Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
110909 CC Reg AgP
CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL RE GULAR MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2009 [ XIRKTIDIOXAV # 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7;00 P.Me Attachments Estimated Estimated Time in Start Time Minutes (Clock Time) 7:00 p.m. B. Review Agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minutes, 10/26/09 Minutes B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, 10/26/09 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. Accept Quote for Sanitary Sewer repairs for Engineer CAF Meadowview Road C. County Road 19 Trail Crossing Planning Director CAF, Resolution D. Vine Hill Trail Administrator CAF, Resolution E. Auditing Services Contract Finance Director's CAF 5 minutes 7:00 p.m. 5 minutes 7:05 p.m. F. Authorize Expenditure of Funds for Public Director of Works Vehicle - One Ton Dump Truck Public Works CAF CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA — November 9,2009 Page 2 of 2 Attachments Estimated Estimated Time in Start Time Minutes (Clock Time) G. Authorize Expenditure of Funds for Public Director of Works Vehicle — Pickup Truck Public Works CAF 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 10 minutes 7:10 p.m. (No Council action will be taken) 9. REPORTS AND PRE SENTATIONS f,. PUBLIC HEARING A. Proposed Improvements for City Project 10 -01, 30 minutes 7:20 p.m. Installation of Watermain as Part of Nelsine Drive Road Improvement Project 7. PARKS S. PLANNING 9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS A. Manor Pond Soil Testing Engineer's 10 minutes 7:50 p.m. CAF 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS A. Approval of Certification of Delinquent Utility Finance 5 minutes 8:00 P.M. Charges Director CAF, Resolution B. SouthShore Center Administrator's 10 minutes 8:05 p.m. CAF C. Administrative Citations Administrator's 5 minutes 8:15 p.m. CAF D. Fire District Budget Discussion Administrator's 10 minutes 8:20 p.m. CAF 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 5 minutes 8:30 p.m. B. Mayor and City Council 5 minutes 8:35 p.m. 12. ADJOURN 1 minute 8:40 p.m. CITY OF r SHOREWOOD U@" 5755 Country Club Road e Shorewood, Minnesota 55331 ® 952 -474 -3236 Fax: 952 - 474 -0128 * www.ci.shorewood.mn.us ® cityhallCki.shorewood.mn.us Executive Summary Shorewood Citi-A Council ReV g ular Meeting Monday, / November, 00 A 5:30 P.M. Council Work Session is scheduled this evening Agenda Item 43A: Enclosed is the Verified Claims List for Council approval. Agenda Item 4313: Staff received two quotes for the Sanitary Sewer repair project. Staff recommends that the City Council approve the resolution that accepts the quote for the project and awards the contract to Infratech, Inc. not to exceed $8,285. Agenda Item #3C: At its last meeting the Council directed staff to go forward with a draft resolution requesting enhanced signage and educational efforts relative to trail /roadway crossings. The resolution is included in your packet for your consideration. Agenda Item 43D: Resolution rescinding Resolution 00 -066 relating to the acquisition of right -of -way along Vine Hill Road for the purpose of constructing a pedestrian and bike trail. Agenda Item #3E: City Auditors Abdo, Eick and Meyers have submitted a contract for annual auditing services for the year ending December 31, 2009, as per their three -year proposal submitted to, and approved by, the City Council last year. Staff is recommending approval of this contract. Agenda Item #3F: The Department of Public Works is seeking authorization for the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund for replacement of Unit 52 - One 1994, F350 Dump Truck, and authorization to dispose of the existing vehicle by means of public auction. From state contract the amount of the authorization is $44,991.71. This expenditure was budgeted for within the CIP. Agenda Item 3G: The Department of Public Works is seeking authorization for the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund for replacement of Unit 53 - One 1995, F350 Pickup Truck, and authorization to dispose of the existing vehicle by means of public auction. From state contract the amount of the authorization is $27,793.04. This expenditure was budgeted for within the CIP. Agenda Item #6A: As special assessments are being considered for part of the Nelsine Drive improvement project (in this case, the installation of City water), a public hearing is required by statute. As the watermain portion of the improvement was initiated by the City, at least a four -fifths vote of the Council to approve ordering the improvement to include the proposed assessment is required. Executive Summary --- City Council Meeting of Novem ber 9, 2009 Page 2 of 2 Agenda Item #9A: The City Council requested more information about potentially dredging Manor pond. Attached is a quote for analyzing the sediment to help determine how expensive the sediment disposal will be. Council should direct staff by motion on whether or not to proceed with the analysis. Agenda Item #I OA: The City Council annually certifies unpaid delinquent utility account charges to Hennepin County, who then places the charges on the property tax statements. The delinquent account holders have an opportunity to appeal to the Coimcil to adjust or remove the certification for their property. After consideration of appeals that may be presented at the meeting, Staff recommends the Council adopt the resolution certifying delinquent utility charges to the 2010 property tax rolls. Agenda Item #IOB: Review and discussion of SouthShore Center budget and potential improvements. Agenda Item #IOC: Review and discussion regarding the possible adoption of Administrative Citations for various traffic violations. Agenda Item #I OD: Discussion related to the Excelsior Fire District Budget and direction on restoration of funding priorities. #zA 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 5:30 P.M. r�K !)►hI?�1�ID���1>��LiTlMlil�� . # .. # �l Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 5:30 P.M. A. Roll Call Present. Acting Mayor Turgeon; Councilmembers Woodruff and Zerby; Administrator Heck; Finance Director Burton; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: Mayor Lizee and Couneilmember Bailey B. Review Agenda Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, approving, the agenda as presented. Motion passed 310. 2. COMPREHENSIVE UTILITY RATE STUDY_ Director Burton stated Rusty Fifield, a Senior Vice President with Northland Securities, was present to discuss the most recent information about the comprehensive utility rate study. Mr. Fifield stated the meeting ] study information. He hoped, o and rate setting for the Clty'§'Ot to what the final rates should bi broad rate pardnzetefs 9h6uld be enterprise 'budgets for 2010. Mr. Fifield suggested he di about it durtrig Council's O� and then sanitary sewer. He based primarily on ,input rec were updated based on'input into the depreciations. He he rates per Council's request. Jacket jor this meeting.. contained a copy of the most recent utility rate )unciLwould be able to wrap up its discussion about financial planning ility.systom this evening. He clarified he did not expect Council to agree this evening Hq�gid`hope Council could reach agreement for what the for 2010. Doing so would give Staff the guidance needed to draft utility �s the water utility analysis first because there was limited discussion er, 12, 2009, work session. Following that he would discuss stormwater ilained all of the utility projections have been updated; the updates are ,d from Council during its last work session. Capital outlay projections eived from Staff. The revised capital projections have been factored back the utility rate comparison was updated to include the City of Tonka Bay Councilmember Woodruff stated Council has not agreed that water main would be extended (if it was not already in place) as part of each roadway reconstruction project. The capital projections reflect that would happen. He questioned why there were no revenue increases from new city -water users included along with an expanded water system. Mr. Fifield explained the projections are intended to determine what the cost implications of expanding the water system as part of roadway reconstruction projects are. He stated the capital costs are included on a cash basis and do not include any borrowing of funds. User revenues from an expanded customer CITY OF SHORE WOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINtJ m October 26, 2009 Page 2 of 7 base are not included, nor are user connection charges and /or assessments. There was no way to reasonably project what the user revenues would be; and, Council has not discussed how it wanted to charge new users for the expansion. The water find balance is significant enough to carry the expansion costs for a period of ten years without requiring a user rate increase. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated one component of the City's current water policy states water expansion will not be done as part of a roadway reconstruction project unless a certain percentage of affected property owners want it done. If water main is installed, residents are assessed for it at the time of installation. This water utility rate analysis is based on a different water system policy than what is currently in place. The projections assume the City fronts the cost to install water main. She indicated the water policy discussion is for another tinge. Mr. Fifield stated the analysis assumes the water fund fronts the cost of extending the system. It does not imply the cost is free to new users. The assumption is the City will either assess.the property up front but defer the payment of the assessment, or the City will create deonnection charge`and, the property owner will pay the charge when they hook up to the water system. The projections show,the water find has sufficient monies to allow that to happen. Administrator Heck explained when Staff updated the Capital, Improvement Program (CIP) for the water system for this analysis it looked at the 20 -Year Pavement Improvement Plan to determine which roadways without water main could feasibly_have it installed. Tl e cost for water main extension needs to be reflected in the projections even if the decision to extend it is based on resident input. He stated that from his vantage point any time a roadway is reconstructed and the capacity exists to extend water main it should be extended and stubbed to the property and property owners `would pay a fee when they connect. Coincilmember Woodruff recapped the analysis reflects that for a period of ten years the City could adopt a philosophy of extending water. plain where needed and feasible as part of roadway reconstruction projects. That would be funded out of a sound water fund without there being any cost recovery for that and without there being any user revenues. Tl e analysis is worst case. He thought this model was useful. Councilmernber Woodruff stated during the October 12`" work session there was discussion about having a lower minimum consumption amount or a. lower mininum charge. At that time he expressed his suppdkif6r the lower minimum amount,:which was a 5,000 gallon consumption amount at a cost of $17.50 per. gnarter. He did not think the updated analysis reflects that. Mr. Fifield stated he would bp reluctant to suggest a substantial variation from the proposed rate schedule. The schedule set up to achieve approximately $630,000 of user revenue in 2010. The 2010 rate schedule has not varied from the one discussed during the October 12`" work session. The rate schedule is based on the user data he referred to during the last work session, and the top tier user charge was adjusted to make up for the revenue that will be lost by lowering the minimum consumption amount and the minimum charge. It's difficult to predict what would happen if the rate structure is fundamentally altered. The analysis did not require any overall user charge increase in revenue going forward. Councilmember Woodruff stated this rate study exercise was driven by the question was it possible to lower the base water utility rate. He thought that was lost in this analysis. After ensuing discussion, Mr. Fifield clarified that financial projections were based on generating the same amount of water revenue with the proposed adjusted rate structure in 2010 as would have been generated with the current rate structure. The analysis reflects the lower consumption amount and charge. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORD SESSION MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Rage 3 of 7 It reflects a minimum 5,000 gallon consumption amount at a cost of $17.50 per quarter, and an additional 1,000 gallon tier 1 charge of $2.95 and tier 2 charge of $4.25. In the analysis, the current rate structure, a rate structure with a Tower minirnum consumption rate, and a rate structure with a lower minimum charge, all produce the same revenue for 2010. Director Burton stated Mr. Fifield and Staff thought it prudent to provide Council with an analysis showing the impact of installing water main where needed as part of roadway reconstruction projects while deferring payment from property owners. Councilmember Zerby explained he had just done a quick calculation based ow consuming 29,000 gallons per quarter per household. The quarterly amount for Shorewood households would be $91.05 based on the proposed new minimum consumption amount. For the other cities in the comparison they would be approximately: Excelsior $109; Minnetrista $106; Mound $98; Orono $10!4; ; and, Tonka Bay $113. He questioned the goal of wanting to lower rates. Larger cities such as Minnetonka and Chanhassen are in the $50 range and he assumed that was because of economics of scale. If the assumption was correct, he questioned if the Council may want to consider the expansion of the water system as a means of helping to reduce rates. He asked how many users consumed the- proposed 5,000 minimiun amount or less. Councilmember Woodruff stated the rate study information discussed' during the October 12` meeting indicated there were 296 users who consumed 1,000 gallons 6r less and 668 users who consumed 5,000 gallons or less for the five billing periods from June 2008 — June,2009. The comparison chart in this evening's meeting packet reflects that all Torika,Bay household pay ',a flat quarterly charge of $11 plus $3.90 for each additional 1,000 gallons consumed. If a,Tonka Bay household consumed 10,000 gallons in a quarter the water bill would be $50. Based on'that, tlfe.City's current charge of $35 for 10,000 gallons is low. Councilmember Zerby questioned why the Council wouldn't want to tie the rate structure to water consumption only and nb to the CIPa Councilmember Woodruff stated table 2 in the water analysis shows two approaches4616wering the 7ainimurn cost. Director Burton stated out of approximately 1,300 users per quarter, 100 — 200 accounts consume no more than 5,009ygallotm, She noted the most ilunrber of low consumption users are in the winter quarter. Councilrllember Zerby stated e understood the intent of what Council was trying to achieve. Councilmemher Woodruff stated, he was not terribly interested in what other cities' charge. He just wanted to ensue; the City was'nancially solvent based on what it charged and that it did not gouge users. Counciliuerriber Zerby stated as a business owner he looks at comparable data. Woodruff stated the information was inter sting. Woodruff then stated Mound has a flat rate of $10.18 plus a $3.05 per 1,000 gallon charge; this w6 <.arnount to approximately $20 for up to 5,000 gallons. The City's current minimum rate is $35 forup to 10,000 gallons. The proposed minimum rate is $17.50 for up to 5,000 gallons. In response to a comment from Acting Mayor Turgeon, Councilmember Zerby asked about the benefit of having another consumption breakout between 10,000 gallons and 20,000 gallons was addressed at the last meeting. Councilmember Woodruff clarified how the rate structure worked for Turgeon. There was Council consensus to go with the 5,000 gallon minimum consumption rate with a per quarter charge of $17.50. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 4 of 7 Councilmember Woodruff requested Council discuss the five key issues identified. He wanted to add a sixth issue of the water fund reserve policy. Mr. Fifield reviewed the issues and decisions made regarding them. Issue I — there was consensus to adjust the minimum charge. Issue 2 — there was consensus to go with a minimum 5,000 gallon consumption amount at a cost of $17.50 per quarter, and, a per additional 1,000 gallon tier I charge of $2.95 and tier 2 charge of $4.25. Issue 3 — the minimum rate for the highest levels of consumption will be increased for those consuming more then 50,000 gallons per quarter. Councilmember Woodruff commented that if the higher fee really does encourage water conservation the rate structure may have to be adjusted in the future to make up for the lost revenue. He noted there were 1143 users who consumed more than 50,000 gallons during the five billing periods from June 2008 — June 2009. Councihnember Zerby commented that there are cities that have seasonal adjustments. Director Burton stated the City's billing system can handle a,number of different tiers, and she could check with the vendor to find out if it can handle seasonal rates: Woodruff cautioned against changing too many things at once; it's easier to assess the impact of one change at a time. Mr. Fifield returned to the issues. Issue 4 — the proposed rate structure should generate reveYues equal to those projected for 2009. Issue 5 is whether the proposed approach'to''capital improvements and water system expansion is acceptable. Councilmember Woodruff stated that needs to be discussed with the full Council. He then stated the City now has the tools to analyze the impact of different options, and it now has the means for setting the rate structure for 20,10 and understand what it means to the water enterprise budget. Director Burton noted the CIP will be discujs'sed during the next Council work session. Councilmember Woodruff stated Council should oiscuss.the�water policy'during its discussions about the CIP. Director Brown stated if water maii'lAs'not installed as part of roadway reconstruction projects it will only improve the financiai ltlpok. Councilmember Zerby suggested Council look at how the current roadway projects work with regard to potential water main installation as part of the roadway reconstruction projects before he settles on a policy. Issue 6 - Mr.'Fifield st "atcd_in previous discussions Council had discussed having reserves equal to 100 percent - of ` annual expenditures for saliitary ; sewer as the minimum threshold. He thought that same appro46h would be reasonable for water as water revenue is unpredictable because it's based on usage. Councilmember, Woodruff suggested Council adopt a reserve policy for the water fund. He thought having the amouu& bf one year's 'operating expenses as reserves was reasonable. Mr. Fifield encouraged the City to continue pinning for capital improvements and depreciation. He noted the City did a very good job of forecasting= ca,pital�ileeds and putting money aside for that. Mr. Fifield went on to discuss the stormwater management analysis. Mr. Fifield stated this analysis contained a lot more detail and projected future costs for stormwater management improvements then when it was discussed during the October 12` work session. He complemented Staff on the job it did in trying to identify potential capital investment. He explained he identified two scenarios for Council to consider. Mr. Fifield explained the first scenario indicates that all annual capital investments will be paid for on a pay -as- you -go basis. It will be done by using a combination of annual operating revenue and stormwater fund reserves. This approach requires a 70 percent rate increase in 2010, no increase in 2011 and 2012, CITY OF S OR ;WOOD WORK SESSION E+ E'rI NC MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 5 of 7 and a 4 percent increase thereafter. He noted that although a 70 percent increase sounds significant, the actual dollar amount increase is not that significant. He stated one way to try to make this increase more palatable is to not increase water and sanitary sewer utility rates in 2010. Mr. Fifield went on to explain the second scenario involves paying for all of the annual capital investments with internal loans. The projections for this scenario reflect the loans will be amortized over five years with an interest rate of 4 percent. The money is repaid to the fund it was borrowed from. This process continues on in perpetuity throughout the 20 -year cycle. This scenario results in an approximate 11 percent yearly increase in user charges through 2020. By then it's anticipated that the system, with funding depreciation, will have built up enough fund balance to offset rate increases. He stated there may be other ways to manage this. Although the rate increase is smaller in 2010 their in scenario 1, it does require a series of moderate rate increases over a longer period of time. Councilmember Woodruff stated the capital outlay reflects costs of approximately $86,900 for Meadowview Road and $88,600 for Nelsine Drive. The amountsin the report discussed on October 12"' were $20,000 and $16,000 respectively. The costs from the feasibility studies' `Wel'e approximately $89,300 and $29,500 respectively. There is no consistency in the - amounts. The approximate cost for Valleywood Lane was listed as $45,000 in the October tf report, and its $263,900 in this - report. Costs for the Boulder Bridge lift station has been eliminated in the current report. He indicated he found it difficult to understand the financials because of the changes in projected capital outlay. He thought there needs to be an agreed to plan for capital outlay before there can .>,e a meaningful discussion about the financial projections. Woodruff then stated in the projections for the. first scenario the charges, for service projected for 2009 year end is approximately $187,000; that amount is less then what was budgeted for 2009 and less then 2008 actual. He asked why this revenue will be less in 26'09 then t;Was in 2008. Mr. Fifield stated assuming the specific capital projections were set aside he asked for Council's t reactions to the two approaches. Councilmember Woodruff expressed' concefpvthat the 70 percent rate increase in scenario 1 is based on a capital improy @ eiiienft plan, he is unsure of. He also- doesn't like to see 11 percent increases for the next 11 years. He :needs to understand if :that . really would be necessary. He stated WSB and Associates conducted' a stormwatei "issyes study.a years ago. The study identified a funding shortfall and ftmdifig nopos. He suggested those findings be incorporated into this rate study. Director Brown; explained as part of this exercise Staff made a concerted effort to provide better estimates aboutiWhat stormwat&r improvements that would be made in conjunction with roadway improvement projects. -That is,the reason for the change in capital outlay amounts. The amounts will change again when the ktual�design work is completed. Councilmember Woodruff questioned why the Echo Road project has been advanced to 2010 from 2012. Director Brown explained the report for the October 12` meeting indicated Vine Hill Road was going to be reconstructed in 2011. The most recent report indicates a mill and overlay will be done instead. This allowed funds to be shifted. Woodruff asked if the financial projections reflect the Smithtown Lane project is delayed until 2010. Councilmember Zerby stated overall he is supports funding stonnwater improvement projects through internal loans. He is not in favor of a 70 percent rate increase in 2010 needed in the pay -as- you -go scenario. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 6 of 7 Councilmember Woodruff requested a fourth key issue be added to the issues list: what the reserve policy for the stormwater fund should be. He suggested the other three issues be discussed after Council has discussed the CIP. The projections can be adjusted after that. There was Council consensus to defer discussion about the key issues until after the CIP was agreed to. Councilmember Zerby expressed concern about reserves because they aren't; sufficient to fund current needs. Mr. Fifield stated the reserve policy will be somewhat driven by capital needs. Director Burton stated Director Brown and Engineer Landini worked hard to project a <20 -year CIP that includes stormwater system and water system improvements in conjunction with roadway projects. The forecast is the worst case scenario. Mr. Fifield went on to discuss the sanitary sewer ar>alysis. Mr. Fifield stated the sanitary sewer analysis has change& elatively little since the October 12` work session. Capital outlay was added for years 2015 -2029 and depreciation was adjusted accordingly. The analysis reflects transferring a $1 ipjllion dollars out of the sanitary sewer fund reserves to create a separate revolving fund for internal foans for infrastructure improvements. The projections reflect there is no rate increase in 2010, and there are modest inflationary rate increases after that. This approach achieves maintaining a minimum f n d`balance equal to 1 -00 percent of annual expenditures. The cost of providing sanitary sewer semkos %ill increase at a; °slightly higher rate then the other two utilities because of thy= ftpcorti b ng,sewer access charge1&f6Ases by Metropolitan Council for 2010 — 2012. This analysis refleectsan effective.use of th`o fund balance and minimizes the increases in user charges. Couucihnember Woodruff stated the 2009 year -end projection was not adjusted to reflect the fact that the Lift Statioh45 Rehabilitation project was'not going to be done in 2009. The projected amount for capital outlay is $258,'000. He thought the projection should be $183,000. In response to a co jinpent from Councilmember Woodruff, Mr. Fifield explained the capital outlay amount of $174,600 in .2015 ``is the average of the capital outlays for 2010 — 2014. The projections beyond that reflect an increase in the average of 4 percent per year. No specific capital improvements projects have been identified for the sanitary sewer systems beyond 2014. Woodruff asked how much the $200,000 for Lift Station 15 affected the average and how often is it necessary to rehabilitate a lift station. Director Brown stated the City's history for improvements to the sanitary sewer system revolves around lift station projects. Brown explained lift station rehabs last 25 — 30 years. The City's focus has started to include more aggressive televising of sanitary sewer lines. The CIP for sanitary sewer will start to include more maintenance of these lines. He thought the use of the average for capital outlay planning is appropriate. Councilmember Woodruff stated he supports creating a revolving fund for internal loans for infrastructure improvements internal through the use of $1 million in sanitary sewer fund reserves. He CITE' OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 7 of 7 Director Nielsen stated the City's Comprehensive Plan states that residents without City water will not be charged for water improvements. If a water project benefits from a loan from the infrastructure bank fund that would be contrary to that policy because the water project would riot be paying interest. Director Burton clarified the water fund would be paying interest on the loan. The infrastructure bank fund would be used for infrastructure improvements that would be of city-wide benefit. Councilmember Woodruff stated virtually everyone pays a sanitary sewer fee. Everyone has contributed to building up the reserves, and the new fund can be used to benefit everyone. Acting Mayor Turgeon stated there was a time when General Fund monies were used for water system purposes. There was Council consensus to establish the infrastructure Mind. Councilmember Woodruff asked Mr. Fifield if Northland Securities anticipated the City would be charged additional fees for what ever work remains on this project:, Mr. Fifield stated the bid was a not - to- exceed amount. He and Northland Securities, have no intention ,q£ billing the City for additional charges when the project is complete. He comilientedthis meeting was '66t included in the original bid. Director Burton stated she believed the City has received a good value from Northland Securities on the utility rate study project. 3. ADJOURN Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded,, Adjourning the City Council Work Session of October 26, 2009, at 6 :48 P.M. Motion passed 4 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED Christine 'Freeman, Recorder Laura Turgeon, Acting Mayor ATTEST Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk #2B CITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, OCTOBER 26, 2009 Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7 :00 P.M. Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers, Turgeon, Woodruff Administrator Heck; Finance Director Burton; Plan Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini Absent: Councihnember Bailey B. Review Agenda Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, approving the agenda 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. City Council Work Session Minufes,,Oetober 12, Attorney Tietien; City for Nielsen; Director of . Motion passed 4/0. C. City Council /Park Commission Joint Meeting Minutes, October 13, 2009 Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Approving the City Council / Park Commission Joint Meeting Minutes of October 03;.2009, as amended in Item 2, Page 2, Paragraph 1, Sentence 2, change "Weinzetl noted that t1ie� association would dedicate itself to raising up to $270,000 of the funds needed for the project" to "Weinzetl noted that the association would dedicate itself to raising up to $270,000 of the funds needed for the project subject to the organization's approval ", and in Item 2, Page 2, Paragraph 3, Sentence 2, after the word zamboni add "if a shelter is required for the chiller, ". Motion passed 31011 with Turgeon dissenting due to her absence at the meeting. 3. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Lizee reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Zerby moved, Turgeon seconded, Approving the Motions Contained on the Consent Agenda. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEE TING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Rage 2 of 21 Aa Approval of the Verified Claims List B. Pre - employment Assessment Services Motion passed 4 /0. 4m MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. A. Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek — Overview of the Sheriffs Office Mayor Lizee stated Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek is present this evening to give an overview of the Sheriff's Office. She noted that South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (LMPD) Lieutenant Dave Pierson is also present as courtesy. Sheriff Stanek stated lie and Inspector Jeff Storms (who heads 1 up the Sheriff's Office Enforcement Services Bureau and Communications Dispatch Center) wanted' provide Council with an overview of the Sheriff's Office and how it works in par=tnership with the SLMPTl The highlights of Sheriff Stanek's comments are as follows. (Addition" al, information can be found in the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office 2008 Annual .Report acopy of which was distributed to Council.) ➢ In Hennepin ,,County there are approximately 12 ;" 12 .3 million residents, there are 47 different jurisdictiotis;,and more than 36 law enforcement agencies. ➢ The Sheriff's Office�=ptQvides services to some individual communities. There are 6 — 12 deputies who handle the west metro area. ➢ Across Hennepin County violent crime '(e.g., rape, robbery and murder) increased 15 percent in both 2005 ' and 2006.,It decreased 10 percent in 2007 and 12 percent in 2008. Neaf467 late 2009 there appears t6 be a 10 — 12 percent decline. ➢ In the ''Sherift's Office there are approximately 850 full -time employees and 150 special deputies / volunteers. The Patrol Dyis(on is located in Brooklyn Park. The Hennepin County Jail is located in :.downtown Mlnzicapoli The Water Patrol Headquarters is located in Spring Park. The dispatch center ar%d administrative offices are located in Golden Valley. The crime lab is 16cated in downtown Minneapolis. ➢ The 'Slieriff's Office provides eight distinct lines of business. The Adult Detention Division security at Hennepin County Jail. The Office assists with search and rescue operations, and with public safety Emergencies County wide. It participates in investigations, makes arrests, enforces criminal code, and enforces traffic laws. The Water Patrol Unit governs water and snowmobile safety enforcement. The Transport Unit transports prisoners and others in care of the Court. The Court Security Division maintains standards of order within Hennepin County Court rooms. The Communications Division provides dispatch services for 36 of the 42 communities, and to 42 local police and fire departments. ➢ In 2008 the Communications Division processed approximately 579,000 calls for service. Slightly less then 12,000 calls were for the South Lake area. crry OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING M[NurE October 26, 2009 Page 3€f2I ➢ The Sheriffs Office launched a new Computer Aided Dispatch system in 2007. It's the backbone for the 800 MHz radio system in the County. It handles approximately one - third of all the 911 calls generated in the County. ➢ The Hennepin County Jail is an 839 bed facility. It's a pre - adjudication facility. In 2008 the Sheriff's Office booked approximately 40,000 people at the Jail. Approximately 70 percent were repeat offenders, and approximately 60 percent were for driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The average length of stay was 6.8 days. ➢ The SLMPD booked 99 people into the Jail in 2008. ➢ The Court Security Division provides court room and building security at nine locations in the County. ➢ Its Civil Unit processed over 7,300 mortgage foreclosure sales in 2008. ➢ The Sheriff's Office conducts investigations through a number of different avenues including special task forces, detectives, and its Criminal Information Sharing and Analysis (CISA) Unit. CISA provides a platform ,for agencies in the County to share crime related information. ➢ The Violent Offender Task Force is a joint effort with local, federal and state law enforcement agencies; it focuses on proactive investigations of violent offenders. There are four other narcotics units that work across the County. There are additional narcotics units in the County that work with neighborirg counties.,. ➢ The Sheriff's Office is mandated by law to serve warrants. It served over 11,000 warrants in the County in 2008. ➢ The Crime Laboratory Un services to 32 suburban la as a state crime lab. The Unit provides forensic and federal agencies. The lab is;one. to process human DNA. hn 200$ th average for the size of coverage are, $1.1 million grant to add seven ern County Boarci`'gr anted, the Sheriff's a:1 crime lab `In Janu "2009 the Sheri cold .eases. =. The highlights of hnspector S it agencies 4i"the County as well as several state rrly three accredited crime labs in Minnesota able �,MPD used about"30 scene hours which is about ved. The Sheriff s Office was recently awarded a -ees to this Unit to focus on DNA analysis. The ce $430,000 for remodeling and expansion of the Office was awarded a $500,000 grant to focus on orcement Services Division are as follows. The Enforcement Set, s Division (formally known as the Patrol Division) incorporates the Special Operations Division. ➢ The Emergehey, Services Unit and the Weapons of Mass Destruction Tactical Response Team are part" f"Ihe Special Operations Division. ➢ lie Watch Corm Program has a lieutenant on every night from 6 :00 P.M. — 2:00 A M, to help out at any type of scene that may happen within the County. The goal is to streamline the.Sheriff's Office response to communities' needs. ➢ The WiiO Patrol is a strong partner with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and its fourteen member communities. Lieutenant Kip Carver, who recently led the unit, will be moving to the downtown command structure. A new lieutenant will be appointed. The Patrol is comprised of one lieutenant, one sergeant, five full -time deputies, and approximately 35 special deputies (i.e., volunteers). The Patrol was authorized to add one additional full -time deputy this year. The Water Patrol deputies cover 104 lakes and 3 rivers in the County. ➢ The Mobile Land to Radio Corps is comprised of 40 members based out of the Communications Facility. It's also a volunteer group. ➢ The Mounted Patrol Group was reformed this year. There are approximately 25 members who help with search and rescue. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 4 of 21 The Emergency Squad operates out of the Brooklyn Park office. It works with the Water Patrol to help recover drowned bodies. The Emergency Squad now participates in the Project Lifesaver to help find program participants who have a tracking device on them. The Explorers Post has done extremely well. Its ranks have grown in the last few years. Most participants on the team are from the Brooklyn Park area. Sheriff Stanek stated the Sheriff's Office appreciates the support the communities give to the SLMPD. He commented that he thought the matrix of law enforcement agencies is stronger then ever. Mayor Liz6e stated the highest visibility the Hennepin County Sheriff s Office has in the Lake Minnetonka area is the Water Patrol which patrols the Lake. She noted she recognized Inspector Storms' face from the many years of service lie had with the Water Patrol. She expressed her amazement about the size of the Water Patrol's coverage area. She asked the guests to comment on the mass casualty incident (MCI) training drill that occurred on September 13, 2009. Inspector Storms stated the Excelsior Fire Department (EFD) was responsible for coordinating the drill. The purpose of the drill was to bring the various agenciestogether to determine how they would work together during a MCI. The Water Patrol partnered with the EFD and other agencies. There were 5 — 6 different response boats from three different agencies. Any scene such as that would be the Water Patrol's jurisdiction per a state mandate, but it works hand in hand wid -rthe other' public safety agencies. Councilmember Turgeon stated Sheriff Stanek had indicated there are 6 — 12 deputies that serve the west metro area. She asked what constituted the :west metro area. Inspector Storms explained the Sheriff's Office has primary jurisdiction of the northwest area;. it has 3 — 4 contract, cities in that area. The area is located north of Highway 394 and basically west of Highway 169. The Sheriff's Office spends time in every area with its patrol units, warrants unit and civil uni=ts. The Special Emergency Response Unit goes into a community where there are "hot spots" to overwhelm the group that is targeting people. Turgeon then asked how the Sheriff's'' Office, State Patrol and SLMPD coordinate who is responsible for what patrolling activities. Strom explained_ the SLMPD has primary jurisdiction over its coverage area. The State Patrol has its owif,working areas,rwhich are mostly highways, but it does cross over to Highway 7. State Patrol is responsible for'a_lot of corn mere ial accidents; it does a lot of the reporting. For the most part the groups work extremely:well together Councihnerinber Zerby asked if the' Sheriff s Office received any compensation for the services it provided uring the Repul�Iic'an NationatConvention. He then asked how the Sheriffs Office would be impacted; by Hennepin County. holding ,it's tax increase to 3 — 3.9 percent for 2010. Sheriff Stanek explained the Sheriff's Office wvas reimbursed $2.1 million dollars for its services. Those funds were turned back ove slo the County,. ounty: ' Stanek then explained the Sheriffs Office budget for 2009 was set in December 2008 Tn the first quarter of 2009 Hennepin County Administration asked for a budget reduction. The 2009 budget was then reduced by approximately 2 percent; most of the reduction was made up for through attrition "of personnel. Hennepin County has set its maximuun tax levy for 2010 at 4.9 :............. percent. The Sheriff's Office will likely have a 2 — 4 percent reduction in its 2010 operating budget over its 2009 budget. That wili be achieved by reprioritizing services it provides county wide, noting there will not be any reduction in enforcement services or the focus on violent crime. Mayor Liz6e thanked Hennepin County Sheriff Stanek and Inspector Storms for coming this evening. B. Discussion Regarding Milfoil Treatment on Gideon Bay Mayor Liz6e stated there is as a representative from the Lake Minnetonka Association (LMA) and residents with Lakeshore on Gideon Bay present this evening to discuss Eurasian Watermilfoil (milfoil) treatment of the Bay. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE October 26, 2009 Page 5 of 21 Ms. Schaub explained Gideon Bay used to be known as a wonderful bay to swim and water ski in. That is no longer the case as is the case for so many of the bays on Lake Minnetonka. The residents would like the support for treating Gideon Bay to make it as milfoil free as perhbaps Grays Bay. Ms. Schaub turned control of the podium over to Gedney Tuttle. Gednev Tuttle, President_ of the Lake Minnetonka Association 'stated he lives on, Brown Bay. He expressed he was sorry that LMA Executive Director Osgood could not be present to give his.exceptional detailed presentation. Mr. Gedney explained the milfoil herbicide treatment of Grays Bay and Phelps Bay has substantially reduced the amount of milfoil in the Bays this past.su nmer. It was virtually eliminated. Prior to the 2008 and 2009 treatments of the Bays they were heavily infested with milfoil. In 2009 the Bays were treated with an herbicide called Triclopyr in early Jude." Triclopyr is only toxic to milfoil and does not harm native aquatic plants other then Sly- ads. Areas with`lily, pads were not treated. Triclopyr has been tested for many years, and it has been ,,'& i9tered by the United $fates Environmental Protection Agency as safe to use in application against milfoil: He clarified the milfoil was virtually eliminated for the 2009 growing season, noting it can't be eradicated ',butI"it"can be' controlled. It has to be treated annually. The cost for the third year of treatment, will be about 80 percent of the cost for the 2009 treatment. The cost for the fifth year'o£ treatment should be down to 25 percent of the original cost. Mr. Tuttle then stated of "Ahe treatments did not come easy. The 2008 treatment was fair in Grays and Phelps Bays but"poor in Carmans Bay. It was" determined that the treatments were done to early in the season; there was not enough growth f the milfoil sprouts for there to be adequate exposure. Also, a liquid herbicide was used which "iwas not as "effective because it became too diluted. Those problems were corrected for the "009,1 reatmens,aPd will be continued going forward. Mr. T explained there is `ala opportuf4 to expand the success of the treatment to Gideon Bay and St. Albans Bay nip >response to the 'desires of the homeowners on those Bays. The estimated cost to treat Gideon Bay for"' e year is $79,000 and $55,000 for St. Albans Bay. The lake measurements and aquatic plant inventories have already been taken for the two Bays. They are needed for the process of obtaining approval from the Doarhnent of Natural Resources (DNR) for the expansion. It's expected that some of the funding for these additional treatments will come fi the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD), the LMA, and the DNR. It's also expected the major funding will come fl - om the residents with Lakeshore property on those two bays. Mr. Tuttle turned the control of the podium over to Rich Kofski. Rich Kofski 30 Florence Drive, Tonka Bay stated he represented all of the residents and boat slip owners on Gideon Bay. He explained he has acted as the lead organizer. There are also 8 — 10 other street captains who are helping bring focus to the effort for the many residents on the Bay. The treatments have worked well in Grays and Phelps Bays, and it works well with other programs being conducted by the LMCD. The residents on Gideon Bay want the opportunity to bring the treatment to Gideon Bay. He indicated he had spoken to the Tonka Bay City Council the past week and requested support through its LMCD representative, a financial contribution, a letter expressing support to the DNR, and a letter CITY OF SHORE WOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 6 of 21 expressing support to the Cities of Excelsior and Shorewood. He's requesting similar support from this Council and will go before the Excelsior City Council in November to request the same. Mr. Kofski explained that to date there have been contributions totaling $20,000 - $25,000. There has been great sponsorship from Mike Mahoney with the SYC. The SYC has already made a contribution and in its flyer to its membership it has included an overview of the project and a request for contributions. Prior to 1987 there was no milfoil in Gideon Bay or Lake Minnetonka as a whole. The group is looking at making a financial contribution to the 5 -year program. The cost is estimated to be $79,000 for years one and two, and decreases to 25 percent of $79,000 by year five. Mayor Liz6e asked if the intent was to conduct a study in 2010 or do the first treatment in 2010. Mr. Kofski stated in 2008 the inventory was done. The residents were rediiested to put that on hold until the granular herbicide was tested in 2009. The inventory was done ifa'agaifl Lin 2009 in order to have data to determine cost estimates from the applicator and the LMA for"�treating Gideon Bay. The permitting process is being conducted in parallel with the fund raising effort:, The' °goal is to start treatment in 2010. Mayor Liz6e stated it's her understanding the group is ap the three cities (Excelsior, Shorewood and Tonka Bay) that have residents with Lakeshore on Gideon Bay. Mr. Kofski stated each "city is being asked for some level of contribution, similar to what was done for Grays Bay. He then stated no one organization or resident can take this task on by themselves. Liz6e stated it has taken a joint effort between the various agencies, cities and residents to treat Carmans;'Grays and Phelps Bays. Mr. Kofski explained all contributions for the Gideon Bay project are lad. g,kept in a separate fund by the LMA for the treatment of Gideon Bay only. If�the project does not cotiieto fruition the money will be refunded to the donors. Mr. Tuttle clarified a small amount of the donations will be used to cover administrative costs. - mans, Grays and Phelps Bays has demonstrated that cooperation things happen: he requested the LMA identify a target level of tes for the Gideoir`Bay treatment project, and to identify funding T7wand LMCD. The treatment programs are a five -year effort. interested in expanding the program to Gideon Bay to warrant Councilrretnber Turgeon stab its 2010 budget;, its 2010 bud stated this Council ._has pretty Council have expresses agencies and other A& lakeshore property on`( request is late in the 201 Shorewood 2010 budge best. the ies. it's her Luiderstanding Tonka Bay has nothing budgeted for this effort in t %s set. She did not think it could make a contribution in 2010. She then *h set Shorewood's 2010 budget. She explained some members of this ced for having more of the effort funded by the current participating [6 commented there are only ten property owners in Shorewood who have Bay. She stated there is a lack of detail and a lack of partners, and the .budget cycle. She reiterated Tonka Bay had already set its 2010 budget, and the is basically set. She commented the timing of this request for 2010 is not the Mr. Kofski stated the residents were just recently notified of the preliminary results for the 2009 treatments of Grays and Phelps Bay. They understand it's possible the request may be too late for the 2010 budgets, but they would like to start treatment in 2010. He noted the program is a 5 -year treatment effort. The request is for all five years. The estimated cost for years one and two is $79,000; year three is 80 percent of that; year four is 60 percent; and after that it's 25 percent. He commented the Tonka Bay City Council indicated it may consider using city dock funds. He again reiterated the residents are requesting support through each of the three cities' LMCD representative, a financial contribution, a letter CITY OF SHOR WOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 7 of 21 expressing support to the DNR, and a letter expressing support to the other cities for each of the five years. Councilmember Zerby stated he would appreciate having more detail. He stated the City has contributed $6,000 in 2008 and 2049 to the Phelps Bay treatment effort. He encouraged the Council members to consider this. If there is agreement to honor the request, Ile was confident there would be funds for it. Councilmember Turgeon stated there is a lot of information this Council has not seen. Mayor Liz6e clarified this Council has a preliminary budget but it will not She requested the LMA and residents keep the Council updated. In response to a question from Mr. Kofski, Mayor Liz6e stated City's primary contact. Mayor Liz6e thanked the residents in attendance for comi Minnetonka. 6. PUBLIC HEARING None. 7. PARKS adopted until December. Heck could serve as the eir support of Lake Commissioner Davis reported on matters considered and actions taken at the October 13, 2009, Park Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that mectil g). With , regard to applying for a hockey grant, she explained the Park Commission would ''like to have ice in Freeman Park, but she thought the cost to build refrigerated rinks "and; operate them in' perpetuity was quite substantial. She thought the Commission needed to discuss this *e. She questioned if it would be possible to get a grant and start with a small rink and lights and then move forward to build on that. The Commission had thought there was a short window of ipportunity to submit a grant application thinking if it submitted it quickly there would be a better chani✓e of tit because there would not be many applicants. The Commission knew thea;:post for the iwblks would be expensive, but the build and operate costs reflected in the Staff re ' 6rt in the Council meeting packet for this meeting are extremely high. She indicated she did not thn# there was a single Commissioiierthat would okay a budget for the cost of operating the rinks. Commissioners were for hockey. and a sports facility at Freeman Park, A 1 Anor Pond Director Brown stAd - 1, nainteirance of Manor Pond has been discussed at great length for many years. He explained the Park Comm, ' ission has received a great deal of resident input regarding the aesthetics of the Pond. hn 2005 the Commission partnered with the Minnehaha Creed Watershed District (MCWD) to perform sampling and testing of the water to determine what plant species were present, and to determine what the least invasive and most cost effective way to treat the Pond. Options for chemical treatment, biological treatment, bacterial solutions, aeration and dredging were identified. He noted the pond is classified as a stormwater basin and continues to function as intended. The focus has been on dredging the Pond to a level which will support healthy plant growth around the edges while keeping a clear water body toward the center. A 4 -foot depth limits the sunlight for the plants to grow. Brown then stated the Park Commission passed a motion asking Council to consider funding the maintenance of the pond out of the Stormwater Fund, noting the Commission feels this is a storm water management project. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL IL E'1'ING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 8 of 21 Brown explained dredging the Pond is a long -term solution. When the City builds a National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) pond its expected life is 25 years. That includes the initial construction loading and the after treatment of treating the runoff through the pond. Manor Pond has never been dredged. He assumed its life would be more like 30 — 35 years long. The soft cost estimate to dredge the Pond is $80,000 - $90,000 and that could increase significantly if the silt to be removed is hazardous. Brown asked Council if it thought dredging the Pond was a worthwhile project, and if so did it want Staff to have the silt tested for some nominal cost. Councilmember Zerby stated NURP ponds are specific in design and de (or 4 — 6 feet). He asked how deep Manor Pond was. Director Brown e deep, noting there is a lot of soft silt on the bottom. Councilmember Zerby stated Manor Pond is located near an intersd( He questioned whether or not the Pond receives much sediment f: stated the Pond is down hill as far as elevation. It's about five feet d He indicated that most of the sand is taken out by the boulevard are that is narrow so some of the sands may go into the Pond.�He noted in size. Councilmember Turgeon stated the problem is the Pond was n6t'j,oe designed to be a storm water basin and continues to serve its purpose'..S Pond was not looking aesthetically pleasing i the lack of rainfall the 1 item on the agenda is the Manor Park warmin g :house which has a cost indicated she is having a difficult time determining where the monc knowing what the overall vision for Manor Park should be. Director Brown explairt� decay. The detention,, bhs pond that does not have rr back in the 1960s it may dredged it will = s till require r Turgeon in to an ae! Chey are 1.5 — 2 meters deep ned it varies from 0 — 3 feet wherir,five roads come together. winter sanding. Director Brown to the water' level from the road. There is an area on Manor Road Pond was about orie'surface acre igned to be an amenity; it was e thought some of the reason the st'awo years. She stated the next hat is higher then expected. She y would best be spent, without of the, th that occurn water bodies one acre in size or more is a lot of ouncilirit bhber Turgeon spoke, of is a small water body. It's a very young plant,species growing rn yet. If an aerator had been put in Manor Pond ve had' art` "in�paet, ,bit it wouldn't have any now. Even after the Pond is some it sounds jo her like people want to change Manor Pond from a Administrator I40k explained the Park Commission discussed that specific issue. The Commission suggested the rfi !! eriance project should more appropriately be funded out of the Stor•mwater Fund because it was designed, a storinwater detention basin. Councilmember Woodruff stated he asked in an email to Staff if Manor Pond is dredged is there any assurance that the Pond will be aesthetically appealing to the residents, to which he thought Director Brown had responded no. Brown clarified that when dredging the Pond out to a 4 -foot depth a lot of the plant species with the exception of milfoil are not going to survive in that depth. He absolutely believes that dredging the pond will bring about a drastic improvement but he cannot guarantee it. He has a 90 percent confidence level. Councilmember Woodruff stated there are a number of unknowns. He suggested moving forward with a study to remove some of the unknowns. The study should identify if the silt is hazardous. After the study is done, he requested Staff refine the cost estimate to dredge Manor Pond. He understands the Pond was designed to be a storinwater detention basin and that it's serving its purpose. It sounds as if the residents CITE' OF SHOREWO D REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES S October 26, 2009 Page 9 of 21 Mayor Lizee stated she concurred with Councilmembers Woodruff and Zerby one of the oldest ponds in the City. She explained that because Manor Pond park there is the issue of aesthetics in addition to that of functionality. Duri about the Pond the Park Commission was asked if the pond was a blue watt Park or was it a stormwater pond. She suggested it be considered as�son discomfort with funding the entire project out of the Stormwater Fund bl stormwater management issues facing the City in the fixture. Them are wAt ground water issues and so forth. She recommended the C determine how to address cleaning up the Pond. She clarifi would be assessed. Until there is clarification of how the P what to do. Park Commissioner Davis stated maintenance of Manor P related issues. Manor Pond has evolved into or the overgrowths in Manor Pond is lily pads. , T to remove them is by dredging. Also, the pads create bumps. Manor Pond was constructed di stated if there isn't going to be skating on the P going to be skating then the structure has to be there is sufficient rainfall nia lily pads e of the prettiest �skai 'y are so large it's in are so tall they stick then there i! ght up to co Id not be as the Manor Park warming house are g areas. She explained that one of �sible to pull them. The only way p tiirotrgh the ice on the pond and ponds are constructed today. She -d'for a warming house. If there is made more usable all year long. If on of a problem. Mayor Lizee stated ua' ^`'� year. there has been limited rainfall perhaps there is another location for a skating rink in Manor Par k B Man ©r Park Warming House Preliminary Design Approval Administrator Heck stated one of the park projects the Park Commission has identified for 2010 is the remodeling of the Manor Park structure such I that it would have restrooms and could be used as a summer facility to host programs with Minnetonka Community Education (MCE). There is no water or sewer in Manor Park; w, and sewer world have to be extended. One design option was to add restrooms to the outside of the struettlre. Another was to construct them inside. This option creates other issues. The structure is not AR tompliant� and there will be other general maintenance issues. He indicated he is aware that Park Coordinator Kristi Anderson has spoken with the City's building inspector and Director Brown regarding cost. Anderson has also spoken with Ellen Luken who is the architect who provided the general cost estimate. The Park Commission recommends Council authorize a preliminary design study to determine the feasibility of the design options, cost estimates, prepare sketches of elevations and design ideas for an enhanced Manor Park warming house for a cost not to exceed $5,000. The expansion of programming with NICE would require some improvements. She stated Manor Pond is located in a City -owned g a meeting this summer aesthetic asset to Manor of both. She expressed ,ause there are so many quality issues, there are - sbin with the residents to she was not suggesting,thp property owners d shoul=d be classified it's, difficult to decide Councilmember Zerby stated if Manor Pond is not going to be a skating rink, then he was not sure he wanted to make a large investment in the existing structure. When Eddy Station was constructed in Freeman Park it cost approximately $400,000 eight years ago. He was concerned it may cost close to that much to make the Manor Park structure into something people would like. He recommended this be CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL M t' lNurP4 October 26, 2009 Page 10 of 21 deferred until there is a decision about what to do with Manor Pond, noting he thought it sounds like a good idea. Councilmember Turgeon stated she agreed with Councilmember Zerby. She then stated if the improvements are made to the structure there will also be additional ongoing maintenance expense for Manor Park. She stated if Manor Pond is improved such that it will be a good skating rink then lights will be needed. She questioned if there would be more lights needed then have been identified. She clarified she did not want to discourage the Park Commission. But, she indicated she was having a problem because of the lack of a solid plan for all of the proposed uses for Manor Park. She recommends the study be deferred until a decision is made about the park as a whole. Councilmember Zerby stated based on what he has read in the Park Commission minutes it's his understanding that the residents want the pond issue resolved first. Councilmember Woodruff stated this project has been discussed for a couple of years. It's his recollection that if the City installs water and restrooms, then MCE will hold summer programs in Manor Park. He stated that seemed like a good thing. That was the original, objective. It seems as if this has morphed into some new direction. He expressed he was astounded by the $350 square foot construction cost. He expressed his reticence to move forward with any design .until the purpose of improving the structure is clarified. Administrator Heck stated the Park Commission had discussed �t wanted to bring sewer and water into the building independent of other warmi rig 'house improvements because it had discussed the possibility of summer programs with MCE. That was one .,ofalte'things that drove th0 ,need for restrooms and hence the remodeling. Councilmember Woodruff stated he wanted to understand exactly what the Park Commission intended to accomplish before the City spent rpohey on a Study. He wanted to have a design specification which identified what activiti" be supported by the structure. Council can then decide if the activities are appropriate. The Park Capital Improvement Program (CIP) ; has identified a $50,000 cost three years in a row and now the cost is est ii)ated to - °1'& $150,000. He stated he wanted to be provided a statement of use for the structure. Councilmember° Zerby`again reiterated the decision has to be made about improvements to Manor Pond first Cd ilmember Woodruff stated could be done in parallel. Mayor Lizee agreed they have to be Mayor Lizee "AU ' 1, Manor Park =has been used for decades and it serves many residents on the east side of the City. The sti in the Park is worn out, it's not ADA compliant, it should have restrooms and water, and it would be ,nice to offer programs in this Park similar to those offered at Freeman Park. She thought making the iinPrIovements is timely. She indicated there is enough flat land in the Park to construct a skating rink. She reiterated the structure has to be upgraded; therefore, she would like to have some preliminary design work done. She requested Council be provided with a firmer recommendation of what is wanted. Councilmember Turgeon stated earlier this evening Park Commissioner Davis stated the ice on Manor Pond is not good. If there is not a good skating rink, there may not be a need to have an upgraded warming house. The structure may need sewer and water, but other improvements may not be needed.. There needs to be a vision for Manor Park before Council authorizes a study is done. CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page I I of 21 Councilmember Zerby recommended a Park Commission committee be formed to work with the residents to determine what they want the building to provide. He suggested that be done in tandem with determining what should be done with Manor Pond. J1l11 1 � 11111111 1 1111 1111111111 � �ill�ilill 11 11 ill 11MAl21 I UJIMAR0111 gal Im I to I I of Councilmember Woodruff expressed disappointment that this project has been on the CIP list for three years. He requested that committee report back to Council in December 2009. Mayor Lizee requested that residents in attendance who want to be part of and phone number. Motion passed 4/0. Tom Beauchamp, 5125 Suburban Drive stated Mayor Li: Pond which was held in Manor Park. He explained the coti for years. Many years ago the depth of the Pond was sign remember that it was at one time 8 — 9 feet deep. Thcres be aesthetically pleasing, or to be a pond that people can tended a meeting t tion about Manor P ly greater then it is are not expecting the i in. He thouaht resin shallowness of the Pond and the amount of pollution in me raa dredged. He stated the Park Commission has.been terrific and has The Commission worked with a consultant who indicated dredgil very long time. He explained that during a: Park._ Commission Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has a requiremeni.tllat At that time it was discussed that Manor Pond';is behind schedi leave their name tugust about Manor 1 has been going on Iaj: Some residents Pond, to be made to , ]its' issues are the At some point the Pond has to be nt a great deal of time on this issue. sAhe best solution and it will last a �Ring it was brought up that the iter ponds be dredged periodically. on that. He stated the Manor Park neighborhood residents' concern is that this issue *yill,,sti11 be a topic of discussion five years from now. The Pond is a focal point Manor,-Park;_ it's the first thing people see when they enter the Park. On behalf of the neighborhood residents, he ` asked Council to'please not delay the dredging of Manor Pond. He commented that the.;res7diop understand this would be a big financial commitment that may not be affordable in 2010, but he asked Coutcil to make a commitment to dredge the Pond and prepare a plan for when it will be done. Mayor L ze'6 stated DirectQr,;Brown has been given direction to have the silt in Manor Pond assessed to detelmzne:;if it's hazardous ; and to get afinner cost estimate for dredging out the Pond. She assured the res�dents't1ae: City will stay "n- , of this issue. C. Hennepin County Youth Grant Proposal Administrator Heck explained. that the Minnetonka Youth Hockey Association (MYNA) had approached the City and asked it tc con "cider partnering on the development of two refrigerated outdoor hockey rinks in Freeman Park. That discussion evolved into one about possibly applying for a grant through the Hennepin County Youth Sports Grant program to help fund such a project. Staff invited the MYNA to attend a joint City Council and Park Commission meeting on October 13, 2009, to make a presentation about its proposal. Park Coordinator Anderson and Park Secretary Grout had been gathering information needed for a grant application. Staff again met with the MYNA the past week and discussed the fact that to date the full MYHA board had not discussed this item. The Park Commission has some unanswered questions about the grant and about the potential project. This evening the MYNA is asking Council to authorize Staff to submit a grant application. Council could at a later time decide to scale the project back or to not proceed with the project. CITY OF SH R WOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 12 of 21 Tim Jenzer a coat h with tl�e MYHA who's son is a member° of MYHA and Sharon Mar an President of the MYHA introduced themselves. Mayor Lizee stated the Council and Park Commission had a discussion with the MYHA about the grant during a joint City Council and Park Commission meeting. Basic things about the grant application were discussed. She noted there is a tight timeline to apply for the grant this year, and there was discussion that it would be prudent to apply for the grant and work out the details after that. The project is to construct one or two refrigerated rinks in Freeman Park. The amount of the grant that would be applied for would be $400,000. Making the grant application at this time would not commit the City to anything. This is just to get the grant process moving forward. She asked Council if they had any additional questions then those asked during the joint meeting. Councilmember Turgeon stated she was not in attendance at the joint meeting. She asked if there was any discussion about charging by the hour for ice time rather then the current per player user charge, to which Administrator Heck responded no there was not. Turgeon asked if there was any idea of what the estimated sewer costs would be, to which Heck responded this discovery process -leas not advanced to that level of detail yet. Heck stated Engineer Landini has indicated the original proposed bcation may not be the best because of the stormwater issues at that location. Turgeon stated the City doesn't normally have the parking lots in Freeman Park plowed in the winter. Those costs don't appear to be reflected in the soft budget projections. She questioned the estimated $20,000 cost for lighting when the Park CIP has a figure of $50,000 for Cathcart Park hockey lighting. She asked if lights would be needed in the parking lot for safety reasons. She then asked what the difference in cost is for permeable asphalt rinks versus refrigerated cement rinks. She assumed refi� Of document indicates the softball fence in Freeri fence is move the field has to be adjusted acco refrigerated ice rinks were constructed she hoped rinks in the future. She then stated ,the Park CIP r if anyone asked if anyone.liad approached the U on redoing the tennis cqurts, to wh ich rector Bi rinks would cast significantly more. She said the k will be moved but _it doesn't say to where. If the ly anal there is a cost for doing that. She stated if there would not be any request for a dome over the is the City ''s,tennis courts will be redone. She asked to find out if it would like to partner with the City responded he did not think so. Councilmember Zerby statecl.he was<m support of applying for the grant. It would not commit the City to spending any money He commented he =phew a trem'etidous number of people in the community who play hockey He thou details about this potential "project can be flushed out in parallel with applying for the grant: Councilfnpmber Woodruff stated prior to the joint City Council and Park Commission meeting some financials had been prepared. At: the meeting there was a more detailed set of financials in which the estimated cost l;ad increased. The meeting packet for this evening had a new set of financials which include the capital costs as well as a projected profit and loss statement. He explained according to the pro forma operating budgetinelud,0 in the meeting packet it's going to cost someone approximately $43,000 a year to run the rinks ghat' cost would be the largest operating cost in the parks budget. He thought $43,000 would be appro ?imately 25 percent of the parks budget. He stated that is a major issue for him. Woodruff then stated that during the joint meeting he requested Staff to get some assurance that if the City applied for the grant and later determined the project needed to be either scaled back or stopped the City would not be on the hook for it. He read the endorsement section of the grant application which said "I hereby certify that the local government unit identified herby is willing and able to undertake the project as described in this application." He stated from his vantage point Shorewood is not willing or able to do that. He then stated he did not know where the City would get $200,000 for project construction and there was no commitment from the MYHA for $270,000. He also did not know where the City was going to find $43,000 a year to operate the rinks. He was not sure the City understood the full extent of the cost. He clarified he did not want to be negative. He stated it appeared to him that the CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2 009 Page 13 of 21 City would be on the hook to do the project if the City submitted the grant application and was fortunate enough to be awarded the grant. Councilmember Turgeon stated from her vantage point this application is being rushed and the Park Commission is being rushed. Park Commissioner Mavis had stated earlier that the Commission had not had the opportunity to assess the impact of the $43,000 operating expense for the rinks on the parks budget. She thought these types of grants are available every year. She questioned where the funds would come from to operate the rinks and to fund any potential increase in lighting costs. She stated she wanted more detail, and she did not think there was any reason to rush the application. Mayor Lizee stated all that Council was being asked for this evening is its support in applying for the grant. She viewed this as an opportunity for the City to enter into a partnership with the MYHA similar to what it does with other organizations. It's also an opportunity to expand the recreational use of Freeman Park for ice skating, noting the City built Eddy Station with rubber floors- specifically for skating. She agreed the City did not want to rush into committing to building the refrigerated rinks. Council needs to have specific detailed plans and it needs to assess the financial feasibility of it. She did not think MYHA was asking for a commitment to do that this evening. it is her understanding that there will be less competition for the grants fiends in this first round of applications. Those who apply by the November 2" a deadline are supposed to hear about the status of there applications` In a few months. If the grant were approved, the City would not experience any financial impact from constructing the rinks for another budget cycle or two. She expressed that sometimes it's prudent to'take a chance and seize an opportunity. Councilmember Turgeon stated it is her understanding that the grant "funds would not be awarded until August 2010. Based on that timetable someone 'would have to upfront some of the funds to start the project until grant funds are received. Administrator Heck stated applicants will be notified of whether or not they will be awarded a grant in January or February of 20.1.0: ''The grant funds will be distributed later in 2010. If there was a desire to start construction of a grant project pz%or to the receipt of funds, some organization would have to front the money. Councilmember Woodruff stated it's 'leis understanding "that the City is applying for the grant. He asked Staff if his uqdgrstandirg;i,s correct, to which Administrator Heck responded it was. Woodra&,moved, Turgeon-seconded, tabling the grant application until there is an opportunity to review rr olr detailed capita)i =and operating cost information and plans, and asking the Minnetonka Youth Hockey association to submit a'letter of commitment to the City of Shorewood indicating it will provide tlefulnding it has indicated it would provide. Mayor Lizee stated t `` grant application must be submitted by November 2, 2009. To table it this evening would result in it beirigUbledfor one year because of the timeline. Councihnennber Woodruff stated lie was fully aware of that. Lizee stated she did not understand the need to table the application. Councilmember Zerby stated it's been the City's intent to have skating in Freeman Park for a long time. If someone is going to contribute $400,000 toward achieving that goal lie personally would jump at that opportunity. The park shelter was built as a warming house. There has been discussion in the past about installing lighting and plowing the parking lot. He thought Council would be missing the boat by not applying for the grant. Councilmember Turgeon stated the park shelter was built to be a warming house. She then stated for the last 6 — 8 years the Park Commission has been asking for just a free, open skating rink. The City has never moved on the opportunity to build a rink for a variety of reasons, money not being one of them. CITY OF SHORPWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEET 1 C MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 14 of 21 There is nothing that says the City can't have free and open skating in Freeman Park. She commented she thought the cost would be less than $400,000. Councilmember Zerby stated if the City just ran a hose to make a free skating rink there would still be a need for lights, to have the parking lots plowed, to mitigate the water issues and so forth. There would still be a financial commitment. Administrator Heck explained the $45,000 operating cost dollar figure was based on numbers provided by the MYNA for maintenance on things such as the chillers. Staff also added costs for warming house attendance, plowing and such. Councilmember Turgeon asked if there were any other cities that had refrigerated rinks. Administrator Heck stated the City of St. Paul has two removable rinks and is constructing a third permanent rink. The City of Roseville has a rink. He explained that many of the operating'costs are,based on St. Paul's costs. Motion failed 2/2 with Lizee and Zerby dissenting. Councilmember Zerby stated he was willing to make another motio chance of passing. He thought Council was at an impas §e. He Woodruff's hesitation about the City being on the hook for .buildit approved. From his vantage point he didn't think there was any leggy City would be able to take advantage of thegrant money if the app there was any harm in applying for the grunt There didn't appea identified in the application if the City decided to ript move forward Zerby moved, Lizee seconded, authorizing Staff to Grant to help construct two refrigerated ice rinks in. Mayor Lizee stated this ids" a real opportunity for the �C thought entering mto. with the MYHA wo past for the larger eommu nity.�It's an,oppprtunity to dev but he is not sure what would have a tted he understood Councilmember .this should the grant application be obligation to doing so. He hoped the �ation was approved. He didn't think oe any repercussions or penalties dfh the project. nepin County Youth Sports ity. It doesn't commit the City to anything. She ild be a good thing. MYNA has done a lot in the glop a skating environment for all people. Councilmember Turgeon stated she wanted the Park Commission to have an opportunity to look at the cost and operating projections before the application is made and to weigh in on the impact to the annual parks budget. She indicated. would be,other opportunities to apply for such a grant. She stated the City.would be responsible fort the long - costs of the rinks. Councilmember Zerby stated the City should be Ale:to dictate some offhose costs. Motion failed 212 with Turgeou.and Woodruff dissenting. Mayor Lizee thanked W Jerizer and Ms. Morgan and other interested parties for being in attendance this evening and bringing this opportunity forward. She hoped the City would be able to move forward on a similar proposal in another season. Mayor Lizee recessed the meeting at 9:17 P.M. Mayor Lizee reconvened the meeting at 9:27 P.M. D. Revised Donor Policy Administrator Heck stated that during its October 13, 2009, meeting the Park Commission passed a motion recommending the donor policy be revised to include the memorial bench program. The program CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 15 of 21 allows the public to purchase memorial benches for their loved ones at no cost to the City. The donor can select a site from the list of sites that have been identified for such purposes. The current cost of the type of bench specified is about $1,000 and it should have a life expectancy of 10 years. Mayor Lizee stated she like the idea of having memorial benches. She was not thrilled with bench in the picture provided in the meeting packet for this meeting. She explained the City of Excelsior benches are much nicer looking; they are cast iron and have a similar warranty. She stated she liked the policy. She requested the search for vendors and designs be extended. Councilmember Turgeon stated there are gorgeous donated benches with plaques located near the swimming beach in the City of Deephaven, and the bench in Manor Park is gorgeous. She indicated she had no issue with the policy. She agreed with extending the search for other vendors and better looking benches. She thought that should happen before the policy is approve =d in case the cost of the benches would be more then $1,000. Mayor Lizee stated the bench cost could be removed from the proposal, noting the cost would go up over the years. Councilmember Zerby suggested the policy could be created around criterion other then bench price. Councilmember Turgeon stated that maybe a list of acceptable vendors could be identified so the benches could have somewhat of a consistent look. Mayor Lizee suggested the policy be sent back to the Park regarding memorial benches clarified. Councilmember Woodruff suggested the City ch000se: He agreed the dollar amount should be taken out of "I someone prepare a map depicting the more precise loc Commission and Staff rework Item 3.E in the policy. Councilmember Zerby questioned if tt would be appro then memorials, including'donations f rem businesses. to having advertising on the 1inches� ":b "ut a business c< in the interest of standardization thi' "City should sul ordered the twa °benches through Excelsior and t he , bra Excelsior' Commission to have Item 31 in the policy benches that opuld be eligible for donations. Liey. He thought it would be helpful to have for benches. He agreed with having the Park fate to accept bench donations for purposes other ouncilmember Woodruff stated he would object d'bave its name on a small plaque. He suggested y the materials. Mayor Lizee stated her family plaques were ordered and engraved according to send this item back to the Park Commission to make the revisions discussed 8. No report was given 666 use there had not been a Planning Commission meeting since the last City Council regular meeting. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for November 17, 2009. A. Tax Forfeit Parcel — Outlot B, Marilynwood Director Nielsen explained Hennepin County Taxpayer Services notified the City that Outlot B, Marilynwood is available through tax forfeiture. This parcel was created as part of the Marilynwood plat. At that time the developer carved out three 20 -foot outlets along the back of his lots and sold them to the adjoining property owners. Outlet B was purchased by the owner of the lots located at 6030 and 6040 Lake Linden Drive, but the owner never legally combined the outlot. The property owner since sold the parcels. Outlot B has since gone into tax forfeiture. Staff is suggesting the City ask Hennepin County to auction the property off and to limit it to the adjoining property owners. He noted he has placed a call to CITY OF SI- OREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page ICS of 21 Taxpayer Services asking if the action could be limited to the owner of the property located at 6030 and 6040 Lake Linden Drive. He is waiting for a response. He noted Outlets A and C were legally combined with their respective parcels. Nielsen stated Staff recommends Council adopt the resolution and forward it to Hennepin County. moved, Adopting RES OLUTION r o a Certain Tax-Forfeited Parcel Lying Within the City and - Approving io Owner." Motion passed 0 Director Nielsen stated if Staff finds out the auction can be restricted to a specific property owner Staff will provide Council with a revised resolution. B. Request for Trail Markings and Education Director Nielsen stated during its October 12, 2009, meeting Council agreed with' a recommendation from the Planning Commission to adopt a resolution requesting Hennepin County improve signage for and education about trail crossings. Since that meeting, Staff determined that recommendations for signage found in an advisory report from the City Engineers Association of Minnesota may '`pro de part of the solution to this issue. Hennepin County could be asked to incorporate;the trail crossing recommendations into educational material. Staff also found a brochure prepared by Dakota County that explains some of the rules as well. Staff recommends Hennepin County consider doii something similar as well. Nielsen then stated Staff is seeking directioi trail markings appear to make a lot of sense r draft a resolution making the specific request Councilmember Woodruff stated this should be resolution should specifically request Hennepin crossing is a pedestrian crosswalk. Council. The City.Elgineers Association's proposed then advise both motorists and trail users. Staff could 's consideration during its next meeting. at all traih crossings in the City. He thought the remove all paint striping that might indicate the Woodruff moved, crossing signage, crossings that 4/0. 9. ENGINEERING/PUB AC W A. County Road 19 Final Close Out draft a resolution asking for improved trail ings and removal of paint stripping at trail Director Brown explained that during its July 27, 2009, meeting Council approved a resolution requesting the advance finding froniihe Municipal State Aide Fund account. That resolution and documentation for County Road 19 was forwarded to the State for processing. Staff has had several meetings with the State to try and move this along. Per Councilmember Woodruff's request, Staff has again brought this back to Council so it can review the City's financial obligations and payment progress. Brown then explained that during the July 27` meeting he explained that the City of Tonka Bay had expressed concern about its obligations. Staff determined Tonka Bay overpaid their obligation due to an error on the part of Hennepin County. Tonka Bay is due a refimd of slightly more than $11,000. All but slightly more then $74,000 of the City's obligation will be covered by the State Aid. The $74,000 amount was funded from the Local Road Fund. CITE' OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 17 of 21 Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, accepting the County Road 19 Final Closeout Report and directing Staff to refund the City of Tonka Bay's overpayment in the arnount of $11,307.13. Councilmember Woodruff stated there needs to be discussion about the small parcel of land located at the northwest corner of the intersection of County Road 19 and Smithtown Road. There had been discussion about acquiring that from Tonka Bay. He expressed his preference was to not acquire the land. Director Nielsen explained the City does not control the intersection and there is a lot of signage placed on that small parcel. The City can't remove signs from that parcel. Administrator Heck noted the Tonka Bay city code doesn't allow signs in rights -of -way. Director Brown stated that,parcel of land is a right -of- way. Councilmember Woodruff stated from his vantage point the disc been resolved. Motion passed 4/0. B. Meadowview Road / Wild Rose Engineer Landini explained that during its October 12, 2009, 1 study for Meadowview Lane. Council requested Staff provide <n or segment of road to the project for discussion at this meeti contained supplemental information provided` by,, TKDA to r( segment of Wild Rose Lane between Eureka : and Me; Reconstructing that segment of Wild Rose Lane, allows for op water main down the roadway rather than using directional �bo study). As a result the estimated cost to extend water main wil and, the cost per benefiting prop�rty_yYill be reduced to $8,130 Wild Rose Lane west oft eadowview Road reduces, down to additional right-of-w4 or aneasement`will be necessary to i lsta Landini stated the feasibility the small parcel of land has ueeting`'Council discussed the feasibility 3t information about adding another road g T11e meeting packet for this meeting �onstiot and install water main in the dowviev�: Road as part of this project. :n cut construction techniques to extend ;ng (which was proposed in the original be�reduced to $138,210 from $174,541; o n the previous $10,267. He noted that a 33- foot -wide right -of -way. Therefore, I the proposed catch basin. consider the following. ■ Constructing,. a 24- fo6t -wide driving surface for Meadowview Road and a segment of Wild Rose Lane with edge control outside of driving surface. Making storm water improvements consisting of pipes and catch basins. ■ Extending the 8"nich water main, and installing hydrants and service stubs to adjoining properties. ■ Making repairs the sanitary sewer consisting of pipe repair, infiltration sealing and ■ An opf ohAo Meadowview Road with no water main extension. Councilmember Woodruff thanked Staff for working with TKDA to provide the information about including a segment of Wild Rose Lane as part of this project. He thought his questions from the last Council meeting have been answered satisfactorily. Woodruff explained the total cost in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Nelsine Drive and Meadowview Lane had been estimated to be approximately $739,000 not including the extension of water main. TKDA's estimates total approximately $466,000 which is approximately $273,000 less then the CIP amount. TKDA's estimated cost to reconstruct the segment of Wild Rose Lane including storm sewer improvements is approximately $255,000 not including the extension of water main. It appears the segment of Wild Rose Lane can be reconstructed within the original CIP projections. CITE' OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 18 of 21 Councilmember Zerby stated during the October 12` Council meeting he asked about possibly reducing the width of Nelsine Drive and Meadowview Road to a 22- foot -wide driving Surface. The feasibility reports indicated the driving surfaces would be constructed to be 24 feet,wide. He asked if Staff had considered that. Director Brown stated the legal requirement is the driving surface can be reduced to 22 feet wide provided there is justification for doing so. Zerby stated he would like there to be discussion about the narrow driving surface in the public information meetings and the' public hearing. Councilmember Zerby encouraged Staff to have a little more adti expressed he was somewhat nervous about acquiring the additiona the age of the neighborhood and past issues the City has experience appropriate to spend a little more effort on right- of -wdy due diligen( Councilmember Turgeon asked if there were any sanitary sewer iss' Landini explained there were some sanitary.,sewer issues for Meadc report. Wild Rose Lane has not been televised yet,. The City shoul for doing the repairs on Meadowview Road. He can request quotes have the work done depending on the direction given by Council. Motion passed 4/0. Turgeon moved, Woodruff secot report needed to be,.done for Wild Director Brown estimated the "c televising to ,b,,0111000 for W i activities in order to keep'tle,pr Lizee`moved, Woodruff sec report for an'amount not to 10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS Aiced right-6f-way investigation. He right -of -way or easement because of when trying to do that. He thought it that had to be addressed. Engineer iew Road in the sanitary televising ;c , eive quotes for on November 4"' televising Wild Rose Lane or just acknowledging that a soils report and sanitary televising Lane. Motion passed 4/0. le soil testing to be $3,000 - $4,000 and the cost for the sanitary Lane. H& "asked Council if they want Staff to order those two wing forward more rapidly. .zing Staff to order a soils report and sanitary televising for Wild Rose Lane. Motion passed 4/0. There was no general/n'6w,bus ness for discussion this evening. 11. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS A. Administrator and Staff 1. Southshore Community Center Operations Report Administrator Heck stated the meeting packet for this meeting contained a report on the Southshore Community Center (the Center) operations, noting the City took over responsibility for the operations and management of the Center effective July 1, 2009. He clarified the 2009 operating deficit through September 2009 is approximately $39,468 for the first three months of operation. The deficit is projected CITE' OF SHOE, C D REGULAR COUNCIL E ETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 19 of 21 to be $28,880 for 2010. He explained the projections are based on current activities at the Center. Since the City took over responsibility for the Center's operations there have been more programs offered at the Center. Some advertised programs did not occur because of lack of participation. More than 200 people attended the Oktoberfest grand re- opening of the Center. He is not sure if that event generated any more demand for activities at the Center. Councilmember Turgeon asked if there was a signed lease with South Shore Senior Partners (SSSP). Administrator Heck explained SSSP had some questions about some of the terms in the lease. Kristi Anderson, who provides management services for the Center, met with SSSP representatives to discuss SSSP's questions. The revised lease will be presented to the SSSP Board for approval. The lease terms are essentially the same as they had been previously. The monthly rent charge is $600, in -kind services for additional time for senior programming through the use of SSSP volunteers to staff the front desk at the Center, as well as consideration for the furnishings and fixtures as well as the kitchen use. Councilmember Turgeon asked if there was a new lease with the C is a new agreement with the Church and the terms are the same,as 1 Councilmember Turgeon asked what portion of the $30,000 in pr( agreements with SSSP and the Church. The revenue from SSSP drive up the annual revenue. Administrator Heck explained there Minnetonka Historical Society terminated its rental agreeme approximately $2,300 - $2,400 per month. The 2010 revenue r totaling $2,500 for all long -term rentals and-�ey revenue was added for an estimated amount of.$ is projected to be $38,000. He and Ms. Ander marketing campaign promoting the Center shot want to give Council a false impression that this target should be to reduce the subsidy the City p. at the Center. F 0 The total esti help ous ted 2010 reven >uld be new rc s a ,Loss in rev the rental therefore the Lake Historically all the revenue was action is based on monthly rentals x.2010 a separate category of class ated'revcnue for rentals and classes venue projection is low. An active il revenues. He clarified he did not n operation in 2010. He thought the towards operating the Center. Councilmember Turgeon questioned the $9,000 expense for insurance in 2010. Director Burton explained the Center is now covered under the `City's insurance policy. An appraisal was done of the Center a few years ago and the building wasOpraised al I million.' Councilmetriber Turc e ,stated it's her understanding Golden Living made a $500 donation to the Center. She asked if the Center's< Qversight Committee had discussed how to handle such donations. AdmrmsIrator Heck explained the Committee has not discussed a donation policy yet. Tile donation has been accoA'o,,.for. He indicated "he and Ms. Anderson will work on developing operational procedures for seeking, hari iltng and using el donations. Turgeon then stated 4lisre had been a $530 electric charge and she assumed that was for the new reception area in the Center. She tl i " ght there needed to be more oversight of the Center's management responsibilities. Councilrilember Woodruff stated Administrator Heck has indicated to him that during the next Council meeting scheduled for November 9"' he will address the following: policies and procedures for accepting and using donations; approval of facility modifications independent of whether or not the services were donated; and, a list of prioritized target projects the donations could be applied to. Council would approve the list and then Heck and Anderson could apply funds to that list. Woodruff commented the City is just learning how to manage the Center's operations. Heck stated there nt. Councilmember Woodruff provided his input to the enterprise budget for the Center. The 2009 year -end revenue projection is $25,000. Rental revenue for $2010 is estimated to be $30,000. The 2009 year -end projection is based on only ten months of the year. From his vantage point he thought a $5,000 increase in revenue over ten months of 2009 revenue is anemic and he was really concerned about that. He stated CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MtN11TFS October 26, 2009 Page 20 of 21 Center reserve funds are being spent, therefore, he questioned the interest earnings projection of $850 in 2010. The 2010 budget for utilities is $7,000 yet the 2009 year -end projection for ten months is $6,000. He questioned if the utilities budget for 2010 was high enough. He stated the deficit projection for the fourth quarter of 2009 is projected to be approximately $5,500 yet the 2010 year -end projected deficit is $28,880 (or about $2,400 per month). A decision was made to discuss the Excelsior Fire Department's 2010 Operating Restoration priorities during the November 9, 2009, Council meeting. t: TI Councilmember Zerby stated he had attended a joint meeting of the Orono, Shorewood and Tonka Bay City Councils regarding extending a trail from the LRT Trail crossing at County Road 19 to the old Dakota Rail line in Orono. He was there as both a Councilmember and a member f the committee who did a feasibility study about a potential trail. The committee has been meeting roughly;every other month for the last 8 — 9 months. The committee's proposal is to improve the feasibility of the existing bike lanes on County Road 19 though a variety of methods with a forward look to creating a trail on each side of the road whenever it gets rebuilt. The Orono and Tonka Bay Councils approved the project. Shorewood Council did not approve it because it wanted more information: Mayor Lizee stated she has asked Andrew Gillet(, with Hennepin Cott qty to contact Administrator Heck about attending the November 23` Council meeltngao�make a presentation onAllis topic. le Mayor Lizee stated Council has regular meetings .,scheduled for November 9"' and November 23` She asked Staff if there was a work session scheduled for November 9"', to which Administrator Heck responded there is. She requested that a work sessio not be scheduled for November 23` n . She explained she may not be unable to'a' end a work session, and she noted that week is a short work week because of the Thanksgiving holiday Director Button stated another enterprise budget work session will be needed and she suggested scheduling it during a,week when there is no regular meeting. Lizee suggested it be scheduled for November 16 I eA stater he thought there was another work session scheduled for November 3 Q 8 rta t,, noted a' Truth In Takatio a hearing is scheduled for December 7"', therefore, a November " budget`vvorksessioil would be difficult. Lizee asked Staff to find a suitable time during the week ONovember 16` for a second work*ssion if one is needed; she stated she would appreciate that. Councilmember Turgeon stated she had "asked Administrator Heck to distribute some of the statistical information discussed during the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department (SLMPD) Coordinating Committee held' 21 She thought Council would be interested in the year -to -date budget report and in statrstt ah inforriaation on crimes and clearance rates. COuncilmember Zerby stated he appreciated being provcled.the information. Heck stated he did not provide Council with a copy of the Uniform Crime Report data because he did not think Council would understand the data unless there was some explanation. He will put the information together along with some explanation and distribute it to Council for informational purposes. Mayor Lizee stated that any tirne Council would like SLMPD Chief Litsey would be willing to come before Council to speak about the data. Zerby stated he was very impressed by the SLMPD's crime clearance rate. Lizee noted they were the highest in Hennepin County. Turgeon stated we don't know what constitutes that so she cautioned against being too impressed with the clearance rate. Mayor Lizee stated the Coordinating Committee discussed the need for a plan for the long -term care and maintenance of the SLMPD facility as well as the need for funding the plan. The Committee delegated the challenge of developing a plan and funding approach to the public safety mernber cities' administrators CITY OF SI-OREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 26, 2009 Page 21 of 21 and manger. The administrative group will present their recommendation to the public safety governing organizations before it's presented to the member cities. Mayor Lizee recessed the meeting to an Executive Session at 10:27 P.M. A. Union Negotiations Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Turgeon, Woodruff and Zerby; Attorney. Tietjen; Administrator Heck and Director of Public Works Brown were present. The purpose of the rn was to discuss the City's negotiations with Local 224, Council 5, of the American Federation of Stale, County and Municipal Employees, AFL -CIO labor union (the union representing the City's Public W6rks,employees). Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, adjourning the Executive Session at 10:58 PM. Motion passed 4/0. fl����K� ► D ► � ._ � lliL�G1��Z�11)►[�lfl The City Council reconvened the regular meeting at 10:59 P 14. ADJOURN Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of October 26, 2009, at 10:59 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. RESPECTFULLY Christine Freeman Christine Lizee, Mayor COUNCIL ACTION FORM From: Michelle Nguy4en Bonnie Burto Background / Previous Action Council Meeting Item Number November 9, 2009 3A Claims for council authorization. The attached claims list includes checks numbered 49O86through 49158, totaling $256,857.35. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the claims list. 1/05/2009 15 PM A/a HISTORY CHECK REPORT VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood RANK: - BRECON BANK DATE RANGB:1.0 /27/2009 THRU 99/99/9999 PAGE: 2 CHECK CHECK CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 000000 11,654.09 000000 2,118.40 049087 263.48 049088 1,820.56 049089 6,397.73 049091 305.00 049094 17.94 049095 240.00 049096 869.50 049097 553.78 049098 233.24 049099 300.00 049100 69.24 049101 373.25 049102 3,942.65 049103 228.16 049104 3,151.63 049105 60.41 049106 370.50 049107 1,298.03 049108 630.00 049109 42.91 CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE 00051 EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H D 10/27/2009 00092 MN DEPT OF REVENUE D 10/27/2009 00086 AFSCME COUNCIL 5 R 10/27/2009 00053 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 302131 -4 R 10/27/2009 00052 PERA R 10/27/2009 20005 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVC R 10/27/2009 16275 AMERICAN MESSAGING R 11/09/2009 01977 ANDERSON, KRISTI B. R 11/09/2009 03230 BIFFS, INC. R 11/09/2009 03325 BOYER TRUCK PARTS DISTRIBUTION R 11/09/2009 03550 BROWN, LAWRENCE R 11/09/2009 29292 CABRERA CLEANING SERVICES R 11/09/2009 04081 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS R 11/09/2009 17300 CENTERPOINT ENERGY R 11/09/2009 04500 CHANHASSEN -CITY OF R 11/09/2009 29297 CLEANER UP R 11/09/2009 05305 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES R 11/09/2009 05345 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS R 11/09/2009 1 CONNIE BLANCHARD R 11/09/2009 06575 DELL MARKETING L.P. R 11/09/2009 29271 DREW KRIESEL R 11/09/2009 07480 EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING R 11/09/2009 PAGE: 2 CHECK CHECK CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 000000 11,654.09 000000 2,118.40 049087 263.48 049088 1,820.56 049089 6,397.73 049091 305.00 049094 17.94 049095 240.00 049096 869.50 049097 553.78 049098 233.24 049099 300.00 049100 69.24 049101 373.25 049102 3,942.65 049103 228.16 049104 3,151.63 049105 60.41 049106 370.50 049107 1,298.03 049108 630.00 049109 42.91 11/05 /2009 12:15 PM A/P CHECK REPORT VENDOR SE''': 01 City c` Shore::.00�t. BANK: 1 DEACON BANK DA RAQGE:10 /27/2009 THRD 99/99/9999 CHECK VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE 07600 EXCELSIOR -CITY OF R 11/09/2009 08712 G & K SERVICES R 11/09/2009 09395 GOPHER SIGN COMPANY R 11/09/2009 09400 GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, IN R 11/09/2009 27195 GRAINGER, INC R 11/09/2009 07900 HAWKINS, INC. R 11/09/2009 29232 HECK, BRIAN R 11/09/2009 10720 HOME SECURITY STORE INC R 11/09/2009 11370 J.H. LARSON COMPANY R 11/09/2009 11650 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED R 11/09/2009 12250 KLM ENGINEERING INC R 11/09/2009 13320 LEE PEST CONTROL INC R 11/09/2009 14467 MARTIN MARIETTA AGGREGATES R 11/09/2009 15176 MENARDS R 11/09/2009 15885 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC R 11/09/2009 81500 MINNESOTA CONWAY AND FIRE SAFE R 11/09/2009 06645 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY R 11/09/2009 17020 MN STATE PATROL R 11/09/2009 19445 NGUYEN, MICHELLE R 11/09/2009 19500 NIELSEN, BRADLEY R 11/09/2009 15900 OFFICE DEPOT R 11/09/2009 15000 PAETEC R 11/09/2009 PAGE: CHECK CHECK CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 049110 182.10 049111 631.85 049112 2,559.28 049113 181.40 049114 590.77 049115 2,826.07 049116 102.93 049117 233.24 049118 117.71 049119 4,628.15 049120 1,058.00 049121 70.00 049122 9,572.66 049123 166.44 049124 864.64 049125 295.52 049126 700.06 049127 24.00 049128 187.74 049129 238.54 049130 101.29 049131 808.13 11/05/2009 12:1.5 PM A/P n_ISTOI2Y CHECK REPORT "_ NDOR. SET: 01. City of Shorewood. BANK: DEA,CON BANK DATE RANG.: 10 /2'7/2009 =HRU 99/99/9999 CHECK VENDOR i.D. NAME STATUS DATE 20268 PANCHYSITYN, JEAN R 11/09/2009 20950 POTTS, KENNETH N. R 11/09/2009 29251 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL GROUP R 11/09/2009 26100 QWEST R 11/09/2009 22160 ROGERS, DON R 11/09/2009 22347 RUMPCA CO INC R 11/09/2009 22950 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE R 11/09/2009 22987 SIR LINES -A -LOT R 11/09/2009 23500 SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT R 11/09/2009 23725 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC R 11/09/2009 29101 SUN NEWSPAPERS R 11/09/2009 23738 T- MOBILE R 11/09/2009 23726 TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLAN R 11/09/2009 24600 TONKA BAY -CITY OF R 11/09/2009 25000 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES R 11/09/2009 25452 TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC R 11/09/2009 29163 US AUTO FORCE R 11/09/2009 83814 VEOLIA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES R 11/09/2009 70200 VERIZON WIRELESS R 11/09/2009 26600 VICTORIA REPAIR AND MFG R 11/09/2009 22901 VIKING LAND TREE CARE INC R 11/09/2009 27190 WACONIA FARM SUPPLY R 11/09/2009 PAGE: CHECK CHECK CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT 049132 745.7.0 049133 2,291.66 049134 743.36 049135 230.93 049136 377.20 049137 291.00 049138 170.23 049140 1,090.00 049141 78,246.00 049142 1,916.92 049143 28.60 049144 34.90 049145 4,900.00 049146 11,349.66 049147 982.62 049148 100.00 049149 106.20 049150 6,990.00 049151 213.79 049152 17.00 049153 563.21 0491.54 15.56 11/0 5 /2009 :.2:15 Pi VENDOR SET: 0'_. --, O. Shorew000 DANK: I DEACON BANK DATE RANGE:10 /27/2009 THRU 99/99/9999 VENDOR I.D. NAME 83900 WASTE MANAGEMENT -TC WEST 18500 WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. 28451 WEB AND ASSOCIATES 19800 XCEL ENERGY ** T O T A L S REGULAR CHECKS: HAND CHECKS: DRAFTS: EFT: NON CHECKS: VOID CHECKS: TOTAL ERRORS: 0 VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: 1 BANK: 1 TOTALS: REPORT TOTALS: A/P HLSTOR" CL-7ECK REPORT PAGE: -; NO CHECK AMOUNT CHECK CHECK CHECK CHECK STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT R 11/09/2009 049155 447.81 R 11/09/2009 049156 5,124.99 R 11/09/2009 049157 25,644.50 R 11/09/2009 049158 1,547.73 NO CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNTS TOTAL APPLIED 68 191,477.50 0.00 191,477.50 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 13,772.49 0.00 13,772.49 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 VOID DEBITS VOID DISCOUNTS VOID CREDITS 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL 70 205,249.99 0.00 205,249.99 70 205,249.99 0.00 205,249.99 72 205,249.99 0.00 205,249.99 11 -05 -2009 12:25 AM C O U N C I '_ REPORT BY VENDOR ... NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: 1 VENDOR SORT' KEY DA DESCRIP1'1GN rUV7D NEPARTi %TENT ;AMOUNT AFSCME COUNCIL 5 10 /27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -- UNION DUES General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 263.48 TOTAL: 263.48 AMERICAN MESSAGING 11/09/09 NOV PAGER General Fund Public Works 8.98 11/09/09 NOV PAGER Water Utility Water 4.48 11/09/09 NOV PAGER Sanitary Sever Uti Sewer 4.48 TOTAL: 17.94 ANDERSON, KRISTI B. 11/09/09 S.S.CTR- RECEPTION 10/26 -11 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 240.00 TOTAL: 240.00 SIRES, INC. 11/09/09 OCT RENTAL General Fund Parks & Recreation 869.5 TOTAL: 869.50 BOYER TRUCK PARTS DISTRIBUTION CTR. 11/09/09 STEERING PARTS UNIT 52 General Fund Public Works 225.98 11/09/09 UNIT S2 BUSHING- STEERING General Fund Public Works 66.08 11/09/09 FUEL TANK PART General Fund Public Works 150.84 11/09/09 UNIT 33 General Fund Public Works 8.83 11/09/09 UNIT 33 BRAKE TUBE General Fund Public Works 102.05 TOTAL: 553.78 BROWN, LAWRENCE 11/09/09 AUTODIATER FOR AMESBURY WE Water Utility Water 233.24 TOTAL: 233.24 CA13RERA CLEANING SERVICES 11/09/09 S.S.CTR CLEAN Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 300.00 TOTAL: 300.00 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 11/09/09 LAMP PART General Fund Public Works 41.76 11/09/09 OIL FILTERS General Fund Public Works 27.48 TOTAL: 69.24 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 11/09/09 GAS General Fund Municipal Buildings 74.43 11/09/09 GAS General Fund Public Works 112.07 11/09/09 GAS General Fund Parks & Recreation 67.09 11/09/09 S.S.CTR GAS Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 71.01 11/09/09 GAS Water Utility Water 24.08 - 11/09/09 GAS Water Utility Water 24.57 TOTAL: 373.25 CHANHASSEN -CITY OF 11/09/09 018505 -000 ACCT SVC ADDRES Water Utility Water 11.45 11/09/09 018505 -001 ACCT SVC ADDRES Water Utility Water 3,931.20 TOTAL: 3,942.65 CLEANER UP 11/09/09 S.S.CTR CLEAN SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Conte 228. TOTAL: 228.16 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 11/09/09 PARK MEETING 10/19 -10/30 General Fund Parks & Recreation 2,160.00 11/09/09 SSCC MGMT COMMISSION 7/01- Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 991.63 TOTAL: 3,151.63 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 11/09/09 EQUIP CLEANING PAD General Fund Public Works 60.41 TOTAL: 60.41 DELL MARKETING L.P. 11/09/09 JOE P. LAPTOP /VOSTRO1220 General Fund Protective Inspections 1,298.03 TOTAL: 1,298.03 =_ -05 -2009 12:15 ANN C O U N C 1 -. REPORT By VENDOR - NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: 2 VENDOR .SORT KEY DA TE DESCRIi?TION FUND DEPARTM ATFiOUSIT DREW KRIESEL 11/09/09 S.S.CTR -CLRAN TOTAL: Scuthshore Communi Senior Community Cente 630.00 2,559. TOTAL: 2,559.28 TOTAL: 630.00 ,FTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FEDERAL W/H General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 4,032.73 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 3,088.37 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 722.31 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Council 80.60 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Council 18.87 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Administration 264.92 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Administration 61.96 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund General Government 401.96 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund General Government 94.01 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Finance 309.96 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Finance 72.49 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Planning 347.04 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Planning 81.17 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Protective Inspections 174.15 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Protective Inspections 40.71 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund City Engineer 189.11 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund City Engineer 44.22 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Public Works 551.61 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Public Works 129.00 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Streets & Roadways 164.64 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Streets & Roadways 38.51 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Tree Maintenance 29.29 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Tree Maintenance 6.85 10/27/09 FICA W/H General Fund Parks & Recreation 255.80 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Parks & Recreation 59.83 10/27/09 FICA W/H Water Utility Water 176.87 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H Water Utility Water 41.38 10/27/09 FICA W/H Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 91.76 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 21.45 10/27/09 FICA W/H Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 50.66 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 11.86 TOTAL: 11,654.09 EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING 11/09/09 GIDEON GLEN BENCH CONTRIBU General Fund Planning 42.91 TOTAL: 42.91 EXCELSIOR - CITY OF G & K SERVICES GOPHER SIGN COMPANY GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, IN GRAINGER, INC 11/09/09 600 OAK ST TRAFFICE - 9/08 -1 General Fund 11/09/09 CH SVC 11/09/09 PW SVC 11/09/09 PW SVC General Fund General Fund General Fund 11/09/09 STREET NAME SIGNS 11/09/09 OCT SVC 11/09/09 OCT SVC 11/09/09 LAMP General Fund Traffic Control /Str Li 182.10 TOTAL: 182.10 Municipal Buildings 102.56 Public Works 361.08 Public Works 168.21 TOTAL: 631.85 Traffic Control /Str Li 2,559. TOTAL: 2,559.28 Water Utility Water 90.70 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 90.70 TOTAL: 181.40 General Fund Public Works 590.7 TOTAL: 590.77 1.1 -05 -2009 1.2:15 AM C O U N C I i.: REPORT BY VENDOR - NOR 9, 2009 PAGE: 3 VENDOR SOR K EY DATE DESCR DE AMO HAWKINS, INC. 11 /09/09 CHEMICALS WATER Water UtiIity Water 2,826.07 TOTAL: 2,826.07 HECK, BRIAN 11 /09/09 OCT CELL /MILEAGES General Fund Administration 79.99 11/09/09 OCT CELL /MILEAGES General Fund Administration 22.94 TOTAL: 102.93 HOME SECURITY STORE INC 11/09/09 ALARM DIALER AMESBURY Water Utility Water __ 2 33.24 TOTAL: 233.24 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST- 302131 -457 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS- DEFERRED COM General Fund NON - DEPARTMENTAL 1,609.60 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS- DEFERRED COM General Fund NON - DEPARTMENTAL 210.96 TOTAL: - 1,820.56 J.A. LARSON COMPANY 11/09/09 BULBS- PW SHOP General Fund Public Works 64.95 11/09/09 BULBS General Fund Public Works 52.76 TOTAL: 117.71 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 11/09/09 GEN RETAINER MATTE General Fund Professional Svcs 1,590.20 11/09/09 RON JOHNSON General Fund Professional Svcs 949.95 11/09/09 RON JOHNSON LITIGATION General Fund Professional Svcs 1,841.00 11/09/09 SMITHTOWN LN PROJECT Street Capital Imp Street Capt Improvemen 247.00 TOTAL: 4,628.15 KLM ENGINEERING INC 11/09/09 INSTALL OF TTM ANTENNA General Fund NON - DEPARTMENTAL 1,058.00 TOTAL: 1,058.00 LEE PEST CONTROL .INC 11/09/09 S.S.CTR SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Cents 70.00 TOTAL: 70.00 MARTIN MARIETTA AGGREGATES 11/09/09 LAST OF SEAL COAT ROCK Street Capital Imp Street Capt Improvemen 9,572.66 TOTAL: 9,572.66 MENARDS 11/09/09 DUMP TRUCKS General Fund Public Works 50.45 11/09/09 ROOF PATCH -SE WELL Water Utility Water 115.99 TOTAL: 166.44 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC 11/09/09 OCT POSTAGE ADDT'L General Fund General Government 9.44 11/09/09 OCT NEWSLETTER SVC General Fund General Government 355.20 11/09/09 DEC NEWSLETTER POSTAGE General Fund General Government 500.00 TOTAL: 864.64 MINNESOTA CONWAY AND FIRE SAFETY 11/09/09 S.S.CTR SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 226.52 11/09/09 PUMP DISCHARGE HOSE Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 69.00 TOTAL: 295.52 MISC. VENDOR CONNIE BLANCHARD 11/09/09 S.S.CTR- COOKING CLASS Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 370.50 TOTAL: 370.50 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 11/09/09 3RD QTR BLDG SURCHARGE General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 700.06 TOTAL: 700.06 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 10/27/09 STATE W/H General Fund NON - DEPARTMENTAL 2,118.40 TOTAL: 2,118.40 MN STATE PATROL 11/09/09 2009 DECALS -DOT VEHICLE CE General Fund Public Works 24.00 -1 -OS -2009 12 :1.5 AM VENDOR SORT KEY C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOR - NOV 9, 2009 DATE DESCRIPTION 7"U NT" DEPARTMENT TOTAL: PAGE: AMOUNT 24.00 NGUYEN, MICHELLE 11 /09/09 MILEAGES General Fund Finance- 187.74 TOTAL: 1@7.74 NIELSEN, BRADLEY 11/09/09 SLUC /PC DINNER /GIS PKG /PAR General Fund Planning 50.54 11/09/09 SLUC /PC DINNER /GIS PKG /PAR General Fund Planning 188.00 TOTAL: 238.54 OFFICE DEPOT 11/09/09 LABEL /TONER General Fund General Government 101.29 TOTAL: 101.29 PAETEC 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 General Fund Municipal Buildings 416.68 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 General Fund Public Works 46.90 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 General Fund Parks & Recreation 145.60 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 Water Utility Water 98.70 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 Water Utility Water 100.2 TOTAL: 808.13 PANCHYSITYN, JEAN 11/09/09 LASERFICHE TRAINING PAT & General Fund General Government 745.10 TOTAL: 745.10 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund NON - DEPARTMENTAL 3,010.68 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Administration 292.31 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund General Government 428.90 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Finance 337.46 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Planning 409.58 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Protective Inspections 213.79 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund City Engineer 209.07 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Public Works 618.74 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Streets & Roadways 187.12 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Tree Maintenance 31.89 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA General Fund Parks & Recreation 302.64 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA Water Utility Water 198.51 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 101.88 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 55.1 TOTAL: 6,397.73 POTTS, KENNETH N. 11/09/09 OCT PROSECUTIONS General Fund Professional Svcs 2,291.6 TOTAL: 2,291.66 PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL GROUP 11/09/09 NOV- DENTAL PREM General Fund Unallocated Expenses 743.36 TOTAL: 743.36 QWEST 11/09/09 10/25 -11/25 SVC General Fund Municipal Buildings 111.81 11/09/09 10/25/11/24 SVC Water Utility Water 59.56 11/09/09 10/25 -11/24 SVC Water Utility Water 59.56 TOTAL: 230.93 ROGERS, DON 11/09/09 PACKETS & MILEAGES 9/10 -10 General Fund General Government 320.00 11/09/09 PACKETS & MILEAGES 9/10 -10 General Fund General Government 57.20 TOTAL: 377.20 RUMPCA CO INC 11/09/09 BRUSH General Fund Tree Maintenance 291.00 TOTAL: 291.00 11 -.05 -2009 12:15 AM C O U N !'.. -, REPORT BY VENDOR - NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: V SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOi,'�IT SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 11/09/09 C.H_ ROAD COUNT General Fund Municipal Buildings 44.31 11/09/09 PARTS General Fund Public Works 7.77- 11/09/09 PARTS General Fund Public Works 38.74 1 PART General Fund Public Works 2.13 11/09/09 PART General Fund Public Works 0.53- 11/09/09 PARTS General Fund Public Works 10.64 11/09/09 PART General Fund Streets & Roadways 9.07 11/09/09 PARTS General Fund Parks & Recreation 44.32 11/09/09 PARTS General Fund Parks & Recreation 10.69 11/09/09 CONDUIT BENDER Water Utility Water 9.33 11/09/09 PART Water Utility Water 9.30 TOTAL: 170.23 SIR LINES -A -LOT 11/09/09 LAID OUT & STRIPED PARKING General Fund Streets & Roadways 1,090.00 TOTAL: 1,090.00 SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT 11/09/09 NOV OPERATING BUDGET EXP General Fund Police Protection 78,246.00 TOTAL: 78,246.00 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 11/09/09 GAS General Fund Public Works 1,916.92 TOTAL: 1,916.92 SUN NEWSPAPERS 11/09/09 PAN NELSINE PROJECT 10/22 General Fund General Government 28.60 TOTAL: 28.60 T- MOBILE 11/09/09 JOE P. CEL SVC -9/21 -10/20 General Fund Protective Inspections 34.9 TOTAL: 34.90 TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 11/09/09 SEPT -SHWD NELSINE DR REHAB Street Capital Imp Street Capt Improvemen 2,450.00 11/09/09 SEPT SHWD MEADOWVIEW RD RE Street Capital Imp Street Capt Improvemen 2,450.00 TOTAL: 4,900.00 TONKA BAY -CITY OF 11/09/09 COUNTY RD 19 -FINAL CLOSEOU MSA Capital Improv NON - DEPARTMENTAL 11,307.13 11/09/09 4TH QTR WATER CONN Water Utility Water 42.53 TOTAL: 11,349.66 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 11/09/09 OCT NEWSLETTER SVC General Fund General Government 982.62 TOTAL: 982.62 TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC 11/09/09 AUG BACTERIA ANALYSIS Water Utility Water 100.00 TOTAL: 100.00 US AUTO FORCE 11/09/09 BATTERY UTILITY General Fund Public Works 106.20 TOTAL: ].06.20 VEOLIA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES VERIZON WIRELESS VICTORIA REPAIR AND MFG 11/09/09 OCT RECYCLING Recycling Utility Recycling TOTAL: 11/09/09 L.S. SVC 9/22 -10/21 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 11/09/09 METAL BAR STOCK General Fund VIKING LAND TREE CARE INC 11/09/09 TREE REMOVAL General Fund 11/09/09 TREE REMOVAL General Fund TOTAL Public Works TOTAL: Tree Maintenance Tree Maintenance 6,990.00 6,990.00 213.79 213.79 17.00 17.00 482.75 80.46 I1 -05 -2009 .- -:15 AM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDOQ3 - NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: 6 VE NOGR SOR 1' i <EY DA TA_. D &�iCR1U1. ION FUT;D JE PT- .R'S "•'F ^J " R`OOUN " TOTAL: 563 .2 1 WACONIA FARM SUPPLY 11/09/09 FILET BULLS General Fund Public Works 15.S6 TOTAL: 15.56 WASTE MANAGEMENT -TC WEST 11/09/09 NOV SVC General Fund Public Works 297.94 11/09/09 NOV- S.S.CTR Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 149.87 TOTAL: 447.81 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -HSA General Fund NON- DEPARTMENTAL 305.00 TOTAL: 305.00 WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. 11/09/09 OCT SVC General Fund Streets & Roadways 5,124.99 TOTAL: 5,124.99 WSB AND ASSOCIATES 11/09/09 ANNUAL BRIDGE INSPECTIONS General Fund City Engineer 1,008.00 11/09/09 SEPT SMITHTOWN LN REHAB Street Capital Imp Street Capt Improvemen 2,529.00 11/09/09 SEPT HARDING LN /AVE REHAB Street Capital Imp Street Capt Improvemen 22,107.50 TOTAL: 25,644.50 XCEL ENERGY 11/09/09 5700 CTY RD 19 General Fund Traffic Control /Str Li 28.61 11/09/09 5700 CTY RD 19 UNIT LIGHTS General Fund Traffic Control /Str Li - 171.85 11/09/09 5735 CTRY CLUB RD- S.S.CTR Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 662.80 11/09/09 24253 SMITHTOWN RD Water Utility Water 684.47 TOTAL: 1,547.73 PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 General Fund Council 1,300.00 General Fund Administration 4,330.42 General Fund General Government 6,483.21 General Fund Finance 4,999.40 General Fund Planning 6,067.75 General Fund Protective Inspections 3,167.44 General Fund City Engineer 3,097.41 General Fund Public Works 9,166.29 General Fund Streets & Roadways 2,772.28 General Fund Tree Maintenance 472.49 General Fund Parks & Recreation 4,483.60 Water Utility Water 2,940.76 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 1,509.34 Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 816.97 TOTAL: 51,607.36 -05 -2009 12:15 AM VENDOR SOT - -,'T KEY 101 404 405 490 601 611 621 631 C O U N C i L REPORT By VENDOR - NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: 7 DA DESCRIPTION FUND DEP7RTMEN'T AMOUNT ---- ------ FUND TOTALS == - -- - -- ---- General Fund 180,210.28 Street Capital Improvemen 39,356.16 MSA Capital Improvement 11,307.13 Southshore Community Ctr. 3,940.49 Water Utility 12,016.24 Sanitary Sewer Utility 2,102.40 Recycling Utility 6,990.00 Stormwater Management Util 934.65 GRAND TOTAL: 256,857.35 TOTAL PAGES: 7 11 -05 -2009 -2:13 AM C O U N C I L REPORT BE DEPARTMENT - NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: i_ DEPARTMENT FUND VENDO N AME DATE DESCR --ION AM OUNT NON - DEPARTMENTAL General Fund _-57PS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FEDERAL W/H 4,032.73 10/27/09 FICA W/H 3,088.37 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 722.31 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 3,010.68 ICMA RETIREMENT 'TRUST- 302131 - 4 57 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS- DEFERRED COM 1,609.60 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS- DEFERRED COM 210.96 AFSCME COUNCIL 5 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS - UNION DUES 263.48 MN DEPT OF REVENUE 10/27/09 STATE W/H 2,118.40 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 11/09/09 3RD QTR BLDG SURCHARGE 700.06 KLM ENGINEERING INC 11/09/09 INSTALL OF TTM ANTENNA 1,058.00 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -HSA 305.00 TOTAL: 17,119.59 Council General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 80.60 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 18.87 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 1,300.00 TOTAL: 1,399.47 Administration General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 264.92 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 61.96 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 292.31 HECK, BRIAN 11/09/09 OCT CELL /MILEAGES 79.99 11/09/09 OCT CELL /MILEAGES 22.94 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 4,330.42 TOTAL: 5,052.54 General Government General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 401.96 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 94.01 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 428.90 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC 11/09/09 OCT POSTAGE ADDT'L 9.44 11/09/09 OCT NEWSLETTER SVC 355.20 11/09/09 DEC NEWSLETTER POSTAGE 500.00 OFFICE DEPOT 11/09/09 LABEL /TONER 101.29 PANCHYSITYN, JEAN 11/09/09 LASERFICHE TRAINING PAT & 745.10 ROGERS, DON 11/09/09 PACKETS & MILEAGES 9/10 -10 320.00 11/09/09 PACKETS & MILEAGES 9/10 -10 57.20 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 11/09/09 OCT NEWSLETTER SVC 982.62 SUN NEWSPAPERS 11/09/09 PHN NELSINE PROJECT 10/22 28.60 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 6,483.21 TOTAL: 10,507.53 Finance General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 309.96 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 72.49 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 337.46 NGUYEN, MICHELLE 11/09/09 MILEAGES 187.74 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 4,999.40 TOTAL: 5,907.05 Professional Svcs General Fund KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 11/09/09 GEN RETAINER MATTE 1,590.20 11/09/09 RON JOHNSON 949.95 11/09/09 RON JOHNSON LITIGATION 1,841.00 POTTS, KENNETH N. 11/09/09 OCT PROSECUTIONS _ 2,291.66 TOTAL: 6,672.81 Planning General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 347.04 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 81.17 11 - -05 -2009 '2:13 AM C O U N C = L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: 2 DEPARTMENT' IUND VENDO P.'ANI DATE DESCRI='TIOn7 AMOUNT PERA 10 /27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 409.58 EXCELSIOR ENGRAVING 11/09/09 GIDEON GLEN BENCH CONTRIBU 42.91 NIELSEN, BRADLEY 11/09/09 SLUC /PC DINNER /GIS PKG /PAR 50.54 11/09/09 SLUC /PC DINNER /GIS PKG /PAR 188.00 "PAYROLL EXPENSES 10 /26/2009 - 99/99/9999 6,067.75 TOTAL: 7,186.99 Municipal Buildings General Fund G & K SERVICES 11/09/09 CH SVC 102.56 PAETEC 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 416.68 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 11/09/09 GAS 74.43 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 11/09/09 C.H. ROAD COUNT 44.31 QWEST 11/09/09 10/25 -11/25 SVC 111.81 TOTAL: 749.79 Police Protection General Fund SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT 11/09/09 NOV OPERATING BUDGET EXP 78,246.00 TOTAL: 78,246.00 Protective Inspections General Fund FETES - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 174.15 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 40.71 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 213.79 DELL MARKETING L.P. 11/09/09 JOE P. LAPTOP /VOSTRO1220 1,298.03 T- MOBILE 11/09/09 JOE P. CEL SVC -9/21 -10/20 34.90 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 3,167.44 TOTAL: 4,929.02 City Engineer General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 189.11 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 44.22 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 209.07 WSB AND ASSOCIATES 11/09/09 ANNUAL BRIDGE INSPECTIONS 1,008.00 PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 3,097.41 TOTAL: 4,547.81 Public Works General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 551.61 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 129.00 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 618.74 BOYER TRUCK PARTS DISTRIBUTION CTR. 11/09/09 STEERING PARTS UNIT 52 225.98 11/09/09 UNIT 52 BUSHING - STEERING 66.08 11/09/09 FUEL TANK PART 150.84 11/09/09 UNIT 33 8.83 11/09/09 UNIT 33 BRAKE TUBE 102.05 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS 11/09/09 LAMP PART 41.76 11/09/09 OIL FILTERS 27.48 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS 11/09/09 EQUIP CLEANING PAD 60.41 G & K SERVICES 11/09/09 PW SVC 361.08 11/09/09 PW SVC 168.21 J.H. LARSON COMPANY 11/09/09 BULBS- PW SHOP 64.95 11/09/09 BULBS 52.76 PAETEC 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 46.90 MENARDS 11/09/09 DUMP TRUCKS 50.45 AMERICAN MESSAGING 11/09/09 NOV PAGER 8.98 MN STATE PATROL 11/09/09 2009 DECALS -DOT VEHICLE CE 24.00 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 11/09/09 GAS 112.07 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 11/09/09 PARTS 7.77- 11/09/09 PARTS 38.74 11/09/09 PART 2.13 11/09/09 PART 0.53- LL -0, 2009 12:13 AM C O U N C I L REPORT By DEPARTMENT - NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: 3 DEPARTMENT VENDOR NAM DATE DESCRTP7'ION AMOUN 11/09/09 PARTS 10.64 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 11 /09/09 GAS 1,916.92 VICTORIA REPAIR AND MFG 11/09/09 METAL BAR STOCK 17.00 WACONIA FARM SUPPLY 11/09/09 FILET BULLS 15.56 GRAINGER, INC 11/09/09 LAMP 590.77 US AUTO FORCE 11/09/09 BATTERY UTILITY 106.20 WASTE NLA_NAGEMENT -TC WEST 11/09/09 NOV SVC 297.94 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 9,166.29 TOTAL: 15,026.07 Streets & Roadways General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 164.64 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 38.51 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 187.12 WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. 11/09/09 OCT SVC 5,124.99 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 11/09/09 PART 9.07 SIR LINES -A -LOT 11/09/09 LAID OUT & STRIPED PARKING 1,090.00 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 2,772.28 TOTAL: 9,386.61 Traffic Control /Str Li General Fund EXCELSIOR -CITY OF 11/09/09 600 OAK ST TRAFFICE- 9/08 -1 182.10 GOPHER SIGN COMPANY 11/09/09 STREET NAME SIGNS 2,559.28 XCEL ENERGY 11/09/09 5700 CTY RD 19 28.61 11/09/09 5700 CTY RD 19 UNIT LIGHTS 171.85 TOTAL: 2,941.84 Tree Maintenance General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 29.29 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 6.85 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 31.89 RUMPCA CO INC 11/09/09 BRUSH 291.00 VIKING LAND TREE CARE INC 11/09/09 TREE REMOVAL 482.75 11/09/09 TREE REMOVAL 80.46 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 472. TOTAL: 1,394.73 Parks & Recreation General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 255.80 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 59.83 PERA 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 302.64 BIFFS, INC. 11/09/09 OCT RENTAL 869.50 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 11/09/09 PARK MEETING 10/19 -10/30 2,160.00 PAETEC 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 145.60 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 11/09/09 GAS 67.09 SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE 11/09/09 PARTS 44.32 11/09/09 PARTS 10.69 * *PAYROLL EXPENSES 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 4,483. TOTAL: 8,399.07 Unallocated Expenses General Fund PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL GROUP 11/09/09 NOV- DENTAL PREM 743.36 TOTAL: 743.36 Street Capt Improvemen Street Capital Imp KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 11/09/09 SMITHTOWN LN PROJECT 247.00 MARTIN MARIETTA AGGREGATES 11/09/09 LAST OF SEAL COAT ROCK 9,572.66 TKDA ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 11/09/09 SEPT -SHWD NELSINE DR REHAB 2,450.00 11/09/09 SEPT SHWD MEADOWVIEW RD RE 2,450.00 WSB AND ASSOCIATES 11/09/09 SEPT SMITHTOWN LN REHAB 2,529.00 11/09/09 SEPT HARDING LN /AVE REHAB 22,107 TOTAL: 39,356.16 i1 -05 -2009 12: 13 AM C O U N C' I i, REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - NOV 9, 2009 PAGE: Al MEDICARE W/H DEPARTMENT FUND VE NAME DAFE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT NON - DEPARTMENTAL MSA CaDltal Improv TONER BAY -CITY OF 1=/09/09 COUN - TY RD 19 -FINAL CLOSEOU 11,307.13 018505 -000 ACCT SVC ADDRES 11.45 11/09/09 TOTAL: 11,307.13 Senior Community Cente Southshore Communi ANDERSON, KRISTI B. 11/09/09 S.S.CTR- "RECF..PTION 10/26 -11 240.00 OCT SVC 90.70 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 11 /09/09 SSCC MGMT COMMISSION 7/01- 991.63 11/09/09 MISC. VENDOR CONNIE BLANCHARD 11/09/09 S.S.CTR- COOKING CLASS 370.50 SVC 9/26 -10/25 100.25 LEE PEST CONTROL INC 11/09/09 S.S.CTR SVC 70.00 11/09/09 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 11/09/09 S.S.CTR GAS 71.01 GAS 24.08 XCEL ENERGY 11/09/09 5735 CTRY CLUB RD- S.S.CTR 662.80 11/09/09 DREW KRIEBEL 11/09/09 S.S.CTR -CLEAN 630.00 CONDUIT BENDER 9.33 CABRERA CLEANING SERVICES 11/09/09 S.S.CTR CLEAN 300.00 11/09/09 CLEANER UP 11/09/09 S.S.CTR CLEAN SVC 228.16 AUG BACTERIA ANALYSIS 100.00 MINNESOTA CONWAY AND FIRE SAFETY 11/09/09 S.S.CTR SVC 226.52 11/09/09 WASTE MANAGEMENT -TC WEST 11/09/09 NOV- S.S.CTR 149.87 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 TOTAL: 3,940.49 Water Water Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H PERA BROWN, LAWRENCE CHANHASSEN -CITY OF HAWKINS, INC. GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, IN HOME SECURITY STORE INC PAETEC MENARDS AMERICAN MESSAGING CENTERPOINT ENERGY XCEL ENERGY SHOREWOOD TRUE VALUE TONKA BAY -CITY OF TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC QWEST * *PAYROLL EXPENSES Sewer Sanitary Sewer Uti EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H PERA GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL, IN AMERICAN MESSAGING VERIZON WIRELESS MINNESOTA CONWAY AND FIRE SAFETY * *PAYROLL EXPENSES Recycling Recycling Utility VEOLIA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Stormwater Managem EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 10/27/09 FICA W/H 176.87 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 41.38 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 198.51 11/09/09 AUTODIATER FOR AMESBURY WE 233.24 11/09/09 018505 -000 ACCT SVC ADDRES 11.45 11/09/09 018505 -001 ACCT SVC ADDRES 3,931.20 11/09/09 CHEMICALS WATER 2,826.07 11/09/09 OCT SVC 90.70 11/09/09 ALARM DIALER AMESBURY 233.24 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 98.70 11/09/09 SVC 9/26 -10/25 100.25 11/09/09 ROOF PATCH -SE WELL 115.99 11/09/09 NOV PAGER 4.48 11/09/09 GAS 24.08 11/09/09 GAS 24.57 11/09/09 24253 SMITHTOWN RD 684.47 11/09/09 CONDUIT BENDER 9.33 11/09/09 PART 9.30 11/09/09 4TH QTR WATER CONN 42.53 11/09/09 AUG BACTERIA ANALYSIS 100.00 11/09/09 10/25/11/24 SVC 59.56 11/09/09 10/25 -11/24 SVC 59.56 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 2,940.76 TOTAL: 12,016.24 10/27/09 FICA W/H 91.76 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 21.45 10/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA 101.88 11/09/09 OCT SVC 90.70 11/09/09 NOV PAGER 4.48 11/09/09 L.S. SVC 9/22 -10/21 213.79 11/09/09 PUMP DISCHARGE HOSE 69.00 10/26/2009 - 99/99/9999 1,509.34 TOTAL: 2,102.40 11/09/09 OCT RECYCLING 6,990.00 TOTAL: 6,990.00 10/27/09 FICA W/H 50.66 10/27/09 MEDICARE W/H 11.86 11 -05 -2009 12:13 AM C 0 U N C I L RL'PCR1 DY DEPARTMENT - Nov 9, 2009 PAGE: 5 D E'UND Vi :'.NOOK N",.M1 DA'. ^F DESCRIP`T'ION PERA 0/27/09 P/R DEDUCTS -PERA "PAYROLL EXPENSES 10 /26/2009 -- 99/99/9999 i•OTAi, FUND TOTALS =__ ------- 101 General Fund 180,210.28 404 Street Capital Improvemen 39,356.16 405 MSA Capital Improvement 11,307.13 490 Southshore Community Ctr. 3,940.49 601 Water Utility 12,016.24 611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 2,102.40 621 Recycling Utility 6,990.00 631 Stormwater Management Util 934.65 GRAND TOTAL: 256,857.35 AMOU3v T 55.16 934.65 TOTAL PAGES: 5 COUNCIL ACTION FORM Department Engineering Council Meeting 11/4/09 Item Number: Background / Previous Action In 2010 we propose to improve Meadowview Road and a segment of Wild Rose Lane. During the preproject inspection the sanitary televising identified several issues in need of repair. The request for quote was sent to four firms, inviting them to quote the repair project. Two firms responded with a quote. Attachment 1 is the Quote Tabulation for the 2010 Sanitary Sewer Repair Project. Quotes were opened and tabulated on November 04, 2009. The low quoter is Infratech Inc. in the amount of $8,285.00. Options 1. Direct staff to contract with Infratech Inc. for this project. 2. Direct staff to utilize a different quoter. 3. Do nothing. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends awarding the contract for the 2010 Sanitary Sewer Repairs be awarded to Infratech Inc. not to exceed $8,285. A resolution is attached for your consideration. Council Action: CITY OF SHOREWOOD + SOLUTION N e 09- A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTE AND AWARDING C NT CT FOR 2010 ROAD IMPROVEMENT P CT SANITARY SEWER REPAIRS WHEREAS, pursuant to a request for quotes for local improvements designated as 2010 Sanitary Sewer Repair Project, City Project No. 10 -02, quotes were received and opened on November 4, 2009; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that Infratech Inc. is the lowest quoter in compliance with the specifications. lip ®W, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: 1. That the Mayor and City Administrator /Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract not to exceed $8,285 with Infratech Inc., in the name of the City of Shorewood, Project No. 10 -02 according to the plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Administrator /Clerk. 1113W D111 I ! ! ! !1 this 9th day of November, 2009. ATTEST: Christine Lizee, Mayor Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk City of horswood Quote Tabulation Sanitary Sewer Repair Project City Project No. 10-02 'Quotes Opened: November 04 2009, 10:00 A.M. City Shorewood Engineer: James Landini M M sm= - 3 IVisu sewer 4 1 Insituform Technologies 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . I , off of COUNCIL ACTION FORM Department: Planning Council Meeting: 11/09/2009 Item dumber: is -.. ,• "r - �' - r • � r. �I • .. ,,;., At the last Council meeting the City Council agreed with a recommendation from the Planning Commission that the City of Shorewood should adopt a resolution requesting that Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County Department of Transportation improve signage and education for trail crossing, especially on busy roads (County Road 19). Staff suggested that the recommendation for signage found in an advisory report from the City Engineers Association of Minnesota (Guidance for the Installation of Pedestrian Crossing Facilities, dated 28 January 2009) would serve as a significant part of the solution to this issue. A draft resolution to that effect is attached for your consideration. Options Adopt or modify the attached draft resolution. Staff Recommendation Obviously, the draft resolution is our recommendation. Staff will take no offense if the Council chooses to modify it in any fashion. It should be noted that whatever resolution is adopted will be forwarded with a letter from the Mayor and City Council to other municipalities, requesting they support our efforts. As a separate matter, we will request that Hennepin County Transportation Department remove any striping at the current intersection of County Road 19 and the LRT Trail that confuses the trail crossing with a crosswalk. Council Action: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING THE LAKE MINNETONKA LRT TRAIL OPERATED V THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT WHEREAS, Three Rivers Park District (Park District) operates the Lake Minnetonka LRT Trail (LRT Trail) extending through several communities between Hopkins and the Carver Park Reserve; and WHEREAS, the LRT Trail serves as a valuable recreational and transportation facility connecting communities in the southwest portion of the Metropolitan region; and WHEREAS, the LRT Trail includes numerous at -grade intersections with local and regional roadways; and WHEREAS, at -grade street and trail intersections present numerous potential conflicts between motorists and trail users; and WHEREAS, there is apparent confusion among motorists and trail users as to the issue of right of way, some of which confusion is compounded by inconsistent signage at trail crossings; and WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood believes that safety at trail /roadway crossings would be greatly enhanced by improved and consistent signage at crossings, as well as by concerted educational efforts by County, State and local agencies; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood hereby requests: That Three Rivers Park District and the Hennepin County Department of Transportation adopt the recommendations for trail and roadway signage contained in Guidance for the Installation of Pedestrian Crossing Facilities, dated 28 January 2009, prepared by the City Engineers Association of Minnesota. 2. That Three Rivers Park District develop educational handouts addressing the issue of right of way at trail /roadway crossings and differentiating trail crossings from crosswalks. Educational materials should be readily available to the public at trail crossings and trail information kiosks. That the Minnesota Department of Transportation develop an educational campaign using all types of media including, but not limited to, print, internet, television and radio, to educate the public as to issues of right of way at trail /roadway crossings and distinguishing between trail crossings and crosswalks. 4. That other municipalities join in support of these requests by adopting this or a similar resolution and forwarding it to Three livers Park District, Hennepin County Department of Transportation and the Minnesota Department of Transportation, with copies sent to the Hennepin County ward and State Legislators. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of November Ii VINIM- � Christine Lizee, Mayor Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk N COUNCIL FORM Description /Background /Previous Action The City Council passed a Resolution (00 -066) in June of 2000 authorizing the Public Works Director and the City Attorney to begin the process of acquiring necessary property along Vine Hill Road for the use of a bike and pedestrian trail. The Right of Way was to extend an additional 10' in width abutting Vine Hill Road along an area described: the north one -half of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of section 36, township 118, range 23. The acquisition was to proceed in accordance with Minnesota Statute 117. To my knowledge and that of the Public Works Director, this project never commenced and land was not acquired. The adjacent property owner has raised issues with this resolution "being on the books ". To address the owners concerns, Staff has prepared the attached Resolution rescinding Resolution 00 -066 adopted by the Council in June, 2000. Recommendation: Staff recommends Council adopt the attached Resolution Council Action: CITY OF SHORE WOOD RESOLUTION NO. 09- .' • • • • • • • . - • ' - • • l • !� i•• • - . ti's • WHEREAS, Resolution 00 -066 authorized and directed the City Engineer and Attorney to undertake and commence the acquisition of right of way along Vine Hill Road for an off road bike and pedestrian trail; and WHEREAS, the City Council has decided not to pursue the construction of this trail at this time; and WHEREAS, the subject property identified in the Resolution is described as the North % of the NE % of the NE % of Section 36, T 117, R 23, Hennepin County, and State of Minnesota. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, that Resolution Number 00 -066 "A Resolution Relating to Vine Hill Road Trail and Right -Of -Way" is hereby rescinded. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD on this 9th day of November, 2009. Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Brian W. Heck, Cit Ad minist rat or Tuesday, October 13, 2009 CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. 00- 066 A RESOLUTION RELATING TO VINE HILL ROAD TRAIL AND RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood is a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City is charged with the construction, operation and maintenance of public facilities throughout the City; and WHEREAS, Vine Hill Road is a collector street as depicted on the Shorewood Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has undertaken hearings and public discussion relating to a pedestrian and bike trail adjacent to Vine Hill Road (the Vine Hill Road Trail); and WHEREAS, the Vine Hill Road Trail is intended to improve public safety through the separation of motorized vehicles from pedestrians and cyclists; and WHEREAS, the Vine Hill Road Trail is a proposed public improvement project adjacent to the existing Vine Hill Road; and WHEREAS, the owners of property located in the north one -half of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter of section 36 township 117 range 23 have asserted an interest in the real estate ® up to and abutting the center line of Vine Hill Road; and WHEREAS, the City desires to construct the Vine Hill Trail as a public improvement project within a public right -of -way. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The City of Shorewood finds a public purpose in ordering the Vine Hill Road Trail improvements; and 2. In order to ensure no delay in the improvements and to further remove any ambiguity as to ownership, the City Council of the City of Shorewood directs the City Engineer and City Attorney to undertake the acquisition of additional right -of -way 10 feet in width abutting the existing Vine Hill Road along the property described in the attached Exhibit A in accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 117. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REWOOD this 26th day of June, 2000. WOODY LOVE, MAYOR ATTEST is BRADLEY J. NI N, A ING CITY ADMINISTRATOR EXHIBIT A North 112 of the NE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 36, T 117, R 23, Hennepin County, State of Minnesota. 11 0 #596576 v I ACTI Department Council Meeting Item number Finance November 9, 2009 3 Item Description: Auditip,���� •• sm The City's independent auditors Abdo, Eick and Meyers, LLP, have submitted their engagement contract for services for the December 31, 2009 annual audit. State statute requires that all cities with a population over 2,500 have an annual audit by an outside independent CPA firm. The estimated fee for the 12/31/2009 audit services is $24,533, as per the 3 -year proposal submitted by the firm last year. The firm of Abdo, Eick & Meyers, LLP has broad experience in Governmental auditing, demonstrated by their extensive list of clients. The Partner -in- Charge of Shorewood's activities is Mr. Andrew Berg, CPA, and he conducts the field work with the assistance of various junior auditors. Shorewood's annual audit usually takes place in early April. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the Audit Engagement Contract with the firm of Abdo, Eick and Meyer, LLP for auditing services for the year ending December 31, 2009. Council Action: Honorable Mayor and Council City of Shorewood Shorewood, Minnesota We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide the City of Shorewood (the City) for the year ended December 31, 2009. We will audit the financial statements of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fiord, and the aggregate remaining fund information, which collectively comprise the basic financial statements of the City as of and for the year ended December 31, 2009. Accounting standards generally accepted in the United States provide for certain required supplementary information (RSI), such as management's discussion and analysis (MD &A), to accompany the City's basic financial statements. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited procedures to City's RSL These limited procedures will consist principally of inquiries of management regarding the methods of measurement and presentation, which management is responsible for affirming to us in its representation letter. Unless we encounter problems with the presentation of the RSI or with procedures relating to it, we will disclaim an opinion on it. The following RSI is required by generally accepted accounting principles and will be subjected to certain limited procedures, but will not be audited: 1. Management's Discussion and Analysis. Supplementary information other than RSI also accompanies the City's basic financial statements. We will subject the following supplementary information to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the basic financial statements and will provide an opinion on it in relation to the basic financial statements: 1. Combining and Individual Fund Financial Statements and Schedules. 2. Summary Financial Report - Revenues and Expenditures for General Operations - Governmental Funds. The following additional information accompanying the basic financial statements will not be subjected to the auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements, and for which our auditor's report will disclaim an opinion. 1. Statistical Section Audit Objective The objective of our audit is the expression of opinions as to whether your basic financial statements are fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and to report on the fairness of the additional information referred to in the first paragraph when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Our audit will be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and will include tests of the accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to enable urs to express such opinions. If our opinions on the financial statements are other than unqualified, we will fully discuss the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to form or have not formed opinions, we may decline to express opinions or to issue a report as a result of this engagement. 952.835.9090 • Fax 952.835.3261 www.aemcpas.com 2009 Audit Engagement Letter - Standard City of Shorewood November 3, 2009 Page 2 r; Management is responsible for the basic financial statements and all accompanying information as well as all representations contained therein. We will prepare a general ledger trial balance for use during the audit. Our preparation of the trial balance will be limited to formatting information in the general ledger into a working trial balance. As part of the audit we will prepare a draft Of your financial statements and related notes. We will also use the financial statements to complete the Office of the State Auditors' City Reporting Form. You are responsible for making all management decisions and performing all management functions relating to the financial statements and related notes and for accepting full responsibility for such decisions. You will be required to acknowledge in the management representation letter that you have reviewed and approved the financial statements and related notes prior to their issuance and have accepted responsibility for them. Further, you are required to designate an individual with suitable skill, knowledge, or experience to oversee any non -audit services we provide and for evaluating the adequacy and results of those services and accepting responsibility for them. Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal controls, including monitoring ongoing activities; for the selection and application of accounting principles; and for the fair presentation in the financial statements of the respective financial position of the governmental activities, the business -type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City's and the respective changes in financial position and where applicable, cash flows, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Management is also responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us and for the accuracy and completeness of that information. Your responsibilities include adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements and confirming to us in the representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole. You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud or illegal acts affecting the government involving (1) management, (2) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (3) others where the fraud or illegal acts could have a material effect on the financial statements. Your responsibilities include informing us of your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the government received in communications from employees, former employees, regulators, or others. In addition, you are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the entity complies with applicable laws and regulations. Audit Procedures - General An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be examined and the areas to be tested. We will plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable rather than absolute assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether from (I) errors, (2) fraudulent financial reporting, (3) misappropriation of assets, or (4) violations of laws or governmental regulations that are attributable to the entity or to acts by management or employees acting on behalf of the entity. Because an audit is designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material misstatements may exist and not be detected by us. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial misstatements, or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However, we will inform you of any material errors and any fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets that come to our attention. We will also inform you of any violations of laws or governmental regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not extend to any later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors. 952.835.9090 • Fax 952.835.3261 www.aemepa -corn 2009 Audit Engagement Letter - Standard City of Shorewood November 3, 2009 Page 3 Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, funding sources, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our audit, we will require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and related matters. Audit Procedures - Internal Control Our audit will include obtaining an understanding of the entity and its environment, including internal control, sufficient to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements and to design the nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures. An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify deficiencies in internal control. However, during the audit, we will communicate to management and those charged with governance internal control related matters that are required to be communicated under AICPA professional standards. Audit Procedures - Compliance As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, we will perform tests of the City's compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and agreements. However, the objective of our audit will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an opinion. Engagement Administration, Fees, and Other We may from time to time, and depending on the circumstances, use third -party service providers in serving your account. We may share confidential information about you with these service providers, but remain committed to maintaining the confidentiality and security of your information. Accordingly, we maintain internal policies, procedures, and safeguards to protect the confidentiality of your personal information. In addition, we will secure confidentiality agreements with all service providers to maintain the confidentiality of your information and we will take reasonable precautions to determine that they have appropriate procedures in place to prevent the unauthorized release of your confidential information to others. In the event that we are unable to secure an appropriate confidentiality agreement, you will be asked to provide your consent prior to the sharing of your confidential information with the third -party service provider. Furthermore, we will remain responsible for the work provided by any such third -party service providers. We understand that your employees will prepare all cash or other confirmations we request and will locate any documents selected by us for testing. Andrew K. Berg, CPA is the engagement partner and is responsible for supervising the engagement and signing the report. We expect to begin our audit in April 2010 and to issue our reports no later than June 30, 2010. Our fee for these services will be as follows: Audit 2009 Office of the State Auditor Reporting Forms 24,533 540 Our invoices for these fees will be rendered each month as work progresses and are payable on presentation. Amounts not paid within 30 days from the invoice date will be subject to a finance charge of I percent per month (12 percent per year). In accordance with our firm policies, work may be suspended if your account becomes 90 days or more overdue and may not be resumed until your account is paid in full. If we elect to terminate our services for nonpayment, out engagement will be deemed to have been completed upon written notification of termination, even if we have not completed our report. You will be obligated to compensate us for all time expended and to reimburse us for all out -of- pocket costs through the date of termination. The above fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If significant additional time is necessary, we will discuss it with you and arrive at a new fee estimate before we incur the additional costs. 952.835.9090 • Fax 952.835.3261 wwiv.aemepas.com 2009 Audit Engagement Letter - Standard City of Shorewood November 3, 2009 Page 4 We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City and believe this letter accurately summarizes the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us. Very truly yours, ABDO, SICK & MEYERS, LLP Certified Public Accountants & Consultants Andrew K. Berg, CPA Governmental Services Partner RESPONSE: This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Shorewood. Signed: Title: 952.835.9090 • Fax 952.835.3261 www.aemepasxom 2009 Audit Engagement letter - Standard COUNCIL ACTION FORM Author /Department Council Meeting Item Dumber Larry Brown/Public Works November 9, 2009 •: • • r BE The Department of Public Works is seeking authorization for the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund for replacement of Unit 52 — One 1994, F350 Dump Truck, and authorization to dispose of the existing vehicle by means of public auction. The existing vehicle has a number of issues, including but not limited to, the amount of rust (which has rusted through the floor boards in several spots) the box which has rusted through, and continuous and ongoing issues with the braking system. From day one, the cab and chassis for this vehicle has been of concern, as it relates to the ability to safely stop and operate the vehicle under loaded conditions. It appears that the box and overhang behind the rear axle was not properly designed when this vehicle was purchased, years ago. The braking system is not sufficient for loaded conditions. The brakes and much of the system has been replaced over several years, to try to address this issue. The dealer has admitted that this is a known issue with the vehicle. In addition, the vehicle is under powered for the box load. The 2009 -2013 Capital Improvement Program does budget for replacement of this vehicle within the City's Equipment Replacement Fund. By more "miracle than metal," this vehicle has lasted the 15 years that had been programmed for this type of vehicle. The City is a member of the Cooperative Purchasing Venture (CPV) with the State of Minnesota. This permits the City to participate in contracts that have already been competitively bid on a large volume basis for the State of Minnesota and other CPV members. Such is the instance for this vehicle. The components, for even a one ton dump truck are bid separately as a "Cab and Chassis" under one vendor, and the box, hydraulic systems, plow package and accessories under a separate state contract. Council Action: Under the CPV program, Table I below is8 summary #f the resultant vehicle pricing. The actual contracts are included a5 Attachments l and Zto this memorandum. Vendor Description Amount Nelson Auto Center F 550 Cab and Chassis $34,657.04 Crysteel Truck Equipment Box, Hydraulics, Plow Package $10,334.67 Total $44,991.71 Table Salvage Value As part of this item, staff is also seeking authorization to auction off the existing vehicle, once the new vehicle arrives, under one of the public bid forums. |n the past, staff has used various public bid venues to dispose ofequipment. |f approved, staff would utilize a public auction forum, such as K-bid or other auction service, to dispose of the existing vehicle that presents the most favorable market conditions. Staff is recommending approval of a motion authorizing the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund for the purchase of one - One Ton Dump Truck and accessories, for on amount of$44,99l.7I. |n addition, staff is recommending authorization to dispose ofUnit 52hv means nfpublic auction, as outlined herein. Reet Department 2228 College Way - PO Box 338 a Fergus Falls, MN 56538-0838 218-998-8866 0 800-477-3013 Ext. 8866 o Fax 218-998-8813 - www.nelsonfergusfaRe.com ^z*o[en**°"nt«w°m*°*m*1m"*vv^"m—a"pl Sold To: Shorewood, MN, City oY Date: 1104/208 Attn: Brad Nathan Phone: 952474-6191 Address: 5755 Country club Rd FAX: Shorewood, K1N55331 Salesperson: Gerry Worrier Key Code: Stock No. Year Make Model New/Used Vehicle ID Number Shorewood IF 2010 Ford F-95DDRVVC/C 4WD Reg Cab 60'CA New Color: VVhite/8bonev|ny| Price of Vehicle Contract 4401 $26 421 Options &Extras add Ei4L diesel engine 99R add power equipment group 8OL add full size spare tire 512 add electronic shift nn the fly 213 add tnai|ering high capacity 535& brake controller 528 add snowplow prep. pkg. 473 add XL Decor grp chrome bumper 17F. and chrome Qm add black molded cab steps 18B add tilt steering wheel 524 Delivery Charge Subtotal Total Cash Price Your Purchase Order# Project # Contract 440180 Thanks f your busi To/ Lessee / End User: Shorewood, MN, City cf Phone: 952`*74'0191 Brad Nathan FAX: Public Works 5755 Country club Rd Shorewood, /NN55331 Signed and Initialed_ Printed Name and Date_ Shorewood F51-1.123 ATTAC W����J�F 1 HMENT //v/�_/n : v CRYSTEEL r 73 Avenue NE . TRUCK EQUIPMENT " Fridley, MN 55432 — �r NO s r�; AN 67eOi 4L 0PPORT7,i iv1 T 57M PLO r6p -. November 4, 2009 Larry Brown City Of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 Reference: Quote for Crysteel E- Series One Ton Body Package for 60" CA Ford Dear Larry: Per your request we are pleased to quote the following equipment manufactured to current standards to include the following: One (1) Crysteel E- Series Mild Steel EST L131330E Ford Application 40" front, 60" CA 9' long x 96" wide OD x 87" wide ID Side height 12" Tailgate height 18" Quick drop tailgate, Fold down sides Fold down side stops Dirt shedding top rails and corner posts 1 /4 cab shield, 7 gauge floor A1011 12 gauge sides and 10 gauge front Painted one fleet color (no base coat / clear coat) 5 year limited warranty on body Crysteel Hoist LB Series Double acting Crysteel Electric /Hydraulic power supply Double acting w/ in cab electric controls $4636.38 $1296.68 $ 485.41 Installation of body, hoist, and power unit $ 767.00 ATTACHMENT 2 Whelen 800 series strobe wl self leveling Bracket mount on cab shield .i-�or 7 qauqe side ILO 12 gauge $ 102.60 6" fitted light boxes rear upper corners of bulkhead $ 227.67 Under body Tool Box Aluminum Tread Plate 18 x 18 x 30 Installed $ 335.45 Custom rear pulls Plate 5/8" steel Plate and all gussets Safety "D" rings 2" pintle ball combo hitch 7 pin RV style connector ICC Bumper Installed $ 879.67 Equipment and installation $9678.02 Tax $ 656.65 Net Total $10334.67 Please look over this quote and if you have any questions, please give me a call at anytime. Sincerely, Bob Brandenburg Crysteel Truck Equipment C.OUNCIL ACTION FORM Author /Department Council Meeting Item Number Larry Brown/Public MORE ill Ill :ill Ill 1 1 Fill iii 11111111 1 1 • ' •.' • The Department of Public Works is seeking authorization for the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund for replacement of Unit 53 — One 1995, F350 Pickup Truck, and authorization to dispose of the existing vehicle by means of public auction. The 2009 -2013 Capital Improvement Program does budget for replacement of this vehicle within the City's Equipment Replacement Fund. Pickups have an expected service life of 10 years. This one is nearing 15 year of age and is ready for replacement. The City is a member of the Cooperative Purchasing Venture (CPV) with the State of Minnesota. This permits the City to participate in contracts that have already been competitively bid on a large volume basis for the State of Minnesota and other CPV members. Such is the instance for this vehicle. Staff also tried to solicit a lower quote from the same vendor who holds the contract for the previous truck purchase (but not the pickup trucks). Staff was expecting that this vendor knew that the state contract was in place, and might be able to compete at a lower price, since the previous purchase was through their firm. This however, was not the case. Vendor Description Amount Elk River Ford F 350 State Contract $ 25,698.04 Nelson Auto Center - Quote F350 Vendor Quote $ 26,484.72 Table 1 Table 1 above, is based on the base unit and options. Attachment 1 is the state contract for the unit specified. As additional items that staff is seeking, outside of the prices above, are a 5 year power Council Action: terrain warranty at$l,Q6S and electronic service documents at$23O. This brings the total amount of $27,79].O4 Identical to the previous agenda item, staff is also seeking authorization to auction off the existing vehicle, once the new vehicle arrives via one of the public bid forums. |n the past, staff has used various public bid venues to dispose ofequipment. |f approved, staff would utilize a public auction forum, such as K-bid or other auction service, to dispose of the existing vehicle that presents the most favorable market conditions. Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of a motion authorizing the expenditure of funds from the Equipment Replacement Fund for the purchase of one - One F350 Pickup Truck for an amount of $ 27,793.04 under the state contract. In addition, staff is recommending authorization to dispose of Unit 53 by means of public auction, as outlined herein. 4G-440139- 2010 5350 SG 44 SR -158" , 8 'box XL Trim - X3 'Wade Turner (763) 274 -3319 ivttil.rner@erCd.00131 Fax to: _Larry Brown - Shorewood Public Works Fax #: E- mail:_ lbrown @shorewoodpw.com Address: City, ST, Zip Date: 11/5/09 Xikfiz . Ejreer (763) 274 -3326 nqreerC@er(dtj.com. Phone #: 952.960.7913 Fleet ID #: (You must leave a fleet ID# to receive gov't pricing) Contract # 440139-4G -2010 Ford F350 SC 4x4 SRW XL 8' box -X313 Includes: 100,000 miles / $50 deductible 5.4L V8 engine, 300HP Auto transmission Block heater Vinyl split bench seat - Front Air conditioning AM /FM Radio LT265/70R17E AT tires Daytime Running Lamps Trailer Tow Mirrors Trailer Tow Package Dual Front Airbags Cruise Control 4 Wheel ABS Brakes Tilt Steering Wheel Full Size Spare Tire Vinyl Flooring Rear Step Bumper 10,400# GVWR 3.73 Limited Slip Differential Vinyl Bench Seat - Rear Skid Plates Front Tow Hooks Electronic Shift on the Fly Transfer Case 100,000 miles / $50 deductible Additional Options Available: Price: XL 'Decor Group $192. Roof Clearance Lights $44. Platform Cab Steps! $296. Power >Locks /Windows /Mirrors $680. Electric Brake Controller $184. Tailgate Step $300. Snow Plow Prep Package $68. 4 Up i er5witches ($36) Warranty Options (price on left is gas engine, price on right is diesel engine) PowertrainCare (3 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $1,800 / $1,860 PowertrainCare (5 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $1,865 / $1,930 PowertrainCare (7 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $2,025 / $2,105 BaseCare (3 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $1,975 / $2,045 BaseCare (5 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $2,050 / $2,130 BaseCare (7 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $2,250 / $2,350 PremiumCare (3 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $2,715 / $2,835 PremiumCare (5 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $2,845 / $2,980 PremiumCare (7 yrs) 100,000 miles / $50 deductible $3,185 / $3,355 Codes Exterior Color Price DX Dark Blue Pearl Incl. F1 Vermillion Red Incl. UJ Sterling Gray Incl. LID Black Incl. UX Ingot Silver Incl. Z1 Oxford White Incl. GG Forest Green Incl. Interior Color S Medium Stone C Camel Seatin 3 Cloth Split Bench Upgrade $20. T Vinyl Split Bench Incl. Vinyl Buckets upgrade ($36) G I Cloth Buckets upgrade $92, Pricing Price (does not include sales tax / lie fees) $ 23,814.04 Additional Options $ 1,864.00 Transit Impr Excise Tax ** $ 20.00 er vehicle"* Extended Warranty (optional) <-- See prices to left Subtotal for each vehicle $ 25,698.04 Number of Units Ordered Service Documents (optional) CD $230 / Paper Co $390 Grand Total for all Units (does not include sales tax / lie fees) ** Transit Impr Excise Tax is applicable in the counties of Anoka, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey & Washington. Does not apply if vehicle is a marked emergency vehicle. Ell/RwerFor&Dodgw1Jeep cu4tovners4nauw& 'Dates Please call with any questions. Payment is due upon delivery of each vehicle 1.5% monthly interest rate will be assessed on accounts not received within 30 days of delivery date or any part thereof. ATTACHMENT 1 COUNCIL ACTION FORM Department Engineering Council Meeting 11/5/09 Item Number: From: James Landini, P.E. - # At the Oct 12, 2009 Council meeting the feasibility study for Nelsine Drive was accepted. This included the potential to extend municipal water with the road improvement. As special assessments are being considered for the Nelsine Drive improvement project, the City must hold a public hearing before the City Council may act on a resolution to order the improvement. As the assessable portion of the project — installation of City Water— has been initiated by the City, at least four - fifths of the Council must vote to approve the ordering of the project. If the Council decides that it will not have special assessments the improvement can be ordered with a simple majority vote of the Council. As required by Minnesota Statute §§ 429.011 to 429.111, a Public Hearing is required prior to ordering the improvements. This hearing was advertised in the Sun - Sailor on Oct 22, 2009 and Oct 29, 2009. The Engineer's Estimate and the proposed Assessment Roll are attached. At the Oct 12, 2009 Council Meeting, the Feasibility report was accepted by Council. The Feasibility report listed the following improvements: Potential Watermain for Nelsine Drive. Sanitary sewer for Nelsine Drive. Storm sewer for Nelsine Drive. Nelsine Drive to be reconstructed at a 24 -foot driving surface with edge control. Council discussed at the meeting the design width as being 22 -foot driving surface with edge control. A Public Information Meeting was held on Oct 29, 2009, to present this project to the neighborhood, and to answer questions regarding the project and the possible assessment. A majority of residents attended the meeting, and written comments were received. The meeting concluded with a Question and Answer session that included a variety of topics, one of which included the City's water connection policy. Residents have been encouraged to complete a survey regarding their preferences on municipal water service. The survey results for the project are attached. One resident is interested in having access to municipal water service. Three are interested in reclamation and one resident does not want any improvements made to the street. Council Action: One resident is open Uz discussion about a drainage and utility easement. | did not hear from the other two residents. If Council wishes to proceed, the next step is then to order the project by Resolution. Three resolutions are attached for your consideration. One includes extension of municipal water service, one does not, and one includes reclamation with no water extension. 1. Direct staff 10 contract with TKDA, Inc. for this project bvresolution. 2. Direct staff to prepare a different resolution. 3. Do nothing. Staff recommends from a technical standpoint that1heCmunc|adoptareso|mtiontoonder the yJe|sineDrive Road Improvement Project as1hereomnstruc±ionmptiondeschbedinthe Feasibility Report. CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the 2008 -2012 Capital Improvement Program identifies the need to improve Nelsine Drive; and WHEREAS, public information meetings for said improvement have been conducted with solicitation of comments of affected property owners being received by the city; and WHEREAS, TKDA, Inc., has submitted a feasibility study for the initialization of project Plans, Specifications, and Engineering Estimate. MOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota: That the proposed improvement be referred to TKDA, Inc., for preparation of Project Plans, Specifications, and Construction Estimates, and is to incorporate into said design the following features. I. Nelsine Drive is to be reconstructed at a minimum width roadway of 22.0 feet in width driving surface, and surmountable concrete edge control outside of the minimum width. 2. Sanitary Sewer Improvements. 3. Watermain Improvements. 4. Storm Sewer Improvements. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of November, 2009. Christine Lizee, Mayor EV YI II DTYI IA Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk CITY OF SHORE' RESOLUTION NO. t That the proposed improvement be referred to TKDA, Inc., for preparation of Project Plans, Specifications, and Construction Estimates, and is to incorporate into said design the following features. Nelsine Drive is to be reconstructed at a minimum width roadway of 22.0 feet in width driving surface, and surmountable concrete edge control outside of the minimum width. 2. Sanitary Sewer Improvements. 3. Storm Sewer Improvements. this 9th day of November, 2009. Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD RESOLUTION NO. g x V,rHEREAS, the 2008 -2012 Capital Improvement Program identifies the need to improve Nelsine Drive; and WHEREAS, public information meetings for said improvement have been conducted with solicitation of comments of affected property owners being received by the city; and WHEREAS, TKDA, Inc., has submitted the feasibility report for the initialization of project Plans, Specifications, and Engineering Estimate. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Shorewood, Minnesota: That the proposed improvement be referred to TKDA, Inc., for preparation of Project Plans, Specifications, and Construction Estimates, and is to incorporate into said design the following features. 1. Nelsine Drive is to be reclaimed to a minimum width roadway of 22.0 feet in width driving surface. 2. Sanitary Sewer Improvements. 3. Storm Sewer Improvements. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD this 9th day of November, 2009. Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA NELSINE ROAD STREET RECONSTRUCTION TKDA PROJECT NO. 14453.000 ENGINEER'S PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST I LS MOBILIZATION $ 8,000 1 LS TRAFFIC CONTROL $ 4,000 390 LF SILT FENCE $ 780 4 EA INLET PROTECTION $ 1,200 7 EA TREE REMOVAL $ 1,750 1,255 SY REMOVE & DISPOSE OF EXISTING BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT $ 2,511 8 EA REMOVE & REPLACE EXISTING DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT $ 6,400 1,967 CY COMMON EXCAVATION $ 13,772 4.6 RS SUBGRADE PREPARATION $ 805 1,225 CY SELECT GRANULAR BORROW (CV), SPEC 3149,213 $ 17,150 865 TN CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE, 100% CRUSHED LIMESTONE $ 13,840 169 TN BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE $ 10,985 169 TN BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE $ 11,830 71 GAL BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT $ 178 2 EA ADJUST MANHOLE CASTING $ 900 1 EA ADJUST VALVE BOX $ 150 1,000 LF SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER $ 9,000 1,622 SY GEOTEXTILE FABRIC $ 2,433 130 CY TOPSOIL BORROW $ 1,820 1,185 SY SODDING $ 3,555 STREET RECONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $ 111,058 CONTINGENCIES $ 11,106 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL, AND ADMINISTRATION $ 27,209 TOTAL - STREET RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENTS $ 149,373 1,000 LF 4" PVC PERT EDGE DRAIN W/BACKFILL & WRAP $ 5,000 2 EA 2 X 3 CATCH BASIN W/CASTING $ 2,600 1 EA STORM SEWER MANIJOLE $ 2,000 1 EA STORM SEWER MANI IOLE WITI I SUMP $ 2,500 48 LF 12" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE $ 1,248 185 LF 15" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE $ 5,180 45 LF 21" RCP STORM SEWER PIPE $ 1,575 1 EA 21" FLARED END SECTION $ 1,000 10 CY CLASS 3 RIP RAP W/GEOTEXTILE FABRIC $ 900 STORM SEWER SUBTOTAL $ 22,003 CONTINGENCIES $ 2,200 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL, AND ADMINISTRATION $ 5,391 TOTAL - STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $ 29,593 *Estimated costs do not include cost to acquire easement for storm sewer outlet Page I oft CITY OF SH ORE WOOD, MINNESOTA NELSINE ROAD STREET RECONSTRUCTION TKDA PROJECT NO. 14453.000 ENGINEER'S PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST 2 EA REMOVE AND REPLACE CASTING $ 1,600 2 EA RING AND CASTING SEALS $ 600 SANITARY SEWER SUBTOTAL $ 2,200 CONTINGENCIES 220 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL, AND ADMINISTRATION 539 TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 2,959 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $181,925 The estimated costs are according to average prices received on similar projects in other areas. The actual costs for this project will be determined through a bidding process and can vary with market conditions at the time of the bid. Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SHORE OD, MINNESOTA NELSINE ROAD WATERMAIN EXTENSION TKDA PROJECT NO. 14453.000 ENGINEER'S PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS I EA CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN $ 1,500 10 LF 6" DIP, CLASS 52 $ 400 447 LF 8" DIP, CLASS 52 $ 20,115 2 EA 6" RES. SEAT GATE VALVE & BOX $ 2,000 2 EA 6" HYDRANT ASSEMBLY (T-6" BURY) $ 6,000 255 LF V TYPE "K" COPPER WATER SERVICE $ 5,100 7 EA V CORPORATION STOP $ 1,050 7 EA I" CURB STOP WITH CURB BOX $ 1,050 306 LB MJ DIP COMPACT FITTINGS $ 1,224 WATERMAIN SUBTOTAL $ 38,439 CONTINGENCIES $ 3,844 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL, AND ADMINISTRATION $ 9,418 TOTAL - WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENTS $ 51,700 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST $ 51,700 The estimated costs are according to average prices received on similar projects in other areas. The actual costs for this project will be determined through a bidding process and can vary with market conditions at the time of the bid. 1"g, 1 1 CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA NELSINE ROAD STREET RECLAMATION TKDA PROJECT NO. 14453.000 ENGINEER'S PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST I LS MOBILIZATION $ 2,300 1 LS TRAFFIC CONTROL $ 1,150 98 LF SILT FENCE $ 195 1,312 SY RECLAIM EX. BIT. AND BASE MATERIALS, 12-INCH DEPTH $ 1,968 466 CY COMMON EXCAVATION $ 4,656 4,6 RS SUBGRADE PREPARATION $ 805 168 TN CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE, 100% CRUSHED LIMESTONE $ 2,688 156 TN BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE $ 10,161 156 TN BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE $ 10,943 66 GAL BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK COAT $ 164 2 EA ADJUST MANHOLE CASTING $ 900 1 EA ADJUST VALVE BOX $ 150 STREET RECLAMATION SUBTOTAL $ 36,079 CONTINGENCIES $ 3,608 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL, AND ADMINISTRATION $ 8,839 TOTAL - STREET RECLAMATION $ 48,526 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 1,000 LF 4" PVC PERF EDGE DRAIN W/BACKFILL & WRAP $ 11,999 STORM SEWER SUBTOTAL $ 11,999 CONTINGENCIES $ 1,200 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL, AND ADMINISTRATION $ 2,940 TOTAL - STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $ 16,139 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS 2 EA REMOVE AND REPLACE CASTING $ 1,600 2 EA RING AND CASTING SEALS $ 600 DIVISION 3 SUBTOTAL $ 2,200 CONTINGENCIES $ 220 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL, AND ADMINISTRATION $ 539 TOTAL - SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS $ 2,959 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS $ 67,624 The estimated costs are according to average prices received on similar projects in other areas. The actual costs for this project will be determined through a bidding process and can vary with market conditions at the time of the bid. P'p 1 of I COUNCIL ACTION FORM Department Engineering Council Meeting 11/4/09 Itern Number: • r � x ► , fi c At the October 26, 2009 meeting Council discussed the possibility of dredging Manor pond. A majority of Council wanted the cost estimate further refined. To provide a better cost estimate, staff requires two pieces of additional information, sediment test results and a survey of the pond bottom. American Engineering Testing (AET) provided the attached sediment sampling proposal and the survey proposals will be available at the Nov 23, 2009 meeting. During discussions with AET it was advised that Manor pond is listed on the National Wetlands Inventory. I confirmed the listing and found some historical aerial photographs showing a plant type wetland in a 1937 photograph and open water type wetland in a 1957 photograph. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) was contacted for Wetland Conservation Act discussion. The MCWD indicated they would be treating this wetland as an open water type wetland and mitigation will not be required for maintenance. AET contacted the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to verify the testing requirements and prepared the attached proposal. The proposal is an estimate and if significant layering is encountered additional testing would be required. Options 1. Direct staff to contract with AET, Inc. for this project. 2. Do nothing. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends awarding the contract for the Manor Pond Sediment Sampling be awarded to AET, Inc. not to exceed $5,000. Council Action: NIERI .: P ETl NC, November 4, 2009 Mr. James Landini, P.E. City of Shorewood 5755 Country Club Road Shorewood, MN 55331 RE: Proposal for Dredge Material Assessment Manor Park Pond Shorewood, Minnesota AET Proposal No. 03 -03616 Dear Mr. Landini: CONSULTANTS ENVIRONMENTAL s GEOTECHNICAL MATERIALS FORENSICS American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET) is pleased to offer the City of Shorewood (the Client) environmental services to assess the Manor Park pond sediments for dredging in Shorewood, Minnesota. This proposal has been prepared in response to your recent request and describes the scope of services, schedule, fees and other information regarding our services. Project Information You have requested that AET provide a proposal to perform environmental testing of sediments from the pond to the southwest of Manor Park in Shorewood, Minnesota. The approximate extent of this pond is shown on the figure below. According to the National Wetlands hiventory (NWI), the size of the pond is about 1 acre. Although this pond is mapped in NWI, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the Wetland Conservation Act Local Governing Unit for this site, informed you that they consider this pond as a stormwater pond and won't require mitigation for dredging activity. You estimate that this pond may have about 3 to 5 feet of standing water. You plan to dredge this pond to about 5 to 6 feet below the normal pond water level to prevent lily pad growth. This could yield about 3 feet of dredging over the footprint of the pond, which would yield about 5,000 cubic yards of material. According Table 7 in the Modified Characterization and Permit Approach for Urban Stormwater Ponds section in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) document Managing Dredged Materials in the State of Minnesota (MPCA Waste Water General #2.01, June 2009 edition), the minimum number of samples recommended for analysis is three. 550 Cleveland Avenue NorthSt. Paul, MN 55114 Phone 651 - 659 -9001 IToll Free 800 - 972 -6364 jFax 651- 659 -1379 www.amengtest.com jAA/EEO This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from American Engineering Testing, Inc. Mr. James T andini, P.E. AET Proposal No. 03 -03616 November 4, 2009 Page 2 of 5 Manor Park Pond Purpose The purpose of this dredge material assessment is to provide data on the thickness and character of pond sediments at three sample, locations of Manor Park pond. Following particle size determinations, concentrations of targeted chemicals will be determined based on land uses within the basin's watershed. The sediment characterization will be performed in general accordance with Modified Characterization and Permit Approach for Urban Stormwater Ponds as detailed in the MPCA guidance document Managing Dredged Materials in the State of Minnesota. You have indicated that the drainage area to this pond includes mostly park and residential land and the nearby municipal streets. You also reported that the site has been a city park for about two decades, prior to which was used for municipal buildings. AFT was not provided a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for this site and has assumed the MPCA baseline parameters of copper, arsenic and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) for the preparation of this proposal. Scope of Services Based on the above information and our discussion with Mr. Dale Thompson of the MPCA Municipal Stormwater Division, AET proposes the following services to assess the proposed dredge material: Mr. James Eandini, P.E. AET Proposal No. 03 -03616 November 4, 2009 Page 3 of 5 Clear public utilities for each pond via a locate call through Gopher State One Call; the Client is responsible for clearing any private utilities in the proposed coring areas. ® Within the pond, advance 1.5 -inch diameter clear plastic sampling tubes (cores) about 4 feet into the bottom sediments at each of three sample locations. For this proposal, we assume that we will use manual sampling equipment and locate the points using GPS equipment. Two cores will be advanced at each sample location so that samples can be collected and analyzed from one core and the other core can be stored for possible additional analyses; additional analyses are not included in this scope at this time. Samples locations will be chosen in accordance with MPCA guidance and will not be located within 20 feet of either the inlets or outlets of the ponds. ® Cap and return the recovered core sample tubes to AEI's St. Paul facility, to log the sediments and prepare the composite samples. At a minimum, the descriptions will include sediment strata, grain type, color, and depth. • Test each composite sample for particle size distribution (gradation) by sieve analyses (ASTM D -422). According to MPCA guidance, if 93% or more of the dredged material is retained on a #200 sieve (i.e., coarser than silt) the material is considered unlikely to be contaminated, and analytical laboratory analysis of that sample is not required. If it is apparent that a sample contains much less than 93% sand and gravel, we will contact you for permission to delete the gradation and proceed directly with laboratory analytical testing. • For each sample with more than 7% passing the #200 sieve, submit it to Pace Analytical Services, Inc. for laboratory analysis. This proposal assumes that all samples will be analyzed for the parameters below: - Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) "extended list" by EPA method 8270 (SIM) - Metals by EPA method 6010 ■ Arsenic (As) ■ Copper (Cu) • Prepare a report of environmental testing results; the report will document pertinent field observations, chains of custody, laboratory reports, and a narrative summarizing the results and comparing them to the applicable MPCA Tier 1 and 2 Soil Reference Values. For the purpose of this proposal, AET has assumed that the sediments within the basin are relatively homogeneous at each sampling location, which would require only one composite sample being tested for grain size distribution at each core location, and if necessary, the analytical parameters. Our estimate assumes that the MPCA will not require gradation or analytical testing of the underlying "parent" material; the intent is to test only the sediments filling the basin that will need to be dredged. Mr, .lames Zandini, RE, AE'f Proposal Igo. 03-03616 November 4, 2009 Page 4 of 5 If differing soils are encountered at a sampled location, such as significant layering of different colors or textures of soil, AET will recommend that these matrices be sampled separately. For example, if silty sand is separated by a distinct layer of silty clay, we will recommend that three samples be analyzed at this location for assessment and testing: one from the upper silty sand, one from the silty clay layer, and one from the lower silty sand. This sampling methodology is recommended in the MPCA guidance and could lead to reducing future project costs in material disposal. Performance Schedule Following written authorization of this proposal, AET estimates it would be able schedule field tasks to begin after three working days. Field operations are expected to last one day. Standard soil laboratory (gradation test) turnaround times are 5 working days or less and standard analytical laboratory (Pace) turnaround times are 10 working days or less. Barring unforeseen circumstances, AET estimates it will submit the report within one week of receiving the final laboratory results. Fees Our fees for services will be charged on a time and materials basis in accordance with the attached fee schedule. For the scope of services described in this proposal, we estimate fees of $3,428 based on the following approximate breakdown: Item Unit Rate Quantity Fee Sample Collection Pond $900 1 $900 Initial Screening (Sieve) Test Each $88 3 $264 Metals (Arsenic and Copper) Each $29 3 $87 PAHs (extended list) lEach $259 3 $777 Report/Project Management ILS 1 $1,400 1 1 $1,400 Estimate Total: $3,428 In the event the scope of our services needs to be revised due to unanticipated or altered conditions, we will review such adjustments and the associated fees with you and receive your approval before proceeding. conditinnc Our services will be perfonned per the Contract Agreement Between. the City of Shorewood and American. Engineering Testing, Inc. For Professional Services, dated September 13, 1999. Ha"11TITM Our scope of services is intended to comply with your request for services. The scope is not intended to assess other potential environmental conditions on the site; there may be areas that are impacted that are not detected, or there may be contaminants present other than those for which we test. This scope of services is not intended to be all- inclusive, covering every possible Mr. James Landini, P.E. AET Proposal No. 03 -03616 November 4, 2009 Page 5 of 5 RIMMINOMMU This proposal has been prepared in general accordance with the MPCA's guidance for Modified Characterization. and Permit Approach for Urban Stormwater Ponds. The end use facility /disposal option you choose for this material may require additional testing and analyses that are not included in the scope of services for this proposal. It is the Client's responsibility to verify that this scope of testing and analyses complies with the requirements of the end use facility; AET and the MPCA do not accept any responsibility for damages or future liability due to improper reuse or placement of contaminated sediment. Acceptance Please indicate your acceptance of this proposal and authorization to proceed by signing, dating and returning one copy of this proposal to us. The original proposal is intended for your records. We appreciate the opportunity to provide this service for you and look forward to working with you on this project. If you have any questions, or need additional infoilnation regarding this matter, please call us. Sincerely, American Engineering Testing, Inc. Richard W. Pen ngs, P.E. Senior Environmental Engineer Phone: (651) 789 -4649 Fax: (651) 659 -1379 Email: rpennings @amengtest.com PROPOSAL ACCEPTED BY: Signature: _ Printed Name: Company: Date: Attachments: 2009 Environmental Fee Schedule 2009 ENVIRONMENTAL FEE SCHEDULE (PAGE I OF 2) L En hieerin_ /Technical Personnel Rates 6, Bore Hole Permeability A. Administrative Assistant $56 /hr B. Engineering /Environmental Technician I 62 /hr C. Draftsperson 69/hr D. Engineering/Environmental Technician II 73 /hr E. Drill Technician /Geotechnical Lab Technician 82 /hr F. Technician Level II CWI /ICBO 82/hr G. Sr. Engineering /Environmental Technician III 87/hr H. Engineering Assistant 98/hr I. Engineer I, Geologist I, Scientist I 105/hr J. Senior Engineering Assistant 110 /hr K. Engineer II, Geologist II, Scientist II 120/hr L. Senior Engineer, Geologist, Scientist 133/hr M. Principal Engineer, Geologist, Scientist 160 /hr N. Principal of Finn 170 /hr O. Litigation Preparation 210 /hr P. Deposition or Court Time (4 -hour Minimum) 265/hr The rates presented are portal to portal, with vehicle mileage, expenses and equipment rentals being additional. Reduced rates may be negotiated for long -tern projects. Overtime for personnel categories A -E charged at above cost Plus 25% for over 8 hours per day or Saturday; and at above cost plus 50% for Sundays or Holidays. Night time shift work will include apremium charge of $30.00 per person Pei shift. 9, SHAFT II. Vehicle Mileage F. A. Personal Automobile /Truck $0.70 /mi B. Yz -ton or 3 /4 -ton Truck/Van 0.90 /111i C. Truck with Coring Equipment 1.00 /111i D. 1 -ton or 2 -ton Rig Auxiliary Truck 1.05 /ni E. Truck with Warring Sign /Crash Trailer 1.10 /mi F. 1 -ton Truck with Drill Rig 1.10 /mi G. 12 to 22 -ton Truck with Drill Rig 1.25/mi H. 20 -Ton CPT Truck Rig 1.50 /mi I. Tractor /Lowboy Trailer 1.70 /mi III. Equipment Rental C. A. Drill Rig Rental 1. Plasticity Index 1. Rotary Drill on I -ton Truck 62 /hr 2. Liquid Limit or Plastic Limit Separately 2. Rotary Drill on 12 to 22 -ton Truck 72/hr Shrinkage Limit (ASTM:D427) 3. Rotary Drill on All- Terrain Vehicle 102/hr Sieve Analysis (includes 4200) 4. Portable, Non - rotary Rig 72/hr B. Auxiliary /Specialty Vehicle Rental G. Specific Gravity I. Auxiliary Truck Vehicle 15.50 /hr 1. Mineral Soil 2. Truck with Warning Sign /Crash Trailer 25 /hr 2. Organic Soil 3. Truck with Coring Equipment 40/hr C. Cone (CPT) Rig /Equipment Rental I. Unconfined Compression 1. CPT Rig (Truck or ATV) 128/hr Consolidation - Primary Consolidation 2. Electronic Cone w /Computer 37/hr Curve up to 32 tsf (ASTM: D2435) 3. Soil Sampler 3/hr Direct Shear Test quoted 4. Water Sampler 20 /hr D. Miscellaneous Equipment Rental 1. Unconsolidated - Undrained 1. Field Vane Shear 300 /day 2. Consolidated - Undrained 2. Field Electrical Resistivity 210 /day 3. Consolidated- Drained 3. Field Seismic Refraction (ReMi) 370 /day Pemneability Tests 4. Inclinometer Reading Equipment 300 /day 1. Rigid Wall 5. Pneumatic Transducer Reading 150 /day 03 GEO -ENV FEE 09(11/4/2009) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. 6, Bore Hole Permeability a. Open End Casing Method 120 /day b. HQ Wiretine Packer 300 /day 7. Borehole Pressuremeter 55 /hr 8. Iowa Borehole Shear Tester 310 /day 9. Double Ring hrfiltrometer 235 /day 10. Photoionization Detector (PID) I10 /day IL GPS Mapping System 13 /hr 12. Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) 680 /day 13, Calibrated SPT Rod 175 /day 14. Portable Concrete Coring Equipment 35 /hr 15. Pavement Testing (FWD includes Truck) a. Falling Weight Deflectometer 150 /hr b. Light Weight Deflectometer 50 /hr E. Geotechnical Software Rental 1. Geo Studio Finite Element 55 /hr 2. CAPWAP 30 /hr 3. AutoCAD 25 /hr 4. Wave Equation (WEAP) 15 /hr 5. LPILE or GROUP 15 /hr 6. Slope Stability (ReSSA) 15 /hr- 7. Stabilized Earth Slopes & Walls 15/hr 8. Settlement (FoSSA) 15/hr 9, SHAFT 15 /hr F. Bit Wear- Rock Coring I. Diamond Bit - Sedimentary Rock a. B, NQ I0 /foot b. HQ 12 /foot 2. Diamond Bit - Metamorphic & Igneous a. B, NQ 17 /foot b. HQ 20 /foot IV. Laboratory Tests of Soil A. Water Content hourly B. Dry Density (includes water content) 50 /test C. Atterberg Limits (ASTM:D4318) 1. Plasticity Index 100 /test 2. Liquid Limit or Plastic Limit Separately 75 /test D. Shrinkage Limit (ASTM:D427) 95 /test E. Sieve Analysis (includes 4200) 88 /test F. Hydrometer Analysis (sieve included) 235 /test G. Specific Gravity 1. Mineral Soil 125 /test 2. Organic Soil 140 /test H. Hand Penetrometer /Torvane 10 /test I. Unconfined Compression 76 /test J. Consolidation - Primary Consolidation Curve up to 32 tsf (ASTM: D2435) 430 /test K. Direct Shear Test quoted per job L. Triaxial Compression Test 1. Unconsolidated - Undrained 190 /point 2. Consolidated - Undrained 280 /point 3. Consolidated- Drained 350 /point M. Pemneability Tests 1. Rigid Wall 240 /test 2. Flexible Wall 340 /test N. Tests of Expansive Soils 125 /test O. Electrical Resistivity (ASTM:G57 -Soil Box) 85 /test P. Organic Content of Soil 55 /test Q. Topsoil Borrow Test (Mn /DOT 3877) 340 /test 03 GEO -ENV FEE 09(11/4/2009) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. 2009 ENVIRONMENTAL FEE SCHEDULE (PAGE 2 OF 2) R. Soil pH 50 /test VIIh Industrial Hygiene Equipment Rental S. Soil Oxidation - Reduction Potential 65 /test A. Sampling Pump, 28.3 liter $50 /day T. R -vahre (Hveem Stabilometer) 360 /test B. Sampling Pump, High Flow 100 /day U. California Bearing Ratio C. Sampling Pump, Dragger 25 /day 1. Granular 560 /test D. Protimeter Moisture Monitor 100 /day 2. Cohesive 630 /test E. Bore Scope 25 /day V. Sand Equivalent Value Q readings averaged) 180 /test F. Wet Wall Detector 25 /day W. Thermal Resistivity w /Proctor (ASTM:D5334) 1. As Received and Oven Dried (2 pts) 910 /test IX. Air Monitoring Equipment Rental 2. Dry Out Curve (4 pts) 1130 /test A. Photoicnization Detector $110 /day X. Proctor Tests (Methods A or B) B. Flame Ionization Detector 125 /day 1. Standard 115 /test C. LEL Meter 50 /day 2. Modified 130 /test D. LandTec Methane Meter 175 /day E. Gas Meter (LEL,02,H2S, CO) 95 /day V. Waste and Wastewater Monitoring Equipment Rental F. Methane Meter 50 /day A. ISCO Autosampler $55 /day G. Air Velocity Meter 50 /day B. Refrigerated ISCO Autosampler 100 /day H. Air Flow Measurement Instrumentation 100 /day C. Liquid Level Recorder 50 /day 1. FIA Monitoring Station 300 /day D. Flow Meter 85 /day J. Innpinger /Meter Console Assembly 200 /day E. Confined Entry Equipment 140 /day K. 02 /CO2 /CO Analyzers 300 /day F. Weir Materials 40 /day L. Isokinetic Sampling Train 350 /day G. Recording pH Meter 45 /day M. Vacuum Sampler Assembly 75 /day H. Kemmerer Type Sampler 45 /day N. Heated Sample Line Assembly 120 /day I. Chlorine Residual Meter 45 /day O. Orsart Analyzer 100 /day J. DR2000 Spectrophotometer 85 /day P. 40L Tedlar Bag 25 /ea Q. GasTech OVM 40 /day VI. Groundwater Monitoring Equipment Rental R. GasTech TGD 40 /day A. Dissolved Oxygen Meter $50 /day S. Three- Dimensional Pilot Tube Assembly 200 /day B. pH Meter 25 /day T. NOxAnalyzer 300 /day C. Conductivity Meter 25 /day U. SOxAnalyzer 300 /day D. Redox Potential Meter 25 /day V, Sample Gas Conditioner 100 /day E. Bailers - Polypropylene 15 /ea W. Extractive FTIR Analyzer quoted per job F. Bailers -Teflon 30 /ea X. Gas Chronnatograph quoted per job G. Groundwater Modeling Software 25 /hr H. Water Level Probe 50 /day X. Expenses I. Oil -Water Interface Sensor 90 /day A. Direct Project Expenses: includes out -of Cost + 15% J. Well Rate of Recovery Equipment 150 /day town per diem; plowing & towing; special K. 2" Pump Assembly 100 /day materials & supplies; special travel, L. Peristaltic Assembly 60 /day transportation & freight; subcontracted M. Stabilization Assembly 90 /day services, and miscellaneous costs N. Turbidity Meter 25 /day B. Equipment Replacement (when abandonment Cost O. Groundwater Filter - Gelman Inline 15 /ea is more feasible than recovery) P. Groundwater Filter— Nalgene 10 /ea C. Equipment Recovery (when required by Cost + 15% Q. HydroPunch7 250 /day regulatory agencies or project specifications) VII. Soil Sampling and Support Equipment Rental XI. Clerical /Drafting Services and Rentals A. Direct Push Sampling System (Geoprobe7) $95 /hr A. Report Reproduction B. XRF Analyzer 375 /day 1. Minimum (copying additional) 50 /report C. Soil Auger Assembly 50 /day 2. Copying .35 /sheet D. Power Auger 65 /day B. Computer and Software Rental (personnel time extra) E. Site Trailer 85 /day 1. AutoCAD 25 /hr F. Level A, B, or C Protective Gear quoted per job 2. AutoCad Plotting 1.00 /sq.ft. G. Vacuum Blower quoted per job 3. Air Dispersion Modeling 25 /hr H. Coliwassa Sampler 15 /ea 4. Ground Water Modeling 25 /hr I. Steam Cleaning Service (includes rental) C. Digital Camera/Photographs 1. Drill Rig /Tools 315 /clean 1. Camera Rental 25 /day 2. Down Hole Drill Tools Only 210 /clean 2. Color Photographs 1.50 /page J. Steam Cleaner 140 /day D. Direct Project Expenses Cost +15% IC Portable Generator (220 volt) 25 /day A minimum charge of $100.00 per job may be assessed to L. Magnetic Locator 25 /day cover administrative costs. 03 GEO -ENV FEE 09(11/4/2009) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. COUNCIL ACTION Department I Council Meeting Item Number Finance November 9, 2009 10 I i I ME 11111011 11111111 Ill i'i r • The city code provides for annual certification of delinquent utility bills against the properties served. A resolution is attached for Council consideration. This resolution is considered and passed annually. The City's authority for certification of unpaid charges comes from Minnesota Statute 444.075: "Subd. 3e. Who may be charged; unpaid charges. The governing body may make the charges a charge against the owner, lessee, occupant or all of them and may provide and covenant for certifying unpaid charges to the county auditor with taxes against the property served for collection as other taxes are collected." Each property owner is given an opportunity to file an objection to this proposed certification of delinquent accounts. As part of the process, they may request a hearing in front of the City Council to explain why the account has not been paid. The City received a written objection and request for a hearing from the following person: Mr. Ron Johnson, 5355 Shady Hills Circle, Shorewood, MN 55331. If any additional affected property owners are present at the meeting, and wish to appeal their delinquent charges, the City Council may also allow them to do so. Staff Recommendation After consideration of appeals that may be presented at the meeting, the City Council is requested to approve the attached resolution certifying delinquent utility charges to the 2009 property tax rolls. Council Action: CITY OF SHORE WOOD RESOLUTION NO. 09 ®xxx WHEREAS, Shorewood City Code provides for the City to place delinquent sanitary sewer charges, water, storm water management utility charges, recycling charges, and dry hydrant charges, on the succeeding year property tax rolls for the specified properties; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has scheduled the consideration of the assessment of such charges and has caused notice of such assessments to be mailed to the affected property owners; and, WHEREAS, the Council has considered such charges at a regular council meeting and has made a determination that delinquent sanitary sewer charges, water, storm water management utility charges, recycling charges, and dry hydrant charges, exist for the specified properties set forth in Exhibits A, B, C, D, and E attached hereto and made a part hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood as follows: That the Hennepin County Special Assessment Division is hereby authorized to place the delinquent sanitary sewer charges, municipal water charges, storm water management utility charges, recycling charges, and hydrant charges, on the 2010 property tax rolls, payable in 2010, at eight percent (8 %) per annum, against the specified properties as set forth in Exhibits A, B, C, D, and E. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Shorewood, Minnesota, this 9th day of November, 2009. ATTEST: Christine Lizee, Mayor Brian Heck, City Administrator /Clerk MUNIC CODE 26 LEVY NO 17530 EXHIBIT A SEWER PID NO ACCOUNT NO, TOTAL PRINCIPAL 25-117-23-33-0058 01-030003-00 161.70 33-117-23-14-0041 02-775206-00 382.06 34-117-23-24-0026 02-945011-00 124.94 34-117-23-24-0028 02-945020-00 237.71 34-117-23-24-0043 02-945023-00 a 215.23 31-117-23-14-0026 03-080005 -00 125.74 31-117-23-14-0029 03-080010-00 470.10 31-117-23-13-0036 03-083210-00 357.36 31-117-23-11-0001 03-365002-00 161.70 32-117-23-14-0069 03-397003-00 381.26 32-117-23-43-0037 03-600210-00 159.53 32-117-23-14-0029 03-775209-00 125.05 32-117-23-11-0021 03-930202-01 348.04 36-117-23-44-0079 04-580112-00 161.70 25-117-23-44-0056 04-705010-00 442.41 25-117-23-44-0054 04-710106-00 254.87 25-117-23-44-0025 04-710110-00 144.63 25-117-23-44-0026 04-710111-00 357.36 34-117-23-31-0015 05-325001-00 470.10 33-117-23-12-0017 10-015205-00 311.82 35-117-23-31-0054 10-025002-00 161.70 29-117-23-44-0030 10-045224-00 161.70 29-117-23-44-0039 10-045231-00 470.10 29-117-23-43-0032 10-045245-00 470.10 31-117-23-44-0010 10-050205-00 57.36 34-117-23-43-0039 10-125008-00 212.57 33-117-23-42-0001 10-170004-00 472.01 30-117-23-32-0010 10-245005-00 161.70 30-117-23-33-0003 10-250006-00 179.49 30-117-23-33-0026 10-255002-00 401.47 30-117-23-33-0030 10-255016-00 161.70 33-117-23-32-0031 10-260032-00 412.58 33-117-23-33-0057 10-260038-00 413.97 25-117-23-34-0025 10-270213-00 412.58 26-117-23-11-0012 10-280004-00 390.40 26-117-23-14-0029 10-285005-00 254.87 26-117-23-14-0040 10-290208-00 594.11 34-117-23-42-0018 10-300005-00 470.10 34-117-23-31-0028 10-325005-00 300.80 32-117-23-12-0008 10-330002-00 419.93 32-117-23-12-0002 10-330003-00 414.33 31-117-23-14-0002 10-365032-00 594.11 26-117-23-14-0025 10-385206-00 254.87 34-117-23-33-0029 10-425002-00 391.18 34-117-23-33-0039 10-425007-00 404,61 25-117-23-32-0023 10-485225-00 412.58 32-117-23-11-0034 10-535001-00 279.11 35-117-23-31-0051 10-545006-00 354.82 35-117-23-43-0006 10-545023-00 357.36 26-117-23-11-0050 10-550204-00 414.41 26-117-23-14-0069 10-550208-00 254.87 26-117-23-14-0103 10-550210-00 357.36 26-117-23-14-0011 10-685010-00 414.30 25-117-23-44-0049 10-705001-00 412.48 30-117-23-42-0003 10-725013-00 549.81 36-117-23-21-0009 10-740005-00 161.70 33-117-23-14-0036 10-745016-00 170.17 32-117-23-13-0032 10-765001-00 470.10 34-117-23-23-0049 10-775205-00 293.54 34-117-23-23-0042 10-775209-00 495.10 33-117-23-24-0006 10-775244-00 412.58 32-117-23-14-0031 10-775273-00 349.10 32-117-23-14-0024 10-775284-00 391.20 32-117-23-14-0038 10-775285-00 357.36 26-117-23-41-0027 10-780006-00 391.28 25-117-23-34-0022 10-780036-00 414.41 25-117-23-34-0012 10-780037-00 412.58 25-117-23-23-0020 10-815013-00 254.87 33-117-23-43-0006 10-863004-00 231,18 34-117-23-23-0043 10-872011/12-00 770.16 34-117-23-23-0045 10-872014-01 79.87 32-117-23-11-0025 10-880001-00 357.36 32-117-23-11-0006 10-883201/2-98 385.77 33-117-23-21-0041 10-905001-00 357.36 33-117-23-22-0020 10-905010-00 414.41 33-117-23-22-0002 10-905017-00 470.10 33-117-23-22-0030 10-905018-00 414.41 25-117-23-22-0064 10-915001-00 470.10 32-117-23-14-0017 10-930205-00 296.04 33-117-23-44-0032 10-940202-00 412.58 ,33-117-23-34-003 10-975242-00 257. 1 TOTAL LEVY NO. 17530 $ 27,329.44 HUNK CODE 26 LEVY NO 17539 EXHIBIT B WATER IO NO. ACCOUNT NO. TOTAL PRINCIPAL 25- 117 -23 -33 -0058 01030003 -00 96.67 33- 117 -23 -14 -0041 02- 775206 -00 373.01 34- 117 -23 -24 -0026 02- 945011 -00 75.87 34- 117 -23 -24 -0028 02- 945020 -00 116.42 34- 117 -23 -24 -0043 02- 945023 -00 112.52 31- 117 -23 -14 -0026 03- 080005 -00 82.84 31- 117 -23 -14 -0029 03- 080010 -00 193.42 31- 117 -23 -13 -0036 03- 083210 -00 337.11 31- 117 -23 -11 -0001 03- 365002 -00 215.28 32- 117 -23 -14 -0069 03- 397003 -00 828.08 32- 117 -23 -43 -0037 03- 600210 -00 141.08 32- 117 -23 -14 -0029 03- 775209 -00 110.95 32- 117 -23 -11 -0021 03- 930202 -01 286.25 36- 117 -23 -44 -0079 04- 580112 -00 179.85 25- 117 -23 -44 -0056 04- 705010 -00 579.71 25- 117 -23 -44 -0054 04- 710106 -00 288.15 25- 117 -23 -44 -0026 04- 710111 -00 176.97 36- 117 -23 -14 -0052 04- 889126 -98 190.09 34- 117 -23 -31 -0015 05- 325001 -00 245.76 25- 117 -23 -33 -0072 09- 030001 -00 242.39 TOTAL LEVEY NO. 17531 $ 4,872.42 MUNIC CODE 26 LEVY NO 17532 EXHIBIT C STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PID NO. ACCOUNT NO. TOTAL PRINCIPAL 25-117-23-33-0058 01-030003-00 2447 33- 117-23 -14 -0041 - 027�7 1 5 - 206 -O�� 34-117-23-24-0026 02-945011-00 28.65 34-117-23-24-0028 02-945020-00 66.99 34 117 -23 -24 -0043 02-9 23.25 31-117-23-14-0026 03-080005-00 55.05 31-117-23-14-0029 03-080010-00 101.54 31-117-23-13-0036 03-083210-00 77.19 31-117-23-11-0001 03-365002-00 91.17 32-117-23-14-0069 03-397003-00 82.36 32-117-23-43-0037 03-600210-00 29.89 32-117-23-14-0029 03-775209-00 77.62 72-117-23-11-0021 03-930202-01 37.58 36-117-23-44-0079 04-580112-00 34.92 25-117-23-44-0056 04-705010-00 94.56 25-117-23-44-0054 04-710106-00 55.05 75-117-23-44-0025 04-710110-00 77.19 25-117-23-44-0026 04-710111-00 77.19 36-117-23-14-0052 04-889126-98 46.47 34-117-23-31-0015 - 65-325001-00 101.54 25-117-23-33-0072 09-030001-00 171.32 33-117-23-12-0017 10-015205-00 77.19 75-117-23-31-0054 10-025002-00 34.92 29-117-23-44-0030 10-045224-00 100.39 29-117-23-44-0039 10-045231-00 101.54 29-117-23-43-0032 10-045245-00 132.17 31-117-23-44-0010 10-050205-00 77.19 74-117-23-43-0039 10-125008-00 124.18 33-117-23-42-0001 10-170004-00 38.91 30- 1 17 -23 -32 -0010 10-245005-00 59.39 30-117-23-33-0003 10-250006-00 41.84 30-117-23-33-0026 10-255002-00 95.39 30-117-23-33-0030 10-255016-00 45.47 73-117-23-32-0031 10-260032-00 124.19 33-117-23-33-0057 10-260038-00 125.24 25-117-23-34-0025 10-270213-00 124.19 26-117-23-11-0012 10-280004-00 85.19 26-117-23-14-0029 10-285005-00 59.39 26-117-23-14-0040 10-290208-00 128.32 34-117-23-42-0018 10-300005-00 138.16 34-117-23-31-0028 10-325005-00 77.19 72-117-23-12-0008 10-330002-00 118.07 32-117-23-12-0002 10-330003-00 95.37 71-117-23-14-0002 10-365032-00 128.32 26-117-23-14-0025 10-385206-00 59.40 34-117-23-33-0029 10-425002-00 84.52 34-117-23-33-0039 10-425007-00 92.37 25-117-23-32-0023 10-485225-00 124.19 32 10-535001-00 61.71 35-117-23-31-0051 10-545006-00 77.19 35-117-23-43-0006 10-545023-00 77.19 26-117-23-11-0050 10-550204-00 95,39 76-117-23-14-0069 10-550208-00 55.05 26-117-23-14-0103 10-550210-00 77.19 36-117-23-22-0024 10-655201-00 450.49 76-117-23-14-0011 10-685010-00 95.39 25-117-23-44-0049 10-705001-00 98.89 30-117-23-42-0003 10-725013-00 128.32 36-117-23-21-0009 10-740005-00 38.87 5 10-745016-00 18.38 32-117-23-13-0032 10-765001-00 120.22 5 10-775205-00 95.11 34-117-23-23-0042 10-775209-00 101.54 33-117-23-24-0006 10-775244-00 124.19 32-117-23-14-0031 10-775273-00 121.87 32-117-23-14-0024 10-775284-00 101.54 32-117-23-14-0038 10-775285-00 100.47 26-117-23-41-0027 10-780006-00 84.52 25-117-23-34-0022 10-780036-00 95.41 25-117-23-34-0012 10-780037-00 124.19 25-117-23-23-0020 10-815013-00 59.39 33 10-863004-00 50.94 34-117-23-23-0043 10-872011/12-00 83.19 34-117-23-23-0045 10-872014-01 27.54 32-117-23-11-0025 10-880001-00 100.47 32-117-23-11-0006 10-883201/2-98 43.98 33-117-23-21-0041 10-905001-00 38.61 33-117-23-22-0020 10-905010-00 95.39 33 10-905017-00 101.54 33-117-23-22-0030 10-905018-00 95.41 25-117-23-22-0064 10-915001-00 132.17 3 10-930205-00 90.71 33-117-23-44-0032 10-940202-00 124.19 7 10-975242-00 83.87 TOTAL LEVEY NO. 17532 $ 7,512.521 MUNIC CODE 26 LEVY NO 17533 EXHIBIT D RECYCUNG PID NO. ACCOUNT - NO. TOTAL PRINCIPAL 25-117-23-33-0058 01-030003-00 12A3 34..117..23-24-0026 02-945011-00 19.90 34-117-23-24-0028 02-945020-00 46 34-117-23-24-0043 02-945023-00 16.14 31-117-23-14-0026 03-080005-00 19.12 31-117-23-14-0029 03-080010-00 35.27 31- 117 -23 -13 -0036 03-083210-00 26 31-117-23-11-0001 03-365002-00 46.52 32-117-23-14-0069 03-397003-00 28.61 32-117-23-43-0037 03-600210-00 26.81 32-117-23-14-0029 03-775209-00 38.71 32-117-23-11-0021 E-930202-01 26.11 36-117-23-44-0079 04-580112-00 12.13 25-117-23-44-0056 04-705010-00 35.53 25-117-23-44-0054 04-710106-00 19.12 25-117-23-44-0025 04-710110-00 26.81 25-117-23-44-0026 04-710111-00 26.81 34-117-23-31-0015 05-325001-00 35.27 33-117-23-12-0017 10-015205-00 26.81 35-117-23-31-0054 10-025002-00 12.13 29-117-23-44-0030 10-045224-00 30.87 29-117-23-44-0039 10-045231-00 35.27 29-117-23-43-0032 10-045245-00 35.27 31-117-23-44-0010 10-050205-00 26.81 34-117-23-43-0039 10-125008-00 36.40 33-117-23-42-0001 10-170004-00 35.28 30-117-23-32-0010 10-245005-00 12.13 30-117-23-33-0003 10-250006-00 36.12 30-117-23-33-0026 10-255002-00 36.41 30-117-23-33-0030 10-255016-00 12.13 33-117-23-32-0031 10-260032-00 36.43 33-117-23-33-0057 10-260038-00 37.26 25-117-23-34-0025 10-270213-00 36.43 26-117-23-11-0012 10-280004-00 29.67 26-117-23-14-0029 10-285005-00 26.81 26-117-23-14-0040 10-290208-00 44.57 34-117-23-42-0018 10-300005-00 44.57 34-117-23-31-0028 10-325005-00 26.81 32-117-23-12-0008 10-330002-00 31.50 32-117-23-12-0002 10-330003-00 36.37 31-117-23-14-0002 10-365032-00 44.57 26-117-23-14-0025 10-385206-00 26.80 34-117-23-33-0029 10-425002-00 29.35 34-117-23-33-0039 10-425007-00 33.34 25-117-23-32-0023 10-485225-00 36.43 32-117-23-11-0034 10-535001-00 21.43 35-117-23-31-0051 10-545006-00 26.81 35-117-23-43-0006 10-545023-00 26.81 26-117-23-11-0050 10-550204-00 36.43 26-117-23-14-0069 10-550208-00 19.12 26-117-23-14-0103 10-550210-00 26.81 36-117-23-22-0024 10-655201-00 36.31 26-117-23-14-0011 10-685010-00 36.41 25-117-23-44-0049 10-705001-00 36.71 30-117-23-42-0003 10-725013-00 44.57 36-117-23-21-0009 10-740005-00 19.12 33-117-23-14-0036 10-745016-00 12.76 32-117-23-13-0032 10-765001-00 45.52 34-117-23-23-0049 10-775205-00 36.10 34-117-23-23-0042 10-775209-00 35.27 33-117-23-24-0006 10-775244-00 36.43 32-117-23-14-0031 10-775273-00 45.52 32-117-23-14-0024 10-775284-00 35.27 32-117-23-14-0038 10-775285-00 26.81 26-117-23-41-0027 10-780006-00 29.35 25-117-23-34-0022 10-780036-00 36.43 25-117-23-34-0012 10-780037-00 36.43 25-117-23-23-0020 10-815013-00 26.81 33-117-23-43-0006 10-863004-00 19.83 34-117-23-23-0043 10-872011/12-00 57.77 34-117-23-23-0045 10-872014-01 19.12 32-117-23-11-0025 10-880001-00 26.81 32-117-23-11-0006 10-883201/2-98 32.52 33-117-23-21-0041 10-905001-00 26.81 33-117-23-22-0020 10-905010-00 36.43 33-117-23-22-0002 10-905017-00 35.27 33-117-23-22-0030 10-905018-00 36.43 25-117-23-22-0064 10- 915001 -00 35.27 32-117-23-14-0017 10-930205-00 31.50 33-117-23-44-0032 10-940202-00 36.41 33-117-23-34-0034 10-975242-00 36.29 TOTAL LEVEY NO. 17533 $ 2,518.55 MUNIC CODE 26 EXHIBIT U LEVY NO 17534 DRY HYDRANT RON JOHNSON October 28, 2009 5355 Shady Hills Circle Shorewood, NfN 55331 By e -mail and U.S. Mail Corrine A. Heine, Special Counsel City of Shorewood Kennedy & Graven Chartered 200 South 6th Street, Suite 4 470 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Tel: 952 -474 -8171 Re: tax special assessment for stormwater management (clean -up) fee billings. Dear Ms. Heine: In our pending litigation I raised a defense, under the federal civil rights statute, to such charges as inequitable and unequal treatment. The City has not paid me for my clean -up of City stormwater flooding of my property since 1996; the City failed to request my consent to entry for the City to perform the clean -up, the City did not have title to easement to enter; and the City acknowledged in 1997/98 that more clean -up would be necessary unless the City fixed the problems for a cost of approximately $50,000 (1995). The City already owes me substantial sums for tax special assessments it had the County collect from me previously, including sump pump fines, windfalls, the City on January 28, 2008 deemed unconstitutional by deleting the ordinance provision pursuant to which it collected the fines. The City's prior Special Council, Mr. Hoff, suggested refunds were appropriate in his January 25, 2008 letter prior to the City's amendment to ordinance, defacto authorizing the refunds. I understand that City certification to the County of the instant accrued fees, for flood clean -up, etc., will come before the City Council soon. Please instruct the City Council to delete these particular utility billing charges and refund all the fees, above referenced, with interest, it previously collected from me, offset by any other utility bill items. I look forward to your prompt response. Thank you. Sincerely, /s/ Ron Johnson cc: Ms. Tietjen Ms. Burton Mr. Heck Mayor & City Council CO UNCIL I L ACTION FO Department Council meeting Item dumber Administration November 9, 2009 10 - B ;r? � From: Brian Fleck, City Administrator f Item: SouthShore Community Center Projections TENTIMEW . The City Council reviewed material at the October 26 Council meeting regarding the last several month's operations at the SouthShore Community Center. This update provided information on programming, operational items, and financial outlook for 2009 as well as projections for 2010. During the discussion there were questions related to additional capital improvement projects that might benefit the center and its operations and better information on the financial projections. Kristi Anderson and I met on several occasions over the past two weeks to refine the projections for the operations. Staff also met last week to go over the complete Capital Improvement Plan and discussed some of the items related to the SouthShore Center. Attached are the following: 1. Overview and detail budget projections for 2009 — 2012 2. Capital items for consideration over the next 3 -5 years You will notice the subsidy to operate the Center increases slightly from 2010 to 2012. The increase is attributable to the increase in the incentive pay provision of our agreement with Community Rec. Resources. This agreement provides Community Rec. Resources with additional compensation based on the rental income generated, the more rental income, the more incentive pay. Council Action: 2009 through 9/30/09 Revenue and Expenditures for SouthShore Community Center Revenue $ To Date Projected Proposed $ Proposed $ Proposed $ 17,400 2009 2009 2010 $ 2011 $ 2012 Event rentals $ 7,333 $ 15,333 $ 25,280 $ 27,808 $ 30,589 Long term rentals $ 11,700 $ 14,100 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 Miscellaneous revenue $ 568 $ 2,090 $ 1,650 $ 1,650 $ 1,650 Total $ 19,601 $ 31,523 $ 44,930 $ 47,458 $ 50,239 Materials and Supplies $ 11,275 $ 16,200 $ 17,400 $ 17,400 $ 17,400 Support Services and Charges $ 35,209 $ 45,377 $ 50,456 $ 53,462 $ 56,518 Capital Outlay $ 13,686 $ 22,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,000 Total $ 60,170 $ 83,577 $ 73,856 $ 76,862 $ 79,918 Revenue less expenses $ (40,569) $ (52,055) $ (28,926) $ (29,404) $ (29,679) Current Projected 2009 2009 2010 2011 2012 Comments Total Projected Revenue Expenditures Materials and Supplies Custodial Services General Supplies Saab Total Materials and Supplies Support Services and Charges Legal Services Communications Printing and Publishing Insurance Utilities Contractual Services Other services and charges Sub total Support Services and Charges $ 7,200 $ 7,200 $ 7,200 $ 7,200 $ 7,200 $600 a month. Church pay's extra for additional events $ 4,200 $ 6,000 $ 7,200 $ 7,200 $ 7,200 $600 a month and will pay extra for additional space beyond alloted time $ 180 $ 540 $ 2,160 $ 2,160 $ 2,160 $ 120 $ 360 $ 1,440 $ 1,440 $ 1,440 $ 11,700 $ 14,100 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 $ 18,000 $ 7,333 $ 15,333 $ 25,280 $ 27,808 $ 30,589 $ 65 $ 1,565 $ 150 $ 150 $ 150 500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 500 Contingency should legal advice be necessary for contracts, etc. $ (72) $ $ 503 $ 525 $ - $ - $ - $ 568 $ 2,090 $ 1,650 $ 1,650 $ 1,650 $ 19,601 $ 31,523 $ 44,930 $ 47,458 $ 50,239 $ 9,692 $ 13,900 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 $ 15,000 For services related to general cleaning and event work. $ 1,582 $ 2,300 $ 2,400 $ 2,400 $ 2,400 General supplies for facility such as bathroom and cleaning supplies $ 11,275 $ 16,200 $ 17,400 $ 17,400 $ 17,400 $ 8,279 $ 8,279 $ 500 $ 500 $ 500 Contingency should legal advice be necessary for contracts, etc. $ (72) $ 150 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 $ 1,500 Covers telephone and internet for the facility $ 2,025 $ 3,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Printing and publishing covers materials for marketing and courses /events $ 8,948 $ 8,948 $ 9,000 $ 9,000 $ 9,000 Provided through LMCIT @ current replacement value $ 4,119 $ 5,500 $ 6,300 $ 6,300 $ 6,300 Water, sewer, garbage, gas, electric, etc. - based on historical data $ 8,799 $ 15,000 $ 23,656 $ 26,662 $ 29,718 Base rate + 20% of income generated for the year per contract. $ 3,111 $ 4,500 $ 4,500 $ 4,500 $ 4,500 Based on historical data $ 35,209 $ 45,377 $ 50,456 $ 53,462 $ 56,518 $ 13,686 $ 22,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,000 $ 6,000 $ 60,170 $ 83,577 $ 73,856 $ 76,862 $ 79,918 Revenue over /(under) expenditures $ (40,569) $ (52,055) $ (28,926) $ (29,404) $ (29,679) SouthShore Center Possible Projects Approx. Cost 1 Connection to City Hall system 5000 2 LCD Projector 2000 3 Creation of Wireless "Hot Spot" 1000 4 Smart Board (on wheels) 3000 5 Audio system w /integrated CD /MP3 player capabilities 5000 6 New sign (possibly digital) on County Rd 19 7 Exterior Painting 8 Patio and landscaping improvements NE side of building 9 Portable Bar - used for events 3500 10 Tile in the Foyer 6000 COUNCIL ACTION FORM Background / Previous Action During the 2009 Legislative Session, the legislature enacted law, which was signed by the Governor, giving cities the authority to issue administrative citations for various traffic offenses that were previously handled by the district court. Some of the "crimes" include speeding less than 10 mph over the limit; vehicle safety violations such as cracked windshield or malfunctioning taillights; and other minor traffic violations. Under this bill the city issues the ticket and the offender is required to pay an administrative fine of $60.00. If the individual cited wants to challenge the citation, the case is taken to a municipal hearing officer, not the court, and an administrative hearing is conducted. Some key points. 1. The administrative fee is set by statute at $60.00 - $40.00 for the jurisdiction and $20.00 to the state. 2. Covers speeding violations less than 10 mph over; stop line violations, and vehicle equipment violations. 3. Does not apply to drivers with a commercial driver's license or who are operating a commercial motor vehicle. 4. Cities are not required to have this program, it is optional. Options Staff Recommendation Staff is looking for feedback and direction from the Council on this program. If the Council desires to consider adopting an administrative citation program, staff will add this to the 2010 work program, prepare the necessary ordinance amendments and other documents, and coordinate with the SLMPD on implementation. ATTACHMENTS: LMC Administrative Citation Tooll(it. Council Action: July 2009 I2evise , . 6 11 Gevtewdm 8W- 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST ST. PAUL, Nim 55103-2044 PHONE; (651) 281-1200 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 FAX: (651) 281-129 WEB: WWW.LMC.ORG Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit What you will find inside: Checklist for Implementing Administrative Traffic Citations New Law on Administrative Citations for Traffic Offenses: Frequently Asked Questions Model Council Resolution 7 Model Flyer for Administrative Traffic Citation Recipients 9 Sample Letter Notifying DPS of Passage of City Resolution 10 Administrative Traffic Citation Fine Remittance to the State 12 Text of Chapter 158, Administrative Citations Law 13 Uniform Administrative Traffic Citation 17 This tool kit helps cities institute a process for issuing administrative traffic citations. It contains a number of provisions a city may want to adopt. A city wishing to adopt any part of this tool kit should review the materials with the city attorney to determine which provisions and what Ianguage are best suited to the citv's circumstances. Because provisions within this tool kit implicate state statutes and involve state and federal constitutional rights, the city attorney should review any modifications to ensure they conform to current law. Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit Checklist for Implementing Administrative Traffic Citations New law authorizes exclusive use of administrative traffic citations for minor traffic offenses. This means no statutory or home rule charter city may use a different process for issuing such administrative traffic citations. A city may, however, issue other kinds of administrative citations pursuant to local ordinance for non - traffic matters such as liquor licensing ordinance violations, nuisance and animal ordinance violations, and so on. The following are the steps a city must take to issue administrative traffic citations. 1. Pass a resolution that • Authorizes police use of administrative traffic citations for $60 per violation. • Obligates the city to provide a neutral third party to hear and rule on challenges. • Bars peace officers from issuing administrative traffic citations in violation of this law. 2. Set up an appeal process using a neutral third -party hearing officer for those who wish to contest their administrative traffic citation. (The legislative intent is that this hearing officer be someone other than city staff or the city council.) 3. Notify the commissioner of Public Safety that the council passed a resolution allowing police officers to issue administrative traffic citations. Send the notice by mail (See Model Letter to the Commissioner of Public Safety on page 10) or by e -mail to tarnara.bolunert a,state.mn.us Keep a copy! 4. Develop an information sheet to give to anyone who gets an administrative traffic citation describing how the person may contest it. (See Model Flyer for Administrative Traffic Citation Recipients on page 9). 5. Buy the new prescribed DPS uniform traffic citation through the state Cooperative Purchasing Venture (CPV) program. The state has contracted with Forms & Systems of MN, located in Minnetonka. A city that wishes to purchase ticket books through the state contract must register for a free CPV membership. To learn more about CPV membership and access the CPV contract, visit www.mmd.admin.state.mn.us/process/contract/CPVContractsLig.asp (Cities may also use the vendor of their choice to create the citations using the template on page 17 of this tool kit.) 6. Track the number of administrative traffic citations issued and the money collected. (The state auditor must collect this infortation from cities each year.) 7. Divide the money collected so that: • Two - thirds of the fine ($40) remains with the city that issued the administrative traffic citation. • One -third of the fine ($20) is paid to the state commissioner of Finance. 8. Submit the state's share of the money to MN Management and Budget, Treasury Division. (See Administrative Traffic Citation Fine Remittance to the State, on page 12). 9. Use one -half of the city's share ($20) for law enforcement purposes. 10. Police officers may issue an administrative traffic citation to a vehicle operator who: • Violates speed limits by less than 10 miles per hour. • Fails to obey a stop line. • Operates a vehicle with a cracked windshield or other specific equipment violation. Note: Those with commercial driver's licenses are not eligible for administrative traffic citations nor are drivers of commercial vehicles. Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit New Law can Administrative Citations for Traffic Offenses: Frequently Asked Questions 1) For what types of traffic violations may the city issue administrative citations under the new law? Cities may issue administrative citations for violations of Minn. Stat. § 169.14 where the speed of the vehicle is under 10 miles per hour in excess of the lawful speed limit. The actual speed of the vehicle must be listed on the citation, and peace officers may not reduce the recorded speed for the purposes of issuing an administrative citation. It is important to note that Minn. Stat. § 169.14 generally prohibits speeding above the posted Iimit, but also prohibits: operating a vehicle at a "speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions" or without due care; failing to reduce speed when approaching or passing an authorized emergency vehicle stopped with emergency lights flashing; failing to reduce speed when approaching and crossing an intersection or railway grade crossing; failing to reduce speed when special hazards exist (such as pedestrians, other traffic, weather or highway conditions); driving slower than a posted minimum speed; and selling, offering for sale, using, or possessing any radar jammer in Minnesota. It is important to note that issuance of an administrative citation for reasons other than simple speeding under Minn. Stat. § 169.14 remains subject to the 10 -mile- per -hour limit. Specifically, if the citation for failing to reduce speed in adverse weather conditions involves speeding that is greater than 10 miles per hour over the limit, the officer should not issue an administrative citation. Cities may also issue administrative citations for stop line violations under Minn. Stat. § 169.30 and for violations of Minn. Stat. §§ 169.46 to 169.68 and Minn. Stat. §§ 169.69 to 165.75. These sections relate mainly to violations of the law on required vehicle equipment, including but not limited to: hitching a toboggan, hand sled, bicycle, or other similar device onto any motor vehicle while being used on a street; driving vehicles in an unsafe condition as to endanger any person; wearing headphones or earphones that are used in both ears while driving; texting while driving; failing to use lights while driving at night or bad weather; having broken tail /brake lights; failing to use a red flag on a projecting load; failing to use a slow moving vehicle sign; having loud mufflers and exhaust systems not in good working order; having cracked or obstructed windshields; and using unsafe or unauthorized metal studded tires. Due to state and federal law, persons who have a commercial driver's license or who are driving a commercial vehicle at the time of the citation may not be issued an administrative citation. These individuals must be issued a regular state criminal citation for the traffic offense. 2) Are peace officers required to issues administrative citations under the new law? Cities are not required to issue administrative citations under the new law. The process is entirely optional. Cities that believe that administrative citations make sense for them may adopt a resolution to issue such citations. In addition, where administrative citations have been adopted, the city cannot require, by ordinance or otherwise, that peace officers issue administrative citations.. Under the new law, peace officers always have the discretion to issue an administrative citation, give a warning, or issue a state criminal ticket. In addition, cities may not set quotas that require or suggest that an officer issue a certain number of administrative citations. Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 4) Can we just keeping using our current administrative citations system for traffic offenses? It is highly likely that cities that are currently issuing administrative citations for Minn. Stat., ch. 169 traffic offenses will need to cease or drastically revamp their existing citation program. The new law specifically lists out the traffic offenses under Minn. Stat., ch. 169 for which an administrative citation may be issued (see No. 1 above), and specifically prohibits the issuance of administrative citations for other violations of Minn. Stat., ch. 169. The new law also requires a city to use a new prescribed uniform citation form designed by the Commissioner of Public Safety. Finally, the statute requires a set administrative fine of $60, mandates how the fine must be divided between the city and state, and requires the city to spend at least one -half of its fine revenues on law enforcement purposes. 5) How can I order the uniform administrative traffic ticket? The state has selected Forms & Systems of MN, located in Minnetonka, to print the uniform administrative traffic citations, which cities can purchase through the state Cooperative Purchasing Venture (CPV) program. The CPV contract number is P- 941(5), and the title is Printing: Administrative Traffic Citations. (Cities may also use the vendor of their choice to create the citations using the template on page 17 of this tool kit.) A city that wishes to purchase ticket books through the state contract must register for a free CPV membership. To learn more about CPV membership and access the CPV contract, visit www.mmd.admin.state.mn.us/process/c ntract/CPVContractsList. asp 6) What is a stop line violation? The new law states that cities may issue administrative citations to vehicle operators who "fail to obey a stop line." A stop line violation is not a failure to stop completely as directed by a stop sign or traffic control signal. A regular criminal citation must still be issued for this type of traffic violation. According to the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, a stop line is a solid white line extending across approach lanes that indicates where vehicles are required to stop in compliance with a stop sign, traffic control signal, or some other traffic control device. An administrative citation for a stop line violation may be issued to a vehicle operator who fails to heed the direction for where to stop, presumably by driving over the line. 7) Does the new law apply to charter cities? The new law applies to all Minnesota cities, including charter cities. 8) Does the new law apply to violations of city traffic ordinances that are not offenses under Minn. Stat., ch. 169? For example, cruising, excessive acceleration, or jake braking? Cities have ample authority to adopt regulations to "regulate the use" of city streets in a manner that is consistent with Minn. Stat., ch. 169. Some cities have adopted traffic ordinances on subjects not regulated by Minn. Stat., ch. 169 and may be currently imposing administrative fines for violations. For example, cities may have ordinances prohibiting cruising, jake braking, or excessive acceleration. Under the new law, cities may continue to issue city administrative citations for these types of local ordinance violations consistent with city ordinance. However, cities may not use the new uniform Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit administrative citation designed by the Commissioner of Public Safety for these types of citations. Cities must develop or continue to use their own citation fora for these violations. 9) Toes the new law apply to local parking ordinance violations? The new law specifically lists out the traffic offenses under Minn. Stat., ch. 169 for which an administrative citation may be issued (see No. I above), and specifically prohibits the issuance of administrative citations for other violations of Minn. Stat., ch. 169. Parking violations are not specifically listed as an offense for which the new uniform administrative citation can be issued. However, cities may still issue local administrative citations for parking violations because Minn. Stat. § 169.04 specifically states "the provisions of this chapter [Minn Stat., ch. 169 — including Alinn. Stat., § 169.999] shall not be deemed to prevent local authorities, with respect to streets and highways under their jurisdiction ...and within the reasonable exercise of the police power fi -orn ... regulating the standing or parking of vehicles. " 10) Are there limits on how we use the funds from administrative fines? The new law requires that a city impose a fine of $60 per citation. When a city peace officer issues the administrative citation, the fine must be shared with the state in the following manner: two - thirds of the fine ($40) remains with the city that issued the administrative citation and one -third of the fine ($20) must be paid to the state Commissioner of Finance for deposit into the state's general fund. Furthennore, one -half of the city's share of the fine ($20) must be used for law enforcement purposes. The new law specifically requires that the funds "be used to supplement but not supplant any existing law enforcement funding." 11) Are there any special requirements related to accounting for funds? The new law requires cities to track both the number of citations issued and to separately account for any fine revenues in all city financial reports, summaries, and audits. 12) What is a neutral third -party hearing officer? The new law requires that the city infonn the recipient of an administrative citation of his or her right to challenge the citation, provide a "civil process" for challenges, and provide a "neutral third party to hear and rule on challenges" to a citation. The law does not provide a definition for a "neutral third party" or provide extensive guidance for cities. However, a common understanding of "neutral" would require that the hearing officer be impartial to both the interests of the city and the recipient of the citation. In addition, a common understanding of "third party" would require that the hearing officer not be one of the principal participants in the controversy (the city or the citation recipient). As a result, the hearing officer should most likely not be the city council as a whole, an individual council member, or a higher -level city officer such as the city administrator or clerk. The neutral third party should be someone hired by the city to specifically handle challenges to citations. 12) What can the city do if someone refuses to pay the fine? If a citation recipient does not pay the fine, the city may choose to dismiss the administrative citation and issue a state criminal traffic citation instead. In the alternative, the city may use traditional debt collection methods. There is, however, no authority in the new law for cities to specially assess the fine against real property for payment as taxes. 13) Where can I get more information on administrative citations? The League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) has developed the Administrative Fines Tool Kit, which is available upon request or can be accessed at www.Imc.org. Please contact Anne Finn at (651) 281- 1263 or afinn a lmc.or , or the LMC Research Department at (651) 281 -1200 or (800) 925 -1122 for more information. Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit Wffls : , y �7�irE�l 4 ��_ ° , :!, ' i � � �i� • �' :1` . 1 fit° , � , � ,. ., �. � , s k - The City Council of the City of , Minnesota, does ordain: WHEREAS: The City is authorized to provide for the issuance of administrative citations for specific traffic offenses designated at Minn. Stat. § 169.999, subd. l(b)(1), (2) and (3), in the amount designated at Mirm. Stat. § 169.999, subd. 5, as it may be amended from time to time; and WHEREAS: The authority to issue administrative traffic citations authorized by this resolution is reserved by law exclusively to licensed peace officers; and WHEREAS: City peace officers may not issue administrative traffic citations in violation of Minn. Stat. § 169.999; and WHEREAS: The City is required to notify a recipient of an administrative traffic citation of his or her right to contest the citation and to appoint a neutral third party to hear and rule on challenges to administrative traffic citations authorized by this resolution; and WHEREAS: Minn. Stat. § 169.999 contains numerous requirements related to the issuance of administrative traffic citations including but not limited to prescribing a uniform traffic citation form, use and sharing of fine revenues, and other administrative measures; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF , MINNESOTA: 1) The City hereby authorizes the issuance of administrative citations for traffic offenses designated at Minn. Stat. § 169.999, subd. I(b)(1), (2) and (3), as it may be amended from time to time; and 2) The City hereby sets the fine for committing an administrative traffic violation designated by Minn. Stat. § 169.999 and this resolution at the amount designated by Minn. Stat. § 169.999, subd. 5, as it may be amended from time to time; and 3) The City hereby directs that only licensed City peace officers may issue administrative traffic citations authorized by this resolution; and 4) The City hereby directs that no City peace officer may issue an administrative traffic citation in violation of Minn. Stat. §169,999; and 5) The City hereby directs that no administrative traffic citation authorized by this resolution may be issued to a holder of a commercial driver's license or the driver of a commercial vehicle in which the administrative violation was committed; and Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 6) The City hereby directs the appointment of a neutral third party to hear and rule on challenges to administrative traffic citations authorized by this resolution. Such appointment may be renewed annually at the first meeting of the year as all other Council appointments, or more immediately as the Council directs, in its sole, reasonable discretion; 7) The City hereby adopts the uniform administrative traffic citation form prescribed by the Commissioner of Public Safety; 8) The City hereby authorizes City staff to create materials as necessary to supplement the uniform administrative traffic citation to provide recipients of an administrative traffic citation with information related, but not limited to, the recipient's right to challenge the citation; the City's process for handling challenges to administrative traffic citations; the location, dates, and times designated to hear traffic citation challenges; the process for paying a traffic citation; and the effect of an administrative traffic citation on a recipient's driving record; and 9) City staff is hereby directed to inform the Commissioner of Public,Safety of the passage of this resolution; 10) City staff is hereby directed to separately account for administrative traffic citations authorized by this resolution in City financial reports, summaries, and audits in keeping with common accounting practices and standards; 11) City staff is hereby directed to designate a special fund for the portion of administrative traffic fines that must be spent on law enforcement purposes, in keeping with common accounting practice and standards, and to report annually, or as otherwise directed by Council, to the City Council on said fund. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was proposed by Council member and was duly seconded by Council member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: And the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of , on , 20_ Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk or City Administrator Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit Administrative offense citations are intended to provide the public and the City of with a less formal, cost - effective alternative to traditional criminal charges for violations of certain state traffic law provisions. An administrative citation carries only a financial penalty and will not be recorded on your driving record. You may choose to contest this citation. Within days of the issuance of an administrative citation, you may choose from the following options: #1 Pay the administrative fine as indicated, and mail or deliver to: M #2 Contest the citation by requesting a hearing with the Administrative Hearing Officer by calling: City of Monday - Friday, a.m. to p.m. citation. Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 10 Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit Commissioner of Public Safety Town Square Building 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Dear Commissioner: Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 169.999, subd. I(e), the City of is writing to inform the commissioner of Public Safety that it has passed a resolution authorizing the city issuance of administrative fines for certain traffic offenses. A copy of the resolution is enclosed with this letter. Sincerely, (name), City Clerk/City Administrator for the City of Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 11 w= Mail to: MN Management and Budget Treasury Division Administrative Fines Surcharge P.O. Box 64577 Saint Paul, N/IN 55164-0577 Checks payable to: "Comm of MMB, Treas Div" Subject: Administrative Traffic Citation Fines 2009 (M.S. 169.999) ('09/Ch 158/Sec 6/Sub 5) From: Number of violations: For Local Units of Government: $20.00 per violation, total remitted to state: $ For State Patrol: $40.00 per violation, total remitted to state: $ Questions? Call Richard Pietz (651) 201-8092 (Name and phone number of a contact pel-S077) Administrative Traffic Citations Too[ Kit 12 Mi nnesota Session Laws 2009, Regular Session Key: (1) Ian g b e t� deleted (2) new Iangua�e is underlined An act authorizing administrative traffic citations BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 6.74, is amended to read: 6.74 INFORMATION COLLECTED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. The state auditor, or a designated agent, shall collect annually from all city, county, and other local units of government, information as to the assessment of property, collection of taxes, receipts from licenses and other sources including administrative fines assessed and collected pursuant to section 169.999 the expenditure of public funds for all purposes, borrowing, debts, principal and interest payments on debts, and such other information as may be needful. The data shall be supplied upon forms prescribed by the state auditor, and all public officials so called upon shall fill out properly and return promptly all forms so transmitted. The state auditor or assistants, may examine local records in order to complete or verify the information. [irrelevant sections omitted] Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 169.985, is amended to read: 169.985 TRAFFIC CITATION QUOTA PROHIBITED. A law enforcement agency may not order, mandate, require, or suggest to a peace officer a quota for the issuance of traffic citations including administrative citations authorized under section 169.999 on a daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, or yearly basis. Sec. 5. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 169.99, subdivision 1, is amended to read: Subdivision 1. Form. (a) Except as provided in subdivision 3, and section 169.999, subdivision 3, there shall be a uniform ticket issued throughout the state by the police and peace officers or by any other person for violations of this chapter and ordinances in conformity thereto. Such uniform traffic ticket shall be in the form and have the effect of a summons and complaint. Except as provided in paragraph (b), the uniform ticket shall state that if the defendant fails to appear in court in response to the ticket, an arrest warrant may be issued. The uniform traffic ticket shall consist of four parts, on paper sensitized so that copies may be made without the use of carbon paper, as follows: (1) the complaint, with reverse side for officer's notes for testifying in court, driver's past record, and court's action, printed on white paper; (2) the abstract of court record for the Department of Public Safety, which shall be a copy of the complaint with the certificate of conviction on the reverse side, printed on yellow paper; (3) the police record, which shall be a copy of the complaint and of the reverse side of copy (1), printed on pink paper; and (4) the summons, with, on the reverse side, such information as the court may wish to give concerning the Traffic Violations Bureau, and a plea of guilty and waiver, printed on off -white tag stock. (b) If the offense is a petty misdemeanor, the uniform ticket must state that a failure to appear will be considered a plea of guilty and waiver of the right to trial, unless the failure to appear is due to circumstances beyond the person's control. Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 13 Sec. 6. AIN TRAFFIC OFFENSES. 7 Subdivision 1. Authority. (a) Except for peace officers employed by the state patrol, prior to a peace officer issuing an administrative citation under this section. the governing body for the local unit of govenunent that empioys the peace officer must pass a resolution that: (1) authorizes issuance of administrative citations; (2) obligates the local unit of government to provide a neutral third patty to hear and rule on challenges to administrative citations (3) bars peace officers from issuing administrative citations in violation of this section. (b) A peace officer may issue an administrative citation to a vehicle operator who: (1) violates section 169 14 and the violation consists of a speed under ten miles per hour in excess of the lawful speed limit (2) fails to obey a stop ling in violation of section 169.30; or (3) operates a vehicle that is in violation of sections 169.46 to 169.68 and 169.69 to 169.75. (c) The authority to issue an administrative citation is exclusively limited to those offenses listed in this subdivision. (d) A peace officer who issues an administrative citation for the infraction of speeding under ten miles per hour over the speed limit must use the actual speed violator's vehicle was traveling at the time of the infraction and may not reduce the recorded speed for purposes of qualifying the offense for an administrative citation. An administrative citation issued for speeding must list the actual speed the vehicle was traveling at the time of the infraction. (e) A local unit of government shall notify the commissioner of public safety after it passes a resolution described in paragraph (a). Subd. 2. Officer's authority. The authority to issue an administrative citation is reserved exclusively to licensed peace officers. An officer may not be required by ordinance or otherwise to issue a citation under this section instead of a criminal citation. Subd. 3. Uniform citation. There must be a uniform administrative citation issued throughout the state by licensed peace officers for violations of this section. No other citation is authorized for violations of this section. The commissioner of public safety shall prescribe the detailed form of the uniform administrative citation and shall revise the uniform administrative citation on such subsequent occasions as necessary and proper. The uniform administrative citation must include notification that the person has the right to contest the citation. Subd. 4. Right to contest citation. (a)A peace officer who issues an administrative citation must inform the vehicle operator that the person has the right to contest the citation. (b) Except as provided . in paragraph (c), the local unit of government that employs the peace officer who issues an administrative citation must provide a civil process for a person to contest the administrative citation. The person must be allowed to challenge the citation before a neutral third party. A local unit of government may employ a person to hear and rule on challenges to administrative citations or contract with another local unit of government or a private entity to provide the service. (c) The state patrol may contract with local units of government or private entities to collect administrative fines and to provide a neutral third party to hear and rule on challenges to administrative citations. An administrative citation issued by a state patrol trooper must clearly state how and where a violator can challenge the citation. Subd. 5. Fines; disbursement. (a) A person who commits an administrative Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 14 violation under subdivision 1 must pa of $60. Except as provide iin paragraph (c) two - thirds of a fine collected under this section must be credited to the general revenue fund of the local unit of ffiovernment that employs the peace officer who issued the citation and one -third must be transferred to the commissioner of finance to be deposited in the state general fund. A local unit of government receiving fine proceeds under this section must use at least one -half of the funds for law enforcement purposes. The funds must be used to supplement but not supplant any existing law enforcement funding. (c) For fines collected under this section from administrative citations issued by state patrol troopers one -third must be credited to the general fund of the local unit of government or entity that collects the fine and provides a hearing officer and two - thirds must be transferred to the commissioner of finance to be deposited in the state general fund. Subd. 6. Commercial drivers' licenses and commercial vehicles; exceotions. An administrative citation may not be issued under this section to (1) the holder of a commercial driver's license or (2) the driver of a commercial vehicle in which the administrative violation was committed. Subd. 7. Driving records. A violation under this section may not be recorded by the Department of Public Safety on the violator's driving record and does not constitute grounds for revocation or suspension of the violator's driver's license. Subd. 8. Administrative penalty reporting. (a ) A county, statutory or home rule city, or town that employs peace officers who issue administrative citations and that collects administrative fines under this section must include that infonmation and the amount collected as separate categories in any financial report summary, or audit. (b) The state auditor shall annually report to the commissioner of public safety information concerning administrative fines collected by local units of government under section 169.999. Upon request the commissioner of public safety shall report to the chairs and ranking minority members of the senate and house of representatives committees having jurisdiction over criminal justice policy and funding summarizing the reports the commissioner received under this paragraph. Subd. 9. Local preemption. The authority to issue an administrative citation is exclusively limited to those offenses listed in subdivision 1. Notwithstanding any contrary charter provision or ordinance no statutory or home rule charter city, county, or town may impose administrative penalties to enforce any other provision of this chapter. Sec. 7. Minnesota Statutes 2008, section 357.021, subdivision 6, is amended to read: Subd. 6. Surcharges on criminal and traffic offenders. (a) Except as provided in this paragraph, the court shall impose and the court administrator shall collect a $75 surcharge on every person convicted of any felony, gross misdemeanor, misdemeanor, or petty misdemeanor offense, other than a violation of a law or ordinance relating to vehicle parking, for which there shall be a $4 surcharge. In the Second Judicial District, the court shall impose, and the court administrator shall collect, an additional $1 surcharge on every person convicted of any felony, gross misdemeanor, misdemeanor, or petty misdemeanor offense, including a violation of a law or ordinance relating to vehicle parking, if the Ramsey County Board of Commissioners authorizes the $1 surcharge. The surcharge shall be imposed whether or not the person is sentenced to imprisonment or the sentence is stayed. The surcharge shall not be imposed when a person is convicted of a petty misdemeanor for which no fine is imposed. (b) If the court fails to impose a surcharge as required by this subdivision, the court administrator shall show the imposition of the surcharge, collect the surcharge, and correct the record. (c) The court may not waive payment of the surcharge required under this Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 15 subdivision. Upon a showing of indigency or undue hardship upon the convicted person or the convicted person's immediate family, the sentencing court may authorize payment of the surcharge in installments. (d) The count administrator or other entity collecting a surcharge shall forward it to the commissioner of finance. (e) If the convicted person is sentenced to imprisonment and has not paid the surcharge before the term of imprisonment begins, the chief executive officer of the correctional facility in which the convicted person is incarcerated shall collect the surcharge from any earnings the inmate accrues from work performed in the facility or while on conditional release. The chief executive officer shall forward the amount collected to the commissioner of finance. (fl The surcharge does not apply to administrative citations issued pursuant to section 169.999. Sec. 8. COMMSSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY CREATE UNIFORM ADNIINISTRATWE CITATION. No later than October 1, 2009, the commissioner of public safety shall create a uniform administrative citation to be issued under Minnesota Statutes section 169.999. The commissioner shall consult with representatives from the Sheriffs Association of Minnesota the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association and the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association on the form and content of the uniform administrative citation. Sec. 9. SEVERARILITY. If and provision of this act, or the applicability provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this act is not affected and must be given effect to the fullest extent practicable. Sec. 10. EFFECTIVE DATE. Sections 2 and 3 are effective August 1, 2009, and the amendments made in sections 2 and 3 to Minnesota Statutes, sections 169.011 and 169.045, expire July 31, 2012. Presented to the governor May 20, 2009 Signed by the governor May 21, 2009, 10:36 a.m. Administrative Traffic Citations Tool Kit 16 \0N� �N0�N0N0NND0Q00N00|�0@� |NN |mmnu ��umimmVnxmmummxNNummmmmUm imm Citation Nunnber' ADMINISTRATIVE TRAFFIC CITATION STATE [)FMINNESOTA ^CQ7 COUNTY, O@ STATE AGENCY NAME" Drivers License Number state /on/event# Name - First, Middle, Last Address - Street, Apt city State Zip DOB (rnmlddlyyyy) Eyes Height 1 Weight Sex Vehicle License No. State 1 Make Model Color Date of Offense Time of Offense Juvenile P2rent/Guardian Location 0 Speed (:1 Driver 171 Owner Statute/Ordinance 169.14 Sub. Speed _ in Zone 0 Driver El Owner Code Stop Line 1005 a*mte/omm"nco 169.30 Offense E] Driver El owner Code Statute/Ordinance 6tat*wormoance xorc REFER TO OPPOSITE SIDE OF CITATION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Officer Badge No. Agency RIGHT TO CONTEST - READ CAREFULLY The State of Minnesota (MN Statute 108.S9S subdivision 5e) has set a fine amount mf$h0.0U for each Administrative Offense. Send a check or money order, along with the signed copy of this Administrative Citation to the address listed below, DO NOT send cash. | understand that by pay this penalty |am admitting to an Administrative Offense. | also understand that | have a right to an Administrative Hearing and I waive that right. Signature Address Date Issuance ofa worth check kso crime, and you will be subject to civil and criminal penalties. \n addition, ocharge ufup0o$S0.00 may be assessed on all returned chocky. "Name ofAgency" "Street Address" "City, State Zip Code" "Phone Number" L ACTION FORM r . Council member Bailey is seeking input from the Council regarding the EFD budget. The budget passed by the EFD and accepted by the Cities provides an allocation of $120,000 mandatory contribution for the Fire Relief Association. Based on market conditions, the fund has recovered some of the earlier losses and the mandatory contribution for 2010 is now around $97,000. The reduction in the Relief Association contribution has "freed up" approximately $23,000 for reallocation. Chief Gerber prepared a priority list for funding restoration — this list is attached. Also attached is an analysis by Dana Young, Deephaven Administrator, regarding payment frequency. One of the discussion points during the budget process was if the cities should adopt a monthly payment schedule rather than the current quarterly payment cycle to provide better cash flow and thereby reducing the need for reserve funds. The next meeting of the fire district will be November 18, 2009. Council Action: Propose a get estoration Priorities October 19 2 Funding Amount for Consideratio a. Original line item for Firefighter Pension Contribution - $120,000 b. Required amount - $97,000 c. Amount of funding for restoration consideration - $23,000 lanning a. I believe it is important for us to plan for 2010, 2011 and beyond. I understand that the impacts of the economy will impact communities far beyond the initial crisis. b. The costs per capita for 2010 for fire and safety services from the fire district are $58.25 c. Service Delivery is a critical element in planning. d. Recruitment and retention are important factors for our service delivery. e. Key areas for consideration include: staffing, facilities, apparatus, equipment, and training. Background — how have reserves been built a. The Excelsior Fire District Reserves have been improved over the last three years. I believe it is important for the Board, Operating Committee, Firefighters, and community to acknowledge how the fund balance reserves have been built up. i. The EFD Board has set more realistic budgets for 2007, 2008 and 2009 and set policy initiatives. ii. The EFD Operating Committee has provided guidance for the operations of the Fire District. iii. The Chief has set goals and objectives for achieving sound fiscal management. iv. The Fire Officers and Firefighters have provided dedicated service while coming in under budget in 2007 and 2008. v. The 2009 Budget is also on track to come in under budget; HOWEVER, the amount under budget _ is projected less than in 2008. vi. The 2010 budget will be extremely difficult to come in under budget with the cuts. vii. The "under budget" amounts have built up the fiend balance reserves viii. The EFD Board has not specifically budgeted for fund balance reserves. b. The reserve funds in the operating accounts and capital accounts are where they should be. The current and projected balances meet or exceed the State Auditors levels. c. The Excelsior Fire District staff met the direction of 0% increase for 2010; however, there were operational impacts that will affect firefighters and service delivery. d. The EFD staff does not want to go back to where we had to present and accept 15 -16% increases because of unrealistic budgets. 1 Relief Association Contribution $23,000 a. Provide the funding to the relief association as budgeted in an effort to minimize required contribution in 2011 and beyond. 2 Salary $8,094 a. Restore 2% increase to Chief, Inspector, Admin Spec. $2,484 b. Restore 3% increase to Firefighters $3,761 c. Restore PERA /Medicare /FICA Costs $1,849 WMIZIUM for 2010. 2. The Excelsior Fire District does not have a "Step Plan"; therefore, any increase for staff is a "step and cost of living" increase. 3. Current EFD staff salaries (Firefighters, Inspector, Administrative staff, Chief) are not at the bottom of the tier, but they certainly are not at the "top" of the scale. 4. Recruiting and retaining staff for our unique service area (costs of homes /businesses) requires us to stay on the "cutting edge ". 5. Creating a "perception" of "penalizing" fire district staff for effective fiscal management impacts the overall management of the District. 6. The costs of hiring, equipping and retraining are higher than the proposed amount for wage increases. 7. Firefighter "salaries" are not a direct relation to costs and services provided by the firefighters, but provide reimbursement for expenses such as fuel and clothing. 8. These costs are .005% of the overall budget 3 Training $14,900 a. Restore training budget to 2009 level $10,250 b. Restore conferences to 2009 level $4,650 Narrative: xi. I believe restoring the training area funding directly impacts firefighter performance, health, safety, risk management, claims avoidance and overall loss control. The life safety initiatives and case studies from firefighter injuries and fatalities from across the country continue to point to training deficiencies and needs. xii. Training individual firefighters receive at conferences and other "off site" training has direct benefits to the individual firefighter and the overall fire district. Restoring training for staff will provide short term and long term impacts to firefighters and the overall organization. 4 Fire Prevention 1 $1,300 a. Restore funding to the fire prevention line item to 2009 $1,300 level Narrative: The restoration of the funding for fire prevention will allow us to continue fire prevention education at current levels. Examples of fire prevention include: xiii. Open House xiv. Education with Schools e air a to a ce u lies as Restore maintenance and supplies line item $ 600 N arrative: The restoration of these funds will help provide realistic budgets for specific line items. T'echnoloey $3,20 a. Restore computer replacement schedule $3,200 xv. Replace two computers /monitors as scheduled Narrative: The restoration of this funding will allow us to stay on schedule for maintaining and replacing current technology needs of the District. Without these funds we will decrease our capacity. 7 Communications $ 950 a. Restore pager purchase to the 2010 budget $ 950 Narrative: The restoration of these funds will allow us to continue to replace / purchase pagers for the District. 8 Building Repair $1,500 a. Restore station maintenance item $1,500 Narrative: The restoration of these funds will help provide realistic budgets for specific line items. The Building maintenance line item is a dynamic line item and often over budget because of two fire stations and still getting "settled" into the buildings. 9 Fire Facilities Fund Account $40,000 a. Restore funding to the Fire Facilities Fund Account to use for future needs "Note — restore percentage as available Narrative: The restoration of fund balances is important. I believe strongly that we need to have adequate fiend balances for effective fiscal management; however, I do not believe they need to over funded. 10 Fund Balance $40,000 a. Restore funding to the Operation Fund Balance to use for future needs "Note — restore percentage as available Narrative: The restoration of fund balances is important. I believe strongly that we need to have adequate fund balances for effective fiscal management; however, I do not believe they need to over funded. October 14, 2009 Tod Excelsior Fire District Board From: Dana H. Young Fiscal Agent Re: Fire District Reserve Funds In light of the fact that the mandatory contribution to the Fire Relief Association will be at least $22,806 less than was originally anticipated in 2010, the Fire Board has requested that staff provide an analysis on EFD reserve funds to assist the Board in their decision on the possible reallocation of these surplus funds. A review of EFD reserve funds is of particular interest since the 2010 EFD Budget includes the use of $40,000 in reserve funds from both the Operating Fund and the Facilities Fund. To this end, staff will provide an analysis on the frequency of payments made by the cities to the District and its potential impact on EFD reserve funds. During the review of the 2010 Budget and the subsequent decision to use $40,000 in reserves from both the Operating Fund and Facilities Fund, discussion was held on the possibility of converting from quarterly payments to monthly payments, which was presumed to not only improve the District's monthly cash flow position but would also allow the District to lower its reserve percentage from the recommended 25% of current year operating expenses to a lesser amount. This would then enable the Board to utilize more of the District's reserves funds to pay for other future obligations, such as any future mandatory contributions to the Fire Relief Association, if needed. Monthly vs. Quarterly Payments After conducting a review of the District's cash flow position over a three -year period from 2010 - 2013, the assumption that converting from a quarterly to a monthly payment schedule would improve the District's cash flow is incorrect. In fact, after reviewing the data, it quickly becomes apparent that a monthly payment schedule actually lessens the District's monthly cash flow position. The reason is actually quite simple - when the District receives quarterly contributions from each city in January, April, July and October, the District is receiving advance payment for three months worth of expenditures. Although the year end cash position of each fund remains unchanged regardless of the particular payment schedule, quarterly payments does have the effect of increasing the overall monthly cash flow position throughout the year. Semi - Annual Payments In fact, pushing the analysis one step further, a semi - annual payment schedule provides the best possible monthly cash flow position for the District since it provides the District with advance payment of six months worth of expenditures. Semi- annual payments would also give the District the opportunity to change the allocation of the payments by providing enough funds to enable the Facilities Fund to pay the January bond payments in full with the January payment and the July bond payments in full with the second annual payment. This would entirely eliminate the need for the Facilities Fund to carry a fund balance at the end of the year. B enefits of Converting to Semi-Annual P_ ants There are significant benefits to the District from converting to a serm annual payment schedule, including: 1. Semi-annual payments would be made to the District in January and July, which would not present much of a burden to cities as the payments would coincide with the cities' receipt of their county settlement payments in December and July. 2. It would improve the overall monthly cash flow for the District and its three most critical funds — Operating Fund, Capital Equipment Fund, and Fire Facilities Fund. 3. It would enable the District to frilly fiend the January bond payments and the July Bond payments from the Facilities Fund, thereby eliminating the deficits that occur within the Facilities Fund each year from January — March and eliminate the need for the Facilities Fund to carry a reserve fund. 4. It would allow the District to transfer $170,000 in excess reserve funds from the Facilities Fund at the end of 2010 that could be designated for a possible Building Fund, or to be designated to pay any mandatory contributions to the Fire Relief Association in the future, or some other purpose. 6. It would much more clearly delineate the appropriate size of reserve funds in the Operating Fund, Capital Equipment Fund, and Facilities Fund. Impact of Semi - Annual Payments on District Fund Reserves Converting to a semi - annual payment schedule would have some very positive effects on District Fund reserves in the Operating Fund, Capital Equipment Fund and the Facilities Fund. Capital Equipment Fund Reserves The Capital Equipment Fund does not have any surplus reserve funds. Annual contributions flow into the fund to support the annual or future purchase of vehicles and equipment and to finance the annual lease payments on more expensive vehicles. While the balance of the fund varies each year, in theory, each dollar in the fund is designated for the purchase of a vehicle or piece of equipment or lease payment sometime in the future. By its very nature, there should never be any surplus funds in the Capital Equipment Fund unless the schedule of capital purchases changes. Facilities Fund Reserves The primary difficulty with the Facility Fund has always been that principal and interest payments for all three bonds are due each January. This upfront expense results in annual deficits in the Facility Fund from January through March until the next quarterly contribution is received in April. However, if semi - annual payments were scheduled to begin in 2011, the District would have the opportunity to fully fund the bonded debt that is due in January with the first semi - annual payment and to frilly fund the bonded debt that is due in July with the second semi- annual payment. As a result of this new payment schedule, the District would be able to transfer approximately $170,000 in surplus fund reserves from the Facilities Fund in 2010. 2 A review of cash flow projections from 2010 — 2012 shows the following year end Operating Fund reserves and reserve percentage: Item 2010 2011 2012 Projected Operating Fund Reserve 327,125 327,129 327,127 Reserves as a % of Annual Operating Expenses 24.0% 22.5% 21.8% With semi - annual payments beginning in 2011, and with a majority of the January payment going to fund the Facilities Fund's bond payments, the Operating Fund reserves drop to $122, 212 in June 2012 before receiving the second half payment from the cities in July. By the end of 2012, Operating Fund reserves are projected to increase back up to $327,127 or 21.8% of 2012 Operating Fund expenses. This is a strong indication that the Operating Fund has sufficient year end reserves at approximately $327,000 to support Operating Fund expenses well into the future. Recommendations Based on my analysis of cash fund balances and fund reserves from 2010 -2013, I would recommend the following actions to the Excelsior Fire District Board: 1. Convert to a semi - annual payment schedule beginning January 2011. 2. Transfer $170,000 in surplus Fire Facility Funds in October 2010 to: a) A Building Improvement Fund b) A Fire Relief Mandatory Contribution Fund c) Or, some other reserve fund. 3. Establish an Operating Fund reserve of $300,000 from 2010 -2013 for the following purposes: a) $180,000 — cash reserves equaling 150% of the lowest projected monthly cash flow of $122,212 that occurs in June 2012 b) $100,000 — cash reserves that may be necessary to fund unforeseen expenditures such as the emergency repair of facilities and /or essential vehicles. c) $20,000 — cash reserves that may be necessary to fund legal services in the event of unexpected litigation. 4. Continue to review the appropriate size of the Operating Fund reserve on an annual basis. 3