030909 CC Reg AgPCITY OF SHO EWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, MARCH 9, 2009
AGENDA
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Roll Call Mayor Lizee _
Bailey _
Turgeon
Woodruff _
Zerby
5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
SOUTIIS ORE CENTER
DINING ROOM
7800 P.M.
Estimated Estimated
Attachments Time in Start Time
Minutes (Clock Time)
7:00 p.m.
A. Review Agenda
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Work Session Minutes, 2/23/09 Minutes
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, 2/23/09
Minutes
C. City Council Work Session Minutes, 3/02/09
Minutes
3. CONSENT AGENDA - Motion to approve items on
Consent Agenda & Adopt Resolutions
Therein:
NOTE: Give the public an opportunity to request an
item be removed from the Consent Agenda.
Comments can be taken or questions asked following
removal from Consent Agenda
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
Claims List
B. Appointing a Data Practices Responsible
Deputy Clerk's
Authority
memorandum,
Resolution
C. Special Event Permit for Knewtson Health Deputy Clerk's
Group 5K Run memorandum
D. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program Engineer's
Amendment memorandum,
Resolution
E. Phone and Data Services Administrator's
memorandum
5 minutes 7:00 p.m.
5 minutes 7:05 p.m.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING AGENDA - MARCH 9, 2009
Page 2 of 2
Estimated Estimated
Attachments Time in Start Time
Minutes (Clock Time)
F. Park Consultant Services Contract Administrator's
memorandum
4.
MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
10 minutes 7:10 p.m.
(No Council action will be taken)
5.
REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
6.
PUBLIC HEARING
7.
PARKS
8.
PLANNING - Report by Representative
5 minutes 7:20 p.m.
9.
ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Water Tower Change Order
Dir of Public 5 minutes 7:25 p.m.
Works' memo,
Resolution
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A.
Southshore Center
Refer to Work
10 minutes
7:30 p.m.
Session Memo
B.
2009 Deer Management Program
Planning
10 minutes
7:40 p.m.
Director's memo
C.
City Hall Signage
Administrator's
10 minutes
7:50 p.m.
memorandum
D.
City Owned Property-5795 Country Club Road
5 minutes
8:00 P.M.
E.
Report on Lake Minnetonka Conservation
Report
10 minutes
8:05 p.m.
District (LMCD) activities by Representatives
Dick Woodruff and Lisa Whalen
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A.
Administrator and Staff
5 minutes
8:15 p.m.
1. City Hall Construction Update
B.
Mayor and City Council
5 minutes
8:20 p.m.
12. ADJOURN
I minute
8:25 p.m.
57; C . TRY CL_-30AD ~ S.. FiE'NC DD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 ® (952) 474-3236
FAX (962) 474-0128 - www.ci.shorewood.mn.us s cityhaII@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Executive Summary
Shorewood City Council Regular Meeting
Monday, 9 March, 2009
A 6:00 PM Work Session is scheduled for this evening.
Agenda Item #3A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval.
Agenda Item #313: The Data Practices Act (Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes) and
Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1205, assign a number of duties to government entities. In a City,
the governing body must appoint a city employee as the Responsible Authority (RA), who
has the authority and responsibility for carrying out these duties. In the past, the City
Administrator/Clerk has been appointed as the RA. The resolution provided appoints Brian
Heck as the City of Shorewood Data Practices Responsible Authority.
Agenda Item #3C: This is a Special Event Permit for the Knewtson Health Group's 2nd
annual 5K Run/Walk event to benefit the Hope Closet for Breast Cancer on Saturday,
June 13. Pending review by the SLMPD, it is expected the permit will be issued for this
event.
Agenda Item #31): The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requested the City of
Shorewood to amend the Storm Water Prevention Plan to document discharges to
impaired waters. Staff recommends adopting the resolution accepting the amendment.
Agenda Item #3E: Staff is recommending approval of the Telephone and Data services
agreement pending satisfactory review by City Attorney.
Agenda Item #317: Staff is recommending approval of the agreement for services with TKDA
for the park study.
Agenda Item #9A: Staff is recommending approval of the resolution that approves Change
Order 1 to the Southeast Water Tower, in the amount of $4,951.13 and that the final
improvement be accepted by the City.
Agenda Item #10A: Discussion and action regarding the SouthShore Senior Community
Center.
Agenda Item #1 OB: Well, it is that time of year again- time to decide what to do about
Odocoileus Virginianus. A memorandum from the Planning Director summarizes the
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Executive Summary ® City Council Meeting of 9 March, 2009
Page 2 of 2
2008 Deer Management Program and seeks direction as to what the Council may wish to
do for 2009.
Agenda Item #IOC: Decision required concerning the type of signage for the City Hall.
Agenda Item #IOD: Administrator Heck will provide a verbal update on the status of the City
owned property at 5795 Country Club Road.
Agenda Item #10E: Dick Woodruff and Lisa Whalen will provide a report on the Lake
Minnetonka Conservation District activities.
5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
SOUTHSHO CENTER
5:00 P.M.
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 5:04 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Bailey (arrived at 5:05 P.M.), Turgeon, Woodruff and
Zerby; Administrator Heck; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown;
and Engineer Landini
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0.
Councilmember Bailey arrived at 5:05 P.M.
2. STREET IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, DISCUSSION
Engineer Landini explained the meeting packet contained a revised resolution seeking statutory authority
to implement a street improvement district as well as a revised letter to the City's elected legislators
requesting them to author the bill to obtain this authority. This authority would allow the City to collect
fees from property owners witbin a district to fund municipal street maintenance, reconstruction and
facility upgrades. Currently this option for funding roadway improvements is not available to any city in
Minnesota. He stated Council will be asked to take action on this item during its regular meeting
following this work session.
All Councilmembers were satisfied that the changes to the resolution and letter discussed during the
February 2, 2009, Council work session had been made.
Mayor Lizee thanked Engineer Landini for his efforts.
3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW
Director Nielsen stated Council commented on the Land Use and Natural Resources Chapters of the
Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) at its February 2, 2009, work session, and Council is being asked to
comment on the Transportation and Community Facilities/Services Chapters this evening. He requested
they provide substantive comments only.
Nielsen explained he received additional comments and suggested changes from Councilmember
Woodruff about the Land Use Chapter since the February 2" d work session, and lie wanted Council to
review four of them.
#Za
CITE' OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 2 of 3
The following are the additional changes agreed to for the Land Use Chapter.
➢ Page LU-10, item 7 - Delete "A commercial maintenance code shall be formulated."
➢ Page LU-11, paragraph 2 - Change "Shorewood's lack of a `traditional downtown' and
Excelsior's strong identity in that regard further add to the problem." to "Shorewood's
lack of a `traditional downtown' adds to the problem."
➢ Page LU- 15, paragraph 3, sentence 3 - Change "To the extent feasible, priority should
be given to "To the extent feasible, attention should be given
➢ LU-27, last paragraph - Change the City should update its current zoning regulations
to accommodate and encourage senior housing to the City may consider
updating its current zoning regulations to accommodate and encourage senior housing
➢ Page LU-28, solar access protection - After discussion there was consensus to leave this
as is. There is some concern that this topic is not directly addressed in the City Code.
The following are the changes agreed to for the Transportation Chapter.
➢ Page TR-3, paragraph 2 - Staff will reword paragraph 2.
➢ Page TR-5, paragraph 1 - Staff will revise the paragraph to specifically point out the
issues of the Galpin Lake Road interchan-c and the Vine Hill Road / Highway 7
intersection.
➢ Page TR-7, item 4 - The following will be added and to promote the safe and
efficient movement of traffic through and out of the City to the metro area."
➢ Page TR-8, streets - After ensuing discussion, there was consensus not to include
anything about the use of golf carts, all terrain vehicles, etc. on City streets in the
Transportation Chapter.
➢ Page TR-8, streets, item 1 - Staff will reword this item to convey the City has established
and will maintain a street classification system.
➢ Page TR-8, item 1 1 Staff will update this item to reflect the City's current policy
regarding curb and gutter.
➢ Page TR-9, mass transit, itcnn 1 - The word "highly" will be deleted in sentence one, and
the second sentence will be deleted.
➢ Page TR-10, item 10 - The second sentence will be deleted.
➢ Pages TR-12 & TR-13 - Staff will clarify the roadway fimctional classification system
included is the Metropolitan Council's, and the format of its document will be changed.
➢ Pages TR-18 through TR-24 - Staff will correct inconsistencies between the text and
graphics, and it will remove any references to roadways with widths the City does not
have.
➢ Pages TR-25 through TR-27 - To do items which have been done will be removed.
The following are the changes agreed to for the Community Facilities/Services Chapter.
➢ Page CF-3, paragraph 3 - Staff will rewrite this paragraph as the there already is a sound
financial program for capital improvements.
➢ Page CF-5, paragraph 2 - Staff will include reference to the City's Comprehensive Water
Resource Management Plan.
➢ Page CF-9, item 2 - Add a reference to the fact the City will update its Parks Master Plan
in 2009.
➢ Page CF-9, item 5 - This item will be deleted because the City is almost fully developed,
and the City has not identified any additional park land it wants to acquire.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 3 of 3
➢ Page CF-16, paragraph 2 - Staff will reword this so it includes all properties are required
to connect to the City's sewer system.
➢ Page CF-21, paragraph 2 - A reference to the City's Comprehensive Water Resource
Management Plan, and also to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System will
be added.
➢ Page CF-22, item 2 Staff will rewrite this item about storm water improvement special
taxing districts.
➢ Page CF -22, parks and recreation - A reference to the Parks Master Plan update will be
included somewhere.
➢ Page CF-34, paragraph 3, sentence 2 - This sentence will be deleted.
➢ Page CF-34, paragraph 5 - After discussion, there was consensus to leave this as is.
4. ADJOURN
Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of February
23, 2009, at 6:15 P.M. Motion passed 510.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
CITY OF S OREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2009
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAM
SOUTIISIIORE CENTER
7:00 P.M.
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Bailey, Turgeon, Woodruff and Zerby; Attorney Tietjen;
City Administrator Heck; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown;
and Engineer Landini
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Turgeon moved, Bailey seconded, approving the agenda amended. Motion passed 510
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, January 26, 2009
Bailey moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
January 26, 2009, as presented. Motion passed 510.
B. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, February 9, 2009
Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of
February 9, 2009, as presented. Motion. passed 510.
C. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, February 9, 2009
Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of
February 9, 2009, as presented. Motion passed 510.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
B. Appeal Notice of Zoning Violation
Applicant: James and Nancy Stubbe
Location: 5750 Covington Road
Motion passed 510.
#aB
SHOREWOOD CI'T'Y COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 2 of 16
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
Mayor Lizee noted there were a few students in the audience this evening to observe a Council meeting as
part of a school project.
5. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. Recognition of Service
On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizee thanked former Planning
Commissioner Bruce Gniffke for his almost five years of service as a Planning Commissioner and
provided him with a plaque of appreciation and recognition. Mr. Gniffke thanked Council for the
opportunity, and stated he has been a resident of the City since 1952.
On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizee thanked former Lake Minnetonka
Conservation District Boardmember Richard Siakel (who was not present this evening) for his year of
service as an LMCD Boardmember, noting he was chosen as the LMCD's Representative of the Year at
its 2009 Save-the-Lake banquet. She stated he will be sent a plaque of appreciation and recognition.
On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizee thanked former Park
Commissioner Howard Young (who was not present this evening) for his nine years of service as a Park
Commissioner. She noted Mr. Young remains very involved ~v Ith the community. She stated he will be
sent a plaque of appreciation and recognition.
On behalf of the Council and the residents of Shorewood, Mayor Lizee thanked former Park
Commissioner Robert Hensley (who was not present this evening) for his over three years of service as a
Park Commissioner. She noted Mr. I-lenslcy and his wife are very involved with the community. She
stated he will be sent a plaque of appreciation and recognition.
B. Report on Council's Role on a Joint Powers Agreement
Mayor Lizee stated Attorney Tietjen will highlight her memorandum which provides a brief summary of
the legal authority and powers of a joint powers entity; a copy of the memorandum was included in the
meeting packet for this meeting.
Attorney Tietjen highlighted the main points of her memorandum. She explained Minnesota Statutes
provides two or more government entities the authority to enter into intergovernmental agreement to
combine resources and efforts to accomplish things the entities could not do alone. The establishment of a
true joint powers organization creates a separate legal entity run by a governing board that has certain
distinct powers and obligations governed by a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) between the parties. The
joint entity may jointly or cooperatively exercise its powers pursuant to terms outlined in the JPA. The
joint entity has the power to own property, receive and expend fluids, enter into contracts, hire employees,
and sue or be sued. The governing board acts as an independent governing body, which consists of
representatives from the individual members, and it has decision making power for the joint entity
consistent with the terms of the JPA.
Tietjen then explained there are unique rules related to liability issues and insurance coverage for joint
powers entities. Minnesota Statutes was amended such that the joint powers entity is liable for the acts or
SHORE OD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 239 2009
Rage 3 of 16
omissions of another participating governmental unit only if it agreed to that in writing. It was also
amended such that the individual members and the joint powers entity are considered a single government
unit for purposes of determining liability for damages. A single member can not be held liable to the limit
under State Statutes. Typically joint powers entities have their own liability insurance coverage.
Tietjen explained the cities of Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood and Tonka Bay entered into a JPA for
the provision of police services in 1998. The South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) JPA
establishes a Coordinating Committee as the SLMPD governing body, and the Committee consists of the
mayors of the member cities. There are certain obligations the Committee must fulfill and it has other
discretionary powers. The individual member cities also have certain rights and obligations under the
JPA. These obligations, powers and rights are listed in the memorandum.
Tietjen went on to explain there have been four amendments to the SLMPD JPA. Amendments two, three
and four deal with how budgeting for police services is handled. The fourth amendment, which is the
most recent, was agreed to in 2006 pursuant to a binding arbitration order that was issued to resolve a
dispute between the member cities regarding budget issues. This fourth amendment changed the JPA in
three ways: 1) it changed the term of the JPA through December 31, 21023, and established specific terms
for withdrawal from the JPA; 2) it added a section requiring the parties to follow a certain process for
dispute resolution; and, 3) it replaced the budgeting process previsions with a new process for
determining the member cities' contributions and for approving the budget. Effective January 1, 2007, the
annual operating budget must be approved by all four member,cities. If that does not occur by September
1 of each year, the JPA specifies a process that must be followed to determine the budget. Shorewood's
annual contribution was set to 50 percent of the approved operating budget.
Mayor Lizee stated the review of how the joint powers organizations operate was very timely. She noted
the City is also a member of the Excelsior Fire District (EFD) joint powers organization which consists of
the four SLMPD member cities plus the City of Dcephaven. She also noted the EFD was a paid-on-call
fire department. She stated there was a recent article written by Lori Sturdevant and published in the Star
Tribune which discussed the need to streamline state, county and local governments. It also discussed the
importance of local govermmems researching what types of services could be provided through
cooperative efforts.
In response to a comment from CoLmCllmember Turgeon, Attorney Tietjen clarified the SLMPD
Coordinating Committee is the govern ing body for the SLMPD pursuant to the terms of the SLMPD JPA,
and it has the decision making authority for the SLMPD. Administrator Heck stated the same applies to
EFD joint powers organizations and the EFD Governing Board.
6. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
7. PARKS
Commissioner Quinlan reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 10, 2009, Park
Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). He elaborated on the Commission's
consideration of South Tonka Little League's request for amendments to the City's Zoning Code that
would allow advertising signs at the ball field in Freeman Park. He noted the Commission unanimously
recommends that request be denied, and that there is a public hearing slated for the March 3, 2009,
Planning Commission meeting. He stated Commissioner Norman was selected as Chair of the
Commission and Commissioner Davis was selected as Vice-Chair.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 4 of 16
In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Commissioner Quinlan explained the Park
Commission did not believe the League's reasons justified a change and the City Code strongly
discourages bill-board type signage. Quinlan also stated aesthetics were also a concern. He explained that
approximately one half of the neighboring communities allow some types of signage in their city parks
and the other half does not. He commented the Planning Commission wanted tine Park Commission to
discuss this request.
Mayor Liz& clarified the Park Commission discussed this item and only made a recommendation.
Councilmember Woodruff stated on Thursday morning there is a tour of the City's parks which is the
official kick-off of the project to update the City's Park Master Plan. He then stated he attended a recent
Park Foundation meeting during which he encouraged the Foundation to have representatives come
before Council to discuss Foundation activities and to meet with the Park Commission.
A. Accept Quote for Eddy Station Facility Maintenance
Mayor Liz6e stated the Park Commission recommends Council approVe, a contract with Koelmen Painting
in the amount of $5,560 for services to perform maintenance on the exterior of Eddy Station located in
Freeman Park. The facility's exterior is in need of maintenance. 'l`lhe Commission recommends moving
this project from the 2010 Park Capital Improvement Progr'a h,(CIP) to the 2009 CIP. The CIP has $3,000
budgeted for this effort. The additional amount of $2,560 can be funded out of Park reserves.
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, accepting the proposal provided by Koehuen Painting for $5,560
for the Eddy Station Facility Maintenance. Motion passed 510.
8. PLANNING
Director Nielsen reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 17, 2009, Planning
Commission meeting (as detailed bi the minutes of that meeting).
9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Seeking Statutory Authority to Implement a Street Improvement District
Engineer Landini explained the meeting packet for this meeting contained a draft resolution seeking
statutory authority to implement a street improvement district as well as a letter to the City's elected
legislators requesting them to author the bill to obtain this authority. A street improvement district would
allow the city to spread the cost of projects over more properties and over a longer period of time. This
financial tool is transparent in that fees collected within a street improvement district would be collected
and used for municipal street maintenance, reconstruction and facility upgrades. This tool would also
allow the city to perform street maintenance and reconstruction on schedule. Timely maintenance is
essential to preserving streets and thereby protecting taxpayer investments. Given the current economy,
this preservation is more important than ever. If the City were granted the authority, it would have to hold
a public hearing before establishing a district.
Landini stated Staff recommends Council approve of the resolution and direct Staff to submit the letter
and resolution to Shorewood's elected Legislators.
Councilmember Zerby stated currently the City has two options for funding roadway improvements. The
property owners along the roadway can be assessed some amount of the cost, or funds from the General
Fund can be used for this purpose noting all property owners contribute to the General Fund. The street
Director Brown stated if the State Legislature granted the City the authority to set up a street
improvement district it does not bind the City to do so.
In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Administrator Heck stated he did not anticipate
the City would incur any cost to make this request other than the possibility that he may have to testify
during a committee hearing to consider the request and he considers activities like that part of his job. In
response to another question from Bailey, Heck stated the League of Minnesota Cities and Metro Cities
would lobby on behalf of cities making this request.
Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 09-012, "A Resolution
Requesting Authority to Establish a Municipal Street Improvement District", and directing Staff to
submit the resolution and request letter to Shorewood's elected N: gislators.
In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Administrator Heck stated because Minnesota
cities are losing state aid and the Minnesota Department of Ti-ansportition budget constraints this request
may have a better chance of getting approved. Councilmember Woodruff commented the Metro Cities
Revenue and Taxation Policy Committee has discussed street improvement districts for the last two years.
Motion passed 510.
B. Authorize to Advertise a Request for Qualifications for Engineering Services
Director Brown stated Staff would like to establish a pool of qualified engineering services consultants to
draw upon for implementation of various Capital Improvement Program projects. Staff has provided
Council with a brief statement of qualifications which will be modified to include a fee schedule. Council
has also been provided with a timetable for soliciting the statements of qualifications from firms and
selecting the pool of firms.
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, directing Staff to collect Statements of Qualifications to use in
creating a pool of Engineering Service Consultants.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he whole heartedly supported the idea. He questioned if an engineering
firm would have to be on the list to be considered for projects, to which Director Brown stated yes.
Woodruff stated that should be clarified in the statement of qualifications.
Motion passed 510.
C. Survey Result from the Smithtown Lane/Ilarding Lane Public Information Meeting
Engineer Landini stated Staff conducted a public information meeting on January 27, 2009, to discuss the
potential reconstruction of Harding Lane and Smithtown Lane. At the information meeting Staff
distributed a survey to use in gathering input about the residents support for reconstructing the roadways
and installing municipal water as part of the projects. Out of the 26 property owners adjacent to these
roadways, 15 completed the survey. Eighty percent of the property owners who completed and submitted
the surveys do not want the roadways reconstructed and 60 percent do not want municipal water service
SHOREWO D CI'T'Y COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINU'T'ES
February 23, 2009
Page 6 of 16
installed. Many of the residents expressed concern about assessments for water main in the present
economic climate.
Landini explained the next step in this process would be for Council to direct Staff to obtain the right-of-
way required for the Smithtown Lane cul-de-sac, procure a survey for the right-of-way and initiate a
feasibility study. He stated if Council did not want to move forward with this next phase in the process
Council could chose to hold a public information meeting on the possible reconstruction of Meadowview
Road and Nelsine Drive. Those two roadways are next in priority.
Landini stated Staff requests direction from Council about how to proceed.
Director Brown stated Councilmembers Bailey and Zerby attended the information meeting, and he had
asked them to comment on the meeting. One of their critiques was Staff needed to clearly understand and
convey that its ultimately Council's decision; not the residents. Yet, it is important for Staff to accurately
communicate the residents' comments and make sure they are part of the public record. He commented
the Cities of Minnetonka and Plymouth are foregoing a number of projects this year because of their
impact on the property owners adjacent to the roadways.
Mayor Liz6e asked how many property owners attended the information meeting, to which Engineer
Landini responded there were eight and noted seven other property owners also completed the survey.
Liz6e stated based on the results 12 out of 26 property owners indicated they' did not want the roadways
reconstructed and 9 did not want municipal water installed. She was not sure that was sufficient
justification to conclude the majority did not want the projects done. She expressed concern about the
lack of response.
Councihnember Bailey stated he was not surprised v ith the results. Although Engineer Landini and
Director Brown did a great job making the presentation at the meeting, the issue of funding was a concern
for the property owners. The property owners want to know if they are going to be assessed for the
improvements. Unless the funding' issue is resolved he thought this is the type of response the City would
continue to receive. He recommended Council quickly determine how to fund these types of projects.
Councilmember Zerby stated the m,o roadways are different. He commented he had asked one property
owner if the project did not cost him anything would lie want it and the individual said no because of the
inconvenience during construction. He then stated Smithtown Lane was more of a rustic style road, and
the anticipated location of the reconstructed road could be different than the current location and result in
loss of trees. Harding Lane would be reconstructed in its current footprint, but residents had concern
about access and parking during construction.
Mayor Liz6e stated it was difficult to know many details about a project until a feasibility study has been
done.
Councilmember Woodruff stated funds were allocated in the General Fund for the reconstruction of these
two roadways in 2009. From his vantage point, these two projects can be started while Council
determines how to fund future projects. He requested Staff break out the survey responses by roadway for
both reconstruction and installation of water, and that the property owners be identified. He stated that
although Council has to be cautious to not be too heavy handed, there are a great number of roadways that
are substandard. It is Council's responsibility to make the tough decisions before the City's roadways
become a catastrophe.
Mayor Liz6e expressed concern that the majority of the residents did not provide the City with feedback.
She thought it would be a mistake to reconstruct roadways without considering the utility infrastructure at
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 7 of 16
the same time; it's prudent for Council to consider the broader picture when considering projects. She
thought it would be beneficial to have a break out of the survey respondents by roadway and water
installation.
Director Brown stated based on experience, the issue of roadway width always surfaces with roadway
reconstruction projects. He explained that in the past the City has used the process of pavement
reclamation instead of reconstruction in certain situations, although not frequently. The reclamation
approach is not as cost effective over the long term; the cost for reclamation is approximately 55 - 60
percent of the cost to reconstruct. He noted the reclamation approached was used on Strawberry Lane
about fourteen years ago and it has performed well.
Councilmember Turgeon commented there are approximately 12 properties on both Smithtown Lane and
Harding Lane and both have cut-de-sacs. She questioned if it would not be better to invest roadway
improvement dollars to first improve roadways with higher traffic. Director Brown stated he had
discussed this with Turgeon prior to the meeting; the rating for roadways could be adjusted to reflect
higher traffic volumes if Council desires. He commented higher-traffic roadways deteriorate faster;
therefore, the impact of traffic is indirectly factored into the rating.
Councilmember Woodruff stated Council discussed the 20-yc_lr PaWcment Management Plan (PMP) in
depth for 2009 and 2010 roadway improvements. He expressed concern that if Council wanted to revisit
the City would lose the opportunity for any roadway reconstruction in 2009. He stated he was not as
concerned about the money because he thought the 2009 revenue and expense budgets were sound, and
these two projects have been budgeted for. He stated to not do these types of projects because of the
economy would be wrong because that would put more people out of work. The City has a healthy budget
and financial situation to do projects that are needed.
Councilmember Turgeon questioned how much impact the residents' input should have in making a
decision.
Engineer Landini stated going on memory he thought five property owners on Smithtown Lane responded
to the survey and of those only one was in favor of reconstructing this road. That would leave ten Harding
Lane property owners responding and eight of them were against the reconstruction. He noted he had
since received an email from another Harding Lane property owner who was against the reconstruction.
In response to a comment from Councilmember Bailey, Director Brown explained asphalt reclamation
involves removing asphalt, grinding it up and reapplying. Brown stated Staff recommends the roadways
be reconstructed because it is a better investment for the City. Brown explained asphalt reclamation has
an approximate 20 year life, while a reconstructed road has an approximate 30 - 35 year life. Also, the
reclamation approach does not allow the City the opportunity to correct drainage issues because edge
control would not be installed, and safety issues tend not to be corrected. He noted there are a number of
drainage issues along Harding Lane. He explained the cost comparison of 55 - 60 percent for reclamation
versus reconstruction may be low because reconstruction costs include edge control. He stated that
although the reclamation effort for Strawberry Lane has performed well, after 14 years it is starting to
show wear and tear.
In response to a request from Councilmember Woodruff, Engineer Landini explained Harding Lane has
50 feet of right-of-way, and the proposed generic alignment and cul-de-sac fit within the existing paved
surface. Smithtown Lane has 66 feet of right-of-way, but the proposed cul-de-sac for Smithtown Lane
will require land procurement. Director Brown noted that a few property owners who attended the public
information meeting indicated the right-of-way boundaries displayed for Smithtown Lane were not where
they thought they should be. He stated one individual stated he had a survey that was contrary to that.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 8 of 16
Staff is concerned that although Hennepin County map shows a 66-foot-wide right-of-way for Smithtown
Lane, it may actually be a statutory right-of-way; the City would not have the rights to that right-of-way.
The right-of-way on Harding Lane is a platted right-of-way and it appears the City has the necessary
right-of-way, noting there could be extra right-of-way needed to resolve drainage issues. This will not be
known until further assessment has been done.
Councilmember Woodruff recommended the Harding Lane project move forward from an engineering
perspective because the City knows that it has the necessary easement to at least reconstruct the roadway.
He would like to move forward with Harding Lane because it does not have easement issues like
Smithtown Lane does.
Councilmember Zerby stated he thought the property owners spoke "loud and clear" that they did not
want the road reconstructed, and there are other improvement projects within the City that the budgeted
funds could be used for. Because the City has limited funds, he did not think it was appropriate to do a
project residents did not want done.
Councilmember Bailey questioned if these projects were not done would they drop to the bottom of the
priority list. He did not think it is appropriate for the City to revisit them year after year. Councilmember
Zerby stated maybe they could be reconsidered in 2010. Bailey strit~d there is a finite amount of dollars
for roadway reconstruction, and he suggested the roadways_that residents do not want reconstructed drop
to the bottom of the list. Bailey thought it prudent to explain to the residents there are budgeted funds to
reconstruct these roadways.
Mayor Lizee stated Council has to determine the City's responsibility and the property owners'
responsibility. A major issue with a proposed project in 2008 was the City could not acquire the necessary
right-of-way. The City cannot delay projects forever. She recollects seeing photographs of serious
drainage issues in properties adjacent to Harding Lane during the spring snow melt. She suggested the
City move forward with projects where it has the necessary right-of-way. She stated engineering work
would identify what other improvements should be considered and determine if additional easements are
needed to do the improvements. Because the City has the necessary right-of-way to reconstruct Harding
Lane, she recommends the City move forward with the next phase of this project.
Administrator Heck commented that there are two Council work sessions scheduled in March to discuss
roadway improvement projects,irncluding financing of projects.
In response to a question from Mayor Lizee, Engineer Landini stated if Council wanted to consider the
next phase of either reconstruction project Staff should be directed to solicit quotes for the construction.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the major issue for the reconstruction of Smithtown Lane is the right-of-
way for the cul-de-sac.
Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, directing Staff to obtain the right-of-way for the Smithtown
Lane cul-de-sac, to procure surveys, and begin the feasibility studies for Harding Lane and
Smithtown Lane.
Councilmember Woodruff noted the motion was not an authorization to do the project.
Councilmember Turgeon stated she wanted to separate the two projects as she did not think the
Smithtown Lane project would be done during the summer of 2009.
Administrator Heck stated at its February 2, 2009, work session Council discussed the goals for 2009.
During the meeting Council requested some changes be made to the projects' descriptions. During that
work session Council directed Staff to prioritize the projects and Cou!icil would review them and revise
them if necessary at a subsequent meeting. The meeting packet for this meeting contains the revised
descriptions as well a prioritized timeline chart. He asked Council for feedback on the priorities.
Councilmember Woodruff requested Staff prepare a cross reference system between the project
descriptions and the timeline chart. He stated he had difficulty matching up the items on the timeline chart
and the projects' descriptions. Administrator Heck stated the pro'jects' descriptions and the timeline chart
are organized by department.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested the Vine Hill Road and Highway 7 study project be a higher priority
than the Sign Inventory Project under Public Works.
Administrator Heck clarified the projects and timeline actually are more of a work program. This is not
how he would like to have the goals and priorities for 2010 developed.
Councilmember Woodruff stated lie wanted Staff to get started on the projects.
Councilmember Zerby stated he did not disagree with any of the projects or the timeline. He thought they
were great.
B. Recycling Program Discussion
Administrator Heck stated Councilmember Zerby expressed interest in having the City's recycling
program reviewed to determine how to increase the amount of recyclable material collected and improve
the recycling process. He then stated Zerby had indicated he was very impressed with Eden Prairie's
single-sort system. Heck explained the meeting packet for this evening contained the City's contract with
the current recycling services provider (Veolia), a memorandum outlining the details of the City's current
recycling program, some information about organics recycling, and an executive surmnary of the City of
Roseville's recycling pilot program conducted in 2004. The current contract with Veolia contains an
option to extend the contract for 24 months and if the City chooses to do so it must notify Veolia of that
decision by June 30, 2009. Veolia then has one month to determine if it wants to agree to the extension. If
it does, the City and Veolia have until September 1, 2009, to finalize the agreement. He asked Zerby to
comment on this topic.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 10 of 16
Councilmember Zerby stated the information he had been provided in early January 2009 about the City's
recycling program and how the current recycling service provider was selected was from 2006. During its
January 12, 2009 meeting, Council requested Staff assemble more current information about recycling
options for Council discussion. The information from Roseville's pilot program was even older than the
information for the City. He questioned if the Planning Commission or possibly the Park Commission
should be involved in this effort. He stated Council has to decide if it wants to have a single-sort or dual-
sort recycling system and the frequency of collections (weekly or bi-weekly). Although he had no specific
supporting data to back this, he thought it may be possible to move to a bi-weekly single-sort system for
approximately the same cost as the current weekly dual-sort system. He asked Council how it would like
to proceed with this. Should it move forward at a committee level? Should a request for proposal (RFP)
process be initiated based on simple cost structure? He stated based on his own experience and
discussions with residents he strongly thought the current recycling program could be improved.
Mayor Liz6e stated there are a number of companies that provide recycling services. Based on articles she
has read in various newspaper publications there are number of variations that can be considered. One of
the criterions that should be considered is what volume of recycled material collected is actually recycled.
There are some companies that offer rewards programs for residents based on the volume they recycle.
Hennepin County has a great program with an expansive list of opportunities. She suggested Council
have a County representative present information about the Cou11ty's program, and that a concerted effort
be made to solicit public input about recycling.
Councilmember Turgeon stated the recycling system selected comes down to cost. There may be some
issues if the frequency of recycling changes to+e clifferent than waste pickup, noting the City does not
have just one City-wide refuse hauler. She suggested organics recycling discussions be done separately.
Administrator Heck stated in order to be able to (let financial numbers for various options an RFP process
should be completed. If that is what Council wants, it should direct Staff to do so.
Councilmember Woodruff thought it is prudent to go through an RFP process. He commented that for the
last recycling services RFP process a matrix of various options was prepared. He suggested that be done
again. He requested Staff revicwthe City's current contract with Veolia and assess where Veolia has or
has not satisfied the requirements of the contract.
Councilmember Zerby stated that based on the minutes of a January 27, 2007, Council work session there
appeared to have been a lot of worthwhile information researched and provided. There had been a group
of cities that had collectively evaluated various recycling options and determined it was not feasible for
all of them to use the same provider. Administrator Heck stated he has located the study and
recommendations of that group.
There was consensus to have Staff prepare an RFP.
Councilmember Zerby stated the contact specifies Veolia provide the City with monthly reports on
recycling volumes, noting he has never seen those reports.
Mayor Liz& stated she wants Hennepin County to make a presentation to Council.
C. Technology Committee Report and Recommendations
Administrator Heck stated the Technology Committee held its first meeting on February 5, 2009, during
which it reviewed and discussed the three proposals for telephone and data services. The Committee
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 239 2009
Page 11 of 16
recommends the City work with Warner Connect to provide a telephone infrastructure for City Hall and
Public Works (the phone system will be hosted at Warner Connect), to provide off-site data storage and
disaster recovery for the City's data systems, host the City's website, and provide internet service. Over
time it may be possible to migrate the City's network servers off-site to a hosted system at Warner
Connect. Warner Connect will develop a communications system using internet protocol telephones
(VOIP). The system will interconnect City Hall and Public Works by using one T-1 line to City Hall and
another to Public Works. Staff will have direct dial lines, voice mail, unified messaging, and other
features. He commented Warner Connect worked with the City of Plymouth to revamp its entire
telephone and data infrastructure, and Plymouth city staff spoke very highly of the work Warner Connect
performed.
Administrator Heck explained the cost for implementation is approximated at $17,000. Monthly fees are
estimated to be $2,800; current fees for phones, internet, and data support are approximately $2,000 per
month.
Councilmember Zerby, a member of the Technology Committee, stated he was very impressed with
Warner Connect representatives. He thought it would reduce some demand on Staff for things such as
data backups and administering phones in the event of problems. Ile explained Warner Connect will be
able to solve problems remotely because much of the technology will be located off-site at Warner
Connect.
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the City work with Warner Connect to provide the
telephone infrastructure for City Hall and Public Works in accordance with its proposal, and to
provide off-site data storage and disaster recovery for the City's data systems. Motion passed 5/0.
Administrator Heck stated the City currently has some employees that have mobile communications
devices which are either paid for or reimbursed by the City. The Technology Committee thought it was
prudent for the City to have a mobile communications policy so it drafted such a policy for Council's
consideration. The Committee recommends approval of the policy. The policy states that for those
individuals who are identified as needing to have a mobile communications device, the City will either
provide the device or reimburse the employee for using their personal device for business purposes.
In response to a question from COLUlcilmember Bailey, Administrator Heck stated he would be
responsible for determining which employees need such a device.
Bailey moved, Liz& seconded, adopting the City of Shorewood Mobile Communications Policy.
Motion passed 510.
D. Southshore Center Update
Administrator Heck requested this item, which was originally scheduled to be discussed as Item 11.A.2
under Staff and Council reports, be discussed under General/New Business because it warranted more
discussion than just an update.
Administrator Heck explained the Friends of tile Southshore Community Center have dissolved and will
not be managing the operations of the Center effective March 1, 2009. Therefore there is no need to
continue to work on an amended lease agreement with the Friends, or to continue down the current path
of amendments to the Cooperative Agreement between the five rnember cities. He stated the Southshore
Center funding group met on February 20`x' to discuss what some of the immediate needs for keeping the
Center operational are, while the five member cities determine the long-term future of the Center. He
commented Councilmember Turgeon attended the meeting.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 12 of 16
Heck stated Council has been provided with a copy of a letter dated February 11"' from Tom Anderson,
President of the Friends Board, informing the Cities of Deephaven, Excelsior, Greenwood, Shorewood
and Tonka Bay of the dissolution of the Friends and outlining the situation. Council has also been
provided with a copy of a memorandum he wrote to the other member cities' Managers or Administrators
outlining the concerns that need to be addressed in order to keep the Center operational for the short term.
There is a need for: a fiscal agent, a day-to-day contact person, and a rental agent; contact to be made with
existing renters and users of the Center as well as future renters; contact to be made with Minnetonka
Community Education (MCE); and, identifying the cost to operate the Center and funding for the
operations. There are questions about the legality of existing rental agreements for use of the Center.
Heck then stated during the February 20`x' meeting of the Southshore Center Funding Group there
appeared to be general consensus that Shorewood could serve as the fiscal agent in the interim. There is
approximately $1150 in Friends prepaid rent that must be transferred, and there are checks to deposit and
bills to pay.
Councilmember Turgeon stated during the Southshore Center Funding Group meeting, Excelsior and
Greenwood representatives indicated they wanted the costs for the long-term care and maintenance of the
facility to be split on an ad-valorem basis, not the proposed equal dinnilg by all member cities. There was
disappointment expressed about the Friends decision to dissolve as some perceived the member cities had
been working hard to reach agreement on lease and Cooperative Agreement amendments. All member
cities must consider how much money they want to invest iii keeping the Center operational and in
maintaining the facility. During the meeting someone asked whether or not the member cities would be
willing to sell the facility if a buyer came forward, and the consensus around the table was yes. Mayor
Lizee stated she was not able to attend the February 20`x' n;cctin~~, but she has attended other meetings of
the group and the topic of selling the facility was never discussed. The Center is a community facility.
Turgeon clarified the question asked was whether or not the cities would be willing to sell the facility;
there was not any direct expressed interest in pursuing the sale of it.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he was confused. The letter from Mr. Anderson is dated February 11`x'
Based on his understanding of the Friend's lease agreement there is a 30-day termination notice clause.
Therefore, he concluded the friends were in default. He questioned if the member cities should send the
Friends a letter stating they arc in default. He stated he thought there is a 10-day cure period in the lease.
Councilmember Turgeon stated during the February 20"' meeting, the group indicated the Friends should
be sent a letter accepting the Friends termination of the lease.
Attorney Tietjen explained the lease agreement states the lease agreement may be terminated upon the
occurrence of one of two events; one is the insolvency or dissolution of the tenant (the Friends) and the
other is the decision to terminate agreed to by two-thirds of the member cities. The lease stipulates written
notice shall be provided to each of the cities and to the tenant 30 days in advance of effective date of
termination.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he wanted a default letter sent to the Friends to establish the rights of the
cities. He then stated he was disturbed that Mr. Anderson's letter was written on February 11`x' and
delivered on February 12`x', yet the Southshore Center Funding Group did not meet until February 20"'-.
He was astounded by the lack of responsiveness. He questioned where the funding for operations will
come from, and who will be responsible for what. Mayor Lizee noted income is received for the use of
the Center; the Friends had projected there would be enough income to operate the Center in 2010.
Woodruff stated he had not been provided with an income statement from the Friends or a business plan
for the Center.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 13 of 16
Councilmember Turgeon stated all of the rental agreements the Friends entered into are now void,
including the rental agreement with the newly established South Shore Senior Partners (SSSP).
Mayor Liz& stated it is incumbent on the five cities who own the facility to step up and do something.
She faults the cities for taking such a long time to reach agreement on the amendment to the lease
agreement with the Friends, and for the controversy over the amendment to the Cooperative Agreement
which resulted in delaying approval of the lease amendment. She stated all parties resulted in the delay of
getting the amendments approved. She stated the cities need to get together and determine what actions
must be taken to keep the Center operational until the cities make a decision about the long-term future of
the Center.
Councilmember Woodruff stated that when Mr. Anderson came before Council in December 2008
regarding the proposed lease amendment, he asked Mr. Anderson why there was a sense of urgency with
the amendment as there was a lease in effect. It was his understanding that as a result of the amendment
the cities would be made responsible for some of the Center's maintenance expenses, and those expenses
for 2009 would have been funded by a $15,000 donation from the Friends. He asked Mr. Anderson if
there was money needed from the five cities for operating the Center in 2009, to which Mr. Anderson
responded no. Woodruff stated at that time lie did not understand what the sense of urgency was if the
only issue was who would write the checks for facility maintenance between then and when the lease
amendment was approved. He stated the situation has changed and the. $15,000 contribution from the
Friends will not be made.
Councilmember Woodruff requested the cities be provided with a business plan, the costs to the cities, pro
forma budgets, a revenue plan, and recommendations for who is responsible for doing what in the short
term. He questioned why the Friends couldn't financially make it if there is sufficient revenue from
Center rentals to operate the Center. He stated he did not object to keeping the Center operational for a
month while some of these things are resolved, but he wanted to know who will fiord the expenses. He
then stated it is his understanding that the. Friends wrote a rental agreement for the facility with the SSSP
for eight hours a day five days a week for some amount of money. He expressed concern the agreement is
not valid as the Friends don't exist, vet SSSI' is tinder the impression it will take occupancy on March I".
Councilmember Bailey stated he agreed with Councilmember Woodruff, and he thought this has turned
into a financial fiasco. The Live cities do not have a business partner to rely on for funding the Center's
operations. It appears that responsibility will become the cities; he does not think this should be the
default position. If the cities are to become responsible for budgeting for operational expenses, then the
cities should be explicitly discussing this. He questioned SSSP's ability to be a reliable operation. He
recommended the cities quickly initiate discussion with SSSP, and if an agreement cannot be reached
between the cities and SSSP then the cities may have to consider the possibility of shuttering the facility
until some acceptable financial alternatives are presented to the cities. He suggested two parallel paths be
pursued: one to find an acceptable tenant that is a financially viable organization and the other is
consideration of putting the facility up for sale if a tenant cannot be found.
Councilmember Turgeon stated the rent from the Center's anchor tenants is not great. The Historical
Society pays $250 a month in rent, the Church pays $600 a month in rent (this rental agreement is through
March 2009 only) for use every Sunday, and it is her understanding the rent for SSSP is $600 per month
for its use of the facility from 8:00 A.M. - 4:30 P.M. Monday - Friday. The revenues from the anchor
tenants will not cover the Center's expenses.
Councilmember Zerby stated he had an issue with how the facility and property were being addressed
when he was first seated on Council. From his vantage point it appeared the Center was being treated as if
it was a shopping center and people were trying to find tenants to fill it. The City is not in the rental
SHOREWOOD CITE' COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 14 of 16
business. It's in the people business; it has to represent its residents and provide them with amenities they
pay taxes for. The facility is located in a horrible location for a retail tenant. He stated the facility was
specifically built to allow the cities to provide services to their seniors and residents. He was not surprised
by the Friends actions based on the confrontational approach the Council had taken with the Friends. This
situation was on a path of destruction in January 2009 when Council would not approve the lease
amendment. He thought it was shameful the way Council treats the City's residents and seniors.
In response to a question from Mayor Lizee, Administrator Heck stated he did not think the Southshore
Center funding group had scheduled its next meeting. Heck explained during the group's last meeting it
was decided that the City would set up a separate bank account for Center related activities and the City
would serve as the fiscal agent for at least the interim. The group has to determine the monthly operating
costs for the Center and discuss MCE's plans for the use of the Center, as well as consider fixture rental
commitments the Friends made.
Attorney Tietjen stated the lease agreement stipulates any subleasing on the part of the Friends requires
prior written consent of the landlord. With respect to the recent rental agreement with SSSP, unless there
was written consent from the cities the agreement would not be in compliance with the terms of the lease.
Prior sublease agreements entered into that have been in effect for some time and with which there has
been no objection have some credibility; they have already been performed and payment has been
received. She suggested Council remain aware of this stipulation with the most recent agreement with
SSSP and future rental agreements.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he was not that concerned about the costs to operate the Center during
March 2009. He wanted to know the City's liability for the long-term (one year) operating costs. He
wants a business plan to be prepared in the next 30 dm's. I Ic doesn't want the City to entirely pay
operating expenses long-term; he can accept it for one month if need be. He commented the City does not
have any partners in keeping the Center open for March.
Mayor Lizee suggested Administrator Fleck contact the other members of the Southshore Center funding
group and schedule another meeting, and Nor. Anderson and some former members of the Friends should
also be invited. Councilmember Turoeon suggested Mr. Anderson and former Friends members should
not be invited to attend this meeting; this meeting would be for the cities' managers and administrators.
In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Attorney Tietjen stated if Council agrees with
her assessment that the documents did not comply with the lease stipulation that subleasing requires the
written consent of the landlord, then SSSP should be put on notice of that. Woodruff stated lie was not
suggesting the cities should lock the door on SSSP as the terms of an agreement have been identified.
Shorewood cannot act on this alone; the other cities must also take action. Tietjen agreed the other cities
must be involved; she was only suggesting that SSSP be put on notice that the City does not think the
rental agreement is binding. In response to a comment from Mayor Lizee, Tietjen stated she would work
with Administrator Heck and the other cities' administrators on preparing a letter. Tietjen suggested she
be involved in the discussions with the managers and administrators.
There was ensuing discussion about insurance responsibilities for the structure and liability insurance.
There was consensus to have Administrator Heck have a letter to SSSP saying the City did not think the
rental agreement is valid, and to pursue drafting a one month rental agreement for the other member cities
to review.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2069
Page 15 of 16
11. STAFF AND COUNCIL PORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
1. City Hall Construction Update
Administrator Heck provided an update on the City Hall renovation project. The project is moving along
well. The interior is being painted. After discussion Xcel agreed the electrical box can be placed inside of
the building. The project appears to be ten days ahead of schedule and under budget.
2. Southshore Center Update
This was discussed as item 10.D.
Other Staff Reports
Director Brown stated there was a water main break at Chestnut Terra`cc the previous week, and the water
tower at Old Market Road is in operation. Antennas will be installed on the tower shortly.
B. Mayor and City Council
In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Administrator Heck stated he was working on
finding a broker to sell the City-owned house.
k
Councilmember Woodruff stated at its March 11, 2009, meeting the Lake Minnetonka Conservation
District is going to consider a request from Bayside Grille Catering for a law change that would allow
Bayside Grille Catering to sell on sale alcoholic beverages on the ice; its valid on sale license for its
facility is not valid for sale off of its property. He asked if Council wanted to provide him with input
about this request. Councilmember Zerby stated he could support the request as long as there is a
stipulation of a maximum distance from land.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Council consider giving Administrator Heck direction to prepare a
list of projects that could possibly be funded with Federal stimulus money. Mayor Liz& cautioned that
when lists are presented based on Council input that it should be very clear it's the Council's
recommendation and not the Mayor's recommendation. Woodruff stated the list could possibly the
Capital Improvement Program. Councilmember Zerby suggested one be a nice place for senior citizens.
Councilmember Bailey stated the Investment Committee held its first meeting on February 18, 2009. The
conclusion was the City's investments were solid. There was agreement to develop an enhanced asset
report, research the various fees the City is paying for management of various investments, and to prepare
a request for proposal for banking services. He noted the City is not disappointed with the services it
receives from Beacon Bank.
Administrator Heck stated there was a special South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD)
Coordinating Committee meeting held on February 18, 2009, to ratify the contract agreement reached
with the SLMPD labor union. A three percent salary increase was approved for union personnel, and the
employer's contribution to health insurance was increase to $885 (the increase was a little more than the
negotiating committee wanted but much less than what the union wanted). A three percent salary increase
was also approved for non-union personnel.
SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
February 23, 2009
Page 16 of 16
12. ADJOURN
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of February
23, 2009, at 9;38 P.M. Motion passed 510.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST:
Christine Lizee, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
CITY OF S__ _.__".'FOOD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MONDAY, MARCH 2, 2009
MINUTES
I. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
5735 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
SOUTIISIIO E CENTER
5:30 P.M.
Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 5:31 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizee; Councihnembers Bailey, Turgeon (arrived 5:35 P.M.); Administrator
Heck; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer
Landini
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Woodruff moved, Bailey seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0.
2. 20 YEAR ROAD PLAN
Director Brown stated the City has 46.54 miles of roadways, and of that 8.59 miles are part of the
Minnesota State Aid (MSA) roadway system. He explained the<City uses the PASER system to evaluate
and rate the City's roadways. The evaluator assigns a number from 1 to 10 for each roadway; a new or
newly constructed roadway is rated 10 and a completely deteriorated roadway is rated 1. This evening's
meeting packet contains a list of all of the City's roadways and their ratings for 2005, 2006 and 2008.
The 20-year Pavement Management Plan ((AMP) reflects roadways with a 2008 rating of less than 5,
which equates to approximately 8.5 miles of roadway, which are targeted for reconstruction over the next
20 years. Staff used an automated process to estimate the costs for this efforts and it's approximated to be
$35.2 million.
Brown explained reconstruction and maintenance of MSA roadways are theoretically funded through the
MSA program. The City's MSA Fund has been encumbered because of the County Road 19 project. He
stated Engineer Landini has estimated the Fund will have over $400,000 in it at 2009 year-end. Landini
stated there will be approximately $363,000 available for roadway reconstruction and approximately
$61,500 for roadway maintenance in the Fund at year end.
Brown then explained that over the years Staff has drafted two, if not three, roadway assessment policies.
To date, Council has chosen not to fund reconstruction with assessments. Council has preferred that the
City's Local Roadway Fund (LRF), which funds local roadway maintenance and reconstruction, be
funded through the general tax levy. The practice had been to transfer $400,000 - $500,000 from the
General Fund in the past; the transfer amount was increased in 2008 and an increase is allocated for
2009. There is approximately $1.5 million in the LRF. The most recent cost estimate to reconstruct a
roadway is approximately $1 million. The City's bonding consultant indicated the City's current debt
limit is approximately $41 million. If Council were to choose bonding as a method for financing
reconstruction, the bonding consultant has estimated that for every $1 million dollars bonded the City's
debt service would be $91,000 a year over a 15-year period at 3.65 percent. Using a debt service amount
of $91,000 and the cost of $1 million to reconstruct one mile of roadway, $400,000 could pay the debt
service for approximately $4.3 million in roadway reconstruction per year.
#Zc
CITY OF SI OREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
March 2, 2009
Page 2 of 6
Councilmember Woodruff commented if the City borrowed $4.3 million the City would be "tapped out"
for fifteen years.
Councilmember Bailey stated the approximate $35 million cost to reconstruct the roadways rated less
than 5 over 20 years amounts to approximately $1.5 million per year. Basically one-half of $1.5 million is
being funded with equity. He then stated he thought the amount was manageable, noting the cost for
reconstructing Vine Hill Road would be quite substantial. From his vantage point, he thought the City
has a sustainable number without having to bond for road reconstruction.
Director Brown commented the City of Minnetonka does not have the resources to reconstruct Vine Hill
Road; therefore, Minnetonka is seeking an estimate to mill and overlay it.
In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff, Engineer Landini stated a newly constructed
or reconstructed roadway should be seal coated the first time within one to two years after construction,
and then the roadway would fall into the once-every-five-year cycle for seal coating.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he recently viewed a League of Minnesota Cities' webinar about how
the Federal stimulus program will affect Minnesota cities. He thought there were two items discussed
that are pertinent to the City. For tax-exempt bank qualified bonds, the exception for small issuers is
raised to $30 million from $10 million for 2009 and 2010. There is $502 million for Minnesota in pass-
through grants for highways and bridges. Of that $345 million is allocated toMnDOT and $155 million
will be sub-allocated to local units of government. All of these funds must be spent on the federal aid
system. The local portion of funds will be distributed by the MnDOT State Aid for Local Transportation
Division (SALT) and selected by the Metropolitan Council. He questioned if there is any possibility the
City could be recipient of any of the local funds.
Director Brown stated he and Administrator Heck attended a Metropolitan Area Managers meeting
during which the Commissioner of Transportation was asked if it would be likely that cities would
receive any of these funds, and the Commissioner said no. He explained the Federal Aid program is
administered similar to the MSA program, but the Federal program's requirements are more stringent. He
commented the City deals with SALT to manage its MSA funds. He stated he was uncertain if SALT
would only serve as a conduit for the flu%v, of funds, or if it would apply its requirements to funding
requests. In response toa question from Councilmember Woodruff, Brown explained the list of highway
and bridge projects is actually an old list that had been prepared. Therefore, the City does not have any
projects on the list. Brown stated he was unsure if any local community safety improvement projects will
be considered for stimulus funding. If they are the City will try for funds.
Councilmember Woodruff stated Minnesota will receive $60 million for sanitary sewer and storm water
projects. One half of funds will be used for grants and will be administered under the existing Public
Facilities Program. It is his understanding there is already a list of projects for these finds, and he
questioned if the City had any projects on the list. Director Brown stated the City was locked out of those
funds.
There was ensuing discussion about the roadway ratings; the up and down rating fluctuations for the
three years identified due to deterioration and maintenance improvements ; and whether or not there will
be additional roadways that will be rated less than five during the 20-year PMP cycle. The bottom line is
as the City moves through the 20-year plan, additional roads will likely deteriorate to the point where
they will be rated less than five; roadway ratings will likely drop as roadways deteriorate over time. Staff
thought the estimate to complete the 20-year PMP could likely be closer to $40 million dollars once
additional roadways are factored in. To date, Staff has not had the time to try an incorporate the ever
changing level of deterioration into the 20 year PMP, noting the deterioration rate should be considered
over a 4 - 6 year period.
CITY OF SHOREW O WORD SESSION MEETING MINUTES
March 2, 2009
Page 3 of 6
Mayor Lizde stated some nearby communities do have roadway assessment policies. She suggested Staff
research their programs and determine why they are or are not successful. She then stated as part of
living in a civil society one should be able to assume there will be paved roads that will be maintained.
It's up to Council to determine how to fund roadway reconstruction and reclamation.
In response to a comment from Councilmember Bailey about Harding Lane, Director Brown explained
Staff has a number of hydrologic concerns about the ground under Harding Lane. Some years the area is
dry and other years there is a substantial amount of water. It's difficult to predict rapid deterioration
because of unknown water factors.
In response to a comment from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown stated it was more important to
consider the rate of deterioration with respect to financing than in determining the exact order of
reconstruction priority.
Councilmember Woodruff questioned if the reclamation approach should be considered for low-traffic
roads (e.g., Shady Island Road) and cud-de-sac roads (e.g., Echo Road). Director Brown stated it may be
beneficial for Council to consider reconstruction of some roads and reclamation of others; he thought
reclamation would be sufficient for certain roadways. Brown commented there is approximately
$204,000 budgeted or seal coating of roadways and another approximately $163,000 budgeted for
overlays in 2009; these costs are in addition to reclamation or reconstruction costs.
Director Brown explained Strawberry Lane was reclaimed in 1995. Along with the reclamation some
edge drain improvements were made at that time. Strawberry Lane has recently begun to show signs of
distress. He stated he and Engineer Landini think a reclaimed road has an approximate 15-year service
life, and the service life of a reconstructed is 30 - 35 years.
Engineer Landini explained he determined the approximated per-square-yard costs to reclaim Strawberry
Lane and factored 5 percent per year inflation and used this amount to calculate the cost to reclaim rather
than reconstruct roadways. If Amlee Road, Manitou Lane and Glen Road had been reclaimed in 2008 the
cost would have been approximately $480,000 and the approximate cost to reclaim Harding Lane and
Smithtown Lane in 2009 is $300,000. Ile noted reclamation would not solve any foundation issues.
In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Director Brown explained the cost to reclaim
Harding Lane is about 35 percent of the cost to reconstruct.
Councilmember Bailey stated based on what Staff has presented, reclamation costs are approximately
one-third the cost of reconstruction, and last almost half as long. He questioned why he would ever
reconstruct a roadway. Director Brown explained reclamation does not solve drainage or safety concerns,
and edge control would not be installed.
Mayor Lizde questioned if utility infrastructure improvements could be done as part of a reclamation
effort. Director Brown explained that could occur if an expanded reclamation approach was used. With a
pure reclamation effort the contractor mills the asphalt and immediately puts it back down. With the
Strawberry Lane reclamation approach the contractor milled the asphalt, took it to a holding location
where it was stockpiled, did the drain tile work, and then brought the milled asphalt back and applied it.
There was additional cost to do this. This expanded reclamation process was more cumbersome because
the contractor had to find an area to stockpile the milled asphalt and it may not be possible to keep
residents' access to their properties open. This process would allow for utility improvements to be
considered.
In response to a question from Councilmember Turgeon, Director Brown explained if the pure
reclamation approach was used for the Amlee Road / Manitou Lane / Glen Road project the contractor
CITY OF SHOREW D WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
March 2, 2009
Page of 6
would have milled the asphalt and re-applied it at the same time, and cars could have been driven on the
roads the same day. The contractor would then have installed drain the along the edges. This drain the
was for the roadway only; it would not solve any drainage issues. The contractor would pack the roadway
and let it sit for 2 - 3 weeks before overlaying it.
Mayor Lizee suggested Staff identify roadways that could be reasonable candidates for reclamation. She
noted the City is a very wet city with many drainage issues, and there are relatively new Federal and
State mandates that must be implemented for managing storm water. She did not think it would be
prudent to reconstruct or reclaim a road without attempting to resolve drainage concerns; they would just
shorten the service life of the roadway surface.
Director Brown commented that Engineer Landini spends a significant amount of time staying abreast of
watershed district regulations. He stated if a roadway was fully reconstructed the City may consider
installing edge control, and it would likely install some form of Natural Urban Runoff Program pond. It's
likely this would not happen with a reclamation effort. Engineer Landini stated if the roadway was
reconstructed within the same footprint the City would probably not have to get a permit from the
watershed district.
Councilmember Woodruff suggested Staff identify criteria to use in determining if a roadway would be
better suited for reclamation or reconstruction. He stated he did not think the City had many serious
drainage concerns. Engineer Landini stated there have been 64 drainage concerns identified in the City,
and the PUP does not consider drainage concerns. Director Brown stated reclamation works best for
roadways without edge control, noting Harding Lane has edge control.
Mayor Lizee stated it would not make sense to her for the City to reconstruct or reclaim a roadway
without considering the utilities, extending water main, fixing drainage concerns and burying power
lines. These things should be should be considered on a roadway by roadway basis. Director Brown
noted water main can be installed as part of an expanded reclamation effort, and the City cannot consider
burying any more power lines
Director Brown stated Staff will identify a set of criteria (including drainage issues, water main
installation, traffic, etc.) for evaluating roadways for either reconstruction or reclamation and prepare a
decision tree for each of the roadways identified in the 20-year PMP.
Councilmember Bailey stated based on discussions it appears Smithtown Lane may be a candidate for
reclamation while Harding Lane may be a good candidate for reconstruction. Director Brown stated
Bailey's assessment was very good.
Mayor Lizee stated previous Councils have discussed the possibility of adopting a roadway assessment
policy, but to no avail. She requested Staff research roadway assessment policies nearby communities
have and report back to Council on the findings.
Councilmember Turgeon stated Councils have discussed the difficulty in being able to prove the value-
added to a property because of a reconstructed or reclaimed road. She suggested Council decide if it
wants to assess property owners for roadway improvements.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he had difficulty with the concept of assigning arbitrary boundaries for
determining what property owners would pay for roadway improvements. He wanted to see examples of
assessment policies that worked. He then stated there are two and one-half funding alternatives for
roadway improvements - assessments, bonding and street improvement districts (one-half of an
alternative). Councilmember Zerby commented with the bonding alternative all property owners pay.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
March 2, 2009
Page 5 of 6
Administrator Heck clarified there are four funding alternatives - the general tax levy, bonding, special
property assessments on properties abutting the roadway for some portion of the cost, and possibly street
improvement districts. Council could use a combination of alternatives, noting if the City creates a street
improvement district approach it could not assess the abutting properties. The City could levy for a
portion of the cost, bond for a portion of the cost and pay for the debt service on the bond out of a street
improvement district where property owners pay the same amount. The issue for Council to decide what
funding method(s) it wants to use.
Councilmember Woodruff stated in almost every case he thought the City would have to issue some
bonds to pay the contractor who performed the work. The residents pay for the debt service through a
special assessment a separate line item will appear on their property tax statement. If improvements are
paid through the general tax levy, the residents will not see a separate line item. With street improvement
districts the residents would see on special line item on their utility bills.
Administrator Heck clarified for special assessments a special assessment district is not created.
Properties abutting the roadway are assessed for the improvements. If a City-wide street improvement
district is created, all property owners will pay the same amount over some period of time. The first few
years of street improvements could be funded through bonding and after a while the payments on the
utility bills would have accrued to the point where the City may no longer have to bond for
improvements.
Director Brown explained some communities had implemented assessment policies based on a specific
roadway width; assessments were not based on the width of a road. Some cities have assessed by
frontage to the roadway and others per property. He stated Council has to decide if it wants to assess
property owners in this economic climate.
Mayor Lizee again requested Staff research other communities' assessment policies to determine what
did and did not work. She asked each Councilmember what their thoughts on special assessments were.
Councilmember Turgeon stated she would not consider assessing for roadway improvements.
Councilmember Woodruff, stated he was not pomfortable with the assessment process, but he would like
Staff to research other comnnmitics' assessment policies. He has a philosophical issue with abutting
property owners funding improvements on roadways that many residents drive on. Water assessments are
specific to benefiting property owners; roadway improvements are not.
Councilmember Bailey stated he would like to have more information about special assessment policies,
and he did not have a strong problem with special assessments.
Councilmember Zerby stated he would like more information on what bordering communities are doing.
He generally would prefer that roadway improvements be funded out of the General Fund, but there may
be times when property owners requested specific improvements to a roadway. If the City mandates
when a roadway will be reconstructed or reclaimed then the property owners at large should pay for that
improvement.
Director Brown stated Staff can prepare financial examples of how different finding alternatives would
work for two City roads. Councilmember Bailey stated he can't imagine the City using special
assessments for all of a roadway's improvement. Councilmember Woodruff stated assessments must be
based on a price per foot.
Director Nielsen stated the first assessment policy the City considered was based on the City paying one-
third of the cost, and residents on each of the two sides of the road paying one-third. The City would also
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORD SESSION MEETING MINUTES
March 2, 2009
Page 6 of 6
pay for any frontage against wetlands. Collector streets were also addressed in the policy. The policy was
comprehensive.
Director Brown again stated Staff will identify a set of criteria (including drainage issues, water main
installation, traffic, etc.) for evaluating roadways for reconstruction or reclamation and prepare a decision
tree for each of the roadways identified in the 20-year PMP for the next work session. Staff will also
provide examples for different funding alternatives for two roadways.
In response to a comment from Councihnember Bailey, Director Brown stated Staff is continuing with
the next steps in the process for the improvements to Harding Lane and Smithtown Lane per Council's
direction.
In response to a comment from Councihnember Zerby, Administrator Heck asked how much credence
Council wants to give to property owners' reluctance for improvements. Councilmember Turgeon stated
if a roadway is to be reclaimed within its existing footprint she did not think the public should have much
input.
Mayor Liz6e stated property owners want to be provided with a 20-year roadway improvement plan. She
suggested the 20-year PMP be reviewed as part of the Comprehensive Plan Planning Districts review
sessions with residents. She stated Council has to decide if and wheii a roadway should be improved, but
whether it is reclaimed or reconstructed can be affected by rights-of-way issues and drainage concerns.
Councilmember Turgeon stated if improvements are going to be paid for out of the General Fund, then
the only question property owners have to answer is if they want water main installed.
Mayor Liz6e recapped what Staff is expected to prepare for the work session on March 16`x'. They will
assemble various assessment policies for neighboring communities, they will prepare decision trees for
each roadway identified in the 20-year PMP v~hich determines what method of improvements will be
made, and they will prepare two examples of the impact of the four funding alternatives.
Councilmember Turgeon suggested assessment policies for cities similar to Shorewood only be
considered.
3. OTHER
There was no other business for discussion this evening.
4. ADJOURN
Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of March 2,
2009, at 7:15 P.M. Motion passed 510.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
Christine Liz6e, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
PAYABLES APPROVALS
For 03/09/2009 Council Meeting
Prepared by: Date:
Michelle T. Nguyen, Sr. Accounting Clerk
Reviewed by:
Date: -
Bonnie,.Biuon, Finance Director
Approved by: _ Date:
*ian fa k, City Administrator
e 4
Ax- - - ; ° 310 910 Ll
-,c
1--#icck Dale Invoice #
AFSCME COUNCIL 5
ICMA RETIREMENT TRU
ICMA RETIREMENT TRU
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
PERA
WELLS FARGO HEALTH
ADVANCED IMAGING SO
ALLDATA
MISC. VENDOR
MISC. VENDOR
AMERICAN PLANNING A
MISC. VENDOR
BARNES DISTRIBUTION
CARQUEST AUTO PART
CARQUEST AUTO PART
CENTERPOINT ENERGY
COMMUNITY REC RESO
CUBFOODS
EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING
G & K SERVICES
G & K SERVICES
GROUT, TWILA
HECK, BRIAN
HECK, BRIAN
HENN COUNTY-FINANCI
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, C
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, C
KREMER SPRING & ALIG
LANDINI, JAMES
LANDINI, JAMES
LANDINI, JAMES
LANDINI, JAMES
LANO EQUIPMENT, INC.
LANO EQUIPMENT, INC.
MAMA
MAMA
MEDICA
MENARDS
MENARDS
MENARDS
MIDWEST CRANE CORP.
MIDWEST MAILING SYST
P/R DEDUCTS - UNION D
P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRE
P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRE
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-HSA
FEB MAINT SVC
SUBSCRIPTION AUTO RE
ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAIN
ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAIN
APA CATEGORY F-4/1/09-
ATTACK ZONES, LLC.:PA
HARDWARE
OIL FILTER LOBE
OIL FILTER
5795 CTRY CLUB RD 1/19-
FEB PARK SVCS
COUNCIL MTG 2/23 & 3/2
NAME PLATE
FEB PW & CH SVC
FEB PW & CH SVC
FEB WELLNESS REIM
MILEAGE REIM
FEB CELL REIM
2009 HAZARDOUS WAST
JAN ATTORNEY SVC
JAN ATTORNEY SVC
SPRING DUMP TRUCK
CELL & CONF 2/25-26 EX
CELL & CONF 2/25-26 EX
ADDTIONAL REIM
MAR WELLNESS REIM
BOBCAT REPAIR
BOBCAT REPAIR
MNDOT SPEAKER 2/12/09
TOM SSOREL MNDOT-02/
MAR MEDICAL PREM
LUMBER PICNIC TABLE
PARK GEN. SUPPLIES
SANDING BELT
ANNUAL CRAN INSPECTI
MAR NEWSLETTERS SVC
48031
48032
48032
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48033
48035
48036
48037
48038
48038
48039
48041
48042
48043
48043
48044
48046
48048
48049
48050
48050
48052
48055
48055
48056
48058
48058
48060
48061
48061
48061
48061
48062
48062
48063
48063
48064
48065
48065
48065
48066
48067
03/03/2009 01200903
03/03/2009 02 200903
03/03/2009 02P20090
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 P 200903
03/03/2009 16 200903
03/10/2009 046430
03/10/2009 17775312
03/10/2009 ALLIANCE
03/10/2009 ALLIANCE
03/10/2009 044754-08
03/10/2009 ATTACK Z
03/10/2009 045183000
03/10/2009 87011
03/10/2009 87740
03/10/2009 57708497-
03/10/2009 4-2009
03/10/2009 022809
03/10/2009 1695
03/10/2009 FEB-09
03/10/2009 FEB-09
03/10/2009 FEB-09
03/10/2009 200902240
03/10/2009 FEB09-CE
03/10/2009 21104
03/10/2009 88187
03/10/2009 88187
03/10/2009 I NVO0340
03/10/2009 200903050
03/10/2009 200903050
03/10/2009 FEB -09-2
03/10/2009 MAR-09
03/10/2009 84550
03/10/2009 84757
03/10/2009 2422
03/10/2009 2423
03/10/2009 001632303
03/10/2009 51164
03/10/2009 52880
03/10/2009 54546
03/10/2009 0060089-1
03/10/2009 67808
Amount
$263.48
$1,609.60
$208.88
$399.68
$5.07
$209.96
$304.59
$140.82
$481.31
$187.87
$263.17
$398.76
$345.97
$3,047.06
$236.19
$305.00
$264.00
$1,500.00
$25.00
$25.00
$413.00
$719.85
$257.61
$26.58
$32.12
$192.57
$2,025.00
$103.70
$9.62
$462.05
$99.64
$40.00
$123.75
$133.22
$210.00
$80.00
$1,500.00
$420.91
$541.50
$45.18
$2.60
$40.00
$242.94
$266.67
$25.00
$25.00
$12,609.96
$101.92
$17.39
$33.99
$222.84
$342.76
7liursday, Alarch 05, 2009 Page I of4
r
Rc caa z
ese
Check Daft?
Ines
48067
MIDWEST MAILING SYST
APR NEWSLETTER POST
03/10/2009
APR-09
$500.00
48068
MTKA YOUTH HOCKEY A
USER FEE OVERPAID RE
03/10/2009
200903050
$10.00
48069
NGUYEN, MICHELLE
FEB MILEAGE REIM
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$83.60
48070
OFFICE DEPOT
GEN SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
464586597
$21.25
48070
OFFICE DEPOT
GEN SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
464749459
$12.41
48071
OFFICE MAX
FIN. BOXES
03/10/2009
110200001
$123.50
48072
PAETEC
PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$139.75
48072
PAETEC
PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$512.74
48072
PAETEC
PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$156.25
48073
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN
MILEAGE/EXP REIM
03/10/2009
200903050
$16.50
48073
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN
MILEAGE/EXP REIM
03/10/2009
200903050
$38.00
48073
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN
FEB & MAR WELLNESS R
03/10/2009
FEB & MA
$80.00
48074
PAZANDAK, JOSEPH
MILEAGES 2/16-2/27
03/10/2009
200903030
$77.00
48075
POTTS, KENNETH N.
FEB PROSECUTIONS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$2,291.66
48076
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL G
MAR PREM MEDICAL
03/10/2009
100577310
$777.01
48077
PURCHASE POWER
POSTAGE REFILL 1/28/09
03/10/2009
184395378
$1,218.99
48078
QWEST
SVC 2/25-3/24
03/10/2009
952470634
$111.37
48079
ROGERS, DON
DELIVERY PACKETS & MI
03/10/2009
200903030
$90.75
48079
ROGERS, DON
DELIVERY PACKETS & MI
03/10/2009
200903030
$250.00
48080
SENSIBLE LAND USE CO
BRAD NIELSEN & MISSY
03/10/2009
MAR25-09
$86.00
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
SNOW
03/10/2009
089625
$25.52
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
SNOW
03/10/2009
089630
$27.67
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
PARK PLUMBING
03/10/2009
089724
$9.04
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
SHOP SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
089727
$138.92
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
SNOW
03/10/2009
089868
$55.34
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
SHIMS
03/10/2009
089960
$2.97
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
KEYS
03/10/2009
089970
$25.43
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
PARK
03/10/2009
090000
$18.08
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
HARDWARE
03/10/2009
090007
$34.24
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
HANDLE
03/10/2009
090027
$17.02
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
KEY
03/10/2009
090093
$6.36
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
SMALL TOOLS
03/10/2009
090146
$106.83
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
PATCH
03/10/2009
090204
$8.51
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
090289
$18.09
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
DEER DISPOSAL
03/10/2009
090419
$18.07
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
WA HEATER PART
03/10/2009
090422
$11.70
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
FIN CHRG
03/10/2009
804719
$13.68
48085
SO LK MTKA POLICE DE
1ST QTR LEASE PYMT
03/10/2009
1ST-09 LE
$58,235.00
48085
SO LK MTKA POLICE DE
JAN HENN CTY PROCES
03/10/2009
JAN09-HE
$372.07
48085
SO LK MTKA POLICE DE
MAR OPERATING BUDGE
03/10/2009
MAR09-0
$78,246.00
48086
SOUTHSHORE CENTER
FEB MEETINGS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$375.00
48086
SOUTHSHORE CENTER
FEB MEETINGS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$100.00
48086
SOUTHSHORE CENTER
FEB MEETINGS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$125.00
48087
SPEEDWAY SUPERAME
GAS
03/10/2009
064699603
$1,626.25
48088
ST. BONI REFRIGERATI
FURNACE REPAIR EDDY
03/10/2009
265147
$310.50
48090
SUN NEWSPAPERS
SIGN AMENDMENT 02/19
03/10/2009
1162225
$32.18
48091
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAP
ORD. NO. 456 2/21
03/10/2009
901094
$33.08
48091
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAP
STLL HEARING 2/21
03/10/2009
901095
$55.13
48092
T-MOBILE
JOE P. CELL 1/21-2/20
03/10/2009
392432578
$38.02
48093
TECHIES
SERVER SERVICE
03/10/2009
223430
$330.00
48093
TECHIES
COMP SETUP ADVANCED
03/10/2009
224420
$234.30
48094
TOLL GAS & WELDING
SHOP SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
253376
$62.41
48095
TOTAL PRINTING SERVI
MAR NEWSLETTER SVC
03/10/2009
7047
$855.55
48098
UNIQUE PAVING MATERI
ASPHALT PATCH
03/10/2009
194043
$4,071.32
48099
VERIZON WIRELESS
BRAD N. CELL -JAN11-FE
03/10/2009
197220005
$101.10
48101
VICTORIA REPAIR AND
METAL SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
2942
$19.17
Jhursday, illarch 0, 2009
Page 2 q/'4
Cheek # ~lB b' I'a n
r
Amount
48102
WACONIA FARM SUPPL
SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
301868
$46.84
48102
WACONIA FARM SUPPL
TIRE CHAINS PARK VEH
03/10/2009
302080
$43.74
48102
WACONIA FARM SUPPL
SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
K77531
$23.42
48102
WACONIA FARM SUPPL
PARTS
03/10/2009
L01002
$46.84
48103
WASTE MANAGEMENT-T
MAR WASTE SVC
03/10/2009
4836923-1
$263.70
48104
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE
TIRES F150 PARK TRUCK
03/10/2009
615799
$496.21
48108
XCEL ENERGY
5795 CTRY CLUB RD APT
03/10/2009
261661660
$37.11
48108
XCEL ENERGY
5795 CTRY CLUB RD BSM
03/10/2009
261663105
$106.87
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$29.24
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$272.63
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$3,211.22
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$489.27
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$151
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$828.39
48110
ZIEGLER, INC.
PARTS
03/10/2009
P0001127
$168.24
TOT=1L F
OR 101 GENERAL FUND
$190,012.34
48105
WILLIAMS TOWING
2000 PONTIAC SUNFIRE
03/10/2009
128989
$402.05
TOTAL F
OR 403 EQUIPMENT REPL
ACEML'rti'T
$402.05
48018
LUND-MARTIN CONSTRU
P.V.#5
02/24/2009
P.V.#5-2
$20,747.00
48040
MISC. VENDOR
AMERICAN SECURITY CA
03/10/2009
AMERICA
$1,182.83
48047
CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS
FEB CITY HALL PROD
03/10/2009
5193
$4,528.50
TOT-IL F
OR 470 CI7'Y BLOC PROJE
CT
$26,458.33
48019
MN DNR WATERS
2008 REPORT
02/25/2009
2009-DNR
$1,858.90
48033
PERA
P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$366.81
48051
GOPHER STATE ONE-CA
FEB TICKETS
03/10/2009
9020829
$32.20
48053
HACH COMPANY
CHEMICALS WATER
03/10/2009
6091854
$121.32
48054
HD SUPPLY WATERWO
WATER METER
03/10/2009
8619128
$89.43
48054
HD SUPPLY WATERWO
WATER METER
03/10/2009
8627620
$55.81
48057
HYMARK ELECTRIC, INC.
AMESBURY WELL CIP
03/10/2009
FEB27-09
$15,108.00
48059
KLM ENGINEERING INC
WATER TOWER
03/10/2009
3652
$4,860.00
48065
MENARDS
WELL RACKING
03/10/2009
12124
$85.75
48072
PAETEC
PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$96.35
48072
PAETEC
PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$94.80
48078
QWEST
SVC 2/25-3/24
03/10/2009
952470960
$54.87
48078
QWEST
SVC 2/25-3/24
03/10/2009
952470960
$54.87
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL
WELL BLDG SCREWS
03/10/2009
090168
$5.10
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF
SE ARE-5775 COVINGTO
03/10/2009
272200006
$100.00
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF
BLDR BRDG 28125 BLDR
03/10/2009
272200007
$100.00
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF
BADGER 24255 SMITHTO
03/10/2009
272200008
$100.00
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF
AMESBURY WELL 20405
03/10/2009
27220005-
$100.00
48090
SUN NEWSPAPERS
CHAPTER 903 WATER US
03/10/2009
1162224
$57.20
48096
TWIN CITY WATER CLINI
FEB WA ANALYSIS
03/10/2009
4711
$100.00
48096
TWIN CITY WATER CLINI
EAST TOWER WA ANALY
03/10/2009
5350
$65.00
48097
U.S. BANK
1996 WA BONDS FICAL F
03/10/2009
2337577
$318.38
48100
VESSCO, INC.
CHLORINE PATS
03/10/2009
44672
$166.13
48106
WM. MUELLER & SONS, I
WATERMAIN BREAK
03/10/2009
149306
$757.60
48108
XCEL ENERGY
24253 SMTWN RD-1/24-2/
03/10/2009
261638811
$340.53
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$758.07
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$71129
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$65.30
48108
XCEL ENERGY
STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$2,750.53
TOTAL FOR 601 d1'11TER UTILITY
$29,376.24
Thursday,
March 05, 2009
Page 3 04'4
~a #
V,,,, Jr 7 ese,i E
- ~k Date
Invoice #
Amount
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$74.54
48051
GOPHER STATE ONE-CA FEB TICKETS
03/10/2009
9020829
$32.20
48099
VERIZON WIRELESS L.S. PHONES 1/22-2/21
03/10/2009
197738145
$244.88
48108
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$565.26
TOTAL FOR 611 SAI ITARYSEIVER 1
'TILITY
$916.88
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$13.24
48107
WSB AND ASSOCIATES JAN SHWD SURFACE WA
03/10/2009
1459-230-
$2,278.50
TOTAL FOR 631 STORM ItATER IYfA!VAGEMENT 1.1"T
IL1T
$2,291.74
48045
MISC. VENDOR CHRIS & CARMEN CLEME
03/10/2009
CLEMENS
$3,364.00
TOTAL P'OR 880 ESCROll" DEPOSIT
$3,364.00
TOTAL CHECICS
$252,821.58
Thursday, itlurek 05, 2009 Page 4 of 4
0~- --I, ACity of Sit
a
~cr . Aa
0310
zps-
If # ' € rfl w..
` 3nlr
InvoiCe#
Amount
48018
LUND-MARTIN CONSTRU P.V.#5
02/24/2009
P.V.#5-2
$20,747.00
TOTAL FOR Lt 'D-41AR1LIV C"0NSTRbTC'TIOIV, LN"C.
$20,747.00
48019
MN DNR WATERS 2008 REPORT
02/25/2009
2009-DNR
$1,858.90
TOTAL FOR r1'ND.YR WATERS
$1,858.90
48031
AFSCME COUNCIL 5 P/R DEDUCTS - UNION DUES
03/03/2009
01 200903
$263.48
TOTAL FOR AFSC;IVIE COV'NCIL 5
$263.48
48032
ICMA RETIREMENT TRU P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED CO
03/03/2009
02 200903
$1,609.60
48032
ICMA RETIREMENT TRU P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED CO
03/03/2009
02P20090
$208.88
TOTAL FOR ICr11A RETIRE_'IIEATT TRUS
T-302131-457
$1,818.48
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$3,047.06
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$345.97
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$398.76
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$187.87
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$366.81
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$140.82
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$209.96
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$399.68
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$263.17
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$236.19
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$13.24
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$74.54
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$5.07
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$304.59
48033
PERA P/R DEDUCTS-PERA
03/03/2009
P 200903
$481.31
TOTAL FOR PERA
$6,475.04
48035
WELLS FARGO HEALTH P/R DEDUCTS-HSA
03/03/2009
16 200903
$305.00
TOTAL FOR WELLS FARGO HEALTH B
ENEFLT.SFCS
$305.00
48036
ADVANCED IMAGING SO FEB MAINT SVC
03/10/2009
046430
$264.00
TOTAL FOR ADVANCED IMAGING SOL
G'TIONS INC
$264.00
48037
ALLDATA SUBSCRIPTION AUTO REPAIR
03/10/2009
17775312
$1,500.00
TOTAL FOR ALLDATA
$1,500.00
48038
MISC. VENDOR ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABILIT
03/10/2009
ALLIANCE
$25.00
48038
MISC. VENDOR ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABILIT
03/10/2009
ALLIANCE
$25.00
TOTAL FOR MISC. VENDOR
$50.00
48039
AMERICAN PLANNING A APA CATEGORY F-4/1/09-3/31/1
03/10/2009
044754-08
$413.00
TOTAL FOR AMERICAN PLAIVA"ING ASSOC
$413.00
48040
MISC. VENDOR AMERICAN SECURITY CABINE
03/10/2009
AMERICA
$1,182.83
TOTAL FOR MISC: VE,1'DOR
$1,182.83
48041
MISC. VENDOR ATTACK ZONES, LLC.:PARK NE 03/10/2009
ATTACK Z
$719.85
TOTAL FOR MISC, t E.>DOR
$719.85
48042
BARNES DISTRIBUTION HARDWARE
03/10/2009
045183000
$257.61
TOTAL_ FOR BARNES DI.STRIBI;TION
$257.61
48043
CARQUEST AUTO PART OIL FILTER LUBE
03/10/2009
87011
$26.58
48043
CARQUEST AUTO PART OIL FILTER
03/10/2009
87740
$32.12
TOTAL FOR CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
$58.70
48044
CENTERPOINT ENERGY 5795 CTRY CLUB RD 1/19-2/17
03/10/2009
57708497-
$192.57
TOTAL FOR CENTERPOINT ENERGY
$192.57
48045
MISC. VENDOR CHRIS & CARMEN CLEMENS:R
03/10/2009
CLEMENS
$3,364.00
TOTAL FOR WISC. ►1E.>'DOR
$3,364.00
J urrst&ry. 1l'rrrch 115, 2009
1'rage I aj 5
apt Descripfio r Chet - Invoice # Aonr~ar l
48046
COMMUNITY REC RESO FEB PARK SVCS
03/10/2009
4-2009
$2,025.00
TOTAL IFO C€1,fl,bl(' 1T)'REC'RL,. OI,,
RC
92,025.00
48047
CONSTRUCTIVE IDEAS FEB CITY HALL PROJ
03/10/2009
5193
$4,528.50
TOTAL FOR CONSTRVC`TI F'E IDEAS PL
AN N]AIG" & P
RECO
$4,528.50
48048
CUB FOODS COUNCIL MTG 2/23 & 3/2
03/10/2009
022809
$103.70
TOTAL FOR CI,-B FOODS
$103.70
48049
EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING NAME PLATE
03110/2009
1695
$9.62
TOTAL FOR E XCELSIOR ENGRA VING
99.62
48050
G & K SERVICES FEB PW & CH SVC
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$462.05
48050
G & K SERVICES FEB PW & CH SVC
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$99.64
TOTAL FOR G & R SERVICES
$561.69
48051
GOPHER STATE ONE-CA FEB TICKETS
03/10/2009
9020829
$32.20
48051
GOPHER STATE ONE-CA FEB TICKETS
03/10/2009
9020829
$32.20
TOTAL FOR GOPHER STATE ONE-GAL
L, IN
$64.40
48052
GROUT, TWILA FEB WELLNESS REIM
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$40.00
TOTAL FOR GROt'T, TIIILA
$40.00
48053
HACH COMPANY CHEMICALS WATER
03/10/2009
6091854
$121.32
TOTAL FOR I1,4CH CO,IIPANV
$121.32
48054
HD SUPPLY WATERWO WATER METER
03/10/2009
8619128
$89.43
48054
HD SUPPLY WATERWO WATER METER
03/10/2009
8627620
$55.81
TOTAL FOR HH SL/PPLY JVATERWORIC
S, LTD.
$145.24
48055
HECK, BRIAN MILEAGE REIM
03/10/2009
200902240
$123.75
48055
HECK, BRIAN FEB CELL REIM
03/10/2009
FEB09-CE
$133.22
TOTAL FOR HECK, BRIAN
$256.97
48056
HENN COUNTY-FINANCI 2009 HAZARDOUS WASTE LIC
03/10/2009
21104
$210.00
TOTAL FOR HEN.N COL/NTY-FIN4tVC111
L !?1GHT & ACCTG
$210.00
48057
HYMARK ELECTRIC, INC. AMESBURY WELL CIP
03/10/2009
FEB27-09
$15,108.00
TOTAL FOR HYAIARKF_LECTRIC, INC.
$15,108.00
48058
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, C JAN ATTORNEY SVC
03/10/2009
88187
$1,500.00
48058
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, C JAN ATTORNEY SVC
03/10/2009
88187
$80.00
TOTAL FOR KENNEDY & GRA V EA,, C'HARTEREII
$1,580.00
48059
KLM ENGINEERING INC WATER TOWER
03/10/2009
3652
$4,860.00
TOTAL FOR KIM EVGI,3EERING LVC
$4,860.00
48060
KREMER SPRING & ALIG SPRING DUMP TRUCK
03/10/2009
INVO0340
$420.91
TOTAL FOR KRE;YIER SPRING & ALIGiVillEVT INC
$420.91
48061
LANDINI, JAMES CELL & CONF 2/25-26 EXP REI
03/10/2009
200903050
$45.18
48061
LANDINI, JAMES CELL & CONF 2/25-26 EXP REI
03/10/2009
200903050
$541.50
48061
LANDINI, JAMES ADDTIONAL REIM
03/10/2009
FEB -09-2
$2.60
48061
LANDINI, JAMES MAR WELLNESS REIM
03/10/2009
MAR-09
$40.00
TOTAL FOR LANDINI,.IAMFS
$629.28
48062
LANO EQUIPMENT, INC. BOBCAT REPAIR
03/10/2009
84550
$242.94
48062
LANO EQUIPMENT, INC. BOBCAT REPAIR
03/10/2009
84757
$266.67
TOTAL FOR LANG EQUIPd1ENT, INC.
$509.61
48063
MAMA MNDOT SPEAKER 2/12/09
03/10/2009
2422
$25.00
48063
MAMA TOM SSOREL MNDOT-02/12/09
03/10/2009
2423
-
$25.00
- -
TOTAL FOR MAMA
$50.00
48064
MEDICA MAR MEDICAL PREM
03/10/2009
001632303
$12,609.96
TOTAL FOR AIEUIC9
$12,609.96
48065
MENARDS WELL RACKING
03/10/2009
12124
$85.75
48065
MENARDS LUMBER PICNIC TABLE
03/10/2009
51164
$101.92
48065
MENARDS PARK GEN. SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
52880
$17.39
48065
MENARDS SANDING BELT
03/10/2009
54546
$33.99
TBcrrsing, Alurch 05, 2009
Page 2 of '5
Check #
Vendor 'Fume Description
Check Date
Invoice #
ntount
TOTAL FOI, , , 1s 5'
$239.05
48066
MIDWEST CRANE CORP. ANNUAL CRAN INSPECTION
03/10/2009
0060089-1
$222.84
TOTAL FOR ;11119 EST CI' 4AE CORP.
$222.84
48067
MIDWEST MAILING SYST MAR NEWSLETTERS SVCS
03/10/2009
67808
$342.76
48067
MIDWEST MAILING SYST APR NEWSLETTER POSTAGE
03/10/2009
APR-09
$500.00
TOTAL FOR AlIDWEST :YIAILING SYSTE-11S INC
$842.76
48068
MTKA YOUTH HOCKEY A USER FEE OVERPAID REFUND 03/10/2009
200903050
$10.00
TOTAL FOX AITKA YO[;'THHOCKEYASSOCIATIO:I%
$10.00
48069
NGUYEN, MICHELLE FEB MILEAGE REIM
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$83.60
TOTAL FOR NGI%YEN, 31ICHELLI;
$83.60
48070
OFFICE DEPOT GEN SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
464586597
$21.25
48070
OFFICE DEPOT GEN SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
464749459
$12.41
TOTAL FOR OFFICE DEPOT
$33.66
48071
OFFICE MAX FIN. BOXES
03/10/2009
110200001
$123.50
TOTAL FOR OFFICE MA.Y
$123.50
48072
PAETEC PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$156.25
48072
PAETEC PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$512.74
48072
PAETEC PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$94.80
48072
PAETEC PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$96.35
48072
PAETEC PHONE SVC 1/26-2/25
03/10/2009
7687958
$139.75
TOTAL FOR PAETEC
$999.89
48073
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN MILEAGE/EXP REIM
03/10/2009
200903050
$38.00
48073
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN MILEAGE/EXP REIM
03/10/2009
200903050
$16.50
48073
PANCHYSITYN, JEAN FEB & MAR WELLNESS REIM
03/10/2009
FEB & MA
$80.00
TOTAL FOR PANCHYSITYNN', JUAN
$134.50
48074
PAZANDAK, JOSEPH MILEAGES 2/16-2/27
03/10/2009
200903030
$77.00
TOTAL FOR PA7.ANDAK, JOSEPH
$77.00
48075
POTTS, KENNETH N. FEB PROSECUTIONS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$2,291.66
TOTAL FOR POTTS, KF,, VA'ETH A.
$2,291.66
48076
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL G MAR PREM MEDICAL
03/10/2009
100577310
$777.01
TOTAL FOR PRINCIPAL F'1A lANCIAL GROGP
$777.01
48077
PURCHASE POWER POSTAGE REFILL 1/28/09
03/10/2009
184395378
$1,218.99
TOTAL FOR PURCHASE POWER
$1,218.99
48078
QWEST SVC 2/25-3/24
03/10/2009
952470634
$111.37
48078
QWEST SVC 2/25-3/24
03/10/2009
952470960
$54.87
48078
QWEST SVC 2/25-3/24
03/10/2009
952470960
$54.87
TOTAL FOR QWEST
$221.11
48079
ROGERS, DON DELIVERY PACKETS & MILEAG
03/10/2009
200903030
$90.75
48079
ROGERS, DON DELIVERY PACKETS & MILEAG
03/10/2009
200903030
$250.00
TOTAL FOR ROGERS, DON
$340.75
48080
SENSIBLE LAND USE CO BRAD NIELSEN & MISSY VILET
03/10/2009
MAR25-09
$86.00
TOTAL FOR SENSIBLE LAtVD 1/.SE COA
LI7iV
$86.00
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SNOW
03/10/2009
089625
$25.52
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SNOW
03/10/2009
089630
$27.67
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL PARK PLUMBING
03/10/2009
089724
$9.04
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SHOP SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
089727
$138.92
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SNOW
03/10/2009
089868
$55.34
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SHIMS
03/10/2009
089960
$2.97
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL KEYS
03/10/2009
089970
$25.43
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL PARK
03/10/2009
090000
$18.08
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL HARDWARE
03/10/2009
090007
$3424
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL HANDLE
03/10/2009
090027
$17.02
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL KEY
03/10/2009
090093
$6.36
lltursih v, ,March 115, 2009 Page 3 of 5
CecA #
a,r
1, esc
Cho
e Ia.. #
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SMALL TOOLS
03/10/2009
090146
$106.83
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL WELL BLDG SCREWS
03/10/2009
090168
$5.10
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL PATCH
03/10/2009
090204
$8.51
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
090289
$18.09
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL DEER DISPOSAL
03/10/2009
090419
$18.07
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL WA HEATER PART
03/10/2009
090422
$11.70
48081
SHOREWOOD TRUE VAL FIN CHRG
03/10/2009
804719
$13.68
TOTAL FOR SHOREWO D TRt %E VALf
iE
$542.57
48085
SO LK MTKA POLICE DE 1ST QTR LEASE PYMT
03/10/2009
1ST-09 LE
$58,235.00
48085
SO LK MTKA POLICE DE JAN HENN CTY PROCESSING
03/10/2009
JAN09-HE
$372.07
48085
SO LK MTKA POLICE DE MAR OPERATING BUDGET EX
03/10/2009
MAR09-0
$78,246.00
TOTAL FOR SCI LK MTKA POLICE DEP
T
$136,853.07
48086
SOUTHSHORE CENTER FEB MEETINGS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$125.00
48086
SOUTHSHORE CENTER FEB MEETINGS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$100.00
48086
SOUTHSHORE CENTER FEB MEETINGS
03/10/2009
FEB-09
$375.00
TOTAL FOR SOUTHSIIORE CENTER
$600.00
48087
SPEEDWAY SUPERAME GAS
03/10/2009
064699603
$1,626.25
TOTAL FOR SPEEDWAYSL'PERAiVIERI
CA LLC
$1,626.25
48088
ST. BONI REFRIGERATI FURNACE REPAIR EDDY STAT
I 03/10/2009
265147
$310.50
TOTAL FOR ST. BONI REFRIGERATIOAV1C
$310.50
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF SE ARE-5775 COVINGTON RD
03/10/2009
272200006
$100.00
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF BLDR BRDG 28125 BLDR BRDG 03/10/2009
272200007
$100.00
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF BADGER 24255 SMITHTOWN R
03/10/2009
272200008
$100.00
48089
STATE OF MN DEPT OF AMESBURY WELL 20405 KNIG
03/10/2009
27220005-
$100.00
TOTAL FOR STATE OF,4IN DEPT OFPL/BLICS'AFE
TY
$400.00
48090
SUN NEWSPAPERS CHAPTER 903 WATER USE 02/
03/10/2009
1162224
$57.20
48090
SUN NEWSPAPERS SIGN AMENDMENT 02/19
03/10/2009
1162225
$32.18
7'OT,AL FOR Si. V NEWSPAPERS
$89.38
48091
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAP ORD. NO. 456 2/21
03/10/2009
901094
$33.08
48091
SUN PATRIOT NEWSPAP STLL HEARING 2/21
03/10/2009
901095
$55.13
TOTAL FOR SZ,N PATRIOT iVEW.SPAPE
RS
$88.21
48092
T-MOBILE JOE P. CELL 1/21-2/20
03/10/2009
392432578
$38.02
TOTAL FOR T-AlOBILE
$38.02
48093
TECHIES SERVER SERVICE
03/10/2009
223430
$330.00
48093
TECHIES COMP SETUP ADVANCED
03/10/2009
224420
$234.30
TOTAL. FOR TECIIIFS
$564.30
48094
TOLL GAS & WELDING SHOP SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
253376
$62.41
TOTAL FOR TOLL GAS & ff'ELDING
$62.41
48095
TOTAL PRINTING SERVI MAR NEWSLETTER SVC
03/10/2009
7047
$855.55
TOTAL FOR TOTAL PRLVTINGSER 17CES
$855.55
48096
TWIN CITY WATER CLINI FEB WA ANALYSIS
03/10/2009
4711
$100.00
48096
TWIN CITY WATER CLINI EAST TOWER WA ANALYSIS
03/10/2009
5350
$65.00
TOTAL FOR TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC
$165.00
48097
U.S. BANK 1996 WA BONDS FICAL FEE
03/10/2009
2337577
$318.38
TOTAL FOR S. BANK
$318.38
48098
UNIQUE PAVING MATERI ASPHALT PATCH
03/10/2009
194043
$4,071.32
TOTAL FOR 1%iV1 7i;E PAl7,S'C:b1.ATERIALS CORP.
$4,071.32
48099
VERIZON WIRELESS BRAD N. CELL-JANI1-FEB 10
03/10/2009
197220005
$101.10
48099
VERIZON WIRELESS L.S. PHONES 1/22-2/21
03/10/2009
197738145
$244.88
TOTAL FOR VERIZON 1fIRELESS
$345.98
48100
VESSCO, INC. CHLORINE PATS
03/10/2009
44672
$166.13
TOTAL. FOR JESSCO, INC.
_
$166.13
48101
VICTORIA REPAIR AND METAL SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
2942
$19.17
lhurmhg, march 05, -)u09 Puge 4 uT
L
# Vendor-'
Check Date
48102
48102
48102
48102
48103
48104
48105
48106
48107
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48108
48110
T07AL FOR FICTOR7, n ,l,
$19.17
WACONIA FARM SUPPL SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
301868
$46.84
WACONIA FARM SUPPL TIRE CHAINS PARK VEH
03/10/2009
302080
$43.74
WACONIA FARM SUPPL SUPPLIES
03/10/2009
K77531
$23.42
WACONIA FARM SUPPL PARTS
03/10/2009
L01002
$46.84
TOTAL FOR WAC'CIA7A IAR-41 SUPPLY
$160.84
WASTE MANAGEMENT-T MAR WASTE SVC
03/10/2009
4836923-1
$263.70
TOTAL FOR WASTE r1lA.,IVAGE:IIENT-I'C
YVES7'
$263.70
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRES F150 PARK TRUCK
03/10/2009
615799
$496.21
TOTAL FOR WESTSIDE [14IOLESALE T
IRE
$496.21
WILLIAMS TOWING 2000 PONTIAC SUNFIRE SE-43
03/10/2009
128989
$402.05
TOTAL FOR WILLIAill.5TOWINfi
$402.05
WM. MUELLER & SONS, I WATERMAIN BREAK
03/10/2009
149306
$757.60
TOTAL FOR Will. AIIIELLER & SON'S, INC.
$757.60
WSB AND ASSOCIATES JAN SHWD SURFACE WA PLA
03/10/2009
1459-230-
$2,278.50
TOTAL FOR EVSB ANU ASSOCIATES
$2,278.50
XCEL ENERGY 24253 SMTWN RD-1/24-2/23
03/10/2009
261638811
$340.53
XCEL ENERGY 5795 CTRY CLUB RD APT 1
03/10/2009
261661660
$37.11
XCEL ENERGY 5795 CTRY CLUB RD BSMT
03/10/2009
261663105
$106.87
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$3.51
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$489.27
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$29.24
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$3,211.22
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$828.39
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$65.30
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$758.07
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$713.29
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$2,750.53
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$565.26
XCEL ENERGY STATEMENT #186249363
03/10/2009
514531711
$272.63
TOTAL FOR XCEL ENERGY
$10,171.22
ZIEGLER, INC. PARTS
03/10/2009
P0001127
$168.24
TOTAL FOR ZIEGLER, LAIC
$168.24
T07A CHECKS $252,821.58
P utrsauty. 41arch (15, 2009 rage n/ 5
o rta }OO ~ ~ae3 ~r~ ~ s °ev ck
1206
U.S. BANK
EDA W.FIRE REFUNDING 2007 03/10/2009
2340114
$1,750.00
1206
U.S. BANK
EDA POLICE REFUNDING 2007 03/10/2009
2340115
$1,750.00
1206
U.S. BANK
EDA E.FIRE REFUNDING 2007C 03/10/2009
2340117
$1,750.00
1206
U.S. BANK
EDA W.FIRE 2003A 03/10/2009
2343272
$1,100.00
1206
U.S. BANK
EDA POLICE 20038 03/10/2009
2343274
$1,100.00
TOTAL FOR t;:5'. 1 T,,N`ls
$7,450.00
TOTAL CHECKS $7,450.00
lhursday, i#lareh 05, 2009 Page I of 1
PAYROLL APPROVALS
For 03/092009 Council Meeting
,1.
Prepared by: Date:
Michelle T. Ngu en, Sr. Accounting Clerk
v
Reviewed by: '
Bonnie Burton, Finance Director
J
Approved by:
. f
B tie 'City Administrator
Date:?
Date:
Payro m X212 /2-1: ; X31 512
Check #
Last _ wme
FirstName
Check Aint
Check Date
48020
BARNES
CHET
D
$128.83
03/03/2009
999999
BROWN
LAWRENCE
A
$2,623.66
03/03/2009
999999
BURTON
BONNIE
M
$2,590.34
03/03/2009
999999
DAVIS
CHARLES
S
$1,439.75
03/03/2009
48021
DAVITCH
JOSHUA
R
$48.25
03/03/2009
999999
DENNEN
PATRICIA
L
$1,358.24
03/03/2009
48022
GIESEN
JON
L
$42.60
03/03/2009
999999
GROUT
TWILA
R
$1,523.95
03/03/2009
999999
HECK
BRIAN
W
$2,569.34
03/03/2009
48023
HELGESEN
PATRICIA
R
$1,470.20
03/03/2009
999999
HELLING
PAMELA
J
$1,310.44
03/03/2009
48024
HITT
WILLIAM
N
$157.92
03/03/2009
48025
KIRSCHT
ADAM
J
$237.49
03/03/2009
999999
LANDINI
JAMES
A
$1,475.05
03/03/2009
48026
LAUGHLIN
JEREMIAH
C
$184.24
03/03/2009
999999
LUGOWSKI
JOSEPH
P
$1,726.19
03/03/2009
999999
MASON
BRADLEY
J
$1,431.57
03/03/2009
48027
MCDONALD
JUSTIN
M
$85.42
03/03/2009
999999
MOORE
JULIE
K
$564.84
03/03/2009
999999
NGUYEN
MICHELLE
T
$1,523.57
03/03/2009
999999
NIELSEN
BRADLEY
J
$1,930.76
03/03/2009
999999
PANCHYSITYN
JEAN
M
$1,974.26
03/03/2009
999999
PAZANDAK
JOSEPH
E
$1,852.44
03/03/2009
48028
POUNDER
CHRISTOPHER
J
$1,667.36
03/03/2009
48029
PRICCO
NICHOLAS
R
$46.99
03/03/2009
999999
RADCLIFFE-KAPUS MICHAEL
L
$152.38
03/03/2009
999999
RANDALL
DANIEL
J
$2,146.80
03/03/2009
999999
STARK
BRUCE
H
$1,291.67
03/03/2009
999999
TOWER
TERRY
R
$1,485.20
03/03/2009
48030
WALSH
TYLER
R
$91.42
03/03/2009
999999
WHETSTON
JOAN
M
$187.93
03/03/2009
Total of Checks
$35,319.10
I hursday, dlarch 05, 2009 Page I of. I
3
s
d
2 ! 4
-y
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD ~ 1O ,LWGJ- , MfC AESOTA. 55331-8927 ® (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 - www.ci.shorewood.mn.us - cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 4, 2009
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
CC: Brian Heck, City Administrator
RE: Data Practices Act Responsible Authority
The Data Practices Act (Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes) and Minnesota Rules, Chapter
1205, assign a number of duties to government entities. The specific employees in the entity who
have the authority and responsibility for carrying out these duties are:
1) the Responsible Authority (RA);
2) the Designee (one or more); and
3) the Data Practices Compliance Official (DPCO)
The RA is the person who ultimately is responsible for the collection, use, and dissemination of
all entity data, and for all of the entity's data practices decisions. The RA must also make sure
the entity complies with all of the requirements of the Act and the Rules. In a City, the
governing body must appoint a city employee as the RA. In the past, the City Administrator/
Clerk has been appointed as the RA. The RA then designates the Designee(s) and the DPCO.
The attached resolution appoints Brian Heck as the City of Shorewood Data Practices
Responsible Authority.
City Council Action
Approval of a Resolution Appointing a Responsible Authority.
4'*
1P®4.1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
CITY F SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 09-
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING A RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, section 13.02, Subdivision 16, requires that the city of
Shorewood appoint an employee as the Responsible Authority to administer the requirements for
government data within the City and,
WHEREAS, the Shorewood City Council shares concerns expressed by Legislature on
the responsible use of all City data and wishes to satisfy this concern by immediately appointing
an administratively qualified Responsible Authority as required under the statute.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Shorewood appoints Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk, as the Responsible Authority for the
purpose of meeting all requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 and with Minnesota
Rules, Chapter 1205.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th
day of March, 2009.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
F _
MEMORANDUM
J_
5755 COU,11 -[,,'CLUB F oAD I '~V4 D, MINNESOTA 55331®8927 - (952) 474®3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 m www.ci.shorewood.mn.us ® cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
DATE: March 5, 2009
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Jean Panchyshyn, Deputy Clerk
CC: Brian Heck, City Administrator
Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
RE: Special Event Permit Application
The City has received a Special Event Permit Application for the Knewtson Health Group -
Excelsior Run by the Bay 5K Run/Walk on Saturday, June 13. This is their 2'd annual 5K
Run/Walk event to benefit the Hope Closet for Breast Cancer. The event starts at 7:30 A.M. on
the LRT at the Shorewood Yacht Club, goes to Smithtown/Eureka Road where runners/ walkers
will turn around and return to their starting point. The Three Rivers Park District has issued
Knewtson Health Group a Special Use Permit for this event. Last year, there were approximately
65 participants. The event will be limited to 100 participants this year. Mr. Christenson of the
Knewtson Health Group stated he will work with the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department
(SLMPD) to arrange crossing assistance at major intersections, as recommended by the SLMPD.
Information about this event will be posted on the website active.com.
The Special Event Permit Application has been reviewed by the Excelsior Fire Department, the
Zoning Administrator, and the City Administrator. The permit is under review by the SLMPD. It
is anticipated the permit will be issued pending review by recommendations of the SLMPD.
A copy of the Special Event Permit is attached for Council information.
3L
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
From:Knewtson Health Group 952 401 8785 02/23/2009 10:45 #002 P,002/003
CITY PERMIT APPLICATION
SHE WOOD (Pursuant to City Code, Chapter 505)
t 5755 Country Club Road - Shorewood, Minnesota 55331
(952) 474-3236 Fax: (952) 474-0128
(Please Print or Type)
Today's Date Z-:3 a Application Fee: n/a Receipt # n/a
Event to be Registered: Any person or persons sponsoring a event at which it may reasonably be anticipated that
there will be more than 75 persons in attendance shall, prior thereto, register such event with the City Clerk, giving the
location, date, time, purpose, names of all sponsors, and the number of persons anticipated will be in attendance.
Permit for Additional Events: Within a period of 6 months following such event, no additional event(s), at which
it may reasonably be anticipated that there will be more than 75 persons in attendance, shall be permitted at the same
location unless the person or persons who propose to sponsor the same shall first have obtained a special permit
therefore approved by the City Council. (Appplication for such permit shall be made to the City Clerk.
Event Location: 235 05 c5Y►'11-I Yi 7 ow Y' Roo,Q~ Date of Event: Q-L -J 3 -QI
Number of Persons (anticipated) to Attend: Q0 'l"ime: ~ Oda. wt +0 1 a
Purpose EY.CfyJ-bt Or kjr\ b ~1 1U1CX, via AV1 V1 0,
Sponsor's Name(s) tSY\evjtt?cyr t-iet~ l` Y1 C2r0.__{~
Daytime Phone 95 Z q ~ o 8555 Evening Phone # _ -1 (D
Special Parking or Safety Provisions (e.g., traffic control, parking, pedestrian access):
Rat-.2_ U--) Li cu~n. U V o c ► t9
c,jes
Enforcement: A police officer may order all persons present in any such group or gathering from which such noise emanates,
other than the ovmers or tenants of a dwelling unit, to irrunediately disperse from said event in lieu of being charged
under this Chapter should the continued health, safety, comfort, and repose of the public be in jeopardy, or if the event is
in violation ofthe provisions of Chamber 501 of the Shorewood City Code. Failure to comply with the conditions of the
Special Events Permit may result in police enforcement.
Applicant's Signature: Ok U\-,,\ j0 Date: ? rZ3 -
K i n► (V\ - Ch r I
Allow 5 business days for processing
For Office Use Only
SLMPD:
Date:
Date:
Fire Marshal:
Zoning Administrator:_ Date: p-{?
City Administrator: } Date: tt v
u
ChiginaP. City o - rosewood, 575 Co tp• Club Road, Shorewood. MN 55371 Copy for South Lake Minnetonka Police Department Fire Nfarshal, Applicant
I r
Feb 27 09 03:29p Ci ~j Shorewood 9524740128 p,2
From:Knewtson Health Group 952 401 8785 0212312009 10.45 #002 P,0021003
~ ftesBt~Fortrr
1?ritat Fornn
CITY OF SPECIAL EVENT
~7 PERMIT APPLICATION
S.C7O `F-` ' `~~jOOD (Pursuant to City Code, Chapter 505)
5755 Country Club Road . Shorewood, Minnesota 55331
(952) 474-3236 Fax: (952) 474-0128
(Please Print or Type)
Today's Date 0Z- Z3 -0 Application Fee:_.
n!a Receipt # n/a
Event to be Registered: Any person or persons sponsoring a event at which it may reasonably be anticipated that
there will be more than 75 persons in attendance shall, prior thereto, register such event with the City Clerk, giving the
location, date, time, purpose, names of all sponsors, and the number of persons anticipated will be in attendance.
Permit for Additional Events: Within a period of 6 months following such event, no additional event(s), at which
it may reasonably be anticipated that there will be more than 75 persons in attendance, shall be permitted at the same
location unless the person or persons who propose to sponsor the same shall first have obtained a special permit
therefore approved by the City Council. Application for such permit shall be made to the City Clerk.
Event Location: 2,35 C7.,S J' m A+ow y, RooA
Date of Event: - pCi
Number of Persons (anticipated) to Attend: 100 Time: ~ 00a w1, 40 1 C7:0::Itm
Purpose FxCe,l S 1,0 r L V-\ ~
W U0
Sponsor's Name(s) 115 e.
Daytime Phone #:_~~Z d 55 Evening Phone # z Z50 (0 8 Q
Special Parkin or S f P
g aety rovisions (e,g,, traffic control, parking,
' '
ka~
Twt
ca„c.~, t~ d t ►~.9
Fn4oreement: A police officer may order all persons present in any such group or gathering from which such noise emanates,
other than the owners or tenants of a dwelling unit, to immediately disperse from said event in lieu of being charged
under this Chapter should the continued health, safety, comfort, and repose ofthe public be in jeopardy, or if the event is
in violation ofthe provisions ofChamber 501 of the Shorewood City Code, Failure to comply with the conditions of the
Special Events Permit may result in police enforcement.
Applicant's Signature:
.C~4 U\.,,x D , ~-Date: ~j 'c)
e.vtpv M. C%Ar, +-e.
vvScy n p. G.
Allow 5 business days for processing
For Office Use Only
SLMPD:
Fire M
Zoning
City Administrator:
Date•
Date: Date:
Date:
Original: City of Shorewood, 5755 Comm. Club Road, Shorewood. MN 55131 Copy to: Soudt Lake Minnetonka Police DepatUnent, Fire Marshal, Applicant ~r
~7-
From:Knewtson Health Group 952 401 8785 02/23/2009 10:45 #002 P.003/003
Loci
t ~2
l LIU u LP d
V-t
U
L
s 4-
~U
H C3 ~ -e CLC +
5755 COUNTRY LG S { ,Q/ Sk, REwOGD, IEP"IESC}TA 55331-8927 ® (952) 4743236
FAX (952) 474-0128 - www.ci.shorewood.mn.us - cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MFAJI".,ANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Brian Heck, City Administrator
FROM: James Landim, City Engineer .
BATE: March 5, 2009
RE: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program Plan (S WPPP) Amendment
As part of the Federal Clean Water Act, the City of Shorewood is required to obtain a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. This permit was originally obtained in
March, 2003.
Recently the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency requested an amendment to our SWPPP to
document the review of discharges to impaired waters.
Attached is the template the MPCA submitted with staff edits. Please review and provide comments
before the meeting so staff can bring a final amendment and resolution to the March 9, 2009, City
Council meeting for adoption.
COUNCIL ACTION
Staff recommends Council adopt the amendment to the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
by approving the attached resolution.
41%
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
_i rid
MS4 Nan- e:
Permit Condition:
Unique BMP Identification Number:
, ry Sheet
City of Shorewood
IV.D Section 303(d) listings
IV.D - 1
BMP 'Pine: Impaired Waters Review Process
BMP Description:
Shorewood will review annually all discharges from our MS4 system to impaired waters, as defined by the current
USEPA approved 303(d) list.
In this review, Shorewood will:
• Identify the impaired waters that are likely to be impacted by the MS4's stonnwater discharge.
■ Use a combination of storm sewer maps and field surveys to identify all potential stonnwater discharges to
impaired waters
• Delineate the watershed area(s) that contribute to the above discharge(s)
• Evaluate the hydrology, land use and other characteristics of the watershed area(s) that may impact the
impaired water as a result of a stormwater discharge from our MS4
Based on the review above, we will determine if any changes to the existing stonnwater system or BMPs are
needed to minimize the impact of discharges from our MS4to the impaired water(s). If such modifications are
deemed necessary, Shorewood will modify our SWPPP and submit those modifications to the MPCA with the
current year's annual report. In our review, we will consider timing and long and short term costs. All assumptions,
reasoning, and justification used to reach a conclusion on whether or not SWPPP revisions are necessary will be
documented in the decision making process and records of this determination kept along with all records associated
with the MS4 permit. A narrative summary of this review will then be prepared, and identify any associated
SWPPP revisions that were made.
Measurable Goals:
• Establish a baseline of information- determine what processes are in place and what has already been
accomplished that will help meet these permit conditions
• Prepare a written inventory of all impaired waters within the jurisdictional boundaries of the MS4, as well
as those outside these boundaries likely to have an impact as a result of receiving stormwater discharge
from the MS4; compile as much detail about the stormwater discharges they receive from the MS4 as is
available
• Prepare a map that includes all impaired waters that the MS4 discharge may impact, all MS4 discharge
points that may impact these water(s), and delineated watershed(s) that may contribute to the impairment
• Complete for records a written overview of the conclusions reached through this review, including the
decision making process used to determine what SWPPP revisions may be needed
■ Prepare a projected schedule and timeline to incorporate any necessary changes into the SWPPP
wq-strm4-60 Updated 7/02/07
Timeline/Ir ientation Schedule:
June 30, ann- - Ily: Identify what steps, if any, have already been taken by Shorewood to meet the requirements of'
section IV.D. of the MS4 General Permit.
June 30, annually: Identify impaired waters receiving likely impacts from stormwater discharges from MS4 and
locate discharges
.June 30, annually: Delineate watersheds contributing runoff to impaired waters
.Tune 30, annually: Develop a Map of discharges
June 30, annually: Complete an Evaluation of hydrology, land use, etc.
June 30, annually: Include in Annual Report to MPCA the overview of the impaired waters review and any changes
to the SWPPP that have been deemed necessary through this review process.
Specific Components and Notes:
This process is to be reassessed annually over the course of the permit cycle. As new 303(d) lists with additional
impaired waters listed are published in the future, Shorewood will review changes to the list and conduct the
necessary review of additional listed waters likely to be impacted by the MS4's stormwater discharges.
When an USEPA approved TMDL is finalized, Shorewood intends to fully comply, to the maximum extent
practical, with all limits and requirements set forth in the TMDL in accordance with the schedule(s) outlined in the
TMDL and the MS4 Permit.
Responsible Party for this BMP:
Name: James Landim
Department: City Engineer
Phone: 952-474-3236
E-mail: jlandmi@ci.shorewood.imn.us
wq-strm4-60 Updated 7/02/07
CITY OF S C WO D
RESOLUTION NO. 9-01
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE STO Z WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION
PLAN (SWPPP)
WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute 115.03 authorizes the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency to implement the section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood has applied for the General Permit for Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer Systems under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System; and
WHEREAS, Staff has prepared an amendment to the SWPPP to document procedures
used to review discharges to impaired waters; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Shorewood, Minnesota,
1. The Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Amendment is hereby adopted
and to be utilized for the City of Shorewood.
2. Said plan amendment shall be forwarded to the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency for reference to the City of Shorewood Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan.
ADOPTED BY WE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th
day of March, 2009.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Cleric
r
-n -
5755 COUNTRY CLU3 ROAD ^ U,iC, ,EV.OOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 - (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 ® www.ci.shorewood.mn.us m cifyhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT: Phone / Data Services Agreement
Background
The City Council approved using Warner Connect to provide telephone and data services
for the City at the February 23 council meeting.
The upfront cost for installation, configuration, and the necessary hardware to operate the
system is $17,505.40 and the monthly cost for services is $2,800.
Staff recommends the council authorize the Administrator to execute a service agreement
with Warner Connect, contingent on satisfactory review by the City Attorney.
~.*1 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
y#
b755 COUN I nY CLUB ROAu SmORBwt.,OD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 ® (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 - www.ci.shorewood.mn.us ® cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Brian Heck, City Administrat
DATE: March 4, 2009
SUBJECT: Park Consulting Agreement
Background
The City Council authorized staff to work with TKDA, the recommended consulting firm
to conduct the park study, in revising the scope of work and cost.
The original proposal submitted by TKDA indicated a cost of just over $25,000 for the
work. Kristi Anderson and I met with representatives of TKDA and refined the scope of
services and the hours dedicated to various tasks. The revised scope of work and costing
comes to $20,300.
Staff recommends approval and authorization for the Administrator to execute the
agreement with TKDA for services.
I
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
5755 COU, T; '.Y CLL W ROAD SHORRw(. Jv, 1... RSOTA 55331-8927 ® (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 - ww.d.shorewood.mn.us - cityhall@d.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
Brian Heck, City Administrator
FROM: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
DATE: March 5, 2009
RE: Accept Change Order 1 and Accept Final Improvements for the SE Area Water Tower
City Project 05-04
On September 22, 2008, the City Council entered into a contract with Classic Protective Coatings, Inc.
to perform structural modifications and rehabilitation to the East Water Tower Facility located at 5500
Old Market Road. The amount of the bid to perform the work was $378,000.
The East Water Tower Rehabilitation Project has been completed. Despite staff's efforts to "beat the
cold weather" and cooler temperatures in the fall, by specifying a "cold weather coating system," the
interior of the tank initially failed to cure. Temperatures in the fall of the year had dropped lower than
what had been experienced over the past few years. Therefore, the epoxy coating system was not
curing properly. Failure to have the tower on line was causing severe operational issues with the water
treatment process.
Therefore, staff directed the contractor to set up temporary heat in the "bowl" of the tower.
Propane tanks were delivered to the site, and very large torpedo heaters were installed interior to the
tank. While the general contractor met the schedule that they had originally planned for the
rehabilitation of the tower, they realized the consequences of having this tower off line due to the
curing issues. As a good will effort, the contractor offered to split the rental price of the heaters, and
stated that they would not add any profit or mark up to the propane fuel used. Staff directed the
contractor to proceed, on this basis. The contractor performed that work at an added cost to the City of
$4,951.13. This represents a 1.3 percent increase to the contract. If approved, funds for this will be
taken from the bond proceeds that were issued for the project.
Since the project has been completed, staff is also recommending that the project be accepted by the
City, pending receipt of the tax withholding forms and final documentation.
Recommendation
Staff is recommending approval of the resolution that approves Change Order 1 to the Southeast Water
Tower, in the amount of $4,951.13 and that the final improvement be accepted by the City.
4
N PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
CITY F SHOREWOOD
RESOLUTION NO. 09-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER I FORT E S.E. AREA WATER
TOWER REHABILITATION PROJECT AND
ACCEPTING FINAL IMPROVEMENTS
CITY PROJECT NO. 05-04
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2008 the City of Shorewood entered into a contract for
construction with Classic Protective Coatings, Inc, for the S.E. Area Water Tower Rehabilitation
Project, City Project No. 05-04; and
WHEREAS, Change Order 1 has been prepared and is attached as Exhibit A, for
additional work outside of the original contract; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reviewed said Change Order and found it
to be cost effective for the project; and
WHEREAS, KLM Engineering and the Director of Public Works has inspected the work
completed under said contract and has found that the work has been completed according to the
plans and specifications; and
WHEREAS, the Contractor has petitioned the City to accept the final improvements for
the project.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of Shorewood:
1. Change Order Number 1 is hereby approved with Classic Protective Coatings, Inc.,
that incorporates services outlined in Change Order 1, attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. The City does hereby accept the work completed pursuant to said contract and
authorizes final payment to the Contractor, subject to the following items:
a. The Contractor must make satisfactory showing that he has complied with the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes 290.92 requiring withholding of State Income Tax.
b. Evidence in the form of an affidavit that all claims against the Contractor by
reasons of the contract have been fully paid or satisfactorily secured.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood this 9th day of March 2009.
Christine Lizee, Mayor
ATTEST:
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
u-
~ P
h wit
3
5755 CG',JTRY CLU- RC-) 6 .~OR-'Nlw JU, V- .NESOTA 55331-8927 ~ (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0125 - www.d.shorewood.mn.us - cityhaI1@d.shorewood.mn.us
City of Shorewood
Change Order Request Form
PROJECT: S.E. Area Water Tower Rehabilitation Project
CITY PROJECT NO: 05-04
GENERAL CONTRACTOR: Classic Protective Coatings, Inc.
DATE OF ORIGINAL AWARD OF CONTRACT: September 22, 2008
CHANGE ORDER REQUEST NO.: 1
Original Contract Amount: $ 378,000.00
Total Amount of Change Order Requested: $ 4,951.13
(as Documented as Attachment 1)
Total Amount of Previous Change Orders: $ 0.00
Revised Contract Amount: $ 382,951.13
I hereby acknowledge that the Change Order No. 1, as represented above has been considered and
approved by the Shorewood City Council on March 9, 2009.
Chris Lizee, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator
Date
Date:
Exhibit A
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
March 1 , 2009
City of Shorewood, MN
Mr. Larry Brown
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Closeout Prices for the Propane Heat for the City project 05-04
Larry:
I have itemized the expense list for your reference.
1. Propane Fuel Tank Set. Price-$105.00
2. Propane Fuel Consumption at 350.00 Per Day for 7 Days. Price -$4,230.52
3. Rental of two 400,000 BTU Heaters Per Day. Price -$465.61
4. Ducting and Fittings. Price - $150.00
Total: $4,951.13
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Classic Protective Coatings, Inc.
John Newkirk
N7670 State Highway 25 Menomonie Wisconsin 54751-5928
SSPC Telephone 715-233-6267 Facsimile 715-233-6268 SSPC
QPl www.classicprotectivecoatings.com QP2
Attachment 1
Wisconsin I Texas I Florida
F
5iw3 G-UNTRY GL:J RO,",D - SHORW AIOOD, MII'NESO IA 55331-8927 0 (952) 474-3236
FAX (952) 474-0128 - www.d.shorewood.rnn.us ® cityhall@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Brad Nielsen
DA'L'E: 5 March 2009
RE: Deer Management Program - 2008 Summary
FILE NO. 405(DMP 08)
The results from the 2008 Deer Management Program are in. We have received the
aerial survey information from Three Rivers Park District (see Exhibit A) and the
report from Metro Bowhunters Resource Base (see Exhibit B).
The aerial survey was done in early February. The number of deer counted on that
particular day was 64, distributed as shown on the map. The 2008 survey had shown
74 deer and the first survey that was flown (2007) had shown 121 deer. It must be
remembered that these surveys are "snapshots" taken on a single day.
MBRB reported after the 2007 program that they had taken 26 deer over four
weekends. For 2008 they removed another 23 deer, again over four weekends. Once
again, the program went off without incident. We did, however, have more
correspondence this year from people in opposition to the program. It should be
noted that staff took any number of calls from people, for and against the program. In
all cases we advised people to submit their connrrents in writing. Our policy is to not
convey voice messages or conversations. The written comments are attached to this
report for your review.
Page three of the MBRB report contains several suggestions relative to a 2009
management program. Staff is looking for direction from the Council at this time. To
the extent that it makes a difference, we spend approximately $1200 per year on this
effort, of which about $700 is spent on the aerial survey. The rest covers printing and
postage. Most of the staff time associated with the program has been done outside of
normal working hours.
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER . ,
Memorandum
Re: Deer Management Program 2005 Summary
5 March 2009
MBRB, in particular its president - BobWhiting, should be commended for
conducting another successful deer removal effort and for their extreme
professionalism. These folks are a tribute to their sport! The Public Works
Department and the South Lake Mirn7etonka Police Department should also be
thanked for their cooperation and assistance in the program.
If you have any questions relative to this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me
prior to Monday night's meeting.
Cc: Brian Heck
Larry Brown
Mary Tietjen
Bryan Litsey
Bob Whiting
-2-
a'
0-3
I. ~nV'~-
h
S~
II
CLA
lock
tom 0
140 / Meters
II ~
r~
f -y PIA4
W, i
11
a~
213
-c
Exhibit A
"r a``'D -
REPORT TO CITE' OF SHO i WOOD ON DEER CONTROL ACTIVITIES
CONDUCTED BY THE METRO BO HUNTERS RESOURCE BASE IN THE
FALL OF 2008
By
Metro Bowlitinters Resource Base
March 1, 2009
INTRODUCTION
This report presents data collected during the City of Shorewood, Minnesota deer
removal archery program in the fall of 2008. The objectives of the deer removal effort
were to remove as marry deer as possible within the geographic boundaries of the hunt
area and within the timelines and rules prescribed by the hunt. A further objective was to
determine if archery could be a safe, efficient and economical alternative method of deer
control.
DESCRIPTION OF AREA
(See attached map)
METHODS
Selections of Archers -
All archers were selected from the MBRB. A random drawing was conducted from the
MBRB Sharpshooter qualified members indicating an interest in participating. A total of
24 archers were selected to participate.
Procedures -
An on-site orientation was conducted to familiarize the archers with the rules and
regulations, property boundaries, contact information with the Shorewood Police Dept,
emergency procedures and other requirements. Archers were provided with Shorewood
City parking passes, hunt permits, and naps. Hunt rules and safety procedures were
discussed in detail. (See attached hunt rules)
RESULTS
Exhibit B
A total of 23 deer were removed during the effort (Refer to table 1). There were a total of
24 different archers that participated in two teams of 12 each in eight days of hunting
activity. Hunting was conducted in the mornings and evenings during hunt days and
stands were put up on Fridays (no hunting on Fridays). A total of approximately 40
hours of actual team hunting effort were spent conducting the activity. The rules of the
deer removal effort were set up to be very conservative (shot distance, number of days
available for hunting, limited area available for hunting).
TABLE 1.
Archer activity, number of deer removed
Shots t;tken Veer Hit nePr rernvere l
Hunt period 1
7
7
7
Hunt period 2
7
7
6#
Hunt period 3
9
8
7#
Hllnt period 4
4
4
3#
Totals
27
26
23
#see discussion
DISCUSSION
There were no demonstrators or press that showed up during any of the activities. Except
for a few instances of coordinating/notification of deer searches, there were no issues
requiring contact with the Shorewood Police. MBRB received positive feedback from
residents that we encountered. Coordination of weekly hunt results was completed each
week with representatives of the City. There were no accidents during the hunt. There
were three deer that were hit and not recovered. MBRB determined that two of these
were superficial hits. All of arrows were recovered during searches for the deer. One doe
could not be located in a large cattail marsh. MBRB could not locate it even after
extensive searching. Rain complicated the searching which was curtailed due to
inclement weather resulting in loss of sign. One of the hunt coordinators went back and
looked throughout the area several times over the next week but the deer could not be
located. Approximately three weeks latter MBRB was called by a lady who said there
was a dead deer in her back yard. She indicated that she had called the City several times.
When notified, MBRB immediately inspected the deer and removed it. The cause of the
deer's demise could not be determined, as the carcass had been eaten by coyotes; but
since the location was adjacent to the cattail marsh where the doe was lost, an assn tnption
was made that it could be the salve deer. Two deer were not recovered during night
searches. These were found the following morning; however both of these had been eaten
by coyotes. Either sex hunting worked well. A total of 3 adult bucks were taken along
with 20 antlerless deer. MBRB observed generally fewer deer in 2008 however there
appeared to still be concentrations of deer in certain areas. Several of the deer removed
during the hunt were donated to the food self.
It appears from the recent deer- surveys conducted by the City, that the deer removal
activities by MBRB are having the desired result of lowering the deer population levels.
?°-2
Based on the experience ofMBRB it usually takes about 3 to 4 years to achieve deer
population goals with archery. However if the City of Shorewood determines that the
deer population has already reached a level of social acceptability, then MBRB
recommends two alternatives for the City to consider. The first is to consider changing to
a maintenance level of hunting activity which would involve less hunting effort in order
to maintain the current deer levels. An example of this used by MBRB in other areas and
initially involves reducing hunting effort by one half. The effort can then be adjusted
each year to meet desired goals. The second alternative is to curtail deer removal
activities and wait until the deer population level increases again to levels of social
unacceptability. In an urban environment without natural predators, it is likely that the
deer population levels would recover to pre-removal levels within 1-2 years. The rapid
population increase is the result of both local deer reproduction and migration of deer
from surrounding overpopulated areas. Depending on landowner preference, MBRB has
used both of these deer maintenance alternatives to good effect. As always, MBRB
reconnmends that the City consult with the Minnesota DNR if there are questions about
management of urban deer populations.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are designed to increase effectiveness if deer removal
activities are conducted again using MBRB.
1. Start the fall hunt in late September- early October time frame when there is still
leaves on trees to provide cover. .
2. Conduct 2-4 hunts with about 3 weeks separating each effort.
3. Either sex deer hunting worked well in 2008 and should be continued.
4. At least 30 days notice would be necessary for MBRB to provide hunters and conduct
an orientation meeting if a fall 2009 hunt is desired.
5. Consider expanding hunt to other available areas in the City. MBRB saw many deer
outside of our hunt boundaries. MBRB believes that there are still concentrations of
deer in certain areas. Some landowners asked us to come to their property to remove
deer. We declined and told them to contact the City.
6. Better advance information to nearby property owners should be considered.
Brad Nielsen
r 19 ..fie-
f %bi` s C l t V 3 sh 7 r e x,17)
v'J OJD
George Gr-enfield
24715 Yellowstone T , i l
s ihorewn )I:t
Dear Mr. Nielsen:
1 am writing, as van requested, to object to the manner
in which the deer hunt was conducted at the Minnetonka
C;ountrV Club last Dece°nber® All living creatures are
terrified i%J"1eT1 they -3;_e e11snd1_c,d, f:i°.d lZ7r i rat oo;, or have
something else done to i.'=1em which orevent s their free
physical m)tion and their libert`% to decide their next °:ove1'rIF-nth
To compound ?;'hat, terror by allowing some,.)!'e to come uD
to the netted animal and blow its >rains out is cruel and
humane. Shorewood should not allow it ¢ it may be the case
that deer need to be cleared from the )lf c )arse; i so,
let it be done )us a it 1_s lone in the 7,artS of t~'1h -
1. other city by means of bow and arro;ar
Secondly, I am puzzled ':''fat the city rd< ull awnt a suecial
nrivilR-' to the cni'nt:ry cl-b when the city knows that the
country club wilfully disreg :rds the minnesota statute or
noise that Dania C allies brJi'!.ght to the c tv's attention in 2007®
t r" Lam`" jF 7
George Greenfield. c.
P:-eIoi'3
Fro : tjohnson2244@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 8:14 PM
To: Brad Nielsen
Subject: Re: Deer Management
Mr. Brad Nielsen
Planning Director
City of Shorewood
Mr. Nielsen:
I have reviewed the email you sent me on September 25th,2008, and still have issues and further
questions regarding the deer management activities in Shorewood. Below these are outlined.
* I still haven't found what the goals and objectives are for this program or a "detailed report". How do
you know when enough is enough? I feel this should be spelled out and made public record. That might
help me understand why we need this program again this year. From what I read in the July 28th,
Council Work Session a packet was to be distributed at the August 1 Ith council meeting was this done. I
didn't see that in the minutes.
* From last year, you said in the Shoreport dated October 11,2007 that the MBRB set its expectations at
just 10 deer. As you know, 26 were taken. You also said that one anterless deer had to be taken before
shooting a buck. In your notes from the July 28,2008, meeting you said that last year anterless deer were
not allowed to be taken. Something here just doesn't add up. This year any sex can be taken. A good set
of goals and objectives are needed!!
"You also said at the July 28, 2008 meeting that there were "no accidents or incidents". But in the
September Shoreport you mentioned "generally positive feedback" was received. To me, using the word
"generally", would indicate there were some incidents.
*As I said before, I received the deer population data from the Three Rivers Park District and the deer
count this year was 74 compared to 112 last year. Because I don't kazow for sure what the sex of the 26
taken last year (based on my previous statement above), my guess is we will have a population well
below 40 after this year. That is not acceptable to me!!
"Because of all the flaws and misrepresentation I see in this program, I would like you to take the
necessary action to reduce the number of hunting days this year from 8 to 4. Since you are the person
from City Hall responsible for this program, you should be able to do that.
Thanks again for reading my concerns and I look forward again to your feedback.
Regards, Tom.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brad Nielsen <bnielsen@ci.shorewood.mn.us>
To: TJohnson2244@aol.com
3/5/2009
Page 2 of 3
Cc: Brian Heck <bheck cuci.shorewood.lnn.us>; Chris Lizee <cgordonlize@mchsi.com>; Dick
Woodruff <dick.woodruff@ahoo.com>; Jeff bailey@target.com, Laura Turgeon (E-n1ail)
<lrturgeon@isi.com>; Martin Wellens <m.wellens@mchsi.com>; oldbail@mchsi.com
Sent: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 6:19 am
Subject: RE: Deer Management
Mr. Johnson,
I apologize for not getting back to you sooner. I read your e-mail the Sunday you sent it, but failed to follow up on
Monday morning. All correspondence (for or against) Shorewood's Deer Management Program is forwarded to
the City Council. The Council uses this input to determine whether or not to continue the program from year to
year.
With respect to your request, I reported late last year that the first year's program resulted in the removal of 26
deer. In July of this year, I reported to the Council the recommendations from Bob Whiting, President of Metro
Bowhunters Resource Board (MBRB) relative to the 08' program, if there was to be one. I have enclosed an
excerpt of the minutes from the 28 July 08 Council Work Session for your review. As you are already aware, the
Council agreed to continue the program for this year.
If you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact me at 952-474-3236 or by e-mail at
bnielsen(a.ci.shorewood.mn.us.
Brad Nielsen
Planning Director
From: Pat Fasching
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2008 11:16 AM
To: Christine Lizee (ChrisLizee(a)MCHSI.com)
Cc: Brad Nielsen (bnie~_i_.sh.o.rewood.mn.us)
Subject: FW: Deer Management
From: TJohnson2244@aol.com Finailto:TJohnson2244 aol.com]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2008 6:03 PM
To: Christine Lizee
Subject: Fwd: Deer Management
Hello Mayor Lizee:
Attached you will find a copy of an email I sent to Planning Director, Bradley Nielson, over a week ago stating my
concerns on the deer management program scheduled for this year. Maybe he's been out of the office or
something but I sure would expect a response from a city official. I couldn't find his "detailed report" that he was
to provide "at a later date" on the 2007 program, maybe you can tell me where that is in the council minutes.
Also, this program removed 26 deer last year, and the count this year from the Three Rivers Park District" is 74, at
this rate I feel we're being way to aggressive with this program. Thanks in advance for your assistance.
Regards, Tom.
From: TJohnson2244
To: bni__else_n__@ci.shorewood.mn.us
Sent: 9/14/2008 6:47:19 P.M. Central Daylight Time
Subj: Deer Management
Bradley J. Nielson
Planning Director
City of Shorewood
3/5/2009
Page 3 of 3
Hello Mr. Nielson
Having recently received the September 2008, issue of "The Shoreport", I am upset again to see on the
front page the article on deer management. Having been opposed to this last year, and I voiced that
concern to the Mayor at one of her Saturday coffee get together's,=2 01 was thoroughly disappointed and
disgusted to see this scheduled for another year.
Here are my thoughts and concerns:
* I live in Shorewood for the outdoors, the woods, wildlife and rural environment it provides, yet close
enough to the "city" for those benefits too. People who move here need to understand that Shorewood is
not the "city" and a deer may eat your hostas, a woodchuck may get under your deck, a racoon may tear
up your yard. There are ways of controlling those things without killing the wildlife. I have lived in
Shorewood for close to 20 years and the amount of wildlife I've seen is more than I can count on both
hands. That's the way it is when you live in a wooded rural area. Leave the animals alone!!
* I talked to the Three Rivers Park District on the aerial counts they have done. In 2007, they counted
112 deer in Shorewood. In 2008, they counted 74 deer. I read where last year 26 deer were removed by
the archers. So, if the same thing happens this year, next years count would be close to 50. Is that what
we want? Not this resident!!
* I have never found anything written or published as to what the goals are for this activity. A city this
size, I believe about seven square miles, a deer population of 74 is not excessive. Is all we want to do is
just get rid of all the deer? Are we just catering to people who don't like wildlife and are complaining?
The statement in the Shoreport about "generally" positive feedback to me means that I must not be the
only one not pleased with this activity. And what facts did the city council use to "determine that the
program should be continued"?
* I would like to see the detailed report that you were to provide to the City Council as stated in the
December 10, 2007 meeting minutes. I couldn't find it in the meeting minutes I went through. Would
appreciate if you could forward it to me or advise as to where it is on the web site.
* Finally, if this deer management activity must take place, I would like the number of days reduced
from 8 to 4. This way maybe we can keep some deer in Shorewood.
Thanks for listening to my concerns and I look forward to your feedback.
OA
Regards, Tom.
Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's ._a_new fashion blog,_plus the latest fall trends and hair styles
at StyleList.com.
=0 A
Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and
nformation, tips and calculators.
3/5/2009
P~e I of
rd Nielsen
From: M SPAULDING [ajcoxspaulding@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 9:34 AM
To: Christine Lizee; Dick Woodruff; Jeff Bailey; Martin Wellens; Brad Nielsen
Cc: Jacque Ridgway
Subject: Fw: Deer Managment
Original Message
From: M SPAULDING
To: Irturgeon@visi.com
Cc: Karen Bovd ; Linda Wood ; Jacque Ridgway
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:55 AM
Subject: Re: Deer Managment
Dear Laura,
I'm sure you can understand the perspective of an individual who also loves to garden and is also
made sad when some of my flowers have been eaten. However, If I were to kill EVERY creature
that causes some damage to my home and my gardens there would be nothing left. For
instance:
1. Let's kill ALL the woodpeckers because they SOMETIMES peck on my house, and my
neighbors.
2. Let's kill ALL the birds in general because the leave bird poop on my steps and deck, I can't
enjoy my deck if there is poop on it I would I have to take soap and water to wash it off, and my
valuable time.$$
3. Let's kill ALL the squirrels because they can get into my bird feeders and eat my expensive
bird seed. That won't matter. We won't have any birds because we've killed them all. Worse yet
they COULD get into the house and start living in my attic and cause an economic hardship.
4. Let's kill ALL the rabbits because they are just as destructive , sometimes more than our
deer. If we kill all of them the birds of prey and, coyotes will die off since they are a food source
for them. So that will be a 3fer.
Laura, I know that you may be the go between for these kinks of issues. And I'm sure you get
my point!!!
Living in harmony w/ nature and the beauty God has placed before us is a MUCH better
alternative. I moved to this area because I enjoy having the deer and their friends frequent my
yard. It is an amazing sight to be walking on the trail in the evening and have God's creatures
grace my presence. THESE ARE GIFTS!! THESE SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED! SO IF
THE DEER ARE CAUSING FINANCIAL RUIN FOR SOME RESIDENTS, well as Jacque says, let them
move to downtown and enjoy the cityscapes. Fair warning, they may still see a deer.
Killing "things" because they don't do as we say do is not the best approach. It is sad for the
human race. DON'T like it, KILL it. How barbaric!
michelle'
Original Message
From: Jacque Ridgway
To: Mich elle.__SpauWing ; Karen_Boyd ; Linda Wood
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 11:57 AM
Subject: Fw: Deer Managment
3/5/2009
Wage 2 of 3
My fight with the city council continues!
On Fri, 9/5/08, Jacque Ridgway <cuer® vahoo.com> wrote:
From: Jacque Ridgway <jacqueric1g@yaho_o_.com>
Subject: Deer Managment
To: "Laura Turgeon" <!rturgeon@visi.com>
Cc: cl_izee@co sh_orewood.mn.us, dwoodruff@ci.shorewood.mn.us
jbailey_ci_shorewood_.mn.us, mweliens@ci.shorewood.mn.us,
bnielsen@ci.shorewood mn._us
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 11:48 AM
Thank you for your response. My address is 22530 Murray Street, which
is in a relatively secluded portion of the city where we have occasional
deer. My home is located on more than an acre as are most of my
neighbors.
Why not have a public vote on the issue?
If 90% of the citizens were against the idea, and 100/o volunteered their
property for the deer killings, the 100/o would surly be enough to kill all of
the deer in the city. Therefore, the selfish minority would prevail.
Shorewood is a relatively affluent community, therefore I have a hard
time believing that the deer who are eatting the rich people's hosta are
causing an economic hardship to the community... If these people don't
like living among deer and nature, perhaps they should move to a condo
in downtown Minneapolis where they would feel more comfortable.
Once again, this is a situation revolving around the all-mightly dollar and
mankind's utter selfishness and disregard for the world we live in. How
sad for us all.
Sincerely,
Jacque Ridgway
On Fri, 9/5/08, Laura Turgeon <1rturgeon@visi.com> wrote:
From: Laura Turgeon <Irturgeon@visi.com>
Subject: Deer Managment
To: jacqueridg@yahoo.com
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 10:26 AM
3/5/2009
Page 3 of 3
Thank you for you email regarding the deer management program that the City of
Shorewood instituted last year. Depending on where you live, which is not identified
in your email, you will get differing opinions regarding this issue. The Council heard
comments from many people within our community expressing their desire that
something be done to reduce the ever increasing number of deer in the area and
the damage they were causing.
To address some of your comments
Liability: The contract with Metro Bow Hunters is very detailed in the scope of
insurance and liability requirements.
Sharp Shooter: Only those within the organization who meet the sharp shooter
qualifications can participate. If memory serves me correctly they must hit a 1 inch
mark from 20 feet. Their services are free to the City. More information is
available on their website.
As previously mentioned, Shorewood began this program last year. There were
enough people interested that we had to create a waiting list as we could not
accommodate the number of requests. We have more than enough requests at
this time to accommodate the 4 weekends currently scheduled.
I understand the sensitivity of the matter, and appreciate your expressing your
thoughts with me.
Regards,
Laura Turgeon
Council Member
City of Shorewood
3/5/2009
Page 1 of 1
®,a M
From: Pat Fasching
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 7:57 AM
To: Brad Nielsen (bnielsen@ci.shorewood.mn.us)
Subject: FW: Deer removal
From: Kathleen B. Fradette [mailto:Shamrock8l7@msn.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 4:31 PM
To: CityHall
Subject: Deer removal
Why 1are you doing i again i ..11
hurting The ~aer are not anyone. Sure they eat the hostas and sometimes
: -3r s, but i is worth it to see their beautiful
i:; - i our yard the whole season!
least dozen. i really i them.
should Maybe we vote on this.
think i i terrible!
a .m®
who live nea to 1' 1. a' 1 Er .
9/17/2008
age 1 of
Brad ie{c.-
From: Kaliboyd@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 3:16 PM
To: Irturgeon@visi.com
Cc: Christine Lizee; Dick Woodruff; Jeff Bailey; Martin Wellens; Brad Nielsen
Subject: Wildlife Management
I understand that Shorewood intends to have a deer hunt within its borders. How disappointing that would be.
As a member of a family of proud hunters, wildlife career managers, biologists, mayor, and frustrated gardeners
and property owners, I have seen many sides of the issues. As a family, we also have had to contend with
lyme disease, a vehicle being totaled by hitting a deer and losing a loved one in a hunt. We are not confused.
At what point do you recognize all life must not be subordinated to a ridiculous, narrow vision of Utopia? Lovely
flower beds and well shaped trees and shrubs are not the sign of a well lived life. Life is for sharing, not for
greedy taking. If the city emphasizes how it looks and how much it CONTROLS, over how it treasures its
inhabitants, ALL inhabitants, we are lost. You have missed the point of why life is beautiful in Shorewood.
Please do not trouble to send me a form reply. It only reinforces the mindlessness of your position. I dare you
to enlarge your vision of the good life by reducing your need to control it, kill it, eliminate it.
Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog-plus._the latest fall trends and hair styles at
StyIeList.com.
10/15/2008
Page 1 c. 1
Brad Nielsen
From: Bobby Arnold [bobbya528@gmaii.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 2:20 PM
To: Brad Nielsen
Subject: Deer
Brad,
Per our earlier conversation. Please consider our property 5760 Covington Road for use in next years
Deer harvest.
Bobby Arnold
3/5/2009
® -7-7'
5755 CJL,.,TRY CLUES N~,/-u m Sk---I-WOOD, MINNESOTA 55331-8927 ® (952) 474-3236
FAX (852) 474-0128 - www.ci.shorewood.mn.us - cityhaII@ci.shorewood.mn.us
MEMORANDUM
y~
TO: City Council
FROM: Brian Heck, City Administrator
DATE: March 5, 2009
SUBJECT: City Hall Signage
BACKGROUND
The City Council discussed the issue of outdoor signage for City Hall. The original
design calls for a "Shadowbox" style sign mounted on the stone arch near the entrance.
When the Council discussed the letter style, they also discussed the need for this sign and
the possibility of having a monument type sign instead.
CURRENT STATUS
The project is a few weeks from completion and the contractor and architect will be off
the job so the Council needs to decide if it wants the original concept sign installed. The
concept for the original sign is attached. Should the Council choose to move forward
with the original plan, we recommend the same letter style used on the water towers and
letter head.
The architect estimated the potential credit for not installing the sign is around $1,500.
He also estimated the cost for a monument sign that conforms to the look of City Hall to
be around $5,000.
OPTIONS
1. Have the sign installed as planned in original concept
2. Reject the sign and plan monument type sign as part of landscaping
3. Install the sign as planned and have a monument type sign installed with the
landscaping plan
PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
i
r
I
s
~m__._~
i
Y i~ 3
_ #
..1
E
} ~ Pi((
2
~u
CYO.
C-~
G-5
Lake Minnetonka Conservation District
Quarterly Report to Shorewood Council
March 9, 2009
Dick Woodruff
➢ LMCD office moved to Shorewood, Frostad Building, on County Rd. 19 in 4Q08
➢ As of 1/31/09: Total Assets= $806K ($545K in cash/investments), $221K is Save
The Lake Funds
➢ Exotics Committee met 2/13 to review milfoil treatment proposal with LMA,
DNR, Three Rivers Parks, MCWD, Henn. Cty. and Army COE (18 people
attended)
- LMA is project managing and negotiating final pricing
- LMCD, Mound and Shorewood have committed funds for Phelps Bay. DNR
grant request is pending and LMA to visit Minnetrista Council. Dick Osgood
considers adequate funding for Phelps likely
➢ Strategic Planning process underway (2 of 3 meetings completed). "Final"
meeting on 3/18
➢ 26 new green/red buoy lights to be added in '09. In Shorewood area: Zimmerman
Pass ("red bridge"), Cedar Pt., SP/Black Lake, Harrisons/Seton Bridge
➢ MCWD representative gave briefing on 2/25. Water quality marginally better in
'08 likely due to lower rainfall. Started to do chloride monitoring in '08 due to
determination of chloride impairment
➢ LMCD's position is that the Lake is a public body of water and thus: LMCD does
not advocate restricted access or user fees. Recent articles about user fees and
restricting access to manage exotics are the LMA's position not LMCD's
➢ Anticipate active enforcement in '09 of.
- too many restricted watercraft at dock
- watercraft at dock not registered to property owner
➢ Dick Woodruff LMCD participation and attendance in '09:
- 1 regular meeting attended as observer, pre-appointment to LMCD
- I of I regular meetings attended
- 1 of 1 Exotics Task Force attended (Task Force Member)
- 1 of 1 Strategic Planning Meetings
}