7
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING ACTIVITY REPORT AUGUST, 1982
I
PERMITS ISSUED Yr. to Date 'Total Previous Year
Number Number Vrlluation Number Valuation
5707-5731 .MO. YTD.
Single Fain. -Sewered - 9 498,170 3 23 1,327,000
Single Farn. -Septic - 3 209,500 2 7 562,000
Multiple Dwellings 1 8 652,640 1 11 1,264,000
(Mo.LJnl ts) (YTD Units) (2) (22) (4) (32)
Dwelling Additions 7 47 306,445 1 20 125,125
Other - 4 74,280 - - -
liusiness District 1 3 819,000 - 3 240,000
Agricultural - - - - 1 132,000
Industrial -Sewered - - - 1 3 2,343,000
Industrial -Septic - - - - 3 792,000
Accessory/Garages 2 26 140,700 1 27 150,750
Signs & Fences 7 34 43,716.50 3 10 15,718
1' i i l� I a� /Woo i tc�vc 1 6 8,705 2 5 92,000
Grading/Foundation - 2 11,165 - 2 59,000
Remodeling (Res. ) 3 21 86,440 6 24 89,630
Remodeling ( Inst . ) - - - - 2 5,300
Remodeling (Other) - 13 701,848 3 29 1,286,500
TOTAL TAXABLE 23 190 3,552,609.50 23 168 8,396,000
TOTAL INST1TUTTCNAL - - - 0 2 5,300
GRANT) '1'OTAI, 23 190 3,552,609. 50 23 170 8,401,300
MO . YTD. MO . 'CIT .
Variances 4 15 1 4
Conditional Use 1 14 3 13
Its'—:;Oni raj; — — — 1
Moving 1 2 - 3
Electric Permits 20 116 13 112
Plmbg. & Htg. Permits 18 118 22 135
Razing Permits
Residential - - - -
Commercial - - - -
Total dwelling units in City after completion of all construction permitted
to date 3,542
Cora Underwood
Bldg. Dept . Secretary
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED IN AUGUST, 1982
5360 Building Permit Renewal - Initial permit expired
5707 Cancelled
5708 Richard Nelson Jr. 321 E. 4th Ave. Addition $ 1,500
5709 Harry Notermann 978 S. Main Deck 800
5710 Robert Larsen 338 E. 4th Ave. Fence 500
5711 Gary Midge 537 E. 1st Ave. Temp. Sign
5712 Charles Kreuser 959 Apgar Fireplace 2,100
5713 William Cragg 300 First Ave. Sign 2,000
5714 Gerald Theis 300 Jackson Park Addition 18,720
571.5 Donald Weber 1177 Harrison Alteration 4,000
5716 Bruce Novak 538 E. 1st Ave. Addition 29,000
5717 Wallace Bakken 1251 E. 1st Ave. Sign 200
5718 Pat Goldberg 2780 C.R. 42 Alteration 40
5719 Florian Dressen 337 Fillmore St. Deck 400
5720 Don Parrott 2047 Eagle Crk. Blvd. Fence 500
5721 James Pierce 1029 Prairie St. Repair 14,000
5722 Clete Link 1009 E. 4th ye. , , duplex (1 unit) 44,200
-. .d/ /./41 %54-el
5723 Clete Link l ''// 10 E. h Ave -1 duplex (1 unit) 44,200
5724 Mary Rudolph 637 Holmes St. 'garage - move 1,050
5725 Robert Davis 3063 Hauer Trail Addition 18,000
5726 Dorothy Egan 129 N. Main St. Garage 3,200
5727 Bernard Carlson 810 E. First Ave. Sign 120
5728 Gary Laurent 118 S. Fuller Sign 800
5729 Michael Menke 953 S. Clay Addition 12,500
5730 Mike Borgstrom 504 W. 2nd Ave. Addition 150
5731 Erhardt Dallmann 1970 F. 11th Ave. Fence 300
$ 198,-780-
,
TENTATIVE AGENDA.
REGULAR SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 7, 1982
Mayor Reinke presiding
1 ] Roll Call at 7 :00 P.M.
2] Approval of Minutes. of August 17th and 24th, 1982
3] Communications :
a] Dennis Moriarty re : Farmer-Bugher Mgmt. Co. Parking Lot Easement
b] John T. Lynch re : Restricting use of access road on West end
of Restoration site
c] George Muenchow re : Community Services Proposed 1983 Budget
d] Robert Vierling re : Alley improvements in Block 50
4] Liaison Reports from Councilmembers
5] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS :
6] Old Business:
a] Illegal Rental Unit - 436 East 5th Avenue - tbld 8/17 (bring 11c )
7] Planning Commission Recommendations: None
8] Resolutions and Ordinances:
a] Ord. No. 103, Amending City Code to permit an establishment to
possess a set up license and a pool table license
b] Ord. No. 104, Amending the City Code to conform to State law
regarding gambling
c] Ord. No. 101 , Amending the City Code regarding park regulations
d] Ord. No. 100, Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
e] Or4d. No. 102, Establishing A Commercial Building Rehabilitation
Loan Program
9] Recess for A Meeting of the Housing & Redevelopment Authority
10] Reconvene
11] New Business:
a] 8:00 P .M. Public Hearing - On General Revenue Sharing Funds
b] 1967 Off Street Parking Deferred Special Assessments
c] Mileage Claim - Fire Department
d] Hiring Consultant for Downtown Plan
e] Authorize Purchases for the Public Works Department
f] Authorize payment to Adrian Herbst
g] Authorize payment to Wallace Bakken
h] Authorize payment to Campbell Appraisal Co. Inc.
i] Authorize payment to Suburban Engineering Co.
j ] Authorize payment of the bills in amount of $51 , 986. 27
k] Res. No. 2044 Declaring Assessments and Setting Public Hearing
on 81-2 Bluff Avenue Improvements
1] Report on Mr. Pumper' s Sanitary Sewer Service Problem
m] Request for Proposals for Free Right ( 1st & Holmes Right Turn Ln. )
n] Alley Problem between Holmes & Fuller and North of Tenth Ave .
12] Consent Business:
a] Accepting turnback of a Part of Trunk Hwy 5 Renumbered 169
b] Accepting Resignation of Police Administrative Assistant
c] Authorize Hiring of SeniorAccountingClerk
13] Other Buspiness: a]toProposedD1983 oBudge�mittee
b] Selection of Auditors
c]
14] Adjourn to Tuesday, September 14, 1982 at 8 :00 P.M.
John K. Anderson, City Administrator
To The City Council:
The First Presbyterian Church of the City of Shakopee , Minn . , will
be in the process of completing our Church by adding the Bell Tower .
This was in our orginal plans when we built in 1966 , but we had to
place it on hold until we could reduce our debt .
We now have a low bid of $43, 000 . 00 and we are asking that the City
wave the building permit fees on this project so that we can start
as soon as possible .
First Presbyterian Church
"..."1612"424g
By :
Russell No tin
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA AUGUST 17, 1982
Mayor Reinke called the meeting to order at 7 :04 P.M. with Cncl .Leroux,
Vierling, Lebens , Wampach, and Colligan present . Also present were John K.
Anderson, City Admr. , Julius A. Coller, City Attorney and HRA Director
Jeanne Andre .
Leroux/Wampach moved to recess for the H.R.A. meeting. Motion carried
unanimously.
Wampach/Vierling moved to reconvene at 7 :34 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Leroux moved to approve the minutes of July 20th, August 3rd, and
August 10th, 1982 . Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux moved to direct that a letter be sent to our legislators
expressing our support to H.R. 6296, the Housing and Urban-Rural Recovery
Act of 1982 and our opposition to any amendment prohibiting the use of the
new multifamily rental housing production program in communities with
rent control ordinances or transfering the $1 .3 billion provided for the
new multifamily housing production program to the CDBG program. Motion
carried unanimously.
Liaison reports were presented by Councilpersons.
Leroux/Wampach moved to authorize the purchase of a hose washer for the
Fire Department from Weber & Troseth Co. for $4,300 and directed the
Finance Director, City Administrator and Police Chief to find a method for
funding the unbudgeted $1 , 800. Roll Call : Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None
Motion carried.
Mayor Reinke recognized Wally Stock, Mayor of Prior Lake and candidate for
state representative. Mr. Stock expressed his concerns about issues he
felt were of mutual concern.
Mr. August Dellwo addressed the Council with comments on the west side
storm sewer improvement.
Leroux/Colligan moved to authorize staff to obtain storm sewer assessment
waivers of hearings from Mr. Wiggin and Watson Construction accepting
the cost of 54 feet of storm sewer estimated to cost $1860 said costs to
be spread over properties they own in the drainage basin.
Cncl .Leroux asked if both parties understand that there will be additional
assessments when Mn.Valley 6th and 7th Additions are developed. The City
Engineer answered that they did.
Cncl .Leroux asked if the $1860 cost was a 100% assessment. The City Admr.
answered that it was a 50% assessment which is pursuant to the City' s
current trunk assessment policy. Discussion followed.
Leroux/Colligan moved to amend the motion by changing the cost amount to
$3720 and tnaadd another sentence that this storm sewer extension is to
be classified as the original portion of the west side storm sewer, which
at this time , we understand to be a lateral .
[Point of clarification: storm sewer laterals are assessed 100%, storm
sewer trunks are assessed 50%]
Bill Sinn stated that the discussion on this extension at the last council
meeting emphasized pipe because no body wanted to make a committment whether
it was a lateralor main trunk line.
The City Admr. stated that this proposed pipe extension within the Mn.
Valley 5th Add' n. is being assessed against property lying South and West
of the 5th Add'n. , not against any properties lying within the Mn. Valley 5th
Add ' n. (Therefore Mr. Sinn' s property within the 5th Add 'n. would not
be assessed. )
Motion carried unanimously on amendment to main motion.
Motion carried unanimously on main motion as amended.
Proceedings of City Council
August 17, 1982 Page 2
Leroux/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2034, A Resolution Approving The
Final Plat of Eagle Creek Junction 1st Addition, and moved its adoption.
City Admr. summarized resolution. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach offered Resolution No. 2043, A Resolution Authorizing
The Sale and Issuance of Commercial Development Revenue Bonds Under The
Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act To Finance A Project
Thereunder, Secured by Payments to be Received Pursuant to A Mortgage
Loan Agreement and A Pledge and Assignment of the City' s Interest in The
Mortgage Loan Agreement and Payments Thereunder to A Trustee, And
Authorizing The Execution of Documents, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call : Ayes; Cncl .Leroux, Vierling, Wampach, Colligan & Mayor Reinke
Noes; Cncl .Lebens Motion carried
Lebens/Leroux offered Resolution No. 2042 , A Resolution Appointing Judges
of Election, and Establishing Compensation, and moved its adoption.
Roll Call : Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 2039, A Resolution Accepting A
Modification by Enlargement of the Redevelopment Project and Modification
of the Amended Redevelopment Plan, and moved its adoption. (Highrise) The
HRA Director stated that the public hearing is being set for Sept. 21st at
8 :00 P .M. Motion carried unanimously.
The Councilmembers, sitting as the Housing & Redevelopment Authority, did
discuss earlier this evening the proposed downtown redevelopment project
commercial redevelopment loan procedures and application guidelines.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct staff to obtain further comments from the
Downtown Committee on the proposed commercial redevelopment loan procedures
and application guidelines and bring forward to the Council an appropriate
ordinance , pursuant to the guidelines set down in the HRA meeting this date.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Reinke explained that the public hearing on expanding the boundaries
of the Highrise Tax Increment Project will not be held this evening. (It
will be held on Sept. 21st at 8:00 P .M. )
Wampach/Leroux moved to deny the request for variance application for ceiling
height requirement for the rental unit located at 436 East 5th Avenue.
Motion carried with Cncl .Colligan opposed.
Leroux/Colligan moved to reconsider the motion to deny the variance request.
Motion carried with Cncl .Wampach opposed.
Leroux/Vierling moved to table the variance request until the City Building
Inspector and the property owner can be present. Motion carried unanimously.
Wampach/Lebens moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance
amending the City Code by deleting Subd. 3f and 3g of Section 6.31 thus
permitting an establishment to possess a set up license and a pool table
license. Motion carried unanimously.
Leroux/Vierling moved to direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance
amending the City Code by permitting gambling pursuant to state law.
Motion carried with Cncl .Lebens opposed.
Colligan/Wampach moved that the bills in the total amount of $262 ,036 . 28 be
ailuwed and ordered paid. Roll Call : Ayes ; Unanimous Noes ; None
Moctpn carried.
Leroux/Wampach moved to approve Change Order No. 2 for Valley Industrial
Blvd. So. , Contract No. 82-2 in the amount of $1 , 514. 13 .
Roll Call : Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Colligan/Leroux moved the consent business: 1] approve application and
grant an On Sale Sunday Intoxicating Liquor License to VFW Post 4046, 132
East 1st Avenue , 2] approve payment to Jeanne Andre in the amount of
$31 . 69 for travel/subsistence reimbursement, 3] authorize the transfer of
$2 ,000 of the budgeted carpet money to overhead door installation for the
police station. Roll Call : Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None Motion carried.
Proceedings of City Council
August 17, 1982 Page 3
Leroux/Vierling moved that staff be directed to erect stop signs on the
northwest and southeast corners of the intersection at East 4th Avenue
and Spencer Street . Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Leroux moved to appoint the City Clerk as acting administrator
from August 19th to August 23rd while the city administrator is on
vacation. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Attorney informed the Council that the Shakopee Job Service has
declined to execute a lease for use of the offices above City Hall ,
therefore, he informed them that they would be allowed to remain at the
City ' s will , which was what Council agreed to at an earlier meeting.
Leroux/Colligan moved that we add to our meeting proceedures the fact that
we will , after this election year, not allow political addresses by any
candidates running for office . Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Wampach moved to adjourn to Tuesday, August 24th at 7 :00 P .M.
Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9 :03 P.M.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk & Recording Sec ' y.
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ADJ. REG. SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AUGUST 24, 1982
Acting Mayor Lebens called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 P.M. with Cncl .
Vierling, Wampach, and Colligan present . Mayor Reinke and Cncl . Leroux
arrived late . Also present were John K. Anderson, City Admr. ; H. R.
Spurrier, City Engr. ; Gregg Voxland, Finance Director, and Judith S . Cox,
City Clerk..
Colligan/Wampach moved to authorize the advertisement for bids for the
construction of Levee Drive from Atwood Street to Scott Street , bid
opening September 13 , 1982 at 10 : 30 A.M. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Engr. explained the proposed bituminous overlay program for
1982 , which includes some streets west of Adams and three areas along
10th Avenue in the vicinity of Market , Atwood and Jackson. He explained
that the bituminous overlay adds additional structure to the street and
that prices for bituminous overlay are good this year compared to seal
coating.
Colligan/Vierling moved to approve the 1982 Pavement Preservation Program
as proposed. Motion carried unanimously.
Vierling/Wampach moved to authorize the advertisement for bids for the
1982 Pavement Preservation Program, bid opening September 13 , 1982 at
10: 00 A.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Discussion ensued on the 1983 proposed budget .
The City Admr. explained the proposed revenue increases budgeted.
Cncl . Leroux arrived at 7 : 58 P.M. and took his seat .
The City Admr. explained the options recommended by departments for budget
cuts .
The City Admr. explained the proposed pay plan for City employees . Dis-
cussion followed.
Mayor Reinke arrived at 9 : 04 P.M. and took his seat .
Discussion continued on the proposed pay plan.
The City Admr. explained the Five-Year Capital Equipment list and Five-
Year Capital Improvement Budget included in the proposed budget . He also
explained the taxing trends .
Consensus was that discussion on the budget would continue on September
7th and Sertember 14th.
The City Admr. advised the Council on current labor negotiations for the
City of Shakopee .
Discussion ensued on the current City Hall column in the Shakopee Valley
News .
Vierling/Leroux moved that Council and department heads continue writing
for the City Hall Column in the Shakopee Valley News with the exception
that if anyone feels uncomfortable doing it that they just opt out and
that there just won' t be an article in that week. Motion carried with
Cncl . Wampach and Colligan opposed.
Leroux/Colligan moved to adjourn at 10 : 32 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Judith S. Cox
City Clerk & Recording Sec ' y.
JASPERS, MORIARTY AND WALBURG, P.A.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
August 6 , 1982 206 SCOTT STREET
JEROME JASPERS SHAKOPEE, MN 55379
TEL.612/445-2817
DENNIS PATRICK MORIARTY y",A4 4 '},r
P Fii 119 WEST MAIN
STEPHEN W. WALBURG bn+ BELLE PLAINE, MN 56011
X132 TEL.612/873-2988
LEE VICKERMAN • n�C1 r
Mr. John Anderson t+ O
Shakopee City Administer Os( O
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
RE: FARMER-BUGHER MANAGEMENT CO.
PARKING LOT EASEMENT
Our file #3435
Dear Mr. Anderson;
During the past week we have had an opportunity to confer with the
Shakopee City Attorney and the Shakopee City Engineer regarding the
above captioned matter. We have discussed the various legal alter-
natives available to my client, Farmer-Bugher Management Co. to
resolve their problem with Mr . Cletus Link. This letter is to
request a n opportunity to meet with the Shakopee City Council for
a brief period during their regular meeting. Our purpose is to
review with the City Council the status of this matter and the
direction we have received from our client to seek and equitable
resolution of this problem. We understand that we will be afforded
this opportunity at the regular meeting of September 7 , 1982 .
Thank you for your cooperation.
Very truly yours ,
JASPERS , MORIARTY AND WALBURG, P .A.
Dennis Patrick M riarty
Attorney at law
DPM:mg
PLEASE ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO OUR SHAKOPEE OFFICE
Et ,,,,,,,t. -,.„ ,t,-,...4,„,
, . _
_.
, .
3,6
m RPHY9S T AN D Cher Fr, ' 1982
CM' O+a".tt:A.;,:'_`RT£r
a Minnesota Valley Restoration of 1840 - 1890
2187 #12, Hwy. 101, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
August 31st, 1982
•
Shakopee City Council
129 East First Street
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
RE: Restricting use of access
road on west end of site .
Dear Council Members :
The Project is being increasingly subjected to trespass
and vandalism by persons entering the fisherman' s road
between our west gate and the Veterans' Memorial Park.
91 They drive either to Pond' s Grist Mill or down to the
spillway on into the woods . They then proceed on foot
along the river front to the north end of the Mall .
,; From here they gain accessto the Church and Atwater House
`' or go further east to the Trumble House and other
-=-� � structures where they drink, smoke, vandalize and some-
times steal artifacts .
We request permission, therefore, to close this road with
a cable gate from 8:30 PM to 8:30 AM. We would keep the
gate open from 8:30 AM to 8:30 PM to permit access for
fisherman and hikers .
We have discussed our problem with Mr. William Hauer.
He advises that he also is experiencing difficulty with
trespassers who drive down this road to where the city' s
farmland begins . Hauer heartily endorses our proposal.
He asks that you approve closing this road with the
understanding that we will give him a key to the gate
which we have agreed to do.
We request your speedy approval of our request to close
the access road.
ailic-rely you ,
Wh‘ 4.A.,'(. 1/0.--d,
Joh. T. Lynch/ General Manager
cc: W. Hauer
JTL:f
City of Shakopee
A K O P F POLICE DEPARTMENT
SH`SSE SO, f 09 r :
���'�` A 476 South Gorman Street
``it1� SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379 `\ `'
P ,� 111/77T
Tel. 445 6666
‘` •� L I G Jit
55379
TO: Mayor, Council Members
FROM: Tom Brownell
SUBJECT: Restoration Access Road
DATE: September 2, 1982
INTRODUCTION
The Restoration Board of Directors are concerned about vandalism
and drinking parties on the Restoration Property which is the
result of persons gaining access to the property using an open
roadway.
BACKGROUND
The Quitclaim Deed executed by the Council February 3, 1969
stipulated the roadway remain open to the public with the intent
to allow sportsmen to have access to the river. Use of the road-
way for the purpose of fishing has decreased, and the police
department has a problem partroling the area due to rough terrain
which causes damage to vehicles.
RECOMMENDATION
Erect a cable gate and restrict use of the roadway between the
hours of 9: 00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Provide Restoration onsite
manager with a key for the purpose of opening and closing the
gate on a daily basis during access hours. Recommendation has
been reviewed with the City Attorney, Restoration Officials and
the person leasing the land for farming purposes.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Direct staff to erect a cable gate on existing posts on the road-
way located between Highway 101 and 30 feet north of the Mill
Creek; provide Restoration onsite manager with a key and notify
the Restoration Board of their responsibility to allow access on
a daily basis between the hours of 7: 00 a.m. and 9: 00 p.m.
cSe¢ve 9aotect
'ttatkopee CIntruutttiitu 47cruires s
129 Levee Dove
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Phone 445-2742
Community Education • Parks • Recreation • Adult Education
August 26, 1982
Mr. John Anderson, Administrator
City Of Shakopee
129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee, Mn. 55379
Dear Mr. Anderson:
The Shakopee Community Services Board at its August 16, 1982
Regular Meeting went on record to support the preliminary
information previously presented to the Shakopee City Council
regarding a Shakopee Community Services Proposed Budget for
1983. The Board would like to adopt a Budget of $ 130,4 00.00
and is requesting the Shakopee City Council to support this
budget with a grant of $33,500.00. The Shakopee School Board
is being asked for a similar consideration.
You, of course, are knowledgeable about the attached supportive
figures previously presented. I would like to emphasize the
following for the Board:
1. The allotment request is the same as has been
received these past two years despite the addition
of new programs and increased costs.
2. One additional major fund raising activity is planned.
3. There will be a slight increase in youth Administrative
Fees.
4. The summer Mini Playground Program will be shortened
from seven weeks to six weeks.
Your forwarding of this information to the City Council will be
greatly appreciated:
Sincerely, ,^w
�4rrl
Georg4,47e.:Muenchow, Dix'.
Shakopee Community Services
GFM:kml
Encl.
A COOPERATIVE EFFORT OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AND SCHOOL DISTRICT 720 SINCE 1954
44 Sr Sr U) U)
Sr
O 0) S, d +) 4-) m N U I 03 C-I
•r. 0 I 0 +) U U S. >> S. C 0 0 I 0 +) 0
U •,-4 E m a) cd 0 cn - 0 0 S. 0 u) >> d
+) •rl m E .') S. +) 0 C`'1 in S. .0 a) 4) a)
u) > 0 0 I O 4 U .H •rl 0) >, 4-4 4. 'd 1 +)
•,-4s, 0 U) S~ 0 0 +) m > 44 -0 u) 0. 0 0 4-1 0 0
Q 0 a., u) 0, 0 S, a) a) S. C 0 0 0 L. 0 0 0
U) (1) S, S. U +) r-1 U a) 0 •.-I O.U +) 4. U) a. •H U) 0.
H a) O ••-c U) .0 0 O. 0 0 0 S. 4-1 a. .-�
O A S. 41 CO N 0 0 +) Cl) d •`)r-I S, cd cd O 0 Q 0 U) CO S.
O +.) 04 0 0 •ra cd Ti w CO o a) • a) a. ..0 .rl W -) •1-) T) O
,C •r♦ 0 >, Q) 0 C: •,1 a) +) 41 > u ,-i u) U) U 0 0 +)
o C . +) i, •,1 cd c 11.n Cl) C E i 0 C .) •,4 4. .c. cn L cd a) +) U
co lc .c-) •r. .0 C Q) I a) O id .-i a) a) O O 'V S. 0. E d O
E .-i I O a) +-, 1`- S-, .0 $, 0 40 .0 0 0 •r. 3 .0 .0 b
'0 E C •r. ci +) U 0. 40 > 041 - 4f) cd .0 d 0) m +)
O 0 +) .0 S-. E C ci a) Hi 0 cd •r' O u) 'd C. a) in Q. C 0 .0
Cd U •-4 •r1 •rl • . -. TJ Hi -1 S. S. 4) E l; .,-i C '0 TS S. X S. in +)
3 u) d a) cd +) d d (14 +) C 40 S, cd 4) •ri S. C 0 Z (1) 4-4 +-) .,-c
0 TS C .. 0. 0 E .• 0 S, E • + C O CO .0 cd d .0 u) a) U
a) C 'd O m Of •H 0 C_) 0 (1) 1 4-4 S. •,-4 4. 0 a) U 0 E cd S, S. d
Q. d 0) 04 X 4-. • S. 0 4-) +- 4. p.. +) +) .0 d al in 0 d .0 Ci C •
O 40 u) ') 4-4 V a) a) in 0 cd C C 0 E= 0) E C=. U +-) 1 0) U
.� S. a) 4) o23 0 +) -r. 1 E 0) >, 404-) 1 •H 0 cd U) 1 U X S-1 cd , +)
d C d S. F-. 0 04 .-4 S. 40 co cd in S. •r1 • d >, C I z. 0 0 a) 40 0)
.0 0 .0 a) - 0 U) +) ', 0 0 4D R. +) U) •• 40 a., u) a) ...-• 04.0 H
U) •- U Ti a) 0 S. U 0 >•, .0 C 4,) H S. 0. 4 a) >, 0 ,H S. in cd O
4) a) C 0 a) d U d u r-1 C •r1 0 i • S. 0 +) r-1 V 1 d 0 0) 0 to C I 4) 0 U i)
4 S. ,..). d + d •-+) S. - •.-i ' 0 •ei .0 S. 1 Sd
+) • ,
O U 0) a, ,.a 0 4 0 0 > S. d Hi +) m d m .0 0 S. 1 . N 40 0 •,-c O • +) X +) u) C
O .0 0 0 0 E 0 S +, 'd .0 E 1 1 0 •. 0 •• O a. 0 U O +) .,-4 0 d a) 'd .. )
A T) -J-) U (H +-) .C: cd E .a) C O r+ >, 40 d 0 +) U) V O.+) 0 3 S. C 0
0 d 0 C +) 0 H U) d H 0 3 0 .-1 .0 \ S
0 E . cd H .H4 E O n C •r1
.-. E •rl 0 +) m cd 0 (I) S. a. Fr. d (. +) S. ..4 0, 3 4. u) 4.
0 -a 4. 0 cd +) .--1 - cd •-4 0 0 P, a) >, 4) d u u •r. a) .!C a) o
Hm O s a) E •• cd u) E, 4. 1 0 0 E u I I C m m0 C C U 0 0.. +)
Cl) '_ m d .,.i* 0. (1) S. 0 0) 4-. a.•.-c o23 •-1 >. 0 Cl) a) 0) .0 m Cr m .H
.0 '0 •r. .0 4) +) (11. +) 0 0 m 10 0 X m +) S. 0 01 U) S. 00 C m WO .4-4S-4 I a)
+) cd C. 0 0 m +) •.+ m C W d 40 0 40 u 0 40 0 0 Cf) d m T) 0
')0 + r
) . , 0) 0. >,•r+ m d 0 r-1 0 0 C cn C cd C •- 0 I 01 0 r-+ S. C 41) m TS
>, S, •r. C E m S. in H 40 cd .0 r-1 0 •rl 0 d •P •.-1 S. TS c.3 H Cd d Cd C 'Cd
.0 0 d u a, - 3 0 0 d. S. a. 0 0 +) 0 I S. S, •,1 'd m 0 C d +) .0 .0 •.+ C m
O 0 >, m •rl 00) 4-4 +), 0) 0 > C Sr +) a) C H H 4-) C- 0 m 0 .R C.) 0 +) 0 U)
TS •r. C4---i a)- 0 +) Q 0, S
0 . En 0 Hi d 1'd •, Cr. d m C •+ •-4 C 0 +) a) o a. S. S, d 4-i cd
a) +, ). Q CY C • 4, 0 0 0) asS
1 . 0 . .0 +) 4 c: 0 a) 0 +) O H d 0 a) ,4: 0) 4-4
S. d U) 0 1)7 d 1), +-) n, 4. 51. 40 [-+ Fc d n, 0 in 0 H .0 X. U d Q in U 0. ) m I-C V
o a) •.1 (1)
LI) S. ,C_ 0 ••
C u E-, a) •
0 0 X o
0. S, -
u) N 0 0 H O o O O o O -i H 0 0
• O U N Cr) M Cr) m �) C 00 (T u� Q
4 E 0 S. rW-) ... -? -1 .-/ - - -1 -f - -1' 4-1- Y
O cd 0 id
•H S. E 0. o
O •
0 0 >, 40 -)
S-, U 4 C •
•'- a 0 U E d 0 0 --N ..-4$4-4 II ^+
d .0 E S. •'- 4-, •• 04-1 >, r1 1
'0 +) Hi d 4D C in 0 0 0 S. H S.
S, a .-S S, 0 d 0 3 •H 1 (1) 0 •• 0 O O
(Cl 'C) cH d 40 S, 0) •rt a) +) d 'd 0 0 •r. m U) .0 •,1
0 •r. O O C14 H +) 0 Cl) 0 U a) 0 C .0 a) U u 'd S.
C > 4. S. 0 m O T) S. O N m >, E d d of -H cd 0 +V)
O m 0 0 d 0 C r-1 •,-, +) 0 •rl S. >,
m S. Q) S. 0 E d O m H •r. H +) 0 S. E r+ a. 0
0) 0. 0 0 in 0 0 '0 .0 +) U d cH a. .-1 m C 0 0 - m •rl
V •r. 40 u +) +) >) C - C > •4-4 a) E Hi C ^) >, > S. in d
•ri O 4-+ d •r. V 4D 0 S. O d ••+ V 0 0 C .r1 C 04 0 +) H 4.0 +)
• +) 0 m +) a) - 0 0 0 '0 4. 0 0 4•4 •r. 0 0 0 C m
f-, O C a) •• S. r 0 S. +) N C 0. ,0 0 1 u C 1 •r+ 0
0 '0 a ,--I IC) •,1 Q) ;{ d U 0 0 in t E I .0 ^ u) 0 d X
U) 0 0 .0 t (O •r. E-1 0 .0 4-) •H 0 •H 0 om +) 4) U) 0. 0
40 a) ,0 4) ) S
0 . S. S. 0 +) .-1 (1) 4-, 0 V •.-) O r--i 4-4 +) .0
>, S. .0 +) d +) 1 d ( 44) 440) 4 >, ri U C O d d - C 1
+) d 4-) I-4 +) 0) m (1) '0 0 0 H C d +) 0 .,-C S. U Cd
.,4 SI 400') 0 a) 0 >-) 0 ,--- .• C 0 H 0 d S. in •41 S. U •,•+ U a)) 0
COCCI 0 E S. .X E •H C U •rc 0. 41 S5. 0 0 E 0 +) H V 'd
0 •4-1 •r. t-- C •H 0 0 •H 0) m •ri . m Em •.-. - +) c:3Q) S. C C
E 0 .0 r-1 •+ +) 0 0 •-) E >, S. S. 0 d 0 I u) m C cd d H .0 cd *4-4E 0 +) 0 0 .-1 in 3 H S. 0 0 0 0 +) 4-1 40 S. E m C d 0 3
O 0 •r4 'U Ti H •N +) +) TS 40 3 0 0 Q C-4 •H d 0 +) +) 1-] 0
U .0 3 0 d 41 r-1-,IN m S. 0) d 0 0 F: () 41 • 0. a) S. d 0 S-.
0 S. 0 0 .-i S, n1...IN 0. 0) •H 'd •,1 4-1 (1) (1) a. Cl) d H d ,k3 C H
O m in U 0 4-. 0 0. 0.H •N 0 • +) E_. 4. 0 0- 0 a.•r+ H •r4 CO
O d 0 m C 0 in 0 d d U H •ra 0 0 0 41 - d in d a.
a..0: 40 V 0 I S, .0 I S. a.'d X U) H I ,•-H .0 U >, 4 m S. • H O X 0
O 0 4-41 C 4,1 0 0 C m U) 4r1 0 0 •• U U C) 0 +) S.
.. T) 0 d +) m in N in +) 023 0 d E 4-4 in m c8 04.) m H m m m E C +) C d CID
d C HI a. • a .H a) 0 0 -' E 0) 0 +) 0 0 a. Cl) 0 4--1 d (1) (I) LZ, d C
.0 d ,--i >,Hi •,-. .4"1 > 0) •rm S
+ d . S. +) S. 1 O •r. .0 >, 0 E: U I •.-1 40 40 11
(1)
CO d +) 0 S. S. Sr r+ S. S. +) 40 0 in m 0 •rl 4. +) 0 E 0 •r1 r1 U S. 4-4 'U 40
0 •H 0 0 d 0 0. d +-) 44 >, •.• 0 b Q co 0 ri H ,sC > a, C m 0 4-4 ,-1 d
O N S. H .0 m H a. 0 Hi u) d d E S. O d fx. C C d a. S. S
.-1 , a. 0 O 'd H 4-) d •rS
1 .
G' tom1- 0 •• U 0) d 0 0 S
d C . .-1 .C". •,-I0 W 0 0 0 E O r-1 0) C +) H .,1 •rt 0 +) 0 d
E-. 4-4 ,0 U) Q co co a. co •rl 0 a, m U +) r-i 0. n. .0 :I: 0 3 d co co m a. d 4-1 X; m CA 40
Ti •
C
•
it
•• 0 H .4
in
E 0 0 O O H O H a) 0 N O
4-1 EA 0 0 Crl .4 .4 Cry Cr -H H N Crl
0 0 H 'I 1--1 HI Hi Hi HI N N N
1--1 P] in .0 -4- - -. -1- ? 0. -. -1' -4
U CO a) c.
0 0. U)
'O O O 0 OHO ul O'O M
C) OO 0 OO N. N 0 0 n
c'1 U) ul r- n ' .O O' CO .-1 •
CO O
O (41. 0
.-a 0
1-1 ul c•-1rt O N M 0'1
} '--4 ,-1 •--i
C., V? i? <I>
•
O r` O O O r- N ul O N- M
+-1 O O O 0 N r- O -r
N ) L 0-1 O O ill M 10 CO CO c'1 .--4
CO 0C ^ ^ ^
CT 'b c'1 Cm .-+ •-1 c''1 CO n CO •--- CO J
•-+ G c'*) .7 M .1 al — .--i M
CO ,--i .--1
U> N', <A-
g ,---.
E O .-, .--1 ul '.O O C 0 '--1 0 •--1 CO M
.-i 0N000N 000 CON. u1O •-, r�
CO •-r cG Ill -.Zr 00 O �' 1-/1 r- N. N N CO v .--i
CO O ^
i.; CT J-1 M .-1 N .--- c"1 N O O —I N -.7
N '-4 U cn -Zr r1 '-4 Q\ N '--1 . M
00 d --+ ..-1
b U> U> U>
G
PO
"U
G
0
GT-, O '--1 --+ ul u1 O N -Zr Cm m CT '--1
,-4 U1 01 O O c''1 O N CO -Zr M CO Ch c111
U) O G 1!1 r- N CT .-+ N. N CO CO rs '7
41 CO G ^ ^ '.O
U ON t-, 0 ,7 '-4 - N '.O M O •-4 -Zr 0.--1
•1-1 '-1 U M -Zr M .--1 CO N ^+ c+1 I
sa (A (I)-
C)
4-1
•r1
G •
G
0
0
0
M
CO
.--1
U)
N
w 0
G') Cl) G
c''1
• U F U) (1 R'+ Sa
C) 1-i N
r-i '23 U) .0 0
. 11 'T
L) > NE
a) 0) 0 •� Tb U
U
G• Ci] G G v Vv) .-%i N al
• 0 O > C) 4-1 a 0
0• w 4-) 0 CG 4 ,-I U) W tea) C
C, m U) .n ,4 W .-1 Oro v ,-a .-4 0 G .4
C) C) -H .-4 v-+ ro u G 4--1ro m ..
G) ,. CO a m ,. •.H o 4-) G
O G >� C) 4J U G o 'O m Cl.•4-1 0 CO CP
G U cG +-1 G U) cG H G Cl. P.H U)
C) O .0 G O •,-1 I-+ 0 a) G (C) C) 'O
> h1 U 1-+ U Z H P.P+ U U C
CV a w w w
•
•
...12
n.--.. ...
moa
0'` 20
M O
N O Q
S U
I
.-1
n O
1 Z
P n O = O O O t n 0 0 U 1 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0•n 0 0 N O o 0 0 0 0 0
000 U)O N P O O r- n n 0 0 to O O O 0 O 0 N P U)U)N arcr U) •l)G o
a S U N T P U) U) W .0 U)n .". d P O P .O m c` )M N P ♦ d m m.0.1 P 4 4
LL .-f W a) .0 n 4 M n L 4 .-1 0N 4 n O .4.1 O O
a O ,CI.4 ., ..4 N nn
N .i.•1
4
H
N
N)H' 1.1 n C' n U)e)Cf N o n en 1,O a'0 0 0 n n N n O N O o O o a 0 o
ma O r OU) POOP[, O c In UI00 OU) O In U)P U)InN 000toNOO
IT W O N ¢.P )) 0).0 U)n ..I a) P O 0. .0 a C' U)M N 4 f 4 Q) C0 0.d P f Or
M O W q)Z M 4 n M 0 4 r 0N .4 n O .4.• O O
I_ m .0... a MI N 141 .0
U M .4..
W
7
0] J
a a
NI- 0
f. MOP- •
M
N6-
07 0• W U
6 .+ 4
I-
W W
W
S N
N m
2 06 nN.-4O•00' M O../P PU)U) .O.O U7 N P OG 07 N N44
M 10 4 N n 0) m U) n n N m 4 4 M N N O m P N O .4 N O 0
o .-M '.04 PO4 )N..n C4P f N.0 M.1 N .+.I.4 00 C a'a' I
7 I 1 04.4N-4.4N n M 4 .0 NN .0
r0 nto to
f- O ,.y
W 1
0
CA
0 a
0] 0 N O O O O O N O O O O O 0 0 0 0 CJ O O t)O O U) O CU 0 0 0 N.P
NM N U7 O O O O P O tl 0 O n O N 0 U)u7 O UTP O N N U 0 0 U)I!'1
1 C0a .44MCONO.OfaNnO,N NOf U)U) 0).OM 00P1WWN...nnn
1 O` a 00"00110N/.. ....../ P4 .r LJ -4.-1.1 -.4® m
2 .. n .0.4 Cr, .4 .4.4
o ,-.1...•
►r •
41) •
.1 .1 •
2
> = ..J M
►+ O 4 .)Mm4N 0000n .Innenn U)4 Nt)P Nr OON.-I n.-1* Z
r O 4 .-1O CV0..e M1 WI 0.10 U) C)O.r .+ .0 P to0 .0U) .0 NP U)U) .0n 0+ C c O
mH 0'M If)NP P n.-1 m0• NN .04 .00n N .04 N NN.4..4N mm 0
2 0•U O0' n4N 0 4.4 N 0•N M O ..1.4.1 .1 NN
O .44 .0 M 0• H ....1.1 2
fti .4.4 0
Y- M
Q I-
N w 4
o cc J W
L) 4 0O0P).-14 aN.4n4 .0 .1' .1.0.01.. WOn.0nn N40nn tY
2 W 00 .04 m40` 4tnn0P .OtnC000 .ONPMn 4.00Mn U
O O o t- !-r x 0' 4[` 4 0 4 0` O P N.0 .0 U) 4 4 4 N N n u n..0 P P W
1. MU O 4 N n N n .0 4 4 O P 44 N N .d O O W
I. M ...gat U7 N W N .W N N i
M W ., .4 .,
LIw
•
M .3
on
(.7 W
w 4. a
v) IY U 0
LI Ir 1- 2
Li 4 •D •-• O
M a a
Q > L
w I 2 v) G.)
W 0 o¢ m amp., 2= O0U WW .- o z
O 00w T a > WN = ....-. a0: 072 O
W W M .-. e20 J W .00 1- ... up-=, x W... O W
W .. .L. M J • m W (n -1 Nam wee U O a
a 2 2 •J 4- (nN ....0 M W • O 22
O U C7 J P. 4 W a 4 ad 2 04 Ll N 0 pe 0 V)V) Q. J a 4 V) N 0
Y ...ICC U tL - Z 1.. M J 07 LL U 0 M 4 1- M 1=.
a M. r > 4 1.✓-.V O V) Cr .• J R J V)V)W O 00.-W 1- 1. 1 ►-
= 4 a WO. LL.JU V) J S 2 0. 2 Woe W m W W O•-'N M. . Q
N W M i 11 O W •-'0. 0 W WW U022 WM., Z W
5 CL ,./) 0 V).4 V) W V)O C^ 4 0 .. 2 ne C7 U W 204- 4 1 4 0 W O V1 0:
W U U WW 2 2 a _W W Z Z N N W c, W C^ J ...1020m6.- 1- U
O w v) 01W 00 = J...a ►- o .4 J 4 40 22 w
cY W 00 .d F- 2 J J W O a J W 4 a W 4 0 ..V) IJ J W J I- J S 2 J 0 0 0:
>- 0 4 4 4 V) J Y 4 a 0 J .-+4 1a. 1-- W> Z 0 J•- W N 4 U 4 r 4 U O 4 O O
.- J J O 2 d O C N .-.O.- O V1 J 4 f' V)...2 2 W 1- V) W I- O W .-S 2 H
ti 2 4 4 W W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 W O O Z t- tJ 0 0 0 M O 4 0 W W O Q 0 2
•
U .- N V) a s S 7 •- N L 0 W►-a s .-1- a .-•0 0 U 0 M- Z .- U 1- Z O 1.- 1..
0 U J JO
N -) W o U 0 .-1 O.1 • O N G` N • 0 0 M O O C' O POM • 0` • .4 • 0 0 • 4 4 7
W 9 C n Q 4 N U) • .. N n n • .I N N n U) .0 P m 0' M • 0. • ..I . 4 0 . 4. 1-
a' m .. .d..4.1.4.4 • N N N N • n n n n n n n n n n • 4 • U) • C' 0` 4 0 0 .+
.. ... V 444447044444. 44. 444444, 4444444 . 4441-4- M }
. .
C�
O
x
44
CD
O
C4
w
CD
O
C4
a
CD
O
Pa
rn
(7 M
v1 O ul � O O n O O ,l 0 0 0 0 ,l 0 vl ,'1 t� v1 u'1 n 0 0 0 vl vl
H N 00 n t.n v1 co 4D on M CO ' 4 O OA VD 00 O Vl M N ,7 ^ Go 00 VD F 4 N. O
Z op ,.O M �7 M M O ,7 •-4 N '""1 M M
OO d CO -4 0 .-4 N .-i
P4 3 1-4
Pa co co- co-
ZO 000 v100v100000000000v100v100000 0
to QD ul .-a O CO M O ,.O N. N O 00 N N. O .-a r- vl CN O` M VD ‘.D N M vl C0
H ,,D M N. O.' N. N. .-1 O1 N .-4 .� .-1 M .4 vO •-+ d' M rl .-4 .--- 0
E-+ qq M M O N U1 VDN
W O N C) d H N
x a A co-
EA W
'000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000 0
Z 0N O MONN0N - -r000 -7 -70N - C CoNNN . C0 0 CO
Mt, u100 . '1
7v1N00 , M COMvDMN N .-i .-+ •-1 •-+ 00n ^ N M
C7 O W A n CO .I .-i .-r 0 .--I -7 ..4 O N I
WOfx .7 G1,' 6 N �7 'i `D
C.) a
An-
BN O N QA vl 0 M u'1 u1 M v1 0 111 0 M 0 00 C -IM M N 0 0 000 00 M I
W ,t 00 N 0, O\ 0M N ,..0 ,7 0 r CO .7 on N -4 ,--4 N N CO OM O, M M N
0 0 . q M
vl —4 CO
o
6
0 I-'i P+ v'
P-I �" IM 000 • ,1 0 0 ,1 Ill N lfl O v1 O N O n n O1 N N .4 0 0 0 n n
P CO O M . N. v'1 I. N N -.4 N O N 0 •-4 'PIM co CO -.1 -.4 O\ vl v1 al MCoco0 00
oN
H O N cr, .•a co .--i M N O N ,7 N r, .-a .-4 .-a N. �7 - .-4 .--4 tin
o N
Z OCD on z00.14) C) r, ,t .4 .-- M 4:, M
N
H P: C7 co
Z 44
000 v100 ,100000000000v100 ,100000 0
v1 O vl n 0 0 n 0 0 v1 0 0 0 0 v1 0 ,l v1 n u1 vl , 0 0 0 v1 if1 0
N CO N- t!1 LIl CO CO 1.11 M CO .--4 O O.' VD 00 O on M N - ,7 •-4 CO 00 4) n -
HH 00 CO 01 �7 M M O -7 .••4 N .4 M I. .-4 .--i 0
to 0 %.0 -1 0 — N .-i
H H ..4 N
D
H
A
• LID • W Q0
W
• cn C) P: W - a H H
W W HE- HHW «D 04 W cn En
W 41 a
a0 0 •Z a H C) Wz • cn W wo C) - D W H
W H 44 Cute44 ,1 C) ,-.1
6 r7 En H H Z vii •27 W W W O' r-7 g 0
co c/4 II 1 Z W Z Z O W W H W 6 un C) 0 P; E+
H cn Up cn ,Zs cn O CO D H H Z •A3 C7 C) W Z uo .1 I H P: W
W H C) OWup HW En 44 Hd1-4 aa
Z un
O C) HH x PS • Z cocoC7r-7H •aw ¢ 44PH
H v) P: H HC) W .7 ZP4 W 6P. W HPHu W O H d O H
Zun
H A <4 ' 4woQO4wo � ¢ "g6
¢ WwaAo'.-aow04C4ZHaaw
n up P+ P+ x3 <4 vi Z W CO a 44 H H w H D 04 CJ A d C) 6 z
c4 H HA
H
C
A
c.-1 OW OOOr+ O -4OONN000 •-a000000 •-4 Or-' 000 HH 'K
CO '"7 O M -r -r vl un H N Cl M .-1 N N M v1 VD N. co cn 01 H .--4 H 00 4c
cA .-4 CO .-I .-1 .-1 .-- .-i ..-1 9C N N N N Cl M M M M M M M M M 9C LP1 9C CM O, 9c,f VT,T 9C
r+ ..-r 0 �Y ,TVT ,f ....1. ,f 9C V7 .7 -7 ,7 .7 -t ,T ,f '1. ,t ,1 ,T 9c 9c 9<
August 23, 1982 LEGAL NOTIFICATION 3 ci
Robert F. Vierling
221 E. 4th Ave .
Shakopee, Minnesota
Shakopee City Council 55379
City of Shakopee Re: Alley improvements
129 E. 1st Ave . in Block #50
Shakopee, Minnesota 1 55379
Shakopee City Council:
I am asking for answers to my questions in the letter of May 17 ,
1982 and this present letter of August 23, 1982.
I was informed by Council-men Jerome Wampach that the City of Shakopee
is going to straighten out the alleyways in Shakopee . According to
Judith Cox, city clerk, the alleyways are a legal sixteen (16) feet
in Shakopee . This is also true on the city plate. With true accord-
ance to the city ordinances this should mean that the full sixteen
( 16) feet be free and clear of all obstructions such as poles, gar-
bage cans, buildings etc . or any object that would obstruct the full
alleyway.
Sommerville, on the East side of block #50 is already too low. In
fact it is so low that curb and gutter can not be put there. Now is
the City still going to lower Sommerville end?
I also want to know the name of the certified surveyor that is going
to survey the alleyway.
I would also like to know why the council people do not set a good exm
ample and have their alleyways tarred? Why stAkt in the middle of
Shakopee? Also why do not some council people have a alleyway by their
own property?
I want to also make sure that both the entrances in the alleyway in
block #50 are the full legal sixteen(16) feet.
How do I stop Charles Cavanaugh from throwing his empty whiskey bottles
on my property, which he has done, all these years since he has lived here .
How do I stop Jim McNearney from digging up my boulevard and killing
a tree and digging up my tar gutter? How do I stop Jim McNearney from
plowing up my boulevard in the winter and then piling up the snow on
my sidewalk, to over six (6) foot high?
How do I keep the Cavanaugh and McNearney Mortuary from blocking my
driveway?
I am asking that the City of Shakopee give me a answer to my questions
in writing, as I have submitted them to the City 'of Shakopee in writing.
I need this for my own records and also for my attorney.
(2 . )
- This will eliminate any questions or denials as to what has been said.
Phone calls can be denied too easily and this will prevent that sit-
uation from arising in the further.
This is to put the City of Shakopee on notice that Charles Cavanaugh's
old brick barn, that was condemned over fifty (50) years ago , is part-
ly on my property and that I will not be libel for any injuries or
responsible for any other accidents caused by the decrepit conition
of that old brick barn. Charles Cavanaugh was informed by my father,
Nickolas G . Vierling and myself that the old brick barn was part of
our property, and so was Jim Mcnearney when4purchased the property
from Charles Cavanaugh.
I would also like to know when the alleyway light will be properly
placed in the center of the alleyway where it is supposed to be so that
the whole alleyway will benefit by it?
Or is the City of Shakopee in these matters going to make variances
for just certain people and in plain English say: " The hell with the
rest of us , as has been done in the past" !
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Vierling
1 ;32
CITY OF SHAs(O 'xEE
geL,)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Amending City Code Regulating Issuance of Pool Table
Licenses
DATE: September 2 , 1982
Introduction
Pursuant to Council direction on August 17th, Mr. Coller has
prepared the attached ordinance amending the City Code which
will permit an establishment to possess a set up license and
a pool table license .
Action Requested
Offer Ordinance No. 103 , An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee ,
Minnesota, amending City Code Chapter 6 entitled "Other Business
Regulations and Licensing" by Repealing Subd 3F and 3G of Section
6 . 31 entitled "Billiards , Pool and other Game Tables" , and move
its adoption.
JSC/jms
ORDINANCE NO. 103
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending City Code
Chapter 6 entitled "Other Business Regulations and Licensing" by
Repealing Subd 3F and 3G of Section 6.31 entitled "Billiards, Pool
and other Game Tables".
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTIONI: REPEAL
Subd 3 F and Subd 3G of Section 6. 31 entitled "Billiards, Pool and other
Game Tables" are hereby repealed.
SECTION II: When in force
After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it shall be
published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in
full force and effect on and after the date following such publication.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of , 1982.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
30th day of August, 1982.
z2z14:4:71est
Jul-ius jA. Coller, II r {
City Attorney
(fib
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Amending City Code on Liquor and Beer License
Regulations
DATE: September 2 , 1982
Introduction
Pursuant to Council direction on August 17th, Mr. Coller has
prepared the attached ordinance amending the City Code to be
consistent with State law regarding gambling and gambling
devices being permitted on premises holding a beer or liquor
license .
Action Requested
Offer Ordinance No. 104 , An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee ,
Minnesota , amending Chapter 5 Entitled "Liquor , Beer and Wine
Licensing and Regulation" by Repealing Subsection 6 of Section
5 . 13 entitled "Beer License Restrictions and Regulations" and
by repealing Subsection 9 of Section 5 . 32 entitled "Liquor
Licensing Restrictions and Regulations" , and move its adoption.
JSC/jms
ORDINANCE NO. 104
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the •City of Shakopee, Minnesota, amending Chapter 5
Entitled "Liquor, Beer and Wine Linensing and Regulation" by Repealing
Subsection 6 of Section 5.13 entitled "Beer License Restrictions and
Regulations" and by repealing Subsection 9 of Section 5.32 entitled
"Liquor Licensing Restrictions and Regulations".
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
SECTION I. REPEAL
Subd. 6 of Section 5.13 entitled "Beer License Restrictions and Regulations"
is hereby repealed.
SECTION II: REPEAL
Subsection 9 of Section 5.32 entitled "Liquor License Restrictions and Regulations"
is hereby repealed.
SECTION III: WHEN IN FORCE
After the adoption, signing and attestation of this Ordinance, it siall be
published once in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee and shall be in
full force and effect on and after the date following such publication.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota
held this day of __. , 1982.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee �~
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form this
30th day of August, 1982.
i 4�
Julius : Coller, II
City Attorney _,_._.-- -'
cy
-J ILIUS A.(;OLLER, If
JULIUS A.COLLER ATTORNEY AT T.A\\ 612-445-1244
18'59-1040
2 1 1 WEST F IRS T AVENUE
SI].AKOPEE, MINNESOTA
scsazo
August 20, 1982
•
TO: JUDY COX, CITY CLERK
FROM: JULIUS A. COLLER, II, CITY ATTORNEY
RE: ORDINANCE 73 and SHAKOPEE CITY CODE Section 10.71
In view of your memo to the City Administrator dated July 26, 1982, it
would seem that the simplest way to accomplish what the council wants,
namely, to repeal Section 10.71 but keep Subdivision 2 thereof and
integrate it with Ordinance 73 previously passed would be simply to
repeal all of Section 10.71 of the Code except the title and Section 2
and then this will be integrated with Ordinance 73 at the next codification.
In view of the length of the new ordinance, a summary would not be
appropriate.
Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
Action Requested :
Offer Ordinance No. 101 , An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota Amending Shakopee City Code by Repealing Part of
Section 10. 71 Thereof, and move its adoption.
ORDINANCE # 1 1
Fourth Series
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AMENDING SHAKOPEE CITY CODE BY REPEALING
PART OF SECTION 10.71 THEREOF
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
SECTION I: REPEAL
Section 10. 71 of the City Code, except the title, to-wit: "RULES AND REGULATIONS
GOVERNING PUBLIC PARKS" and except Subdivision 2 thereof, is hereby repealed.
SECTION I I: WHEN IN FORCE
This ordinance shall be in force and effect from and after the date of its passage
and publication.
Adopted by the City Council of Shakopee, Minnesota in session held this
day of , 1982.
~- Mayor of the City of Shakopee--------
ATTEST:
hakopee ..a--ATTEST:
City Clerk
Prepared and approved as to form
this 20th day of August, 1932
City Attorney
...
dr
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE: Cable Ordinance No. 100
DATE: September 3 , 1982
Introduction
On August 10 , 1982 , the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 100 ,
which awarded the cable franchise . The City Attorney and City
Clerk have since recognized certain minor changes necessary to
conform to the law and incorporate this ordinance into the City
Code .
Background
Copies of pages which have been changed are attached. A brief
summary of each of the changes follows .
1 . Page 6 - the title and inital paragraph have been changed to
coincide with the general format which allows ordinances to
be incorporated into the City Code.
2 . Page 109 thru 112 , Section 15 - the signatories of the franchise
have been revised, language has been added to allow for a
summary of the ordinance to be published rather than the full
ordinance , a new Section 15 .02 , Effective Date , has been added
and Section 15 .04 , J. has been completed.
3 . The prepared summary has been included as part of the ordinance
as required by law.
Requested Action
1 . Move to reconsider Ordinance No. 100.
2 . Move to amend Ordinance with recommended changes to pages 6
and 109-112 as contained in the memo dated September 3 , 1982 ,
by Administrative Assistant Jeanne Andre .
3 . Move to adopt Ordinance No. 100 as amended.
JA/jms
ORDINANCE NO. 100
FOURTH SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AMENDING
SHAKOPEE CITY CODE BY ADDING THERETO CHAPTER 15
ENTITLED "CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE ORDINANCE"
THEREBY GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO ZYLSTRA-UNITED
CABLE TELEVISION COMPANY, TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A
CABLE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE;
SETTING FORTH CONDITIONS ACCOMPANYING THE GRANT OF
THE FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR REGULATION AND USE OF
THE SYSTEM AND PRESCRIBING PENALTIES FOR THE
VIOLATION OF ITS PROVISIONS.
SECTION 1 . STATEMENT OF INTENT AND PURPOSE, AUTHORITY,
FRANCHISE APPLICATIONS .
1 .01 Statement of Intent and Purpose. City intends, by
the adoption of this Franchise, to bring about the develop-
ment of a System, and the continued operation of it. Such a
development can contribute significantly to the com-
munication needs and desires of many citizens of Shakopee.
Further, City may achieve better utilization and improvement
of public services with the development and operation of a
System.
Studies engaged in by the Shakopee Ad Hoc Cable
Communications Committee created by the city council of City
have led the way for organizing this means of procuring and
securing a System deemed best suited to the cable service
territory comprising the City of Shakopee. This has
resulted in the preparation and adoption of this Franchise.
-6-
SECTION 15 . EFFECTIVE DATE; PUBLICATION; ACCEPTANCE;
GUARANTEE; EXHIBITS
15 .01 Publication; Posting. This Franchise shall be
signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Administrator
and City Clerk. The City Clerk shall publish the title of
this ordinance and the official summary in the official
newspaper with notice that a printed copy of this ordinance
in its entirety is available for inspection by any person
during regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk
and the Shakopee Library. Publication of the official sum-
mary shall clearly inform the public of the intent and
effect of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall see that a
copy of this ordinance is filed in her office and in the
public library of the City of Shakopee, which the Council
hereby designates as locations at which a copy is available
for inspection by any person during the regular office hours .
15.02 Effective Date. This Franchise shall take effect
upon issuance of a Certificate of Confirmation of this
Franchise by the Board. This Franchise may incorporate by
reference, without publication in full , a statute of
Minnesota or a rule of the Board or the FCC and the offering
of Grantee.
15 .03 Publication of Notices. All public notices
required to be published by City, including this Franchise,
shall be published in the official newspaper- of the City.
-109-
Grantee shall pay the costs for publication of this
Franchise and amendments to it, as such publication is
required by law.
15. 04 Acceptance; Time of Acceptance; Guarantee;
Incorporation of Offering; Exhibits.
A. Grantee shall have 30 days from the effective
date of this Franchise to accept this Franchise in form
and substance acceptable to City, unless the time for
acceptance is extended by City. Such acceptance by
Grantee shall be deemed the grant of this Franchise for
all purposes .
B. Upon acceptance of this Franchise, Grantee
shall be bound by all the terms and conditions contained
herein. Grantee shall provide all services and
offerings specifically set forth in the Offering to pro-
vide cable communication service within City and, by its
acceptance of this Franchise, Grantee specifically
agrees that the Offering of Grantee, including all pro-
mises, offers, representations and inducements contained
therein, is specifically incorporated by reference and
made part of this Franchise. The failure to refer to
the Offering in any specific provisions of this
Franchise shall not be a limitation on the obligation of
Grantee to fully comply with the Offering. Grantee
further acknowledges that all promises, Offers, repre-
-110-
sentations and inducements contained in the Offering of
Grantee were freely and voluntarily made to City by Grantee.
C. The Offering shall be permanently kept and
filed in the Office of the City Clerk and the originals
or reproductions thereof shall be available for inspec-
tion by the public during normal business hours . Also,
the Grantee may summarize the Offering in a manner
acceptable to City or reproduce the entire Offering, and
shall have either at the following locations in the
following quantities :
1 ) Office of the City Clerk - 1 copy;
2 ) Public library - 1 copy each;
3 ) Office of the City Attorney - 1 copy;
4 ) Local office of Grantee - 1 copy;
5 ) Office of any School District in City - 1 copy.
D. In the event of conflicts or discrepancies
between any part of the Offering and the provisions of
this Franchise or between any part of the summary made
by Grantee and the Offering, those provisions which pro-
vide the greatest benefit to City, in the opinion of
City, shall prevail .
E. Grantee shall have continuing responsibility
for this Franchise. Grantee is a wholly owned part-
nership entity of two parent corporations . Accordingly,
performance of this Franchise shall be sOcured by
-111-
guarantees of the parent corporations in form and
substance acceptable to City, which shall be delivered
at time of, and as part of, acceptance of this
Franchise.
F. With its acceptance, Grantee also shall
deliver to City an opinion from its legal counsel ,
acceptable to City, stating that this Franchise has been
duly accepted by Grantee, that the guarantees have been
duly executed and delivered, that this Franchise and the
guarantees are enforceable against Grantee and the
guarantors in accordance with their respective terms,
and which opinion shall otherwise be in form and
substance acceptable to City.
G. With its acceptance, Grantee also shall
deliver to City true and correct copies of documents
creating Grantee and evidencing the power and authority
referred to in the opinion of Grantee' s counsel, cer-
tified as of a then current date by public office
holders to the extent possible and otherwise by an
officer of Grantee.
H. Each exhibit is a part of this Franchise and
each is specifically incorporated herein by reference.
The exhibits are as follows :
I . Upon acceptance by Grantee, all fees and
charges for acceptance of this Franchise 'and all costs
-112-
and expenses incurred by City shall be paid in full .
City shall provide to Grantee an itemized statement of
its expenses . Any costs not identified by City before
date of acceptance shall he paid promptly to City when
an itemization of such costs and expenses is provided to
Grantee.
J. Acceptance shall be construed to be an accep-
tance of and consent to all the terms, conditions and
limitations contained in the ordinance granting the
Franchise as well as the provisions of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Shakopee . Uurthermore such
acceptance shall, for all purposes contained in said
Franchising Ordinance, be considered an agreement between
the City and the Grantee and, in the event of the legal
inability of the City to exercise franchising or regu-
latory authority, this document shall survive and be
considered a contract between the parties and be enforce-
able according to its terms.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, in Session held this
day of 19
ATTEST:
By By
City Clerk Mayor of the City of Shakopee
-113-
OFFICIAL TITLE AND SUMMARY
ORDINANCE NO. 100
FOURTH SERIES
I. TITLE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE AMENDING SHAKOPEE CITY
CODE BY ADDING THERETO CHAPTER 15 ENTITLED "CABLE COMMUNICATIONS
FRANCHISE ORDINANCE" THEREBY GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO ZYLSTRA-
UNITED CABLE TELEVISION COMPANY, TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A CABLE
COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE: SETTING FORTH
CONDITIONS ACCOMPANYING THE GRANT OF THE FRANCHISE; PROVIDING
FOR REGULATION AND USE OF THE SYSTEM AND PRESCRIBING PENALTIES
FOR THE VIOLATION OF ITS PROVISIONS.
II. SUMMARY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS
That the following summary shall clearly inform the public of the intent and effect
of the ordinance and shall be published in the official newspaper of the city.
In order to bring about the development of a cable television system that will
contribute to the communication needs and desires of the citizens of Shakopee,
the city council created the Shakopee Ad Hoc Cable Communications Committee,
which conducted studies that contributed to the preparation and adoption of the
franchise ordinance.
The cable company is required to reimburse city for costs incurred in awarding
a franchise.
Before a cable company was selected, the company's technical ability, financial
condition and legal qualifications were considered in a full public hearing affording
reasonable notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
The cable system selected as a result of the selection process has the following characteristics
is described as follows:
Fifteen year non-exclusive cable franchise provides two networks
Subscriber Network
58 channel capacity
53 initially activated
47 initially program
4 reverse channels capable of two-way services
and future data services.
Institutional Network to schools, libraries, churches, social centers, and other public
buildings
capable of interconnecting with subscriber network
capable of handling 35 downstream and 24 upstream
channels simultaneously.
Service to any requesting subscriber in the cable service area within 90 days of the request.
Periodic performance tests and system maintenance tests will be conducted to ensure
that all performance standards are being met and all FCC and state cable board requirements
are being met.
$98,555 has been budgeted for a fully-equipped access studio that will be available for
use by cable subscribers on a first-come first-serve basis.
Three tiers of service will be available: the Universal Tier, Tier I, and Tier II.
The following channels and programs will be provided on the Universal Tier:
Cable Channel Designated Programming/Services
2 KTCA - Channel 2 - PBS - St. Paul
3 Community Television Channel (Public
Access) /Community Bulletin Board
4 WCCO - Channel 4 - CBS - Minneapolis
5 KSTP - Channel 5 - ABC - St. Paul
6 Regional Interconnection/ Regional
Bulletin Board/Job Shop
7 Leased Access
8 KTCI - Channel 17 - PBS - St. Paul
9 KMSP - Channel 9 - IND - Minneapolis
10 Educational Access Channel/School
Bulletin Board
11 WTCN - Channel 11 - NBC - Minneapolis
12 Government Access Channel/ Municipal
Bulletin Board (Designated
Emergency Channel)
13 Color Weather Radar
Tier I will include all of the channels and programs provided on the Universal Tier, plus
the following channels and programs:
Cable Channel Designated Programming/Services
14 FAA Restricted Frequency
15 Home Box Office (Premium)
16 Cinemax (Premium)
18 Reserved for PBS Cable+ (Premium)
23 AP NewsCable/AP Minnesota Newswire
24 C-SPAN
25 USA Network/Calliope
26 Appalachian Community Service
Network/American
27 The Health Channel+
28 Modern Satellite Network/Daytime+
-2-
29 WGN - Chicago
30 Music Television
31 CBS Cable
32 WOR - New York
33 Dow Jones Cable News
34 Christian Broadcasting Network
35 The Interfaith Channel/Religious
Access
36 The Nashville Network+
37 Cable News Network 2+
38 The Weather Channel+
39 Cinemerica+
40 Home Theatre Network (Premium)
41 Reserved for future programming
42 Reserved for future programming
43 Pay-Per-View: Sports and
Entertainment Specials (an
optional service for Tier I
subscribers)
Tier II will include all of the channels and programs provided on the Universal Tier and
Tier I, plus the following:
Cable Channel Designated Programming/Services
17 The Movie Channel (Premium)
19 Bravo (Premium)
20 Showtime (Premium)
21 The Entertainment Channel (Premium)
22 Home Theatre Network+ (Premium)
44 Entertainment and Sports Programming
Network
45 Cable News Network
46 FAA Restricted Frequency
47 WTBS - Atlanta
48 Nickelodeon/ARTS
49 Satellite Programming Network
50 The Shoppers' Channel+
51 UTV+
52 Reuters News-View
53 Reserved for future programming
54 Reserved for future expansion
55 Reserved for future expansion
56 Reserved for future expansion
57 Reserved for future expansion
58 Reserved for future expansion
59 Reserved for future expansion
+ Subject to service availability
-3-
Grantee with approval by Grantor
shall have the right to revise the
channel allocations to accomodate
new programming services, or in
the event of additional FAA frequency
restrictions. City authorities shall be
advised of any planned revisions.
Initial rates and charges will be as follows:
PROGRAMS AND SERVICE INSTALLATION MONTHLY
Home Theater Network $10.00 $4.95
Home Box Office $10.00 $8.95
Showtime $10.00 $8.95
Cinemax $10.00 $8.95
The Movie Channel $10.00 $8.95
The Entertainment Channel $10.00 $8.95
Bravo $10.00 $8.95
Home Theater Network-Plus $10.00 $9.95
Public Subscriber Network $10.00 $5.95
Pay Per View — undetermined
varies per event
Parental lock-out devices will be provided by Grantee free of charge.
Studio and Equipment Usage Rates
1. Non-commercial users non-cable productions:
Studio $50/hour
Editing $25/hour
Cable productions:
Studio No Charge
Editing No Charge
2. Commerical users non-cable productions:
Studio $125/hour
Editing $ 45/hour
Cable productions:
Studio $50/hour
Editing $20/hour
Institutional Network Rates
1. Non-Commerical Users:
No Charge for video, audio, and data uses,
Standard installation for No Charge.
-4-
Non-Standard installation charges based on
the cable company's actual cost.
Data and audio terminal interface equipment
provided and installed without charge.
2. Commercial Users:
Uniform installation, service and equipment rates
will be negotiated for the institutional
network.
Outlets provided at the company's actual cost.
Data, audio, and visual terminal and interface
equipment leased at a rate to recover
depreciation and installed at cost.
3. Government Buildings
A basic Tier I service and a converter will be
provided to each upon request by city at
no charge.
Advertising Rates
No charge for Public Service Announcements.
1. National Rate Card:
Per thousand homes*
52 spots (60 seconds)/year: $10.00
104 spots (60 seconds)/year: $ 9.00
156 spots (60 seconds)/year: $ 8.50
2. Local Rate Card:
Per thousand homes*
52 spots (60 seconds)/year: $ 9.00
104 spots (60 seconds)/year: $ 8.00
156 spots (60 seconds)/year: $ 7.00
Program and Service shares (e.g., ESPN) based on rating points computed from
latest Arbitron or commissioned survey of cable homes. Fixed position spots are
15 percent extra per contract.
Leased Channel Rates
1. Leased Video and Audio Rates
Commercial users:*
-5-
1 hour, single time use $100.00
1 hour, minimum 25 times $ 75.00
1 hour, 52 times $ 50.00
1-3 hours, single time use $ 75.00/hour
1-3 hours, more than one time $ 50.00/hour
More than 3 hours/day $ 35.00/hour
Dedicated annual use $5,000 to $10,000/year**
Non-Commercial users:
Rate is 50 percent of that for commercial users.
2. Leased FM Audio Rates
FM audio will be leased for $25.00 per hour.
SCA frequency use for leased FM: $100/week.
*If use of channel is for revenue generation purposes Grantee shall negotiate additional
profit sharing agreements.
**Annual leased channel rate may be subsequently adjusted + - 20 percent based
on day parts used, number of hours contracted, and advertising revenues generated.
Home Security System Rates
Installation Monthly
Panic button (with cable only) Free $ 1.95
Basic security to include:
Two smoke detectors,
two magnetic door switches,
panic button, control panel
with battery standby,
Tocom IIIC
Without basic cable service: $495.00 $ 9.95
With basic cable service: $450.00 $ 9.95
Full security to include:
All basic service components
and options: interior traps
window and door switches,
siren, panic buttons, etc.
Without basic cable service: Depends on $19.95
size and
configuration
With basic cable service: Depends on $19.95
size and
configuration
-6-
A non-profit community access corporation may be formed to manage the use of public
access and other community channels of the system.
To defray the costs of system regulation, in consideration of permission to use the public
ways, and to fund the community access corporation if one is formed, the cable company
will pay a franchise fee of five percent of gross annual system revenues.
The sum of $10,000 will be put on deposit by the cable company as security for faithful
compliance with all requirements of the franchise ordinance. Additionally, the sum of
$100,000 will be on deposit to ensure that construction is completed on schedule.
The company will hold the city harmless for any damages or penalties resulting from
the operation of the franchise, and will furnish insurance for both the company and city
officials to provide comprehensive coverage in the event of damages resulting from system
operation.
The city has reserved the right to revoke the franchise in the event that the cable company
substantially violates the terms of the ordinance. The city has also reserved the right
to purchase the system in the event that the company decides to consider selling it.
Regional interconnection will be encouraged when that becomes possible. The institutional
network initially will be capable of interconnection with any cable system in the City
of Chaska.
Construction of the system will be completed within six months of the date of state
cableboard confirmation. All public building and zoning codes will be strictly complied
with.
For the purposes of operating a cable system, the city has authorized Zylstra-United to
make use of the public ways to install cable equipment.
Zylstra-United will submit annual reports disclosing financial information, a copy of
the company rules and a written report of the performance test.
A toll-free telephone line will be available 24-hours a day, seven days a week to receive
subscriber complaints and maintenance requests. Also an office will be maintained by
the company and will be open during all regular business hours.
A repair force of technicians will be available to respond to service requests within 24
hours of receipt of a request or complaint.
Subscriber contracts will be for a period of up to twelve months, unless after twelve
months the subscriber may terminate the contract at any time with no penalty.
At the time the contract is entered into, each subscriber will be provided with instructions
on filing complaints and making service requests.
There will he no charge for disconnection of an installation or outlet.
Rates and charges will remain constant for two years after construction is completed
in the initial service area. After that time, rate changes will only be made with the
review and approval of the city council.
-7-
To protect the privacy rights of individuals, the ordinance prohibits monitoring of cable
transmissions or distribution of names and addresses of subscribers without subscriber
permission.
At the expiration of the term of the franchise, the city has reserved the right to elect
to review or extend the franchise, invite additional franchise applications, terminate
the franchise, or purchase'the system. The company may apply for renewal 12 to 18 months
before the franchise expires.
The Shakopee City Administrator will be responsible for administration of the franchise.
Minor variations from strict compliance with the requirements of the ordinance will
be reviewed pursuant to a variance procedure included in the ordinance. Variances will
only be approved after review by the city administrator and with the approval of the
city council
III. NOTICE
This title and summary have been published to clearly inform the public of the
intent and effect of the City of Shakopee Cable Communications Ordinance. A
copy of the ordinance in its entirety is available for inspection by any person during
regular office hours at the office of the City Clerk and at the Shakopee Library.
-8-
C4-1y Cot. e
H / '
MEMO TO: City Council and HRA Commissioners
FROM: Jeanne Andre , HRA Executive Director
RE : Commercial Rehabilitation Loan and
Interest Reduction Programs
DATE : September 3 , . 1982
Introduction:
A Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Program was included in the financial
plan for the Downtown Tax Increment Project No . 1 . An allocation of
$50 ,000 for interest write-downs was provided, contingent on the City
adopting criteria for such a program.
Background :
As envisioned, the program will be operated by the Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority (HRA) based on broad criteria adopted by the City Council .
Ordinance No . 102 was drafted by O' Connor and Hannan to incorporate the
statutory requirements for a rehabilitation loan program. This ordin-
ance establishes the HRA as the responsible authority and empowers it to
provide additional criteria and procedures for the administration of
the program. The HRA can then fine tune the loan process and criteria
over time without the adoption of an ordinance for each change .
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the ordinance and recess
for the HRA meeting in order that the HRA can adopt the specific criteria
which it reviewed at its August 17 , 1982 meeting. These criteria and
procedures were also reviewed by three local financial institutions who
suggested minor revisions and the Downtown Committee which approved the
materials as presented. The Downtown Committee is considering recommed-
ing architectural review of each building improvement proposed for
interest write-downs , and a comprehensive list of downtown buildings or
blocks considered more suitable for demolition than rehabilitation
(which would not be provided interest write-downs under the criteria) .
The Committee is not ready to make its formal recommendation on these
issues at this time , and has not proposed where the architectural review
would fall in the procedures .
The formal changes recommended by the HRA and financial institutions
have been incorporated into the revised documents and are listed below
for review by the Council and HRA.
Changes to Loan Procedure :
1 ) Page 2 , Step 4.B. - Applicant ' s submission of financial
statements will be included in Step 4.B. rather than
Step S .A. as previously indicated.
Changes to Description and Guidelines :
1 ) Page 1 , A - An introductory statement explaining why the
program has been adopted is now included.
City Council & HRA Commissioners
Page -2-
2 ) Page 2 , C .4. - The amount of the interest write-down has
been established as variable up to 4%, with no interest
write-down to an amount of less than 10%. The write-
down will be discontinued if the loan goes into default .
3 ) Page 4, D. 3 .-D. 5 . - It is clarified that the maximum
loan amount , loan ratio and loan term as listed are set
by statute and each lender will individually establish
reasonable limits warranted for each loan.
4) Page 4, D.4. - A loan minimum of $25 ,000 has been set ,
taking into account what is reasonable given certain
fixed costs of granting the loan.
5 ) Page 4, D. 7 .a. - Labor costs can be included if the
applicant is a construction contractor.
6 ) Page 5 , D. 10 . - A statement has been included in the
description stating that the City assumes no liability
for the loan. (O' Connor and Hannan has recommended
that this language also be included in loan documents
prepared by the lending institutions . )
Once the Ordinance and criteria are adopted, the program will be
immediately implemented. According to initial estimates by O'Connor
and Hannan (assuming the maximum four percent write-down for each loan)
the City will be able to write-down up to $120,000 in loans in 1982, and
around $200,000 in 1983-84. Funds for further loans could become avail-
able if the existing tax increment district captures a larger increment
than originally estimated or if new districts are created. In previous
computer runs undertaken to establish the district , no increment from
Beren' s building was included in the financing plan due to the short
time frame . (The increment went into the reserves to pay off the bonds
more quickly . ) A new computer run is now underway to determine how much
additional money for rehab loans might be available from this increment .
Four potential applicants have already been identified - the Moonen
building, Berens , Wampachs and the Pelham Hotel . These four will be
directly informed when the criteria are adopted and other downtown
businessmen will be indirectly informed through a newspaper story. It
is anticipated that applicants will be served on a first-come-first-
serve basis . Once current funds are gone , applicants will need to go
forward without write-downs or wait until further funds become available.
John Anderson has expressed an interest in serving those businesses in
the current tax increment district first if there are not enough funds
to initially serve all applicants , and expects those buildings in the
district to be ready to proceed most quickly.
Requested Action:
City Council: Adopt Ordinance No . 102 , An Ordinance of the City of
Shakopee , Minnesota , Amending Shakopee City Code Chapter 2 entitled
"Administration and General Government" by Adding Thereto Section 2 . 71
Establishing and Providing for the Administration of a Commercial Build-
City Council & HRA Commissioners
Page -3-
ing Rehabilitation Loan Program to Rehabilitate and Preserve Small and
Medium Sized Commercial Buildings in the City of Shakopee Pursuant to
the. Laws of Minnesota 1982 , Chapter 590 and Adopting by Reference
Shakopee City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2 . 99 .
HRA: Adopt Resolution n-9 , A Resolution Determining to Operate a
Commercial Building Rehabilitation Loan Program and an Interest
Reduction Program in Downtown Shakopee .
JA: cu
•
ORDINANCE NO. 102
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City Code
Chapter 2 entitled "Administration and General Government"by Adding Thereto
Section 2. 71 Establishing and Providing for the Administration of a Commercial
Building Rehabilitation Loan Program to Rehabilitate and Preserve Small and
Medium Sized Commercial Buildings in the City of Shakopee Pursuant to the Laws
of Minnesota 1982, Chapter 590 and Adopting by Reference Shakopee City Code
Chapter 1 and Section 2.99
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
Section 1. Authority. Pursuant to Laws, 1982, Chapter
590 , Sections 1-4 , the City of Shakopee has been authorized
to establish a commercial building loan program to rehabili-
tate and preserve small and medium sized commercial build-
ings located within its boundaries, and to provide for the
administration thereof by the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Shakopee. Pursuant to Laws
of Minnesota, 1982, Chapter 590 , Sections 5-10 , the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee
has been authorized to develop and administer an interest
reduction program to pay in periodic payments or in a lump
sum payment any or all of the interest on loans made pursu-
ant to Laws, 1982, Chapter 590, Sections 1-4 for the reha-
bilitation or preservation of small and medium sized commer-
cial buildings.
Section 2. Findings. The City Council of the City of
Shakopee finds that many commercial buildings in the City
are physically deteriorating, underused, economically inef-
ficient or functionally obsolete, and in need of rehabilita-
tion to meet applicable building coder; that the e is a need
for a ccmprc`, nsive prograrl for the reha.:ii . qui, ou of such
buildings to prevent economic and physical blight and dete-
rioration, to increase the municipal tax base, and to assist
in the implementation of the comprehensive plan for the City
of Shakopee; that some owners of small and medium sized
commercial buildings are unable to uf{o. d Leh bilitdtion
loans on terms available in the private mortgage market or
to obtain rehabilitation loans on any terms because the
private mortgage market is severely restricted; and that the
health, safety and general welfare and the preservation of
the qualify of life of the residents of the City of Shakopee
are dependent on the preservation and rehabilitation of
•
small and medium sized commercial buildings in the City of
Shakopee.
Section 3. Housing and Redevelopment Authority To Act
On Behalf of City. The City Council of the City of Shakopee
hereby authorizes the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Shakopee to exercise any and all of the
powers conferred on the City by Laws 1982, Chapter 590,
Sections 1-4 to operate and administer a municipal commer-
cial rehabilitation loan program within the City of
Shakopee.
Section 4. Administration. The Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee is hereby
granted the power and authority to adopt from time to time
- 2 -
various program regulations and guidelines for the commer-
,__ _L Luilding rehabilitation loan program authorized' by this
ordinance, which regulations shall include a definition of
"small and medium sized commercial buildings" , loan eligi-
bilily and loan priority criteria, loan amount limitations
and any other provisions and regulations which may from time
'L0 Lime be necessary or desireable.
Section 5. Commercial Building Rehabilitation Loan
Program: There is hereby pursuant to Laws 1982 , Chapter 590 ,
as amended, established and provided a program for the mak-
ing of loans for the rehabilitation and preservation of
small and medium sized commercial buildings located within
the City of Shakopee, which program shall be administered by
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City
of Shakopee in accordance with the following regulations,
conditions and provisions, and such other regulations and
guidelines as shall be formulated and adopted by the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Shakopee:
a. Loans may be provided and made for the
rehabilitation and preservation of small and medium
sized commercial buildings, and all such loans
shall be secured either by mortgages on the prop-
erty with respect to which the loans are made or by
other security acceptable to the City Council of
the City- of Shakopee. Except as hereinafter pro-
vided, such loans may be made on such terms and
- 3 -
conditions as may be authorized pursuant to the
regulation: and guidelines which shall be _.�?optcd
by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority .
b. Loans made under the program shall be
eligible for interest rate reduction payments by
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, a: autho-
rized by Laws l9Z2, Chapter 590, Sections 5-10, in
the amounts, and upon the terms and conditions as
may be authorized by the program regulations and
guidelines which shall be formulated and adopted by
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
c. In approving applications for loans pur-
slant to this Ordinance and the program, at least
the following factors and conditions shall be con-
sidered:
1. The availability and affordability
of private mortgage credit;
2. The availability and affordability
of other governmental programs;
3. Whether the building is required,
pursuant to any court order , statute or ordin-
ance, to be repaired, improved or rehabil-
itated; and
4. Whether the proposed improvements
will. result in conformance with building and
zoning codes and improvement of the aesthetic
quality of existing commercial areas.
- 4 -
Section 6 . Limits* inn ^:r,e Joan program shall be
operated within the fellong
1. Only buiiings loc:.tcc.: within the City of
Shakopee Downtown Develop;r._nt District shall be
eligible for loans under the procram.
2 . The terms and conditions of all loans
made under the program shall be fixed so that the
sum of all repayments of principal and interest on
them, not then delinquent, and all fees and charges
collected, together with other sums to be con-
tributed by the City, shall, over the duration of
the program, be estimated to be equal to or greater
than the sum of all estimated costs of the program,
as determined by the program administrator and
approved by the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, including administrative costs, mortgage
foreclosure costs, and principal and interest pay-
ments on bonds issued to finance the program to the
extent not paid from bond proceeds;
3. No loan shall be made for a period exceeding 20
years;
4. No loan shall exceed 80 percent of the estimated
market value of the property to be rehabilitated upon com-
pletion of the rehabilitation, less the principal balance of
any prior mortgage existing on the property ,at the time the
loan is made;
- 5 -
5. No loan shall be made in excess- of $200,OOO. for the rehabilitation
of any particular small or medium sized commercial building; and
6. No grants bf any money shall be allowed or made as a part of the
loan program authorized by this Ordinance.
Section 7. Summary Approved. The Council hereby determines that the
text of the summary of this Ordinance marked Official Summary or Ordinance No.
and a copy of which is- attached hereto, clearly informs the public of the intent
and effect of the Ordinance. The Council further determines that the publication
of the title in such summary will clearly inform the public of the intent and
effect of the Ordinance.
Section 8. Posting and Filing. The City Clerk shall see that a copy of
this Ordinance is filed in our office and in the public library, which the
Council hereby designates as a location at which a copy is available for inspect-
ion by any person during the regular office hours.
Section 9. Publication. The Clerk shall publish the title of this Ordinance
and the official Summary in the official newspaper which is notice that a printed
copy of this Ordinance is. available for inspection by any person during regular
office hours at the office of the City- Clerk and the City library.
Section 10. Penalty. Chapter 1 and Section 2,99 are hereby adopted by
reference as fully as if set out in detail herein.
Section 1i. Elective Date '['his Ordinance takes effect upon its passage
and publication of its title and the official summary.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee,
Minnesota, held this day of _ , 19'82.
ATTEST; Mayor of the City of Shakopee
City Clerk
Prepared approved as to form this 1st day of September, 1982.
Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
ORDINANCE NO. 102
Fourth Series
An Ordinance of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, Amending Shakopee City
Code, Chapter 2 entitled "Administration and General Government" by Adding
Thereto Section 2.71 Establishing and Providing for the Administration of
a Commercial Building Rehabilitation Loan Program 'to Rehabilitate and
Preserve Small and Medium Sized Commercial Buildings in the City of Shakopee
Pursuant to the Laws of Minnesota 1982, Chapter 590 and Adopting by Reference
Shakopee City Code, Chapter 1 and Section 2.99.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
The following is the official summary of Ordinance NO. , Fourth
Series, approved by the City Council of the City of Shakopee, on the
day of , 1982.
SUMMARY
The City Council of the City of Shakopee finds that many commercial buildings
are physically deteriorating, underused, inefficient or obsolete and in need of
rehabilitation and that some of the building owners are unableunder the present
economic conditions to finance such undertaking which is vital to the public
health, safety and general welfare of the citizens. To assist in such rehabil-
itation the City Council of Shakopee pursuant to Laws of 1982, Chapter 590,
Sections 1 -10 authorized the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Shakopee to
net in behalf of the City and empowered it to adopt various programs and guide
lines and administer the programs in accordance with the following provisions
and guide lines.
a. Loans may be provided and made for the rehabilitation of small and medium
sized commercial buildings secured by mortgages on the property or by other
security acceptable to the City Council. Such loans maybe made on such terms
and conditions as are authorized pursuant to the regulations and guidelines to
be adopted by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority.
b. Loans made under this program shall be eligible for interest rate
reduction payments by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, as authorized
by the Laws of 1982, Chapter 590, Sections 5-10.
c. In approving applications for loans pursuant to this Ordinance and the
program, at least the following factors and conditions shall be considered.
1. The availability and affordability of private mortgage credit.
2. The availability and affordability of other governmental programs.
•
-Y+ u .n. .....
3. Whether the building is required, pursuant to any court order,
statute or ordinance, to be repaired, improved or rehabilitated.
4. Whether the proposed improvements will result in conformance
with the building and zoning codes and improvement of the aesthetic quality of
existing commercial areas.
d. Limitations
1. Only buildings located within the City of Shakopee Downtown
Development District shall be eligible.
2. The terms and conditions of all loans shall be fixed so that the
sum of all repayments of principal and interest on them, not then delinquent,
all fees and charges collected, together with other sums to be contributed by the
City shall over the duration of the program, be estimated to be equal to or
greater than the sum of all estimated costs of the program as determined by the
program administrator and approved by the City Council, including administrative
costs, mortgage foreclosure costs- and principal and interest payments on the
bonds issued to finance the program to the extent not paid from the bond proceeds.
3, No loan shall be made for a period exceeding 20 years.
4. No loan shall exceed 80 percent of the estimated market value
less the principal balance of any prior mortgage existing.
5. No loan shall be made in excess of $200,000 for the rehabilitation
of any particular small or medium sized commercial building.
6. No grants of any money shall be allowed or made as a part of the
loan program authorized by this Ordinance.
The above summarized ordinance was adopted by the Shakopee City Council on
the. day of 1982, and the foregoing Summary was
approved on said date by a 4/5ths vote of the Council as per required.
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST;
City Clerk
This Summary was prepared and approved as to
form on thisday of , 1982.
Julius A. Coller, II, City Attorney
4
RESOLUTION NO. 82-9
A RESOLUTION DETERMINING TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING
REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM AND AN INTEREST REDUCTION
PROGRAM IN DOWNTOWN SHAKOPEE
Whereas , the City of Shakopee has adopted Ordinance No. 102,
establishing a Commercial Building Rehabilitation Loan Program pur-
suant to Minnesota Laws 1982 , Chapter 590, Sections 1-4; and
Whereas , the City of Shakopee designated the Housing and Re-
development Authority in and for the City of Shakopee to operate and
administer this program on behalf of the City ; and
Whereas , pursuant to Laws of Minnesota, 1982, Chapter 590,
Sections 5-10 , the Housing and Redevelopment Authority can develop
and administer an Interest Reduction Program to pay any or all inter-
est on loans made pursuant to Laws , 1982 , Chapter 590, Sections 1-4;
and
Whereas , funds have been allocated in the Tax Increment Financing
Plan for Downtown Tax Increment Financing District No. lA for a
Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Program; and
Whereas , the Authority judges the Loan and Interest Reduction
Programs to be in the interest of the City to aid in the improvement
and economic revitalization of its downtown business district ;
Now therefore , be it resolved that the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority in and for the City of Shakopee :
1 . Hereby establishes that it will operate a Commercial
Rehabilitation Loan Program and an Interest Rate
Reduction Program; and
2 . Hereby adopts in its entirety the "City of Shakopee
Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Procedures" (Second
Draft A - September 1 , 1982 ) , and the "Program
Description and Guidelines for City of Shakopee
Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Interest Rate Reduc-
tion Program" (Third Draft C - September 2 , 1982 ) ,
as attached hereto and made a part hereof ; and
3 . Hereby initiates these Programs and announces the
availability of these programs to downtown business-
men.
Adopted in Special Session of the Housing and Redevelopment.
Authority in and for the City of Shakopee held this day
of , 1982 .
Chairman
ATTEST:
Executive Director
Approved as to form this
day of ,1982
City Attorney
City of Shakopee/Procecure for Rehabilitation Loans
SECOND DRAFT A-O' CONNOR & IiRNNAN
Si'ptes;iber 1 , l°82
_ CITY OF SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL
REHABILITATION LOAN PROCEDURES
STEP ONE
Potential loan applicant contacts City. Applicant is
directed to contact:
Housing and Redevelopment Authority in
and for the City of Shakopee, Minnesota
Attn: Jeanne Andre
City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee , Minnesota 55379
The HRA should forward a copy of the Program Guidelines to
the potential applicant, together with a list of participa-
ting lenders ( "Lenders") and the appropriate contact persons
at each Lender . Lenders shall have primary responsibility
for the processing of applications for loans under the Pro-
gram.
STEP TWO
The potential Applicant contacts a Lender. At the in-
itial meeting with the Applicant, the Lender should take the
following actions:
A. Have the applicant complete a Loan Application for
the Program.
B. Review the Program restrictions with the Applicant
to determine eligibility of the building and the proposed
improvements under the Program.
C. Determine if Applicant can provide a mortgage on
the property to be rehabilitated to secure the loan. All
mortgages must be executed by the fee owner of the prop-
erty. If the Applicant is not the fee owner , written agree-
ment of the fee owner to execute the mortgage should be
obtained prior to any other action on the loan application.
D. Review estimated costs Applicant will incur to
obtain the loan:
Bond Counsel Fee (O'Connor & Hannan)
City of Shakopee Administrative Fee
Lender ' s Loan Fee
Title Insurance Cost (Morgag`_e '
Recording Fees (Mortgage , Bond Documents)
Charge for Lender ' s Credit Report
Appraisal Fees
These costs will be eligible for inclusion in the loan.
E. Advise Applicant that if the Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority (HRA) should give preliminary approval to the
Loan Application, an inspection by the City and/or" the
Lender , a City Code Compliance Report, and an M.A. I . ap-
praisal will be necessary.
STEP THREE
If, after completion of Step 1, the Applicant desires to
proceed with the Loan Application, the Lender should take
the following additional steps:
A. Have the Applicant complete the Lender ' s loan
application.
B. Have the Applicant prepare a detailed list of pro-
posed improvements and estimated costs for each; plans
should also be provided if they have been drawn.
C. Applicant' s Loan Application, together with the
list of improvements and estimated costs, and plans, if any,
should be forwarded to the HRA for approval, Attention:
Jeanne Andre.
D. Caution applicant not to begin construction of the
proposed improvements prior to final approval of the loan by
the HRA. Improvements commenced prior to final loan ap-
proval by the HRA shall not be eligible to be financed with
loan proceeds.
. STEP FOUR
A. The HRA reviews the Loan Application and supporting
documents and gives its preliminary approval to the loan.
B. The Applicant prepares and submits personal and
business financial statements to the Lender , and approves
Lender ' s submission of these statements to the City.
C. The Lender performs a credit report on the Appli-
cant and gives its preliminary approval to the loan.
- 2
STEP FIVE
A. The Lender instructs the Applicant to obtain : ! i)
an M.A. I . appraisal of the property to he rehabilitated ;
( ii) an inspection and City Code Compliance Report from the
City; and (iii) firm bids on all improvements to be financed
from the loan. '
B. The Lender gives its final approval to the loan.
C. The Lender forwards the appraisal, the Code Compli-
ance Report, the firm bids, the financial statements, and
notification of its final approval to the BRA, Attention:
Jeanne Andre.
D. The HRA gives its final approval to the loan. If
the loan is to be financed through the issuance of an indus-
trial development bond (IDB) or tax exempt mortgage, final
approval should not be given until the issuing authority
(either the HRA or the City) has approved a resolution
giving preliminary approval to the issuance of the IDB or
tax-exempt mortgage.
STEP SIX
A. Lender notifies Applicant that rehabilitation work
may now begin.
B. Lender obtains abstract to property from Applicant
and applies for title insurance binder .
C. If the loan is to be financed by the issuance of an
IDB 9r tax-exempt mortgage, the HRA notifies bond counsel,
O'Connor & Hannan, 3800 IDS Tower , 80 South Eighth Street,
Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55402, Attn: Arlin Waelti , to initi-
ate preparation of the necessary bond documents, and places
bond counsel in contact with the relevant employees of
Lender and with Applicant or Applicant' s counsel.
STEP SEVEN
A. Lender , Applicant, and Bond Counsel determine
closing date.
B. All bond documents are circulated by bond counsel
for approval and execution by the parties.
C. After closing date is set, mortgage is filed prior
to closing. •A certificate of filing of the mortgage must be
obtained for closing.
- 3 -
STEP EIGHT
The Closing
A. All bond counsel fees and the City' s administrative
fee shall be payable at this time.
B. Lender will receive assignment of the mortgage and
the promissory note and assignment of the promissory note
from the HRA or City, as applicable.
C. City will appoint the Lender Trustee for the City
for the benefit of any holder (s) of any industrial develop-
ment bonds or tax exempt mortgage.
D. Bank should obtain a certificate of hazard insur-
ance from the Applicant.
STEP NINE
A. Net proceeds of the loan will be deposited in an
escrow account at the Lender , with the Lender acting as
Trustee. Lender will disburse from this account pursuant to
a Loan Disbursement and Escrow Agreement executed by and
between the Lender , the Applicant, and the HRA.
B. Upon completion of improvements financed by the
loan, Lender will forward sworn construction statement and
lien waivers to title insurance company and obtain final
title policy.
C. Any funds remaining in the escrow account after
completion of all improvements to be financed from the loan
will 'be applied to the loan balance, first to interest and
then to principal.
- 4 -
City of Shakopee/Comm. Rehab. Guidelines
THIRD DRAFT-C-O'CONNOR & HANNAN
September 2 , 1982
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND GUIDELINES FOR CITY OF
SHAKOPEE COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION LOAN
INTEREST RATE REDUCTION PROGRAM
A. INTRODUCTION
The City of Shakopee Commercial Rehabilitation Loan
Interest Rate Reduction Program is a municipal program ad-
ministered by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and
for the City of Shakopee, designed to provide incentives for
major rehabilitation of existing commercial space in down-
town Shakopee. The Program operates by making available
commercial loans to rehabilitate and preserve existing com-
mercial buildings at an interest cost to borrowers signifi-
cantly below that available through conventional fi-
nancing. Loans under the Program will be made through par-
ticipating local lending institutions. The City and the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority will reduce the interest
rate 'charged borrowers in two ways. First, the City will
fund loans under the Program through issuance of tax exempt
obligations of the City; the significantly lower interest
rates borne by such tax exempt obligations are passed on to
the borrower. Second, the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority will provide a further interest rate reduction
below the tax exempt rate by paying directly to the lending
institution a portion of the interest expense on the loan;
the Housing and Redevelopment Authority will pay up to 4% of
the fhterest rate on the loan, provided, however , that in no
event will the Authority reduce the effective interest rate
charged to the borrower below the rate of 10%. Eligibility
for loans under the program shall be determined by the Hous-
ing and Redevelopment Authority pursuant to the following
guidelines and restrictions. However , the credit worthiness
of individual participants in the Program shall be subject
to the approval of the participating lending institutions.
B. ELIGIBLE PARTICIPANTS
1. Any individual , partnership, corporation or other
business entity shall be eligible to make application for
loans under the Program. The applicant need not be the
owner' of the premises to be rehabilitated; provided, how-
ever , that the owner of the building shall be required to
approve the loan and the rehabilitation work, and to execute
any mortgage on the building relating thereto.
C. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS
1 . Loans will be awarded under the Program for the
rehabilitation of small and medium-sized commercial build-
ings. A commercial building shall be any building the pri-
mary ground floor function of which is a retail, service, or
office use.
2. Buildings qualifying as small or medium-sized com-
mercial buildings eligible for loans under the Program shall
have a total floor area not exceeding 20 ,000 square feet.
3 . To be eligible, the building to be rehabilitated:
a. Must be located within the City of
Shakopee Downtown Development District;
b. Must be in conformance with the City' s
zoning code;
c. Must comply, after rehabilitation, with
the City' s Comprehensive Plan and with
any approved development plan for the
Downtown Development District; •
d. Must not have been identified for public
acquisition;
e. Must be insured for its full replacement
value.
4. All loans under the Program will be eligible for an
inter'st rate reduction below prevailing market interest
rates for tax-exempt obligations. Eligible loans shall
receive an additional interest rate reduction of four per-
cent (4%) below prevailing market rates for tax exempt obli-
gations, provided, however , that no loan under the Program
shall be eligible for or shall receive any reduction in the
interest rate on such loan below ten percent (10%) . There-
fore, the interest rate on any loan under the Program shall
be the greater of : (i) the market rate for such loan, as
determined by the lender , less four percent (4%) ; or (ii)
ten percent (10%) . Loans under the Program shall remain
eligible for interest rate reduction payments only so long
as the borrower shall not be in default under the terms of
the loan, and upon any default by the borrower , the borrower
shall become solely and exclusively responsible for all
interest then unpaid or afterwards accruing on such loan at
the full interest rate upon such loan.
- 2
5 . Improvements and expenditures financed under the
Program shall be limited as follows :
a . Rehabilitation loans shall not include
expenditures for the acquisition, instal-
lation or repair of furnishings, person-
alty, or trade fixtures.
b. In the case of mixed-use structures,
eligible improvements shall include only
those relating to the commercial portion
of the building , the commercial operation
of the building, or mechanical or struc-
tural repairs relating to the building as
a whole (including repairs to the build-
ing ' s facade, roof , plumbing , electrical
systems, structural elements, heating and
cooling systems, fire safety systems and
insulation) . All work done must meet
City Code.
c. Rehabilitation loans shall be used for
the rehabilitation of existing buildings,
and shall not be used for the construc-
•
tion of new facilities. However , con-
struction of reasonable additions to
existing buildings which, together with
other rehabilitation improvements, will
enhance commercial use of the building
shall constitute qualifying rehabilita-
tion expenses.
d. Refinancing of existing debt shall not be
allowed under the Program.
e. If the rehabilitation work is to be per-
formed by the owner , the applicant, or
the owner ' s or applicant' s employees,
expenditures for labor costs shall be
eligible only if the main occupation of
the owner or applicant (as the case may
be) is construction or renovation.
D. LOAN REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS
1. Applicants must have the financial means to repay
the loan, as determined by the lending institution.
2. The applicant shall provide a mortgage on the
building as security for the loan.
- 3 -
3. 'i'hP maximum amount which any applicant shall be
eligible toJ L-ocrow for the rehabilitation of any particular
::. ..1.1u7;,-sized building shall be the lesser of :
( i ) 2u') , ; L;O ; or (ii ) 80 percent of the estimated r;;arket
value of the building after completion of , its rehabilita-
tion,_ less the principal balance of any prior mortgage ex-
isting on the building as of the time application for the
loan - is made. These amounts are the statutory maximums
allowable under the Program; the amount of individual loans
made under the Program shall be subject to the approval of
the lender based on economic and financial considerations.
4 . No loan shall be made under the Program for any
amount less than $25 , 000.
5. The maximum term of any rehabilitation loan under
the Program shall be 20 years. This is the maximum term
allowable by statute; the actual term of any loan under the
Program shall be subject to approval of the lender based on
economic and financial considerations.
6 . The City shall charge an administrative fee in the
amount of one-half of one percent (1/2%) of the principal
amount of the loan, or $500 , whichever is lesser , with re-
spect to each rehabilitation loan made pursuant to the Pro-
gram. This fee shall be paid by each loan recipient to the
City prior to or at the loan closing.
7. All costs, expenses, and fees associated with the
Project shall be paid by the applicant. Such costs are
eligible for inclusion in the loan, and include:
a. Cost of materials and labor (provided
that expenditures for labor performed by
the owner or the applicant or the owner ' s
or applicant' s employees shall be eligi-
ble only if the major occupation of the
owner or applicant, as the case may be, .
is construction or renovation) .
b. Architect' s fees.
c. Attorney' s fees.
d. Bank charges such as, but not limited to,
the following:
(i) appraisal fees;
(ii) credit reports;
(iii) inspections;
(iv) abstracting and filing fees;
(v) mortgage registration taxes;
- 4 -
(vi ) title insurance premiums;
(vii ) service charges.
e . r- :,it administrative fee.
8 . Rehabilitation loans shall not be approved unless
the building is being brought into full compliance with the
provisions of the City Code. The City and/or the Lender
will 'perform a thorough inspection of the premises to be
rehabilitated prior to the approval of any rehabilitation
loan under the Program.
9 . After rehabilitation, and prior to retirement of
the loan, the rehabilitation property must remain insured
for its full replacement value.
10. The City and the Housing and Redevelopment
Authority will undertake only to underwrite the interest
expense on rehabilitation loans under the Program to the
borrower , and not to guarantee repayment of the rehabilita-
tion loans. Neither the City nor the Housing and Redevelop-
ment Authority shall have any responsibility or liability
whatsoever for repayment of any principal, premium, interest
or fees relating to any loan under the Program upon or after
default by any borrower ; upon and subsequent to default upon
any loan made under the Program, satisfaction of the loan,
including all unpaid interest thereon, shall be the sole
responsibility of the borrower (s) .
E. SELECTION GUIDELINES
1. In approving applications for rehabilitation loans
under the Program, the City shall consider the following
factors:
(a) The availability and affordability of
private mortgage credit;
(b) The availability and affordability of
other governmental programs;
(c) Whether the building is required, pursu-
ant to any court order , statute or ordin-
ance, to be repaired, improved or reha-
bilitated; and
(d) Whether the proposed improvements will
result in conformance with building and
zoning codes and improvement of the aes-
thetic quality of commercial areas.
- 5
2 . The City shall give priority to the following ap-
plications for rehabil LaLioii loLr.s :
a. An appi icz.Lion to finance repairs or
rehabilitation which are required pursu-
ant to court order , statute or ordinance;
b. An application by an applicant who has
been unable to obtain financing through
other means ;
c. An application to finance the, rehabilita-
tion of a building which is essential to
maintaining the commercial nature of an
area.
•
•
- 6 -
TENTATIVE AGENDA
HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
IN AND FOR THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Shakopee , Minnesota
Special Session September 7 , 1982
Chairman Leroux presiding
1 . Roll call at 7 : 30 p.m. or thereafter.
2 . Accept Special Meeting call .
3 . Approval of Minutes of August 17 , 1982 .
4. Commercial Rehabilitation Loan and Interest Reduction
Programs .
a . Discussion
b. Adopt Resolution 82-9
5 . Other business
6 . Adjourn
Jeanne Andre
Executive Director
PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ADJ .REG.SESSION SHAKOPEE , MINNESOTA AUGUST 17 , 1982
Chrm.Leroux called the meeting to order at 7 :04 P.M. with Comm. Vierling,
Lebens, Wampach and Colligan present. Also present were Jeanne Andre,
HRA Director; John K. Anderson, City Admr. Julius A. Coller, City Attorney;
and Judith S. Cox, City Clerk.
Colligan/Wampach moved to approve the minutes of August 3, 1982. Motion
carried with Cncl .Lebens abstaining because she was absent from the meeting.
The HRA Director explained that the final two units in Macey Second Add'n.
should be ready for closing by the end of August.
Vierling/Lebens moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make,
execute and deliver a deed to Lot 3, Block 3, Macey 2nd Add'n. subject to
inspection and approval by staff of improvements constructed therein, to
Goodwin Builders, Inc . This action to be in accordance with contract
for deed between Goodwin Builders, Inc. and the Shakopee Housing and
Redevelopment Authority, for the purpose of conveying said property to
authorized buyer identified by HRA. Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None
Motion carried.
Col ligan/Wampach moved to authorize appropriate HRA officials to make,
execute and deliver a deed to Lot 4, Block 3, Macey 2nd Add'n. , subject to
inspection and approval by staff of improvements constructed therein, to
Goodwin Builders, Inc. This action to be in accordance with contract
for deed between Goodwin Builders, Inc . and the Shakopee Housing and
Redevelopment Authority, for the purpose of conveying said property to
authorized buyer identified by HRA. Ayes; Unanimous Noes; None
Motion carried.
The HRA Director explained that the resolution now before the Authority
is to adopt an amendment to the Elderly Highrise Redevelopment Project
area to include Lots 8, 9 , and 10, Block 7 . She explained that this
property would become part of the project area but not the district .
The resolution forwards the amendment to the Planning Commission for
review and to the City Council to conduct a public hearing.
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 82-5 , A Resolution Determining
To Undertake A Modified Redevelopment Project , and moved its adoption.
Motion carried with Cncl .Lebens opposed.
The HRA Director explained that the Council will be discussing and adopting
Downtown Redevelopment Project Commercial Redevelopment Project Commercial
Redevelopment Loan Procedures and Application Guidelines and because the
HRA will be administering the program, she thought that the HRA members
may wish to discuss the procedures and guidelines. She also mentioned
that the procedures and guidelines have not yet been discussed with any
lending institutions and that the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee will
be meeting next week to discuss them. Discussion followed and staff was
directed to research the concerns expressed by the commissioners: 1] under-
write interest to a maximum of 4%, but the interest shall not be reduced
to less than 10%, 2] language be included which explains that the City
is merely underwriting the interest and at no time will they be involved
in satisfying the loan should the mortgagee default, 3] language be included
which provides that if the mortgagee defaults they will become responsible
for all the interest on the loan and the City ' s underwriting shall terminate,
HRA MINUTES OF AUGUST 17 , 1982
Page -2-
4] consider permitting the rehabilitation work performed by an applicant
or his employees to be eligible labor expenditures included in the loan
if the applicant is a contractor.
The HRA Director explained that the Council will need to consider an
ordinance adopting the redevelopment loan procedures and application
guidelines which will be prepared by staff and will include recommendations
from both the HRA and the Downtown Committee.
Colligan/Lebens offered Resolution No. 82-6, Authorizing HRA Officials to
Enter Into Promisory Note and Second Real Estate Mortgage for Payment
of Lot Value Upon Resale by Homebuyer for Lot 3, Block 3, Macey Second
Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Colligan/Vierling offered Resolution No. 82-7, Authorizing HRA Officials to
Enter Into Promisory Note and Second Real Estate Mortgage for Payment of
Lot Value Upon Resale by Homebuyer for Lot 4, Block 3, Macey Second
Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Wampach offered Resolution No. 82-8, Authorizing HRA Officials to
Enter Into Promisory Note and Second Real Estate Mortgage for Payment of
Lot Value Upon Resale by Homebuyer for Lot 5, Block 3, Macey Second
Addition, and moved its adoption. Motion carried unanimously.
Lebens/Vierling moved to adjourn at 7:34 P.M. Motion carried unanimously.
Jeanne Andre
H.R.A. Director
Judith S. Cox
Recording Secretary
I/a)
Budget Hearing On General Revenue Sharing
The City of Shakopee will hold a public hearing at 8 :00 P.M. on
September 7 , 1982 , in the Council Chambers of City Hall , 129 East
First Avenue , Shakopee , Minnesota , for the purpose of hearing
written and oral comment from the public concerning the proposed
annual budget for fiscal year 1983 and the use of revenue sharing
funds as contained in that proposed budget , summarized below.
General Revenue sharing (GRS ) is a program of general fiscal sup-
port from the federal government to state and local governments
with only limited Federal requirements about how the money should
be spent . Decisions on the use of these funds are made at the
local level , by the government and people closest to local pro-
blems . The revenue sharing regulations require a hearing on the
proposed use of these funds in relation to the overall budget
before the budget is adopted each year.
All interested citizens , groups , senior citizens and organizations
representing the interests of senior citizens are encouraged to
attend and to submit comments .
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED 198/ BUDGET
City of Shakopee
General Fund
Revenues
Source Amount
Property taxes $ 807 ,420
Licenses & Permits 98 ,800
Intergovernmental 693 ,993
Service Charges/User Fees 390 ,900
Fines and Penalties 22 ,000
Federal Revenue Sharing 165 , 500
Other Revenue 284, 799
Total $2 ,463 ,412
Expenditures
Activity GRS Funds Other Funds Total
( if any)
General
Government $ 8 , 300 $ 410,995 $ 419 ,295
Public Safety 54,000 753 ,910 807 ,910
Public Works 87 ,200 762 ,415 849 ,615
Recreation 16 ,000 237 ,965 253 ,965
Miscellaneous 132 ,627 132 ,627
Total $165 ,500 $2 ,297 ,912 $2 ,463 ,412
A copy of this information, the entire proposed budget and
additional background materials are available for public
inspection from 8 : 00 to 4 : 30 weekdays at Shakopee City Hall ,
129 East First Avenue .
Dated this 20th day of August , 1982 .
John K. Anderson
City Administrator
City of Shakopee
ilb
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Parking Lot Assessments
DATE: September 2 , 1982
Introduction
The City Council levied assessments for parking lots in 1967 .
Some of the assessments were supposedly deferred for 15 years
which is January 1 , 1983 . It is time to decide how to handle
the deferred assessments .
Background
See attachments :
1 . City Attorney letter dated August 16 , 1982
2 . Resolution No. 205
3 . Resolution No. 215
4. Resolution No. 222
The special assessments still deferred and outstanding as of
September 2 , 1982 are :
Lot Orig. Total
Parcel Block Assessment 45% Interest ( 1 ) 45% + Int .
27-001-042-0 1 ,4 $ 452 .00 $ 203 .40 $ 124.07 $ 766 .41
27-00168-0 1 ,6 1 ,272 . 00 572 .40 349 . 16 921 . 56
27-001-069-0 2 ,6 1 , 568.00 705 . 60 430 .41 1 ,136 .01
27-001-134-0 1-3 ,21 1 ,272 .00 572 .40 349 . 16 921 . 56
27-001-141-0 7 ,21 1 ,999 .00 899. 55 548 . 73 1 ,448 . 28
27-001-142-0 8 ,21 1 ,499 .00 674. 55 411 .48 1 ,086 .03
27-001-157-0 10 ,22 1 ,092 .00 491 .40 299 . 75 791 . 15
27-001-238-0 1&2 ,30 2 , 157 .00 970. 65 592 . 10 1 , 562 . 75
27-001-239-0 2 ,30 455 .00 204. 75 124. 90 329 . 65
27-001-240-0 3 ,30 1 , 375.00 618 . 75 377 .44 996 . 19
27-001-249-0 7 , 30 1 ,397 .00 628 . 65 383 .48 1 ,012 . 13
27-001-251-0 9 ,31 1 ,092 .00 491 .40 299 . 75 791 . 15
27-001-252-0 10 ,31 1 ,162 .00 522 . 90 318. 97 841 . 87
27-001-259-0 10 , 32 829.00 373 .05 227 . 56 600. 61
$17 ,621 .00 $7 ,929 .45 $4 ,836 . 96 $12 , 766 .41
( 1 ) Interest at 4% from September 26 , 1967 (Resolution No. 205 Adoption)
to January 1 , 1983 not compounded and computed on the 45% base .
( [P x .45 ] x .04) x 15 . 25 = i
Interest on the deferred assessments has not been placed on the tax
rolls each year as referenced in Resolution No. 205 . The assess-
ments are now due and payable January 1 , 1983 or on the 1983 tax
statements .
Parking Lot Assessments
Page Two
September 2 , 1982
Alternatives (as shown in City Attorney' s letter)
1 . Extend deferment on such conditions determined by Council .
2 . Begin collecting the assessments with taxes at a specified
interest rate and over a specified length of time.
3 . Collect the assessment and interest in one shot with the 1983
taxes.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council make the reduced (45%) assessment plus
accumulated interest be payable with the taxes over 10 years plus
interest on the total at 8% from January 1 , 1983 .
Note : Council may want to defer action on this until September 21 ,
1982 and provide affected property owner notice of the situation
and proposed action.
Action Requested
1 . ( if desired) Move to direct staff to mail notices to affected
property owners of the status of the deferred assessments and
proposed action.
2 . Move to table this item until September 21 , 1982 . ( see No. 1 )
3 . Move that the 1967 deferred special assessments for the 1967
Parking Lot Improvements plus interest as listed in the
Finance Director' s memo dated September 2 , 1982 be certified
to the County Auditor for collection with the taxes over ten
years with interest at 8% commencing January 1 , 1983. Direct
staff to prepare appropriate resolution.
GMV/jms
Jrn us A. COLLER, LI
ATTORNEY AT LAW
211 %VEST 1'1Rwr AVICNUE
S13AKOPICh:, MINNESOTA 55370
August 16, 1982
To: Judy Cox, City Clerk
Shakopee City Hall
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Judy:
You inquired sometime back how to proceed with the 1967 off street deferred
,-,Sassessments which are to become due and payable in January 1, 1983.
The off street parking improvements .;hod a two fold purpose. One was to
alleviate a congested parking in the central business district and the
other was to clean up the area along the north half of Blocks 4 and 5.
The Council was aware that the improvements would immediately benefit
some of the area while other portions of the area would have only future
—� benefits and also that business places would be in a better position to
J pay for the assessments than residential areas. Accordingly, the assess-
went area was divided into two districts. District A was to receive
immediate benefits and the assessments were to be paid payable over a 15
L.
year period beginning in 1969; District B included the areas of future
benefit and those assessments were to become due and payable whenever the
property described in Section B :is_. converted to commercial use,and if not,
V7 previously converted before January 1, 1983, 43% of the amount of said
assessment shall become due and payable on January 1, 1983. interest at
/ 4% on the basis of 45% setforth in Sub Section B was to be paid semi-
U' 1 annually with other taxes levied during the moratorium period. Some of the
assessments in District B have been paid and some have not. The question
asked is how to proceed at this time with the deferred assessments because
as a result of Resolution 205, Resolution 215 which provided for a reassess-
ment of some of the property in District A and Resolution 222 reconfirming
the reassessments the picture appears somewhat confusing. However, the
original intention of the Council is stillintact in my view inspite of the
apparent confusion.
Resolution 205 was the enabling resolution and it is still in full force and
effect as far as the assessments in District B are concerned. Resolution 215
and Resolution 222 repealed only the portions of 205 in conflict and that dealt
with assessments in District A only. The assessments in District B were not
changed.
In view of the foregoing, the Council has the following options:
Option 1: Extend the deferred payments granted byResolution 205 for District
B on such conditions as the Council may determine.
- 2 -
August 16, 1982
To: Judy Cox
Option 2: Determine aver what period of time the assessments deferred
in District B of Resol_ution205 are to be paid and .ek what interest rate the
deferred payment shall bear after January 1, 1983.
Option 3: Proceed with collecting the amount of the assessments so
deferred with the 1983 taxes plus the interest accumulated thereon. This
option however I do not feel is viable and it is one th " would violence
to the intention of the Council whenResolution 205 was a sed, namely, to
relieve the residental property of a present payment.
It should be remembered that Resolution 205 provided �Tistrict B assess-
ments shall bear interest at 4% on the basis of 3% t b ub Section B and
shall be payable semi-annually with other taxes levied on ,11 property. This
orius e3� fid. I am advised
interest should have been collected Burint rat p i
that it was not so collected so that th tal unt of the interest that
would be due on January 1, 1983, shou . .e adde o the deferred assessment.
Since the hearing has already been he . on t ssessments, all that must be
done if the Council adopts Option 2 or 'Nkg'NJo add the uncollected interest
to the assessments due as of Januar 1, 1'8 and certify the total amount due
to the County in line with Op one 3. ould Option 1 be adopted a new
Resolution would have to b$ nacted se ing out the terms and conditions of the
defetrment. ( 1
t
Rpectfully submitted,
;/
JL ius A. Colier, II
1 City Attorney /-
,-)2\
JAC/nh
•
•
,
RESOLUTICI1J222
Resolution Closing Hearing on Propose; Special Assessments for the Acquisition, Con-
struction and Improvement' of Off-Street Parkin; Facilities and Approving Assessment
Roll thereon
HEREAS, Pursuant to lawful notice given, the Common Council of the City of
Shakopee met on the date previously set in said notice and adjourned said hearing
from time to time until September 26, 1967, and at said hearings heard and passed
upon all objections to the proposed assessments for the acquisition, construction
and improvement of off-street parking facilities, and has amended such proposed
assessment as it deemed just and equitable.
NO'.;, THEREFORE, 'RE IT RESOL TED Li THE COI,LON COUi CIL Or' THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE
1. That the hearings on the proposed assessment for the acquisition, construction
and improvement of off-street facilities be, and they hereby are, closed.
2. That such proposed assessments as amended by the Common Council as it deemed
just and equitable,a copy of which is hereto attached and made a part hereof, is hereby
accepted and shall, together with en 'ineering, le al, publication and collection costs,
constitute the special assessment against the lands named therein, and each tract of
land therein included is hereby found to be benefited by the proposed improvement to
the extent and in the amount of the assessment levied against it together with the
proportionate cost of engineering, legal, publication and collection costs.
3. That such assessment shall be payable in equal installments extending over a
period of fifteen (15) years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before
the first Monday in January, 1969, and shall bear interest at the rate of five percent
( 5,!)) per annum from the date or the completion and acceptance of the work. To the
first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment from said date of
completion and adoption until December 31, 1967. To each subsequent installment when
due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
'-W. That it is hereby determined and declared that the benefited property described
in Section 3 of the attached schedule is benefited to a lesser extent than the property
described in Section A of said schedule and is assessed as shown in Section E of said
schedule to be payable as immediately hereinafter provided, to-wit:
A. The amount of said assessment shall be due and payable whenever said
property described in said Section B of said schedule is converted to commercial
use on a pro rata rated square-foot basis of commercial building and/or commercial
use during the period .from the passage of this Resolution up to January 1, 1983 or
B. If not previously converted as provided in the foregoing subsection
before January 1, 1983, forty-five percent (145 ) of the amount of said assessment
as shown in Section B of said schedule shall become due and payable on January 1,
1983.
C. Interest on the unpaid balance figured on the basis of the 45* set
forth in Subsection B hereof, shall be payable semi-annually with other taxes levied
on such property at the rate of four percent OM per annum from and after the
completion and acceptance of said work as hereinbefore provided.
5. That the owner of any property assessed hereby may, at any time prior to
certification of the assessments to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment
on such property with interest accrued to the date of payment to the City Treasurer,
except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within
thirty ( 30)vdays after the completion and acceptance of the project; and such owner
may thereafter pay to the County Treasurer the installment and interest in process of
collection on the current tax List, and he may pay the remaining principal balance
of the assessment to the City Treasurer.
6. That the City Recorder shall file the assessment roll pertaining to this
assessment in his office and shall certify annually to the County Auditor on or before
October 10 of each year the total amount of the installment and interest which are to
become due in the following year on the assessment on each parcel of land included in
the assessment roll.
for
7. That/the purpose of providing notice of said deferred assessments, as herein-
before established, the City Recorder is authorized and instructed to prepare a
notice thereof under the seal of the City of Shakopee as to such parcels covered by
said deferred assessment and cause the same to be recorded or filed, as the case may
be, in the office of the Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles of Scott County,
:'linnesota, and when such deferred assessment is paid in full, to file or record a
.
•
release thereof as to each such parcel.
�'_/.
Passed in dtla1„.,,,,,,j's sion of the Common Council of the City of Shakopee
held this . $, day /of .74Citt , 1967.
President of the-Common Council
ATEST: u c7 ( -tt,(.:, /
).)
City Recorder
Approved this . h d4' of .t_- , 1967.
/_,;
Mayor of th/City of Shakopee
Prepared and approved this
26th of S-. ember, 106^.
1 _ , / f
I
City AtF orne , ,...�
v
- A 1
1 4
0
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR RE-ASSESSMENT
FOR PARKING FACILITIES
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 150, duly adopted on
Decelither 13, 1966, the Common Council ordered a certain public
improvement consisting of the acquisition of certain lots and
pracols of land and the making of such improvements thereon
as would fit them for public use and public parking, all in
accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section
459. 14, and
WHEREAS, said land, consisting of 12 parcels, has
been acquired and contracts let for the improvement thereof
at a total estimated cost of $24:e2t900, and
esiga.--4e.ese s2
VJEREAS, the Common Colleen has heretofore deter-
mined that in order to provide necessary funds for the payment
of the cost of said improvement, the city shall issue and sell
$200, 000 Automobile Parking Facilities Bonds of 1967, and the
council is authorized to sell bonds pledging the faith and
credit of the city for the payment without prior approval of
the voters if special assessments have been or will be levied
in an amount not less than 50 per cent of the amount of such
boads, and
WHERTSAS, pursuant to motion duly adopted by the
Common Council on July 11, 1967, a hearing on assessments was
set for September 12th, 1967, and
WHEaELS, notice of such hearing was given by publi-
cation and posting and the Common Council met on September 12th
to hear and consider such assessment and said hearing having
been continued and adjourned until September 26, 1967, the
Common Council adopted Resolution No. 205 which closed hearing
on proposed special assessments and approved an assessment
roil, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has determined, on the
advice of the municipal attorney, that the assessment or proposed
assessment, or any part thereof, is or may be invalid, and that
it is necessary to make a re-assessment as authorized by Min-
nesota Statutes, Section 429.071, Subd. 2, in order that the
property specially benefited by said improvement shall bear its
fair share of the cost thereof and that bonds may be issued in
anticipation of collection of special assessments,
NOW, UEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 13y the Common Council
of the City of Shakopee as follows:
1 . The off-street parking improvement as set out and
described in Resolution No. 113, adopted by the
Common Council on June 14, 1966, shall be hereafter called
1967 Parking Facilities Improvement.
2. It is hereby determined that part of the property
benefited by 1967 Parking Facilities Improvement
is benefited to a lesser extent than other property and sep-
arate benefit districts are hereby established, as follows:
District A shall be those lots in Blocks
3, 4, 5, 6, 21, 22, 23, 24, 29, 30, 31 and
32 as listed on the "Proposed Off-Street
Parking Assessments Schedule E" dated
October 24T-44166...
-•
. • 4
t 0 1
. . • 4 f .
District B shall be those lots in Blocks
4, 6, .21, 22, 24, 29, 30, 31 and 32 as
listed on the "Proposed Deferred Assess-
ments for Future Benefits from Municipal
Off-Street Parking Facilities" dated
J411,L-2.:11.-1962.
3. The common council further determines that in accord
ance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sec-
tion 459. 14, Subd. 7, that the property in District B shall
. bear less special assessments and that said assessments shall
be deferred until a later date or until such time as the prop-
erty is used for commercial purposes.
4. The special assessment for 1967 Parking Facilities
Improvement, as adopted by Resolution No. 205,
adopted by the Common Council on September 26, 1967, is hereby
annulled and set aside.
5.: The re-assessment roll for 1967 Parking Facilities
Improvement, prepared by Melvin Lebens, City Recorder,
and filed in his office on October ii/ , 1967, is hereby adopted
as the proposed assessment for 1967 Parking Facilities Improve-
ment.
6. The Common Council shall meet at the Council Room in
the City Hall on ,,, 2 , the ,., .- day of November,
1967, at ,('-: ,' o'clock P. M. to hear and consider all objections,
and if iso determined, to adopt the proposed re-assessment and the
recorder shall publish notice thereof in the official newspaper
at least once not less than two weeks prior to such meeting of
the council, and shall mail such notice to all property holders.
Passed in regular session of the Common Council of
the City of Shakopee held this 31st day of October, 1967.
---.
/1.01 ,,r4:4 :e*
47
Presiaent of Fhtinnimon Councla
Attest :
,Q
ic (ii.. r ic e 0,
City Recorder
i 0*
,4
c't
i r
•c.... e,,,, r
----
, ,
.......""°"*.* 9
-2-
RESOLUTION NO. 1. .-
.
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING REASSESSMENT FOR
1967 PARKING FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT
BE IT RESOLVED By the Common Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, as follows :
1 . The city recorder has heretofore, with the assistance
of the engineer, selected by this council for such
purpose, calculated the proper amounts to be specially assessed
against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land in the
city, which was approved by Resolution No. 205 adopted Septem-
ber 26, 1967 .
2 . The common council has determined that because of
errors in the original proceedings, the proposed
assessment is or may be invalid but that the property described
therein is benefited by said improvement and in order that the
property owners shall be required to pay the cost of said im-
provement in proportion to benefits received, it is necessary
to correct said errors and defects by adopting said assessment
as a reassessment pursuant to Section 429 .071, Subd. 2, Min-
nesota Statutes.
3 . Notice has been duly published and mailed to each
property owner, as required by law, that the common
council would meet in special session at this time and place
to pass on a proposed reassessment .
4 . A proposed schedule of assessment for off-street
parking benefits has at all times since its filing
been open to inspection and copying by all persons interested,
and an opportunity has been given to all interested persons to
present their objections, if any, to such proposed reassess-
ment , or to any item thereof, and objections have been filed.
5. The common council finds that each of the lots,
pieces or parcels of land enumerated in said proposed
reassessment was and is specially benefited by the construction
of 1967 Parking Facilities Improvement in the amount of said
proposed reassessment set opposite the description of each such
lot, piece or parcel of land and that said amount so set out
is hereby levied against each of the respective lots, pieces
or parcels of land therein described.
6 . Such proposed reassessment is adopted and confirmed
and the sums fixed and named in said proposed reas-
sessment are adopted and confirmed as the proper special as-
sessment for 1967 Parking Facilities Improvement, for each of
said lots, pieces or parcels of land respectively.
7. Said reassessment so adopted and confirmed shall be
certified to by the city recorder and filed in his
office and shall thereupon be and constitute the special as-
sessment for 1967 Parking Facilities Improvement .
8. The amounts assessed against each lot , piece or par-
cel of land as set forth in Schedule A shall bear
interest from the date hereof until the same have been paid
at the rate of Afibo.per cent per annum.
9. The reassessment under Schedule A shall be payable
in 15 equal annual installments payable on the
-1-
•
• . _
•
•
1st day of January• in each year, beginning in the year 1969
and continuing until all of said installments shall have been
paid, each installment to be collected with taxes collectible
during said year by the county auditor.
10. The city recorder is hereby directed to make up and
file in the office of the county auditor of Scott
County a certified statement of the amount of all of such un-
paid installments and the amount which will be due thereon on
the 1st day of January in each year.
Passed in regular session of the Common Council of
the City of Shakopee held this 28th day of November, 1967 .
fr� it
Presfden� 'o�/, a Common Council
i
Attest :
r. N /j
/, t It it' , 1.� /q-17
City Recorder
Approved: 'ti 7 /
vk.
r'
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
-2-
.
2--
/ lam
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
RE: Mileage Claim - Fire Department
DATE: August 30 , 1982
Introduction
In your informational items for the August 17 , 1982 meeting you
received a copy of the attached memo. I noted on the informa-
tional items that we would handle it administratively; however ,
Butch Ring has brought up an additional point .
Background
Butch contacted Jerry Wampach and told him that Doug Reeder had
agreed to pay mileage instead of purchasing the Fire Department
a car. So , the question is , were Gregg and I changing the pre-
vious administrator ' s transportation reimbursement policy?
I called Mr. Reeder and he remembered establishing the policy to
pay for Fire Department mileage. However, when I explained the
particular claim in question he differentiated between Fire Depart-
ment activities for which the City would pay mileage and Fire Relief
Association activities stating that he felt that it was inappro-
priate to charge activities supporting one fund to another fund.
Gregg and I couldn' t agree more.
The problem is fairly straight forward. If Street Department
employees work on the sanitary sewer system or go to a school
on sewelrs , its charged to the Sewer Fund not the Street ' s General
Fund Division. In the Fire Department ' s case , they control the
Relief Association Fund, and any costs picked up by the Fire
Department ' s General Fund leaves that much more money in their
Relief Association Fund. They have a vested interest in keeping
cost down in the Relief Association Fund and that is why they
have made the request to have it paid out of the Fire Department
General Fund.
Alternatives
1 . Approve the claim for payment of $11 . 20 to Marvin Athmann for
payment from the Fire Department General Fund.
2 . Disapprove the claim and recommend that it be paid for out of
the Relief Association.
Recommendation
Staff recommends alternative #2 .
Action Requested
Move to disallow the mileage claim of $11 . 20 for Marvin Athmann for
Relief Assocation activities and restating that the City will pay for
mileage for regular Fire Department activities .
JKA/jms
�/4/.
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administra r ! i
FROM: Gregg Voxland , Finance Director
RE: Mileage Claim - Fire Department L.7
DATE : August 13 , 1982
Introduction
The Fire Chief has submitted a claim for mileage on behalf of
Marvin Athmann in the amount of $11 . 20.
Background
The trip was made by Mr . Athmann to attend a Fire Relief Associa-
tion meeting. It appears to staff that this claim is more
appropriately an expense of the Relief Association and not the
City . A review of vouchers for 1981 showed that the City did
not pay for a similar trip. It appears that the City did pay
for a similar trip in 1980 , but staff did not "catch it" to
question the claim.
Alternatives
1 . Approve the claim for payment of $11 . 20 to Marvin Athmann.
2 . Disapprove the claim.
Recommendation
Alternative #2 is recommended .
Action Requested
Move to disallow the mileage claim of $11 . 20 for Marvin Athmann .
/ )
/MEMO TO: John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: Don Steger
City Planner
RE: Hiring Consultant for Downtown Plan
DATE : September 2, 1982
Introduction:
On September 1, 1982 the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee voted to
recommend to the City Council that they commence the process
of hiring a downtown planning consultant. The consultant would
be responsible for formulating a downtown plan and providing
coordination for implementation. The Downtown Tax Increment
Project has earmarked approximately $30,000 for the consultant ' s
cost . The consultant would work directly with the Ad Hoc
Downtown Committee and City staff throughout the planning and
implementation stages.
If the consultant hiring process is approved by the City Council,
the City staff will solicit proposals from consultants and conduct
the initial screening. The remaining 3 to 4 consultants would
then be expected to make a presentation to the Downtown Committee
who will make a hiring recommendation to the City Council.
Alternatives :
1. Motion to hire a downtown consultant
2. Motion not to hire a downtown consultant
Recommendation :
The Ad Hoc Downtown Committee recommends that the City Council
authorize the staff to commence the process of hiring a downtown
consultant.
Action Requested:
Move to authorize staff to commence the process of hiring a
downtown consultant .
;a�: f �. C.; / -1- x yr 0Xiti1S. �1YEE
%�=�k' �`� 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
i' , A . : 11-0
}
.r, . J�
MEMO
TO: _______Common Council
FROM: Public Works Department
suli.iECT: _ 1982_Capital_ Egitip. _ ud
Bg_et
DATE__-_—Aubust 2b , 1982_,__
INTRODUCTION : l'h.is memo will request permission to purchase Public
-- - Works equipment as requested and budgeted in the 1 982
Capital Equipment budget .
The accessory equipment listed below will be for
our new 27 , 500 GVW truck which we expect to be delivered
by next week. The accessory equipment for the truck
will be installed in our shop , and should he mounted
sometime next month. The equipment requested will make
this truck comparable to the other trucks in our fleet .
We had budgeted $ 35 ,000 for this vehicle and re- 1
lated equipment , with $ 25, 714 being used for the truck
as specified , and $ 8 , 432 . 25 for the related snow equip-
ment as presented in this memo. A total of $ 34 , 146. 25
will be paid for the complete truck and accessories .
The other equipment requested will be two ( 2 )
replacement mower decks for the Park Dept . , a flail
mower which will be used by the Street and Park Depart-
ments jointly , and a 4" high output trash pump to be
used , generally , in emergency situations .
These quotations will be reviewed by the Equipment
Purchase Committee prior to presentation to Council .
SANDERS
Background:
The majority of our fleet use a spinner type sander
which covers a wider area to be sanded-it is also
• offset to the left side of the truck which allows
us to "throw" sand into the opposite lane of traffic
without having to drive in that lane. Our tandem
truck has been equipped with a roller type sander which
we found is more efficient in specific application,
such as, parking lots, alleys , rural roads, & lanes
of traffic which need a saturated application where
needed . We feel that one more truck should he equipped
with the Roller type sander for better diversification.
of equipment in our fleet.
QUOTATIONS : ( Budget - $9 , 286 . 00 for truck accessories )
Hayden-Murphy Co.
Mpls-
"Swenson" Model UR-310 (roller) $ 1401. 25
"Swenson" Model UAZ-lll (spinner) $ 1895. 25
Ruffridge-Johnson Co.
Mpls-
"Central" Model S-33 ORL (spinner) 1650 . 00
Itasca Equipment Co.
Savage-
"Hi-Way" Model TG-ll0 (sp.inner) $1883 . 00
"Hi-Way" Model TG-505 (roller) $1780 . 00
Recommendation: We recommend purchase of the "Swenson"
Model UR-310 (roller) sander for $1401 . 25 from:
Hayden-Murphy Equip. Co. Mpl.s . , Mi nnesota
PLOWS
Background
We have obtained and submitted prices on the
standard steel plows which we have used for many years .
However, a new ployethylene plow has now been introduced
and proven• to be quite valuable as a snow-fighting tool .
This plow is constructed of 3/8" polyethylene , has a
• standard steel frame , ribs , & moldboard , but features a
30% savings in fuel consumption because the plastic
surface creates virtually no resistance to the snow as
it pushes it to the side .
The 3/8" polyethylene is purported to be very hardy
to extreme cold without breaking and is heavy enough
( 1 ,800 lbs . ) to prevent the cutting edge from riding over
normal snow ridges during :i plow operation . The City of
Wayzata has already purchased this type of plow and re-
ports that this plow is doing a good job for them.
The price of this plow is approximately $370.00
higher than the standard steel model , but the fuel savings
will make up the difference in a few seasons . We would
like to purchase this innovative plow and analyze its
merits over the next winter season, noting in particular,
the ease of pushing snow because of its frictionless
features .
r PLOWS - CONT
QUOTATIONS : FRONT PLOW BALDE lift ( power reversible w/husting hitch)
( Budget - $9 , 286 . 00 for truck accessories
Hayden-Murphy Co .
Mpls . "Henke Model 41-R11 $4305 . 40
"Henke Model 41-R11P $4775 . 40
( Poly )
Falls Machine Co.
• Little Falls , MN "Fall5' Model PR 11 -43 $4350 . 00
Itasca Equip. Co.
Savage "Wausau" Model 45-11 -HR $4440 . 00
MacQueen Equip. Co.
St . Paul "Frink" Model 3611 ATSFWR $5334 . 00
"Frink" Model 3810 PISA-WR$476 5 . 00
( Polyethylene )
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend purchasing the "Frink" Model 3810 poly-
ethylene plow with a 29" Husting Hitch from MacQueen Equip.
Co. for $4 ,765 .00.
Background
The U.B. Blade is mounted underneath the
truckbody at 35 degree angle between the axles.
It is hydraulically operated from the cab and
is spring, loaded to absorb any hard shocks or
obstructions such as manhole covers or frozen
rocks . This type of blade has proven to be in-
valuable in our daily operations by:
1. enabling us to use less sand/salt by cleaning a
pathway in front of sander application.
2 . cut compacted snow & soft ice and cleanup
during snow operations .
3 . Provide a blade for "one Man" application
of gravel & crushed rock in alley and rural remote
gravel operations .
4 . Provide "on the job" availability of a blade to
level gravel & bituminous materials.
Every truck in our fleet has been equipped with
the underbody blade. This purchase will complete our
objective to install a U.B . Blade on all of our trucks .
'NOTATIONS : UNDERBODY BLADE ( Budget - $9 , 286 .00 for truck accessories )
T. McMullen Co.
S t. Paul-
"Root" F-5 Snoblade- $2356 . 00
Itasca Equipment Co.
Savage- "Wausau" U .B . Blade- $3700 . 00
Hayden-Murphy Co.
Mpls- " Inland Model SB 10 $ 2495 . 00
RZCOMMI:NDATI ON:
!a^' ra rcco:1:ncn.l ing nurc':as i nvr or the , 00t F'-5 unaerhod y
snow:)lade for t'..a amount of `7,235:,. 00 from T. 1cMullen 'Co. of St. Paul
Replacement of Woods Mower decks
BACKGROUND:
Recently, we solicited quotations for two ( 2) Woods L 306
mower decks to replace the Woods mower decks installed on our
2 Model 140 International-Ilarvestor rotary mower tractors. This
will be the third replacement of these rotary decks and should
remain in service until the tractors are scheduled for replacement
in 1984 . These rotary mowers decks are mounted underneath the
tractors, and are considered the "workhorse" for the majority
of our mowing duties. The quotations received, are only for
the mowing deck, spindles and blades which are mounted on a
72" frame. When we initially budgeted for these decks, some years
ago, we thought that we would have to replace them entirely.
QUOTATIONS_ (Budget - $2500)
Lano Implement Co. (Shakopee)
2- Model 306 All (kit #9702) decks @540 . 00 $1080 . 00 .
Carlson Tractor and Equip. Co. (Rosemount)
2- Model 306 AH (kit #9702) decks @545 . 00 $1090 . 00
Long Lake Ford Tractor Co. . (Long Lake)
2- Model 306 All (kit #9702) decks @555 . 00 $1110 . 00
Kromer Equip. Co. (Mound)
2- Model 306 All (kit #9702) decks @791 . 66 $1583 . 32
RECOMMENDATION:
We recommend purchasing the two ( 2) Woods Model L306 All
mower replacement decks from Lano Implement Co. for $ 1080 . 00
FLAIL MO 7R
I3AcKCIROUND:
We have been considering, for some time, using a flail
type mower in certain applications where the mowing surface
is littered, rocky, or very uneven. The flail mower would be
mounted on a 3 point hitch on the rear of our John Deere 300
sickle mower, where it could be also utilized with the roadside
weed mowing with the sickle mower . The unit will offset 20"
to the right of the machine so a strip won' t he left between
the sickle and flail mower . By using this method, with both
mowers, a time saving "one pass" mowing method could he used
on most applications . The flail mower usually is capable of
doing a better cutting job than a sickle mower, because hammer
knives revolve around a rotating drum grid will get lower to
the cutting surface. A flail mower can also be used in the
Memorial park arca with has numerous rock outcropping, where this
area has always been notoriously hard on our rotary mower .blades.
We have been fortunate, the past two years, to have found
a private contractor willing to do the contract mowing for home-
owners in conjunction with the weed notices issued to property
owners. This type of mowing is generally shunned by most equipment
owners because of the rocks, posts, and rubble generally found
or dumped on these vacant lots. We feel that we have to he in a
position to mow these lots ourselves if the private contractor
breaks down or decides not to continue working with our weed
control program.
After viewing several flail type mowers, we elected to ask
for quotations on two models which are very similar in specifications
The list pr ice for the MOTT and !')PD mowers requested , are
nearly identical, however, the Ford Company is currently offering
a generous discount to governmental agencies which we felt we
couldn' t ignore. This explains the price variations . on the
quotations submitted .
QUOTATIONS: (budget - $3000)
Carlson Tractor and Equipment Co. (Rosemount)
•
Ford Model 917 88" flail mower $ 1752 . 00
Mott Model 88-0 88" flail mower. 2062.00
Long Lake Ford Equipment Co. (Long Lake)
Ford Model 917 88" flail Mower $ 1890 . 00
Mott Model 88-0 88" flail mower 2146 . 00
Bryan Equipment Co. (Brainerd)
Mott Model 88-0 88" flail mower $ 2411 . 92
RECOMMENDATION :-
We
ECOMMENDATION :-cue recommend purchasing the Ford Model 917 88" offset
flail mower from Carlson Tractor and Equipment Co. for $ 1, 752 . 00
9 .. TRA5H PUMP - -
ti B11C.4GROUND:
We have encountered many situations, through the years,
where we have found a demand for a high volume• pump to meet
the immediate need to remove water. On most of these occasions,
the demand is of an emergency nature where we haven' t got the
time to make arrangements to rent a pump of this size. Such an
emergency, comes to mind, when we had a flow stoppage on the
interceptor line and we had to run to Minneapolis to rent 4"
pumps to control the backup and lower the manholes in order to
enter them to remove the problem object. We hve a 3" pump in
our inventory, but this pump is not nearly large enough to handle
, some emergency situations . Capacity wise, there is a great
difference between a 3" anti 4" pump. A 3" pump is rated at
4800 gallons per hour, while the capacity of a 4" pump is rated
at 37 , 800 gph.
It would also be our ultimate goal to equip this pump
with enough vinyl discharge hose to enable us to have the
ability to bypass a whole block of sanitary sewer in the event
of a complete stoppage. This need has presented itself several
times in the past, and we feel that we should he able to handle
this type of emergency when the situation occurs.
This pump will be of great value for general dewatering ,
construction site water control, transfer of waste materials,
high output ditch drainage, and general emergency uses.
QUOT11T10'IS : Heavy Duty 4" Trash Pump (Budget - $2200)
Hayden-Murphy Equip. Co. "linneapolis •
Uomelite H .D. model 160TP4 with cast iron 16 h. p.
Briggs-Stratton engine equipped with wheel kit. $ 1, 555. 00
20 ft. suction ( intake) hose 174 . 00
50 I t . PVC vinyl discharge hose 115. 00
Power Quip. Equip. Co. Burnsville
MI-T-M 4" with 14 h. p. Wisconsin engine $ 1959 . 00
• 20 ft. suction (spiral wire) 249 . 00
50 ft. discharge (vinyl coated) @ 149 . 00
'iCOMMENDAT I ON :
We recommend purchasing the i,omelite "iode1 160TP4 pump from
Hayden, "Iurphy Equip. Co. for $ 1 , 555 .00.
20 ft. suction hose 174 .00
4 - 50 ft. vinyl discharge hoses @ 115 . 00 each. for a total-$2.189 . 0
( 460 . 00)
This is a summary of the recommended purchases contained in the
Public Works Department memo of August 26 , 1982:
Action Requested
Authorize the following purchases :
1 . one "Swenson" Model UR-310 (roller) sander for $1 ,401 . 25
from Hayden-Murphy Equipment Company , Minneapolis , MN
2 . one "Frink" Model 3810 polyethylene plate with a 29" Husting
Hitch from MacQueen Equipment Company for $4,765 .00.
3 . one Root F-5 underbody snowblade for $2 ,356 .00 from T. McMullen
Company , St . Paul .
4. two Woods Model L306AH mower replacement decks from Lano
Implement Company for $1 ,080.00.
5 . one Ford Model 917 88" offset flail mower from Carlson Tractor
and Equipment Company for $1 , 752 .00.
6 . and from the Hayden-Murphy Equipment Company, one Homelite
Model 160TP4 pump for $1 , 555 .00, 20 feet suction hose for
$174.00 , four 50 foot vinyl discharge hoses at $115 .00 each
for a total of $2 , 189 .00.
//
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson
FROM: Jeanne Andre , Administrative Assistant
RE : Payment to Adrian Herbst
DATE : September 3 , 1982
Introduction :
The City is preparing to finalize the Cable Franchise award and receive
reimbursement for expenses incurred in this process . A further decision
by the City Council is necessary to prepare the final listing of ex-
penditures .
Background :
According to the "Request for Proposals for a Cable Communications
System" the City is to be reimbursed by an initial franchise fee of up
to $20,000. The City has expended funds of at least $20,000 at this
time . The expenses include the $5,000 initially contracted for attorney
services by Adrian Herbst , plus an additional amount subsequently
authorized by the City Council . Mr. Herbst has incurred additional ex-
penses as outlined in his attached letter and July billing ( the August
billing is still to come ) . He recommends that language in the prelimin-
ary and adopted ordinance will allow these costs to be passed on to the
cable company, even though the $20,000 maximum has been exceeded . The
cable company has informally agreed to accept an additional $2000-$3000
charge . If authorized by the City Council , I will include Mr. Herbst ' s
additional charges on the expenditure list to be paid by Zylstra-United.
If this reimbursement is received by the City from the cable company,
the City will then pay the additional bills presented by Mr. Herbst .
If the cable company refuses to pay any or all of the additional fee ,
the issue of payment to Mr. Herbst can be reconsidered by the City Council
to determine if any payment will be made from the general fund .
Requested Action:
Authorize staff to present bills presented by cable attorney Adrian
Herbst beyond his previously authorized expenditures to be charged
against the initial franchise fee to be paid by Zylstra-United Cable
Television Company ( ZU), and if reimbursement for these fees is paid
to the City by ZU, authorize payment to Mr. Herbst of his July and
August billings .
JA: cu
Attachment
HERBST & TRUE, LTD.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
2030 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER
7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH TELEPHONE
ADRIAN E.HERBST (612) 835-2434
DANIEL D. TRUE BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431
GARY R..L Tz
JOHN F. GIBBS
LEGAL ASSISTANT �
August 6 , 1982 r' it:.1,,t {: �-''a"�'
}� L.
nsfl c1
r�'. a i .3
Jeanne Andre
c/o Shakopee City Hall C;1"( Gy
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
RE: Our File Number 81-1026G
Dear Jeanne:
Please find enclosed our billing for the month of July.
This billing includes additional time not billed to you in
June. I have been somewhat uncertain as to exactly how to
account for additional time incurred by our firm relative to
the work on the Shakopee ordinance. While I recognize that
I have a contract with Shakopee which specifies a specific
amount, substantial additional time was incurred by us due
to a lot of requested changes and increased activity not an-
ticipated.
As you know, Zylstra Company had two different law firms
review the ordinance, both of which made comments about dif-
ferent provisions that they wanted us to reconsider and re-
write. A tremendous amount of time was devoted to those
requests in order to provide the Committee with an accurate
analysis from a legal standpoint relative to all of those
different issues. As a consequence of the work that we devoted
to this, a substantial portion of the requests for change of
Zylstra were withdrawn by them.
In addition, more time was devoted from a negotiation
standpoint because of the requests of Zylstra and the Committee.
Therefore, we were not working on the documents from the stand-
point of providing a final draft ordinance by merely rolling
into the preliminary a proposal of the cable company. A lot
of negotiation has been involved.
In order to deal with this, I did include a section in
the preliminary ordinance and it is also included in the final
ordinance to protect Shakopee. The provision is found under
Section 15. 03 (I) which provides as follows:
HERBST & TRUE, LTD.
Jeanne Andre
Page Two
August 6 , 1982
"Upon acceptance by Grantee, all fees and
charges for acceptance of this franchise
and all costs and expenses incurred by
City shall be paid in full. City shall
provide to Grantee an itemized statement
of its expenses. Any costs not identified
by City before date of acceptance shall be
paid promptly to City when an itemization
of such costs and expenses is provided to
Grantee. "
The fees and expenses that you have been billed for by us
are certainly a proper matter to be paid for by Zylstra. This
provision was used by me in the Northwest area and all of the
costs and expenses were promptly paid for by the cable company
that accepted the franchise and, in my experience in many other
franchising areas, this also is the case. It is not possible
because of the complexity and nature of the process to always
have a complete idea at the beginning of the process as to what
all costs and expenses might be.
I trust that Shakopee will honor our billing despite the
fact that it is in excess of the amount originally quoted to
you. I want to assure you also that the time involved has been
accurately accounted for by us and that the time was needed in
order to turn out a good produce for the city.
Very truly yours,
A-Yit
Adrian E. Herbst
AEH ndr
Enclosure
HERBST 8C THTJE, LTD.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
2030 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER
7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH
BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431 TELEPHONE
(612) 835-2434
To Shakopee Ad Hoc Cable Committee File Number 81-1026G
c/o Jeanne Andre
Shakopee City hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 July 31 , 1982
7/6/82 Preparation for meeting on 7/8/82; review of Shakopee obsce-
nity ordinance; preparation of opinion including cable obsce-
nity provisions in franchise ordinance or obscenity
ordinance; legal research re obscenity.
7/7/82 Telephone conference with Anita Benda.
7/8/82 Preparation for meeting on 7/8/82 ; attendance at Committee
meeting; legal research re obscenity; intra-office conference
with associate; drafting of memorandum re obscenity ordi-
nance.
7/14/82 Conference with Anita Benda; review of 5. 2172 and compromise
bill .
7/15/82 Work on ordinance renegotiation.
7/16/82 Work on ordinance renegotiation and drafting of revisions .
7/19/82 Work on ordinance renegotiation and legal questions re
several issues .
7/20/82 Work on ordinance renegotiation; telephone conference with
Roger Zylstra; drafting of provisions to resolve questions of
Zylstra.
7/23/82 Telephone conference with Jeanne Andre re additional ordi-
nance modifications; corrections on work requested by Jeanne
Andre.
7/26/82 Work on ordinance revisions .
7/27/82 Telephone conference with Roger Zylstra.
7/30/82 Correspondence to Jeanne Andre re Goldwater bill .
HERBST & THUE, LTD.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
2030 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER
7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH TELEPHONE
BLOOMINGTON. MINNESOTA 55431 (612) 835-2434
To
ATTORNEY' S FEES : $ 2, 519 . 50
PLUS COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS :
Photocopying 27 .00
Printer 38 .00
Emery Air Freight 21 .00
Long distance calls 9.00
$ 95 .00
TOTAL ATTORNEY' S FEES PLUS COSTS: $ 2, 614. 50
PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT: $
PAYMENT FROM TRUST ACCOUNT: $
PREVIOUS BALANCE: $ 3, 169 . 38
TOTAL BALANCE DUE: $ 5, 783 .88
7
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator '
FROM : H. R. Spurrier /J
City Engineer
RE : Halo 2nd Addition Improvement
DATE : September 3, 1982
Introduction :
ivir. Idallace Bakken has requested payment for sidewalk constructed as a
part of the Halo 2nd Addition improvements.
Background :
At the [li a '_ thy; City was contracting for the improvermL,nt of Salo 2nd Addition,
ivir. Bakken was constructing a motel in the subdivision. In order to complete
his building, ivir. Bakken had to construct the sidewalk.
Mr. Bakken has requested that the City reimburse him for the cost he
expended in constructing the improvement, which was installed in accordance with
the plans later bid by the City.
The City has already assessed property owners for that work.
Alternatives:
The City has two alternatives:
1 . Pay Mr. Bakken the contract price the City paid for sidewalk
Mr. Bakken installed.
2. Pay nothing and reject Mr. Bakken's request.
Recommendation :
It is the recommendation of City staff that Mr. Bakken be paid the contract
price paid for sidewalk. That price is less than Mr. Bakken's actual cost but
ivir. Bakken agrees to accept that amount.
Action Requested:
Authorize payment of $2,486. 25 for the construction of sidewalk, which is a part
of Halo 2nd Addition improvements, charging to Fund 58-514-41.
HRS/jvni
//4
kiEiviO TO : John K . Anderson
City Administrator
•FROwi :
h . R. Spurrier / �
City Engineer — ---
RE : Out of Cycle Bill Payments
DATE : September 3, 1982
Introduction :
Attached are bills from Campbell Appraisal Company, Inc. and Suburban
Engineering Company, Inc.
Background:
The Campbell Appraisal Co. , Inc. bill was inadvertently overlooked because
it was not mailed separately to the City but was included in a copy of the
appraisal. Staff was advised to this consequent to August billing cycle and
recommends payment of the bill out of cycle.
The second payment is to Suburban Engineering, Inc. for Valley Industrial
Boulevard South. This payment did not make August cycle because of a
question regarding the work performed by the consultant. That matter has
been resolved and staff recommends payment.
Action Requested :
1. Authorize payment of $750. 00 to Campbell Appraisal Company, Inc. , 8609
Lyndale Avenue South, Bloomington, MN 55420 for appraisal of benefit
on Bluff Avenue. Funds should be dispersed from Fund 59-4310-530-41.
2. Authorize payment of $3,840. 00 to Suburban Engineering, Inc. , 1101
Cliff Road, Burnsville, MN 55337 for Valley Industrial Boulevard South
to be dispersed from Fund 59-4310-530-41 .
HF2S/jvm
INVUiLL
UBUR�AN Main Office 571-6066
. qi NGINEERING
6875 Highway No. 65 N. E.
INC.-_______ Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432
5.10
, Civil, Municipal & Environmental Engineering
South Office 890 6510
1101 Cliff Road
Land Surveying • Land Planning • Soil Testing Burnsville, Minnesota 55337
I
•
PLEASE REMIT TO MAIN OFFICE
_J DATE July 23 1982 RECEIVED
City of Shakopee 4rfrt
129 1st Ave. East ' .vim 3 1982
Shakopee, MN 55379 INVOICE NO. 20423
Cust. No. 1980 CITY OF KOPEE
Job No. S81121
L .J NET 30 days — legal interezt will be charged monthly thereafter.
Minimum charge 50e.
QUANTITY DESCRIPTIO N
— _ AMOUNT
Re: Valley Industrial Blvd. So. Project No. 82-2
For Extra Services:
Construction Staking; thru July 17, 1982.
Prin. Surveyor 4 hrs. @ $48.00 = $ 216.00
Survey Tech 2 6 hrs. @ $24.00 = $ 144.00
3 man crew 18 hrs. @ $69.00 = $1 ,276.50
2 man crew 402 hrs. @ $55.00 = $2,227.50
TOTAL DUE $3,040.00
"9-' 4..5//-- 53O- /
to
L
Invoice #3949
CAMPBELL APPRAISAL CO., INC. REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL
MORTGAGE LOANS & BROKERAGE
8609 LYNDALE AVENUE SOUTH
BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55420
PHONE: 612/888-1221
June 30, 1982
• Mr. Bo Spurrier
City Engineer
Shakopee City Hall
129 East First Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 Re: Lot 1, Block 17 & vacated
land between Lot 1,Blockl7
•
& Lot 6, Block A,East
SHakopee, Scott County,Mn
TERMS — NET. PAST DUE ACCOUNTS SUBJECT TO 1%SERVICE CHARGE.
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Study of the above-referenced property $750. 00
B 9 THANK YOU!
/
.17 ' 4.•
-.. r ,i0
co/ P,T,ER/E0
—I ;P,
.... , .
`-174
---A
-.
0
INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 1%PER MONTH WILL BE
"-','`)., _,-."'s\
e S'ir--- CHARGED ON ALL ACCOUNTS UNPAID AFTER 30 DAYS
(..
ANNUAL INTEREST RATE 12%
r 1 i 07 k
1 (,,
i
1
w.., .""' 4= 4 4s$4.44;4•444114,114r4444,*
trkt,0y.,4+414 i,i„,,ii,p pt..04,4,04101 ii, I.,4a+itifli.Okko.tAi.tittf' –14104.00414410 ; ' •... - , :, • I .iMkt.:11.;.,. , 1*. •'•'•'• • ' .
ii ,tt 4.,,t twial.4017,4r, • • :9-iitt,, .,- , ..! ,-• --,
' '• "I a ' # I ••• -i i.• • i ,, , • • •VIttlit ' 'iodfiii."- •714:;.:14,:;irrt
;g,„7: 41a:•.i t:.0, .•• Iii;iii•l ' ;; • ' ,rt : ' • '. . ei,,r,4iir,*.• •:-.;:,:-- :is •::: .i . ....-.-- . ....,
„' .,- 9,.r--- .-;..i.;;:...:, ,,-..,.,,„-.14 ••: 4 I', 0 *Aw..1 :t' y, c,f, ..0 lit.: ,-1.1.,rit t,f-rs„....,1, .„ ' l'•: - -. .-,:„:10
il!!. 117' , 1,1C-1:141.4,!la,001.-0440. •','!,,• sn'" ,41,"-:-.; • ,:- .., Iff '!1AW $.0;;‘Vc;,*;14q •',! . 'IL,I..::,,
' 4 • • -s •:, , .'„ , , ,
O in cfl N CO rn 0 H N CO d" Ln in N in 0) 0 H N
!T•' e-{ c--i ,-1 H e--I N N N N N N N N N N CO CO Cr)
N N N N N N N N N C` N C` N N N N N C`
t) U (1) a) a) a) a) cn O1 6) cn a) O) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0)
• co CO O d• 0 0 d- in 0 0 rn 0 d •co H in d• d-
(-0 H O co O �t ao N O O CO O CO d- N Ln H H
Ln t O N 0 0-) in H 0 0 H In in CO d' 0 CO 0)
'4.
0 N co H cod• co d• in 0 co N N co `O in CO co
co
a) co N CO NN d' in -I N N
N Cp
In In N CO
•
4-1
(4--1 • a)
0
0
a) Cl) H 'b a)
Cl) a) ll C • 0 CD •a) > 5-4 Cl) a)
S� m S� ca a
a a a• w ro a) Q rd = 0 C SO-I
cid Cl) al m E E Hm (I) a) b0 > _ _ _ (d al >
.0 a) .0 C U a) (Cl S, a) a) U .0 a) m
U) Ll: U) H H • E 'Cl •H CC S U) (I) LL' (d
i I
1 a)
•
4� a) 4 ri rl C Q O = _ = H u 0 H
u O u (4-i O 3 S 0 0 cd
cd c� CO U Pa a • N Cl) Z • Q)
Z H ,C = E
U
U P U) U C P Cl) (TS = = _ • u
(d
(I) 0 U) W (O co ..-i (Cl C • a) E 0 = = = (S O U) O
H U H a H W In H n h < U > H U U)
a. a
a) Cl) O a) _
E E • • a (4
-H •r1
U) a▪ a Ei E-I • U) a >C = _ _ o7S co
b0 E E 4-+ •H .r{ (Cl
0 O H u C U) _ _ _ Ei
rl U U H S 0 .Q U P P
(U U Cn .0 -1 •r-I •H Q
al Q �` n. C r1 cd c� E-I H U
H H U) 4-1▪ 4-1 I I U) cI5 _ _ _ Z X H H H
H H W a) Cl) a) U)a) Cl) Ss-• U) Lt.
w Cr) r-, a CO CO a) a) (n Cl)
ri I •r1 •r-I v--I b0 H U a a U 1..1 I_)
1-) u 0 I) P P S.4 0 RS a)
x •,-i •rf S-i •r1 •'-i •ri Cd CIS O � > = = _ CD •H _ _ _ .H .H = •H .H
0 aai CD � a) aE) CD al (ti U 0 C a) O C3 a) a) a)
cz rz a a rz ( U) U) U) a El Q (z W W (4Pa
rz x
Es (ID co O d• 0 0 d- in 0 0 H rn d- in 0 H N N0) LO H O Li) d- d•
in H0 in 0 d• CO N 0 0 ao rn 0 a) 0 O) Ln N H d N Ln Ln H H
Ln d• 0 N 0 o) in H 0 0b co NLn d t H W H N 0 co o)
0 in H O d• co d Ln 0 H N o) H co co co in cO co
O) OJ N CO N N dt in r-I H N CO CO C)
in N c0
In N in
•
V0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0
U H H H H H H v-I v-I v-I H H r-I v-I H H H r--I H r--I H H .-I .-I H H
d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0
H H H r-1 H H H H H H -1 H H H H <-I ,-I H ,-1 v-I ,H H v.--I ,-I H
N V H H H H v-I H H N--1H H H v-I H r-i H H H R H v-I v-I H CO
ap in CO CO CO CO 0 0 0 0 0000 0 0000 0 00 00 CO
a)
bD
clip_, H H H H H H Ln H co cn N N• c) CO N� O O O O H H r-I H H H
H C) a) a) 0) rn o) <-1 cO co H• H H H N H O• O• O• O• co co• d• 0) 0) o)
•
C\j p H H H H H H H r-I H H H H H r-I Cr O O O O N N H H H H
CO O H H H H H H Ln H co cr) N N o) cc) N O O O O H H H H H H
a) 0 o) a) a) o) a) a) H co co H H H H N H O O O O CO CoCr o) a) 0)
H • • • •
0 H H CO C` N 0 0 0 0 0000
H N O H O NN N 0 H N
L) E"L N N CO N N N 0 in 0) N CO CO CO cO a) N d' d" d' Cr) CO CO N N N
U) (I a) CP a) a) O) CS) H H CO CO CO CO CO Co CO in in Ln Ln N N N 0) 0) a)
rz3 d- d• d- Cl" d- d• c- d' d' d• d" d• d• d' d• co c'•) CO co d• d' d- d• d' d-
H H H H H H H H H H H H N H =, H v-I H 1H --i -i r- H-I r-I
‘ CO � CO CO �� O 0 0 O O O O O \ � � � J \ \ J � y> > \ \ ) I \ \ J
0
Z CO d' in (D N OD 0) 0 H N CO
CO CO (r) CO 0') CO CO d' 7 `z Ln
NN N N N N N N
N N
U 07 Q) 0) 0) a) 0) 0) a) 0) N N l)
,..; O 0 0 0 0 LI) CO CO N 0 0) 0 0
O ct O O in (O N
• . N N O O
0 0) LO O N N 0 CO 0 N CO
V CO C\ LI) 0) H 0) 0 N (O CO O
O H H H H
N H N
Ln
<-1
^
0)
0 U) •
C0.
(I) N C 0 H C
O • a) U O = H
allE 0 U) U) U Q)
E 4 1 ,H
OG (.c 0 (11 C O Q C
C t H u W 0 C
I• U) 0 H
4-4
�' a) 4-1v 30 =1 = H Li 0
Cli U)
0U
4-1
> (ii CO 0 a) C H H = - - - U) d0 CT. H
Z •,� ' 3 'd CO > al U C a
Li 'ti c.)
U) U) W •H C H Z Z = 3 = _ _ = 0 •H
H `� a U U) 4 Z . C H
b
C
CT._. • • (n
• U) • ( C)
cil m a a
UO E 0 U) U) H U H • E
4a e 0 U) CD U U = �, 0
�Q U rl 0 0 S r i al C.,
H Q) W a) Z Cl.)
W 0
GG U) 4-♦ fZ C U) a) C •
Q) 4-1
a) W U) ,a) a) C i a) C � a)
H (� O •r-I U) U) U •H 0 N
H I C U ,C = = _ = O u CO
C3 O 1J 0 CD • • !D .H = O. 1D •H S-I ))
Cti
H •r1 •r-I H (H CH .,--1 .-i Q) .H H
¢ > E E a 0 0 E .,-i ,.y 0
E •r-1 u E E
pp a Z a Z a a z H Z U LCO 71-UN N
a � � N
H 0 in 0
0 0 0 0 0 In CO 010 000LnN 0 H (OCCO) CbON 0 0 H [� 00
0 d" 0 0 Ln LO N 0 0 H H .--1 H 00 LI) CO O N H 0) O H 0 0 00 H 0)
^ ^ ^
r, O 0) (0 0 N N 0 N d" H H H d" N N in C7 (0 N Ln c0 in dr O N 0) H
CO d" 0) 0 0) H 0) d' (0 H H H CO in H N d' CO H N CO CO H CO Ln
N N, Ln 0 -1 H H H N ff-? fR
Ln c-1 0)
H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H ,-1
,
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H --1 `CJ U)
'C C
(Y) H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H ,__1
C C �"i
I U c0 c0 c0 0 0 0 a0 00 00000 W 0000000 0 CO I,,
C HN
b.0 • H H
>, (ti H
co
G H H H H Ln Ln H N Ln in N CO H H H co CO ,H N N H N N <...1 .0 0 0
E..., 0) 0) CO H H 0) d' (h ('O d' 00 c0 co 6) H H c0 (h O dr('0 ( CD S�
m C >,
N H H H .-i H H H N H H H H H H H H N H H H H N <0 H H a) cti
CO 0 H H H H Ln Ln H N In In N CO H H H CO 00 H N N H N N ,-{ (Tf U a
0) U 0) 0) 0) CO H H 0) d' CO CO d' C7 C7 (0 a) H H (O C7 d' CO (O d' 0) O I 1
H N cO 0) 0 0 (0 00 HHHHH (0 0000000 N N H 0c
L.) HCO N N 0) H H N N N N N CV N N N N N N N N N N N N
U) ~ 6) Cr) Q) d CO CO 0) 0 CO (') 0 (� COO 0 () 0-) C7 () CO (O N
W1. Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr d- Cr Cr Cr Cr Cr d' d- 'Kr Cr d' d d- d
A H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H r.H
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Steve Hurley
RE: Bluff Avenue Assessments
DATE: September 3 , 1982
Introduction
In accordance with City special assessment procedure, Resolution
No. 2044 declaring the cost to be assessed has been prepared for
Bluff Avenue Improvement Project #81-2 .
Background
The Certificate of Completion for the Bluff Avenue Improvement
Project was signed June 25 , 1982 . Final figures were then
available for calculation of assessments to benefitted property
owners .
Although Shakopee Public Utilities Commission meets Wednesday,
September 8 , 1982 to review assessment figures they have been
reviewed by S .P.U. C. ' s manger, Lou VanHout who anticipates no
problem with their approval by the Commission.
Recommendation
Staff recommends the adoption of a resolution which declares the
cost to be assessed and sets the date for the assessment hearing
at October 5 , 1982 at 8 : 00 p.m.
In the event S . P.U.C. does not approve the assessment figures ,
the assessment hearing notice will not be sent to the local
newspaper.
Action Requested
Adopt Resolution No. 2044 , A Resolution Declaring the Cost to be
Assessed and Ordering the Preparation of Proposed Assessment
Project No. 81-2 , Bluff Avenue Improvements .
(Resolution No. 2044 will be provided Tuesday)
SH/jms
RESOLUTION NO. 2044 1/ k
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE COST TO BE ASSESSED AND
ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT OF
BLUFF AVENUE FROM DAKOTA STREET TO THE WEST LINE OF
HALO 1ST ADDITION ( 81-2 )
WHEREAS , a contract has been let for the improvement of
Bluff Avenue from Dakota Street to the West line of Halo 1st
Addition by Sanitary Sewer and Watermain and the contract
price for such improvements is $65 ,285 . 80 and the expenses
incurred or to be incurred in the making of such improvements
amounts to $38 ,103 . 75 , so that the total cost of the improve-
ments will be $103 ,389. 50 and of this cost Shakopee Public
Utilities Commission will pay $1 , 143 . 88 from its fund established
for future trunk watermain improvements and the City will pay
$0.00 as its share of the total 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 $102 ,245 . 67 .
2 . The City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer
shallforthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially
assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot ,
piece or parcel of land within the district affected, without
regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and he shall file
a copy of such proposed assessment in his office for public
inspection.
3 . That the City Clerk shall , upon the completion of such
proposed assessment , notify the City Council thereof.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1 . That a hearing shall be held on the 5th day of October,
1982 , in the Council Chambers of City Hall at 8 :00 P.M. to pass
upon such proposed assessments and at such time and place all
persons owning property affected by such improvements and pro-
posed assessments will be given an opportunity to be heard with
reference to such assessment .
2 . That the City Clerk is hereby directed to cause a notice
of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once
in the official newspaper of the City of Shakopee at least two
weeks prior to the hearing and he shallstate in the notice the
total cost of the improvements . He shall also cause mailed notice
of such hearing to be given the owner of each parcel described
in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the
hearing.
Adopted in session of the City Council of
the City of Shakopee , held this day of
1982 .
Mayor of the City of Shakopee
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Approved as to form this
day of , 1982 .
City Attorney
/, L
MEiviO TO : John K . Anderson
City Administrator
FROM : H . R. Spurrier ),�
City Engineer C_..
RE : Thomas Pumper Sanitary wer Service
DATE : September 3, 1982
Introduction :
Mr. Thomas Pumper, 129 Prairie Street, has had a history of freezing
problems with his sanitary sewer service and has asked the City to correct
the problem.
Background :
For a number of years, the City has had frost problems with the sanitary
sewer in Prairie Street south of 1st Avenue. The City sanitary sewer has
frozen shut and it has been necessary to steam the line several times each
year.
The problem is very similar to the problem the City had on Main Street, where
the City insulated a sanitary sewer to reduce problems. Mat work has
proven to be effective.
In the case of Main Street, there was a property owner that had a sanitary
sewer service subject to freezing because it was not insulated in the roadway.
The property owner paid the cost of insulating the sanitary sewer service.
On Prairie Street, the property owner has asked the City to pay the cost of
insulating the private service line. Insulating the private service line would
be against present City policy. However, the City could include the work in
the main insulation and then assess the cost of insulating the service provided
the property owner waived the hearings and appeal of the assessment.
Detailed below is the estimated cost of insulating the City main and the cost of
insulating a 4 inch sanitary sewer service:
John K . Anderson September 3, 1982
T. Pumper Sanitary Sewer Service Page -2-
Sanitary Sewer Main
Item Estimated Estimated Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Total
1 Reconstruct and Insulate
8" Sanitary Sewer 60 L. F. $ 35. 00 $2, 100.00
2 48" Diameter Manhole 1 Ea. 900. 00 900. 00
3 Patch First Avenue 1 L.S. 2,800. 00 2, 800. 00
Subtotal $5,800. 00
10 Percent Contingency 580. 00
TOTAL $6, 380.00
Sanitary Sewer Service
Item Estimated Estimated Estimated
No. Description Quantity Unit Price Total
1 Insulate 4" Sanitary
Sewer Service 30 L. F. $15. 00 $ 450.00
2 Street Restoration 30 L.F. 5. 00 150. 00
Subtotal $ 600. 00
10 Percent Contingency 60.00
TOTAL $ 660. 00
The estimate of sanitary sewer main insulation is presented for informational
purposes. That work has previously been authorized by City Council.
In answer to Mr. Pumper's request, it is the recommendation of City staff
that Mr. Pumper be advised the City does not participate in the cost of work
on private sanitary sewer services. City Council could offer to include the
sanitary sewer service insulation in the sanitary sewer main insulation work
and assess that cost so long as Mr. Pumper would waive his rights to public
hearing and appeal of the assessment.
Action Requested :
Authorize City staff to include sanitary sewer service insulation on Prairie Street
in the City project so long as the property owners will waive their rights to
public hearing and appeal of the special assessments.
HRS/jvm
1 _
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson
City Administrator ,--
FROM: H. R. Spurrier 40
City Engineer
RE: Free Right Turn for Northbou d Trunk Highway 101 at
1st and Holmes
DATE: September 7, 1982
Introduction:
Attached is a request for proposal prepared for the above-captioned project.
Background:
City staff pursued the historic review of the building located at 1st and
Holmes and found that it was necessary to prepare two reports; one a project
development report and two, a location and design study report, pursuant to
Mn/Dot State Aid Memoranda No. 77-20.
The preparation of these two reports would be expedited by having a consultant
more experienced in their preparation perform the work. Therefore, it is
recommended that City staff contact several firms, much in the manner of
the Infiltration/Inflow Analysis procedure and request proposals for the work.
The content of the proposals is specified in the attached request.
This request will be sent to several consultants specializing in highway work.
The proposals will be returned to City Council for action at a later date.
Action Requested:
Direct City staff to distribute the request for proposals which are to be
returned for Council action by October 5, 1982.
IIRS/jvm
Attachment
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Introduction :
The City of Shakopee is undertaking a project to improve and renovate
downtown Shakopee. • Part of the improvement includes improved traffic
flow and changing the focus of visitors.
Problem :
The City desires the installation of a free right turn for North bound
Trunk Highway 101, at the junction of Trunk Highway 101 and Trunk
Highway 169 in Shakopee.
The City of Shakopee must condemn and remove the building located
on the Northeast corner of the junction. The Minnesota Department of
Transportation (Mn/DOT) will design and construct the free right turn.
The building that must be removed is in the National Register of
Historic Places.
The City must fund this project with Federal Aid Urban (FAU) Funds.
Duties of the Consultant:
Prepare a Project Development Report (PDR) pursuant to Mn/DOT State
Aid Memorandum No. 80-17-A-5 and the Location and Design Study Report
(LDSR) , pursuant to Mn/DOT State Aid Memorandum No. 77-20 for the
construction of a free right turn lane for North bound Trunk Highway 101
at the junction of Trunk Highway 169 in Shakopee. This construction will
require the acquisition and demolition and disposal of a building included in
the National Register of Historic Places, utilizing Federal Aid Urban Funds
allocated to the City of Shakopee.
Upon approval of the PDR/LDSR, prepare the necessary plans and
specifications for site work and building demolition in accordance with Federal
guidelines. The proposed project is a unique use of FAU Funds. The consultant
must be familiar with FAU Projects, projects which involve buildings in the
National Register of Historic Places and reports that must be prepared for
the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
Proposal Content:
The proposal should contain the following materials or information :
1. The experience the firm has with Federal Aid Urban Projects,
Minnesota Department of Transportation Projects and projects
that impact buildings in the National Register of Historic Places.
Request for Proposals
Page Two
2. An estimate of the number of manhours to prepare the
Project Development Report and the Location and Design
Study Report and the plans and specifications for the
demolition.
3. The qualifications of personnel that would perform the work.
HRS/jiw
/ / /
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator 7
FROM : H. R . Spurrier c-
City Engineer
RE : Alley Maintenance between Holmes and Fuller Streets
North of 10th Avenue
DATE: September 3, 1982
Introduction :
Mr. Bernard Baumann, 358 South Holmes Street, contacted City staff regarding
the condition of the alley behind his residence.
Background :
Mr. Baumann has requested that the City regrade the alley so that the roadway
is centered within alley right-of-way. Such regrading would require the
trimming and removal of some obstructions that now exist along the alley
right-of-way.
Such work is ordinarily beyond the scope of routine maintenance since such
work would be tantamount to reconstruction.
Mr. Baumann advised staff that he would appear before Council to discuss
this matter.
HRS/jvm
MEMO TO : John K. Anderson
City Administrator �-
FROM : H. R. Spurrier
City Engineer
RE : Turnback of Part of Trunk'Highway No. 5 Renumbered 169
to City of Shakopee
DATE : September 3, 1982
Introduction :
Attached is a letter addressed to the City Clerk and a Quit Claim Deed for
part of Trunk Highway No. 5, Renumbered 169 to the City of Shakopee.
Background :
This highway right-of-way is actually Harrison Street between 2nd Avenue
and 6th Avenue. The Quit Claim Deed transfers control of the right-of-way
from the State of Minnesota to the City of Shakopee.
The City has no choice but to accept the right-of-way. The reason there is
such a difference between the time the conveyance was authorized and the
submission of this Quit Claim Deed is not known, but City staff will research
that matter and present it to Council on the table September 7th.
It is the recommendation of City staff that Council authorize the City Clerk
to properly record the attached Quit Claim Deed pursuant to the instructions
on Release No. 63.
Action Requested
Authorize City Clerk to properly record the attached Quit Claim
Deed pursuant to the instructions on Release No. 63 .
HRS/jvm
attachment
"okri..NRA IF
t
Doi tio �1inn(•s��t<� AUG 3 1 1982
c 1 )('1 )i1x1111('111 01 TIilIP-J )Orlil1iO11
1rilnsi)Orlilli( )1 1�(1il( ii1i . CITY OF SHAKOPEE
<ti 5Q° Si. 11-lul, Alinnc'sOtil 55155
rOF TPP
August 27, 1982 PlIfm X12-2 -f967
Ms . Judith S. Cox
City Clerk
City Hall - 129 E. 1st Ave.
Shakopee , MN 55379
In reply refer to: 360
S .P. 7009 (169=5)
Turnback of a Part of Trunk Highway No. 5 Renumbered 169 to the City
of Shakopee
Release No . 63
Dear Ms . Cox :
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 161 . 16 and 161 . 24 , the State of
Minnesota has conveyed by a Quit Claim Deed , executed by Richard P.
Braun, Commissioner of Transportation, a portion of the above
referenced Highway No . 169 to the City of Shakopee; as shown as the
shaded area on the attached right of way map and legally described in
said deed .
This conveyance was authorized for release June 25, 1958.
It is vitally necessary to maintain and help perpetuate a proper and
valid chain of title on behalf of the State as well as all adjoining
land owners . We , therefore , request that you record this deed as soon
as possible. Please have the enclosed TURNBACK RECORDING DATA form
completed and return it to this office.
If you require additional information, call Mr . Neal Bartelt, Office
of Right of Way, or write this office.
Sincerely, /
A. J. Hansen, P. E.
Office of Right of Way
AJH:ssd
Enc .
RW00006404E
An Equal Opportunity Employer
1 'CL)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson
City Administrator
FROM: H. R. Spurrie.
City Engineer 11,
RE: Turn Back Trunk Highway 5 Renumbered 169
DATE: September 7, 1982
Introduction:
Pursuant to the memoranda dated September 3, 1982 I have contacted Mn/DOT
regarding the above-captioned matter.
Background:
The Quit Claim Deed forwarded to the City Clerk as a part of Release No. 63
made June 25, 1958 completes a process of title transfer that takes approxi-
mately 16 to 25 years, once the transfer has been approved.
Recording the Quit Claim Deed is simply a formality that represents the
last step of the process.
HRS/jvm
SII
I 2j)
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Judith S . Cox, City Clerk
RE: Authorizing Hiring of Police Administrative Assistant
DATE: September 2 , 1982
The present Police Administrative Assistant has submitted a resigna-
tion effective October 1 , 1982 . ( See attached)
Request Council authorize the filling of the position. The position
is a full time , permanent budgeted position.
It is the desire of the Police Chief and the City Administrator
to change the title of this position from Police Administrative
Assistant to Secretary.
Action Requested
Move to accept the resignation of Diane M. Heinz and to authorize
filling of the Police Secretary, clerical level V.
JSC/jms
attachment
August 26 , 1982
•
Thomas G. Brownell
Chief of Police
Shakopee, Minnesota
Dear Tom:
I have an opportunity to acquire a second court
reporter for transcript typing and have decided to
accept .
Therefore , I am submitting my resignation to be
effective October 1 , 1982 .
Respectfully,
>)1
Diane M. Heinz
c1982
CITY Cyt- S1. AKOPEE
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg M. Voxland, Finance Director
RE: Senior Accounting Clerk Position
DATE: September 2, 1982
•
Introduction
Council has previously authorized the filling of the vacant, authorized and
budgeted Senior Accounting Clerk position.
Background
Staff has followed the hiring procedure outlined in the Personnel Policy.
There were no applications received from current employees. There were
thirty-six applications received from non-employees. These were screened
on the basis of education/training and experience. Seven applicants were
interviewed. Staff is recommending that Council appoint Marilyn Remer
(resume attached) to the position of Senior Accounting Clerk at a starting
wage of $5.87 per hour (six months service credit) effective September 9, 1982.
Alternatives
1. Appoint Ms. Remer as recommended.
2. Modify recommendation.
3. Give staff directions to proceed in some other manner.
Action Requested
Move to hire Marilyn Remer with six months service credit at a starting rate
of $5.87 per hour effective September 9, 1982.
GMV/jms
-QGtYI'7e i'11 5 — �!P�!1 ca71-i D 1C1°1 ae2►m G�'' 5 �Gt r1 e Q
5 ra+ as c. .a+t
/2 --
MEMO TO: City Council
FROM: Don Steger/City Planner
RE: Appointment to Ad Hoc Downtown
Committee
DATE : September. 3 , 1982
Background :
A year ago, Kay Benson who represented St . Francis on the Ad Hoc
Downtown Committee , resigned from the Committee. Dan Steil ,
Chairman of the Committee , has now found a replacement ( see
attached letter) . He is requesting the City Council to appoint
Mike Sortum to the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee .
Requested Action :
Move to appoint Mike Sortum to the Ad Hoc Downtown Committee .
DS : cu
Attachment
PHONE 612-445-6300
"/ FIR NATIONAL BANK
OF' SHAKOPEE
SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA 55379L MEMBER FEDERAL DEPOSIT CORPORATION
September 2, 1982
5�,�. 3 1 j'L
Mr. Don Steger
City of Shakopee
129 East 1st Avenue
Shakopee, Minnesota 55379
Dear Mr. Steger:
Through contact with St. Francis Hospital , Mr. Mike Sortum the Director
of Fiscal Services at St . Francis Hospotal has been proposed for member—
ship on the Ad—Hoc downtown developement committee.
Please have the City Council act on the appointment of Mr. Sortum to
the committee at their meeting on September 7, 1982. Thank you very
much.
I
Sincerely, 1
7/'---A-x•—•-PV
Daniel G. Steil
Chairman — Ad—Hoc Downtown Committee
DGS/mr
i
/3 ,L
MEMO TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator
FROM: Gregg M. Voxland , Finance Director
RE: Selection of Auditors
DATE: September 2 , 1982
Introduction
It is time for Council to select an auditor for fiscal year 1982 .
Background
The City of Shakopee has had the firm of Jaspers & Company as
auditors for about twenty years . The firm has had the same
individual on the audit for about seven years . Last year staff
recommended Council consider changing auditors . Staff again
feels that Council should consider changing auditors in order to
insure independence and to gain the benefits of an auditor who
has worked for other cities and has different experiences and
also a fresh view point on Shakopee ' s operation. Most audit firms
that have sufficient staff rotate the individuals on the job and
many cities have a policy of changing auditors every 3-5 years to
provide the rotation. Staff believes that it is good accounting
practices to provide rotation of auditors on the job.
Alternatives
1 . Request proposal from Jaspers .
2 . Request proposal from Jaspers and other qualified accounting
firms .
Recommendation
Staff recommends alternative No. 2 . This recommendation is not
intended to reflect negatively on Jaspers & Company.
Action Requested
Move to direct staff to solicit proposals for the 1982 audit from
several audit firms including Jaspers & Company.
GMV/jms
To The City Council :
The First Presbyterian Church of the City of Shakopee , Minn . , will
be in the process of completing our Church by adding the Bell Tower .
This was in our orginal plans when we built in 1966 , but we had to
place it on hold until we could reduce our debt .
We now have a low bid of $43,000 .00 and we are asking that the City
wave the building permit fees on this project so that we can start
as soon as possible .
First Presbyterian Church
By :
Russell No in