04-11-11 CC Reg Mtg Agenda
#2A
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2011 6:30 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Mayor Lizée called the meeting to order at 6:35 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizée; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, Woodruff and Zerby; Attorney Keane:
Administrator Heck; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director of
Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5/0.
2. EMINENT DOMAIN
Mayor Lizée turned control of the discussion about eminent domain over to Engineer Landini and Attorney
Keane.
Engineer Landini stated the purpose of this session is to educate Council on the various processes used for
acquiring land for public purpose. He explained Minnesota State Statute §465 give cities the right to
acquire land. Minnesota Statute Chapter 117 governs the procedure for acquiring land through an eminent
domain process. A city can acquire land within 90 days through a quick take procedure. The eminent
domain process takes a minimum of 140 days. An appraisal is required to move forward with eminent
domain proceedings.
Landini then explained the City has some stormwater management projects, which have required the City to
ask property owners to grant the City easements. The property owners either denied the City the easements
or refuse to talk to the City. Acquisition through the eminent domain process is one of the tools that would
allow the City to move forward with those specific projects.
Administrator Heck explained the City has encountered instances where projects have been cancelled
because the City couldn’t get the necessary voluntary easements. There may be times when it would be
better for the City to consider acquiring land through the eminent domain process rather than cancel a
project. He stated Staff thought it prudent to provide Council with information about the process so
Council could eventually consider developing a policy that outlines circumstances for which the City may
want to consider using eminent domain to acquire the land needed to move a project forward. There is a
project in the not too distant future when it would be beneficial to acquire a larger piece of land to
implement a better solution and in those instances the property owner may want to be financially
compensated for granting use of a larger piece of property.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 2 of 4
Attorney Keane stated the preferred approach for acquiring an easement or right-of-way (ROW) is through
the negotiation process. He explained he prefers to use City staff to conduct the negotiations. The City
could also contract with one of a couple of companies that provide ROW and easement acquisition
assistance or use a consulting engineer.
Keane explained he prefers staff first because there is a relationship with staff, there is an established
ongoing dialogue, and there wouldn’t be a great deal of additional out-of-pocket costs. Staff can be more
responsive and flexible than a ROW agent. With regard to the easement near Silver Lake, he stated he
thought staff could package some flexibility with the property owner that a ROW agent might not have at
their disposal. He explained that during the negotiation, phase staff can characterize the voluntary sale as a
sale in lieu of eminent domain and that does provide tax advantages to the property owner. The City can
avoid or delay the taxable event of that. The property owner can take the proceeds from the sale, put them
into other comparable real estate within three years, and not have a taxable event.
Keane stated if the City is unable to negotiate a land acquisition with a property owner and therefore enters
into the process of acquiring the land through eminent domain it gives the City the certainty of acquiring the
easement within 130 – 140 days.
Keane reviewed the risks of the eminent domain process. The City is locked into the process and the
process cost money. The City is starting a law suit and it has to go to court to petition to acquire the land
interest. The City has to get a formal appraisal prepared. If the City has to go to hearings there is a cost
associated with that. The City would have to pay commissioners to assist with determining the damages.
Keane noted that the basic premise in the eminent domain process is the property owner’s rights are
protected by the federal and state constitution. He stated Malkerson Gunn Martin LLC, the firm he works
for, collectively has more eminent domain experience on its legal staff than any other firm in town. He
noted the document included in the meeting packet explaining the eminent domain process is extremely
comprehensive.
Keane explained the first step in the eminent domain process is a determination by the Council, as the
governing body, that the City needs the property. This would be in the form of a adopting a resolution
declaring a public purpose. The City would notice the property owner(s) and establish a date for the court
to adopt the finding of public purpose. Once the court sets a hearing date and issues an order to transfer the
title of the property the property owner is entitled to the proceeds.
Keane then explained the court appoints three commissioners who are charged with reporting back to the
court their determination of damages within 180 days. Hennepin County requires the commissioners be
comprised of an appraiser, a licensed real estate professional and an attorney all of whom have experience
with property values.
Keane went on to explain that in 2006 the State Legislature made significant changes to the eminent
domain process. The requisites remained pretty much the same. But a 20/40 rule was implemented in
addition to some other nuances. Under the 20/40 rule if the condemning authority makes a certified offer
and the final award is 20 percent over the certified offer, the property owner can ask for recovery of all of
their fees and costs. If the final award is 40 percent over, the condemning authority must reimburse all of
the property owner’s fees and costs. The intent of the 20/40 rule is to force the condemning authority to
make a more realistic offer in first instance.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 3 of 4
He explained the property owner has three bites at the apple – the negotiation phase, the hearings before the
commissioners, and if the property owner is not satisfied with the commissioners’ determination of
damages, they can appeal to a jury trial of six lay people.
Keane then stated a lot of care has to go into making the certified offer especially on partial land takes. If
the acquisition of part of a lot creates a situation where a lot that could have legally been subdivided can no
longer can be subdivided after part of the lot is acquired the property owner is entitled to the damages for
the part actually acquired as well as any damages to the remainder of the property that wasn’t acquired. It’s
imperative for the condemning authority to assess the consequences thoroughly, particularly from the
vantage point of the property owner.
Keane went on to state the power of eminent domain should be used sparingly. But there are times where
the land is absolutely needed for public purpose and good. There is no other place for a pipe to go, for
stormwater to flow, or for a roadway turn lane to go. He commented he thought the principals of the
eminent domain process are fair and equitable, but they are burdensome on the public. He explained he
personally goes to every extent possible to negotiate the acquisition of the easement or ROW.
Keane noted the document include in the meeting packet explains the eminent domain process in mostly
chronological order and it’s easy to understand. He encouraged the members of the Council to review the
information at their convenience.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the document did not include any examples for applying the process to
drainage easements. Attorney Keane explained the process applies to the acquisition of any public interest
in private property.
Councilmember Woodruff then stated some past councils decided they did not want to acquire land through
the eminent domain process. He recommended Council make a policy decision about what staff should do
and in what order. He stated that in the past Director Brown has indicated the City has had a policy not to
purchase easements.
Director Brown explained the goal has been to negotiate easements through added value. Brown noted the
City has acquired land through eminent domain in the past. It was used against seven parcels for the
reconstruction of the Trunk Highway 7 and Highway 41 intersection. It was used against 22 parcels for the
County Road 19 and Smithtown Road intersection project. Brown noted some past councils thought the
amount of emotion attached to the eminent domain / condemnation process was too great and therefore
chose not to use the process.
Councilmember Woodruff stated when the Glen Road reconstruction project was being considered a
significant number of residents refused to grant easements to the City that were necessary to move the
project forward. He explained that from his vantage point the amount of pain and cost that would have
resulted from the acquisition of the number of easements needed through eminent domain was not worth it.
He again stated the City needs to have a policy that would identify the various steps to go through to
acquire land and how to decide the negotiating position the staff should carry out. He noted he was not sure
if it could be boiler plate or if it should be talked about on a case by case basis.
Administrator Heck noted staff can’t negotiate the acquisition of land for a price unless it’s been pre-
approved by Council through a resolution.
Mayor Lizée stated it seems clear to staff that eminent domain is one of the tools in the tool box, but not
one of the first ones that should be used.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 4 of 4
In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff, Attorney Keane explained the City can acquire
ownership rights through eminent domain as well as the right to use the property through that process.
Keane noted the City can also get a temporary easement.
Director Brown stated if Council moves towards creating a policy or procedure for acquiring land through
the eminent domain process the first thing that has to be answered is if the public good is worth acquiring
land through that process.
3. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session of February 28, 2011,
at 7:02 P.M. Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST: Christine Lizée, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
#2B
CITY OF SHOREWOOD 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2011 7:00 P.M.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
Mayor Lizée called the meeting to order at 7:05 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Lizée; Councilmembers Hotvet, Siakel, Woodruff and Zerby; Attorney Keane;
City Administrator Heck; Finance Director DeJong; Planning Director Nielsen; Director
of Public Works Brown; and Engineer Landini
Absent: None
B. Review Agenda
Administrator Heck requested item 10.D be removed from the agenda because staff forgot to include the
current policy in the meeting packet. This item will be placed on the March 14, 2011, Council meeting
agenda.
Councilmember Woodruff requested Item 10.F Liaison Appointments to the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek
Watershed District (RPBCWD) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). He stated there is a
resident who is interested in the liaison position to the RPBCWD. He stated the MCWD is hosting a
series of meetings about the aquatic invasive species initiative the MCWD wants to undertake and the
comments and he thought it appropriate for Council to have a brief discussion about that. Mayor Lizée
stated she intends on mentioning the meetings under Item 12.B on the agenda.
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, approving the agenda as amended. Motion passed 5/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Special Meeting Minutes, February 14, 2011
Woodruff moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the City Council Special Meeting Minutes of
February 14, 2011, as presented. Motion passed 4/0/1 with Lizée abstaining due to her absence at
the meeting.
B. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes, February 14, 2011
Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, Approving the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of February
14, 2011, as presented. Motion passed Motion passed 4/0/1 with Lizée abstaining due to her absence
at the meeting.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Lizée reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 2 of 17
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, Approving the Motion Contained on the Consent Agenda.
A. Approval of the Verified Claims List
Motion passed 5/0.
4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR
There were no matters from the floor presented this evening.
5. PUBLIC HEARING
None.
6. REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS
A. 2010 Recycling Program Update by Rich Hirstein, Allied Waste
Mayor Lizée stated Rich Hirstein with Allied Waste is present to provide Council with a report on the
2010 recycling program.
Mr. Hirstein stated prior to 2010 the City’s recycling program was a dual-sort, small-bin program. During
2009, 61 percent of the households in the City used the recycling program at least once a month. Some of
the reasons people cited for not recycling more is they thoughts it’s too much of a hassle to have to sort
recyclable materials, the small bins were to heavy to carry to the curb and it was difficult to determine
what materials were recyclable.
Mr. Hirstein explained the City converted to Allied Waste’s single-sort recycling program and the
RecycleBank recycling incentive rewards program effective January 1, 2010. One of Allied Waste’s and
the City’s goals was to increase household participation in the program during 2010. During 2010
380,000 pounds (about 191 tons) more of recyclable materials were collected than in 2009. That equates
to about 160 pounds more per household per year. During 2010 85 – 90 percent of the households
participated in the recycling program. During the last six months City residents ordered 1,635 rewards
from the RecycleBank program. Each participating household that recycles gets about $20 in value each
month.
Mr. Hirstein stated the City’s residents are doing a great job of recycling. He then stated the drivers for
Allied Waste recently put notices in a household’s recyclable container when they noticed the
household’s container was consistently overflowing with materials to let the residents know they can
request a larger container at no cost to them. A couple dozen households recently upgraded to the larger
containers. He noted that staff has done a great job of communicating with Allied Waste so issues can be
resolved quickly.
Mayor Lizée stated the City’s current recycling program is a wonderful program and that the City has
always tried to stay ahead of the curve when thinking about the environment.
Councilmember Woodruff asked Mr. Hirstein to explain how successful Allied Waste is in keeping the
recyclable materials it collects out of the waste stream.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 3 of 17
Mr. Hirstein explained that Allied Waste is the second largest recycler in the world. The company has two
large material recovery facilities in the Twin Cities. Allied Waste takes the recyclable materials collected
in the City to its recovery facility located in North Minneapolis. The material is separated and sorted
through an automated process, noting glass and plastic material can be sorted optically. About 3 percent
of the materials collected ends up being garbage. The sorted material is put into bales and shipped out to
about 220 different places it’s sold to throughout North America. The recycling facility in North
Minneapolis is the fifth largest in North America.
Councilmember Siakel noted Allied Waste was very responsive when one pickup was missed at her
house.
Councilmember Hotvet expressed her excitement about the program. She asked Mr. Hirstein what the
future holds for plastics numbered 1 – 5. Mr. Hirstein stated before Allied Waste can start collecting
plastics numbered 3 – 5 and things such as milk cartons, it has to find a vendor that will take the products
that Allied Waste believes will remain in business for a long time. Allied Waste doesn’t want to start
collecting those types of materials and then have to stop doing so.
Hotvet stated she would like to see more recycling done in the City’s commercial district and she looks
forward to City working with Allied Waste on that project. Mr. Hirstein stated Allied Waste is working
with the City of Excelsior on that same thing.
Councilmember Zerby stated he is pleased to see the progress the recycling program has made. He asked
if the RecycleBank rewards program contributed to the increase in recycling. Mr. Hirstein responded he
can’t quantify it contributed to the increase, but he does think people are more aware of and pay attention
to a recycling program when there are reward incentives. Mr. Hirstein noted some people will never take
advantage of the rewards program even if they recycle materials.
Councilmember Woodruff expressed concern that during the last six months residents only ordered 1,635
rewards, noting he accounted for 12 of the orders and they were all for CUB Foods. He noted a household
can pay for its monthly recycling bill by using the CUB Foods award. Mr. Hirstein clarified that pays for
more than the cost of the recycling program. Woodruff stated he would like to encourage the City’s
residents to take greater advantage of the rewards program. Mayor Lizée suggested that be done through
the City’s newsletter.
Mr. Hirstein thanked the Council for wanting the City to partner with Allied Waste for recycling services.
7. PARKS
No report was given because there had not been a Park Commission meeting since the last City Council
regular meeting. The next meeting is scheduled for March 8, 2011.
A. Park Entry Signs
Administrator Heck explained that in 2009 the Park Commission worked with a consulting firm to update
the City’s Park Master Plan. During that effort the Commission discussed its desire to have new entry
signs installed in the City’s parks as part of the effort to have a unified look. The Council agreed to
allocating funds for the signs in the 2010 budget. Unfortunately, the company the Commission worked
with on a design for the signs went out of business so the project was rescheduled to 2011. Park
Coordinator Kristi Anderson found another company to work on the design and she obtained quotes from
a couple of companies for installing the masonry mounts for the signs. He displayed a mockup of what
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 4 of 17
the proposed entry signs will look like. The signs the Commission recommends resemble the stonework
and feel of City Hall. The signs will be aluminum with lettering on them.
Heck went on to explain the Park Commission recommends signs be installed in Cathcart Park, Freeman
Park, Manor Park, and Silverwood Park. A sign for Badger Park has not been discussed because there had
been discussion about a sign at City Hall that would identify City Hall, the Southshore Community
Center, and Badger Park. The quote for the four signs is $11,207 and the quote for the masonry bases is
$11,780 for a total amount of $22,987. The 2011 Capital Improvement Program allocates $30,000 for
park signage. Because the total quotes for the signage is less than what is budgeted, the Commission
recommends purchasing and installing a small directional trail sign and base for Freeman Park and one
for the South Shore Community Park (the Skate Park). The quote for the two additional signs is $4,000
and $3,200 for the two additional bases. The total for the six signs and six bases would be $29,187. The
Commission recommends the purchase of the six signs and associated sign bases.
Councilmember Woodruff asked if there is an issue with having a sole source bidder. Administrator Heck
responded its okay under statutory requirements and its well under the formal bid threshold.
Councilmember Hotvet stated the Park Commission had a lot of thoughtful discussion about this proposal
for signage, noting she was the liaison from the Council at the Commission’s meeting when this was
discussed.
Hotvet moved, Zerby seconded, approving the purchase of signage and sign bases for Cathcart
Park, Freeman Park, Manor Park, Silverwood Park, South Shore Community Park, and a small
directional trail sign and base for Freeman Park for an amount not to exceed $29,187. Motion
passed 5/0.
8. PLANNING
Planning Commission Chair Geng reported on matters considered and actions taken at the February 15,
2011, Planning Commission meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). Geng noted the
Commission will begin discussing sustainability during its March 1, 2011, meeting and that topic will be
discussed during most of the remaining 2011 meetings for the Commission. He related that Director
Nielsen has recommended to the Commission the possibility of having a joint meeting with Council to
discuss sustainability. Geng expressed his support for Nielsen’s recommendation. Mayor Lizée stated she
thought that would be a good idea; sustainability has been the magic word. Councilmember Woodruff
suggested the Park Commission also be included in that discussion.
Mayor Lizée stated she looks forward to hearing about the Planning Commission’s recommendations for
any future redevelopment of the Smithtown Crossing area.
A. Zoning Code Amendment – Side yard Setbacks Abutting Fire Lanes
Director Nielsen explained there are 10 fire lanes located in the City. Fire lanes are old platted street
rights-of-way that were never developed as any kind of street. Many years ago the City conducted a study
of what to do with the fire lanes. There was discussion about whether to vacate the fire lanes, turn them
over to the adjoining property owners, or keep them for some public purpose. The study resulted in a
decision to keep the lanes and to classify them according to their then current use.
Nielsen then explained that in 2010 Staff had been meeting with realtors and prospective buyers of the
property located at 26100 Birch Bluff Road. That property is a very substandard lot in terms of zoning,
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 5 of 17
size, width and so forth. The property’s nonconformance is compounded by its location next to the Third
Street Fire Lane. If the property were abutting a regular lot the side yard setbacks would be a maximum of
20 feet with a minimum of 10 feet. The setback for a property abutting a fire lane is 35 feet all by itself.
The fire lane setback uses up a good portion of the adjoining lots in terms of setbacks.
Nielsen also explained if the 35-foot setback from the Third Street Fire Lane were required for the 26100
Birch Bluff Road property the property would have only five feet of width for a buildable area. The
existing building on the property is nonconforming. If the fire lane were treated as any other lot the side
yard setback would be twenty feet on the side of the property abutting the Fire Lane and a good share of
the house would be within the buildable area of the lot and it would allow the structure to be added on to.
He noted in the past the City granted a variance in a similar situation because it created a hardship on the
property. At the time the variance was granted there was a decision to consider amending the City
Ordinance should another one of these situations come up.
Nielsen went on to explain the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendment
to the City Ordinance that would change the side yard setback requirement for lots abutting fire lanes; fire
lanes would be treated as if they were another interior lot. The amendment would make the 26100 Birch
Bluff Road property buildable although restrictive. It would allow for some reinvestment in the property.
Nielsen noted the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the amendment.
Mike Kozel, 26170 Birch Bluff Road, stated he is familiar with the Third Street Fire Lane. He noted he is
the listing agent for the 26100 Birch Bluff Road property. He distributed a picture of the property and Fire
Lane. He stated from his perspective it’s a non-use fire lane. No one uses it. It’s the low point on the street
and serves as the wash for stormwater. He explained if the fire lane side yard setback requirement is
enforced the lot 26100 Birch Bluff Road property is a non-buildable lot. The house on the property is 55
years old and the garage is almost on the street. The prospective buyer is willing to do nice job with the
house and move the garage. The lot is currently assessed at $650,000. He questioned what it’s worth if the
lot is not buildable.
Councilmember Siakel noted she was the liaison for the Council at the Planning Commission meeting
when the public hearing was held. She stated staff did a good job of presenting information about all the
fire lanes located in the City. The Commission had good discussion about the proposed amendment. She
expressed her support for the amendment.
Councilmember Zerby asked if surrounding communities had similar side yard setback requirements for
properties abutting fire lanes. Director Nielsen responded he was not sure, but he thought they had
different policies for handling fire lanes.
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, Approving ORDINANCE NO. 474, “An Ordinance Amending the
Shorewood Zoning Code as it Pertains to Side Yard Setbacks Abutting Fire Lanes”. Motion passed
5/0.
9. ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
A. Silver Lake Outlet Land Acquisition Negotiations
Engineer Landini stated the meeting packet contains a copy of a draft resolution authorizing staff to
negotiate the acquisition of land located at 5750 Covington Road near Silver Lake. He explained there is a
storm sewer outlet on the property. The City has a 20-foot-wide easement that goes down to the outlet.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 6 of 17
The residents in that area and Council have expressed interest in making improvements to the stormwater
system there in order to remove/reduce the amount of sediment that is being deposited in Silver Lake. In
order to improve the site for maintenance access Staff recommends the City purchase additional land.
In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Engineer Landini explained the City had been
granted a 20-foot-wide easement in the past. Landini then explained there are two other easements on the
5750 Covington Road property. One of them is granted to the Metropolitan (Met) Council and it is 35 feet
wide. The other is a 20-foot-wide trail easement near the area that is granted to the City. In response to
another question from Woodruff, Landini explained the City’s stormwater easement shares a side
boundary with the Met Council’s easement. Landini noted there is some separation between the City’s
stormwater and trail easements. Woodruff stated if the City acquires more land from the property owner
there will be some restrictions on his land. In response to another question from Woodruff, Landini stated
he did not think the City would want to use some of the Met Council’s easement because the Met Council
has infrastructure in their easement that has to be maintained. Landini noted the City would want to go
south toward the trail easement.
Councilmember Woodruff asked if there is an opportunity to obtain an easement on the property adjacent
to the 5750 Covington Road property instead that would satisfy the City’s need. Engineer Landini
explained the adjacent property is too far away.
Woodruff expressed his reluctance to approve the negotiation for buying property when he doesn’t know
what the requirement is. He stated the City doesn’t have to buy property in order to get an easement.
Engineer Landini stated the initial discussions with the owner of the 5750 Covington Road property have
been about purchase fee title. He noted the project has not been designed yet because the amount of land
that will be available for the project is not known. He explained the intent is for the City to buy a strip of
land.
Administrator Heck explained the area is where the City has a stormwater structure and the City just had
it cleaned out. The owner of the 5750 Covington Road property and other property owners in the area
have expressed concern about the continued overflow in the area. Also, the City has discussed with the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency the possibility of designing things so that stormwater structure
doesn’t discharge directly into Silver Lake. He explained Staff felt to give the City the most options for
addressing the problem properly purchasing additional land would be best. He noted Staff needs Council
authorization to even discuss the purchase of land.
In response to a question from Councilmember Hotvet, Engineer Landini stated he can’t imagine the City
needing more land than it is requesting.
Mayor Lizée stated this problem has been around for a while. She explained Staff has spoken with
residents in the area and with representatives from the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District to
help identify the best options for the City.
Councilmember Siakel asked how much additional land the City wants. Engineer Landini explained the
City wants an additional 18,000 square feet and that would still leave the property owner with a
conforming lot.
Councilmember Zerby stated he thought the City needs to take the next step in the project.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 7 of 17
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO. 11-006, “A Resolution
Authorizing Staff to Negotiate Land Acquisition”. Motion passed 5/0.
10. GENERAL/NEW BUSINESS
A. Park Commission Appointments
Mayor Lizée stated earlier this evening Council interviewed five applicants for three open Park
Commission seats. She thanked the applicants for taking the time to be interviewed, and she noted all of
them were good candidates. She explained two of the seats are for three-year terms and the other is to fill
out the remaining two years of a term.
Councilmember Zerby stated he thought Council interviewed good candidates.
Zerby moved, Hotvet seconded, Adopting RESOLUTION NO 11-007, “A Resolution Making the
Appointments of Mark Kjolhaug (3-year term), Steve Quinlan (3-year term) and Lynda Gooch
Hartmann (2-year term) to the City of Shorewood Park Commission effective March 1, 2011.”
Motion passed 4/1 with Woodruff dissenting.
B. Southshore Community Center Boulevard Sign
Administrator Heck explained in 2010 the Oversight Committee for the Southshore Community Center
(SSCC) and Kristi Anderson, the contracted manager for the SSCC, discussed Mr. Anderson’s desire to
replace the existing sign for the SSCC located along County Road 19 with a monument sign with a digital
message display. The sign would have a similar look to the signs discussed earlier this evening for the
parks. The existing sign provides space for messages, but it’s difficult to change the messages during the
winter months because of the snow. Ms. Anderson believes an electronic sign would enhance the
visibility of the SSCC as well as the programs and events held there. There has been a campaign in
progress to raise funds for the purchase and installation of such a sign for over seven months. To date
about $6,900 has been raised. Of that the City of Deephaven contributed $3,000 and the City of
Greenwood contributed $1,200. The total cost to purchase and install the stone base for the sign is about
$21,600.
Heck stated the project is not budgeted for in the 2011 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Therefore,
Staff suggests the sign be budgeted for in the 2012 CIP. He noted the location for the new sign has to be
agreed upon. There is some interest in locating the new sign where the existing sign is. Staff suggests the
sign be located in a spot that is best for the SSCC and the City.
In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Administrator Heck explained the existing sign
is not located in a Hennepin County right-of-way.
Councilmember Woodruff stated he thought this is a good idea. He expressed concern about the Cities of
Excelsior and Tonka Bay not having made any contribution for this and they are two of the larger users of
the SSCC. He suggested Staff speak with those cities about contributing funds.
Woodruff explained the City Sign Ordinance states “no sign shall be illuminated with any flashing or
intermittent lights, nor shall it be animated, except for time and temperature information”. Yet the
documentation about the proposed sign talks about messages on the sign changing. He stated the City has
to adhere to the same standards as others are held to. Administrator Heck explained Staff realizes the
Ordinance does not allow for changing messages across the sign. But, that restriction could potentially be
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 8 of 17
eliminated in the future and if so the new sign would have the capability to change messages. That
capability would not be used unless the Ordinance was amended.
Director Nielsen explained he has spoken with Ms. Anderson who indicated she would probably change
the sign once a day at maximum. Nielsen noted as part of the Planning Commission’s work program it
will discuss signs that change intermittently because they are becoming more popular. Businesses want to
have signs that can be changed electronically rather than by hand and cities are looking into ordinance
changes to allow that. Nielsen stated he did not think changing the sign once a day counts as intermittent.
Mayor Lizée stated just because the City doesn’t allow signs that display moving information now
doesn’t mean it won’t allow it in the future. She then stated the Cities of Chanhassen, Excelsior and
Minnetonka allow electronic signs that change. Councilmember Woodruff stated Minnetonka has them
now because the court forced it to do that. Lizée clarified court actions were about billboard signs along
the highway. Lizée explained she was talking about the monument sign in front of Minnetonka City Hall,
which is similar to the sign proposed for the SSCC, and the sign in front of Minnetonka High School.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she thought the sign will help communications efforts in the community
and she thought it’s a great idea. She then stated she thought it demonstrates that the South Lake cities
want to work together with regard to the SSCC.
Councilmember Siakel asked if Excelsior and Tonka Bay have been asked to make contributions toward
the purchase and installation of the sign. Administrator Heck explained those two cities are aware of the
desire to have a new sign. But, they have not specifically been asked to contribute nor have they
volunteered a contribution. Deephaven voluntarily contributed money for the sign early on. The City has
kept the other four cities that also have an ownership interest in the SSCC aware of how the management
and operations of SSCC are doing.
Mayor Lizée explained that when the City took over interim responsibility for managing the SSCC the
City indicted it would appreciate donations from the other four cities for operation of the SSCC. They
were not specifically asked to make donations at that time. She asked if the donations from Deephaven
and Greenwood were made specifically for the sign. Ms. Anderson responded they were specifically for
the sign project. Lizée noted other entities have made donations for the sign.
Councilmember Zerby asked if a 2010 year end report for SSCC operations has been written and provided
to the other four cities. If not, this message could be included in the report. The report could be reviewed
with the other cities and at the same time funding could be solicited. Administrator Heck responded the
annual report is being written.
Mayor Lizée stated she agrees that the SSCC needs better identification, noting that has been known since
it was built. She explained there is no access road to the SSCC directly from Country Road 19. She stated
that once people have been to the SSCC they will remember how to get to the wonderful facility. Efforts
are in progress to get directional signage at the intersection of Country Road 19 and Smithtown Road as
well as Country Club Road to direct people to the SSCC.
Lizée questioned if a new sign at the current location on County Road 19 is the best use of the funds. She
stated there is a lot of visual and physical traffic on Country Road 19. There are roads off of Country
Road 19 to the City’s Public Works facilities and to the public safety facilities and there are many other
exits off of Country Road 19 in that general area.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 9 of 17
Lizée stated the existing sign for the SSCC is the only marker for the SSCC on Country Road 19. She
asked if it would be better to locate the new sign on the City Hall, Badger Park, SSCC campus. The sign
could direct people to the various facilities and at the same time display a message. She stated there are
tall snow banks off of Country Road 19 from November through March/April. She questioned how
visible the sign is now. She asked if the new sign would be located higher up so drivers, bikers and
pedestrians would be able to see it. She stated it’s important to identify buildings. She noted the SSCC is
not identified on the back of the building. She suggested considering having a gently lit or neon sign on
the back side of it to help people locate the SSCC.
Lizée clarified she supports the idea of the sign and wants it to happen. She wants to help people get to
the SSCC. She again expressed concern about the proposed location for the new sign.
Director Nielsen stated he has spoken with Ms. Anderson about the proposed location for the new sign.
He expressed his agreement with there being a need for directional signage to City Hall, Badger Park and
the SSCC. He stated the sign being proposed is more informational and it would get a lot more exposure
if it were located off of Country Road 19 rather than on the campus. There are about 13,000 trips a day on
County Road 19 versus 3,000 – 4,000 on Country Club Road. It would also help identify the SSCC in the
back. He explained there had been discussion about having a kiosk type sign at the corner that directs
people to the various facilities on the campus when the County Road 19 Corridor Study was being done.
He thought the informational sign would be of greatest value off of County Road 19.
Councilmember Zerby suggested the location of the sign be a project for the Planning Commission. He
recommended any signage for the SSCC include the word community on it. Saying just Southshore
Center doesn’t convey what the building is.
Zerby moved, Woodruff seconded, authorizing the allocation of funds for a new sign and sign base
for the Southshore Community Center in the 2012 Capital Improvement Program and directing the
Planning Commission to make a recommendation for the location of the sign for Council discussion
and consideration.
Mary Ann Miller, 4198 North Shore Drive, Orono, stated she makes a living doing interactive events for
corporations. She noted she is 100 percent for profit and that she uses many event centers. She explained
that all of the centers she uses have signs with the exception of the SSCC. She stated the SSCC is her
favorite place to hold events. But, the lack of signage is a problem as is the fact that it is hard to get to.
She noted that she spends a lot of time making sure her clients can find the SSCC; much more time than
she wants to. She explained having to send clients such detailed explanations of how to get to the SSCC
doesn’t legitimize her business strategy. Also, it doesn’t convey that the South Lake cities have a
wonderful facility to offer. She stated because the SSCC is so difficult to get to she doesn’t get overly
excited about the thought of bringing her top clients to the SSCC if the clients are hard pressed on
logistics. A lot of her clients are international and are not familiar with the South Lake area. That makes it
even harder to explain how to get to the SSCC. She expressed she thought the SSCC is an excellent
facility to hold events in. She commented the hardest thing to get new people coming to the SSCC to do is
turn onto Country Club Road right after they have turned onto Smithtown Road. She noted she is
coordinating an event for General Mills at the SSCC tomorrow and General Mills staff had to do a test
run out there last week and rework the directions for getting there.
Councilmember Siakel stated she agrees there is a need for signage and she agrees there is a need a one
on Country Road 19. She also agrees installing directional signage to City Hall, Badger Park and the
SSCC is essential. She recommended the signage needs be addressed in its entirety and that it be done
right. She suggested the Cities of Excelsior and Tonka Bay be asked to participate. She stated having the
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 10 of 17
Planning Commission become involved with this is a great start. She suggested the Planning Commission
not wait until 2012 to start discussing this.
Administrator Heck stated Council doesn’t have to wait until 2012 to authorize a project and move it
forward. Allocating funds for the project in 2012 allows Council the opportunity to prioritize this project
along with other potential 2012 projects. He noted Council can authorize spending funds for this sign in
2011 if it wants.
Councilmember Siakel stated she would like to have more conversation about the proposed sign before
2012.
Administrator Heck noted Council has already authorized directional signage.
Mayor Lizée stated the discussion this evening confirms the need to identify the SSCC. But, there is also
a need to identify the campus and what it is and what it does. Hopefully, there will be continued
discussion about signage needs for the campus.
Jeanne Straus who works with Minnetonka Community Education (MCE), stated MCE holds events at
the SSCC. She noted that MCE used to offer more things at the SSCC, but because of the difficulty in
explaining to people how to get to the SSCC, MCE had cut back. She explained that many of the people
that attended MCE events weren’t from the area. She noted that for one class MCE held at the SSCC 4
out of the 16 registered people never found the SSCC even though there were people on the corner trying
to direct them. She explained the MCE has prepared an 8.5” by 11” sheet of directions to give to event
attendees. She expressed she thought the SSCC is a treasure. She stated she thought there is a need for a
sign off of Country Road 19 and another sign at the intersection of County Road 19 and Smithtown Road.
She then stated MCE will offer more programs at the SSCC if there is better signage.
Motion passed 5/0.
C. Carver County Open Fiber Initiative
Administrator Heck explained that Excelsior City Manager Luger had informed him that Carver Country
is going to build an infrastructure (a fiber ring) for high speed broadband internet services. The project is
called the Carver County Open Fiber Initiative (CCOFI). Carver County had offered Excelsior the
opportunity to participate in the program and Luger wondered what the City was going to do.
Unfortunately, he was not aware of the program so he contacted Carver County to get more information.
Carver County will own the fiber ring but it will not provide services for utilizing it. The fiber ring will be
over 89 miles long and it will connect all of the cities in Carver County as well as most of the school
districts and some other facilities. There will be fiber spurs off of the ring that will allow for other entities
to connect to the network. Carver County received a $6 million grant from the Federal Government and
the County will commit about $1.5 million of its own money toward the project. The County thinks the
breakeven point on the project will be reached in about 3 – 4 years. A lot of the savings will come from
eliminating the need for T1 lines around the County for a savings of about $200,000 per year.
Heck then explained if the City wants to consider connecting to the fiber infrastructure the City would
have to pay the cost of installing fiber from some location in the City to one of the connection points in
the fiber ring. He noted he doesn’t know how this would interact with the Lake Minnetonka
Communications Commission’s (LMCC) potential fiber to the home initiative. That project involves
ownership of the fiber as well as the programming and services that go over the fiber.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 11 of 17
Heck stated Staff is seeking Council direction about if it wants Staff to research this opportunity further,
noting he thought this is an interesting opportunity.
Director DeJong stated he thought that having a broadband connection with higher speeds than the
existing T1 line is something that will be needed at City Hall. He then stated there are other possibilities
that should also be researched. He explained the Minnetonka School District has all of their schools
linked so there has to be a fiber line installed which runs from the Excelsior Elementary School to the
Minnewashta Elementary School that the City could potentially connect to.
Councilmember Woodruff stated the LMCC has been working on a fiber to the home initiative and
continues to explore it. He explained the CCOFI is a governmental network. Carver County is installing
the network to all the government related agencies and entities located within the County. The County has
contracted with a private company to build the infrastructure. The County has indicated to the private
company and other companies that if they so choose can lay additional fiber in the same trench as the
CCOFI infrastructure is as it is being installed in order to accommodate commercial and residential uses.
The County’s network as it is funded has no commercial or residential components with the exception of
Ridgeview Medical Center located in Waconia. The County will not provide any equipment at the end of
the pipe or any services. He noted Carver County was able to apply for the grant because it’s classified
rural by the Federal Government (Hennepin County is classified urban). He expressed his support for
researching this opportunity further.
Councilmember Zerby stated that based on the project map the fiber will come along State Highway 7
between State Highway 41 and the fire station in Chanhassen. He expressed his support for researching
this opportunity further. He stated the City should also talk with the public safety organizations about this
because he thinks there is a conduit that runs under Country Road 19 to the public safety facility in
Shorewood.
Councilmember Hotvet stated she thought this is a great opportunity for the City to be proactive and that
she supports Staff researching this further. She also thought it beneficial to find out more about partnering
with the public safety organizations, the commercial district and also potentially with the Minnetonka
School District.
Councilmember Siakel asked what the advantage is of working with Carver Country. She stated it’s her
understanding that the LMCC has funded a sizeable project to look into the viability of installing fiber in
the LMCC community. She then stated Carver County not only received grant money from the Federal
Government it also assessed its residents for part of the CCOFI costs. She asked what the value would be
to the City’s residents of doing these projects. She also asked if the City would realize cost savings by
connecting to a fiber network and how long it would take to reach a break even point.
Administrator Heck explained that the City of Roseville recently ran a fiber line from Roseville City Hall
to the North St. Paul and that cost about $100,000. He stated the cost to run a fiber line is about $100,000
per mile.
Councilmember Siakel asked if Staff is asking Council for authorization to research this opportunity
further or authorization to let Carver County know the City is definitely interested in pursuing this.
Administrator Heck responded either would be fine. Heck stated the City needs to let Carver County
know if it wants to discuss this more. He then stated if it’s viable for the City to do it may not happen for
a while. He expressed he thought it prudent to wait and see how/if the LMCC broadband initiative
advances. He also thought it prudent to find out if the City of Excelsior is going to take advantage of the
opportunity to connect into the fiber ring.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 12 of 17
Hotvet moved, Woodruff seconded, directing Staff to research the Carver County Open Fiber
Initiative opportunity and other similar options further. Motion passed 5/0.
D. Stop Sign Placement Policy
This item was tabled to the March 14, 2011, Council meeting agenda.
E. Southshore Community Center Seating
Administrator Heck explained a couple of corporate clients that utilize the Southshore Community Center
(SSCC) have expressed there displeasure about the chairs in the conference room. As a result, chairs from
City Hall are hauled over to the SSCC for those organizations to use. He expressed concern that hauling
the chairs back and forth is going to result in people getting injured and/or chairs being damaged. He
explained the SSCC Oversight Committee directed SSCC Manager Anderson to obtain quotes on chairs.
He stated the meeting packet contains information from Ms. Anderson on chair style and costs. Staff
recommends purchasing the chairs per Ms. Anderson’s recommendation.
Woodruff moved, Siakel seconded, approving the purchase of fifteen chairs for the conference
room located in the Southshore Community Center for an amount not to exceed $2,057.30. Motion
passed 5/0.
F. Liaison Appointments to the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District
(RPBCWD) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD
Councilmember Woodruff explained that historically Council has had Council liaisons be a representative
to the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District (RPBCWD) and Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD). Early in 2011 Council decided it would like to have residents who are not elected
officials serve as the liaisons. To date the liaisons have not been appointed to either of the two
organizations. He related that Jeff Arnold, 5760 Covington Road, has expressed interest about serving as
the liaison to the RPBCWD.
Woodruff moved, appointing Jeff Arnold as the liaison for the Council to the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff
Creek Watershed District.
Mayor Lizée noted she has spoken to Mr. Arnold about his interest in serving in that capacity.
Councilmember Siakel asked if Mr. Arnold has contacted Staff to let them know of his interest.
Councilmember Woodruff responded it’s his understanding that he has. Siakel clarified her question was
regarding process.
Administrator Heck noted that Mr. Arnold is a member of the Citizen Advisory Committee to the
RPBCWD and it makes sense for him to serve as the liaison for Council as well.
Siakel seconded. Motion passed 5/0.
Mayor Lizée explained Shorewood resident Jeff Casale has been appointed by the Hennepin County
Board of Commissioners to the Minnehaha Creed Watershed District Board of Managers. Mr. Casale and
Mr. Eric Evenson, the MCWD District Administrator, have agreed to provide quarterly updates to
Council on MCWD activities.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 13 of 17
Administrator Heck explained the schedule is for Council to receive quarterly updates on MCWD and
RPBCWD activities and semi-annual updates on Minnetonka Community Education activities.
Councilmember Woodruff recommended Mr. Casale’s appointment be formalized through a motion.
Mayor Lizée stated Mr. Casale is already formally appointed to the MCWD Board of Managers and has
offered to update Council on a quarterly basis. She did not think a formal appointment is necessary.
Woodruff stated the appointment has been open since January 3, 2011, and it will remain open until
someone is officially appointed, noting it can be left open. Councilmember Zerby stated he has no
problem with not formalizing the liaison appointment because the representative does not vote on the
City’s behalf. Zerby noted the City Engineer has attended meetings on behalf of the City when more
substantive things were discussed. Zerby stated if this doesn’t work out satisfactorily for Council it can be
reconsidered.
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Curbside Pickup
Administrator Heck explained that during its January 24, 2011, meeting Council directed Staff to gather
information about possibly bringing back the curbside pickup component of the City’s spring clean-up
program. Council wanted per household cost estimates and a list of items that would be collected at the
curb. The meeting packet contains the information gathered. The cost is $25 - $30 per household for the
same types of things that are collected as part of a household’s regular refuse pickup. Some haulers will
pick up things such as scrap metal. No recyclables are separated out of the materials collected at curbside
with the exception of scrap metal.
Heck then explained that some cities and haulers do collect appliances at the curbside and in most cases
the household is charged for that. The cost ranges from $75 – $200 depending on the appliance collected.
The City of New Hope provides appliance collection services and its residents are billed for that over a
two-year period; that service is provided every other year. Every household pays for that cost even if they
don’t take advantage of the service. The City’s residents can drop off appliances at the City’s drop-off
collection site for a lower fee and there are private companies that will pick up appliances. He noted the
2011 budget does not include funds for curbside pickup. He also noted the last time the curbside pickup
service was provided to households the cost was $18 per household with all households paying that
amount.
Councilmember Siakel asked if the City has been paying for the cost of operating the spring clean-up
drop-off collection program. Administrator Heck explained the City pays for the staff time and the
contractors, but it charges for some of the services. Director DeJong explained the program is run through
the recycling program. In the past the City has charged a fee for the disposal of equipment/appliances.
The City covers the staff time associated with that and it costs the City $3,000 – $5,000 per year to do
that. In response to another question from Siakel, Heck explained the $25 – $30 per household charge is
independent of whether or not the household puts anything out for curbside pickup. DeJong noted the
curbside pickup cost is for doing a special refuse pickup throughout the City and the cost for that is over
$55,000.
Mayor Lizée thanked staff for the research it did on this. She stated some residents have told her they
would like to have the curbside pickup. She noted some of the City’s sister cities provide such a service.
She commented that when there was curbside pickup people would take stuff households put out before
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 14 of 17
the hauler could come and get it. She suggested the City survey its residents in 2011 about whether or not
they would like to have and to pay for a curbside pickup program in 2012.
Councilmember Siakel stated she would like to be provided with data about curbside pickup participation
and about the number of complaint calls the City received from residents having to pay for a service they
didn’t use. Administrator Heck stated it’s his understanding from staff that the City received several
hundred complaint calls. Heck noted the City does receive calls from residents who want the City to
participate in organics recycling. Siakel asked when the curbside program was discontinued. Director
Brown noted the City dropped the curbside pickup program about five years ago.
B. Public Safety Facility Financing Surplus
Administrator Heck stated during its January 20, 2011, the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department
(SLMPD) Coordinating Committee discussed how the unspent bond proceeds in the construction funds
for the public safety facilities were handled. The Shorewood Economic Development Authority (EDA)
reduced the 2011 debt service payment amounts for the SLMPD and the Excelsior Fire District by their
respective surplus amounts in the construction fund. This will create a surplus in each of the
organization’s debt service fund for 2011 unless some other action is taken. After discussion the
Coordinating Committee endorsed moving the SLMPD’s 2011 surplus in its debt service fund to its
building fund. The Committee Members were also to bring the endorsement to their respective City
Council for discussion. He noted he incorrectly stated that the Tonka Bay Council favored returning the
surplus funds to the member cities. That is not the case. That Council favors putting the surplus funds into
the SLMPD’s and the EFD’s building fund for future maintenance of the public safety facilities. He
explained this topic was discussed briefly during the EFD Board meeting on January 26, 2011. The EFD
Board made no recommendation, but it’s his understanding that the representatives from the Cities of
Deephaven and Greenwood indicated they were more interested in having the surplus funds returned to
the member cities.
Heck stated Staff recommends the public safety organizations keep the surplus funds for reserves or use it
for a one-time project, but not to fund operational expenses.
Councilmember Siakel stated she supports putting the surplus funds into capital improvement funds.
There will eventually be a need for maintenance on the two facilities and it will be more difficult to get
funds from the member cities when they are needed.
Mayor Lizée stated the SLMPD Coordinating Committee has talked about the need for a building fund
for maintenance of and improvements to the police public safety facility over the last few years. She then
stated to be good stewards of the facilities funds for the long-term care and maintenance of the facilities
should be set aside.
Councilmember Hotvet asked if the joint powers agreements (JPA) for the EFD and SLMPD designate
anything for this. Administrator Heck responded they do not. Heck stated it’s up to the EFD and the
SLMPD governing bodies to determine what they are going to do with the surplus at the end of 2011.
Mayor Lizée recessed the meeting at 9:01 P.M.
Mayor Lizée reconvened the meeting at 9:05 P.M.
Mayor Lizée asked Attorney Keane to explain the role of the SLMPD Coordinating Committee, the role
of the EFD Governing Board and the role of the member cities as agreed to in the JPAs.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 15 of 17
Attorney Keane explained the JPA for each organization is the policy document for each organization.
The JPAs set forth the rights and duties and responsibilities of the respective members. Their respective
JPA also locked in the funding formulas for the organizations. At the operating level decisions are made
by the SLMPD Coordinating Committee Members and by the EFD Governing Board Members. Each
member city’s representative has an equal participating vote.
Administrator Heck stated that former Attorney Tietjen prepared a document describing the joint power
arrangement and how they work. He will try and locate the document and if he finds it he will distribute it
to the members of the Council.
Councilmember Woodruff asked if there is a restriction on how the remaining funds in the construction
fund could be spent.
Director DeJong explained the surplus proceeds that were in the construction fund were from bonds
issued in 2003. In December 2010 the Council authorized the transfer of the unspent bond proceeds in the
construction fund to the debt service fund. Earlier this year the Shorewood EDA billed the EFD and
SLMPD for an amount that will cover each organization’s debt service payment. The amount billed was
less than the amount the organizations collected from their member cities in 2010 to cover payments. The
EFD and SLMPD have possession of the surplus funds in their debt service funds. Council is discussing
what recommendation it wants to make to the SLMPD Coordinating Committee and the EFD Governing
Board regarding how the surplus funds should be used. The question is should the funds be remitted back
to the member cities or should they be used for some capital purpose.
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, recommending the South Lake Minnetonka Police Department
Coordinating Committee and the Excelsior Fire District Governing Board use the surplus funds in
their respective debt service funds for capital purposes and that the surplus funds be transferred
into a reserve account. Motion passed 5/0.
Mayor Lizée stated she will bring Council’s recommendation back to the SLMPD Coordinating
Committee. Councilmember Zerby stated he will do the same for the EFD Governing Board.
12. STAFF AND COUNCIL REPORTS
A. Administrator and Staff
Administrator Heck stated the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) is hosting three meetings
over the next few weeks to talk about aquatic invasive species (AIS). One of the meetings will be held at
the Southshore Community Center (SSCC). Mayor Lizée explained the MCWD sent an email to the
mayors of the cities in the MCWD. The MCWD wants to have open discussions with the mayors about
the impacts of AIS, how to work together to protect the waters in the MCWD, and how to mitigate AIS.
th
Lizée noted that she plans on attending the meeting on March 10 at 7:30 A.M. at the SSCC. Lizée
explained the meetings are being held in three different locations because of the number of cities in the
MCWD.
th
Heck then stated during its meeting on March 9 meeting the LMCD Board will hold a public hearing to
discuss an application from the Shorewood Yacht Club to reconfigure its docks.
Heck went on to state the MCWD developed draft revisions to its Stormwater Management and
Administrative Rules. A 45-day public comment period for the proposed rule changes is open until March
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 16 of 17
31, 2011. After Staff reviews the rule changes it will present Council with its perspective on how the
proposed changes may impact the City. He noted single family properties are not included in the rule.
th
Heck also stated he distributed the summary of the community visioning meeting held on February 24
which was prepared by Rebecca Heidepriem with Fritz Partners. He noted Excelsior City Manager Luger,
th
Tonka Bay City Administrator Kohlmann and he plan to meet on March 4 to continue discussions about
potential collaborative efforts. He stated he will work with the City’s website developer to put some
explanation about the visioning efforts on the website.
Director Brown stated the excavation of the stormwater structure near Silver Lake has been completed.
Staff has asked the contractor to take their sign down at the area. He then stated the Metropolitan Council
has undertaken a manhole sealing and grouting project for its line that goes through Silver Lake.
Brown explained Shorewood and Excelsior Public Works staffs having been working with area residents
about the problem at Division Street. After the rainstorm in January 2011 some of the outlet structures
froze up when the weather turned extremely cold and a significant amount of the water from the wetland
backed up on to Division Street. He noted Shorewood and Excelsior share Division Street. He explained
up to eight inches of ice formed on the roadway. The staffs have been monitoring the roadway since that
happened. The staffs have been trying to clear the ice and water off the roadway during the melting
season.
1. December 2010 Budget Report
The meeting packet contained a copy of the December 2010 Monthly Budget Report.
B. Mayor and City Council
Mayor Lizée thanked Staff and Councilmembers for participating in the retreat they attended on the
rdth
mornings of February 23 and 24. She stated she thought there was a successful outcome to the meeting.
She also thanked Staff for sharing their comments freely with Council.
th
Lizée then stated she thought the second visioning meeting held on February 24 between the Cities of
Excelsior, Shorewood and Tonka Bay was successful.
Lizée noted she received aerial maps of potential flooding areas in the MCWD and she will turn them
over to staff.
13. ADJOURN
Zerby moved, Siakel seconded, Adjourning the City Council Regular Meeting of February 28, 2011,
at 9:24 P.M. Motion passed P.M.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Christine Freeman, Recorder
ATTEST: Christine Lizée, Mayor
CITY OF SHOREWOOD REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
February 28, 2011
Page 17 of 17
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
COUNCIL ACTION FORM
Department Council Meeting Item Number
Finance April 11, 2011 3A
Item Description: Verified Claims
From: Michelle Nguyen
Bruce DeJong
Background / Previous Action
Claims for council authorization. The attached claims list includes checks numbered 51539 through
51587 totaling $667,037.83.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the claims list.
4/07/2011 1:16 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 2
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE: 3/29/2011 THRU 99/99/9999
CHECK INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
00051 EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H D 3/29/2011 000000 11,958.46
00092 MN DEPT OF REVENUE D 3/29/2011 000000 2,169.83
20005 WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVC D 3/29/2011 000000 1,092.39
00053 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-4 R 3/29/2011 051539 1,369.29
00052 PERA R 3/29/2011 051540 7,261.67
29306 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 R 4/11/2011 051542 13,840.20
16275 AMERICAN MESSAGING R 4/11/2011 051543 17.99
29379 ANDERBERG, WAYNE R 4/11/2011 051544 120.00
02860 BARNES DISTRIBUTION R 4/11/2011 051545 549.09
29338 BLANCHARD CATERING, INC. R 4/11/2011 051546 687.67
17300 CENTERPOINT ENERGY R 4/11/2011 051547 330.52
18100 CITY OF MOUND R 4/11/2011 051548 6,109.50
05056 CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT, INC R 4/11/2011 051549 164,219.34
06645 DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY R 4/11/2011 051550 1,313.92
26110 DEX ONE R 4/11/2011 051551 9.85
29271 DREW KRIESEL R 4/11/2011 051552 1,274.58
02000 EARL F. ANDERSEN, INC. R 4/11/2011 051553 762.30
07653 EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT R 4/11/2011 051554 145,847.55
29322 EXCELSIOR FLORIST R 4/11/2011 051555 50.42
29387 FASCHING, GREGORY R 4/11/2011 051556 429.68
07900 HAWKINS, INC. R 4/11/2011 051557 80.00
27400 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD. R 4/11/2011 051558 1,193.01
4/07/2011 1:16 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 3
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE: 3/29/2011 THRU 99/99/9999
CHECK INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
1 HEARTH & HOME TECH. INC R 4/11/2011 051559 57.10
29232 HECK, BRIAN R 4/11/2011 051560 181.99
10500 HENN CTY TREASURER R 4/11/2011 051561 437.00
29386 HOTVET, LAURA R 4/11/2011 051562 26.00
1 IMAGE TRADER AT LANDSAT.COM R 4/11/2011 051563 39.98
1 ISPACE FURNITURE R 4/11/2011 051564 2,049.64
11650 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED R 4/11/2011 051565 199.50
13550 LIZEE, CHRISTINE R 4/11/2011 051566 30.00
29259 MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP R 4/11/2011 051567 2,341.50
15403 MAMA R 4/11/2011 051568 20.00
15885 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC R 4/11/2011 051569 351.38
00085 MINNESOTA LIFE R 4/11/2011 051570 433.91
15395 MN CITY/CTY MGMT ASSN. R 4/11/2011 051571 225.00
29368 NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE R 4/11/2011 051572 512.56
15900 OFFICE DEPOT R 4/11/2011 051573 140.35
15000 PAETEC R 4/11/2011 051574 527.31
1350 PRUDENTIAL GROUP INSURANCE R 4/11/2011 051575 781.26
26100 QWEST R 4/11/2011 051576 311.49
29339 SKEIE, PAT R 4/11/2011 051577 240.00
23500 SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT R 4/11/2011 051578 140,159.00
25000 TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES R 4/11/2011 051579 1,407.38
25452 TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC R 4/11/2011 051580 100.00
4/07/2011 1:16 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 4
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE: 3/29/2011 THRU 99/99/9999
CHECK INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
25550 UPS R 4/11/2011 051581 17.38
70200 VERIZON WIRELESS R 4/11/2011 051582 215.77
26600 VICTORIA REPAIR AND MFG R 4/11/2011 051583 32.06
83900 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN R 4/11/2011 051584 513.21
19800 XCEL ENERGY R 4/11/2011 051585 8,037.78
28600 ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC R 4/11/2011 051587 1,293.62
05305 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES E 3/29/2011 999999 1,260.00
05305 COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES E 4/11/2011 999999 9,924.96
06572 DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA D 4/01/2011 999999 681.23
09400 GOPHER STATE ONE CALL E 4/11/2011 999999 86.05
10576 ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC E 3/29/2011 999999 67.00
13070 LANDINI, JAMES E 4/11/2011 999999 40.00
15500 METRO COUNCIL ENVMT(WASTEWATER E 3/29/2011 999999 59,486.26
18500 WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. E 4/11/2011 999999 1,657.71
19435 SPRINT E 3/29/2011 999999 131.47
19445 NGUYEN, MICHELLE E 4/11/2011 999999 92.00
19500 NIELSEN, BRADLEY E 3/29/2011 999999 695.00
23725 SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC E 4/11/2011 999999 3,804.61
27590 WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE E 3/29/2011 999999 44.78
28451 WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. E 4/11/2011 999999 12,006.50
29154 UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS CORP. E 4/11/2011 999999 1,867.64
4/07/2011 1:16 PM A/P HISTORY CHECK REPORT PAGE: 5
VENDOR SET: 01 City of Shorewood
BANK: 1 BEACON BANK
DATE RANGE: 3/29/2011 THRU 99/99/9999
CHECK INVOICE CHECK CHECK CHECK
VENDOR I.D. NAME STATUS DATE AMOUNT DISCOUNT NO STATUS AMOUNT
* * T O T A L S * * NO CHECK AMOUNT DISCOUNTS TOTAL APPLIED
REGULAR CHECKS: 47 506,148.75 0.00 506,148.75
HAND CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
DRAFTS: 4 15,901.91 0.00 15,901.91
EFT: 14 91,163.98 0.00 91,163.98
NON CHECKS: 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
VOID CHECKS: 0 VOID DEBITS 0.00
VOID CREDITS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
TOTAL ERRORS: 0
VENDOR SET: 01 BANK: 1 TOTALS: 65 613,214.64 0.00 613,214.64
BANK: 1 TOTALS: 65 613,214.64 0.00 613,214.64
REPORT TOTALS: 67 613,214.64 0.00 613,214.64
04-07-2011 01:14 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDORS - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 1
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_
ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC 3/29/11 SVC 02/15-03/15 General Fund Municipal Buildings 67.00_
TOTAL: 67.00
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 4/11/11 APR RECYCLING SVC Recycling Utility Recycling 13,840.20_
TOTAL: 13,840.20
AMERICAN MESSAGING 4/11/11 APR PAGER General Fund Public Works 8.99
4/11/11 APR PAGER Water Utility Water 4.50
4/11/11 APR PAGER Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 4.50_
TOTAL: 17.99
ANDERBERG, WAYNE 4/11/11 MAR SNOW SHOVELING Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 120.00_
TOTAL: 120.00
BARNES DISTRIBUTION 4/11/11 HARDWARE PAINT & SUPPLIES General Fund Public Works 549.09_
TOTAL: 549.09
BLANCHARD CATERING, INC. 4/11/11 MAYORS/SCHOOL DIST MTG General Fund Council 103.45
4/11/11 MCWD 03/07/11 EVENT Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 134.09
4/11/11 SPRING GARDENT EVENT Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 450.13_
TOTAL: 687.67
CENTERPOINT ENERGY 4/11/11 MANOR WARMING HOUSE General Fund Parks & Recreation 52.54
4/11/11 SSCC 06/17-07/22 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 277.98_
TOTAL: 330.52
CITY OF MOUND 4/11/11 2ND QTR SVC General Fund Fire Protection 6,109.50_
TOTAL: 6,109.50
CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT, INC 4/11/11 EXCEL FIRE DIST. EQUIPMENT Equipment Replacem Equipment Replacement 164,165.90
4/11/11 CAL GAS METER Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 53.44_
TOTAL: 164,219.34
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 3/29/11 PCS-03/13-03/25 General Fund Parks & Recreation 1,260.00
4/11/11 PCS-03/28-04/08 General Fund Parks & Recreation 2,250.00
4/11/11 1ST QTR COMMISSION Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 3,742.96
4/11/11 2ND QTR SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 3,750.00
4/11/11 ASSISTANT SVC-03/31-04/07 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 182.00_
TOTAL: 11,184.96
DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA 4/01/11 APR DENTIST General Fund Unallocated Expenses 681.23_
TOTAL: 681.23
DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 4/11/11 1ST QTR SURCHARGE General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 1,313.92_
TOTAL: 1,313.92
DEX ONE 4/11/11 MAR ADS Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 9.85_
TOTAL: 9.85
DREW KRIESEL 4/11/11 MAR SVC & SUPPLIES Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 480.00
4/11/11 MAR SVC & SUPPLIES Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 234.58
4/11/11 MAR SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 560.00_
TOTAL: 1,274.58
EARL F. ANDERSEN, INC. 4/11/11 SSCC-METAL SIGN Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 762.30_
TOTAL: 762.30
04-07-2011 01:14 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDORS - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 2
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_
EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FEDERAL W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 5,085.08
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 2,170.53
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 749.35
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Administration 263.43
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Administration 61.60
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund General Government 454.87
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund General Government 106.39
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Finance 313.02
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Finance 73.20
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Planning 294.37
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Planning 68.84
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Protective Inspections 193.11
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Protective Inspections 45.17
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund City Engineer 191.51
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund City Engineer 44.79
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Public Works 582.90
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Public Works 136.32
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Streets & Roadways 151.01
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Streets & Roadways 35.31
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Ice & Snow Removal 148.57
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Ice & Snow Removal 34.76
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Tree Maintenance 61.16
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Tree Maintenance 14.30
3/29/11 FICA W/H General Fund Parks & Recreation 114.31
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H General Fund Parks & Recreation 26.74
3/29/11 FICA W/H Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 38.77
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 9.07
3/29/11 FICA W/H Water Utility Water 150.13
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H Water Utility Water 35.10
3/29/11 FICA W/H Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 99.35
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 23.24
3/29/11 FICA W/H Recycling Utility Recycling 17.35
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H Recycling Utility Recycling 4.05
3/29/11 FICA W/H Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 130.29
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 30.47_
TOTAL: 11,958.46
EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT 4/11/11 OPERATIONS General Fund Fire Protection 78,173.17
4/11/11 BUILDINGS General Fund Fire Protection 67,674.38_
TOTAL: 145,847.55
EXCELSIOR FLORIST 4/11/11 FLOWER-DENNIS JOHNSON General Fund Council 50.42_
TOTAL: 50.42
FASCHING, GREGORY 4/11/11 SEC 125 EXP General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 429.68_
TOTAL: 429.68
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 4/11/11 FEB SVC Water Utility Water 43.02
4/11/11 FEB SVC Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 43.03_
TOTAL: 86.05
HAWKINS, INC. 4/11/11 CHLORINE Water Utility Water 80.00_
TOTAL: 80.00
HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD. 4/11/11 SAMPLE HYDRANT Water Utility Water 1,193.01_
TOTAL: 1,193.01
04-07-2011 01:14 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDORS - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 3
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_
HECK, BRIAN 4/11/11 CELL General Fund Administration 79.99
4/11/11 MILEAGE General Fund Administration 62.00
4/11/11 WELLNESS General Fund Administration 40.00_
TOTAL: 181.99
HENN CTY TREASURER 4/11/11 FEB ROOM & BOARD General Fund Police Protection 437.00_
TOTAL: 437.00
HOTVET, LAURA 4/11/11 LEGISLATIVE MILEAGE General Fund Council 13.00
4/11/11 LEGISLATIVE CONF General Fund Council 13.00_
TOTAL: 26.00
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 1,025.00
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 344.29_
TOTAL: 1,369.29
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 4/11/11 RON JOHNSON LITIGATION General Fund Professional Svcs 199.50_
TOTAL: 199.50
LANDINI, JAMES 4/11/11 APR WELLNESS REIM General Fund City Engineer 40.00_
TOTAL: 40.00
LIZEE, CHRISTINE 4/11/11 CHAMBER LUNCHEON 03/17 General Fund Council 15.00
4/11/11 CHAMBER LUNCHEON 03/17 General Fund Administration 15.00_
TOTAL: 30.00
MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP 4/11/11 FEB-GENERAL MATTER General Fund Professional Svcs 1,850.00
4/11/11 FEB-PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PRO General Fund Professional Svcs 259.00
4/11/11 FEB-ADM CODE ENFORCEMENT General Fund Professional Svcs 166.50
4/11/11 FEB-LAND USE & DEV APP General Fund Professional Svcs 66.00_
TOTAL: 2,341.50
MAMA 4/11/11 LEGISLATIVE MEETING 03/10 General Fund Administration 20.00_
TOTAL: 20.00
METRO COUNCIL ENVMT(WASTEWATER) 3/29/11 APR WASTEWATER SVC Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 59,486.26_
TOTAL: 59,486.26
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC 4/11/11 APR NEWSLETTER SVC General Fund General Government 351.38_
TOTAL: 351.38
MINNESOTA LIFE 4/11/11 APR LIFE INS General Fund Unallocated Expenses 433.91_
TOTAL: 433.91
MISC. VENDOR HEARTH & HOME TECH. IN 4/11/11 26150 OAK LEAF TR-JOB CANC General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 55.00
HEARTH & HOME TECH. IN 4/11/11 26150 OAK LEAF TR-JOB CANC General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 2.10
IMAGE TRADER AT LANDSA 4/11/11 COPIES FOR HENN CTY-INV#21 General Fund City Engineer 39.98
ISPACE FURNITURE 4/11/11 SSCC CHAIRS Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 2,049.64_
TOTAL: 2,146.72
MN CITY/CTY MGMT ASSN. 4/11/11 CITY/CTY MGMT ASSN. RENEW General Fund Administration 225.00_
TOTAL: 225.00
MN DEPT OF REVENUE 3/29/11 STATE W/H General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 2,169.83_
TOTAL: 2,169.83
04-07-2011 01:14 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDORS - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 4
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_
NGUYEN, MICHELLE 4/11/11 MAR MILEAGE REIM General Fund Finance 92.00_
TOTAL: 92.00
NIELSEN, BRADLEY 3/29/11 APA CONF REG-APR 9-12 General Fund Planning 695.00_
TOTAL: 695.00
NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE 4/11/11 REPAIR L.S. #5 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 512.56_
TOTAL: 512.56
OFFICE DEPOT 4/11/11 GEN SUPPLIES General Fund General Government 94.22
4/11/11 GEN SUPPLIES-PLANNING General Fund Planning 46.13_
TOTAL: 140.35
PAETEC 4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC General Fund Municipal Buildings 135.86
4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC General Fund Public Works 46.90
4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC General Fund Parks & Recreation 145.60
4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC Water Utility Water 98.70
4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC Water Utility Water 100.25_
TOTAL: 527.31
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 3,361.88
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Administration 318.02
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund General Government 530.71
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Finance 376.75
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Planning 378.12
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Protective Inspections 252.25
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund City Engineer 224.66
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Public Works 700.20
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Streets & Roadways 182.56
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Ice & Snow Removal 182.06
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Tree Maintenance 80.27
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA General Fund Parks & Recreation 139.42
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 45.32
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Water Utility Water 183.90
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 122.36
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Recycling Utility Recycling 20.29
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 162.90_
TOTAL: 7,261.67
PRUDENTIAL GROUP INSURANCE 4/11/11 APR LIFE INS General Fund Unallocated Expenses 781.26_
TOTAL: 781.26
QWEST 4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 General Fund Municipal Buildings 120.76
4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 General Fund Public Works 57.03
4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 Water Utility Water 66.85
4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 Water Utility Water 66.85_
TOTAL: 311.49
SKEIE, PAT 4/11/11 JAN-MAR-WORK SESSION General Fund General Government 240.00_
TOTAL: 240.00
SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT 4/11/11 2ND QTR LEASE PYMT General Fund Police Protection 57,517.00
4/11/11 APR-OBE General Fund Police Protection 82,642.00_
TOTAL: 140,159.00
SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 4/11/11 GAS General Fund Public Works 3,804.61
04-07-2011 01:14 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDORS - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 5
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_
_______________
TOTAL: 3,804.61
SPRINT 3/29/11 SVC 02/13-03/12 Water Utility Water 65.73
3/29/11 SVC 02/13-03/12 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 65.74_
TOTAL: 131.47
TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 4/11/11 LETTERHEADS General Fund General Government 152.89
4/11/11 APR NEWSLETTER SVC General Fund General Government 859.17
4/11/11 INSPECTION CARDS General Fund Protective Inspections 154.11
4/11/11 APR NEWSLETTER-RECYCLING I Recycling Utility Recycling 241.21_
TOTAL: 1,407.38
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC 4/11/11 MAR COLIFORM BACTER Water Utility Water 100.00_
TOTAL: 100.00
UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS CORP. 4/11/11 COLD PATCH General Fund Streets & Roadways 420.82
4/11/11 COLD PATCH General Fund Streets & Roadways 280.55
4/11/11 COLD PATCH General Fund Streets & Roadways 1,166.27_
TOTAL: 1,867.64
UPS 4/11/11 P.W. PACKAGE General Fund Public Works 17.38_
TOTAL: 17.38
VERIZON WIRELESS 4/11/11 L.S. -SVC 02/22-03/21 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 215.77_
TOTAL: 215.77
VICTORIA REPAIR AND MFG 4/11/11 PARTS General Fund Public Works 32.06_
TOTAL: 32.06
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 4/11/11 APR SVC General Fund Public Works 360.15
4/11/11 APR SVC Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 153.06_
TOTAL: 513.21
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA General Fund NON-DEPARTMENTAL 803.94
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA General Fund General Government 288.45_
TOTAL: 1,092.39
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE 3/29/11 TIRES General Fund Public Works 44.78_
TOTAL: 44.78
WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. 4/11/11 SAND-SNOW General Fund Ice & Snow Removal 1,657.71_
TOTAL: 1,657.71
WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 4/11/11 FEB-SIGN ASSET MGMT WORK P General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 1,890.00
4/11/11 FEB-PROJECT OBSERVATION Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 5,258.50
4/11/11 FEB-6180 MURRAY HILL DRAIN Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 630.00
4/11/11 FEB-5750 COVINGTON RD VALU Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 2,500.00
4/11/11 FEB-SILVERWOOD PARK Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 1,728.00_
TOTAL: 12,006.50
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 General Fund Municipal Buildings 508.87
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 General Fund Police Protection 3.75
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 General Fund Public Works 440.10
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 24.24
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 3,311.04
4/11/11 5700 CTY RD 19 General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 31.11
04-07-2011 01:14 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY VENDORS - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 6
VENDOR SORT KEY DATE DESCRIPTION FUND DEPARTMENT AMOUNT_
4/11/11 5700 CTY RD 19 UNIT LIGHTS General Fund Traffic Control/Str Li 198.84
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 General Fund Parks & Recreation 838.88
4/11/11 SSCC- 06/22-07/24 Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 66.73-
4/11/11 24253 SMITHTOWN RD-02/22-0 Water Utility Water 238.58
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 Water Utility Water 385.05
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 Water Utility Water 273.88-
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 Water Utility Water 1,831.26
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 566.67_
TOTAL: 8,037.78
ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC 4/11/11 BROOMS -SWEEPERS General Fund Streets & Roadways 1,293.62_
TOTAL: 1,293.62
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 General Fund Administration 4,386.58
General Fund General Government 7,353.02
General Fund Finance 5,196.65
General Fund Planning 5,215.43
General Fund Protective Inspections 3,479.13
General Fund City Engineer 3,098.79
General Fund Public Works 9,657.85
General Fund Streets & Roadways 2,517.91
General Fund Ice & Snow Removal 2,511.24
General Fund Tree Maintenance 1,107.13
General Fund Parks & Recreation 1,923.05
Southshore Communi Senior Community Cente 625.22
Water Utility Water 2,536.26
Sanitary Sewer Uti Sewer 1,687.88
Recycling Utility Recycling 279.90
Stormwater Managem STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 2,247.15_
TOTAL: 53,823.19
=============== FUND TOTALS ================
101 General Fund 392,437.27
403 Equipment Replacement 164,165.90
490 Southshore Community Ctr. 13,558.24
601 Water Utility 6,905.31
611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 62,880.80
621 Recycling Utility 14,403.00
631 Stormwater ManagementUtil 12,687.31
--------------------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL: 667,037.83
--------------------------------------------
TOTAL PAGES: 6
04-07-2011 01:13 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 1
DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_
NON-DEPARTMENTAL General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FEDERAL W/H 5,085.08
3/29/11 FICA W/H 2,170.53
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 749.35
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 3,361.88
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-302131-457 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM 1,025.00
3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-DEFERRED COM 344.29
MN DEPT OF REVENUE 3/29/11 STATE W/H 2,169.83
DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 4/11/11 1ST QTR SURCHARGE 1,313.92
MISC. VENDOR HEARTH & HOME TECH. IN 4/11/11 26150 OAK LEAF TR-JOB CANC 55.00
HEARTH & HOME TECH. IN 4/11/11 26150 OAK LEAF TR-JOB CANC 2.10
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA 803.94
FASCHING, GREGORY 4/11/11 SEC 125 EXP 429.68_
TOTAL: 17,510.60
Council General Fund LIZEE, CHRISTINE 4/11/11 CHAMBER LUNCHEON 03/17 15.00
EXCELSIOR FLORIST 4/11/11 FLOWER-DENNIS JOHNSON 50.42
BLANCHARD CATERING, INC. 4/11/11 MAYORS/SCHOOL DIST MTG 103.45
HOTVET, LAURA 4/11/11 LEGISLATIVE MILEAGE 13.00
4/11/11 LEGISLATIVE CONF 13.00_
TOTAL: 194.87
Administration General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 263.43
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 61.60
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 318.02
LIZEE, CHRISTINE 4/11/11 CHAMBER LUNCHEON 03/17 15.00
MN CITY/CTY MGMT ASSN. 4/11/11 CITY/CTY MGMT ASSN. RENEW 225.00
MAMA 4/11/11 LEGISLATIVE MEETING 03/10 20.00
HECK, BRIAN 4/11/11 CELL 79.99
4/11/11 MILEAGE 62.00
4/11/11 WELLNESS 40.00
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 4,386.58_
TOTAL: 5,471.62
General Government General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 454.87
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 106.39
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 530.71
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC 4/11/11 APR NEWSLETTER SVC 351.38
OFFICE DEPOT 4/11/11 GEN SUPPLIES 94.22
WELLS FARGO HEALTH BENEFIT SVCS 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-HSA 288.45
TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 4/11/11 LETTERHEADS 152.89
4/11/11 APR NEWSLETTER SVC 859.17
SKEIE, PAT 4/11/11 JAN-MAR-WORK SESSION 240.00
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 7,353.02_
TOTAL: 10,431.10
Finance General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 313.02
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 73.20
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 376.75
NGUYEN, MICHELLE 4/11/11 MAR MILEAGE REIM 92.00
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 5,196.65_
TOTAL: 6,051.62
Professional Svcs General Fund KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 4/11/11 RON JOHNSON LITIGATION 199.50
MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP 4/11/11 FEB-GENERAL MATTER 1,850.00
4/11/11 FEB-PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PRO 259.00
4/11/11 FEB-ADM CODE ENFORCEMENT 166.50
04-07-2011 01:13 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 2
DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_
4/11/11 FEB-LAND USE & DEV APP 66.00_
TOTAL: 2,541.00
Planning General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 294.37
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 68.84
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 378.12
OFFICE DEPOT 4/11/11 GEN SUPPLIES-PLANNING 46.13
NIELSEN, BRADLEY 3/29/11 APA CONF REG-APR 9-12 695.00
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 5,215.43_
TOTAL: 6,697.89
Municipal Buildings General Fund ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIONS INC 3/29/11 SVC 02/15-03/15 67.00
PAETEC 4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 135.86
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 508.87
QWEST 4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 120.76_
TOTAL: 832.49
Police Protection General Fund HENN CTY TREASURER 4/11/11 FEB ROOM & BOARD 437.00
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 3.75
SO LK MTKA POLICE DEPT 4/11/11 2ND QTR LEASE PYMT 57,517.00
4/11/11 APR-OBE 82,642.00_
TOTAL: 140,599.75
Fire Protection General Fund EXCELSIOR FIRE DISTRICT 4/11/11 OPERATIONS 78,173.17
4/11/11 BUILDINGS 67,674.38
CITY OF MOUND 4/11/11 2ND QTR SVC 6,109.50_
TOTAL: 151,957.05
Protective Inspections General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 193.11
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 45.17
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 252.25
TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 4/11/11 INSPECTION CARDS 154.11
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 3,479.13_
TOTAL: 4,123.77
City Engineer General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 191.51
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 44.79
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 224.66
MISC. VENDOR IMAGE TRADER AT LANDSA 4/11/11 COPIES FOR HENN CTY-INV#21 39.98
LANDINI, JAMES 4/11/11 APR WELLNESS REIM 40.00
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 3,098.79_
TOTAL: 3,639.73
Public Works General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 582.90
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 136.32
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 700.20
BARNES DISTRIBUTION 4/11/11 HARDWARE PAINT & SUPPLIES 549.09
PAETEC 4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 46.90
AMERICAN MESSAGING 4/11/11 APR PAGER 8.99
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 440.10
SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA LLC 4/11/11 GAS 3,804.61
UPS 4/11/11 P.W. PACKAGE 17.38
QWEST 4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 57.03
VICTORIA REPAIR AND MFG 4/11/11 PARTS 32.06
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE 3/29/11 TIRES 44.78
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 4/11/11 APR SVC 360.15
04-07-2011 01:13 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 3
DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 9,657.85_
TOTAL: 16,438.36
Streets & Roadways General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 151.01
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 35.31
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 182.56
ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS, INC 4/11/11 BROOMS -SWEEPERS 1,293.62
UNIQUE PAVING MATERIALS CORP. 4/11/11 COLD PATCH 420.82
4/11/11 COLD PATCH 280.55
4/11/11 COLD PATCH 1,166.27
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 2,517.91_
TOTAL: 6,048.05
Ice & Snow Removal General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 148.57
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 34.76
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 182.06
WM. MUELLER & SONS, INC. 4/11/11 SAND-SNOW 1,657.71
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 2,511.24_
TOTAL: 4,534.34
Traffic Control/Str Li General Fund XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 24.24
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 3,311.04
4/11/11 5700 CTY RD 19 31.11
4/11/11 5700 CTY RD 19 UNIT LIGHTS 198.84
WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 4/11/11 FEB-SIGN ASSET MGMT WORK P 1,890.00_
TOTAL: 5,455.23
Tree Maintenance General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 61.16
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 14.30
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 80.27
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 1,107.13_
TOTAL: 1,262.86
Parks & Recreation General Fund EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 114.31
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 26.74
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 139.42
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 3/29/11 PCS-03/13-03/25 1,260.00
4/11/11 PCS-03/28-04/08 2,250.00
PAETEC 4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 145.60
CENTERPOINT ENERGY 4/11/11 MANOR WARMING HOUSE 52.54
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 838.88
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 1,923.05_
TOTAL: 6,750.54
Unallocated Expenses General Fund MINNESOTA LIFE 4/11/11 APR LIFE INS 433.91
DELTA DENTAL OF MINNESOTA 4/01/11 APR DENTIST 681.23
PRUDENTIAL GROUP INSURANCE 4/11/11 APR LIFE INS 781.26_
TOTAL: 1,896.40
Equipment Replacement Equipment Replacem CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT, INC 4/11/11 EXCEL FIRE DIST. EQUIPMENT 164,165.90_
TOTAL: 164,165.90
Senior Community Cente Southshore Communi EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 38.77
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 9.07
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 45.32
EARL F. ANDERSEN, INC. 4/11/11 SSCC-METAL SIGN 762.30
04-07-2011 01:13 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 4
DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_
COMMUNITY REC RESOURCES 4/11/11 1ST QTR COMMISSION 3,742.96
4/11/11 2ND QTR SVC 3,750.00
4/11/11 ASSISTANT SVC-03/31-04/07 182.00
MISC. VENDOR ISPACE FURNITURE 4/11/11 SSCC CHAIRS 2,049.64
CENTERPOINT ENERGY 4/11/11 SSCC 06/17-07/22 277.98
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 SSCC- 06/22-07/24 66.73-
DEX ONE 4/11/11 MAR ADS 9.85
DREW KRIESEL 4/11/11 MAR SVC & SUPPLIES 480.00
4/11/11 MAR SVC & SUPPLIES 234.58
4/11/11 MAR SVC 560.00
BLANCHARD CATERING, INC. 4/11/11 MCWD 03/07/11 EVENT 134.09
4/11/11 SPRING GARDENT EVENT 450.13
ANDERBERG, WAYNE 4/11/11 MAR SNOW SHOVELING 120.00
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 4/11/11 APR SVC 153.06
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 625.22_
TOTAL: 13,558.24
Water Water Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 150.13
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 35.10
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 183.90
HAWKINS, INC. 4/11/11 CHLORINE 80.00
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 4/11/11 FEB SVC 43.02
PAETEC 4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 98.70
4/11/11 02/26-03/25 SVC 100.25
AMERICAN MESSAGING 4/11/11 APR PAGER 4.50
SPRINT 3/29/11 SVC 02/13-03/12 65.73
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 24253 SMITHTOWN RD-02/22-0 238.58
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 385.05
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 273.88-
4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 1,831.26
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC 4/11/11 MAR COLIFORM BACTER 100.00
QWEST 4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 66.85
4/11/11 SVC 03/25-04/24 66.85
HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS, LTD. 4/11/11 SAMPLE HYDRANT 1,193.01
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 2,536.26_
TOTAL: 6,905.31
Sewer Sanitary Sewer Uti EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 99.35
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 23.24
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 122.36
CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT, INC 4/11/11 CAL GAS METER 53.44
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 4/11/11 FEB SVC 43.03
METRO COUNCIL ENVMT(WASTEWATER) 3/29/11 APR WASTEWATER SVC 59,486.26
AMERICAN MESSAGING 4/11/11 APR PAGER 4.50
SPRINT 3/29/11 SVC 02/13-03/12 65.74
XCEL ENERGY 4/11/11 STMT#275500231-SVC 01/25-0 566.67
NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE 4/11/11 REPAIR L.S. #5 512.56
VERIZON WIRELESS 4/11/11 L.S. -SVC 02/22-03/21 215.77
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 1,687.88_
TOTAL: 62,880.80
Recycling Recycling Utility EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 17.35
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 4.05
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 20.29
TOTAL PRINTING SERVICES 4/11/11 APR NEWSLETTER-RECYCLING I 241.21
ALLIED WASTE SERVICES #894 4/11/11 APR RECYCLING SVC 13,840.20
04-07-2011 01:13 PM C O U N C I L REPORT BY DEPARTMENT - APRIL 11, 2011 PAGE: 5
DEPARTMENT FUND VENDOR NAME DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT_
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 279.90_
TOTAL: 14,403.00
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Stormwater Managem EFTPS - FEDERAL W/H 3/29/11 FICA W/H 130.29
3/29/11 MEDICARE W/H 30.47
PERA 3/29/11 P/R DEDUCTS-PERA 162.90
WSB AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 4/11/11 FEB-PROJECT OBSERVATION 5,258.50
4/11/11 FEB-6180 MURRAY HILL DRAIN 630.00
4/11/11 FEB-5750 COVINGTON RD VALU 2,500.00
4/11/11 FEB-SILVERWOOD PARK 1,728.00
**PAYROLL EXPENSES 3/28/2011 - 99/99/9999 2,247.15_
TOTAL: 12,687.31
=============== FUND TOTALS ================
101 General Fund 392,437.27
403 Equipment Replacement 164,165.90
490 Southshore Community Ctr. 13,558.24
601 Water Utility 6,905.31
611 Sanitary Sewer Utility 62,880.80
621 Recycling Utility 14,403.00
631 Stormwater ManagementUtil 12,687.31
--------------------------------------------
GRAND TOTAL: 667,037.83
--------------------------------------------
TOTAL PAGES: 5
#3B
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Regular Appointment to the Position of Light Equipment Operator
Meeting Date: April 11, 2011
Prepared by: Larry Brown, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Brian Heck, City Administrator
Attachments: Attachment 1-September 1, 2010 meeting minutes
Policy Consideration: This item considers the regular appointment to the Light Equipment Operator
position per hiring policy.
On Wednesday, September 1, 2010, the Shorewood City Council approved the
Background:
appointment of Greg Fasching as a Light Equipment Operator (refer to Attachment 1). The
appointment to this position was a result of the need to fill a vacant position for a Utility
Operator, for the Department of Public Works.
Mr. Fasching’s first day on duty was October 4, 2010. I am very pleased to report that Mr.
Fasching has successfully completed his six month probationary period and has been a star
employee in learning the City’s utility systems, and has performed all of his duties with great
excellence and professionalism.
In accordance with what had been agreed to at the time of the appointment, Mr. Fasching’s
rate of pay will remain at the current rate, and will not be increased until his one year date of
employment.
Financial or Budget Considerations: As there will be no increase in the current rate of pay, this
regular appointment has no impact on the current salary budget allocation.
Options:
1.The City Council may chose to approve the regular appointment of Mr. Greg Fasching to
the position of Light Equipment Operator within the Department of Public Works.
2.The City Council may chose to decline the appointment of Mr. Greg Fasching to the
position of Light Equipment Operator with the Department of Public Works.
Recommendation / Action Requested:
Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the regular appointment of Mr. Greg
Fasching to the Light Equipment Operator position.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
Next Steps and Timelines: Upon approval, Greg Fasching’s appointment status will change from
probationary to regular.
Connection to Vision / Mission: Mr. Fasching is an exemplary employee who contributes to
providing residents with quality public service and a healthy living environment by efficiently performing
his duties in a professional manner.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 201.0
MINUTES
1. CONVENE SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
4:00 P.M.
Mayor Liz6e called the meeting to order at 4:00 P.M.
A. Roll Call
Present. Mayor Liz6e; Councilmembers Turgeon, Woodruff, and Zerby; and City
Administrator Heck
Absent: Councilmember Bailey
B. Review Agenda
Turgeon moved, Zerby seconded, approving the agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0.
2. AUTHORIZATIONS TO HIRE
Woodruff moved, Turgeon seconded, approving the appointment of Bruce DeJong as Finance
Director. Motion passed 4/0.
B. LIGHT EQUIPMENT OPERATOR
Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, approving the appointment of Greg Fasching as Light
Equipment Operator.
Council member Turgeon asked if Mr. Fasching holds any certifications or licensures. Heck said he holds
both a sanitary sewer and water operator license.
Motion passed 4/0.
3. ADJOURN
Woodruff moved, Zerby seconded, Adjourning the City Council Special Meeting of September 1, 2010,
at 4:03 P.M. Motion passed 410.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Brian Heck, Recorder
Christine Liz6e, Mayor
Attachment 1
#10A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Healthcare Decisions Day Proclamation
Meeting Date: April 11, 2011
Prepared by: Brian Heck, City Administrator
Reviewed by:
Attachments: Resolution #11-011
Policy Consideration: Should the Council declare April 16 “Healthcare Decisions Day?”
Background: The Mayor received a request from the Grathwol Law office in Excelsior asking the City to
declare April 16 “Healthcare Decisions Day.” The purpose is to make the public aware of the importance
of preparing a healthcare directive so if you are unable to make decisions regarding your care, there is a
legal document for doctors and family members to look to for guidance in the level of care you receive.
Governor Dayton issued a proclamation and a resolution proclaiming April 16 “Healthcare Decisions
Day” is attached for Council consideration.
Financial or Budget Considerations: There are no financial obligations related to this item.
Options:
1)Adopt the resolution; or
2)Do not adopt the resolution.
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends adoption of the resolution.
Next Steps and Timelines: if Council adopts the resolution, staff will forward the resolution to the
Grathwol Law Office.
Connection to Vision / Mission:
Visionary leadership
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
11-011
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING APRIL 16, 2011 TO BE
HEALTHCARE DECISIONS DAY
WHEREAS
, Most residents of Shorewood have not exercised their right to create and
advance directive to guide their healthcare in the event thy cannot speak for themselves; and
WHEREAS
, There is a strong need for advance healthcare planning; and
WHEREAS
, A healthcare directive offers valuable guidance and assurance that, during a
time of critical healthcare need, decisions with regard to one’s healthcare will be executed and
honored without family conflict or legal intervention; and
WHEREAS
, Community members, including healthcare professionals, lawyers, and citizens
are ready and willing to volunteer time to ensure all adults have the information needed to document
their healthcare decisions; and
WHEREAS
, Healthcare Decisions Day provides an opportunity to document one’s
healthcare decisions in a uniform Advance Directive recognized by legal and healthcare
professionals throughout the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS
, the Elder Law Governing Council of the Minnesota State Bar Association and
Hospice Minnesota are joint liaisons to the National Healthcare Initiative;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
, by the Shorewood City Council does hereby
declare and proclaim April 16 to be:
HEALTHCARE DECISIONS DAY
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 11th day of
April, 2011.
ATTEST: Christine Lizée, Mayor
Brian Heck, City Administrator/Clerk
#11A
MEETING TYPE
City of Shorewood Council Meeting Item
Regular Meeting
Title / Subject: Street sign placement policy
Meeting Date: April 11, 2011
Prepared by: Brian Heck, City Administrator
Reviewed by: James Landini, City Engineer
Attachments: Policy
Policy Consideration: Should the Council establish a policy for the placement of street signs requested
by the public?
Background: Staff was asked to respond to a neighborhood request to install a stop sign at the
Yellowstone Trail and Glencoe intersection creating a 4-way stop. The request was initially made to a
council member. Following some looking, staff discovered a resolution adopted by the Council in 1992
laying out the criteria for placing a street sign.
Staff brought the resolution to council at the March 14 meeting for review and direction. Council
directed staff to update the policy and reference the Minnesota Manual on Traffic Control Devices.
Financial or Budget Considerations: Adoption of the policy does not have an immediate financial
implication
Options:
1)Adopt the policy as presented;
2)Amend the policy and adopt;
3)Request staff modify the policy;
4)Do nothing
Recommendation / Action Requested: Staff recommends the Council adopt the policy.
Next Steps and Timelines: following adoption, staff will evaluate requests in compliance with the
policy.
Connection to Vision / Mission:
Quality public service.
Mission Statement: The City of Shorewood is committed to providing residents quality public services, a
healthy environment, a variety of attractive amenities, a sustainable tax base, and sound financial
management through effective, efficient, and visionary leadership. Page 1
CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
STREET SIGN POLICY
Purpose
: the purpose of this policy is to outline the process and procedure for residents to request
placement or removal of a city street sign meant to control traffic. Such a sign includes, but is not limited
to, stop signs, yield signs, no-parking signs, restricted turning, etc.
Procedure
Application: an individual, group of people, neighborhood, etc, desiring to have signs on city streets
installed or removed, must provide a request in writing delivered to the city engineer via e-mail or U.S.
Postal service. The request must include at minimum the following information:
1) Type and number of sign(s) requested; and
2) Location of the sign(s); and
3) The reason for the placement or removal of the sign(s); and
4) The general number of people affected by the proposed action.
The requestor can, if so desired, provide a petition for the action signed by residents of the affected
neighborhood.
Processing: upon receipt of the request to place or remove street signs, the engineer will conduct an
analysis of the location based on the type of sign(s) requested to determine if the request meets the criteria
established in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD). The review
and evaluation may include:
1) A review of the number, type, and nature of accidents in the area;
2) Traffic volume and speed;
3) Sight lines; or
4) Traffic flow;
In most cases, the engineer will complete the review and provide a recommendation to the City Council
within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. Requests received during the winter months will be
st
processed by May 31.
Council Action: the city engineer will prepare a report for the City Council on the request and providing a
recommendation based on the objective evaluation based on the MN MUTCD.
Council retains final decision on approval or denial on the placement or removal of street signs.